Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for SMA

Real Name SMA   
Search for:
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
Nickname Scottish Martial Arts
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Homepage http://
Signed On Jun 16, 2002, 23:16
Total Comments 2880 (Senior)
User ID 13410
User comment history
< Newer [ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 ] Older >

News Comments > DCS: UH-1H Huey Beta Access with Preorders
2. Re: DCS: UH-1H Huey Beta Access with Preorders Apr 30, 2013, 21:28 Scottish Martial Arts
It's probably for the best, as flying this thing is so bloody difficult that it would just be embarrassing to fly with other people. Gonna need at least a few weeks, before I'd feel comfortable being seen behind the cyclic of the Huey. (I haven't crashed or anything, but god damn does my flying look sloppy, almost like a top that is starting to lose its spin and wobble out of control)

Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Evening Tech Bits
3. Re: Ubuntu version 13.0.4 is now available Apr 26, 2013, 01:38 Scottish Martial Arts
When did they cut support to 9 months? I thought the non LTS releases were supported for 18 months.

With this release. I believe they're trying to encourage non-enthusiasts to stick with the LTS releases, but I may be completely misremembering their reasoning.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Air Conflicts: Vietnam "Takeoff" Trailer
3. Re: Air Conflicts: Vietnam Apr 17, 2013, 13:25 Scottish Martial Arts
Much more interested in DCS UH-1 Huey, which is immenent at this point. Once the 1.2.4 patch for DCS World is ready, the Huey module will launch at the same time. The 1.2.4 changelog is out at this point and all indications suggest that its just undergoing final testing before launch. Once you catch the simulation bug, thus sort of arcade stuff just doesn't cut it anymore.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Skyrim Development Ends; Bethesda on to "Next Adventure"
32. Re: Skyrim Development Ends; Bethesda on to Apr 15, 2013, 14:51 Scottish Martial Arts
FO3 was an amazing game and I liked it better than NV like many other people. It was ghastly if you were a fallout 1-2 fan and expected a clone of these, because it's a completely different game.

It had poor writing, poor system design, cookie-cutter dungeon design, decent art direction but some horrifically incompetent art (look at the proportions of the character models sometime, particularly their hands), poor loot progression (mortal sin for what was essentially a dungeon crawler), poor combat, and while it provided a whole world for you to explore, exploration by and large wasn't very rewarding. And of course it's technical design bore no resemblance whatsoever to the originals, the world didn't feel much like Fallout, and the story barely meshed with the proceeding titles, but hey I'll be kind and assume to be valid the argument that fans of a franchise shouldn't expect a truly "next-gen" sequel to be anything like its predecessors. Even then, however, you're still left with the fact that taken on its own merits, FO3 wasn't well designed at all. If you only judge a game by whether or not you had fun playing it, and not by how engaging or intriguing the gameplay that creates that fun is, then I guess FO3 was alright. But then you can have a lot of fun playing checkers, even though when compared to chess it's not a particularly interesting or compelling game.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Skyrim Development Ends; Bethesda on to "Next Adventure"
22. Re: Skyrim Development Ends; Bethesda on to Apr 15, 2013, 14:03 Scottish Martial Arts
Rattlehead wrote on Apr 15, 2013, 11:43:
Good, now get to work on Fallout 4.

Good god, no. Skyrim vastly exceeded expectations and was a superb title, but it only exceeded expectations because Fallout 3 was so ghastly. Bethesda needs to stick to what they do well rather than mangling vastly different franchises until they fit the mold that Bethesda has made for itself.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > America's Army Beta Signups
21. Re: America's Army Beta Signups Apr 9, 2013, 09:05 Scottish Martial Arts
Thats because most troops are very lousy shots in combat conditions, it takes a certain type to be able to stay cool enough to actually do anything other than spray & pray under fire.

The other piece is that American soldiers are generally trained to, when under fire, keep up a steady volume of return fire, even if they can't yet see individual enemy soldiers. The idea is that if you are in contact and under fire, you generally are going to have a difficult time maneuvering, so at that point if you aren't at least firing your weapon in the general direction of the enemy -- and thus providing some minimal degree of suppressive fire so that friendly elements out of immediate contact can maneuver to kill the enemy -- then you aren't contributing to the fight.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
55. Re: Op Ed Apr 7, 2013, 11:14 Scottish Martial Arts
PHJF wrote on Apr 7, 2013, 08:47:
The next time somebody comes to me with a problem of theirs I'm going to tell them to fuck off because at least they aren't in Afghanistan. Problem solved!

I didn't mean to come off that way, although rereading my posts I certainly did sound as if that was what I suggesting. My main point was that people just need to keep things in perspective.

Having worked with foster kids for a while now, the average age I work with is about 15 or so, and about 8 out of 10 of the kids I work with are completely fucked. Let me repeat that: 15 years old and your life is completely fucked. Now strictly speaking, there's generally nothing physically stopping them, such as being wheel chair bound, from turning their life around, but the sum total of the shit they have been through, and all the things that their shitbag parents neglected to teach or instill in them, is such that they don't have the habits, knowledge, or skills to make the decisions necessary to turn things around. Aristotle was absolutely right when he suggested that good habits are essential to virtuous behavior, and that those who develop bad habits at an early age will rarely if ever live virtuous lives. And by the time the kid is a teenager it's generally game over: their habits have formed, they have a natural (for their age) distrust of authority figures and desire to assert themselves as individuals, and no one ever instilled in them virtues that create a moral compass (shoplifting is bad, recreational drugs probably won't move my life forward, school is essential to having any sort of life, etc.). These kids are absolutely making bad choices, but who, in their right mind, would think these bad choices are on them, and not on the people whose only qualification to raise a child was a functioning womb and a wad of sperm? The thing is though, it's the kid who gets to bear the consequence of parental incompetence: a ruined life for the next generation.

Your life, and my life, is pretty good in comparison, huh? I'm certainly not going to get worked up if I ever find myself making less than my coworkers for some arbitrary and unfair reason. I'd try to fix it, sure, just as we should try to fix unequal pay between men and women, but we shouldn't pretend that, in the scheme of things, this is some great evil. A minor evil, to be sure, but not a great one.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
48. Re: Op Ed Apr 7, 2013, 03:03 Scottish Martial Arts
Flatline wrote on Apr 7, 2013, 02:52:
The inequality and gender bias against women is HARDLY a "first world problem". It manifests in different ways depending on the culture. Here in the US, it manifests in a payroll prejudice, and slut shaming if you're raped (I'll go ahead and point to Stubenville to show you what I mean). In some countries, you're put to death if you're the victim of the rape because you've slut shamed your family so bad by being raped.

I've bolded the key part. Sure, pay inequality is part of a larger problem that is serious. That yuppy women make slightly less money than yuppy men, however, is not the moral equivalent of being stoned to death for being raped.

In a perfect world, society would treat men and women equally. We don't live in a perfect world. That some women chose to treat their marginally smaller income as a horrific crime of oppression that has rendered them helpless victims is not proof of great injustice, but proof of their own self-absorption and ingratitude for how good they have it. You know, the word cisgendered, antonym to transgendered, was thrown around a few times in this thread and the article that prompted it. Do you know how many transgendered women are unemployed, and thus making zero pennies on the dollar, as opposed to 85 pennies? No one knows for certain, but estimates are in the 50-60% range. If you get to know the trans community a bit, anecdotally, you'll quickly discover that the ONLY trans women who are not destitute are either sex workers or post-college transitioners who are software engineers. Everyone else flounders in poverty. Not to mention the snide remarks, stares, etc. they get for just having the temerity of going out in public, nor to mention the anguish they experience for not having the security of being secure in their gender identity. There's some privilege for an upset upper-class feminist to check: having the privilege of the world treating your gender as if it's normal and natural.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
45. Re: Op Ed Apr 7, 2013, 02:46 Scottish Martial Arts
Quboid wrote on Apr 6, 2013, 20:29:
It's not the biggest problem in the world, but does that mean we should ignore it? Should we ignore everything except whatever is the biggest problem?

Didn't say that. But it strikes me as a very first world problem compared to what I see on a daily basis. And if I worked with poor people from the third world, rather than foster kids from the San Francisco Bay Area? Well, the cup of rage would runneth over the next time I meet some educated, well-to-do, white or Asian woman who feels a great injustice has been done to her because she is statistically more likely to make marginally less money than her male coworkers.

Is it an injustice? Sure. Should we right injustice where ever possible? Of course. But is it comparable to being 11 years old and having a dad who sells your food stamps so he can buy drugs for himself and his girlfriend? No, absolutely not, and anyone who suggests that it is needs to wake the fuck up. There's a lot of evil in this world, and most of it is beyond anyone's ability to fix. The Greek's were right: human existence is inherently tragic. Don't settle for injustice, but also be grateful that Zeus didn't give you a destiny from the jar purely of evil, rather than the jar containing evil mixed with the good, because chances are, there are people -- not far away in the third world, but in the very city in which you live -- who, through no fault of their own, have lives much worse than yours.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
35. Re: Op Ed Apr 6, 2013, 17:16 Scottish Martial Arts
That or they want to be on record as doing their part to "make the world a better place" without having to actually put much effort into it beyond, say, a drive-by piece on a blog.

Seriously. Talk is cheap. As is visiting Tijuana for a whirlwind 4-day weekend to "build houses for the poor." Anyone that actually tries "to make the world a better place" for a career, as opposed to making the occasional impassioned blog post, can tell you how intractable most social problems are. By the time you've met a 12 year old gang member, a 13 year old meth addict, and a 14 year old prostitute, or two, you begin to recognize that any change you effect will be marginal at best, and anyone who thinks they've "done their part" by writing a blog post is completely blind.

And to be perfectly blunt, given the scope and severity of what your average foster kid, for example, has been through, the fact that upper middle to upper class college educated cisgendered white women make about 15% less than their male counterparts strikes me as relatively minor problem in the scheme of things.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
25. Re: Op Ed Apr 6, 2013, 15:44 Scottish Martial Arts
netnerd85 wrote on Apr 6, 2013, 15:31:
Cutter wrote on Apr 6, 2013, 13:38:
I much prefer, rum, sodomy, and the lash.
Keep your rum and lash (not sure what that is TBH :|) but I'm all for sodomy - Vodka helps here!

*30 mins of politically incorrect comments that weren't published here*

He was paraphrasing Churchill's famous quip that the history of the Royal Navy is that of "rum, sodomy, and the lash." And a lash is simply an improvised whip, with whipping being a common disciplinary measure on board Royal Navy vessels of the Age of Sail.

As for the article in question, anyone whose stated objective is to "raise awareness" needs to be put against a wall and shot. I've gradually shifted leftward in my political convictions over the last decade or so -- although I still consider myself a moderate pragmatist -- but one thing that continues to irk me is leftwing "activists" who feel that "raising awareness" accomplishes anything more than their own self-satisfaction.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
29. Re: Morning Tech Bits Apr 5, 2013, 20:37 Scottish Martial Arts
bigspender wrote on Apr 5, 2013, 18:29:
guide for installing windows 8? LOL whats next guide to getting inside a car?

Yeah, that article was a major WTF. I figured something from "Overclockers Club" would be a performance tweaking guide for a fresh Win8 installation or something. But no, it's literally a three page guide of "insert installation media, follow the prompts, and set a good password".
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
14. Re: More Big Picture Details Apr 5, 2013, 15:02 Scottish Martial Arts
As long as I can continue to have a desktop interface (i.e. 24 inch widescreen monitor, full keyboard, 5 button mouse, reference quality speakers, etc.) and so long as the host has the power of a desktop and isn't permanently gimped, I don't really care what the form factor of the host is. If I can plug an actual interface into it and not be crippled with a touch screen, the host can be a smart phone for all I care. On the other hand, it will probably be many years before a smart phone offers comparable power to desktops at a comparable price, and likewise it will probably never be the case that a smart phone or laptop or tablet or whatever the NEXT BIG THING is will be as customizable and upgradeable and as repairable at home as a desktop.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Out of the Blue
29. Re: Out of the Blue Apr 4, 2013, 21:24 Scottish Martial Arts
NegaDeath wrote on Apr 4, 2013, 16:48:
Roger Ebert passed away.

I'm quite bummed about his death. I read his reviews nearly every Friday morning for years until his health problems started drastically limiting his output. He understood and could communicate the humanistic virtues of literature (film being a subset of literature) better than nearly every other critic writing for a popular audience. I'd even venture that between Ebert and the film unit I had in AP English as a high school senior, the foundation was laid for me to finally "get" literature and the humanities partway through my sophomore year of college, a lifelong and invaluable gift that even most highly educated and highly intelligent people never get to have (ask your average engineering student what they think of the literature class they are "forced" to take, and they'll call it a complete waste of time).

As for Ebert and video games, I'd wager that while Ebert knew little about video games, the video game fans who were so critical of Ebert knew even less about art.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Morning Safety Dance
8. Re: Morning Safety Dance Mar 29, 2013, 13:33 Scottish Martial Arts
PropheT wrote on Mar 29, 2013, 12:25:
The job of her department is to monitor and understand threats, potential threats, communication mediums used to initiate them, and so on. If she hasn't used email in 10 years and is unfamiliar with modern social communication sites it makes it much harder to make decisions based on how they should be handled in respect to her department's needs.

To make it simple, have you ever had a job where middle management had no idea what you do for a living, but still made decisions about how you do it and when, and why, and the resources involved, based on views that didn't necessarily mesh with the reality of your work? It's like that, and it's not an unreasonable point of view.

I am unconvinced that terrorists are coordinating their plots through Twitter with enough regularity that it is a good use of the Secretary of Homeland Security's time to be tweeting with any frequency. One can understand what Twitter is, how to use it, and how, under limited circumstances, it can be quite useful, while recognizing that little, if any, of your time would be productively spent in using it. If Napolitano didn't know what Twitter was, or couldn't figure out how to use GMail, I would be concerned. But if she just feels that her time is more productively spent elsewhere, then more power to her.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Morning Safety Dance
7. Re: Morning Safety Dance Mar 29, 2013, 13:16 Scottish Martial Arts
I really dont understand by what you mean when you put work in parenthesis.

Because unless you work in public relations, or some other job where your primary contribution to the organization is communicating information, then time spent on email is not productive time, but instead the necessary evil you have to complete before you can be productive. Let's say you're a programmer: you're being productive when you are writing and debugging code. You're not being productive when you're reading about upcoming meetings or changes in organizational policy. Those are both pieces of information you need to have, so it's not as if the time is wasted, but if you spend the first 90 minutes of your work day reading and answering email, that's 90 minutes where you're not writing and debugging code, or whatever your primary job is.

Email can be an effective tool, but in my experience, in most organizations, it is a poorly utilized timesink that detracts from, rather than enhances productivity. Most studies on the productivity effects of email would back me up on this point.

When email communicates important information briefly, then it's a wonderful tool, but such email is pretty rare in my experience. As a result, most email does not actually enhance your ability to accomplish your primary job tasks. If you're going to maximize the productivity effects of email, then you need to get real good at deciding what's important enough to read, what's important enough to skim, what's important enough to (briefly) respond to, and what you can safely ignore. Unfortunately, most people can't do that, and they spend time on email far past the point of diminishing returns.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Morning Safety Dance
3. Re: Morning Safety Dance Mar 29, 2013, 11:09 Scottish Martial Arts
Not concerned at all about Napolitano's lack of email use. From what I heard when she revealed this in an interview a few days ago, it's not that she can't figure out how to use email, which would be VERY worrying, it's that she just thinks it's a near complete waste of time. Email can create a paper trail which is useful in many situations, but the telephone is faster, and without proper discipline, it becomes incredibly easy to "work" on your email all day, rather than actually get real work done. Looked at that way, I don't mind at all that she doesn't use it except when she absolutely has to.

edit: Read the article and it's fucking ridiculous. The author makes no distinction between technology that is useful and technology that is a distraction: you are either "into technology" or you are not. He's horrified that she doesn't tweet! One can be VERY technically inclined and yet recognize that most new technologies, particularly when we're using technology as a euphemism for social media applications, are complete wastes of time. I don't tweet, I don't use Facebook, I try to limit the amount of time I spend on internet fora (although their lure can be seductive, as this post illustrates), and I try to limit the amount of time I spend playing games (my biggest weakness). Despite that, I'm a hobbyist programmer who has made some open source contributions, and am currently teaching myself the computer engineering curriculum -- on data structures and algorithms, multivariable calculus, and electromagnetism at the moment --from my alma mater -- my degree is in Latin and Greek: turns out being able to read difficult, complex texts with interest and understanding without the aid of a teacher IS a useful skill! -- preparatory to changing careers into software development. In short, I'm pretty technically inclined, but according to this douchebag I shouldn't have any duties related to technology because I don't tweet.

This comment was edited on Mar 29, 2013, 11:30.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
71. Re: Op Ed Mar 19, 2013, 20:54 Scottish Martial Arts
So what do you suggest? People just cave into what the left wants and remove rights in line of "feeling good'? When you really break down the incidents that have happened recently, it ties far more into mental state of the nutbags performing these heinous acts than anything else. Yet there isn't a major outcry to look at ways to improve mental heath treatment so that these types of people don't continue to snap in the first place. Why is that? Is it because it's a far more complicated issue than just passing feel good happy bans on semi automatic guns?

That you seem to be equating "the public good" with "feeling good" says nothing complimentary about the sophistication of your political thought. With regard to mental health, any cursory glance of the headlines regarding the political response to Newtown would tell you that nearly every politician who has had something to say on this issue, has also been advocating for increased mental health services and mental health screening. If you know someone who has a lexisnexis subscription ask them to run a search over the past 90 days with the key words: Newtown AND "Mental Health". You'll quickly find that your assertion holds no water. Finally, the subset of the mentally ill which are violent is EXTREMELY small. While some mass shooters are mentally ill, the Aurora gunman comes to mind, some are not, the Columbine shooters or Anders Breivik come to mind there. While I certainly don't wish to suggest that we should ignore people's mental health needs, you shouldn't pretend that institutionalizing crazies will stop gun violence, just as Feinstein et al. shouldn't pretend that stopping the further sale of assault rifles and similar weapons will have a similar effect.

When it comes to mental health, mental "pathologies" are often nothing more than behaviors which run against societal norms, as opposed to something which has a physiological, measurable basis. We shouldn't assume that just because someone does something objectionable, even something monsterous, that the person in question hears voices, cannot restrain their mood, or is incapable of rational thought: some people make a rational choice to lash out at the world, and even if psychiatric diagnostics (which is mostly educated guesswork) had the accuracy of say diagnosing pneumonia, we still wouldn't be able to screen such people.

To be clear, my argument is not that banning assault rifles and similar weapons will stop gun violence. Rather, my contention is that even if one assumes that the 2nd Amendment's purpose is to place a check on tyrannical usurpers of the Republic -- rather than a measure which was intended to mollify enough anti-Federalists that the Constitution could even be ratified in the first place -- then the technology of war has sufficiently moved on from 1789 that the 2nd Amendment no longer provides that check.* I'm sorry but if usurpers seized control of the military/government and the rest of the world stood idly by, you would be a far more effective freedom fighter by using improvised explosives that you detonate from a distance. Any sort of effective resistance, even one fighting a purely assymetric war, would depend upon having mortars, machine guns, MANPADS, and antitank weapons, which, in order to acquire in the numbers you would need, would require the backing of a foreign power, much like how we backed the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan in the 80s. In other words, the check against tyranny will not come from your private gun collection: it will likely come from foreign covert intervention, supplying money, munitions, and special forces teams to train and lead those Americans willing to fight against the new tyrannical regime. So to reiterate, the 2nd Amendment may once have been a check against tyrannical ambitions, but it is no longer.

If the freedom to own weapons does not check the tyrannical tendencies of the government, then what good does it do? Well, the fact that many weapons do have civil applications -- namely personal defense, hunting, wildlife control, and sport -- suggests to me that restricting ownership of all firearms is going way too far. The question then becomes, which firearms have a civil application which provides benefits in excess of the costs of having such weapons freely available? To look at it another way, cars are extremely deadly pieces of machinery, but since they are freely available, we enjoy a degree of mobility that enhances are lives so much that the risk of being killed or maimed in a car accident is relatively insignificant in comparison. We should look at our gun laws the same way: does the benefits of having this weapon freely available outweigh the cost? Shotguns, for example, fulfill all of the aforementioned civil applications well, and yet are less effective at killing large numbers of people, so the benefits surely outweigh the costs, and as a consequence it only makes sense that people should be able to own shotguns. Assault rifles however, have only one civil application: sport shooting. Using an assault rifle for home defense is lunacy, as the rounds could overpenetrate through walls and hit loved ones, and a weapon that size would be difficult to maneuver in the cramped quarters of a house: an M1911 would do you far more good. Likewise, while an assault rifle can definitely kill a deer, deer hunters generally only get one good shot at the animal before it darts off into the forest, so an assault rifle has no real advantages over a traditional hunting rifle. Now, firing an M-16 on burst fire is a great deal of fun, and firing an AK-47 on full auto is even more fun, but if the best civil use an assault rifle can be put to use for is having fun at the rifle range, does that really serve a good which is greater than the costs which are incurred, namely that someone who so decides can easily kill large numbers of innocents, or even large numbers of responding police officers, before they themselves are killed? Granted, stopping the sale of assault rifles won't stop all future gun crimes involving assault rifles, but if it reduces such crime even a moderate amount, wouldn't that be worth being limited to shooting an M-1 or M1903 when you go to the rifle range for recreation?

This is all just stuff to consider. Although we must remain a nation of laws, and respect the rule of law, we must not let blind adherence to existing laws stop us from considering what is actually best for our society, otherwise how would our society ever get better? Sometimes laws need to be changed, and if the 2nd Amendment truly can only be interpreted as an unlimited right to own whatever weapons system you wish, then perhaps its a law which has outlived its service to the public good.

*Consider that in a US Army Light Infantry Rifle company, the M-16 assault rifle/M-4 Carbine is the LOWEST casualty producing weapon system. If a rag tag bunch of tyranny resisters equipped with second hand AK-47s and AR-15s is going to be completely outgunned by unsupported light infantry, imagine what would happen once you bring a full mechanized combined arms combat team to bear.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
23. Re: Op Ed Mar 19, 2013, 09:41 Scottish Martial Arts
Azusa wrote on Mar 19, 2013, 02:50:
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Mar 19, 2013, 02:21:
I won't engage in a discussion of 'civil applications'. The 2nd amendment isn't about civil applications, it's about resisting a militia/army that has usurped government from the people. Nothing civil about it.

Fair enough about moving the goal posts, but I could likewise charge that you're splitting hairs: the point is that there is a whole hell of a lot of military hardware, hardware that would be ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL to resisting a tyrannical government/military, that you cannot get and will never get. As such, the second Amendment's ability to actually protect citizens from tyranny is extremely limited -- the technology of war has become so complex and so expensive, that the best that a man with only a rifle in his hand and an idea in his head can do is hide in the hills and be a gadfly by occasionally detonating a car bomb.

I'm not against freedom: I think gun laws should be as lax as is conducive to the public good. But I am not convinced that assault rifles serve a civilian purpose, and thus I think the net utility of assault rifles is to the detriment of the public good. Whether banning them is constitutional, I cannot say for certain -- although we did have such a ban for over a decade and the Supreme Court never, to my knowledge, struck it down -- but purely on the basis of public policy, separate from constitutional law, I think we lose more than we gain by having assault rifles, sub-machine guns, machine guns, et al. freely available.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
19. Re: Op Ed Mar 19, 2013, 02:21 Scottish Martial Arts
It's not against federal law, or the laws of most states, to own a rocket launcher.

A MLRS is not a rocket launcher -- it is self-propelled rocket artillery piece built off the M113 chasis: I'm pretty damn sure you can't go buy an operational MLRS + ammunition carrier + ammunition at the local gun show. An MLRS is colloquially known in the Army as a grid-square remover as it can be fired to kill every soft target in a 1km x 1km area, which happens to be the size of a grid square on a Mercator Grid Reference System map, which is the kind the US Army uses. As far as I know, you can't go buy one. Likewise you can't go buy an A-10 Warthog. You can go buy P-51 Mustang, but guess what? You'll be flying sans the battery of 6 Browning M2 .50 machine guns. Your right to bear arms, a well regulated militia being necessary to a free state, is not sacrosanct. There are already restrictions on it that have passed constitutional muster. Whether an assault weapons ban will pass constitutional muster is beyond my expertise: I'm not a constitutional lawyer. I can say however, after have used an assault rifle extensively, and having fired one in anger on more than one occasion, that they have about as many civil applications as the aforementioned MLRS.

I'd respond to the rest of your points, but I just got home from work, still have some personal work that I want to get done before I get to sleep, and I have to be back at work tomorrow at 7:00am. This supposed pinko commie, who's never known an honest days work or even knows which way to point a rifle, let alone having worn the uniform the US Army, has too much shit to do to waste time "discussing" politics on the interwebs.``
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
2880 Comments. 144 pages. Viewing page 21.
< Newer [ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 ] Older >


Blue's News logo