Posts by Steve Parks
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Yes, you've repeatedly taken a maximalist copyright position, while occasionally admitting that you personally make illicit downloads of copyright material. And on this basis, you've attacked me personally as a hypocrite.
Go figure.
I can't; I can't figure out Robery at all. I'd guessed, though, that there's more to his arguments with Russell than we see here.
nothings going to happen till the code is up and running so essentially it a law in waiting, its completely ineffective so what's the point in getting offended by it.
This is bonkers. You implicitly seem to agree with the point that the law is dependent on the code, yet the code isn't even close to being a reality. We don't know yet what form it will take, and there's argument over the merits of what has been proposed so far. Yet, go ahead with the law anyway?
-
...still, the chance of making a change to the legislative plans is probably low. Here's hoping....
-
This was organised at relatively short notice. More importantly than the number who turned up today is the number of emails and the number of signatories on the petitions. I think it was Russell who said that he heard that MPs were surprised at the number of emails they received on this issue.
-
-
Well, that was a quiet, bourgeois little protest.
Was very polite, wasn't it. Decent enough turn out, though.
That rascal, Peter Dunne, eh... using the occasion to put the boot into the now defunct ERA. Still, good to get support from him.
-
Sad to hear about Bob Munro. My condolences to his family.
-
...and apologies for not being blacked out--but I am, in spirit.
Me too. In fact, that's black coffee in that there image.
-
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. If the dead gang member did have a gun, would that have made it ok?
Interesting point. It seems the potential existence of a gun affects our perception in a funny way, like some deadly Shrodinger-style thought experiment. If there had been a gun there after all, Allen may not even have been prosectuted. Yet the fact of a gun or not would still not have been known for certain by the shooter at the time; he was still "shooting first", either way. Gun = self-defence; no gun = maybe not self-defence. Yet either way, the shooter had no more or less reason to belive that there was a gun when pulling the trigger.
Getting off my philosophical tangent, the the key to me is: was it reasonable for him to have believed that Collier was likely to be about to reach for a gun and shoot him?
Given the overall circumstances, I'm inclined to think 'yes'. It's a boardline call, though. I think the background and the circumstances lend credence to Allen's claim that Colllier threatened to kill him, and that Allen believed that to be genuine.
-
People who don't get a say, because others in positions of power or judgement can't see beyond their own prejudices, and so have decided their life has no worth or quality.
I don’t see it as anyone saying her life was worthless as such (and I'm sure her father didn't think so), but how long are we justified in artificially forcing someone to stay alive when they would otherwise have died, naturally. (The most important thing, of course, is what they want, but sometimes we have to surmise what they would have wanted from the views of family and friends.)
I see this as possibly leading to the situation where murdering a disabled person (eg a child), or even withdrawing care as in the case of a disabled child in some societies is seen as less of a crime, than killing a so-called normal person.
As per Giovanni’s remarks, I don’t see any correlation between countries allowing people to die in this type of circumstance and less rights or respect for people with disabilities.
It all comes down to what our view of people. I say that we are all equally human and no one has right to say one human life is more valuable than another. Others of course disagree.
I broadly go along with “all people’s lives are equal”, but it isn’t for me to tell someone else they must continue to live, in all circumstances, no matter what, when they may not want to. This means I think you can consistently believe that all human life is equal, and still say there needs to be a limit to how long we artificially hold someone alive.
-
These black gravatars make my brain think everyone is the same person.
I know what you mean, Russell.