pliftkl

The spoken language has some horrible holes in it. A couple of my favorite examples: "You cannot put too much salt in a margarita" (which has two completely opposite meanings) and "I did not say he beat his dog" (which can have seven different underlying meanings depending on where you put the inflection).

Small clarification - I don't think you can sell it to an FFL or through an FFL. I think you'd be able to sell it directly to another person, but there's no mechanism to have it go through the NICS system (which requires a manufacturer and serial number).

It's not specifically to address the quality, but the way in which those employees are valued. If a company wants to bring in a crappy engineer for $200k/year, I think that's their business. If we put in place a point system (education, years of experience, technologies), you'll simply end up with all out fraud and resume packing. It ultimately comes down to what a sponsoring company is willing to pay. Let the market decide which ones are most valuable, rather than a random lottery.

Obviously there would need to be some level of enforcement to prevent "wage adjustment" once the applicant arrives.

The primary reasoning behind the suggestion is to prevent the H1B from being used as a mechanism for driving down wages.

Or, as proposed elsewhere, keep the cap and remove the lottery system. Grant visas to the top paid applicants. This removes allows companies with a need to great engineers to pay for them, and reduces the influx of lower quality H1-B's.

"There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know." - Donald Rumsfeld

I remember fondly the advice of my first computer science instructor in the mid-80's: Becoming a great programmer is easy! Get a notebook. When you make a mistake, write it down. Don't make that mistake again.

It's simplistic, but it's resonated with me for 30+ years.

While I wasn't getting blackout drunk repeatedly, I definitely had an unhealthy relationship with alcohol, and removing alcohol had enormous positive effects on my cognitive abilities.

I also do a heavy dose of caffeine in the morning.

Think about it this way. What if there were a million doors, and you pick one. The host then opens 999,998 other doors, showing you nothing behind them. Stick with your choice, or pick the other door? Of course you pick the other door - you had only a one in a million shot at picking the right door.

You can't win a gun battle with the United States government. What you can do is to be armed and force the government to kill you (and risk being killed). While Bundy shouldn't have been anyone's poster child for the 2nd amendment, when armed men rallied around him, the government backed down (and gave him his cattle back) rather ran risk a showdown. When the government faces a group of 30 citizens with AR-15's, the government has a choice to make: fight, and a lot of people die, or back down. That's the inherent value of the 2nd Amendment as a balance to government power.

I think you are missing his point. The term "assault weapons" is a made up term. It describes a series of cosmetic features on a rifle, and if a rifle has a sufficient number of those features, it becomes an "assault weapon". The gun community, the people who you would need in order to buy your weapons, is not going to like that name. Since most of your potential buyers aren't going to like the idea itself, you might as well come up with a website name that they are going to find blatantly offensive.

Didn't the killer shoot the person who would have monitored the firearms first before taking them? So this solution would only be helpful if law enforcement actively tracked the position of all "assault weapons" at all times. And that seems like a bad idea on a variety of levels.