Feminists support nudity in certain contexts (such as public nudity as part of a protest). If it's nudity in other areas (such as a strip club), they vilify it because the evil men are there providing the dancers with a source of income.

No, that's always been the tagline to sell it to the population as a whole. Yes, their first steps many years ago were equality, but after that was achieve they went on to pursuing the primary goal which was superiority. And guess what? They got it. Both in regards to social expectations and the law, women are viewed as superior to men in basically every way and it keeps getting worse for men every single day. I want equality, but it's rather sad to see men promoting the very people who are getting men classified as second class citizens in the US.

Well, looks like no multiplayer for me from now on. I didn't use it much anyways.

Do you realize how many millions (actually probably hundreds of millions) of people in the US drive and talk on the phone or even text while driving every year without getting in an accident? The people who are dumb enough to put a phone over driving are dumb enough to get themselves killed no matter how many laws you pass.

It doesn't matter how many laws and regulations you pass, people will still die. It shows just how delusional people like you are to think that you can actually legislate away death.

The problem with their thinking is that tablet sales are outselling PC sales because everyone already has a PC and due to the power of modern hardware, you don't need a new PC every three years. Most people don't have a tablet and if they do have one, the hardware is improving so fast that they'll want to buy a new one after a couple of years.

Bingo. Make it so that the Metro interface can be completely disabled in the options menu and after it is disabled Windows looks exactly like Windows 7 and I'd consider it. It really seems like Microsoft is on an "every other release" cycle where XP was great, Vista was shit, Win 7 was great, Win 8 is shit, etc.

Except Nixon was a saint compared to Obama.

First off, "well regulated" when referring to the military means "well trained / disciplined" not "highly controlled by the government". You can look up the definition in older dictionaries and see for yourself. Secondly, even the Supreme Court has explained that the first half of the amendment was explaining why we need the right to bear arms, not placing restrictions upon who can bare arms. Lastly, while each State has their own definitions for a state militia, the US Constitution specifies all able-bodied men up to 45 years old (older if they have previous military experience) are the militia.

This is exactly why rights should never be up for a vote, because most people can't be bothered to learn what they are talking about.

First off, about 30,000 of those are suicides. Studies have repeatedly shown that gun ownership has no impact on suicide rates. Secondly, the US has roughly 315 MILLION people in it. About 3.5 times as many people die in car accidents in the US each year as are killed with a gun (that even includes self-defense shootings in that number).

You have to be really immature to think your emotions invalidate peoples right to self-defense. Even the most anti-gun groups have admitted that there are (low end) 10 times as many cases of guns being used for self-defense each year as there are murders involving guns. The facts simply do not support your purely emotion based argument.

If someone kills my friend with a gun, how is it the responsibility of millions of people who didn't commit the murder? Why should almost half the adults in the US be punished for a crime that they didn't commit?

Exactly. I was going to make the same argument, so I'm glad someone else did to save me having to do the math (I really should just save a template for situations like this). We have decades of data showing that the number of people who legally own a gun and use it to commit a crime is (statistically speaking) zero. We also have plenty of data showing that gun owners are actually less likely to commit a crime and are less likely to shoot the wrong person than police in a defensive situation. It always amazes me that Slashdot is supposed to be filled with intelligent people who use facts to derive conclusions, yet so many want to use nothing but emotion when the issue of guns comes up.

FYI, you can already go to any FFL (gun shop) and ask them to do a background check when performing a private sale. Anyone selling to a person that they don't know would be wise to do this. The problem people have with your idea of banning private sales is that the only way to enforce it is for the government to track every gun and every gun owner. Quite using scare tactics when you don't even know the existing laws.

Yeah, those plastic bullets don't show up on metal detectors. Wait, you mean it still fires regular lead / copper bullets? Well fuck, there goes the "it's undetectable" scare tactic.

No, their official problem with the gun is that it lacks rifling in the barrel, thus making it fall into the category of "any other weapon", which is restricted under the National Firearms Act of 1934. The gun still would show up in a metal detector (metal firing pin and metal bullets).