StringJunky

Crazies are an unavoidable feature of life but guns are not. No, they can't be controlled with gun llaws but the damage they inflict can be lessened by keeping the two apart. Think of the damage that person would have inflicted had he had a gun.

So first I have a question in mind. Does the mobile company uses satellite or radio tower to transfer the wireless internet that we receive on our cell phone? I think they use both depending on where it's got to go... overseas for instance they might use satellite.... depends on traffic volume in the networks. You can get laptops with slots to put a SIM in and get external dongles. Not yet.

I thought you had made a mistake. OK: Feel free to make assertions based on your own personal code but don't conflate that with being objectively right.

That post was responding to Disarray. I...must.... stop.... responding. I don't go into this kind of discussion to'win' an argument; it's too serious a subject. I go in with the intention of testing my thoughts and having them critiqued. I also critique others thoughts on the matter. What I write at any given time is the current state of my thoughts and learning; it's a true record of where I'm at. I feel too many people, on subjects like this, say what they think other people want to hear. I don't mind being wrong if it allows me to understand more than I did yesterday. A group of people nodding constantly to each other won't learn much will they? I don't say to myself "Oh, what's the standard moral high ground and will give me the most rep or nods". I like to view and argue from different perspectives. There is some truth to be found in all of them.

Whichever way you look at it, you have a raised baseline of fear/caution not found in a typical UK resident. I have no premeditated means of self-defence available in my home; I worry about it as much as I worry about a meteorite crashing into it. Due to the general scarcity of firearms, the odds of being killed by an intruder because he doesn't need one to get what he wants or can't get one are considerably reduced

It's cognitively lazy, in a way, as it's far easier to twitch your forefinger than it is to negotiate.

No, I don't think so, they eventually redshift out of the visible spectrum beyond a certain expanse of time/distance. Leading on from Endy's question: does the photon redshift beyond detection just outside the HL distance? Is that what the HL is?

If you like guns for reasons other then self-defence that's ok but most people seem to own one because they think they need one. The very fears that propagate their prevalence, in turn, causes the dangers of being shot to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Zapatos You have a gun because everybody else does. This fact of firearms being highly prevalent increases your risk of harm by a firearm, therefore you need to own one. If you remove/reduce the prevalence you reduce or negate the need to own one.

<lightbulb moment> . Thanks. I thought Michel's thread was similar, and it did initiate this one, but I didn't want to confuse the flow of that one with my problem.

If the expansion of the universe is uniform throughout and is less than c, how is it that beyond the Hubble Limit (HL) a photon will never reach the observer? I can understand, at great distances, that it gives a certain measured or apparent expansion rate that may exceed c, causing a photon to redshift, but locally, around the photon, the expansion rate still matches, objectively, the expansion rate at the locality of the observer. As it stands atm, in my current - wrong, no doubt - understanding, it seems that, beyond the HL, the expansion actually increases incrementally faster than c locally, resulting in the photon never reaching the observer i.e. it doesn’t just seem to be a measurement effect. I know I’m missing something but I don’t know what.

Keep it in the fridge in a sealed bag to prevent condensation. Drill some holes in the fridge side to route the cables.

Some nice, thinly-veiled, derogatory and hand-wavey dismissive adjectives there which is usually where discussions on this sort of topic end up. I'm going to be bigger that and refrain from reciprocating in kind. Nothing like a purely qualitative, evidence-free diatribe, is there to cover up a Christian-inspired moral framework that is embeddedin western culture; forgiveness is all and morally 'superior' as declared, by some "atavistic" decree. Let's call "a spade a spade" here. I'm out.

Yes, that's right.

I'm going to bow out because the trouble with this sort of adversarial discussion is there are no quantitative references we can use to support our arguments. It's a bit like mathematicians arguing their respective positions solely with axioms; axioms are not provable. Our words are weightless assertions.

So, they carry guns to assuage their paranoia/fear because everyone else is carrying guns who too, in turn, wish to assuage their paranoia and fear because the former are carrying guns; nice little bit of mutally paraniod reciprocation.going on there. America is trapped in a vicious circle of endemic mistrust between its citizens, with the government and vice versa.

In your principle.

I'm discussing hypothetically about the principle. I'm not thinking of any particular country. I'm interpreting Ten oz's question generally; I think he is too. 'Unnecessarily' is subjective i.e. you don't think so.

This is what is absent and cannot be present when people are armed because paranoia/fear precludes it.

Because we, as citizens, have relinquished our right to exercise personal justice. We entrust the government to exercise it for us. It has been invested with that responsibility to act on our behalf in such circumstances.

Lovely strawman, you have learnt much in your discussions here. That's your opinion.`Your arrogance is disappointing to think that such a divisive question is quickly solved.

I was being playfully sarcastic.

We should eat beans, stick pipes up our bottoms and bottle it to run our cars. Ed: You are an Envangelist fisher of omnivores spreading the vegetarian gospel.

I wore that album out and Hemispheres. Lyrically, I rank Peart with Waters at clever, conceptual writing. They make a complex, sophisticated noise for a three piece rock band. The Trees is a great political tune: La Villa Strangiato is a good showcase for their composing and playing skills.

That's it! You've fixed the overpopulation problem.