Why the fuck didn't Twizzlers capitalise on the non-plastic straw market?!
You're pretty much simultaneously claiming that Cummings was an astute liar but also an incompetent fool. Cumming fooled almost half a nation into voting against their interets, in a vote that Nigel Farage called 2 days prior - "If I lost 48 to 52, I'd be out campaigning the very next day".
Boris didn't join the Leave campaign because of Cummings. He joined after his meeting with Lebedev. Much to the surprise of his old school mate David Cameron, who went on record saying as much in interview at the time.
Personally, I think Dominic Cummings is nothing but a weasel looking out for his own interests. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson is nothing but a knock off Rowan Atkinson character, performed by fellow Oxford alumni Alexander Boris DePfeffel Johnson. Someone who desperately wanted to be able to charge the same for his private party appearances as "Former Prime Minister Tony Blair".
The difference being shouting "FIRE" in a theatre only remotely might kill people, while pulling a gun will much more likely lead to death. Also, the laws against shouting "FIRE" have proven far more effective than anything with guns.
You cannot compare the 2nd Amendment with any other law. It doesn't have any rational justification behind it.
There are ways, it just requires Federal law makers to actually have balls. Unfortunately, Federal law is woefully insufficient - whether it be in writing legislation or Supreme Court rulings. States can't make effective laws, because poorly written Federal laws and a politically stacked Supreme Court can easily circumvent them.
Even more unfortunately, it's most likely that conservatives will unravel Federal law, but only for their benefit. They've already been practising their "Convention of the States". Furthermore, state governments are predominantly Republican, in a disproportionate misrepresentation of the US population.
And that last part is the key problem: we have a "representative" democracy. We vote for someone to go to Washington and make/vote on laws on our behalf. This made sense 100 years ago, when it took forever to travel and communicate. Now, technology gives us the ability to communicate with almost anyone else in the world instantly. We need a direct democracy, where everyone gets to have their say, as much as they want to.
Furthermore, people shouldn't just have the opportunity to vote on what kind of laws should be made, but on the individual fleshed out law itself, and also in review of laws both before they're enacted and after they've had some time to play out. Disinformation campaigns have proven effective for very occassional votes, but they cannot be maintained indefinately. We need to make it hard to manipulate voting.
We need to go back to thinking about democracy in such a way as to make it bullet proof. If you look at the UK, they vote with pencils - all because there is the remote possibility of replacing a pen with one that has disappearing ink. That's the kind of abject paranoia we need to be implementing.
Australia have done pretty well with it all. Pay people money for their guns, then fine people if they still have them outside the law.
Handguns in particular are completely unnecessary. They don't shoot very accurately, they only exist to perpetuate violence between people.
People parrot that a lot. Of the two core developers, one is an unhinged tankie, the other is far more moderate and reasonable.
At the end of the day though, it's your instance admin that you're putting trust into. Regardless of what version it says at the bottom of the page, the website could be running any code at any time.
I mean I probably should have bolded the "DR" part. But I feel like I'm probably right, MS are scum, they're worse than Facebook and Google. At least the others can maintain the pretence that user data theft is some kind of exchange for free access.
You can't build a car without paying for the nuts and bolts. We make the nuts and bolts (data), there's a trillion dollar industry trading our nuts and bolts, and we don't get paid anything. People say it's worth pennies per year, but trillions of dollars on 8 billion people mean that peoples' data is worth somewhere around $1,000 per year.
TL;DR Microsoft needs your data to make more money from you after you pay for their products.
You losing your protection for having a gun does nothing to help the person that you killed with it.
But the right to bear arms is in no way in line with the others. Freedom of speech makes sense. Equal treatment of all citizens by the government does also. The right to play with guns is in no way comparable to this.
Please answer me this: why should you have the right to play with guns, with few if any restrictions, when it is clear that everyone having such a right directly leads to death? Why is your right to have fun more important than other peoples' lives?
Edit: Why is it that no one can justify why they should have guns?? Did you trade your balls in to buy your gun?
That isn't inherently lemmy.ml, it's just that many hexbear and lemmygrad users moonlight over there these days. Point being the instance isn't quite as definitive a label as the style that has spilled over.
Absolutely.
Although I imagine some sort of German engineered version, where the hole isn't all that big but somehow maintains structural integrity yet significant flow rate.
The life we could've had if McDonalds didn't dictate things.