Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:the solution: (Score 1) 486

by Shakrai (#48043577) Attached to: The $1,200 DIY Gunsmithing Machine

I'm not sure how 'not forbidding' is different than 'allowing'.

The AC said it better than I ever could.

Regardless, slavery wasn't handled just through the 10th amendment. Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 specifies that slaves (i.e. people who are neither free nor indianans) count as 0.6 people for determining the number of congressional representatives from a state. Because of that, I'd say that the constitution condoned slavery.

You should actually research the matter rather than parroting poorly informed talking points. The 3/5th's clause was a compromise between the Northern States that wanted slaves to count for nothing (thereby eroding the political power of the slave holding states and presumably leading to a quicker demise for the institution of slavery) and the Southern States that wanted them counted at 100%. Had the North gotten its way it's quite probable that the Civil War and ultimate emancipation of the slaves would have occurred a generation sooner than happened in our timeline.

Comment: Re:uhh (Score 1) 496

by LWATCDR (#48040301) Attached to: Elon Musk: We Must Put a Million People On Mars To Safeguard Humanity

Funny thing is his brand of "righteous living" is not all that different from common sense to day.
He was anti-smoking, anti-drunkenness, and pro child support.
What a terrible thing.
"He did seem to have a lifelong obsession with that, but it tended to be very much of the "if you'll all just live exactly the way I tell you you'll be better off" variety that doesn't necessarily deserve to be lionized"
So he was a democrat like Mayor Bloomberg?
 

Comment: Re:the solution: (Score 3, Insightful) 486

by prisoner-of-enigma (#48040157) Attached to: The $1,200 DIY Gunsmithing Machine

I think your post, while well thought out, misses the point of an armed citizenry. No one is realistically thinking a lightly-armed, poorly-trained citizenry can effectively wage war against a well-equipped, well-trained professional military force. Nor do I think anyone is suggesting a straight up guerrilla-style campaign for asymmetric warfare.

No, the point of an armed citizenry is to give the government pause. An unarmed populace can be brought to heel without much in the way of bloodshed. But an armed populace? Even a lightly-armed one means the government can't just march in and round up potential dissidents. There is the strong possibility of a firefight. Sure, the little guys will probably lose. But it means the government must escalate to lethal force just to get started on whatever nefarious course it may be planning for its citizens.

In a way, it's little like conventional vs. nuclear combat between nation-states. When both sides were purely conventional, wars were fairly common (call this analogous to both sides being armed with swords). When one side has nukes and the other does not, the side with nukes gets its way pretty much whenever it wants without ever having to drop a nuke (analogous to a police state with a disarmed citizenry). But when both sides are equally armed with dangerous weapons that require either side to really think about whether they want to invite a deeply damaging and dangerous conflict...you get very few actual wars (analogous to an armed state and armed citizenry).

If I'm unarmed and the government (for whatever reason) decides I need to be removed, not only can I not stop them, but I probably can't even inflict significant harm on them. They will most likely even take me alive, without a protracted fight. The risk to them in this case, both in blood and bad PR, is minimal.

If I'm armed and the government (for whatever reason) decides I need to be removed, they will most likely succeed. I will, however, most likely succeed in causing casualties and/or making a big PR spectacle of being taken down. I might even achieve martyr status if I'm killed, causing a PR debacle for the government. The government will want to avoid these things, thus they will try to find means other than brute force of arms to remove me. Or they might not remove me at all, deeming the political risk too high. This is why we need to be armed. Not as a credible army-in-waiting, but as a deterrent.

Comment: Re:Bruce Perens (Score 1) 222

by LWATCDR (#48039943) Attached to: Back To Faxes: Doctors Can't Exchange Digital Medical Records

That is just it. The VA has already developed the software to do all this and it is in the Public domain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V...
All you have to do is state that if you take medicare you must use a system compatible with VistA.
It has been used for decades and has been updated as well. A lot of companies even use it as a base for their products.
I would love to see the US government move it from public domain to GPL but I doubt that is possible legally.

Comment: Re:Honestly, rifles are not the problem (Score 1) 486

by Shakrai (#48039001) Attached to: The $1,200 DIY Gunsmithing Machine

20 years ago, my dad and I came home from a camping trip a day early, but late at night. If my mom had been armed, she would have shot at both of us.

Gosh, if only there was a way to have let your Mom know that it was the two of you instead of a would-be rapist. Perhaps you could have yelled out "HI MOM, WE'RE HOME EARLY!" as you entered the house. Nah, that couldn't possibly work. It's a damn good thing for you she wasn't armed or you'd be dead now. I have the same fear every time I come home early, but thankfully my girlfriend has evolved some pretty neat biological features like eardrums that reduce the likelihood of this happening....

Comment: Re:Anarchy is all fun and games... (Score 1) 486

by Shakrai (#48038887) Attached to: The $1,200 DIY Gunsmithing Machine

Syria is most recent historical example

The Civil War there has been ongoing for a little over three years. The American Revolutionary War took eight years to fully resolve itself. The Syrian Government only controls about 20% of the country if this map is any indication, so that would seem to dispel your notion that you can't effectively fight the police state.

The Syrian Government is doomed in the long term; it's basically a battle of attrition at this point and the cold mathematical reality is that al-Assad's followers have less males of military age than his opponents. Barring decisive intervention from the outside he is doomed; I leave it to the reader to decide if this is a good thing or not...

Comment: Re:This device is not new or interesting (Score 3, Insightful) 486

by Shakrai (#48038787) Attached to: The $1,200 DIY Gunsmithing Machine

This would be great for organized crime and drug cartels. People with a need for untraceable guns, that use them regularly, and that have money to make it happen

Such people generally use stolen firearms or (more rarely) legally purchased firearms via straw buyers (i.e., Here's $1,500, buy this $1,000 firearm for me and pocket the change)

Criminals don't need to build their own firearms when there are sufficient numbers of stolen ones in circulation.

Comment: Re:the solution: (Score 4, Informative) 486

by Shakrai (#48038741) Attached to: The $1,200 DIY Gunsmithing Machine

The Constitution allowed slavery, for instance, and no vote for women.

It did no such thing, it simply reserved such matters to the States, per the 10th Amendment. The 14th and 19th Amendments changed that of course. The 14th was actually intended by its drafters to be interpreted more broadly than it has been, in theory it should have immediately applied the Bill of Rights against the States (including the 2nd Amendment) but SCOTUS neutered it and it has instead taken the better part of a century and a half to get most of the Bill of Rights applied against the States.

Incidentally, the established process of amending the Constitution (Article V) is available for gun control proponents to take advantage of if they think they can actually win a debate on the merits of the issue. All you need to do is convince 2/3rd's of Congress and 3/4ths of the State Legislatures to sign off on a repeal or amendment of the 2nd Amendment. Best of luck with that. :)

"It is better to have tried and failed than to have failed to try, but the result's the same." - Mike Dennison

Working...