That may have reduced the likelihood, but closing them down would not prevent incidents from showing up in this list. For instance, check https://www.schoolsecurity.org/trends/violent-deaths-and-sch... >March 16, 2005:…
>At the end of the day, we all want food, shelter, safety, and some amount of personal privacy and freedom. That may be the case, but different policies and social norms will result in different people getting more or…
>My limited but non-zero experience in real-world situations has shown that "Angry Mobs" are far more likely to be armed than "Peaceful people" And my point is that it doesn't really matter that much if the angry mob is…
There is a fundamental asymmetry. Attackers only have to fight battles that they judge to be worth fighting. If they don't think their chances are good enough, whether because they don't have the right weapons or the…
Or you could compare them to the partisans that conducted sabotage against the Wehrmacht in Eastern Europe, for instance. The military would grind to a halt without a functioning supply chain, and it's very difficult to…
It doesn't really work both ways. Angry mobs looking for food don't need guns to cause problems for peaceful people. Peaceful people do need guns to protect themselves from angry mobs looking for food.
I don't think you could have gotten that less straight. What is convenient is that many definitions exist, so a convenient one can be chosen based on its suitability for making a particular argument at a particular…
>Quite a few Convenient. Where do they suggest a rigorous definition of a support group in that article?
>The idea is that women have less access to various support networks that men do Source? Is there a rigorous definition of a support network, and some statistics showing that women have less access to them?
>it's strong evidence that we shouldn't be uniquely concerned over negative portrayals of trademarks. Again I'm not sure how it's evidence of that, but I agree that we should not be uniquely concerned about negative…
The plaintiff would have to show that they lost revenue as a result of the false statements, which I would think would be particularly difficult to do in that case, because portrayals made openly by a competitor are not…
>The fact that we don't ban deceptively positive depictions of branded products is strong evidence that we do trust consumers to know the difference between fiction and reality. I would definitely not classify that as…
>We still allow people to publicly criticize products. Yes, but you're not allowed to harm people or businesses by knowingly making false statements about the product in your criticism. I would guess that a negative…
It looks like even putting it nicely did not save tasogare's comment from our most brave and wonderful moderator. Many of mine were also flagged, despite me being extremely polite.
>The big issue with your reasoning: racism isn't an opinion, it's a crime. Some manifestations of it are in some jurisdictions. How is that an issue with my reasoning? >You're talking about freedom, but for good reason…
It is a whole lot easier to expel immigrants than it is to expel a large chunk of the native population, but yes you are correct. Everything I have said applies equally well to immigrants, though immigrants will tend to…
Perhaps you should consider that it does make sense, and you simply don't want to understand it. I don't think you're intellectually incapable of understanding it.
>It's a really fundamental tradition of french society, going back to the revolution (or even before) that you can think how you like. That doesn't mean you have to want people who happen to think very differently to…
>See I actually think that it's a good thing to call for, say , "stamp out racism". Does stamping out racism to you involve preventing people from freely and equally participating in the political process? By which I…
The way people in a society think influences the character of that society, obviously. Do you disagree with that? If people in some society like the way their society is, more or less, why should they want to import a…
>that didn't make any of them right. Didn't make them right about what? >The fact that millions of people are still racists nowadays doesn't mean we should accept that either. You do have to share a country with them,…
No matter where you were in the developed world, the majority in 1932 (though not necessarily the majority of the elites) would have held similar views or views that were even further away from yours. The US, for…
Are the yellow vests looting?
Is he wrong though?
>If you run a restaurant, you can refuse to do business with anyone you choose. You will suffer legal consequences if it's determined that you refused to do business with them on the basis of certain characteristics…
That may have reduced the likelihood, but closing them down would not prevent incidents from showing up in this list. For instance, check https://www.schoolsecurity.org/trends/violent-deaths-and-sch... >March 16, 2005:…
>At the end of the day, we all want food, shelter, safety, and some amount of personal privacy and freedom. That may be the case, but different policies and social norms will result in different people getting more or…
>My limited but non-zero experience in real-world situations has shown that "Angry Mobs" are far more likely to be armed than "Peaceful people" And my point is that it doesn't really matter that much if the angry mob is…
There is a fundamental asymmetry. Attackers only have to fight battles that they judge to be worth fighting. If they don't think their chances are good enough, whether because they don't have the right weapons or the…
Or you could compare them to the partisans that conducted sabotage against the Wehrmacht in Eastern Europe, for instance. The military would grind to a halt without a functioning supply chain, and it's very difficult to…
It doesn't really work both ways. Angry mobs looking for food don't need guns to cause problems for peaceful people. Peaceful people do need guns to protect themselves from angry mobs looking for food.
I don't think you could have gotten that less straight. What is convenient is that many definitions exist, so a convenient one can be chosen based on its suitability for making a particular argument at a particular…
>Quite a few Convenient. Where do they suggest a rigorous definition of a support group in that article?
>The idea is that women have less access to various support networks that men do Source? Is there a rigorous definition of a support network, and some statistics showing that women have less access to them?
>it's strong evidence that we shouldn't be uniquely concerned over negative portrayals of trademarks. Again I'm not sure how it's evidence of that, but I agree that we should not be uniquely concerned about negative…
The plaintiff would have to show that they lost revenue as a result of the false statements, which I would think would be particularly difficult to do in that case, because portrayals made openly by a competitor are not…
>The fact that we don't ban deceptively positive depictions of branded products is strong evidence that we do trust consumers to know the difference between fiction and reality. I would definitely not classify that as…
>We still allow people to publicly criticize products. Yes, but you're not allowed to harm people or businesses by knowingly making false statements about the product in your criticism. I would guess that a negative…
It looks like even putting it nicely did not save tasogare's comment from our most brave and wonderful moderator. Many of mine were also flagged, despite me being extremely polite.
>The big issue with your reasoning: racism isn't an opinion, it's a crime. Some manifestations of it are in some jurisdictions. How is that an issue with my reasoning? >You're talking about freedom, but for good reason…
It is a whole lot easier to expel immigrants than it is to expel a large chunk of the native population, but yes you are correct. Everything I have said applies equally well to immigrants, though immigrants will tend to…
Perhaps you should consider that it does make sense, and you simply don't want to understand it. I don't think you're intellectually incapable of understanding it.
>It's a really fundamental tradition of french society, going back to the revolution (or even before) that you can think how you like. That doesn't mean you have to want people who happen to think very differently to…
>See I actually think that it's a good thing to call for, say , "stamp out racism". Does stamping out racism to you involve preventing people from freely and equally participating in the political process? By which I…
The way people in a society think influences the character of that society, obviously. Do you disagree with that? If people in some society like the way their society is, more or less, why should they want to import a…
>that didn't make any of them right. Didn't make them right about what? >The fact that millions of people are still racists nowadays doesn't mean we should accept that either. You do have to share a country with them,…
No matter where you were in the developed world, the majority in 1932 (though not necessarily the majority of the elites) would have held similar views or views that were even further away from yours. The US, for…
Are the yellow vests looting?
Is he wrong though?
>If you run a restaurant, you can refuse to do business with anyone you choose. You will suffer legal consequences if it's determined that you refused to do business with them on the basis of certain characteristics…