funsec mailing list archives
Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs
From: Drsolly <drsollyp () drsolly com>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 22:45:01 +0100 (BST)
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006, Brian Loe wrote:
On 4/19/06, Drsolly <drsollyp () drsolly com> wrote:Actually, in some respects - mostly little ones - you do have more freedoms than us.Not sure what you mean by "actually". Actually, in many respects, especially the important ones, we have a hell (you've probably call that "heck") lot more freedom than you. Try working as a prostitute in new York,Prostitution is legal in the UK? Didn't know that, perhaps your in Amsterdam...
I'm in England, and it's legal here. Ditto most civilised countries.
Doesn't matter. Prostitution is legal in parts of the US - and could be legal in more areas if the citizens of those areas so chose to make it so, or, more accurately, their representatives did.
You can always argue "we haven't got freedom X because our representatives don't chose to give it to us". Fact is, if someone wants to be a prostitute, you stop them doing so, except in one small part of the USA. It's immoral that prostitution is illegal - imagine how you'd feel if it were illegal to be a programmer.
or marrying someone the same sex in Maine,This too is becoming more "legal" in the US - not that it was EVER a legal issue to begin with...but, hey, that's between you and your god/king/ceaser.
Same thing. You don't have that freedom.
or buying a glass of beer if you're over 18 but under whatever irrational age you set as the minimum.Yep, pretty stupid, eh? I remember being 12 and buying a pack of smokes for my older cousin. They decided to not sell them to me that day and an old man standing in the back (well, leaning, he had only one leg) said, "yep, helluva thing. You can fight an' die for yer country at 18, but don' think you c'n buy a beer when ya get home."
Well, I can understand controlling what children (e.g. age 12) do. But if someone is old enough to vote, drive and die for your queen, then it's morally wrong to bar them from the other freedoms that adults have, such as the right to drink beer. I cannot imagine how you justify this law.
In MOST respects, however, your little more than serfs (how'd that happen - thought you got rid of the queen! <g>). God forbid you defend yourself from attack in your own home. A basic, inalienable right like that? Ha... not in your kingdom! Only the king shall have arms! :)Actually, we are allowed to use reasonable force to defend ourselves;And who is the judge on what is "reasonable" and when?
A court of law is the judge, of course, just like in any other criminal case.
we just aren't allowed to kill someone who broke into our house to steal a candlestick.How'd you determine that they wanted a candlestick exactly, ask them?
I also note that Americans aren't allowed to have any kind of serious armaments, just those pathetic little popguns to make them feel like they have real arms.Popguns? I dunno, my .308 is exactly the same gun the US and English millitary is carrying for a sniper rifle - unless they're shooting a .50 cal (which I could also buy at the local gun store if I wanted and could afford one). The pistol I carry (I carry everywhere but work) was used well in almost every war America has fought in since 1911 <g>.
Popgun. You can't buy tanks, AFVs, artillery, bombs or any of the other things that you would actually need in order to carry out the purpose of the [whatever the number is] amendment.
a month of vacation, period? Man...I could go for that. I've even heard of folks having 3 months paid holiday!What is "holiday"?Vacation?
What is "vacation"? Is that where you stop working for a while? I guess that would be useful for folks who don't understand why people are willing to actually pay them to do what they enjoy doing. _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Current thread:
- RE: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Young, Keith (Apr 17)
- Message not available
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Brian Loe (Apr 17)
- Message not available
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Justin Polazzo (Apr 19)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Brian Loe (Apr 19)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Drsolly (Apr 19)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Brian Loe (Apr 19)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Drsolly (Apr 19)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Brian Loe (Apr 19)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Drsolly (Apr 19)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Blue Boar (Apr 19)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Valdis . Kletnieks (Apr 19)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Brian Loe (Apr 19)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Drsolly (Apr 20)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Brian Loe (Apr 20)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Drsolly (Apr 20)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Blue Boar (Apr 20)
- Re: University of South Carolina e-Mail Compromises StudentIDs Drsolly (Apr 20)