General / Off-Topic ......and down we go, into the rabbit hole!

[lysan]

The resources you got access to, do not come entirely from your country.

Most of it I produce myself, however some of it is produced outside, I don’t buy products produced in China and other places, as they are not made with the same standards as we are producing our (western countries) products. I always buy products made locally, and mostly from mom and pops shops..

 

[lysan]

My point is that none of his here on this forum are speaking to the demographic that is driving population explosions; you can't honestly expect me, yourself or lysan or whoever to do anything about population growth in China?

China will soon be surpassed by India, its an exponential explosion of humans, and when they can’t feed themselves anymore they migrate to a new “corn” field and start all over, of course people will resist if millions are trying to take what you have, luckily our forefathers gave us the right and tools to defend ourselves even if our lazy politicians won’t.

 

[Shadowdancer]

Well that depends on whether the user is the aggressor, or the target. Believe me, shouting "I'm a pacifist, it wouldn't be fair to attack me" is not a sound defensive strategy....

In having to use it, you would not be the aggressor. Take, e.g., the codified (probably antiquated by a massive shift in power, and often cited out of context to further different goals) "right to bear arms" amendment to the USA constitution that is meant to provide and protect means of violence for protecting oneself or the state against transgression. It is explicitly meant to provide for the moment when society as a whole (the state) has failed (to protect its citizens). It is by no means the right to go forth and kill people to take their stuff.

 

[jasonbarron]

In having to use it, you would not be the aggressor. Take, e.g., the codified (probably antiquated by a massive shift in power, and often cited out of context to further different goals) "right to bear arms" amendment to the USA constitution that is meant to provide and protect means of violence for protecting oneself or the state against transgression. It is explicitly meant to provide for the moment when society as a whole (the state) has failed (to protect its citizens). It is by no means the right to go forth and kill people to take their stuff.

I don't think he was saying that it was, though. If you look at the Asimov quote he was referring to (and mine, too, for that matter), he was simply pointing out what a nonsensical, entitled attitude it was.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Violence is absolutely justifiable under certain circumstances. Every law we abide by in a civilized society, for instance, is backed up by the threat of violence.

I agree with this, dont get me wrong it is a nice sentiment to think that violence is always bad, and it should certainly be a matter of last resort

but it is incredibly naive to believe that violence is never justified.

Hitler has already been used as an example, but even more "every day" (thankfully not literally) things can sometimes justfiy violence.

you walk home and see an adult trying to abduct your child, i would definitely be using more than strong language to cut that out.

or you hear a person screaming for help whilst being sexually assualted.

There is a reason why police are trained in combat..... if i was getting mugged and a copper sees it, i want that officer to do more than ask the mugger politely to stop.

Where do draw the line is the real issue, there is definitely a line which should not be crossed, but to suggest there is never a line to be able to cross is just as wrong (in either extreme)

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

I think he's confusing violence and aggression. I am very non-aggressive. However I can, and have, used Violence in the past as a means to an end to stop events that I believe justified the level of force used. But that's it - once you're "made your point" - you stop. All else is bullying.

i have thankfully never been in the position to make that call (though i did massage a cheese pasty into the hair of a bully at school once)

however I am of the view that IF someone who i perceived to be a major threat to mine or my families well being starts a fight, and you get the upper hand, you make sure they dont get up.

I am not talking about killing anyone, but i have seen to many examples in that totally accurate medium known as hollywood movies to know that if when they go down you dont make sure they stay down it goes horribly wrong......

So IF someone came at me with a knife for instance, and i happened to have a plank of wood, if 1 hit dropped them, the next 2 hits would be on their kneecaps........ it wont kill em but they wont be getting up again after before help arrives. And yes i would use that defence in court (and likely get sent down so hey ho, lets hope i never have to test my word on this).

 

[Noddie]

It really isn't like that. People always talk about how they'd stop someone else in this rational, considered way. Believe me, as someone who's been on the receiving end of it, it's absolutely nothing like the movies. The first thing is there is a massive shot of adrenaline - suddenly you loose all peripheral vision and most of your hearing. You feel your heart racing. Have you ever tried to play an old video game on a too-fast system? - it's practically uncontrollable, all you can do is lunge around wildly over-controlling until you've got the hang of it? Well, your own body does that to you. It's a little like being drunk in that you're aware of what's in front of you, but very focussed on it to the extent that even quite significant blows will barely be felt. Sometimes you'll look at your aggressor and realise that behind every human being there is an angry ape. You may be aware of entirely inappropriate expressions on your own face - be that a rictus grin, a grimace of terror or scowl of aggression - some people even burst out laughing. The small, rational part of your brain that you usually think on as "you" is - again like being drunk- trying to corale the beast but it's just being drowned out by the rush of blood and the howling of the ancient ape that just woke up. And afterwards you always wonder. Am I me, or am I just a beast pretending to be me?

Some men live for it.

 

[Morbad]

I don’t buy products produced in China and other places

What model of phone and computer do you have?

to the extent that even quite significant blows will barely be felt.

Which is why pain compliance is a farce in any serious situation.

 

[Voracity_T]

Noone to argue with if they're all dead.

 

[lysan]

What model of phone and computer do you have?

That’s a tricky one, most electronics are produced in China, some assembled elsewhere, I haven’t broken down every single item in my household, so let me rephrase it. I try to avoid product that is made in China. However to be honest, if one need to track down where it all comes from you will spend more time checking that, then search for good products. It’s more a statement really because so much is produced under Chinese controlled territory. When all this is said, I don’t change my phone nor my computer every year, my phone is 4 years old and my PC is around the same age, all my daily shopping is from local stores using locally produced materials.

 

[Morbad]

I try to buy local when I can, but for many products there simply aren't any competitive ones produced without sweat-shop slave labor, let alone anything made locally. That said I've never been a conspicuous or frivolous consumer, and most of what I buy is food and cleaning supplies.

 

[lysan]

I try to buy local when I can, but for many products there simply aren't any competitive ones produced without sweat-shop slave labor, let alone anything made locally. That said I've never been a conspicuous or frivolous consumer, and most of what I buy is food and cleaning supplies.

I agree with all that, however we can try to support locally produced products as much as possible, I “shop” a lot at the local junkyard, because you can find a lot of good parts if you take the time to get it. My cars are 20 and 10 years old, but they still run very well and I do not plan to get a new one until they simply can’t run anymore, and by that time I guess it’s all electrical powered cars, I still dream of my flying car though

 

[Noddie]

I agree with all that, however we can try to support locally produced products as much as possible, I “shop” a lot at the local junkyard, because you can find a lot of good parts if you take the time to get it. My cars are 20 and 10 years old, but they still run very well and I do not plan to get a new one until they simply can’t run anymore, and by that time I guess it’s all electrical powered cars, I still dream of my flying car though

One of the things I find interesting about a "Flying Car" is that there actually isn't anything inherently more complex about a light aircraft (particularly a fixed-wing aircraft) than a modern car. Operation is somewhat more complex due to the inability to stop, the need to move in 3 dimensions (rather than 2, as cars basically do) and various factors relating to the weather and so on. But in actual fact there probably isn't much of a reason why you can't mass-manufacture a utility helicopter for about the same price as a modern saloon car, except for the radically different volumes you sell - which is at least partially because of the difference in price. And cost of training to operate. But more because of the difference in utility (you can't land a heli at the office - society isn't structured that way) because our society is set up for cars.

But actually the first heavier-than-air powered flight was 1903, and the Ford model T came out in 1908. So cars and planes both started in the same era, at least, and I've often wondered if, had the plane turned up just a bit earlier, we might have a society of pilots. Rather than build roads everywhere would we have built a network of runways next to towns and VOR beacons instead or motorways?

perhaps the world of "Crimson Skies" isn't so fanciful, after all?

 

[lysan]

quadcopters would be ok, even if the only could carry 2 people, but the range is awful at the moment.

 

[Arry]

It really isn't like that. People always talk about how they'd stop someone else in this rational, considered way. Believe me, as someone who's been on the receiving end of it, it's absolutely nothing like the movies. The first thing is there is a massive shot of adrenaline - suddenly you loose all peripheral vision and most of your hearing. You feel your heart racing. Have you ever tried to play an old video game on a too-fast system? - it's practically uncontrollable, all you can do is lunge around wildly over-controlling until you've got the hang of it? Well, your own body does that to you. It's a little like being drunk in that you're aware of what's in front of you, but very focussed on it to the extent that even quite significant blows will barely be felt. Sometimes you'll look at your aggressor and realise that behind every human being there is an angry ape. You may be aware of entirely inappropriate expressions on your own face - be that a rictus grin, a grimace of terror or scowl of aggression - some people even burst out laughing. The small, rational part of your brain that you usually think on as "you" is - again like being drunk- trying to corale the beast but it's just being drowned out by the rush of blood and the howling of the ancient ape that just woke up. And afterwards you always wonder. Am I me, or am I just a beast pretending to be me?

Some men live for it.

This is true. Some men 'do' live for it, normally very short lives, through.

It's called, the red mist. Over which, it is just a matter, of control.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

This is true. Some men 'do' live for it, normally very short lives, through.

It's called, the red mist. Over which, it is just a matter, of control.

i think it is fair to say - i dont think it is already covered - this is a perfectly natural response and is actually a beneficial thing we need to have to some degree. Thankfully for most of us it is something we wont experience often = or ever = but i can think right now of at least 1 time where it saved me (and one time it could have got me in serious trouble when i threw a friend through a (open) window

 

[Six6VI]

In having to use it, you would not be the aggressor. Take, e.g., the codified (probably antiquated by a massive shift in power, and often cited out of context to further different goals) "right to bear arms" amendment to the USA constitution that is meant to provide and protect means of violence for protecting oneself or the state against transgression. It is explicitly meant to provide for the moment when society as a whole (the state) has failed (to protect its citizens). It is by no means the right to go forth and kill people to take their stuff.

That's not quite what it's for, depending on who you ask of course. The objective is to have an armed and well regulated militia to defend the people against a tyrannical government, if it becomes necessary.

In today's polite society most people are far removed from violence. They don't get to experience the wonders of slaughtering, skinning, boning and filleting meat because some faceless process worker does that job while they're getting their nails done. They just pick up a plastic wrapped tray at the shop.

If you plan to have any heat in your house, felling a tree requires a level of violence, or at the very least a significant amount of effort with a sharp tool. The tree may argue you're being violent to it, and may even prefer to get it over with quickly given the chainsaw option. Ain't it great we invented electricity instead!

Oh, that's western democracies. There's still places where it's far from safe to travel unarmed or alone.

 

[znôrt]

The amount of goal post shifting that goes on in this thread about what constitutes "violence" is making my head spin.

only read with one eye but i think what constitutes violence is very clear unless you go into specific and abstract cases. the discussion is about 'justification', i.e., what 'good' or 'bad' violence is. which is, of course, totally subjective, but history shows that the stronger prevails and his violence attains status of 'right'. until someone more violent, and thus more right, comes along, that is.

 

[Voracity_T]

If the whole world was to take an eye for an eye everyone will be blinded except for one guy, who has one eye.

On the other hand, unfortunatly violence is the only thing some understand.

Honestly I think its a shades of grey thing. Entirely circumstantial.

 

[Robin of Spiritwood]

It really isn't like that. People always talk about how they'd stop someone else in this rational, considered way. Believe me, as someone who's been on the receiving end of it, it's absolutely nothing like the movies. The first thing is there is a massive shot of adrenaline - suddenly you loose all peripheral vision and most of your hearing. You feel your heart racing. Have you ever tried to play an old video game on a too-fast system? - it's practically uncontrollable, all you can do is lunge around wildly over-controlling until you've got the hang of it? Well, your own body does that to you. It's a little like being drunk in that you're aware of what's in front of you, but very focussed on it to the extent that even quite significant blows will ....

Yep. You have direct experience.
Did you get the shakes after?

I've been held up by guys who were in the tail wind of the adrenaline rush. The gun muzzles were all over the place, and they had the muscle weakness too. They could barely keep balanced.
They kept swivelling their gaze and the guns, because they had narrowed down their fields of vision so much that it had become binocular, and they were struggling with the 2 images.