OK< paranoia on the internet

[Leo_Gnardo]

So in the beginning I was very surprised, now not any more, about finding things which were "typical from here" being actually also quite typical "there" ... some 2000 km and 5 Countries away ... and viceversa.Small World indeed

Let's not forget the presence of Vikings, at the top of their form they made it to Iberia and the Mediterranean. Also seagoing trade thousands of years ago between southern Ireland, southern England (including what's modern day Wales & Cornwall), across to the French coast, Galicia in northern Spain, and what's now coastal Portugal. Doubtless these sailors also made it into the Mediterranean and nearby Africa. DNA tests on some of my family members, with known ancenstry in Scotland & Ireland & Wales, show links to Galicia. I'm sure it's much the same for many people of similar lineage. Similarly, many in NE Europe show links to Syria - apparently there was a migration to these areas as the last ice age came to an end.

[Enzo]

My Spanish is rusty, but I think I remember this one:

Mi coche de alquiler está lleno de anguilas.

[g1]

My Spanish is rusty, but I think I remember this one:

Mi coche de alquiler está lleno de anguilas.

Hmmm. Google seems to be at a standoff whether it is your rental car, or your hovercraft, that is full of eels.

[g1]

DNA tests on some of my family members, with known ancenstry in Scotland & Ireland & Wales, show links to Galicia.

I also have links to Galicia in my ancestry, but this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:L..._in_Europe.svg

[J M Fahey]

Let's not forget the presence of Vikings, at the top of their form they made it to Iberia and the Mediterranean.

Even worse , they regularly reached ... Egypt !

As of Galicians, they are Celts, even play the bagpipe.

[Enzo]

People think the government is watching them, but here is who REALLY is watching you:

The New York Times reported in May that the "sophistication" of Google's and Facebook's ability to identify potential customers of advertisements is "capable of targeting ads ... so narrow that they can pinpoint, say, Idaho residents in long-distance relationships who are contemplating buying a minivan." Facebook's ad manager told the Times that such a description matches 3,100 people (out of Idaho's 1.655 million). [New York Times, 5-14-2017]

[Leo_Gnardo]

People think the government is watching them, but here is who REALLY is watching you:

Ding dangalang blangit, I thought you were gonna say Santa Claus!

[Leo_Gnardo]

Even worse , they regularly reached ... Egypt !

As of Galicians, they are Celts, even play the bagpipe.

Egyptians & Vikings, that musta been some party.

Bagpipes & plaid/tartan cloth developed in Italy. But most of all I luv the German word for a bagpiper: der Dudelsackpfeifer.

[J M Fahey]

Oh, German is easy
No need to learn or create new words to expand vocabulary, just glue together as many already known ones as you need and you´ve got it
In this case droning + bag + pipe(ish) which is as accurate a description as I ever heard

[Dave H]

Oh, German is easy
No need to learn or create new words to expand vocabulary, just glue together as many already known ones as you need and you´ve got it

That sounds about right. I once spent a week in Karlsruhe working at the kernforschungszentrum.

[rjb]

People often complain that gun control won't stop murders, that a murderer will find some way to kill someone if they want to. So if you prevent someone from buying a gun they can buy a knife or burn your home.

Or they can text and cellphone you to death. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/16/u...y.html?mcubz=0
Or kill you with a hidden treasure. Pastor dies in search for famous hidden treasure - CBS News

[bob p]

People often complain that gun control won't stop murders, that a murderer will find some way to kill someone if they want to. So if you prevent someone from buying a gun they can buy a knife or burn your home. But those are generally people planning a murder, a first degree murder. A second degree murder is a killing in which the killer intended to kill, but only in the moment. Not a planned act - an emotional outburst. Someone in a rage who runs out to buy a gun so he can shoot me will usually be thwarted if he has to wait three days or wait for a background check or whatever the impediment might be. Three days later he has cooled to the point of just hating me, but not willing to murder for it.

SO when I make the assertion, it isn't some hard and fast rule, but in general, the laws to prevent someone rushing to own a firearm will deter the murder. Someone carefully planning to do me in will find an alternative weapon. Nothing deeper than that.

It seems to me in gun control arguments, the NRA side often likes to say something like "if you take away their guns they will find another way". WHich I would agree with if we are discussing first degree murder. But they then use that as a basis for claiming all gun control is therefore useless. And that I do not agree with for the above reasons.

Thanks for explaining that, Enzo.

I agree that it sounds logical, though I'd add a qualification to the idea that "lack of access" is a deterrent to 2nd degree murderers: it's only an effective deterrent to that subset people who aren't highly motivated to complete the task irrespective of whether or not a firearm is readily available.

I'm inclined to think that the problem of lack of access to a suitable weapon (knife, gun, ballpoint pen, guitar cord, whatever) only applies to the class of people who: a) are programmed to believe that they need access to a gun to kill someone (in reality they don't); b) who are the kind of people who aren't willing to put their own safety at risk when they're contemplating killing someone (ie: cowards who prefer to kill from the safety provided by distance); and c) are not morally and ethically restrained from being likely to commit a 2nd degree murder in the first place.

There are a lot of people in the world who aren't: a) lacking in a capacity for creative thinking and improvisation, b) cowardly and fearful for their own safety and c) morally disinclined to kill someone in a fit of passion. Those kinds of people, if highly motivated by passion, will in all likelihood will think up an alternative means of accomplishing their goal regardless of whether any particular class of weapon is handy. If they're the kind of person who is willing to go hand-to-hand in a fit of passion, sacrificing regard for their own safety, then they are not going to feel repressed by the lack of immediate access to a firearm. Those people aren't the kind of people who will abort their plans just because Weapon A isn't available. They're likely to improvise. And if they have a well developed sense of moral ambiguity then they probably won't hesitate. As an example: there are many 2nd degree murders that are committed with heavy blunt objects, where access to a gun or a waiting period didn't factor into the outcome.

To be fair, I think that the only time that lack of access to a firearm actually dissuades someone from committing 2nd degree murder is when a murder scenario is being imagined in the minds of people who aren't likely to ever commit bare-handed murders. People who aren't likely to commit a murder probably believe that a lack of access to weapons will dissuade everyone else as much as it would dissuade them. Their viewpoint creates selection bias as the project their views onto the imagined actions of others.

I agree that limiting access would probably limit acts from being performed by the types of kinds of cowards who only gain bravery through ready access to a weapon that empowers them with overwhelming advantage coupled with a perceived sense of personal safety. But there are also a lot of people in the world who aren't such cowards. Those people, if highly motivated by passion, aren't going to be dissuaded by a waiting period. Those people will improvise on the spot and execute their passion-fuelled plans without hesitation. People who are committed to getting something done certainly aren't going to be deterred by lack of access to the easiest way of getting what they want. Not having ready access to a weapon that makes the task easiest for them might not create a hurdle high enough to stop them from proceeding with a more difficult task. There are plenty of people out there who, in the heat of the moment, will think creatively and find a way to accomplish what they want to accomplish, irrespective of whether or not a gun is available. In that light, the belief that 2nd degree murders are prevented by restricted access to tools seems to amount to wishful thinking.

[rjb]

That's what I meant about the guy with the "This truck protected by Smith and Wesson" bumper sticker. It might just as well say "Please give me a reason to shoot you." Which is the wrong mentality for a gun owner. And yet one of the most common within that demographic.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.6add237d8215

[Chuck H]

That boy sure looks the part too. Almost creepy to the point that if I had to attach an image to the profile I outlined I couldn't have done any better.