141–150 of 168 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some people also need to get in the habit of researching a claim by themselves.
Pretty sure doing your own research turns you into a conspiracy theorist; so I don’t think we’re supposed to do that anymore.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Transportation influences urban development. That is why most houses have a garage. There is no such thing as private transport (streets are public). Transportation has been heavily centralized since the New Deal. The bicycle was okay for most people living in cities in the 30s, now it is not because the government has favored the car infrastructure over the last decades. I think we need to start with not letting gov…
This is true. But it does not negate the comment you are replying to. Once you introduce kids into the mix (esp infants) - this whole narrative falls apart quite quick, ditto for elders/people with disabilities. Bikes, public transport are not a substitute for the vehicle. I do agree that the vehicle should not be the default transportation even if I do consider myself a "car guy".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The government will soon be able to geofence areas to keep vehicles out of. Wonder if you will get a warning as you get close or if they will just cut out. "Warning, you are approaching a closed zone. Stop your advance. Compliance is mandatory. Mobility privileges for this vehicle will be revoked"
That exits essentially for aircraft today, albeit not automated. Try flying your little Cessna too close to the capitol mall or any number of sites in the world. You’ll very quickly and very unceremoniously be intercepted by other aircraft with big guns telling you to get the hell out.
Imagine driving in a remote road on a cold night, no cell signal, a deer crosses the road and you swerve to avoid it. The car thinks your drunk and kills the car. You're stuck, no cell signal, good chance of hypothermia.
A bigger, real-world problem is that cars with lane-keeping assist will steer you back towards the deer. Some of the earlier EVs I tried had lane-keeping assist so brutal that it was like trying to steer a car with a broken power steering pump belt, if it didn't want you to change lanes - genuinely dangerous. The Kia EV I tried a few weeks ago just felt like it was tramlining a bit when I changed lanes without indica…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is misleading. While there are privately owned tanks, they are all old, and lack any weapons (other than as a battering ram). They likely could cause a lot of trouble for a local police force, but would not stand up to any infantry force in the world. So in an actual conflict with the U.S. government, none of those tanks would be more than symbolic. And whole a general gorilla insurrection in the U.S. would be n…
It is misleading, but not for the reasons you state. There are private tanks in the US with functional weapons, including both mounted MGs and the cannon. In fact, there’s a place in Uvalde, TX that will let you come drive and shoot theirs for a couple grand. > none of those tanks would be more than symbolic Correct, but that’s not why. A tank would be worse than useless in an insurgency. > The whole idea that a Seco…
This idea that citizens would somehow unite against a tyrannical government has always been a fantasy, even during the revolutionary war.
Here in Minneapolis, there have been multiple anecdotal reports of ICE being able to remotely unlock cars, disable them, and even open windows. Whether its true, its certainly seems possible. Its made me very concerned about public safety if we allow our government to have this power. I actually believe being able to own and use a vehicle freely should be protected under the 2nd amendment. Im picturing a world where…
Driving is a privilege, not a right. People are required to demonstrate a level of skill in order to not hurt and kill other road users too much and there are other considerations as well. I, for one, do not welcome people driving with compromised or no vision, or being subject to occasional loss of control whilst having a seizure etc.
I also don't think that it's a good idea to allow a person to continue driving if they've previously used their vehicle as a deliberate weapon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes you think the army will go along with it? Sure some will, but expect many soldiers will rebel.
The Navy is currently blowing up random boats in the Caribbean (including double taps on survivors) because reasons.
People sign up for a variety of reasons; to keep their own safe is one of them, and that reason is incompatible with being the aggressor in a civil war.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What makes you think the army will go along with it? Sure some will, but expect many soldiers will rebel.
Army goes along with anyone that ensures continual financing of the army. Review history of any putsch ever.
If the White House keeps up current threats against allies it may find nobody willing to lend them money, and therefore the government will be forced to inflate its way to balancing the books each year; if they follow through with kicking out the undocumented migrant workers (even if they improve their current behaviour and limit themselves to *only* undocumented migrant workers), they mess up US agriculture at the same time; there is also visible corruption and self-dealing within the government.
The question is the level, rather than the existence of these factors.
There's been another authoritarian in my lifetime who messed with farms by actually kicking out non-native people in the way Trump threatens, demonstrating even worse corruption, and that actually did try to fund the government with inflation rather than my hypothetical of "will be forced to": Mugabe. It didn't go well for Zimbabwe, and the US military can observe what happened there and decide if that's what they want to see in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least some conspiracy theorists do selective research.
Selective research is an oxymoron. The word for it is cherry-picking and it is better classified as a fallacy.
Most people… eh. I don't know about the rest of the world, and my experience was in the 90s, but for me GCSE triple science was a list of facts to regurgitate in exams, and although we did also have practical sessions those weren't scored by how well we did Popperian falsification (a thing I didn't even learn about it until my entirely optional chosen-for-fun A-level in Philosophy; I don't know if A-level sciences teaches that).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Its made me very concerned about public safety if we allow our government to have this power. ICE says it can legally enter homes without a warrant So we’re beyond concern now
>ICE says it can legally enter homes without a warrant Source for this claim, besides the usual exemptions that are available to all law enforcement (ie. exigent circumstances)?