|
On November 04 2016 13:07 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2016 04:14 GreenHorizons wrote:
If you got a celebrity to sign a contract by getting their autograph (on the contract) it wouldn't stand up in court would it? I guess this could be seen as a reason to only make large signatures on stuff? I guess that's what I'd do, after thinking about this. If my signature is always some wild shit that belongs on a poster, no judge will believe it was intentional.
Safest way would probably be to use different signatures on official documents and when giving out autographs.
|
|
|
On November 06 2016 06:09 zlefin wrote:Is conservatism a no longer relevant evolutionary strategy? a question I wondered reading up on this article and others related to it: http://www.ehbonline.org/article/S1090-5138(15)00017-3/fulltexti.e. is the evolutionary basis for conservatism no longer relevant with modern science and medicine?
Short answer: No.
Long answer: How would anybody on earth ever know the answer to that question...
|
I mean, the article is obviously silly, but the two evolutionary strategies outlined are real... males can either just try to fuck as many women as possible, or stay with one and help her/your offspring. But I'd argue modern society makes the whole not-being-a-deadbeat thing more important, not less.
|
yeah, from a personal evolutionary point of view, I'm convinced that the winning strategy right now is to shove your dick into as many girls as possible. Especially girls that don't really care about contraceptives, and too conservative for abortions. Oh, and sperm donations! It's not like you have to protect your family from mammoths and dinosaurs any longer. And with some luck your kids, growing up without a father, will do the same.
Not sure it's the winning strategy on a more macro scale for us as a species, but well, who cares?
|
So there's this small but loud minority of American gun owners who use the the saying "from my cold dead hands" when referring to the potential for legislation that would further regulate firearm ownership. The subtext or the "cold dead hands" idiom essentially says "the government will have to kill me and take the gun from my corpse if those laws pass". The implication is that the person will fight against government forces using a firearm to defend his or her right to own said firearm.
So my question is, who are those patriotic 2nd amendment loving Americans planning to shoot? The police, who'd be the most likely personnel being tasked to seize firearms? Perhaps the military? Are they saying that they would commit terrorist attacks against the politicians who made those decisions? All that sounds pretty bad... so who are they going to shoot?
|
On November 06 2016 10:00 Djzapz wrote:
So there's this small but loud minority of American gun owners who use the the saying "from my cold dead hands" when referring to the potential for legislation that would further regulate firearm ownership. The subtext or the "cold dead hands" idiom essentially says "the government will have to kill me and take the gun from my corpse if those laws pass". The implication is that the person will fight against government forces using a firearm to defend his or her right to own said firearm.
So my question is, who are those patriotic 2nd amendment loving Americans planning to shoot? The police, who'd be the most likely personnel being tasked to seize firearms? Perhaps the military? Are they saying that they would commit terrorist attacks against the politicians who made those decisions? All that sounds pretty bad... so who are they going to shoot?
A tiny part are actual crazies who would shoot a police officer trying to take their guns away.
Most are just idly boasting and pretending to be tough dudes, and part are hoping the threat of violence will be enough to deter action (And they are probably right)
|
On November 06 2016 10:00 Djzapz wrote:
So there's this small but loud minority of American gun owners who use the the saying "from my cold dead hands" when referring to the potential for legislation that would further regulate firearm ownership. The subtext or the "cold dead hands" idiom essentially says "the government will have to kill me and take the gun from my corpse if those laws pass". The implication is that the person will fight against government forces using a firearm to defend his or her right to own said firearm.
So my question is, who are those patriotic 2nd amendment loving Americans planning to shoot? The police, who'd be the most likely personnel being tasked to seize firearms? Perhaps the military? Are they saying that they would commit terrorist attacks against the politicians who made those decisions? All that sounds pretty bad... so who are they going to shoot?
They probably expect their guns to be collected by communist mexicans of muslim religion.
It sounds like a statement from a minority (I hope...) that sees things in very black and white: the right-thinking true americans wanting nothing but freedom for the greatest country around, and all the others, which have a range of attributes and opinions ascribed to them, and in general evil.
In case it comes to armed standoff between the true Americans and the evil commy arms collectors taking their freedom away, maybe they would pull the trigger. In general, they'd shot whoever because they think they stand for a lot of things they actually don't. A kind of moral strawman I guess.
But what do I know... I'd be happy to hear from someone in that camp explain a bit what the deal is.
|
|
|
On November 06 2016 14:04 JimmiC wrote:
I think you would be shocked. I had a conversation with a couple of wealthy successful men from texas in their 40s. Who were convinced there is a large conspiracy, the president is already chosen and they will need to protect their rights. And if they allow guns to be taken it's a short slippery slope to no freedom. I think this belief is far more engrained than most of outsiders think. And not just the crazies, but many of the educated "normal" people, Esspecially in the South and pockets in the Pacific north west.
I wonder if those people remember that they were saying those same things in 2008 and 2012. I was there, I heard them. I even smugly said "Obama won't take your guns" and they all went nuts anyway. "Talk to you in 4 years" I'd say, "You'll still have your guns!". They told me I was crazy. THIS time is the real one. Like the end of the world in 2012. That one was the real one. Seriously. Be afraid!
|
|
|
On November 06 2016 14:27 JimmiC wrote:
It was some what surreal. Like they were talking as if they were saying facts but to me it sounded so far fetched. There is some very entrenched distrust of government that we don't have.
I have guns here in Canada and we have a few nutbags too, I've had the displeasure of dealing with a few of them on various communities... I find most people unpleasant and overzealous about their dislike of Canada's firearm laws, but it just doesn't get as violent and twisted as it seems to get in the US.
The distrust of government is mostly distrust of the liberals. People are irritated and angry sometimes but rarely suggest the use of violence to combat some imaginary "tyranny" trying to disarm Canadians. Many are fine with gun ownership being a privilege in Canada (like driving) rather than a right like in the US.
The whole "tyranny" angle is very strange. They dredge up citations from 3 centuries ago by people who say the regime is at risk of being usurped and to turn into an authoritarian government / tyranny... which made sense at the time.
|
|
|
On November 06 2016 14:36 JimmiC wrote:
Tons of guns where I live but they are rifles and shotguns from farmers and hunters. Sadly there are a few hand guns and assult rifles starting to show up. I think in the states there are tons of the people killers. That and more of a mentality to use them. I would rather lose my wallet then kill someone over it. There it's different.
IDK that handguns and assault rifles showing up is really necessarily a bad thing. I own this thing to shoot at paper, I keep it doubly locked in a safe and whatnot. I had to jump through a bunch of administrative hoops and pass safety tests and background checks to get it and I think it's fine. But I'd never dream of ever suggesting I would use it to protect my "right" to own a firearm.
There's quite a gap between "I enjoy this hobby and would be disappointed if it got wrecked" and "I'll kill police officers who try to take my shit because of a court order or a new law".
+ Show Spoiler +
|
|
|
On November 06 2016 15:00 JimmiC wrote:
The issue is not the 80% fuck even say 90 or 95% that can own guns responsibly it's the 5% that shouldn't and can't. They seam to be drawn to them and now a split second bad choice = death.
If people want to shoot paper have ranges where you rent the gun. No need for bringing it home to own.
Well I have mine at home securely locked in a safe that's bolted down and with a lock on the trigger and I think I should be able to own my own that I can clean and adjust on my own to practice the discipline that I enjoy. The rental guns on ranges are beat up and abused by careless people... And since every one is different, you lose repeatability if you want to get the most accurate you can be.
I guess this isn't the place to debate this really but with how relatively infrequent accidents and gun deaths are with legally own firearms in Canada, it would seem like a radical move to take away my stuff. I would comply, don't get me wrong, but I would consider legislation like that to be emotionally motivated. I'm in favor of regulation, but not "bans" that would prevent me from owning a gun that I've bought, registered, did three separate safety formations (3 days worth), got background checked for, etc.
There are a lot of things that we can do to manage risk in every area of life but I don't think we necessarily should.
Either way I'm done now, you can respond or PM me :p
|
I'm starting my own chiropractic adjustment business out of my garage with no license. Any tips to earn my customers trust?
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On November 07 2016 15:57 Epishade wrote:
I'm starting my own chiropractic adjustment business out of my garage with no license. Any tips to earn my customers trust?
Make sure your customers don't have too many false expectations. Many of them go into illegal or semi-legal massage parlors or chiropractics expecting to find a brothel, so tell them clearly that it isn't a brothel. Maybe wink at them while telling them that to make sure they understand the earnestness of your message.
|
On November 07 2016 15:57 Epishade wrote:
I'm starting my own chiropractic adjustment business out of my garage with no license. Any tips to earn my customers trust?
Buy a PhD or MD title and claim that you use revolutionary clinically proven methods. Make sure to get an article written about you in "natural health" magazine. Get a relative of friends to claim that you saved their life when the regular conspiracy doctors couldn't help them.
That should get you started pretty well.
|
On November 07 2016 17:28 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2016 15:57 Epishade wrote:
I'm starting my own chiropractic adjustment business out of my garage with no license. Any tips to earn my customers trust? Buy a PhD or MD title and claim that you use revolutionary clinically proven methods. Make sure to get an article written about you in "natural health" magazine. Get a relative of friends to claim that you saved their life when the regular conspiracy doctors couldn't help them. That should get you started pretty well.
After a brief googling I'm surprised by how easily obtainable fake MD titles apparently are. Consider some of my naivety gone. Interesting that it even exists though. Usually those offering alternative treatments can't put enough distance between themselves and those poor misguided doctors who have it all wrong - all you really need is an aura healing and a lavement. I also find it hard to believe there is any real pleasure in using a title you haven't actually earned. Further, from personal experience it's not like the title actually brings a lot of benefits. If anything people start sharing weird personal details which you would really rather be without when they learn you are an MD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BpFeLmK.jpg)
