I am a “regular” flyer and a stoner and I never fail to bring with me a sample of devil’s lettuce when I’m leaving for extended period of time and never once I’ve had any issue bringing my hazardous material with me.

One time I even embarked with a small firework in my wallet I forgot I placed there after a party and none bat an eye.

Security level: top (not gun)

The best steps would be the ones taking them to the guillotine

Content moderation is gonna be tough, especially when advertising for absolute freedom of speech. It’s possible trolls will ruin the environment in a very short time if moderation and its rules wouldn’t be very clear and applied when necessary

If I may spend my two cents in this discussion I’d like to also propose Mr. Hicks as one of the true thinkers and philosopher of the last century. He had a lot in common with George from a social analysis standpoint and he also saw us humans as bi-faced entities capable of producing both the nastiest and the most beautiful acts while recognising that usually the lowest and most destructive instincts were the one guiding our choices.

As George did for you he also helped me forming my vision of the world and its current state of affairs while also making me laugh manically.

A huge thanks to both these men for helping some of us finding a way to navigate through this sensless journey, you’ll not be forgotten

First of all, gun laws have been more or less the same for the past 100 years in the U.S., so how can they be the cause of the recent rise in mass shootings? Simple answer: they’re not.

But they are, would your laws be stricter the appearance of these mass shootings would drop significantly since they perpetrators would have to go through a much mor rigorous screening process before being allowed near a firearm. The copycats and emulators are able to repeat these crimes ALSO because they have easy access to firearms, don’t act like this wouldn’t be a root cause for the mass shooting problem

Secondly, mass shootings make up a tiny fraction of gun violence; the fact that so many White liberals harp on mass shootings really just shows that they only really care about the gun violence that threatens to affect them and their kids. If they were serious about curbing gun violence, their focus wouldn’t be on mass shootings so much as smaller-scale gun crime

Those who commit small-scale gun crime use the same laws in place for mass-shooters and everybody else to access firearms used in their crimes

Third, many liberals are openly willing to kill a hobby that most gun owners enjoy without harming anyone, because they personally find said hobby unsightly and stupidly think they can stop gun violence in the U.S. by getting rid of gun stores—because that’s always put a stop to gun violence in other countries wherein it’s illegal to buy/sell guns (/s).

The Australian experience after the mass shooting in Port Arthur at the end of the 90ies tell a different story and it shows that guns buyback/confiscation can and will reduce crime committed by guns

I personally want to see many improvements to our gun laws in the U.S., such as more stringent background checks, laws against people with histories of serious psychiatric illness having access, laws against people with violent criminal histories having access, etc, but getting rid of all guns? No, total overkill, and such hardline, unreasonable stances are costing Democrats much-needed votes and ironically helping right-wing Nazis get closer to taking over the country. These views make no fucking sense when you scrutinize them and are clearly fueled by emotion rather than logic.

Tell that to the republicans, who see any intervention on the existing gun laws as an attack to the second amendment. More background checks? No thanks. Red flag laws? No thanks. Limiting firearms possession to those convicted of violent crimes? No thanks.

Who is the party operating according to feeling and who is the one operating according to common sense and logic? Let me give you a hint, it’s not the blue one who is using scare tactics to keep everything as it is

I’m really sorry to bother but the link provided does not work for me, I also tried to use the way back machine but it seems no one has saved a clear copy of the page so far… Have you another link to a non-paywalled version of the article to share by chance? Thank you for your help in any case!!

Absolutely. Poverty comes never alone, it usually brings other friends to the party. Like poor education, lack of security, stress, poor nurishment and poor social environment. All this together can easily bring out the worst of people, while the contrary can improve their conditions.

If you are focused on surviving you’ll never be able to grow as we are all supposed to

Because the movie does not hint at eugenetics as solution to the crisis, it’s a hymn against stupidity and a cry to better educate the masses. First of all about sexual education and the danger of unprotected sex and secondly about politics and civic duties. I mean, I really don’t see how one could interpret the message of the movie as “do eugenetics”, that’s all.

That’s not true at all, genetics only play a part in the mental development of a person, much of it is instead related to the environment where a person has been growing.

It is as with talent, some people are better than other at certain activities but even the most gifted person cannot compete with a professional who has spent his life training and studying his craft.

The same can be said for “intelligence”: if you are never taught to think you’ll never think once in your lifetime, even if you are the exact copy of Leonardo da Vinci; on the other hand, even if you are thick as a rock but you’ve been growing in a society focused on your development you’ll be able to become a normal person.

Eugenetic politics do nothing for humanity betterment, social structure is much more important IMHO

Here in Italy the first one to learn and adapt is always the mafia. The state is so clunky and unnecessarily complicated that it takes ages for it to change and adapt its ways, once this happens the mafia has already changed and transformed to keep away from the law enforcement hands as much as possible.

Nowadays mafiosi do not go around in poor clothing with weapons on them, the wear nice suits and briefcases filled with documents to keep on their shady businesses as they did from the Borbonic times

Yeah, I know, but even his story is far from being over. He might be dead but his clan and his way if conducting business are certainly not over: assuming the opposite is exactly what mafia would like us to know since it requires ignorance from both the people and the state to thrive at the best of its abilities.

Cave semper canem when talking about mafia and choose your words carefully as they are vmmasters if trickery and deception on top of being horrible human beings (if such kind of animals can be even called “humans” at this point).

Peppino Impastato forever an hero, Messina Denaro forever a shitstain on the heel of the Italian boot

puts the end to a story of violence and blood

Yeah, sure Biondi, we can rest easy knowing mafia has been defeated once and for all. /s

What a fucking clown in a fucking circus if a country. Mafia will never be healthier than when we think it to be dead, they thrive in the shadows and in the cover this kind of happenings provide.

To me for example was always fine. I got it on launch day and with my PC I experienced very minor issues and almost no crash (maybe one if I remember correctly) and, even if it wasn’t the game CD Project Red marketing department had led us to believe, it was a nice and enjoyable experience for me.

I mount an i9-9900k with an Asus motherboard and a 3070 dual fan, I don’t recall the precise model right now; not a fancy build as I use a very old case and air cooling, but it gets the job done for a 1440 experience at circa 45 FPS.

Now I’m curious to test this 2.0 patch, I’m watching my brother playing on his PC right now and, with a 1070, he’s still getting good performances and the game mechanics look nice! The skill trees are really interesting, I can’t wait to try it out myself!

Well, one of the two parties available is bent over in respecting corporate interests while eroding societal safety nets, the other is doing the same but with an accent on religious authoritarianism in service of an orange Cheeto.

There would be more than enough space for them to cooperate on common ground but, unfortunately for the oligarchs, the latter party seems to have lost the script of the standard political play and is now giving it’s leading roles to real nutsacks who are (unwillingly) exposing the inner workings of the political machine for everyone to see. As I see the situation from Italy this can only be a good thing as seeing the innards of a broken machine is the first step to start its necessary maintenance

Well, a fall from a high window is not the best way to survive captivity :)

Of course he will be discredited as a doctor and he will be found to be a west-paid spy for a large number of years before falling from the window of his prison cell (in Russia they are so humane prison cells don’t have bars on them).

I sure hope Putin’s next doctor won’t be as careful when dosing his medications. I’d love to see some ipecac being distributed in the coffe cups of a closed meeting between Putler and the north-korean bimbo

You seem to equate a family not having a body with not having news of that soldier. But Ukraine has been collecting and identifying Russian bodies since the start of the war, and notifying families wherever possible. Many of the soldiers also have their own phones, and those phones have told the west a great deal about what is really going on behind Russian lines. Yet you seem sure that none of those soldiers would use their phones to speak of deaths within the unit. Interesting take.

You seem to forget that, following the bombing caused by a massive presence of phone signals in a single spot, Russia has been much more careful in letting its trooper use their cellphones. Beside that I imagine a family not having any news from his relatives at the front would be anxious for their loved ones and would start asking questions, even if it meant facing criminal charges. Ukraine can identify a portion of the bodies from the battlefield I imagine, and they would be able to reach the families of an even small percentage I reckon.

LOL. Think that over a bit and get back to me. Seriously.

I’ve thought about it and I really can’t see who can pay Wagner’s operators salaries, let alone arming them according to their standards (much better than the Russian army ones, can we agree on that?).

As far as I know Russia pays its soldiers 300-400€ a month and Wagner mercenaries are paid circa 2k (those who are not serving instead of being in a cell). Prigozhin was capable of providing for Wagner through his affairs in Africa and through the money he got from the Kremlin, will Putin be able to substitute such an income? What will happen if not? I’ve got my answers but they are just hypotheticals, who will live will see.

True enough. But that does not make either of us an expert on Russian affairs. His article does make one of us a fantasy writer, though.

He certainly knows Wagner better than you since he probably met them on the battlefield.

Works for me, lol. It’s just an opinion, and everyone’s got one.

But it helps, when forming an opinion, to acquaint oneself with all available fact first. And to be completely honest, you didn’t even spot the most questionable opinion in my post. (Hint: Who is Sergei Shoigu?) But keep working on it, because as far as I’m concerned the more people that are interested in the subject as whole, whether right or wrong, the better.

Thank you for taking the time to state your disagreement.

No problems, it’s a pleasure to have a conversation about these thematics since there is always to learn about any subject. In this sense, who is Sergei Shoigu? What I know about him is that he is a Putin sycophant only good as a yes man and coming from a political career scarcely linked to any military activity. Am I missing any information about the man?

Prighozin was funding much of Wagner himself, for example.

So, who is going to pay now that he’s dead?

And that Russia’s young men are not coming home in boxes because they are just not coming home (Russia doesn’t want the bodies so as to avoid paying death benefits to families)

I imagine these families will be happier and happier each day that goes by without having any information about their loved ones.

But honestly, the biggest head scratcher here is the plain fact that mercenaries “to dispose of Putin” have been available forever

But if Prigozhin was paying their fees and keeping them in check with his control structure how could they have been available to change their masters?

I see your reply to the article as you see the article itself: full of speculations and assumptions but the main difference between the OP post and yours is that you are a nobody giving his opinion on the internet while the author of OP post was assistant director intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance for the HQ Land Command.

Given the status I’m more inclined to listen to his speculations rather than yours, respectfully

Thank you for expressing so well a simple thought that seems to be complicated to some of the people intervening in this thread!

Kudos!

While you were on active duty and patroling the streets this dude has been (and I quote) “from 2007 to 2010, he was based at HQ Land Command as assistant director intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance”.

Do you think in this timeframe and under this qualification he might have had the chance to gather information and intelligence on some of the most well-known paramilitary and private mercenary armies such as Wagner?

IMHO I reckon he had more knowledge about these issues than a grunt on the groun so, if you aren’t qualified to speak about these issues, I don’t see the same situation with Mr. Gordon.

Then again these are just speculations on his side but they are far more informed than what you are trying to sell me with your (willingly?) limited and inaccurate analysis of his career.