Philorandroid

There are plenty of resources out there for reactivating spent 9x19mm casings (Project ButWhatAbout) with supplies legally available in Western Europe, it's wishful thinking that just banning ammo would pan out. The genie's kind of out of the bottle.

That's the age range defined in the article, is it not?

How can you honestly dismiss an argument solely on the grounds that it lacks polarization?

Your intellectual cowardice is on display. Stick to your brutish name calling, you wouldn't do your side any favors arguing on its behalf.

Every public forum, ever. No Twitter discourse would be complete without it. Florida's "Don't Say Gay" bill had social leftists crying foul of targeting trans children by banning sexually explicit material in Kindergarten through third grade.

Perhaps the answer lies in teaching kids (young adults?) in an objective, strictly-educational manner as the time dawns for it to become relevant in their lives.

Of course that solution would be objected to by both sides. The social leftists think it's literally a death sentence to trans children to not teach 6-year-olds about anal sex, and populist conservatives think sex ed in any capacity is degenerate pedophilia.

I'd held the position for years that social media had demonstrably negative effects on childrens' minds -- and all the while, I was derided, because at the time there was no empirical evidence assembled conclusively stating such, and my inductive reasoning to that end was handwaved away.

I feel vindicated. Technology can be a powerful force for good, but perhaps giving impressionable young minds unrestricted access to the internet is short-sighted and fraught with peril.

Enlightening comment. Why's it a failure exclusive to capitalism? Would this not have happened under a mixed economy, or a centrally-planned one?

>Those who haven’t anything in them to tell them what they like and what they don’t—whether it is breeding, or happiness, or wisdom, or a code, however old-fashioned or however modern, go Nazi.

If Thompson's overarching point is that credulity, detachment from reality and moral flexibility are the different symptoms of willingness to support evil, then cheers to that; but unless she was being poetic, I'm not sure making a parlor game of it is conducive to honest judgment.

"It's not biased, because it's biased the way I want it to be."

You're responding to the argument you think I made and never did. No false equivalence, no hidden meaning, just fanciful fiction on your part.

My brother in Christ, re-evaluate your thorazine dosage.

You're getting really possessed over things I never said.

Because there's no platform or ideology on earth capable of paid advocacy besides the oil industry, and certainly no political movements ostensibly grounded in "green" advocacy.

>There is no scope for it causing 'respiratory issues'...

But it's also an easy platform to sell to the un/misinformed, and a great platform for a candidate who just wants what's healthiest for you and the environment.

That would be the pragmatic solution; but in states like CA, where rolling blackouts are already commonplace to reduce the strain on the grid, the implications of mandating the use of more electricity seem dire.

No One Is, It's Spontaneous™

The movements that evolve into genuine threats are only obvious in hindsight. We know the Beer Hall Putsch because, well, it's Hitler. If we afford the same level of proactive scrutiny to every demonstration, riot, or other indication of intent to subvert the democratic process following the assumption that it will metamorphose out of control, Jan 6 would be one of a great, great many: https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/inauguration-2017/washingt...

15% revolutionary LARP, 15% intent to cause damage/mayhem, 70% self-guided tour of Congress. If it were given the same benefit of the doubt as the BLM riots, it'd be classified as mostly people showing up to a rally because their idol told them to with bad actors leading the charge after he told them "go home".

The dollar-store gallows picture is still laughable.

Four rioters died of various causes, and Officer Sicknick was pepper sprayed and died of thromboembolic strokes -- it was falsely reported for weeks that he was beaten to death with a fire extinguisher. Saying he died "due to his injuries" contradicts the medical examiner's report, court proceedings and general sense.

Inigo Montoya would like a word, speaking of the cry wolf effect.

Yes, the implication was that tribalism by intellectual default is bad.

Okay, I'll bite. If Jan 6 really was an attempt at revolution to install a dictator, it should be seen as a laughable and emasculate event proving how anemic the movement is/was -- Alec Baldwin has successfully killed more people than an entire mob of Trump supporters so oft characterized as gun-toting lunatics.

>it just seems a pointless characterization that makes a readers eyes glaze.

On the contrary, they're priming their audience's opinions with masterful efficiency. They're making a bet that their readers will either nod in affirmation, or if they're not in the know about Parler, dismiss it out of hand. Not a defense of Parler on my part, but the cry wolf effect of labeling everything outside the sterile walled garden of limousine liberalism "far-right" is as tiresome as it is unhelpful.

"As Wikimedia projects have risen in prominence across the world, it has attracted increasing attention of those who would like to control the information published on it, for political or other reasons."

Not that curtailing conflicting interests where possible is wrong, but "a number of users with close connections with external parties... editing the platform in a coordinated fashion to advance the aim of those parties" echoes the Wikimedia Foundation's behavior in recent years, or tacit acceptance thereof.

Things are rarely so simple as "all it takes is for you to do it yourself." For instance, I'd been looking at land to build my own house on, since housing prices are extortionately high. The land to build on is seemingly even-less available, the material cost of building a house are quite high, and the mortgage rates to fund the materials and labor are astronomical. It's an unfortunate potpourri of poor circumstances.

It's not a pot-shot to say that remote learning is ineffective for children. If an environment tailored for education isn't effective, how could a home environment filled with distractions sans any full-time adult motivation be considered an upgrade?

Plus, once-in-a-100-years or not, a substantial portion of a generation of kids spent their formative years in a world that enforced physical separation, covered faces and general agoraphobia for a world bearing an unseen, airborne and contagious horror (with a fatality rate between 0.001 and 0.003 for ages 0-19, established since late 2020[1]). Children born during the pandemic have already demonstrated decreased IQs, and that's just in the short-term. We're probably going to see an upward trend in childhood neuroses and maladaptive social behavior in the years to come.

[1] - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2918-0

"No spinning blades" claim aside, this seems like quite a novel innovation!

Law is only a paper veneer to keep honest people honest. Legal acts do about as much to deter desertion and security leaks as speed limit signs keep people from speeding.

Indeed. "It's for your own good" is a terrifying thing to hear from authority.

I can say without a reasonable doubt that misinformation laws are not "good" laws. At absolute best they're as shortsighted as they are misguided, opening the door for a ruling party to arbitrarily declare what reality is and isn't, and take punitive action against anyone who disagrees.