Access Denied

You do not have permissions to access this page.

Latest Posts Comments Articles
    • 20 Cognitive biases that screw up your decisions (Last post by MadHatter)
    • I am guilty of many if not ALL of these at one time or another. Further there are several that I am likely guilty of regularly. I think this is a wonderful tool for self evaluation. Frankly I doubt its possible to be human and not be guilty of some of these your entire life. Our brain filters things in particular ways and we can try to be aware of it and train it away but I doubt it can ever be totally stopped.
    • Doctor Who's Sonic Sunglasses - really? (Last post by Vera Gman)
    • I totaly agree with you the sunglasses really! First i thot it is a joke like 11th had it "fezes are cool". And i also agree that a sonic is way to powerful i know when i started whaching with 9th it just opend the dors or Doctor yousded like a somethin to translate. You can see crealy in second episode. And that is too powerful it is a screwdriver and what they do? Even in 50th anneversery they made a joke like the sonic is week and it is not a wapon. P.S.: sory abowt my englesh is my second language :blush:
    • Justice in the Force (Last post by den385)
    • The only answer I got is that Force is not my wishful thinking. But it makes so much sense that I feel better. Thank you, brothers)
    • Guns in America (Last post by Adder)
    • I guess the real issue isn't about access to weapons, especially in the US where they are everywhere already, but what degree of capability to inflict damage can a legal weapon have ie you cannot own a rocket launcher. Access to weapon's have and need a hard limit, so it should be about where that limit is most effective. Which means for defence purposes, then the limit would seem to be equivalent or higher then the threat. I know that view is slightly one dimensional, such that population of handgun wielding innocents against one criminal with an M4 would not be a good move for the sane criminal. One thing to consider is that limit for legal ownership is likely not going to increase, yet criminals will be able to continue to increase their weapon's lethality. So IMO the self defence from crime, and right to revolt are not really strong arguments... as no modern military is going to be stopped by numbers of citizens armed with rifles, carbines, shotguns and handguns. A possible idea would seem to be in affordable armour and protection measures but tighter building access controls and armoring levels in vehicles and structures help drive an increase in criminals capabilities to counter the increase protection measures. I don't have an answer for the US, as its too saturated, but I'm happy with Australia's approach despite being a gun nut myself. If anyone has a gun here where they shouldn't, then they get treated like a serious threat by Police no matter their actual intention - which does reduce the number of guns on the street. Unfortunately illegal guns are still easy to get here since we have a widespread organised crime problem, but I think it would be a lot worse if we did not have the law changes back in `96. I personally saw about 3 at social events before 96 with young adults, but haven't seen one since. I think there are other measures to protect oneself then pretending to be able to employ one effectively when needed, as the situation where one can do so would probably also be a situation which could be managed by other means - its the situation where other options for protection break down which also likely mean one is less able to use a gun effectively.... which means giving another criminal another weapon at the end of the day - unless they are actually there deliberately to kill you, like your being hunted or something, then it would be sleeping with one eye open and one hand of the weapon no doubt!! Of course my imagination is good enough to understand that is not a rule, and familiarity with ones premises against even multiple attackers in the dark would offer some advantage to the home owner, but I cannot help but think the criminal is probably going to be less rational, more resourced, not alone and probably ice'd to the hilt which means even getting the first hit/s might not be enough, but also not probably there to kill you but rather rob you and if its a choice between letting them ransack the house while you duck out the back, or risk confronting them in a gun fight, I'd take the former each time.
    • Workout Check-In Thread (Last post by MadHatter)
    • Hey all I wish to start working out because I need to drop the weight. My problem is that getting started for me. Its just hard to motivate myself because I dont really like working out and lack transportation most days. Does anyone have advice or work out plans that work from home mostly? Does anyone have advice on getting yourself started despite not really liking the idea.
    • Well done, feminism. Now men are afraid to help wo... (Last post by OB1Shinobi)
    • i dont want to be or seem rude or hostile i have to say that there is a huge disconnect between the lives and thoughts of real actual living men and the STEREOTYPES of what and how men think and act that are being presented in this thread
    • On War & Religion (Last post by OB1Shinobi)
    • Quote: Quote: Also, the assertion that any life has inherent value is false by necessity, since "inherent value" is already something internally inconsistent. Value is an outcome of putting value upon things. It cannot be inherent by definition. Nor does a majority of largely popular religions in our day, and by that I mean religions with any global influence of note, teach that life has inherent value. The value of life they teach is often only as far reaching as the religion's tribe and doesn't extend even as far as to all mankind, and it is also, in most cases, contingent upon either ourselves, a cosmic impersonal justice and morality system, or a countable set of deities. Value and inherency are two incompatible things. 1- i think i elaborated on this in my response but i wanted to add - did you really not understand the basic point i was expressing? i mean, i do respect that it is important to be as precise with our language as possible, but if we are communicating in a friendly and mutually uplifting way, do you really have to pick every damn thing apart to nth degree? its very frustrating discussing topics with you because we get sidetracked on minutia for no better reason than that you find an opportunity to be critical and wont let it pass but maybe that is only my impression and not your intent? 2 - EVERY religion teaches that there is a higher order of existence and that we are a part of that order - that we have a place and a purpose within it - THIS IS OUR VALUE and this is what religion does ---- so you arent going to explain why it is wrong to burn down villages? and your response to that is "NO YOU DO IT!" ? well i think i will say that numerous religion systems have explained this far better than i could do what is this time you speak of "long before religion existed"? i am talking about RELIGION - the phenomena of religion itself and not just some particular religion, such as taoism or jediism im not sure that we can speak of a time "before religion came along" ? my understanding is that the best of our modern thinking has determined that religion existed as far back as human beings can be said to be HUMAN BEINGS in the modern sense
    • Your Inner Council: What is it and how to develop ... (Last post by Loudzoo)
    • This is a great thread - and I like your list! Here are my current 7, in no particular order: George Fox - for original thought and steadfastness in the face of oppression Obi Wan Kenobi - just because . . . Bjorn Lomborg - for effective environmentalism, no matter how unfashionable ( Lao Tzu - for wisdom Thomas Young - the definitive polymath provides inspiration that everything is interesting Valentino Rossi - for bravery, technical acumen, persistence and sense of humour Edgar Mitchell - for pursuing his interests and beliefs in the face of opposition (
    • SW Force Awakens books (Last post by Br. John)
    • I have this one. Aftermath: Star Wars: Journey to The Force Awakens It starts immediately with the end of Return of the Jedi but only covers a short time period - not near the thirty years that have passed. I understand that time period (between VI and VII) will be filled in with more books. There's going to be a single episode comic that tells why C3PO Spoiler: has one red arm now. [attachment]
    • Rants far and wide (Last post by Connor L.)
    • I'm working so hard with so little result... This is slow. Slow is a good teacher, though... I must remember that.

There are 743 visitors, 9 guests and 37 members online (none in chat): Sirius, Br. John, Sarus, Grom Fett, Alethea Thompson, steamboat28, Jestor, Karn, ren, Kitsu Tails, Gisteron, Luthien, V-Tog, isisinabi, Alexandre Orion, Alan, Metsu Desal, Khaos, Kamizu, Edan, tzb, Calanon, Cabur Senaar, Cristris_Jons, SeventhSL, den385, Maro, Loudzoo, Nadintafro1, Competent, Tellahane, Corsair Gorscue, Alexander Orion, Mikhael, Ufon, Morkhen, Mael, Vera Gman, Jack.Troutman, Mattanator, MadHatter, Raven Crest.

Follow Us