Cliven Bundy didn’t win, though, which is the goal of the folks who think that their guns will save them. The whole klan still lost, because the government has a monopoly on force. The feds were patient, sure, and probably in part because of fears of dealing with the shitshow using force would have gotten them into.…

I feel like you’re mistaken.

I know, and I should read the whole ruling for the reasoning specifically about concealed carry.

I think this country needs to have a real conversation about guns, and what we want to do about them. I doubt it’ll happen, so we’ll just constantly shout at each other about it, but in a perfect world we’d do it. I legitimately question whether the 2nd amendment is essentially outdated—there’s precious little…

I don’t assume everyone’s an asshole. I assume that when someone’s being an asshole, that means that they’ve waived the right to complain if, when they’re being an asshole about something they don’t know anything about, they get a testy reply. Which is what happened here. You were condescending, despite being directly…

Actually, it can!

They do not have a contract. Are you not able to read the article, or are you just trolling?

What the heck? Did the MoU give a date past the Olympics, or did the judge just pull a Reagan (my word for when the government transparently supports business in a labor dispute where it’s very clear management is in the wrong, a la the air traffic controllers that Reagan screwed over, beginning the breaking of…

Huh. Interestin’...I checked too and you’re right.

It seems weird to me to give a sic to “premedidated” rather than just assuming that what was heard as a d was actually a t?

I said it in another recent thread on the same subject and I’ll say it again here: I don’t get the reasoning against the DP except in practical terms...which means that I’m opposed to it generally (we’re really bad at it) but in favor theoretically...and this is AFAIK definitely one of those ideal cases, where reality…

“Are you actually asking how it could be just, or was that a rhetorical question? Because it sure seems like you are saying that it is somehow unjust to have a society that doesn’t provide for the state-sanctioned homicide as punishment for crimes.”

I asked how it could be just. Simply saying that lots of people think it is does not answer that.

You can make the same argument about all criminal punishment. It just doesn’t hold up. “Any society that locks people in a cage for their crimes is monstrous as well” would use the same logic of the anti-death-penalty logic. (That said, we are terrible at its use and I’m therefore generally against it because we’re…

I’m somewhat confused about your position. You do recognize that just because someone has a right to do something, it doesn’t mean that they aren’t an a-hole for doing it, right? So therfore your responses, predicated as they are on the question of whether there’s a right—versus whether it’s normatively…

Well, I don’t WANT that; thought I was clear about my opinion on the matter. ...

I don’t understand this idea of blaming the scores for the toxicity of gaming culture. I mean, yeah, it’s toxic. But somehow the film industry managed to avoid this particular toxicity despite having had a scored review system since, what, the 20s? So what is Metacritic doing “wrong” to engender this toxicity that…

I really do agree with you on the overall point, so forgive me for bein’ all quibbly, but: In your hypothetical, doesn’t your employer have a group plan in general? Presumably, there was paperwork as part of that when they signed up, right? So...if there’s a form and an organization is like “Nope!” then the insurance…

Oh hell naw, that’s their money!

I’m not sure I get your drift? I mean, it would be more paperwork received (and printed), and therefore more expensive in that sense, but I’m not sure it would be dramatically so? Though I don’t recall who processes that paperwork now...whether it’s the insurance companies or the government itself.