rhaig

I remember those designs. Some used embedded sensors, later they switched to a metalic paint strip on the road. These designs do it all through image recognition and laser rangefinders. a lane for self-driving vehicles could incorporate things such as reduced following distances allowing more traffic on the roads. Going 50mph with inches from the guy in front of you as opposed to 50-75 feet would put a much higher density of traffic in one lane. I could see this could greatly improve the traffic congestion problems on main lanes as well. -- Rob

Well even if it had to be military service, that doesn't amount to universal conscription. Anyway, it doesn't really matter. I still think voters would be better off having motivation to educate themselves more about their candidates if they understood how the government works. -- Rob

You are misinformed. Like many, I read the book in my youth. I disagree with the Heinlein's notion that in order to be eligible to be a citizen with full rights, one is obliged to perform military service. It's a totalitarian regime's attitude, not that of a free people. We are fortunate that there are those who will volunteer anyway, even if it is for personal gain (hey - that's called a "two-way street", as opposed to "skin in the game"). Those who expect "the others" to cheerfully volunteer to get shot at and blown up gratis (or "For a soldier I listed, to grow great in fame. And be shot at for sixpence a day.") had better think again. mh . I'm glad you read the book. You apparently have forgotten the part where it was mentioned that military service wasn't the only way to do your term of federal service. You also mentioned universal conscription which does not take place in the book. Thus my (apparently incorrect) belief that you hadn't read it. Voters that has served their government in some way will better understand the system that they are contributing to (through voting). We have voters that don't know the policies that their candidates have supported in the past, the platforms they say they will support in the future, or how the voting system even works. We have voters who vote based solely off of name recognition, race, religion, or party affiliation. To put it simply, I believe most of our voters today are ignorant of the pertinent facts surrounding the candidates they are voting for. If they had served in the military, or worked for the federal government, they might find themselves a little more concerned with the function of the federal system, and educate themselves. Maybe we should blame our schools for not educating our children well enough around the function and purpose of the government, and how important each vote is. I don't have the answer. But I can recognize part of the problem. -- Rob

A lot of this discussion reminds me of the ancient Spartans. You might remember them - they were the ones who placed a premium upon elitism, so much so that they became totally inbred and went genetically bankrupt. Universal conscription isn't a panacea - it's always unevenly (and quite unfairly) applied. It's one of the major reasons it was done away with. The majority of people who advocate it appear to do so out of a "punitive" attitude; e.g., "you're going to give something back or else." This tends to imply a non-zero-sum game; id est, that someone, simply by existing, owes something either to the state or to someone else. Neither of these is compatible with a democratic society. Another poster put it succinctly: we need to right-size our military, and get more for our money. A universal draft won't help that. To the contrary, it will injure the goal. We don't need cannon fodder in uniform - we need the bravest, toughest and smartest - we won't get them by drafting them. More bodies in uniform won't help us beat Hadjii - we're simply not fighting that kind of war. we're in an asymmetric struggle where our numbers and our military power don't count for much. Sure, a volunteer military isn't cheap, but it's the right way to do things. mh . ah... so you never read the book. you saw the movie of the same title. in the book it's well explained that in exchange for a term of federal service (any federal service, including office work, not just military) you received your citizenship and voting rights. It's called having skin in the game. -- Rob

Since you ask: 01/14/2007 http://richmond.indymedia.org/newswire/display/12548/index.php Was that a trick question? no, it wasn't a trick question. latest I'd found was 2003, so once every 3 or 4 years they get in a bind over a historical re-enactment group. Interesting timing. -- Rob

when was the last time the NAACP spoke out against civil war re-enactment? -- Rob

look... I know you disagree with me as a matter of principle, but yeah, the cop had an emotional response to them being from germany and driving carelessly. He let it affect the manner in which he performed his duties, and he came off as an asshole. probably pissed also because he knew that even if he wrote them, they wouldn't have paid it. Deutschbags... definitely. -- Rob

wow... asshole cop. However... find me a cop that wouldn't be pissed at someone for going almost 100mph in a 70mph zone. good hunting. -- Rob

therefore correlation implies causality -- Rob

we all know he'd pay crap-all attention to it last year. outside of election year, he's more concerned about his hair. -- Rob

being a genius and doing something with it are two entirely different things. -- Rob

not the first time a news outlet didn't fact check. doubt it will be the last. this one is a pretty impressive fuckup though... jetpacks? nice one. -- Rob

so you're not denying ignoring the earlier post pointing out divergent views of different tea partiers and making a broad generalization... (at least I didn't see any such denial.) -- Rob

so after it's been demonstrated the divergant views of different tea partiers, you disregard that and paint him with a broad brush... how typical. (yes, that's another broad brush I just painted you with... how you like it?) -- Rob

depends. sec 9 of Tx Penal code describes when the use of force (and deadly force) is allowed. Criminal mischief (vandalism) doesn't cross the line unless it's at night. I'm sure there are some actions they might take that would be justifiable under sec 9, but as long as it's just stuff, I don't think it's worth shooting anyone over. -- Rob

Even so, if you're legally carrying a gun and someone shoots at you are you really going to be prosecuted for defending yourself? In Texas? Stereotype much? Eh? Where's the stereotype? I was simply under the impression that Texan self defence laws were very permissive, even by normal US standards. every shooting in TX reported to the police requires (by law) a grand jury hearing. So you're going to be arrested certainly. Whether or not you're charged is up to the grand jury. Then you get to go defend yourself in front of a jury of your peers. -- Rob

Simmer down.

I saw the line last 10 years, and my brain interpreted "the last 10 years" as "his last 10 years" because I don't see how bush could have done anything about it in the past 2 years. But I did see how as governor he might have had some influence in the 2 years prior to being elected. so put your damn smiley faces away. and ask how Bush could have done anything in the past 2 years, and maybe you'll see how I got my wires crossed. this is where I'd insert a "stfu" with a smiley face behind it, but I see warnings are being handed out for stfu nowadays. so I'll refrain. :) -- Rob

yes, but he did say 10 years. that would back up into his governorship. -- Rob

I wonder why that pussy from Texas didn't do anything about this as it grew worse and worse in the last 10 years Leave it to an America hating liberal to blame George Bush. STFU nah... it's that people think that the TX gov has any power. The gov position in TX is a figurehead position. Honestly I bet Rick Perry's hair has more governmental power in TX than he does. Political influence? yeah, that's different. -- Rob

It went through my mind too. I did see an interview with a game warden that said "there was evidence of gunfire" on her jetski. and this lake has had reports of this type of thing in the past. don't worry about the TV references, at least you didn't expect there to be a border patrol checkpoint in the middle of the lake. -- Rob

sure it does... just slap it around a little in there :) -- Rob

I'm sorry... I know you typed some words, but I'm too busy looking at your avatar. -- Rob

well there were the 2 border patrol agents, Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, in 2006 that did their job, shot at drug traffickers, and got sentenced to 11 and 12 years respectively. and keep in mind these were border patrol agents. -- Rob

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3964673;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread -- Rob