You'll find that your idea of "rights" disappears quite quickly as soon as any functioning society breaks down.
My "idea" of rights exists at any scale and under any circumstances. That's the entire point. Irrational people do indeed look to take advantage circumstances in which they feel willing to take the chance that their use of violence will go unchallenged because of unpleasant or unexpected circumstances. Which doesn't change the fact that they lose their claim to life when they deny you yours. That's the right you naturally have: to use (or have used on your behalf) the violence necessary to defend your life. Why? Because rational people don't kill other people except in self defense. Those who initiate the violence waive their rights to live in peace.
You're confusing having a right with happening to have the power to defend it at some particular time. These are not the same thing.
Exactly, because in the jungle there are no rights
Oh, I get it now. You think that human beings aren't any different in their cognitive abilities, capacity for reason, and ability to think abstractly and communicate than are, say, tigers or lemurs.
I don't need it, but I need a government to tell others that.
No, you can tell them yourself, and if they are too irrational to digest the concept, and you're too weak to defend against violent, irrational people, then you need a government to help you protect your rights.
In a modern society arms are useless.
Really? Then why does every single political leader - across the spectrum, including flaming lefty tyrants, eastern European strongmen, laid-back Scandinavian royalty and elected officials, mayors of cities, etc. - have armed protection at their disposal?
Why do police departments train in the use of arms? Why do militaries, even strictly defensive ones, understand the need to be able to use arms?
It's nice for you that you live in a fantasy world where there is no need for a 90-pound woman to ever defend herself against a man three times her size. Where is it, exactly, that you live that there are absolutely no violent people, no robberies, no rapes, no crimes that endanger lives? Please be specific, and if you would, please link to some reports that show your zero crime rate. Not that you will, of course, because you're full of it, and you know it.
What a load of shit. Without a government, you have no rights. Go live in a jungle sometime...
Wow, you really haven't thought this through, have you? You should.
So, you and another 100 people are in the jungle. 10 of you decide to get together in a group (you know, assembling) and chant something they think is important (you know
The US constitution recognizes this, and its first amendment explicitly says that the government can't infringe on that right. There's no place in the constitution that defines the right to assemble or speak
Without a government, a society, a rule of law, etc there is no such thing as 'rights'.
Nonsense. Without rule of law, there is no protection of rights. You really think that your right to speak comes from the government? You truly don't understand that it's the government's job to prevent other people (and those same government institutions) from forcibly shutting you up?
we will be at the point every robber in Canada will be armed with these and the government will have little choice but to give us the right to bear any arms
Governments don't give rights, they either protect them, or they infringe upon them. What you're looking for is the Canadian government ceasing to infringe on that right.
You must be new here.
This. There are several missing important moderations. "You must be new here" should be one of them. Along with "+1 Troll" (or "+1 look at that") a positive mod for things which are sufficiently bad to be worth reading.
The simplest way to get this is to separate the qualitative from the quantitative i.e. have one drop-down with the score (+ or -) and one with the qualifier. More or less the way metamod works now, but with all the options all the time.
the ten people running Magic Leap
So, pretty much you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You can just come right out and say it, if it will make you feel better.
Of all the emails, not a single one has yet to be shown it was CLASSIFIED AT THE TIME IT WAS SENT/RECEIVED! I can't state this enough.
Actually, you CAN say it enough. You already did. You're wrong, so continuing to say it is pointless.
Let's keep this simple. Do you understand what SAP material is? Yes or no. Just say yes or no.
In terms of "classified" documents being found on it, so far, no one has said if any of them were ever "classified" at the time they were sent.
Yes, they have. Items sitting on the server in her house were from SAP material (above-top-secret stuff) that by its very definition is classified. We're talking about actual, current, operational intelligence - the sort of stuff that involves moles in foreign governments, satellite imagery from NRO systems, that sort of thing. The State Department has just said that there are over 20 emails just in this latest small batch that can't even be released in any sort of redacted form because the classified material in them is so sensitive. When she got the SoS gig, she signed the usual federal paperwork that says that if she becomes aware of classified material existing in channels that aren't appropriate (as in, government-controlled secure access systems) regardless of whether or not it is so "marked," that she is criminally liable for its mishandling if she doesn't immediately involve security personnel to secure it. She completely blew off that requirement.
She also didn't release any of them to the public, without them going through the proper channels
No, what she did was have her own personal staff (people without clearances!) go through 60,000-some emails and decide BEFORE ANYONE IN THE GOVERNMENT GOT A LOOK AT THEM which were or weren't "work related." Which means that even among the emails they eventually passed along, her non-cleared personal employees at her foundation were pawing through what we now know were SAP-level documents. Further, she took everything and burned it to some USB drives, and gave at least one to her NON-CLEARED lawyer, who then put it in his own personal safe. Crimes, again, at several points along the way.
In other words, all the steps have been followed.
No, they haven't. She explicitly went about conducting official government business, including the handling of Special Access Program material, on a non-secured private server in her home - all for her personal convenience and so that she could avoid FOIA requests looking at her government correspondence. So the very first step that should have been followed never was, right there. She never even had State set her up with a secure mail account in the first place. You understand that, right? She never even COULD have followed the rules because she chose to avoid even the very first step of following the rules. Then she failed the next requirement, which was to turn over ALL of her government-related records at the time she left office - again, something she chose not to do, and she had to get subpoenaed for the information and dragged the process out for years after she left office before delivering the information after she'd had her own staff handle it, destroying over half of it. That's another violation of the required process. The archivists at State are the ones who are supposed to decide what is, and isn't relevant from a record-keeping point of view. She deliberately prevented that step. She then stripped off all of the meta data and other header information from all of the emails she DID deliver, and provided them as context-less printouts, on 50,000 pieces of paper. And that's just her getting started on doing it all wrong.
Until someone comes out and says that document so and so was classified at the time it was sent and was known or should have been known to be classified by the person sending it and/or receiving it, nothing wrong has occurred that crosses into any type of criminal offence of state secrecy laws.
This has already been established. You're not paying attention. Inspectors General from multiple intelligence agencies have said that there was at-the-time classified material (including the holy grail, SAP-level material) running around on a non-secure computer in her house.
Another megabytes the dust.