Rights, right?

Things never banned..

The state concerned over the high number of traffic accidents and thefts causing accidents has passed a new policy.

Under this ruling cars can be {cars, Trucks, Motorcycles, powered transport or capable of powered transport} .

Effective today the cost of drivers license increased to 500 dollars, and good for 1 year.

You must apply for it with the local chief of police and as it's may issue the chief may deny for no specified reason.

You cannot apply for it if you have any prior civil, criminal or traffic infractions.
You must be 18 or older.
You cannot purchase a car without a valid license and if for any reason your license becomes invalid you must return the car to an authorized holder or dealer.
Owning or having a car with an terminated or expired license on your property is a felony.
Your license must be valid to sell a car, if you sell more than 1 a year you must have dealers license.

You cannot sell your car to anyone that does not present a license.
There is a mandatory 14 day waiting period on all sales.
You cannot have more than one car unless you are a business with prior approval.

All transfers and sales must be checked through the License Authority to confirm the buyers license is valid.

A license check is required to buy gasoline.

When not in use or under the control of it's licensed owner the car must be disabled, secured in a garage, and locked using a lock approved by the police chief.

You must be register to the car you are driving and the car must not be on any prohibited list created by the energy conservation enforcement people.
Other licensed drivers may only use your car if you are present.

The major cities, since there is mass transit you must prove you need a license as you have no need to drive.

You may not drive your car to another state unless the license and type is recognized there.

You must file Part B of Registration if the car is from another state and it must be verified it is not modified outside the compliance list.

See I didn't ban cars either. I am reasonable. Of course if your rich or important this is not a handicap.

Eck!

What happened?

My brother was a sharp wit. So I'll borrow from him again as it applies.

Regarding the "Reasoned discourse" which was anything but..

It wasn't a total failure, as it can stand as an example of what not to do.

Or maybe, Those that repeat history are doomed to finally learn it.

May favorite was, In a battle of wits, you are unarmed, go away, quickly.
He was of no patience with those that made claims and not much else.

Bottom line it was the old rehash of Usenet troll post of leading with ideology, beliefs and some fragmentary statistics and engaging in a flamewar unprepared. Back in the Usenet days we had users that were likely experts in a wide range of fields and also good at spotting falsity and poorly thought out claims. The trolls would bring in their shills and often would get caught. In the end they were often exposed or badly ridiculed.

At the start it was clear, censorship and veiled agenda. The mind wasn't open as it required looking at many things that didn't fit the faith based model. Those that took the ball off her court got their full say and agree or not the First amendment was upheld.

I'll throw the first bone. Japete, I will defend to the end your right to say anything be it outrageous or simply poorly thought out. The expectation is you must honor that as well. All else is dishonorable.

Incoming, check six..


Eck!

Over at "Common gunsense"

First I will say it with there is no common sense there.

japete said...

--quote:
See anonymous above about arming airline passengers. Wow. " but aided and abetted by those who require passengers and pilots to be unarmed. A single armed passenger or crewman could have stopped the terrorists from taking over the plane, or significantly helped in preventing continued use of the plane." Are you sure you want that in writing? You have no idea if a single armed passenger could have stopped those terrorists- conjecture on your part and not fact.
--close quote

This is faulty on so many levels. Horribly so and an insult to those passengers of flight 93 and the three other aircraft that day.

At 09:28:17, Hijackers took over flight 93 with presumed intent of crashing in the Washington DC Captital area with one of the major government sites being targeted.

Due the the availability of flight recorder, radio communications and more than 10 cellphone calls the course of that flight was clear. The passengers did attempt to overtake the hijackers and interrupted their plan. We do know the crash was the result of the passengers attempting to take back the aircraft by physical force but were unable to do so before the hijackers crashed it rather than fail completely.

As such The people of Flight 93 exhibited the valor we expect of heros, they acted to the fullest extent rather than die in vain. To say it another way they were trying to be responsible and prevent a tragedy of greater proportions and possibly save their lives as well. This is not speculation.

Had one or several passengers a weapon of any effectiveness such as a firearm their capability to overcome the 4 hijackers would have have a higher probability of success. To deny they could have possibly had a better chance if armed is remarkable.

Japete's comment is a off hand dismissal without critical consideration. I would submit she believes that is because a firearm/gun is only evil and therefor cannot be of assistance. This is a failure of thought, counter to the initial precept of "an open mind.." and indicative of the underlying belief system. To wit, all guns cause death and therefor are evil. This is not fact it is belief. At this point we cannot have discourse as the initiator has made clear if it does not support her position all other positions are to be denied, derided, dismissed, suppressed and in the most most disingenuous ways to hide from a presented argument. This is corrupt to the fullest extent. Though the answers given to her have been met with a clear and consistent pattern of deceit and deception and obfuscation.


To this I call bullshit!
You are a liar, disingenuous and employ obfuscation in the conversation, it's not name calling is a clear use of descriptive terms regarding your acts.

Liar: a person who tells lies, falsehoods are lies.

Disingenuous: lacking in candor; also : giving a false appearance of simple frankness : calculating

Obfuscation: the concealment of intended meaning in communication, making communication confusing, intentionally ambiguous, and more difficult to interpret.

late update:
Thank You Joe Huffman:

Cognitive dissonance, when there are two ideas in conflict and they cannot be resolved and can manifest as cognitive distortions. This would form a cogent basis for the failed attempt to communicate where the belief system is confronted. See Wikipedia Cognitive distortion for more detailed analysis.

Your "Japete" actions are a ruse intended to present your view and only that and by doing so attract an audience. I firmly believe you have achieved attracting an audience but have failed in the most unattractive way to present an unbiased stance. I'm sure you got your faithful club members that believe your truth as they are also incapable of critical thought and willingly accept bankrupted thinking. Unfortunately for you you have attracted the curious and those that oppose failed thinking as well as those that believe in th right to own firearms for lawful use and I fully believe [but without any facts on my part to support it] that is the larger audience and they are clearly displeased with your tragic denial of anything that does not fit your paradigm. So you filter as a defense mechanism any answer that would not meet the ridding of evil guns criteria and it comes from the only violence you know.

Gun violence is a subset of violence. Any critical thinker can explain that but you cannot accept it. The converse, that is all gun violence is a superset of violence is patently false. You have asserted that position. By logic we conclude that removing guns does not remove violence and your thinking is defective. End game, discourse is not possible as the end result is only two sides delivering their position and there is no exchange possible.

Regarding compromise:

The end this discussion is in USA, our Constitution article 2 makes clear firearm ownership is a right. One that is being abridged incrementally without due consideration. When good citizens are forced to pay outrageous fees, climb all manner of bureaucratic walls, submit to regulations that are a minefield then the laws invoked are defective and must be struck. The courts have been presented with cases that clearly show the line is being crossed and have ruled that was so. We have no need to present arms to compel the government as it is still legitimate and the judiciary is still functional.

When compromise has the effect of suppression or submission without serving a greater good it is corrupt. We have seen compromise, the greater good is that common citizens are frustrated when they attempt to use the tools of self defense. That is broken.

To the uncritical thinkers:

I have gone past compromise and I find I near nothing left. You are whistling in the wind, ignoring reality and are the very wolf at the door. I have a low tolerance of varmints, be gone.


Everyone else; heads up, look ahead, look right, look left and check your six.


Eck!

Singing pigs and Logic

My younger brother once taught me a lesson.

It's impossible to argue with an irrational person.
Simple and very profound and painfully accurate.

The anti-firearms people and the religious fanatics are birds of a kin. They fervently believe they are right with nothing but false data, bankrupt conclusions and a firm belief that this time they can make it work. Since they do not aspire to critical thought, you cannot engage them in a dialog that does not either support their beliefs or result in stalemate.

Doing the same thing repeatedly is a symptom of insanity. Insanity is often applied as irrational thoughts and/or actions. Entering a discussion with a known outcome and hoping for a different one is a risky behavior.

With that if you do not want to appear insane, it is suggested that discourse with irrational people should not be attempted.

Or put anther way. Teaching a pig to sing is pointless. It annoys the pig and most everyone else. There is remote chance for success.

Ear plugs and secondary hearing protection are well advised.



Eck!

9 years..

I will not forget.

I am no longer angry.

They should fear me.

They will never rent space in my head.

I will try to be prepared.

We must still be the nation of laws that existed on 9/10/2001


Today is the 9/11 and nine years later. I can't forget the horror, shock and dismay.

I was angry, but life has taught me anger is sometimes a poor motivator. However, I have resolved to be more alert, prepared and have put some deep thought on who is best able to protect me, and those around me. As a result I do not fear them as I will not go to them and play on their field and if they come to me I get to play on my field. On my field I make the rules, they are designed for me to win. Reminder, you (the vermin) "We have awakened a sleeping giant and have instilled in him a terrible resolve" (Yamamoto) applies to you.

I prepare, not out of fear. I have learned that hurricanes, tornadoes, lightening, and inattentive drivers are a greater risk to my having a bad day. I prepare for those with an eye to the possibility of the unlikely. The vermin that made this day infamous I cannot prepare for as they did the unlikely though with far less than complete success.

For those that insist that we should be a nation of disarmed sheep overburdened with incomprehensible laws and nearly autonomous security agencies I say you have sold out to them. Them being those that want America to fail, collapse or die. They have no designs to invade, convert or change us. They only want anarchy so they can have it their way. To that I say stay over there, shoot each other up, live like vermin. Don't come here, we for the still shoot vermin. Hunting varmints is an American tradition too.

Message to the vermin. We are a free an open society. Open debate is encouraged. Do not let the few that are favorable to your case, belief or riotous cause give you cheer. It is only commentary and debate, and it can easily turn on you.

We still remain.



Eck!

The Big Lie

While touring the web I come to witness a perfect example of The Big Lie. Seem the rapacious religious right has no moral qualms about the use of hyperbole or out right Lies.

Tolerance is not negotiable. Bullies are not good, right or even moral. Bullies abusing anyone be they, geeks, gay, nerd, poor, shy, or whatever should have no place to hide. They are about power and control, they live for fear induced in others. They are criminals. Those that suggest not squelching those activities are criminals as are those the "look the other way".

Bottom line, schools should be safe and promote education, not hives of petty criminals
maintaining their domains like prisons.


Eck!