Yeah... but we seem to just have sales. "This product is cheaper for everyone, even if you are unaware." I much prefer that. I get things, or more of things, specifically because they are on sale, but I don't want to have to spend the time going through coupons, cutting them out, collecting them, deciding which…

I would say 'no'... but that's mostly as someone who's waited in line behind people who swiped their debit card four times and still isn't working, and less as someone who understands the confusion... But my mum is like that, we don't even typically let her do it on her own, I either just have her debit card ahead of…

What Kategories said: all the factors you list don't typically exist for the reasons you list them. Still slow people, but not for those reasons, and discounting those reasons, I would say less slow people than you have to deal with.

If I'm not mistaken, that doesn't count for the FAA... but I don't know, I've only flown one hour in the past dozen years, I don't know what the rules are, and that hour was within Canada, so the FAA had nothing to do with anything.

Hey, I hate people talking on calls too, but... I'm not going to ban phones over it, just give people dirty looks and maybe sush them. Personal interaction, not statutory action.

I'm inclined to agree with the general "once it's out there, it's out there" message of other repliers. If you really don't want it out there, post it somewhere/somehow that it can't be saved and reuploaded, but since that's virtually impossible (for the technologically inclined, for those that aren't it's pretty…

I must have missed that being said.... or considering in Canada we spend about 4 months languishing that same statement, before spending 8 months stating that winter has arrived, I just didn't notice it.

Not much better...

I don't know if we can say for certain it doesn't apply to all black holes... but you're welcome to test the theory out.

Pff, that's the easy way to accomplish the same thing. Live a little! Fly into a black hole!

I'm inclined to agree with you. I do not recall him saying that.

Those are not all covered under the Roddenberry-Abrams Principle. You've described the Roddenberry-Aroeste, Roddenberry-de Lancie, and Roddenberry-Behr Principles!

I think you mean Gary Mitchell...

Interesting... Still can't understand how the front of a building would get ripped off/collapsed, but the rest would stay standing.

For what it's worth: you at 15 and him at 19 would be perfectly legal in Canada. Hell, so long as you are marginally older than 15 now, it wouldn't have just been legal due to a close-in-age exception, but it would have been completely legal, as the age of consent was 14 from the 19th century (at least that's what…

I'm pretty certain he was charged with what would be called our statutory rape law...

Not really, most of these sex crimes carry mandatory minimums, not sure why they did not apply here.

Age of consent was raised from 14 to 16 sometime in the past 4ish years.

Well of course we do! We just don't call it "statutory rape", like how we say indictable offense and summary conviction instead of felony and misdemeanor.

Minimum sentencing is, unfortunately, all over the Criminal Code. Just doing a search through the Code for "a minimum punishment of" found 75 results. Now, a lot of these are hybrid offenses, but even if we cut the number in half, that's still 33 offenses with mandatory minimums.