February 25, 2005
“California is going to be a Hispanic state, and anyone who doesn’t like it should leave."
“California is going to be a Hispanic state, and anyone who doesn’t like it should leave. They should go back to Europe” - Mario Obledo, Co-founder of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF)
Where do we start with this one???
I suggest that we all use this website: www.reportillegals.com/
February 17, 2005
Our favorite Monopolist knows exactly how it works...
Here's what Bill Gates told Microsoft employees in 1991:
"If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today's ideas were invented and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today...A future start-up with no patents of its own will be forced to pay whatever price the giants choose to impose."
Apparently, he had a clear game plan.
Bill Gates And Other Communists
We are truely no longer free - A pet ordinance
A local 'city' (used loosely) has decided to make an ordinance limiting the number of pets that someone can own to 4.
Who in the hell do they think they are!?!? I personally have 4 cats and a dog. They are all fixed, all have current shots, all are well maintained. Who in the hell does the government think they are to pass a law saying that I can only have 4 pets!?!?!
If the problem is pet welfare, there's already cruelity laws on the books to take care of that!
This is just wrong!
Red Light Cameras - How is this happening!?!
Today, I was listening to the radio and the subject of Red Light Cameras (RLC as they are known in the business) came up.
What I would like to know is: Why are we tolerating these?"
The facts are that even though they reduce the running of red lights (usually in the 90% range), they INCREASE the number of rear end accidents! On the radio this morning, the pro-RLC person made the argument that an increase in rear-end accidents of ~2% is a small price to pay for the ~90% reduction in running red lights. Sounds good, eh? Well, I did some investigating and found that on average, the number of accidents at RLC intersections actually went up after the RLC was installed.
Now, you will ask: "How can it be that accidents wents up when there was a 90% reduction in red light violations and only a 2% increase in rear-end accidents?!?" Well, the answer is simple! The majority of red light violations do not cause an accident! The pro-RLC people are comparing apples to oranges!
The fact of the matter is that governments are installing RLCs under the guise of increasing safety but are infact causing a more unsafe condition. Their true motive is money.
I urge every person who have been involved in an RLC caused accident to sue: 1) the RLC's owner (usually Lockheed-Martin) and 2) the local government who installed it.
The other thing that bothers me about this money grab scheme is the legality! They ticket the registered owner of the vehicle and not the actual driver. Also, usually these tickets are non-contestible!
This is just wrong!
What I would like to know is: Why are we tolerating these?"
The facts are that even though they reduce the running of red lights (usually in the 90% range), they INCREASE the number of rear end accidents! On the radio this morning, the pro-RLC person made the argument that an increase in rear-end accidents of ~2% is a small price to pay for the ~90% reduction in running red lights. Sounds good, eh? Well, I did some investigating and found that on average, the number of accidents at RLC intersections actually went up after the RLC was installed.
Now, you will ask: "How can it be that accidents wents up when there was a 90% reduction in red light violations and only a 2% increase in rear-end accidents?!?" Well, the answer is simple! The majority of red light violations do not cause an accident! The pro-RLC people are comparing apples to oranges!
The fact of the matter is that governments are installing RLCs under the guise of increasing safety but are infact causing a more unsafe condition. Their true motive is money.
I urge every person who have been involved in an RLC caused accident to sue: 1) the RLC's owner (usually Lockheed-Martin) and 2) the local government who installed it.
The other thing that bothers me about this money grab scheme is the legality! They ticket the registered owner of the vehicle and not the actual driver. Also, usually these tickets are non-contestible!
This is just wrong!
February 01, 2005
NIH study: Risk-taking diminishes at age 25
The Summary: "A National Institutes of Health study suggests that the region of the brain that inhibits risky behavior is not fully formed until age 25"
This is interesting along with an article I saw a few years ago that said that: The reasoning portion of the human brain doesn't fully develop until age 16.
Now, you may ask, why is this significant? Well, people nowadays have a problem raising children. Too often they think of their kids not as children (with the associated brain development) but and miniture adults that are perfectly capable of making the right decisions based on reason. The brain development studies should show that, children are, in fact, incapable of making clear, reasonable decisions and should be treated as, well, children.
Here's a good article on the subject:
What were they thinking? Youths' brains seen as factor in fatalities
This is interesting along with an article I saw a few years ago that said that: The reasoning portion of the human brain doesn't fully develop until age 16.
Now, you may ask, why is this significant? Well, people nowadays have a problem raising children. Too often they think of their kids not as children (with the associated brain development) but and miniture adults that are perfectly capable of making the right decisions based on reason. The brain development studies should show that, children are, in fact, incapable of making clear, reasonable decisions and should be treated as, well, children.
Here's a good article on the subject:
What were they thinking? Youths' brains seen as factor in fatalities
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)