 | | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
|
(...) Okay, but would you hold a profoundly retarded person equally culpable for his actions as a fully-functioning, mentally healthy adult? To do so would be, in my view, unforgiveably cruel and unfair. By the same token, if a child is (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
|
(...) Frank's "[as an abuse]" is a perfect clarification. Basically, I think that to deny access to our rights as citizens based on the age of the citizen (which I assert kids are) is exactly the moral equivalent of denying rights based on skin tone (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
|
(...) As one of the people suggesting that everything can be treated as a property right, I would like to point out that I don't think that compensation is the sole remedy. Certainly people who demonstrate an inability to restrain themselves need to (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
|
(...) Of course not, and in fact you've nicely paraphrased my objection to a pure "propertly loss/compensation" system of law that some here have previously proposed. But if the accepted laws of society recognize that you have duly repaid your debt (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: W
|
|
(...) We only ever hear from the puppet-master at the end of the show. ;) Scott A (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: W
|
|
(...) That's 'cause he thinks he's Major T. J. "King" Kong. ;) Scott A (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: And now for something completely different...
|
|
(...) Rather than simply restating the claim; perhaps you should just say why you think he is a "luddite"? Scott A (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
|
(...) One feeling I have is that if someone is still dangerous, they belong in detention or treatment. Simply hanging a sign around their neck (and these laws are just high tech versions of hanging a sign around a persons neck) isn't really going to (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Megan's Law, and its implications
|
|
(...) Does guilt vanish with repayment? If I steal your car and am required to compensate you and pay an additional fine, have I then _not_ stolen your car? I think there are some pretty disturbing abuses of these laws, and I go back and forth about (...) (22 years ago, 10-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Timmy
|
|
(...) Arrrrr, there be nuthin' a-wrong wi' Timmy. He be making good chum when chopped inta small 'nuf bits. If'n ya be fishing fer yer great white, then he be good fer trollin' abaft yer transom on a really big 'ook. Thrashes 'bout most convinc'n'ly (...) (22 years ago, 9-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Timmy
|
|
What is basicly wrong with Timmy? Personally, I find Timmys to be quite cute. I don't think they are frightening at all. I find that the "story of 'Evil Timmy'" to be quite hilarious, but not quite believeable. The line it came from, now that was (...) (22 years ago, 8-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: And now for something completely different...
|
|
(...) I gotta dig up an old article about defining "inverse hyperbolic co-tangent" that I wrote years ago--I think you'd appreciate it. At the very least, you'll say it's pure Dave K :) (...) Ow, shot right in my heart--I'll take that ;) That said, (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: And now for something completely different...
|
|
(...) But if you're dismissing the conclusion of Source A because it is flawed, then you must dismiss the same conclusion from Source B. If you're dismissing the conclusion from Source A because you believe that Source A is biased (which still (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: W
|
|
(...) I don't think you have clearance for that. He only speaks when he's in Undisclosed Locations.... (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: And now for something completely different...
|
|
(...) We are alike in kind, my friend, as far as digression goes. We differ only in degree. My digressions are short, while yours... what was it J2 said? "novella" I believe. Oh, and by the way, when I said I was going to let you have last word on (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: And now for something completely different...
|
|
(...) Just to make sure we're clear here. Are you saying it would have been better had no one ever discovered North America? Are you saying that you'd rather that the western hemisphere forever remained the domain of its then current inhabitants? (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: And now for something completely different...
|
|
(...) No. If two sources come to the same conclusion about something and one is biased and unworthy of further consideration that does not so tar the other source. (...) But I am not, in fact arguing that at all. I'm arguing for private exploitation (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Religious bigotry = Patriotism, say State Representatives
|
|
(...) Here's another take that makes it even more dubious that this guy (a judge?) has much justification for complaining. (URL) (scroll down to "Birth of an Urban Legend" and I can't say how long this cite will work)... -start- Birth of an Urban (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: And now for something completely different...
|
|
(...) If by "assertions with bias (but no cites)" you're referring to the listed citations of statements by the American Society for Cell Biology, Bob Park, and Joel Achenbach, I'm afraid the burden is on you to establish that these are biased (...) (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: W
|
|
(...) Oh I forgot the Quayle! Oh how that brings back the SNL skits... VP Cheney doesn't seem to get in the news as much--only thing I hear about him is his poor health and his oil ties with Iraq. I don't think I've ever heard him speak. Dave K (22 years ago, 7-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
