HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Nuclear Unicorn » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »

Nuclear Unicorn

Profile Information

Member since: Wed Sep 16, 2009, 07:33 PM
Number of posts: 13,906

Journal Archives

There is no such thing as being, "anti gun."

All law is predicated on the use of force, including deadly force.

Those who propose gun control laws are not advocating for the absence or guns but merely exclusivity in the use of guns. Advocating for laws is to advocate for the use of force.

But the use of force against whom? Women? The elderly? Shop owners? Family members? Hobbyists?

And this is supposedly done in the name of protecting the innocent.

Gun control is a wildly self-contradicting creed.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Thu Jan 8, 2015, 06:46 PM (13 replies)

What would you say about a man who said to women

"Why are you working outside the home? Don't you know that's not your place?"

We would probably all be stunned into silent, blinking incredulity. The thought that anyone would suggest a woman she could not make her own way in the world strikes us as deeply offensive.

Suppose, then, this interlocutor doubled-down on their argument by saying a woman choosing to work outside the home was better off leaving such things to more capable people, that she was probably going to do more harm to herself or, worse, her selfish desire was the gateway by which others would be able to ruin society, in effect making her the reason for society's ills.

Such a person would be more than merely dismissed. They would be sent packing as nothing more than a blunt-headed misogynist.

If they then backed-up their demands with suggestions that women be compelled by any means to keep their place it would be immediately known that such a person could not be reasoned with and the more distance put between such a person and one's self, the better. The argument betrays itself, it isn't about what is best for society or women but about control so as to force others to live by that person's expectations.

Control. That's all it is about. nothing more and nothing less.

Sexual assault -- rape -- is also about control. There is no other explanation. Someone wanted something and another person refused to provide it so it will be taken or simply to show another who is boss.

Some people choose to demonstrate a sense of control in various ways but the rapist seeks a method that strikes at the very soul of the victim. It degrades, dehumanizes and humiliates the victim. That is its intent. No person should have to suffer such things. No person should be allowed to inflict such things.

So when a woman decides she wants to proactively take the means to defend herself, to not suffer an assault (or not suffer an assault -- again) she has the right to do so. To own one's body is far more personal than seeking a career outside the home. To tell her she should leave such things to more capable people or that she is to more is going to do more harm to herself or, worse, her choice is the gateway for the evils of others is -- at best -- demeaning.

To then suggest that such a woman should be compelled to obey -- just as before -- betrays the purpose of those arguments.

Control.

I am no more suggesting a woman is required to own a gun to prove her feminist bona fides anymore than I am suggesting a woman must work outside the home (For the record I do not carry a gun and I work outside the home part-time, spending the majority of my time taking care of my school-aged SIL). However, the choice must be there and it is a choice exercised by millions of women.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Sat Jan 3, 2015, 10:21 AM (11 replies)

Slave labor farms left to continue undisturbed by police

Heartrending --

Inside SOUTH Korea’s slave farms where cruel families send mentally disabled relatives to toil in fields rather than care for them

* The rural island chain, off southwest coast, is home to thriving slave trade
* Tales of slavery using disabled people repeatedly emerged in last ten years
* Recent investigation found more than 100 workers were receiving no pay
* Police and officials who knew about islands have not faced punishment


In one of the world's richest countries - it is a fate too cruel to believe.

But it recently emerged that a remote set of South Korean islands have long been used as slave camps - where families send their mentally disabled relatives to toil in salt farms so that they don't have to care for them.

Slavery thrives on this chain of rural islands off the country's rugged southwest coast, nurtured by a long history of exploitation and the demands of trying to squeeze a living from the sea.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2894429/South-Korea-s-dark-secret-Remote-islands-families-send-mentally-disabled-relatives-work-slaves-salt-farms.html#ixzz3NjDyGkn7
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Fri Jan 2, 2015, 11:15 PM (1 replies)

When The FISA Court Rejects A Surveillance Request, The FBI Just Issues A National Security Letter

When The FISA Court Rejects A Surveillance Request, The FBI Just Issues A National Security Letter Instead

We've talked quite a bit about National Security Letters (NSLs) and how the FBI/DOJ regularly abused them to get just about any information the government wanted with no oversight. As a form of an administrative subpoena -- with a built in gag-order -- NSLs are a great tool for the government to abuse the 4th Amendment. Recipients can't talk about them, and no court has to review/approve them. Yet they certainly look scary to most recipients who don't dare fight an NSL. That's part of the reason why at least one court found them unconstitutional.

At the same time, we've also been talking plenty about Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, which allows the DOJ/FBI (often working for the NSA) to go to the FISA Court and get rubberstamped court orders demanding certain "business records." As Ed Snowden revealed, these records requests can be as broad as basically "all details on all calls." But, since the FISA Court reviewed it, people insist it's legal. And, of course, the FISA Court has the reputation as a rubberstamp for a reason -- it almost never turns down a request.

However, in the rare instances where it does, apparently, the DOJ doesn't really care, knowing that it can just issue an NSL instead and get the same information. At least that appears to be what the DOJ quietly admitted to doing in a now declassified Inspector General's report from 2008. EFF lawyer Nate Cardozo was going through and spotted this troubling bit:



https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20141224/14510929524/when-fisa-court-rejects-surveillance-request-fbi-just-issues-national-security-letter-instead.shtml


People should be in jail but laws are for the peasants, not their masters.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Thu Jan 1, 2015, 04:31 PM (0 replies)

The definition of "Beautiful" according to Nuclear Unicorn

Apparently it's a topic at the moment; so, here goes --

BEAUTIFUL

The first two syllables are--

BE YOU



Anything else would be unattractive.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Wed Dec 31, 2014, 12:08 AM (5 replies)

Newsweek: Study Finds Body Cameras Decrease Police’s Use of Force

Study Finds Body Cameras Decrease Police’s Use of Force

...

The Journal of Quantitative Criminology recently published the study, which detailed the first controlled and much-discussed experiment to ask whether body-worn cameras could reduce the prevalence of police use-of-force or the number of complaints filed against police.

Conducted by the University of Cambridge’s Institute of Criminology, the study, based on a 12-month trial in Rialto, California, found that body-worn cameras reduced the use of force by roughly 50 percent, says Dr. Barak Ariel, the lead author. Complaints against police also fell 90 percent during the study period compared with the previous year.

“This is a promising tool for police officers, which is likely to be a game changer not only for the professionalization of policing, but in terms of police-public relations,” says Ariel, an assistant professor at the Institute of Criminology at Hebrew University in Jerusalem and a lecturer in Experimental Criminology at the University of Cambridge in England.

...

http://www.newsweek.com/amidst-debate-study-finds-body-cameras-decrease-polices-use-force-295315


Who watches the watchmen?

We do.

They exist, not as an entity in their own right but with our permission and at our pleasure.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Mon Dec 29, 2014, 02:35 PM (9 replies)

If I'm arrested for attacking a fashion model w/ a rolled up newspaper while in a blind panic

I want you all to understand what happened --



3D-printed robotic spider dress keeps creeps at bay



...

The ripply, skeletal bodice is 3D printed (or rather, laser sintered) and laden with motion and respiratory sensors that link back to the main processor. Approach it too quickly or too aggressively and those arms spring into a defense position. But, as Wipprecht told Motherboard, a more discreet saunter up to the wearer might be met with "smooth, suggestive gestures". The dress takes into account how calm the user is thanks to those sensors, which in a way makes the garment less of a gussied-up wearable and more of an extension of the wearer's body. Wipprecht is no stranger to the intersection of haute couture and spindly machinery - she unveiled an earlier version of the spider dress two years ago with the help of hacker-roboticist Daniel Schatzmayr that drew in similar themes of personal space in an increasingly mechanized world. This year's version though amps up the level of beautiful body horror with a sleeker, more organic aesthetic that looks a little more like something H.R. Giger would've dreamed up.

http://www.engadget.com/2014/12/23/anouk-wipprecht-spider-dress/
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Sat Dec 27, 2014, 09:53 AM (15 replies)

If the internet outage in North Korea was a cyber attack by the US

do you support President Obama's decision to authorize the response?

A) Yes. Without reservation.

B) Yes. So long as there are no serious repercussions against the US, its citizens, allies and/or interests

C) Nyha-nyah-nyah! What cyber attack? I CAN'T HEAR YOU!

D) Maybe. If the response was properly vetted through the international community

E) No. The risk of escalation with a regime as unpredictable as NK is too high

F) No. Retaliation is never the answer

G) No. America has no business attacking other nations, even if only electronically

H) No. The evidence is too flimsy

I) Other (please explain)
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:32 PM (31 replies)

Do women have the right to self-defense even if the chosen means of defense is a gun?

Discuss.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Tue Dec 23, 2014, 10:40 AM (63 replies)

Wait. What? The North Koreans hacked us?

They broke in to privately owned servers and devices, lifted the content and are now using that information gained to control us and keep us fearful?

Who do they think they are? The NSA?


Seriously though, how bad is it that our supposed national security apparatus is useless for protecting us despite their expense and sophistication? Even worse, the enemy isn't doing to us that own so-called defenders aren't doing to us all the time.
Posted by Nuclear Unicorn | Thu Dec 18, 2014, 03:12 PM (5 replies)
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »