I can see that perhaps fewer firearms MIGHT correlate with fewer people shot, but probably it would work the other way. Someone contemplating potential use of a firearm, for whatever reason, surely can readily obtain a firearm, regardless of whether or not "printable guns" become an additional access method. And I notice that marijuana and cocaine have been illegal for longer than I have been alive, as has under-age drinking of alcohol, but I know of nothing besides chosing NOT TO that keeps anyone wanting alcohol, marijuana, or cocaine from getting some, and it seems that the number detered by law is quite possibly exceeded by the number spurred on by the concept of doing something prohibited.
Which is nothing.
The value of a democracy and a republic is that decisions are hard to make and implement, making the society somewhat stable, while also tending towards the members redoubling efforts during tough times, making them resilient as well. But the idea that such dcisions as are made have greater legitimacy is hogwash. Crowd sourcing works like a market, one idea and one transaction at a time; making rules based on majority opinion is just a less compeytent form of dictatorship.
I hope we get to the DuneUniverse soon, where Families have Atomics and there is no public aurthority.
Things change, I am said to be good at dealing with change, but I DO NOT like it. Yet what I am used to and like, now, was unimaginable when I started my path (life: 1948; computers: 1965) a few years ago. Viva la difference. But it's a MIND shift I think anyway - its not a tool on my job or an appliance in my home or a major corporate asset...it's getting so it's more like a door knob (famously held to be the total example of what computers WERE NOT). And I'm beginning to see it that way myself - dislike for the small expensive doodad that likely will be lost or stolen, beginning to be replaced by a feeling that my net and compute comnection is a basic sense, that I wish always to have everywhere and when.
Doomed from the start. First we have people expecting that they can do more together than apart, usually untrue. Totally untrue if it involves voting...that is, the idea that a community can make a decision and compel its members to go along. Legitimate when arguably the survival of community and members is at stake but not otherwise. Neither fuel economy nor automobile exhaust is a problem at all, in that sense.
Then we have the idea of standards and objectivity, another set of false concepts, more trouble than they are worth.
I doubt it is possible to regularly operate an automobile without obtaining a pretty good idea of its fuel economy. Enough said.
The whole thing just taxes people with better things to spend their money on for something that really does not matter, except maybe to people who believe in such fantasies as nations controlling their fate, governments having wisdom, or that people are too stupid to conserve if they find something to be scarce or expensive and being used wastefully. If it’s cheap and abundant it CAN’T be wasted.
There are so many things alleged drivers do besides drive..paint toenails, eat lunch, discipline kids/pets, drink beverages (the more dangerous of which seem to be the hot ones that can end up in senistive boldily places), look for toll change, talk to the other folks in the car, stare at the attractive person of the opposite/appropriate sex, etc. that I see no reason why we should worry about the various uses and missuses of telephones/tablets/smartphones/texting platforms. And besides, as long as we let PEOPLE drive without supervision, injuries we will have, regardless. Even airplanes being flown by computers and supervised by expert pilots crash. THIS IS JUST MORE BLUE SMOKE AND MIRRORS!
When people die, we feel motivated to make recurrence less likely, but when what we do won't do that, but only make it look like our leaders care, I say its a crock of male bovine solid waste.
Since we can not trust voters (after all, with a dozen measures, a person could vote yes on them all, making no choice at all where priority matters (as it does everywhere but ego boo) lets let all "public" action be driven either by cash, or people SIGNING UP for the ONE THING they want
defamation - the concept that when it happens to you, there is a law to let you seek damages or at least a stop to it - like privacy and "intellectual property", these concepts are history. And I don't think that they will be missed. Law is mostly there to let the State maintain a monopoly of violence, hopefully enabling the rest of us to avoid violence. The nature of internet harms being what it is, violence might remain, but not against the perpetrator. So the law need not care either.
It just helps to remember the science of it - rights exist for the convenience of society and those in charge of it and for no other reason...
I've been saying it since 1956 at least. Because we have approached the carrying capacity of our planet, both in terms of our ability to annihilate ourselves and in terms of resources, we had better be prepared to move out there. I don't claim to be in Hawking's league, but I really doubt one has to be a genius to see that this needs to be done.
Anyway, Governments have no more right to zap people than I do; both might decide to, and go do it, but neither has such a right.
Therefore, if the untrustworthy folks in Washington, DC, Tehran, and Pyonyang (the three leading terrorists although China and Russia are in the game too) have such arms, we should too.
"The anarchist dictum when it comes to grand juries" sounds like the Wise Guy's Creed to me.
As a Celebrity is merely someone who is well-known, for being well-known, I am really not interested in any celebrity's views about anything, except in a few cases their view of whatever they themselves did to help make their name well-known. And it would never occur to me to spend a nickel more, or a nickel less, on anything, due to political associations. There are indeed people I tend to buy from, or will not buy from, because I have my opinions, but these would be opinions about THEM, not about whatever off-topic issue they favor or oppose.
I like Card in general and the Ender books; aside from the origin story and the first couple of times DC tried to convince me the Man of Steel might bite the dust in THAT issue, Superman is just not on my radar, illustrated or otherwise. I did kinda like the old TV show though, but hated the movies.
And it makes even more sense than I thought it would. The only likely flaw I see if confirmation bias...it just seems SO obvious that most folks distrust utter strangers, and that entirely unanimous agreement tends not to foster creativity...
Just because half the human race is infuriated, and the other half feeling now justified in enslaving or worse the first half, does not make the research mistaken, wrong, or unfortunate. If I wanted to exterminate a few billion people, or all of them, I would not even think to look for an excuse or a reason - what might such be, after all? Policy (speaking as one who has been there) has nothing at all to do with facts. It has to do with advantage, in terms of mostly relative values, then coalition maintenance, then vested interests be they material or immaterial.
Facts come along when ordinary people discover that none of the policies work, unless they are bent to accommodate the facts.
There are lots of 500-year or longer historical trends - not enough for genetics but nearly enough for cultural stuff - that show that diverse populations that SURVIVE as diverse populations have to develop ways and means of turning same to advantage, which usually improves economic prospects as well. There APPEAR to be some differences in the means and medians for various characteristics, linked to gender or maybe predominant continent of origin. Perhaps this sort of diversity too is helpful.
Then there is the billiard ball theory, that everybody had to start somewhere, and kept going until the water got too darn deep. That would be to places like the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Ocean coasts of the big Europe-Africa-Asia-Australia landmass, which might of course also be benefiting from (a) ocean harbors and (b) rivers draining hinterlands. Who knows but its fascinating.
DON'T LET THE PC POLICE waste any more of any one's time! Merge them with USA Homeland Security, and then abolish them totally!
Just think if everyone followed their league: absolutely refused to comply with laws and regulations particularly that part of that elites win, others lose pile of $^% that hides monopolistic bribe sharing behind a thin veil of concern for safety, equality, the environment, etc. As the so-called EU is one of the worst offenders, we might see their area returned to its 1945 condition, all their pathetic governments collapsed. And if all Europe could be totally freed from government, we could try it next in the USA.
Quantity has a quality all its own. But as no one REALLY wants to use these things, being able to spend one's competitors into the poor house is almost as good as winning an exchange of weapons, and far more environmentally sound...