Logan's Run thread:10-1-06 Boy that got first Microchip in Florida now 18, dies in Motorcycle wreck

[palehorse]

wtf is the point of this thread?

 

[sandorski]

Dave: Your threads usually have some sort of cohesion between the event and the Republican Rant, but this thread is reaching even for you. Some of your threads the Issue/Republican tie-in is very vague, but WTF does anything you wrote have to do with the rant this time?

It's actually ok to post things without adding in your Patented Republican Rant. Try it and see.

 

[Aisengard]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
BTW: The Logan's Run remake came out and was called The Island. Although some say there will be another remake.. hmmmm... and The Island was not a total remake, just shared a lot of the same ideas.

Actually, the Island was HEAVILY drawn from a bad old movie "Parts: The Clonus Horror". Exact same premise, different plot outcomes. If you see it you'll know what I'm talking about, although they did do a Mystery Science 3000 show on it, that's how I saw the movie.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: BrownTown
I still can't tell whether Moonbeam is ever serious of not, he always posts things that sounds like hes joking, but then maybe hes serious?

Like most things, whether they are good of evil depends on how they are put to use and what kinds of safeguards are in place. There is no doubt in my mind that crime will pretty much end when anybody who commits it can be discovered. That discovery can be made very possible with total monitoring by computers. Who knows what the world would be like filled with people itching to sin but who can't because they would be instantly identified. And lots of people are infected by insane notions from religion like the mark of the beast. I find it fascinating to probe areas where people are clearly irrational. You may be so paranoid about what you think is your personal right to privacy that it will be fine with you that others get away with murder. I wonder about these absolutist views.

Aren't you being a little extreme? We are considered innocent until proven guilty, so if one is forced to submit to a chip then you are basically saqying you have to prove youself innocent and that is an invasion of one's privacy IMO.

It will turn out to be a moot point in the end because before long an implant will be a condition of employment. No chip, no job. Welcome to Corporate America.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: BrownTown
I still can't tell whether Moonbeam is ever serious of not, he always posts things that sounds like hes joking, but then maybe hes serious?

Like most things, whether they are good of evil depends on how they are put to use and what kinds of safeguards are in place. There is no doubt in my mind that crime will pretty much end when anybody who commits it can be discovered. That discovery can be made very possible with total monitoring by computers. Who knows what the world would be like filled with people itching to sin but who can't because they would be instantly identified. And lots of people are infected by insane notions from religion like the mark of the beast. I find it fascinating to probe areas where people are clearly irrational. You may be so paranoid about what you think is your personal right to privacy that it will be fine with you that others get away with murder. I wonder about these absolutist views.

Surely you jest. People don't commit crimes because they think they can get away with it. They commit crimes because they want to commit crimes. Big Brother won't end crime, he'll simply give us the largest prison population history has ever seen.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Dave: Your threads usually have some sort of cohesion between the event and the Republican Rant, but this thread is reaching even for you. Some of your threads the Issue/Republican tie-in is very vague, but WTF does anything you wrote have to do with the rant this time?

It's actually ok to post things without adding in your Patented Republican Rant. Try it and see.

I didn't see any mention of Republicans.

Guilty concious perhaps on your part???

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
It will turn out to be a moot point in the end because before long an implant will be a condition of employment.

No chip, no job.

Welcome to Corporate America.

Actually I had an article in the original thread that was the idea.

They also suggested that no medical history, no job.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
It will turn out to be a moot point in the end because before long an implant will be a condition of employment.

No chip, no job.

Welcome to Corporate America.

Actually I had an article in the original thread that was the idea.

They also suggested that no medical history, no job.

I can tell you from personal experience that it's already that way.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: sandorski
Dave: Your threads usually have some sort of cohesion between the event and the Republican Rant, but this thread is reaching even for you. Some of your threads the Issue/Republican tie-in is very vague, but WTF does anything you wrote have to do with the rant this time?

It's actually ok to post things without adding in your Patented Republican Rant. Try it and see.

I didn't see any mention of Republicans.

Guilty concious perhaps on your part???

Hmm, re-read, you are correct, no Republicans mentioned. Guilty conscience? Not at all. Let's just say that your Rants have been getting tiresome and increasingly bizarre(and usually tie-in Republicans ). I couldn't figure out WTF your point was with this thread and in my state of confusion your oft "Republican" rant was one of the few things that came to mind.

Is this thread about a tragic death? Related to Politics? Some kind of Skynet like conspiracy? WTF?

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: BrownTown
I still can't tell whether Moonbeam is ever serious of not, he always posts things that sounds like hes joking, but then maybe hes serious?

Like most things, whether they are good of evil depends on how they are put to use and what kinds of safeguards are in place. There is no doubt in my mind that crime will pretty much end when anybody who commits it can be discovered. That discovery can be made very possible with total monitoring by computers. Who knows what the world would be like filled with people itching to sin but who can't because they would be instantly identified. And lots of people are infected by insane notions from religion like the mark of the beast. I find it fascinating to probe areas where people are clearly irrational. You may be so paranoid about what you think is your personal right to privacy that it will be fine with you that others get away with murder. I wonder about these absolutist views.

Surely you jest. People don't commit crimes because they think they can get away with it. They commit crimes because they want to commit crimes. Big Brother won't end crime, he'll simply give us the largest prison population history has ever seen.

Well crazy people aside, most people have an objective when they commit a crime. So it becomes a risk / reward situation where criminals will commit crimes that they deem worth the risk given the rewards. This can apply from multibillion dollar enron scandals to stealing that candy bar from the grocery store. No one commits a crime thinking they'll be caught, and I dont know anyone that would commit a crime knowing they WOULD get caught (aforementioned crazies aside). With total flawless monitoring (something that pretty unrealistic) the risk would be 100% since you will ALWAYS be caught, which makes the reward not worth the risk and thus driving down crime.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Mo0o
Well crazy people aside, most people have an objective when they commit a crime. So it becomes a risk / reward situation where criminals will commit crimes that they deem worth the risk given the rewards. This can apply from multibillion dollar enron scandals to stealing that candy bar from the grocery store. No one commits a crime thinking they'll be caught, and I dont know anyone that would commit a crime knowing they WOULD get caught (aforementioned crazies aside). With total flawless monitoring (something that pretty unrealistic) the risk would be 100% since you will ALWAYS be caught, which makes the reward not worth the risk and thus driving down crime.

I have no proof, but I'd be willing to bet that most murders are committed without thinking. A moment of anger, a crime of passion. An argument escalates. I doubt many murders are the kind of thing we see on TV with meticulous planning.

Edit: And don't forget about crimes committed while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, which throws rational thought out the window.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Mo0o

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: BrownTown
I still can't tell whether Moonbeam is ever serious of not, he always posts things that sounds like hes joking, but then maybe hes serious?

Like most things, whether they are good of evil depends on how they are put to use and what kinds of safeguards are in place. There is no doubt in my mind that crime will pretty much end when anybody who commits it can be discovered. That discovery can be made very possible with total monitoring by computers. Who knows what the world would be like filled with people itching to sin but who can't because they would be instantly identified. And lots of people are infected by insane notions from religion like the mark of the beast. I find it fascinating to probe areas where people are clearly irrational. You may be so paranoid about what you think is your personal right to privacy that it will be fine with you that others get away with murder. I wonder about these absolutist views.

Surely you jest. People don't commit crimes because they think they can get away with it. They commit crimes because they want to commit crimes. Big Brother won't end crime, he'll simply give us the largest prison population history has ever seen.

Well crazy people aside, most people have an objective when they commit a crime. So it becomes a risk / reward situation where criminals will commit crimes that they deem worth the risk given the rewards. This can apply from multibillion dollar enron scandals to stealing that candy bar from the grocery store. No one commits a crime thinking they'll be caught, and I dont know anyone that would commit a crime knowing they WOULD get caught (aforementioned crazies aside). With total flawless monitoring (something that pretty unrealistic) the risk would be 100% since you will ALWAYS be caught, which makes the reward not worth the risk and thus driving down crime.

Except for violent crimes, making something a crime in most cases greatly increases the reward. For example, the illict drug trade would not be so profitable if illicit drugs weren't illegal. We already have the largest prison population that history has ever seen. Total flawless monitoring is not only "pretty unrealistic," it's completely impossible. Who watches the watchers? Or... imagine trying to record every moment of your life and watching at the same time -- basically the same thing. The purpose of "Big Brother" therefore is not to prevent crime (that would defeat the fear and propaganda that claims to justify Big Brother's existence), but to control crime for profit ala the mafia syndicate rackets.

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Mo0o
Well crazy people aside, most people have an objective when they commit a crime. So it becomes a risk / reward situation where criminals will commit crimes that they deem worth the risk given the rewards. This can apply from multibillion dollar enron scandals to stealing that candy bar from the grocery store. No one commits a crime thinking they'll be caught, and I dont know anyone that would commit a crime knowing they WOULD get caught (aforementioned crazies aside). With total flawless monitoring (something that pretty unrealistic) the risk would be 100% since you will ALWAYS be caught, which makes the reward not worth the risk and thus driving down crime.

I have no proof, but I'd be willing to bet that most murders are committed without thinking. A moment of anger, a crime of passion. An argument escalates. I doubt many murders are the kind of thing we see on TV with meticulous planning.

Edit: And don't forget about crimes committed while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, which throws rational thought out the window.

But I think if a government is unstable or if the local police force is undermanned, one could probably see a spike in murder and crime rates

 

[OrganizedChaos]

all i want to say is this..

THE BOX = best robot ever!

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Mo0o
Well crazy people aside, most people have an objective when they commit a crime. So it becomes a risk / reward situation where criminals will commit crimes that they deem worth the risk given the rewards. This can apply from multibillion dollar enron scandals to stealing that candy bar from the grocery store. No one commits a crime thinking they'll be caught, and I dont know anyone that would commit a crime knowing they WOULD get caught (aforementioned crazies aside). With total flawless monitoring (something that pretty unrealistic) the risk would be 100% since you will ALWAYS be caught, which makes the reward not worth the risk and thus driving down crime.

I have no proof, but I'd be willing to bet that most murders are committed without thinking. A moment of anger, a crime of passion. An argument escalates. I doubt many murders are the kind of thing we see on TV with meticulous planning.

Edit: And don't forget about crimes committed while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, which throws rational thought out the window.

IIRC more then 50% of all murders are committed under the influence of alcohol and the victim knows the murderer.

Pre-meditated murders get the headlines, yes, but even Gary Ridgway aka the Green River Killer and the most prolific serial murderer in US history killed roughly the same number of people in his entire 20 year career as the average annual murder rate in a medium-sized city.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Mo0o
But I think if a government is unstable or if the local police force is undermanned, one could probably see a spike in murder and crime rates

If the government is unstable, yes. Local police force undermanned, probably not.

 

[robphelan]

i'm a Dem who didn't realize how Dem I was til dumbya took office... I also have 2 girls <= 3 yrs old. I have seriously thought of having some sort of tracking device implanted until they were 10-13yrs old if available.

After they were old enough, they could make the decision whether to keep it or not.

the thought of them being abducted wracks me with anxiety.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Such a genius and he can't figure out the fact that motorcycles are dangerous.

So are knives, cars, 4-wheelers, kitchens.......:roll: