Freedom? We have more freedom in Oz than anywhere. It's our mantra. Amercans coming here for the first time are so anal and straight laced compared to us. Some just can't handle the openness and scarper for home but most embrace it with a passion that amazes. You gotta try it it and get outside your 'comfort zone' but be aware Aussies tell it like it is. A lot of you will be shell shocked. Many blues (fights) have occurred as you don't get our ultra dry sense of humour.
Laser pointers banned after attacks
- Thread starter Tempest
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Quote:
Bad hair day Gary?
No particularly.
Quote:
How many countries have you lived in Gary?
Just this one.
Relax, sprintman. oim jess pokn' yeer ribs, m8.
You need to grasp my intensely irritating, often insulting, sense of humour
Bad hair day Gary?
No particularly.
Quote:
How many countries have you lived in Gary?
Just this one.
Relax, sprintman. oim jess pokn' yeer ribs, m8.
You need to grasp my intensely irritating, often insulting, sense of humour
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Gary:
Because the thing is a uniquely lethal weapon, made all the more dangerous because it is easily hidden, masquerading as an innocent "pointing" device. You can pop one in your pocket, walk down to the nearby airport, and kill a lot of people with no more effort than it takes to go buy a gallon of milk. And on top of that, there's absolutely no "counterbalancing" beneficial use for the things.
And it's not just airplanes. You can maim spectators at a ballgame, kids on the playground, drivers in the street, you name it.
..and where does the list end? There are always going to be acts of this type and no banning of any device will stop this as long as you have people raised without any sense of society. Raise better citizen.
Quote:
Should we allow people to cultivate anthrax, just because we want to preserve "freedom" in our society?
..and how far are you willing to restrict and alter our way of life for fringe activities by marginal people? Again, where do you feel is "too far" ..and do you think that there isn't an even more fearful (as in more guarding) type who wants to ban even more items.
What I'm seeing a close parallel (not complete) in your words to what I call "backfill" justification for enabling a restrictive act.
"We're banning all bottles over 3.5oz on carry on luggage (just in case) because they could be used to ...."
It's a akin to:
"Well, I bought Johnny a new pair a Guest jeans because, if I didn't, he could be shunned by other kids at school and it would probably harm his ego for the rest of his life and that would be unfair (add more length to have it compete with Baggens monologue to Ruddy near the end of Lord of the Rings).
You're the precursor of the future committee for "social suitability" in all items available to the public and you're of the assumption that someone as sensible as you is going to fill its membership.
You're doing it to, allegedly, protect the society. Someone, someday, may do it to restrict the society.
Gary:
Because the thing is a uniquely lethal weapon, made all the more dangerous because it is easily hidden, masquerading as an innocent "pointing" device. You can pop one in your pocket, walk down to the nearby airport, and kill a lot of people with no more effort than it takes to go buy a gallon of milk. And on top of that, there's absolutely no "counterbalancing" beneficial use for the things.
And it's not just airplanes. You can maim spectators at a ballgame, kids on the playground, drivers in the street, you name it.
..and where does the list end? There are always going to be acts of this type and no banning of any device will stop this as long as you have people raised without any sense of society. Raise better citizen.
Quote:
Should we allow people to cultivate anthrax, just because we want to preserve "freedom" in our society?
..and how far are you willing to restrict and alter our way of life for fringe activities by marginal people? Again, where do you feel is "too far" ..and do you think that there isn't an even more fearful (as in more guarding) type who wants to ban even more items.
What I'm seeing a close parallel (not complete) in your words to what I call "backfill" justification for enabling a restrictive act.
"We're banning all bottles over 3.5oz on carry on luggage (just in case) because they could be used to ...."
It's a akin to:
"Well, I bought Johnny a new pair a Guest jeans because, if I didn't, he could be shunned by other kids at school and it would probably harm his ego for the rest of his life and that would be unfair (add more length to have it compete with Baggens monologue to Ruddy near the end of Lord of the Rings).
You're the precursor of the future committee for "social suitability" in all items available to the public and you're of the assumption that someone as sensible as you is going to fill its membership.
You're doing it to, allegedly, protect the society. Someone, someday, may do it to restrict the society.
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
You're doing it to, allegedly, protect the society. Someone, someday, may do it to restrict the society.
Or to make big $ on puts on laser pointer manufacturers, or whatever is being targeted at the moment.
You're doing it to, allegedly, protect the society. Someone, someday, may do it to restrict the society.
Or to make big $ on puts on laser pointer manufacturers, or whatever is being targeted at the moment.
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
..and where does the list end? There are always going to be acts of this type and no banning of any device will stop this as long as you have people raised without any sense of society. Raise better citizen. Again, where do you feel is "too far" ..and do you think that there isn't an even more fearful (as in more guarding) type who wants to ban even more items.
Gary,
For crying out loud, it's not like someone is trying to ban apple pie. It's a lethal weapon that foreseeably will be used for mass destruction and almost certainly will be determined to enjoy no second amendment protection.
For sure some doofus will come along and want to ban something else. That's what you have legislatures for - to pass judgment on this stuff.
Excuse me now, I'm going to go look for a military grade flame thrower. I understand they make a great cigarette lighter and garbage bag hole burner, and, based on that utility, I must be fully entitled to own one.
..and where does the list end? There are always going to be acts of this type and no banning of any device will stop this as long as you have people raised without any sense of society. Raise better citizen. Again, where do you feel is "too far" ..and do you think that there isn't an even more fearful (as in more guarding) type who wants to ban even more items.
Gary,
For crying out loud, it's not like someone is trying to ban apple pie. It's a lethal weapon that foreseeably will be used for mass destruction and almost certainly will be determined to enjoy no second amendment protection.
For sure some doofus will come along and want to ban something else. That's what you have legislatures for - to pass judgment on this stuff.
Excuse me now, I'm going to go look for a military grade flame thrower. I understand they make a great cigarette lighter and garbage bag hole burner, and, based on that utility, I must be fully entitled to own one.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Quote:
It's a lethal weapon that foreseeably will be used for mass destruction and almost certainly will be determined to enjoy no second amendment protection.
It's a legit device that can potentially be used in a lethal manner. Now I'm merely playing the devil's advocate here, there should be some "regulation" or whatnot to restrict the distribution of this device ..but you're not convincing me with your criteria/justification for such an action. It's too invitational to the Orwellian tournament. You do realize that we already have banned books (some from OZ) that are deemed propaganda and that we aren't allowed to read here due to this type of thinking.
Quote:
Excuse me now, I'm going to go look for a military grade flame thrower. I understand they make a great cigarette lighter and garbage bag hole burner, and, based on that utility, I must be fully entitled to own one.
Many have been built by DYI'rs. You can go on YouTube and see plenty. Typically ..they'll only blow themselves up ..but do you feel that this should be a banned homegrown project "just because"? Granted, you can't buy one off the shelf ..but that's merely a matter of assembly.
It's a lethal weapon that foreseeably will be used for mass destruction and almost certainly will be determined to enjoy no second amendment protection.
It's a legit device that can potentially be used in a lethal manner. Now I'm merely playing the devil's advocate here, there should be some "regulation" or whatnot to restrict the distribution of this device ..but you're not convincing me with your criteria/justification for such an action. It's too invitational to the Orwellian tournament. You do realize that we already have banned books (some from OZ) that are deemed propaganda and that we aren't allowed to read here due to this type of thinking.
Quote:
Excuse me now, I'm going to go look for a military grade flame thrower. I understand they make a great cigarette lighter and garbage bag hole burner, and, based on that utility, I must be fully entitled to own one.
Many have been built by DYI'rs. You can go on YouTube and see plenty. Typically ..they'll only blow themselves up ..but do you feel that this should be a banned homegrown project "just because"? Granted, you can't buy one off the shelf ..but that's merely a matter of assembly.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Socialism (the fascist type -as opposed to "socialized") will be willingly adopted. It won't happen overnight. It will be one increment and action at a time. It's always done out of necessity. Eventually, you create necessity to put another item on the socialist side of the evolution.
Protecting your way of life by destroying the fundamentals that have produced your way of life. It's a doomed process from the start.
Protecting your way of life by destroying the fundamentals that have produced your way of life. It's a doomed process from the start.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Victory Vodka will be permitted for the "Outer Party" members
Actually, I'm beginning to see the possibilities with these things as a self defense tool. Would be much easier to carry and use then a CCP handgun.....
And no permit required.....
And no permit required.....
Not flexible enough just having one approach, maybe you agree? Logic, for one, doesn't require a license... so to speak. Need maybe logic, laser pointers, and cookies for example. "When the only tool you have is a hammer, all your problems look like nails" - Mark Twain
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2003
- Messages
- 23,591
Just a not on how the laser issue is being, or rather has been, handled in Germany:
Retailers must not sell green laser pointers that put out more than 1 mW to private people. That means only Class 1 and Class 2 lasers may be sold to anyone. Class 3R, 3B and 4 (< 1 mW) are restricted to professional use.
Possession of a Class 3R, 3B or 4 laser is legal for private use. So if you can get your hands on one you will not be charged or punished and the device will not be confiscated. If however, using your laser causes harm to person on public property, you will be held responsible.
Why is Class 2 the limit for the non-professional consumer? According to tests, the lid (blink) reflex time (0.25 seconds), which makes a person close his eyes when exposed to bright light, is a sufficient safeguard with these low-powered lasers. However, it is now believed that the blink reflex works only in 20% of people to the up to now expected degree.
Lasers have been used by people to blind soccer players. Laser pointers are not allowed in soccer stadiums anymore.
Retailers must not sell green laser pointers that put out more than 1 mW to private people. That means only Class 1 and Class 2 lasers may be sold to anyone. Class 3R, 3B and 4 (< 1 mW) are restricted to professional use.
Possession of a Class 3R, 3B or 4 laser is legal for private use. So if you can get your hands on one you will not be charged or punished and the device will not be confiscated. If however, using your laser causes harm to person on public property, you will be held responsible.
Why is Class 2 the limit for the non-professional consumer? According to tests, the lid (blink) reflex time (0.25 seconds), which makes a person close his eyes when exposed to bright light, is a sufficient safeguard with these low-powered lasers. However, it is now believed that the blink reflex works only in 20% of people to the up to now expected degree.
Lasers have been used by people to blind soccer players. Laser pointers are not allowed in soccer stadiums anymore.
Gary:
Just because we can never enforce perfect prohibition of such devices doesn't mean we shouldn't try. If we make it very, very hard to get one's hands on one of these laser canons, sure there will still be the distinct possibility that a dedicated criminal or terrorist will still get one and use it. But preventing idiots from buying them at Wal-Mart will almost entirely eliminate the possibility of some misguided high school kid easily bringing down a plane load of innocent passengers, or maiming a dozen or so classmates at a basketball game.
And just because "the authorities" ban laser cannons does not imply that tomorrow they'll be banning apple pie, football, or anything else. Again, laser canons lose in this calculation because they combine immense potential for killing and maiming while offering virtually zero benefit in return.
Just because we can never enforce perfect prohibition of such devices doesn't mean we shouldn't try. If we make it very, very hard to get one's hands on one of these laser canons, sure there will still be the distinct possibility that a dedicated criminal or terrorist will still get one and use it. But preventing idiots from buying them at Wal-Mart will almost entirely eliminate the possibility of some misguided high school kid easily bringing down a plane load of innocent passengers, or maiming a dozen or so classmates at a basketball game.
And just because "the authorities" ban laser cannons does not imply that tomorrow they'll be banning apple pie, football, or anything else. Again, laser canons lose in this calculation because they combine immense potential for killing and maiming while offering virtually zero benefit in return.
I can blind someone with my fingers, and a lot of people have indeed been blinded in that manner (not by me personally), intentionally or otherwise. Are they going to cut those off?
P.S. Why does it have to be "a dozen or so"???
P.P.S. Who watches the watchers?
P.S. Why does it have to be "a dozen or so"???
P.P.S. Who watches the watchers?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Hey, ek, I don't necessarily disagree with you ..out of necessity. I'm merely pointing out the other shoe that will, most assuredly as I breath (for the time being, mori), come to fall. It ushers in, with a helping hand, a more authorized/endorsed authoritarian climate.
There are two ultimate solutions. One is to breed and foster better citizens. The other is to enforce restrictions to liberties.
While we've apparently done little to foster/promote one ..we've surely advanced on the other with great and ever increasing strides.
Which one is your desire ..and which one do you ultimately fear? Which one do you feel impotent to change?
Probably both.
There are two ultimate solutions. One is to breed and foster better citizens. The other is to enforce restrictions to liberties.
While we've apparently done little to foster/promote one ..we've surely advanced on the other with great and ever increasing strides.
Which one is your desire ..and which one do you ultimately fear? Which one do you feel impotent to change?
Probably both.
Quote:
We have more freedom in Oz than anywhere.
Now that is just funny.
Quote:
And just because "the authorities" ban laser cannons does not imply that tomorrow they'll be banning apple pie, football, or anything else.
Sure it does, and there is plenty of historical proof. Oz has banned or removed kids play ground equipment because it is potentially dangerous. http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...true#Post999926 Guns same, now lasers. Couple this with the increased police powers due to "terrorist concerns", and you have one very scary place.
Once Big G starts telling you what you need, they don't stop.
We have more freedom in Oz than anywhere.
Now that is just funny.
Quote:
And just because "the authorities" ban laser cannons does not imply that tomorrow they'll be banning apple pie, football, or anything else.
Sure it does, and there is plenty of historical proof. Oz has banned or removed kids play ground equipment because it is potentially dangerous. http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...true#Post999926 Guns same, now lasers. Couple this with the increased police powers due to "terrorist concerns", and you have one very scary place.
Once Big G starts telling you what you need, they don't stop.
Originally Posted By: Julian
I can blind someone with my fingers, and a lot of people have indeed been blinded in that manner (not by me personally), intentionally or otherwise. Are they going to cut those off?
P.S. Why does it have to be "a dozen or so"???
P.P.S. Who watches the watchers?
I haven't yet seen a comparison to a laser cannon that holds up. Your fingers? Come one, that's so different it's not funny. First off, your fingers have tremendous beneficial use. Second, they're attached to your body, so the idea of cutting them off is simply absurd. Finally, while yes, you can blind someone with a finger, you can't blind the pilot of an airliner loaded with passengers from a mile away.
EDIT: Oh yeah, it doesn't have to be a dozen, or any particular number. Being able to blind one person, unseen from afar, is bad enough.
I can blind someone with my fingers, and a lot of people have indeed been blinded in that manner (not by me personally), intentionally or otherwise. Are they going to cut those off?
P.S. Why does it have to be "a dozen or so"???
P.P.S. Who watches the watchers?
I haven't yet seen a comparison to a laser cannon that holds up. Your fingers? Come one, that's so different it's not funny. First off, your fingers have tremendous beneficial use. Second, they're attached to your body, so the idea of cutting them off is simply absurd. Finally, while yes, you can blind someone with a finger, you can't blind the pilot of an airliner loaded with passengers from a mile away.
EDIT: Oh yeah, it doesn't have to be a dozen, or any particular number. Being able to blind one person, unseen from afar, is bad enough.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Julian
Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Just because we can never enforce perfect prohibition of such devices doesn't mean we shouldn't try.
Perfect for who?
You've got the wrong sense of "perfect" here. Or maybe I should have used another term, such as "100% effective". Hey guys, I'm actually a firm believer in the minimal use of gov't power, but in cases like this where something presents no valid positive benefit at all, and has monstrously huge potential for killing large numbers of people, I have zero problem with rules against such a thing. Newsflash: we've been prohibiting or limiting things since humans started living together in an organized society. At least in the US, we've done a pretty good (but not perfect) job of balancing freedom against the rules.
Still waiting for someone to articulate a valid reason for allowing the sale, possession, etc of these laser cannons...
Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Just because we can never enforce perfect prohibition of such devices doesn't mean we shouldn't try.
Perfect for who?
You've got the wrong sense of "perfect" here. Or maybe I should have used another term, such as "100% effective". Hey guys, I'm actually a firm believer in the minimal use of gov't power, but in cases like this where something presents no valid positive benefit at all, and has monstrously huge potential for killing large numbers of people, I have zero problem with rules against such a thing. Newsflash: we've been prohibiting or limiting things since humans started living together in an organized society. At least in the US, we've done a pretty good (but not perfect) job of balancing freedom against the rules.
Still waiting for someone to articulate a valid reason for allowing the sale, possession, etc of these laser cannons...
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
