Please wait...
2025-08-12 11:59 from Nurb432
I think that is the angle they used for generations to keep
women from voting, especially here in the US. "you stay home and
tend the house, you don't need to contribute to important stuff,
nor have the knowledge"
( at least that is how i remember it in history class.. i'm old,
but not so old to have lived it :) )
I am knowledgeable about that, but the idea that if you don't contribute resources to public affairs you don't get to decide how you use them is a bit different.
But yeah... if you were a house wife doing house chores only you didn't have the option to contribute to public affairs. And I agree it sucks if you get forced out with no option to get in. But on the other hand I wonder how many women would op-in or opt-out if given an honest choice.
These days I think I would opt out of the system.
2025-08-11 00:16 from IGnatius T Foobar <ajc@citadel.org>
The whole "18 for responsibilities, 21 for privileges" thing is
bullshit.
Complete bullshit. I didn't know it was lowered to 18 for the draft.
That's horrible.
s/privileges/rights/
And when was the draft ever not 18? I'm no historian but I'd bet over a century ago it was even lower.
I think it was 21 up until the 1940s. It also had a cap age. Both were moved due to the war, and it never returned back to where it was.
( for a specific person around here, my disclaimer was added "I think".. not 100% sure )
Mon Aug 25 2025 01:09:46 UTC from zelgomer
And when was the draft ever not 18? I'm no historian but I'd bet over a century ago it was even lower.
I have an impopular opinion here, but I think that the people
contributing money and resources should be the people deciding how
those are used. That is the edge Athens had back in the day.
If it's "impopular" then call me impopular. I do believe voting should only be available to taxpayers. Freeloaders shouldn't get to vote for more freeloading.
Tytler observed centuries ago why that collapses societies.
In the US, voting was originally only available to white male landowners over 35. While perhaps those specific criteria may not be workable today, the point is that they wanted the important policy decisions being made by people who had some skin in the game.
And the anti-gun crowd awakens. "high capacity and assault weapons need to be banned"
No, those people need banned.
I've said it before, I've gotten in trouble for saying it, but I'll still say it again:
People who support gun control laws deserve to be shot.
Kalifornia bans Glock"
not sure the details, but its not constitutional regardless. That is one thing our founders screwed up on as SCOTUS has no teeth.. And there should have been some penalty for legislatures that pass 'clearly unconstitutional laws'.
Left out the marketing term "assault" ( which honestly im so sick of hearing )
And i guess the slow quiet push for "3D printers need a hidden watermark" is advancing, out of the public eye.
Fri Sep 19 2025 03:24:45 UTC from IGnatius T FoobarMost anti-2A people believe there are only two kinds of guns: AR-15 (all long guns) and Glock (all handguns).
Agreed.
Or at the least they get no assistance when they are being robbed or something.
Thu Sep 04 2025 03:33:27 UTC from IGnatius T FoobarI've said it before, I've gotten in trouble for saying it, but I'll still say it again:
People who support gun control laws deserve to be shot.
Something like that, yes. As you know, my style is hyperbolic. So I've gotten myself in trouble for the first version, even though it's pretty clear that I'm not about to go around shooting gun grabbers. That's the point though -- people who think that criminalizing guns would reduce violence are amazingly stupid, and we would be well served by removing them from the gene pool -- and from polite society.
3D printers with watermarks, aint ever gonna happen. most all 3d printers are made in china or europe, along with filament. the manufacturers will simply ignore any mandate. any dumb thing they add, we'll simply replace the offending part with one we machine up ourselves. oh wait, sorta like we can machine up our own guns made of metal. oooo we need to add watermarks to milling machines next. people are significantly dumber in the last 10 years. watch the videos of students on campus trying to answer simple 5th grade questions. these zombies vote and will likely be your doctor in 10 years (MD doctor in the future does not equate to MD today)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tf4cPdz1r8
Fri Sep 19 2025 10:25:11 AM UTC
Left out the marketing term "assault" ( which honestly im so sick of hearing )
And i guess the slow quiet push for "3D printers need a hidden watermark" is advancing, out of the public eye.
Fri Sep 19 2025 03:24:45 UTC from IGnatius T FoobarMost anti-2A people believe there are only two kinds of guns: AR-15 (all long guns) and Glock (all handguns).
There are already a few that do 'phone home' and prevents you from printing 'bad things'. So they do exist... But yes, easy to get around or just build your own. I know someone who built his own from scratch at least 10 years ago. Pretty cool machine too..
Fri Sep 26 2025 16:46:55 UTC from test23D printers with watermarks, aint ever gonna happen. most all 3d printers are made in china or europe, along with filament. the manufacturers will simply ignore any mandate. any dumb thing they add, we'll simply replace the offending part with one we machine up ourselves. oh wait, sorta like we can machine up our own guns made of metal. oooo we need to add watermarks to milling machines next. people are significantly dumber in the last 10 years. watch the videos of students on campus trying to answer simple 5th grade questions. these zombies vote and will likely be your doctor in 10 years (MD doctor in the future does not equate to MD today)