07-14-2014 07:46 AM
4,617 ... 7071727374 ...
tools
  1. ItnStln's Avatar
    Every time I see your name I think "Italian Stalin" ... sorry, shutting up now!
    lol it's all good. Besides, you're the only one who caught it!

    I misread it...I thought you said Stallion, not Stalin. Sorry!
    He's just the only one that said something. ;-)
    My apologies, I just realized you said "Stalin," not "Stallion."
    Aquila likes this.
    03-14-2013 08:43 PM
  2. Aquila's Avatar
    My apologies, I just realized you said "Stalin," not "Stallion."
    Yeah I think it's supposed to be "Rocky" and comes off as "Mussolini"
    03-14-2013 08:48 PM
  3. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    There are still people out there who believe that we never landed on the moon. I rest my case.
    03-14-2013 09:03 PM
  4. ItnStln's Avatar
    Yeah I think it's supposed to be "Rocky" and comes off as "Mussolini"
    lol, I'm sorry...how's that?
    03-14-2013 09:26 PM
  5. Aquila's Avatar
    lol, I'm sorry...how's that?
    That's why the original quote said, "shutting up now"... my brain is broken.
    03-14-2013 09:34 PM
  6. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    There are still people out there who believe that we never landed on the moon. I rest my case.
    Why haven't we been back? ...lol

    Sent from my ADR6410LVW using Android Central Forums
    geekymcfly likes this.
    03-15-2013 05:56 AM
  7. Aquila's Avatar
    Why haven't we been back? ...lol

    Sent from my ADR6410LVW using Android Central Forums
    No oil; no indigenous population to exploit. The people that do live there have big, big guns and don't want us there. No exploitation possible.
    geekymcfly likes this.
    03-15-2013 06:02 AM
  8. rexxman's Avatar
    Government, reguardless of which party or administration has become increasingly less concerned with anything other than growing government. Gun control came up. Domestic government agencies are loading up. The administration is asking for the right to use drones against the public. So is it really that far of a stretch that we COULD find ourselves under martial law?

    Sent from my ADR6410LVW using Android Central Forums
    When did the administration ask for the right to use drones against the public? Who did they ask?

    Blue 32gb Galaxy S3
    03-15-2013 06:54 AM
  9. Aquila's Avatar
    When did the administration ask for the right to use drones against the public? Who did they ask?

    Blue 32gb Galaxy S3
    To be specific, that'd be the 2007 administration and they didn't ask. They assumed the ability based on an interpretation of war time executive powers.
    geekymcfly likes this.
    03-15-2013 07:04 AM
  10. cdmjlt369's Avatar
    To be specific, that'd be the 2007 administration and they didn't ask. They assumed the ability based on an interpretation of war time executive powers.
    Yes...this is correct. The go ernment has been fighting over this issue a lot lately.The disturbing part is there doesn't have to be evidence presented before or after such a strike.



    http://abcnews.go.com/m/blogEntry?id=18412905

    from my ADR6410LVW using Android Central Forums
    Aquila likes this.
    03-15-2013 07:20 AM
  11. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    My apologies, I just realized you said "Stalin," not "Stallion."
    Oh crap. Yeah I missed that too. Maybe a typo?
    03-15-2013 12:35 PM
  12. ItnStln's Avatar
    Oh crap. Yeah I missed that too. Maybe a typo?
    That was my original thought, but see below:
    Yeah I think it's supposed to be "Rocky" and comes off as "Mussolini"
    How do I change my username?!?!
    03-15-2013 08:20 PM
  13. Aquila's Avatar
    That was my original thought, but see below:


    How do I change my username?!?!
    LoL 90% of people will see 'Rocky'
    03-15-2013 08:27 PM
  14. ItnStln's Avatar
    LoL 90% of people will see 'Rocky'
    Hopefully lol.
    Aquila and jdbii like this.
    03-15-2013 08:35 PM
  15. Kevin OQuinn's Avatar
    LoL 90% of people will see 'Rocky'
    I mean we all did right? :-)
    Aquila likes this.
    03-15-2013 09:34 PM
  16. ItnStln's Avatar
    I mean we all did right? :-)
    I did!
    jdbii likes this.
    03-15-2013 10:33 PM
  17. Aquila's Avatar
    Drone strikes violate Pak sovereignty: UN - thenews.com.pk

    Apparently the UN and Pakistan both agree that us using drones in their country is highly illegal and disrespectful, especially given that nearly or at least, depending on source, 20% of the casualties are civilians.
    03-16-2013 12:26 AM
  18. Ayy Pii's Avatar
    Has anyone seen a actual drone strike?
    03-16-2013 03:47 AM
  19. Aquila's Avatar
    Has anyone seen a actual drone strike?
    Just video.
    03-16-2013 04:11 AM
  20. Ayy Pii's Avatar
    Just video.
    can you show me ive never seen what this looks like
    03-16-2013 11:43 AM
  21. Tall Mike 2145's Avatar
    We would have to have a another secession of states, IMO, to legally be able to deploy the U.S. military against domestic interests, otherwise it's still a violation of P.C.A. And hey... what the heck about due-process?

    I mean, I know Obama has said he has no intentions, and no I don't buy into the rhetoric of the Republican Party that Obama is just a nascent form of Hitler, but Senator Paul (above) is absolutely right on this point. This is unconstitutional, kingly / emperorly / dictatorly power we're talking about here. This goes against our founding documents, the Federalist Papers, the Declaration of Independence, the reason we left Europe to come found colonies here in the first place, and heck, even the Magna Carta. I mean, this is some pretty huge stuff.

    The Federal Government doesn't have the authority to give itself the authority to do this.

    As far as such previous luminaries as MLK Jr., Malcolm X, and probably even Thomas Jefferson would likely contend, social contract theory has to apply to our nation, and according to it, there does eventually come a point at which we the people have to step up and stop this from going further. If there is no benefit from obeying the laws, and in fact if there is a detriment derived from obeying the laws, then the agreement that binds everyone to those laws is essentially broken. This is not to say it gives us all license to unlimitedly do whatever we want (e.g. "chaotic anarchy") but it means we're not obliged to follow those laws which are going to hurt us, and we have a right to change them, and ultimately, if it comes to it (hopefully not), by any means necessary.
    Aquila and metz65 like this.
    03-16-2013 10:06 PM
  22. Live2ride883's Avatar
    I found this tonight and thought I would share.

    YouTube
    03-17-2013 09:02 PM
  23. jdbii's Avatar
    Is this for real? If it is, I don't think he is doing the pro-2nd Amend camp any favors with these kind of theatrics.

    I hate to nit-pick (because any statement can be dissected,criticized, and disputed) but I think he misrepresented Yamamoto's "gun-behind-every-blade-of-grass" as the USA's best line of defense from foreign invasion. Yamamoto spent many years in the States and was educated at Harvard. Unless I don't remember my history studies from my university days, he was adamantly opposed to going to the war with USA. He argued it would be a disaster for Japan since the US's industrial capacity and resources dwarfed that of Japan. Yamamoto may have stated the "gun-behind-every-blade" statement to some imbecile in his government or to some committee in order to get their attention and make a point, but Yamamoto never for one second believed Japan was going to invade the US mainland. (I am no expert, I'm just stating my opinion). I do in fact believe there is some soundness to the argument.......I just don't think Yamamoto meant it literally.

    As far as something being illegal for looking like something it isn't. I think it is okay to make it illegal based on looks alone. I don't see a difference between that and having laws that make it illegal to hold up a bank with a toy gun that looks real.
    03-18-2013 02:08 PM
  24. Aquila's Avatar
    Is this for real? If it is, I don't think he is doing the pro-2nd Amend camp any favors with these kind of theatrics.

    I hate to nit-pick (because any statement can be dissected,criticized, and disputed) but I think he misrepresented Yamamoto's "gun-behind-every-blade-of-grass" as the USA's best line of defense from foreign invasion. Yamamoto spent many years in the States and was educated at Harvard. Unless I don't remember my history studies from my university days, he was adamantly opposed to going to the war with USA. He argued it would be a disaster for Japan since the US's industrial capacity and resources dwarfed that of Japan. Yamamoto may have stated the "gun-behind-every-blade" statement to some imbecile in his government or to some committee in order to get their attention and make a point, but Yamamoto never for one second believed Japan was going to invade the US mainland. (I am no expert, I'm just stating my opinion). I do in fact believe there is some soundness to the argument.......I just don't think Yamamoto meant it literally.

    As far as something being illegal for looking like something it isn't. I think it is okay to make it illegal based on looks alone. I don't see a difference between that and having laws that make it illegal to hold up a bank with a toy gun that looks real.
    I think the guy in the video is serious and agree he is harming his cause more than helping. That being said, there isn't really a pro-2nd amendment or anti-2nd amendment camps. 99% of American's are pro 2nd amendment; we're just in disagreement on how to interpret it 250 years later. For example, do we take it at face value outside the context of the rest of the Constitution? Do we consider the other writings by and those that inspired the authors? Do we analyze the stated reasons or make up new ones? Both sides are guilty of inventing reasons and interpretations of the 2nd amendment; so heavily that most of us don't even know we're arguing about the wrong amendment.

    Very interesting point on Yamamoto. It should be added that Japan resisted open war with the US at every cause; even warning our allies and our ambassador's directly about their intentions to, "surprise" us with battle in the Pacific. Regardless of whether war with Japan was necessary, through strangulating boycotts and other sanctions, we gave them no alternative. I'd agree that Japan wanted that war to be as limited as possible, because their real enemy was the fact that they were a set of islands, cut off from the rest of the world effectively by the US and China, and unable to stand as an economical power without an extensive trade network.

    Good point about bank robberies. I'm not sure it's exactly the same reason, because using a toy gun to rob a bank is using the threat of violence, and the bank employees may not know it's a toy. That's intentionally escalating the situation in terms of the bank's fear and therefore coerced compliance and it's done so intentionally, with the added cynicism of trying to dodge a label of, "armed robbery", which adds prison time, etc. In the case of "assault weapons", there are two obvious sides: 1. The reality that these weapons are no more or less dangerous than their non "assault weapon" counterparts, that are merely cosmetically different. That's like saying putting a case that makes your iPhone look like a Galaxy S3 changes the manufacturer or gives you TouchWiz. 2. Law enforcement officers on the other side of the barrel have no idea if your firearm comes with a selector switch. By the numbers, they can assume it doesn't, but they've been burnt by that before. I don't really believe law enforcement officers need to be coddled, but lets be real... the safer they feel (before they become abusive of their powers), the calmer they are. The fastest road to LEO's participating in an active police state is confrontations with armed civilians; Those confrontations and the results are hugely wasteful given that the fear on both sides will usually be the result of ignorance and misunderstanding, not of legitimate malice.
    jdbii likes this.
    03-20-2013 05:17 AM
  25. jdbii's Avatar
    In my opinion Drones are going to go main stream very quickly.

    Maybe in less than 10 years UPS and FedEx will deliver packages by drones, hospitals will transport donor organs, law enforcement will use in Search and Rescue, and any number of Federal, State and private organizations will use to deliver things and collect data. It is lot easier to fly a drone over a live volcano than a helicopter, and the Coast Guard will be able to conduct SAR when searches otherwise would have been called off. I could see DNA samples or bullet casings retrieved from a crime scene and sent by drone to the lab for immediate analysis. Law enforcement in the major metropolis's worldwide, where warrants for searches are required, will probably start deploying the police for searches without a warrant in hand. They will get the judge to sign it, and then send the warrant off by drone to the police at site so time isn't wasted waiting for the warrant.

    With drones being so pervasive and widely used, it is only a matter of time before law enforcement puts a gun on a drone. In some stake-out somewhere, armed drones will be used to supplement or supplant snipers. In the beginning they will just be used as data and intel, but the pressure will be so great to arm them that I see it as an inevitable. It won't be a question of the US military using drones domestically against the citizenry. It will be a question of when the use of lethal force is justified by law enforcement.
    03-24-2013 02:50 PM
4,617 ... 7071727374 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Larva Cartoon - FREE and FUNNY Application
    By liontyping in forum Android Apps
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-21-2014, 11:03 AM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-25-2013, 07:33 AM
  3. POI information and Gallery
    By robjulo in forum Samsung Galaxy S4
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 11:00 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2013, 04:28 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD