DanG
-
Content
6,580 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by DanG
-
No, I'm saying that individual circumstances should be taken into account when determining punishment and prosecutorial fervor. I think I've been abundantly clear about that. Would you care to state your own position on the matter? - Dan G
-
Just because you don't like my examples doesn't make them awful. You're arguing from the standpoint of the current legal definition of illegal entry, which doesn't differentiate between individual cases. I can't refute that argument, since it is simply a statement of fact. The argument I'm trying to refute is the implied argument that the current system is just fine, including the single sanction of deportation you seem to favor. My argument is that the system would be better if individual circumstances, including intent and effect, were taken into account. Basically, you're arguing about what is, I'm arguing about what should be. - Dan G
-
That would be great, if there actually were ways for people without college degrees to enter legally. Since there aren't (practically), it doesn't really solve the problem. And what about the millions of people already here? Is your only solution to throw them all out and have them all apply for the few legal enrty slots that they won't qualify for anyway? - Dan G
-
I have yet to see your argument, so I can only assume all you have is word games and intentional misuderstanding. Would you care to comment on anything I've written? - Dan G
-
In your zero tolerance world a sixteen year old who consentually fucked a fifteen year old would get the same sentence as a forty year old who fucked a ten year old at knifepoint. Rape is rape, right? - Dan G
-
No, dumbass, I was paraphrasing your position. Don't bother with your stupid fucking word games. It's childish and boring. If you want to state your position in response to what I've said, please do so. Otherwise, shut up. - Dan G
-
"Homicide" is "homicide". Are you saying that judges and juries should have no leeway to take into account individual circumstances? - Dan G
-
I guess you've never heard of justifiable homicide. - Dan G
-
Not compared to the ones going to college, working professional jobs, or having sons who enlist in the Army. The cited document talks about leniency for illegal aliens with immediate family members in the military. That seems fair to me. It doesn't seem right to deport a mother or father whose son is fighting in Afghanistan or Iraq. - Dan G
-
de jure, but not de facto. Now that we've both reduced the other's position to a meaningless slogan, care to comment substantively? - Dan G
-
Of course, illegal is illegal, but it sounds like you are arguing for a zero tolerance policy. Usually, zero tolerance is a sign of a lack of rationality. Zero tolerance for weapons in schools has resulted in kids being suspended for squirt guns, and zero tolerance for drugs has resulting in jail terms for pot residue. There should be some leniency available in the enforcement of all laws. That's why we have human judges and juries, not justice robots. Every case is different, and I don't see anything wrong with allowing immigration officials to be more lenient with people who are positively contributing to the country. Of course, if you're a zero tolerance zombie, I can see why you'd disagree. - Dan G
-
An analyst on the radio yesterday that we could still see lawsuits from smaller classes of women, such as a class of Assistant Store Managers, or similar. He believed that such classes would be able to meet the commonality standard. - Dan G
-
They're going after the ones taking good jobs from American workers and are being more lenient to the ones contributing to the country either economically or through military service. What's wrong with that? - Dan G
-
Einstein developed the theories of special and general relativity before the equipment to test them was invented. He used what he called thought experiments, and a shit ton of math. Just because the theories weren't immediately verified by scientific experiments (as they have now been) didn't make them less scientific. - Dan G
-
I guess I conflated this story with the Operation Gunwalker story. - Dan G
-
So the government was supplying guns to Mexican drug gangs in order to create evidence that stricter gun control was needed? Sounds a little far fetched, unless I don't understand the premise. - Dan G
-
Greek debt crisis is Europe's 'Lehman moment'
DanG replied to dreamdancer's topic in Speakers Corner
Since most of the stimulus was in the form of tax refunds, I would think a person like you would be happy that the money was returned to the rightful owners, namely the people. - Dan G -
Can you make your theory clearer by just saying what it is? I don't get what you're implying. - Dan G
-
Got a cold? Thinking of doing a skydive anyway?
DanG replied to EFS4LIFE's topic in Safety and Training
That's what you get for going to the gym. If you'd stayed on the couch like a good American you'd be fine. - Dan G -
Type this phrase into Google: "theory prior to big bang", and get back to me on that. You have the right to that opinion. I have the right to think that believing in the Divine is much, much worse that trying to figure it out for ourselves. - Dan G
-
Got a cold? Thinking of doing a skydive anyway?
DanG replied to EFS4LIFE's topic in Safety and Training
I've had three ruptured ear drums in my life, one from jumping with a cold. The risk of infection to the inner ear, damage to the semi-circular canals (like the OP), permanent hearing loss, and being prohibited from activities you enjoy is not worth even a hop and pop. - Dan G -
You should reread the article. The "controversy" is over adding 0.3mm/year to the measured rate. The 0.3mm/year is not the total rate, it is the adjustment that this particular group is using. No one ever claimed that the rise was going to be tens of feet in a single year, I have no idea where you got that idea. Basically, one group of scientists are saying the oceans will rise X feet over a given period, and the other group is saying they will rise 0.85*X feet. The point I was trying to make was that the difference in outcome is not that great. The overall point is that no one disputes that the oceans are rising, it is just a matter of a small difference in rate. - Dan G
-
Well, if you read the whole (very short) article, no one, including this lawyer, disputes the fact that the sea level is rising. They are quibbling over the rate of the rise. As usual Fox News distorts the story to fit their agenda. - Dan G
-
Well, not really. Entropy is going in one direction in the currently visible universe, but that doesn't mean that the universe had a beginning when entropy = 0, and will end when entropy = 1. For example, making the simple assumption that the universe is not a closed system negates your entropy argument. - Dan G
-
Says who? There are lots of theories, consistent with the Big Bang, that postulate the existance of matter and energy prior to the Big Bang. - Dan G