Fergalish, I think your problem is that you are assuming your questions are security-based, when they are much more cultural in nature. If we lived in a different culture , where carrying a gun and defending oneself is to be expected, people would be taught how to behave themselves accordingly from a young age, and the two questions you asked wouldn't even be relevant.

Here's my train of thought on private ownership of nukes in a libertarian society:

When you own land, you will likely also have a contract with a private security company. That company will make to keep the territories under its contract safe, and will likely either directly own, or contract out, an insurance policy for your property as a service. That way they will both cover you should you get robbed or have your house burn down, and have an incentive to make sure that never happens to you in the first place, since insurance costs money.
Should some nutcase manage to sneak in and detonate a nuke on one of the properties protected by this company, the company will get have its reputation severely damaged, and will lose a lot of money paying for insurance claims and litigation (lawsuits). If nukes blowing up is something that is considered a serious problem in that area, the security company will likely step up to create methods and technologies to help prevent that from happening.
Other security companies may also exist that to allow the ownership of nukes, though they will very likely require you to show that you have a good reason for owning it (likely industreal one only), will very likely require you to pay much higher insurance fees on it, and will probably register you on a publically shared list as a nuke owner. Now, if someone does manage to get one in secret and blow it up somewhere, it again goes back to the security company being accused of failing to monitor for nukes and nutcases, resulting in litigation against the company, and the company trying to find the culprit to either sue them in turn or at least bring them to justice.
As for what if someone decides to not have security company contract? That will mean that the person's property is practically defenseless, and they have no recourse against anything that happens to it, so will likely be considered as a very stupid thing to do.


I guess bottom line is, whether government or private, regulation will happen. Question is whether it will happen due to majority-rule imposed government legal sanctions, or through privately owned contract agreements.

Start shooting holes in my idea... now.

Well, to be fair, she is a HOMEschool girl, so it's not like she has much of a chance to learn anything other than what her parents feed her. Heck, she's still getting grounded at 17.

She's also still around and reading, though it seems no longer posting. I wonder if her parents took away her keyboard? (Mine used to do that. Typing with a mouse and on screen keyboard sucked.)

Haters gonna hate, and sure, there will still be pockets of the world where strongmen oppress the people. but being the eternal optimist, I'm seeing a lot of those regimes fall apart and dissolve, in part because the oppressed people are pissed, and in part PRECISELY because you really can't make all that much money through oppression, and thus eventually run out of things to pay with to buy weapons, bombs, etc. Someone mentioned Somalia, and it's is actually an excellent example. There, angry power -crazy militias have morphed into private security forces, working in tandem with business and populace. Sure, it's about as extortionist as mafias, but their fees aren't as high as the taxes we're paying for police and military here.

Would "protecting your business by not killing your customers, not disrupting business in your area, and preserving your own reputation" play into this at all? Since customers have the might to give you their money or not I mean. I'm once again reminded by the India/Pakistan incident a few years ago, where both countries were, once again, on the brink of war, and Indian businesses convinced (forced) the government to back down because India was a huge international business hub, and couldn't just take a break to go to war.
Or am I completely off topic here?

End the wars, legalize marijuana, and legalize gay marriage for states that chose to pass it? Yeah, would be interesting

Ah, sorry, Serenity is the name of the movie based on the Firefly TV series http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_(film)
SPOILER






In summary, a space sci-fi flick where the interplanetary government is taking over and oppressing the planets, and a group of smugglers (the heroes) are rebels fighting against it. That world is plagued by some really messed up race of what used to be humans, who kill indiscriminately and cannibalize their victims. In the movie you find out that the source of those super-violent cannibals was a government experiment on a distant planet, where they forced everyone to take drugs that would make them docile and nonviolent. Most of the planet's population became so docile and apathetic, they just sat there and did nothing until they died.

Is this a Firefly reference?

both of those pics are the same person.

My grandmother had a computer starting with Win95. My parents had one since Win3.1. (I don't count, cause I'm a PC nerd). Practically all of our acquaintances had one, since they had to use them for word processing and stuff. By the time Win98 came out, I didn't really know anyone who still didn't have one. I do live in a middle class area though.

The lines have been drawn... the trenches have been dug...

Lucky for us, Congress only tends to allow Presidents to do at most 30% of the stuff they want to do

*looks at PinkiePie's new sig*


Aww sh**! I hope that wasn't my fault  

*COUGH* What??? O.O

ED? You mean like Special ED?

Rule #1 of salesmanship: Only ask questions, and have the buyer come up with the answers. If you give them the answers, they'll be skeptical. If they come up with the answers on their own, they'll believe them.

The trick is to know what questions to ask.

One of my gifts is being able to "read between the lines," and I don't expect Pinkie to come up with all the right answers right away. She is incredibly bright (in both meanings of the word), surprisingly tough, willing to fight for herself, and willing to get angry when appropriate (all somewhat rare and very respectable qualities). A lesser person would have resorted to personal name calling, or ran away angry and crying by now. She has stuck to it despite the very difficult topics, and I am fully aware of the difficulty of type of things I am bringing up and asking of her (yes, I'm claiming that what I have been saying in this entire discussion is, mostly, not accidental blunders, and are words I fully meant to say). I do actually recognize her skills at subtly sidestepping points she may not have answers for, or is uncomfortable confronting, (as opposed to just being dumb and avoiding questions like trolls often do) and instead constantly refocusing the discussion to the points she believes are important. Switching this topic to a discussion about rape was somewhat unintentionally brilliant of her, and has given me an extremely difficult and dangerous challenge, for which I am actually very thankful to her, since it's rare for me to get challenged on such a level that I am forced to think hard and chose my words extremely carefully. Kudos for making me stumble and go into an overly defensive position, as well. The personal assumptions she makes about me I simply chuck to her youth and inexperience, and her statement of "I'm just a 17 year old girl! How dare you!" actually made me laugh at how disingenuous it seemed, since she has been an extremely strong and high level opponent through all this in spite of her age. No, I don't expect to change her mind (although it's inevitable her views on homosexuality and god will evolve over time, at her own pace), but I am enjoying asking such difficult and rarely discussed questions, having her fairly skillfully navigate them, and give me her opinions on them. Mostly I am enjoying learning so much about her, since I am actually starting to admire her somewhat. She so reminds me of the kids I mentioned I used to talk to so many years ago. And, from what I have seen of her so far, even if I think she may be a bit misguided, and do feel sorry for, and very angry at, what her parents did to her regarding that camp situation, I'm fairly sure she'll be ok, since whether she holds on to her faith, or whether it fades a bit over time, she'll definitely be a force to be reckoned with. Just don't tell her I said so ; )

As I said, not me.

When it comes to crazy fees that are borderline robberies, sure.

To be fair, I wasn't personally hurt by any of BW's claims or scams, and have never had my BTC stolen or scammed, since I try to do my own research on places I do business with (Bruce is at most just an advertisement), so perhaps not being hurt by him means I'm a bit biased.

I don't claim to know everything on the subject and have not taken Feminism 101 (is that one of your homeschooling classes?). I've only claimed that I am a supporter. And that I'm willing to learn. Though the other girls I hang out with don't seem to have this "daily reality of rape culture." It's not something they seem to be too worried about. I don't know if it's because they are just stronger, or are better at hiding it, or if you are somewhat of an exception with your fear (which, with your experience, can be expected).


I asked out of curiosity, and without implications. Thank you for answering. That does sound rather horrible.


So, what you're saying is that if those statistics were to be expanded to homosexuals of ALL ages, the numbers and the percentage would be even higher?


This part actually explains your actions quite a bit. I was suspecting that you were homeschooled, so thanks for confirming.


You're making assumptions again, and we've both gotten in trouble on here for doing that. I don't hate women. I admit I don't understand some of them, but every person is different regardless of their gender. And if being hurt by a woman was what caused one to be gay, then pretty much almost every guy on the entire planet would have been gay. On the contrary, my biggest heartbreaks have been caused by guys, so by your logic I should be very straight now.


You are right, the statistics are shockingly high. How is it that something so prevalent is being so well hidden by so many people? Or are the 1 in 5 who said yes to "In your lifetime have you been forced to submit to sexual intercourse against your will?" including everything from actual rape, to things like being coerced into sex by psychologically abusive boyfriends (do it or I'll leave you), and things like girls who do it of their own will but regret it later? It just feels like lumping all of those together is a bit unfair to the women who've had to deal with the actual violent type of rape, and is distorting the numbers to the point where people may find them hard to believe and to listen.
I think you should report your rape to the police, since it seems to be still bothering you. I also think you should stop wearing it on your sleeve like a badge of honor. Fight to overcome and not have it affect your life and all that, since if that incident is still making you live in fear, than your rapist is still hurting you and holding control over you.



I would never dream of implying that any of that was your fault. I'm implying that it's god's fault for letting it happen. I mean, if I wanted to be like God, does that mean that if I ever see a woman being raped, I should not stop it and instead just stand there and say nice things to the woman to comfort her? That's why I'm glad I'm not like god in the least. (i.e. I sure as hell would do something about it, unlike him)