text:
READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
Now more than three months since the tragic mass shooting at the Sandy Hook Elementary School, and amidst nationwide debate regarding gun legislation, on Wednesday evening "Piers Morgan Live" hosted five police chiefs, and one sheriff, opening up his program to a healthy discussion on guns, and firearm legislation.
As magazine size continues to be one of the more controversial tenants of the overall debate, Redding's Douglas Fuchs – one of five Connecticut cops to join Piers Morgan in studio – insisted that limiting a guns capacity can allot police critical moments which can potentially save lives:
"Two seconds makes a difference, that two seconds is an opportunity, that two seconds is a chance," he said. "We know that in law enforcement. That protects civilians and it certainly protects our officers, and gives them a better or a fighting chance when in harms way."
Meanwhile, as Wednesday saw Colorado governor John Hickenlooper sign three new gun-control measures into law, Sheriff Ronald Bruce joined the program live via satellite, offering an explanation for why he's refusing to enforce his state's new legislation:
"I just don't agree with it," said the Hinsdale County Sheriff, specifically referencing a law that limits the amount of bullets permissible in a given weapon. "There's a major concern which I concur with, that this is – based on, looking at history for the last 100 years – is that proverbial foot of the door, that it's a 15-round magazine today, it's a 10-round magazine tomorrow, and a no magazine a year from now."
Shifting his attention back to his face to face round table, which featured the five men from Connecticut, Morgan asked Patrick Ridenhour to respond to his Colorado colleague:
"I say that it's our responsibility to enforce the law, whatever it is," said the police chief from Stratford. "It's not for us to really look at the reasons behind it. We have elected officials who give us laws, give us mandates to enforce. And that's what we're supposed to do."
Watch the clip, and listen to the interview, as six law enforcement officials, including five from the state that sadly calls the Newtown massacre home, further discuss and debate gun safety, and firearm law.
» Follow "Piers Morgan Live" on Twitter
» Follow "Piers Morgan Live" on Instagram
As gruesome and painful as it would be for MOST ALL OF US, I truly believe that 100% of Congress and the Senate must LOOK AT the death photos of the children of Sandy Hook. Then I think Wayne LaPierre should be forced to look at these same photos, live and on Piers' show and then see if he can look into the camera's eye and STILL hold to his unbelievably STUPID, narrow-minded, unfeeling, inhuman, 'greedy old white man' mentality!
Sue... your suggestion of publishing those photos of the innocent at Sandy Hook for propaganda reasons for any one to see..even as you say just for the members of congress or the senate...and then for LaPerre is disgusting...and pointless to say the very least... and here's why...First of all none of those proposed bans would have prevented Sandy Hook or any other of those evil shootings..period,,2nd...As gruesome as it sounds any kind of gun would produce horrific looking wounds and not just the wounds from those semi automatic rifles what the gun grabbers incorrectly call "assault rifles" ..what are you proposing to ban all guns ??...And 3rd... the focus should be on the evil deranged killer Lanza and his sickness and how we can prevent another wacko from doing more evil,and not the method he used for his evil...It seems that you have been 'buying in" on to much liberal gun grabbing propaganda,and not the facts...Don't let people like revolting Michael Moore who could very well make a profit by getting involved in this and he doesn't even seem to care at all about the feelings of the victims families and Piers Morgan who has a background in tabloids and was once fired for faking photos of soldiers to make them look like they were abusing prisoners...The unscrupulous Morgan will do or say anything for ratings...don't be a sucker just sayin.
Do you know how you sound 'B". what video game are you playing giving you such vigor hope to play armymen, cowboys and indians. Sorry but this is the dumbest thing thought out!
We are not talking about "propaganda". We are talking about truth. Those beautiful innocent children were murdered. The weapon used was a military style death machine. Just like in a murder trial. Like a Jury....elected officials should be shown all the evidence of what these types of guns can do before they make any decisions. Regarding comments that any new laws wouldn't have made a difference had they been in place....that's nonsense. Had there been a law requiring in depth background checks it is quite reasonable to say Lanza's Mom wouldn't have been able to purchase the gun. Had there been a law that limited the size of clips Lanza would have had to pause to reload. According to law enforcement experts just one to two seconds could have meant lives saved. So, the propaganda claim is erroneous, and so is the "it would have made no difference" claim.
Have you thought of at the end of each one on your shows to ( like Erin Burnett idea ) of announcing each day how many gun deaths since Sandyhook ????
Thats the smartest thing someone has said in the last two weeks. Limit the dam bullets! Sure you think semi0automatic guns shoot Bang One mississippi, bang two missiissippi ,bang . Its rata tat-ta -ta -ta dead before you can look at the shooter. are you that dense to think it wouldnt be like that, Really viewers next to comment. think this on out , put yourself in a senario situation. NO your not going to be the imaginary hero in this one. And the likely hood for that senario to work out for you to be the hero is nill!
I would like for everyone to look at what we are discussing here.. I hear Piers Morgan saying that if we can save one life wouldn't it be worth it; I would say that we should be trying to save as many live as possible! No one is looking and saying why don't we put more laws around alcohol; as alcohol related deaths are over ten (10) fold what gun related deaths are?? I believe that no one wants to tackle this monster as most of the people are using alcohol.
As effective as the actual pictures might be, I don't believe it is feasible because of privacy issues. I believe it would be almost as effective to have artistic depictions of generic faceless children with their heads blown off and their guts hanging out. Additionally, a scene showing 26 faceless children with various wounds inflicted should be acceptable and require no permissions. Finally, the only way to defeat the gun nuts is with money, ie Blumberg and others. A national campaign raising money block by block and sending it where it can be most effective defeating the Democrats who, because of their cowardice defy the will of the American people. Gabby Gifford and/or Blumberg could organize the effort.
A start at what? Handwringing, crying, and a shocking admission that this confirms what we already know – those children died horrible deaths?
You may as well be dancing on their graves waving a "ban the magazines" poster. Do you even grasp in the slightest way how ghoulish your suggestion is? It is one small step removed from putting their heads on pikes to make your point. Please, return the discussion to rationality.
So, according to you everyone who owns a firearm is a "gun nut"? Fanatics always speak in derogatory absolutes. In that, your opinion means little.
"greedy old white man" Sue? Like a typical liberal and typical supporter of gun control you are a racist and a bigot and it matters not that you direct your racism toward white people instead of black people.
First off I think either side (far right and far left) are both wrong and one-sided agendas!
I, personally, am a registered democrat but consider myself a moderate democrat; 21 year military veteran, active member of NRA, gun owner, and father of two living in Connecticut about an hour and a half form Sandy Hook Elementary. I notably voted for Obama in both elections and I feel something has to be down about the current gun regulations federally and locally in CT BUT I think the state of CT is going crazy trying to eliminate everything! Gov Malloy is doing everything in his power to make guns illegal all together even though we are one of the strictest states currently.
Furthermore the Colorado Sheriff has a point; Pierce mentioned 100 round magazines (that's overkill and an exaggerated) as the argument is for or against "30 Round" clips and as the sheriff stated once those are made illegal then whats next, 10 round clips? Secondly, the Redding CT Police Chief didn't state anything, Pierce was putting words into his mouth along with what he did say, YES, changing a clip will allow a 2-3 second advantage BUT what is the shooter pulls out another weapon.....then there's no advantage!
DID ANYONE STOP AND THINK ABOUT ALL THE GUN-RELATED DEATHS FROM HANDGUNS? That is what really needs to be addressed not the elimination of anything specific. I, for one, enjoy shooting (not hunting) but simple target/range shooting and it is fun to shoot an AR-15 with a 30 round magazine.....but so is shooting a WWII-era Springfield M1 Carbine or M1 Garand, why eliminate one type of firearm just because some deranged kid with a irresponsible mother enacted a tradegy. I cannot look at those pictures and justly support the far right agenda but on the same note it aggravates me knowing the democrats are using this to further their agenda!
Moreso, WHY is the government putting this ahead of the economy, more lives are being lost due to that! What about tightening the current gun laws and regulations? What about reforming mental health issues? Why was this mother allowed to openly have guns in a house where there was a deranged child with a history of violence??? WHY? WHY? WHY? Stop doing nothing and making new laws and govern the ones that are out there!!!!!!!!!!!
Depending on the way the state of CT and the country settle this is whether I lose faith in both parties......Independent voting is looking better all the time!
What you are advocating is an emotional response to a situation which requires a rational one instead. We are trying to solve a problem of violence, not put a band-aid over bruised sensibilities.
Your comment shows perfectly why we have the problem we have. Feel good changes do nothing when we need actual solutions. Did the gun jump into Adam's hand and go off by itself? Was the gun purchased legally? Have you seen what a shotgun does to a body? If giving up my guns was really the answer I would be the first one to do it. I can promise you that looking at the pictures would not change anyone's views that is looking for a rational answer. It amazes me how stupid all of you liberal people can be. If you want to save children's lives, start making a stand against the 1.2 million abortions that your party protects each year! Maybe the fix would be to test people on the ability to have rational thought and get rid of anyone that isn't capable..
I fully agree with you. This past weekend I was driving on USHWY 95 heading south bound to NYC approximately 2 miles outside of Bridgeport Connecticut and as I looked up to the left, I saw a very large billboard sign that made me weep. The sign can be seen from a long distance and it reads... "We Are Sandy Hook, We Choose Love." I would like Mr. LaPierre and some of the gun advocates across the country to take a ride south bound on USHWY 95 heading toward Bridgeport Connecticut. Its an errie feeling and a chilling reminder of what happened in that sleepy little town three months ago, a chilling scene that numbs the soul. I challenge any American to go for a ride and look at that sign. See if it odoesn't do something to you.
You act as if gun owners don't have children and aren't equally disgusted. The difference is we are trying to actually find a solution, you just want the crying girl to get out of a speeding ticket..
Pittsburg is where the Henry Rifle Company's Receiver's are made for their lever action rifles, world famous guns. And Connecticut is famous for the Colt Firearms Plant In Hartford where its been for over 100 years, The Colt AR-15 is the original that Bushmaster and all other copies are made after. The Mossberg Gun Comapny is in New Haven CT where the Model 500 Pump Shotgun is made, the same model used by the Menendez Brothers to murder their parents, . And the Winchester Firearms Headquarters is in North Haven CT , all 3 of these companies have paid taxes to the state of CT for decades,,CNN will never ever tell you or anyone stuff like this.
Sue, protecting children is important but so are our rights. Firearms and their place in the 2nd amendment are not just about sporting, hunting and collecting. They are for an armed citizenry. Our forefathers gave ordinary citizens the ability to posses the same weapons that ordinary soldiers were issued, in order to help defend the country and to discourage tyranny from within. The weapons and equipment they are trying to ban are the same, standard issue weapons that the average infantry soldier uses. That is what the 2nd amendment is really about; the general population's ability to defend themselves against ALL enemies, foreign or domestic. This is not gun problem, this is a culture problem. Keep in mind that in Switzerland adult males are required to keep fully automatic weapons and ammunition in their homes and that they have extremely low rates of gun violence. If Adam Lanza did not have a gun then he would have built a bomb. Remember, Timothy McVeigh did not have a gun when he killed 168 people in Oklahoma, including 19 children.
Do you think we should show the Liberals pictures of abortions which their platform supports? I hear all the liberals crying about these children in Sandy Hook who did indeed die a horrific event, while they support abortion and the slaughter of thousands of innocent babies. Yet they believe the woman has the right to choose while a responsible gun owner should have their rights stripped. Hypocrisy is the true Liberal platform. And before all of you Liberals start chiming in about how you don't support abortion......doesn't matter, the platform you support does.
While I understand your point I don't believe that showing photos of the dead will have long lasting results. This is a complex issue. The people in those positions could probably gain access to the photos if they really wanted to. I have a child and By no means Would I ever downplay what happened. You do need to realize that the same people your talking about hold various positions on multiple committees. Some have access to video images , pictures and other material of horrors that occur here and abroad that are just has sick and heartbreaking. The elected officials are going to do little if anything to make major changes in gun policy. Yes we do have a gun problem, but it is not that simple. This issue can not be dissolved down to a single point that ends with a fix. The control aspect of this issue needs to be one of the mental health and that should be better interconnected to the purchase of ammunition. We seem to have had little issue slapping requirements and laws into place to restrict, track and control over the counter cold medication yet we can't successfully implement a system of checks and balances for firearms and more specifically ammunition. There is simply too much money involved on the back side to implement major change in short order. These folks your referring to ride on waves of money and influence , that is how they got where they are today.
All this talk about someone intervening in the 2 seconds when a shooter is changing magazines is pure speculation and BS...First of all wacko's almost always have more then one weapon,and even if they didn't it's highly doubtful that someone would stop a shooter in the 2 seconds for him to change magazines...case in point. according to witness's.In.the Aurora Colo shooting..Holmes magazine on his AR jammed right when begin using it ..he then discarded the rifle and started to use his shotgun and his 2 handguns ....It's also ridiculous to think that a wacko or a criminal will obey the law and use a low capacity magazine to comply with the law...These ridiculous laws will only effect law abiding citizens and will not in any way make the innocent any safer.In Colorado there are millions of 30 round AR Magazines that will always be there...and legal if a citizen owns these magazines before the new law takes effect...How are those laws supposed to be enforced...It's questions like this that liberals like Piers Morgan never talk about. It is hoped the good people of Colorado will vote those binging liberals out of office and those mindless laws will be put to the voters to decide in 2014... and I have no doubt that the voters would reverse those worthless laws.
Keep dreaming B. The right with ther voting aginst family safety has just cost them the election for the next twelve years. You guys are doing us such a favor. Everyone is watching every vote. And the GOP is putting the sloagan in Gold letters that they hate middle america and their families safty. Hold on tight for the termoil coming the NRA and the GOP's way!
Wrong. Democrats have avoided the gun control issue for years for a reason. Many people voted democrat because they thought that Democrats had given up on the foolishness of gun bans. Well they are getting a wake up call now and will surely start voting Republican again in the future.
I'm one of those "democrats" who have traditionally voted for democrats until NOW! If the state and country go too far left and crazy trying to get rid of everything then I'm going republican! All this controversy has sparked me to rejoin NRA after 15-20 years of non-membership! I have agreed with Obama politics up until now, he is spending too much time and energy on saving 26 children and teachers whereas there are larger issues he is ignoring such as handgun violence, debt, and the economy! This will bankrupt the gun manufacturing industry and put thousands of people out of work which may even create newer problems!
The far left wave better STOP because many of us moderate democrats will (and are) jump ship!
Thanks guys , we appreciate your vote for the new cause for Americas safty legislation
I hope your two beautiful girls never experience the tragedy of Newtown and if they did, I doubt that you would be of the same frame of mind. As the Chief of Police of one of the CT towns said, the 2-3 seconds delay that changing a magazine give a law officer or a good guy with a gun in the area to disable the maniac. It also gives the victims a few seconds to run. I hope that your two beautiful girls have that opportunity. Apparently they won't if you vote your conviction.
Unfortunately the children were in a gun-free zone, and law enforcement was not anywhere near close enough to do that. It is poor reasoning to think it could have influenced the outcome.
Gun-free zones are a really bad idea. It is much better if criminals have to think there is 50-50 chance that their target homes or buildings are possibly armed with even military style rifles. That notion itself will greatly deter criminals.
Honestly, that 2-3 seconds to change out magazines is totally IRRELEVANT! There were no police around to take the gunman down in Newtown or take advantage of a 2-3 second "advantage". The gunman was dead before they ever got there! So whether or not he had a 10 round or 100 round magazine is totally IRRELEVANT and wouldn't have helped at all in Newtown. I understand it may help in other scenarios but not here.
What about drunk drivers? If they mow your kids down are we gonna eliminate alcohol? Or better yet....eliminate all cars! Again, I am for the better governing of our current laws!
Criminals would also just go to another state to get higher capacity magazines if they really wanted them. All these proposed bans degrade the true reasons for the second amendment, such as citizens being able to help defend the country if it were ever needed. These bans will create an ineffective citizen army. Can you imagine a militia trying to fight in a conflict while screwing around with bullet buttons and 10 round magazines? I keep hearing people say "these weapons are designed to kill as many people as possible as fast as possible". Yes, that's correct; enemy invaders or a mob of thugs running a home invasion on you.
Thank you Piers Morgan for keeping the gun control debate in the spotlight. I have listened to some of the arguments against gun control and cannot understand the rationale behind allowing assault rifles to be purchased by the general public. For what purpose does a citizen "need" this type of weapon? Hunting? Protection? Really?? Who is buying this argument? I'm pretty sure this type of weaponry was not what the guardians of our country had in mind when they passed the 2nd amendment. Where do you (or how CAN you) draw the line on what weaponry is allowable under the protected "right to bear arms"? I agree that a ban would not "solve" the problem of recent mass killings. (If "solving" is equated to totally eliminating.) To think that there is a simple solution is unrealistic. There are many other aspects to address–this is a multi faceted problem and dysfunction of our society. There are many other areas that need to be addressed. However, I do not understand how anyone can disagree with the idea that removing these war weapons from our everyday life would result in lowering the death toll in our country. It is one prong to fix. Just because it won't "solve the problem" does not mean it won't mitigate it. And it does not mean that it should not be approved as a first step in "solving" this problem. One less life lost would prove that it helped. My concern is that the NRA is creating more fear in the public and their only suggestion is to bear more arms! How self serving -but also a great marketing ploy. A very disappointing and disturbing win-win. Thanks for keeping the discussion alive.
well said
My problem with you and Brastacs is that you seem to think that you need big clips with 50-100 rounds to defend yourself. For myself I feel perfectly safe with my Remington shotgun with a six clip magazine. If I can't stop someone with that weapon, I don't believe a multiple round magazine in the hands of a scared amateur gun hand would be much better.
I have several shotgun...just where do you find a shotgun with a six clip magazine? I really believe that you do not own a shotgun or any gun for that matter. You don't even know the name of the components of a gun.
I don't own an AR-15, but if someone wants to protect himself against gang bangers that may outgun him, it's not my place to say that he can't have it, just because I myself don't need it. And I think there's a good possibility the sight of those big guns can intimidate even armed criminals causing them to flee (you may not have to even fire a shot). That is a life saved! Wouldn't it be a great defense mechanism for anyone, especially if you are a small-built woman or a senior person or physically disabled?
The "need" argument is simply not a legitimate point. When did you become the guiding light whose place it is to determine other people's needs? And, please explain to everyone where and how the rights we are given are to be determined by your rationalization of what is needed or necessary, or even acceptable?
And it must be pointed out again, for the sake of clarification, that the AR-15 is not an "assault" weapon, nor is it an instrument of war. The instruments of battle that our military wield are completely different and for the most part unavailable to the public.
When the discussion begins to address the issues rationally and realistically more people will be willing to listen.
Bravo Piers Morgan for getting the Senators on record about gun control votes so we can see who is supporting the gun ban and who is not. So sad that Harry Reid isn't doing this...why can't he force a vote so we can see who has the audacity to vote against the kind of legislation that most people want. Keep up the great work! You are proving to be a better representative of the people than the sad specimens we've sent to the Congress and Senate. And...don't let the horror fade. That is exactly what has happened in the past. Giving voice to the police and parents and victims of gun violence and showing the senselessness of our existing gun laws and the gun lobby rhetoric is so important. THANKS for your work!
Firearm acquisition licence is a good solution like in Canada. Any police officer or trapper in the article cannot Change small magazine in 2 seconds at -45 in a wind . Ar 15 are used in the artic for human safety. Morgan can carry a heavy lever action 1800's gun himself, or take a horse to work..
It's all very simple. Require buyers of Assault Weapons to purchase an Insurance Policy on each one they own. Let the Insurance Companies do all the background checks and access the risk, and pay out if an Insured Weapon is proven to do harm.
Yes!!!1 Now this is progress and thinking outside the box. That isnt to hardnow is it right wings!
It is unconst'tutional to impose a financial toll on our fundamental rights protected by the Bill of Rights.
Really? I didn't know the news organizations were mandated to buy insurance by law... Is that a Federal law? Could you give me the exact law? (point me to an appropriate government link since it looks like you understand the law.)
So, you think that the individuals should also be mandated to have insurance for libel, slander or like in case you falsely scream "fire" in a crowded movie theater and cause panic and injuries to people?
Youre thoerys proven guns need to be regulated somewhat like automobiles, bank loans,Houseand morgages, votin guidelines ( sure their being smeared now buy the GOP and they are little cheaters: sore loseres (Gop wants to stack the deck, its true, Hey pennsylvannia) and lets see who else is trying to rig electoral college voting system in their State, Who are ya? maybe if you are scarred with the automatic fact you'll be sued along with prosecution with neglect with your fire arm, you probably wony mess up, Eh!
sm, read the whole conversation about the mandatory liability insurance me and three other posters discussed. The downside of it is not only being unconst'tutional. Marc finally understood and admitted to it. He may be on the other side of gun-control than I, but he has the intelligence to understand and honesty to acknowledge when he sees a valid point in opposing arguments. That's how we have a good debate man, which you obviously are not capable of. Heck, you can't even stay on the subject. What does this have to do with the election? And I don't ever neglect my guns. I store them in my speed vaults when I'm not carrying. Have you ever parked your cars all night on the street and not in your garage? They could get stolen and used for a crime too.
The principle you ascribe is not legal. It is a matter of settled law that you cannot charge a fee to exercise a right. The supreme court argued it many years ago and it has stood the test of time. Research the term: poll tax.
Poll Tax? Requiring Insurance Policy is not a Tax. Our Government only needs to pass one requirement. The Insurance Companies will do all the regulating. There are fees now associated with gun ownership, if you want to own a high powered firearm, you can purchase a policy along with your weapon.
Do you think mandatory liability insurance would have prevented the Newtown massacre? I don't think Adam's mother would have had a trouble getting insurance.
Maybe not. Nothing we do as a nation will completely stop this. But it may slow it down. My idea is an alternative to a ban on assult weapons. It is just an aid in slowing down the frequency of these acts.
Do you know one of the unintended consequences of imposing insurance on gun owners? People who really want to buy guns (or keep the guns they have) would willfully avoid going to see a doctor, even when they sense they may have some kind of mental problem, in fear of their doctor visits shown in their medical records become a hindrance to owning guns. Which means, your idea could prevent some people who need psychiatric treatment from receiving it, thus, create more unstable people with a gun who are "untreated"... what do you think of that?
You are telling that to Marc and not me, right? I'm against imposing mandatory liability insurance on gun owners.
Are you kidding me? You can't be serious with that comment. Maybe the Insurance company would require you to get a complete check-up prior to giving you the policy.
Do you propose "a complete check-up" is given only when you buy insurance? or annually when renewing? Is once a year good enough? (We don't even do that when getting car insurance, do we? probably we should!! to stop people susceptible to road rage from driving!!) In between, if a gun owner suffers depression, he could decide not to see a doctor in fear of his insurance provider denying him or increasing his premium. So he may self-medicate or doesn't treat his condition at all. How is that good for public safety? I'm against it, not because your idea isn't fix-all, but it could possibly be counter-productive.
Reading your first post one has to ask if you actually think it wise to insure a firearm against causing harm? Firearms do not cause anything. What would this insurance scheme accomplish? It is like betting that some tree or boulder will not commit a crime today. Pretty safe bet.
Who, or what would be insured, and who, or what would be the beneficiary? And for what purpose?
By the way, there have been many attempts to cause monetary stresses which dissuade others of, say, a certain group, from exercising their rights. All have been struck down in court. Call it a fee, tax, insurance, membership, donation, permission, price of admission...... it is all the same thing.
Just like any idea or suggestion given there are many people out there ready to pick it apart. I have not read one post that hasn't been ripped apart by the left or right. I have learned alot by posting an idea. I have learned that there is never going to be anything we can do as a nation about the senseless massacuring of our citizens until we all learn to Love and Respect each other. There will be no ideas that will come up that all people accept.
Facts and logic don't mean much to Piers. Semi auto guns are not "assault weapons". This is all just another step down the road to a total gun ban proposed by the lap dog media. Nobody wants to have innocents killed, especially kids. The reality is that the laws/bans proposed by the hysterical left will achieve zero. Enforce the gun laws we have in place. Prosecute those that fail the background check and pass a mandatory life sentence to anyone committing a crime with gun. Leave the responsible gun owners alone.
Yeah, there death machines!
Death machines!
...that cause far fewer deaths than cars, alcohol, prescription drugs, and doctors.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not in favor of banning any of those. Just saying, every gun in America, on average, kills about .0000983 people per year (using educated guesses of about 30,470 gun deaths and about 310,000,000 non-military firearms). Every doctor in America, on average, kills about .295 people per year (using 195,000 malpractice deaths against 661,400 doctors).
Here's the thing: people don't blame the scalpel, or the forceps, or the syringes. They blame the doctor. But somehow, the tool gets blamed when it comes to guns, and nothing else. Would someone like to tell me why?
You didnt think about that last conversation about , you could be out with your family ( just as much as me and the rest of america) and be desimated by coinsedance or be affraid to let your kids go twenty five yards from your house. you dont read the issues and the people who vote on the issues when you go to the polls do ya! I feell it in my gut you vote just like you parents, or your bad boyfriend. this generation dosent know what the Reagan administration did, and the way the real world is going now, No research of any kind! so be it!
I am a gun owner and used to be a member of the NRA, before they became a front organization for gun manufactures. It pains me to hear concerned individuals like yourself to believe that is nothing that can be done. Surely you can accept the proposition that more complete background checks and requirements to report gun transfers would have some effect. Currently at a gun show I can buy just about anything in any numbers and transfer to local gangs or to cartels in Mexico and not suffer any consequences or follow up trail. We (you and me and all of our fellow citizens) are responsible for much of the violence in this country and the vast majority of the mayhem in Mexico. I hope that you feel ashamed as I do instead of being proud of your ability to do so.
De[pending on what state you are in, YOU can buy almost anything BUT when you sell it to gangs or drug cartels then YOU are responsible!
You can do the same at a gun shop, once you buy something in any amount you can transfer or sell it to whomever you like. That's where the "responsible" gun owner has an obligation to govern where it goes! The government cannot prevent every person from transferring their legally purchased firearms to whomever they wish, it simply cannot be controlled. That's why gun owners need to control their own firearms and where they go!
Hey Doc...you are wrong when you say American arms are responsible for the mayhem in Mexico. Most of the firearms used in Mexico come from overseas not the US. The majority of the semi auto and fully auto weapons in use in Mexico are the AK47 and AK47 variants. These are not made in the US. It goes without saying Fast and Furious did ship arms to Mexico and I am sure there were purchases of US made weapons by the cartel. It is a matter of economics...an AR15 runs between 600 on up...AK47 variants can be bought overseas for 200 hundred on up.
Re: The "slippery slope" argument. I also have a slippery slope fear: Today it's okay to have AR-15 assault weapons, tomorrow it's machine guns. What has stopped the gun lovers from taking more and more with each passing year? And shouldn't they have a reason to want larger capacity weapons?
Saying "shall not be infringed" is not enough. Is the word "regulated" not also in the amendment? When we have less regulation, we see the mass murders of children. What would we see if we had a bit more regulation? Why not give that a try?
That's ridiculous Chicago has the most gun control and regulations in the country and is one of the deadliest places in the country...last year alone they had over 500 shooting deaths and that was more the Afghanistan...how's all that gun control working out there ??
Interesting none of the community leaders, former gang members or victims of violence interviewed in this rather revealing news piece on the gun violence in Chicago thinks new guns or gun bans will have any impact on the killings. The resounding answer to the problem in Chicago according those interviewed, is that it's about jobs and providing hope in an increasingly unequal society.
Then explain to me madamdeb, why the Swiss who are ranked as the 3rd largest gun owning nation on the planet, have one of the lowest homicide rates in the world? Most Swiss homes own an assault rifle.
Madamdeb while that might be so about their military issue rifles it is not true about their own personal firearms. Shooting is a nationally celebrated sport in Switzerland with shooting match events being televised on national TV. Furthermore, two of Switzerland's neighbors, Germany and France are ranked 4th and 5th globally in terms of firearms ownership and they too have equally low homicides rates as the Swiss. The same can also be said for Italy and Spain two other large gun owning European nations with low homicide rates. If we subscribe to Piers' notion that more guns mean more homicides then these countries should have some of the highest rates on the planet, but they don't they have some of lowest.
Cr, what about the gun related suicide rate in Switzerland? Isn't it the highest in Europe, though not as high as US.
Good point, madamdeb. If the slippery slope goes both ways from where the issue stands it clearly illustrates the point that we are already at the apex. In a free society this is as good as it gets – you enjoy freedom because it is granted to everyone, and that includes those that may misuse it.
Claiming a right to limit the freedom of others opens the door to allowing them to limit yours. Freedom works only in an open and reciprocal manner. The success depends on honor, respect, and individual responsibility. This is a problem of culture and not a problem of hardware.
@madam: Connecticut is one of the strictest states for gun ownership, assault weapons and non-assault weapons that are legal in many states are illegal here BUT its all about money! CT actually allows machine guns as long as you pay the high price for one and the even higher price of registration, somewhere in the neighborhood of several thousands of dollars to have a 5 year CT Machine Gun Special registration such as a fully automatic AK-47 or fully automatic Thompson "Tommy Gun" as long as you pay the big bucks its all legal! NOW here is what is the scam: semi-automatic AK-47s (modified for use in approx 30-40 other states) that only fire single shots are NOT legal in Connecticut! Same goes for Thompson M1 "Tommy Guns", the fully automatic ones are legal with special registrations that cost thousands but the simply, safer, cheaper single shot ones of the same brand name are ILLEGAL! Just for reference purposes in CT a gun owner needs a background check (or at most a 2 week wait) to own a modified single shot newer version of an AK-47 known as AK-74 which costs a few hundred dollars; the AK-47 modified as a single shot for other states is illegal in CT but not the AK-74 BUT if you have unlimited money you can purchase a pre-ban AK-47 thats modified for FULLY AUTOMATIC at a cost of $2000-3000 plus $3000-5000 for the permits/registration! Now how is that fair, thats money talking......and democratic CT knows it but they dont care as long as they get the big money for these guns they allow it!
It doesnt seem fair but thats the law, if youre a law-abiding citizen with deeper pockets then you can afford the expensive fully automatic machine guns!!!!
So yes to answer your question......states already do allow machine guns but most people cannot afford them!
You have a very short term view if you think that gun rights have been expanding historically. The second amendment is a neutered shell of what it once was. Today we celebrate being able to keep a .223 caliber semi-automatic rifle with a 30 round magazine, when it used to be possible to own a .45 ACP caliber, fully automatic submachine gun with a 100 round magazine. The criminal element ruined that for us; the Thompson submachine gun was viewed as a gangster gun, and was banned from private ownership.
Of course, crime had spiraled out of control due to a black market created by the banning of alcohol, which led to the creation of the American Mafia, which has led to a history of corrupt politicians and policemen we are still mired in.
Also, "regulated," as it was used during colonial times, would be used instead of "disciplined" or "trained." It was stating that the militia should be well trained, and that anyone should be able to have a firearm as long as they're well trained in it's use.
Precious, Our forefathers wouls "S–T" if they knew what we have done to the country and the 2nd amendments. Heads would Roll!
The word "regulated" refered to the supply of ammunition for the rifles in use at the time. The Supreme court recognizes that the word "regulated" in use on the 1700's meant to supply powder and bullets.
Let me correct that last post. The term well regulated militia refered to the citizens being armed with rifles and ammo. This is what the word "regulated" meant when the Consitution was written. The 2nd Amendment was to ensure the citizens were equally armed as the government.
All Piers has to do is to cross reference the names of the Congress and the Senators who vote no to Dianne Feinstein Assault Weapons Bill with the stocks they, their family members and friends own. This will absolutely tell the reason for the No vote.
Can we also reveal how many hired guns each person who votes in favor of this ban has around them at any given time? Or maybe we can reveal how Diane Feinstein has placed herself outside of her state laws by owning a concealed carry permit and handgun?
California does allow CCW but it is difficult to obtain. Feinstein, as I understand from one of her speeches, no longer has a CCW.
ALso..Gifford's husband recently obtained a CCW permit.
Go Ron Bruce!!!
OK, here is how i feel, The government, the police, the civilians, everyone needs to look at the gun control, in many different aspects. I have 2 little beautiful girls, if anything ever happened to them i dont know what i would do, BUT, trying to say that banning guns, or even the capacity of the clips will make this country any safer , does not make sense, really think about it, Is it legal to kill people? was it legal to take a gun into the schools or the movie theater? NO do you think that the people that do these things care about the laws? NO so what makes you think that the people that do these things will care about the new laws you people try to pass? all these laws will do is make the law abiding citizens unable to defend themselves from the criminals that wont listen and that still have 30, 50, 75 and 100 round clips. i agree that it should be harder for mentally ill people to obtain weaponry, but if you agree with piers morgan that you are like him, Mentally Disabled
why do you insist on perpetuating the thought that the Sandyhook shooter used an AR15 He only used hand guns to kill those children so don't blame the AR15 for that slaying.
and in Washington state there is always a background check and waiting period for hand guns,but should be for all guns ..
I think everyone should have to take a gun handling course and background check before they can purchase a gun....
Way to say it Penny, you are 100% correct in your statement. The fact of the matter is that the long rifle didn't do the killing that we are being told it did, ask the first responders yourselves when you come to Connecticut. Hand Gun shells found at the scene of the crime to kill those innocent kids and teachers, but most wouldn't know this because the records are now sealed and it's now months behind us with reporters like PM misinforming and skewing the truth to the public. You've all been duped by once again, believing a corrupt media. This is nothing more than a grab for your rights piece by piece. Laws won't change a thing, listen to the parents who have spoken up about this from Connecticut, Colorado, etc. The only thing that will heal the problem is fixing the moral collapse of our society, which is in a drug induced coma listening to all the inaccurate news coverage from both left and right, different teams but the same hidden agenda.
I also happen to strongly agree with Penny on background checks, that is as long as media doesn't expose your information to the masses like they did in Westchester County New York. I guess the human species will never learn from past experience. Give up your control, give up your rights to a greedy and corrupt Government and eventually it will work against you. The gears are already turning unfortunately.
Well said "Penny" and "FromCT"!
I agree totally, the far right and far left are both the problem and everyone in the middle suffers!!!!!!!
Correct me if I am wrong. I believe the record shows that Lanza used the AR15 to kill others,then killed himself with a handgun. The Aurora shooter used an AR15.
So...we're gonna ban clips that carry more than fifteen rounds because it'll give someone who is being shot at a split second to karate chop the bad guy!?! That's the dumbest, most unrealistic, Hollywood dreamt scenerio that could happen in the furture of which I have ever heard. Piers...you're an idiot.
After Mr. Morgan finished his dialogue with the policemen, that hack (Piers) concluded by saying "Shame on America." Let me just say that if the anti-gun crowd could focus on making laws against criminals and not against the law-abiding citizens of America. they might get somewhere.
its the little things that say a lot right. lets show dead kids he calls for, and each of the men were let talk, tell he got to the one that said its the movies, its the games, the kids see to much they feel nothing and he is cut off. and he moves on to give the other person more time to talk. let take away guns but banding blood killing movies no way Morgan would be never say that what a chicken he is to up set his little money hunger low life hollywood jerks.
The killer practiced tactical reloads and learned to transition to a handgun he didn't even fire all of the rounds out of the magazine before he reloaded 2 seconds would not have made a difference and these cops know it. shame on them. they are ignoring the facts it is different because every situation is fluid the level of training this killer had he was focus on creating maximum damage. How would two seconds make a difference for unarmed school children and teachers with no weapons? There were no cops there and when they got there he killed himself.
So, Piers, it's ok for law enforcement to use weapons of war against U.S. citizens? This is ok with you, huh? When the officer said he didn't believe citizens should own assault weapons, because they were weapons of war, I didn't see you inquire about when he'd be getting rid of his weapon of war? You know nearly every cop in a cruiser has an assault weapon, usually an AR-15, sitting right next to him. If I have to give up mine, are they giving up theirs, too? Or, will the country just become one big Police State? Good cops, go bad too, so perhaps they should have their guns banned too, since we'll never know which cop is going to go coocoo next! It would be worth it if it saved 1 life, right? Isn't this another unarguable fact? Remember that term? You tried to cram it down everyone's frickin' throat over the 2 seconds it takes to change out a magazine.... come on! Retard!... never go full retard!.. oops, too late for you! So listen up, if you're so worried and frightened by citizens of this country owning guns, then you'd better learn to get used to this idea, real quick, or better yet, instead of all your silly little threats about deporting yourself, why don't you actually do it! Get out! Because, Americans are never going to give up their guns! Ever! This country will revolt, first! I honestly think we're only 1 shot away from it right now. Are you prepared for it? Better start, because it's coming to a town near you! You'd never guess who owns a firearm, or 10! The neighbor next door, the perfectly normal looking guy down the street, are probably all packing heat and their weapons of war are all loaded up and ready to go at the very first sign of trouble. Time to high tail it out of town, Piers! I promise you, we'll sure have one huge goodbye party for you when you leave... this will be a party the whole country will never forget! Maybe we'll have a block party, too!.. and no, you're not invited!!
I think I prefer the notion of elected law enforcement officials, like the Colorado Sheriff interviewed last nigh, who serve to protect and uphold the const*tution, rather than those who are appointed to serve by politicians, and paid to enforce the laws made by their paymasters. I'm rather alarmed by the comment made by one of the CT's police chiefs last night that he would uphold whatever law is passed. Isn't this open to an eventual abuse of power? Conversely, elected police officials offer a final check against power abusing politicians.
^5 been said many times, the captured war criminals of Nazi Germany plead they were just doing their jobs and they were put to death by the winners of the war stating we are doing ours. It hit me the same way. Sheriffs are who I call , not 911 that brings city police to my farm. 20 years of peace & not 1 call so far.
Scare The Pilgrims has a farm,ee-i,ee-i,oh!
There's something to be said for elected Sheriffs. Here's one speaking out about the stricter laws in NYS.
Cr, No you didnt put a vid of HANNITY "the witless' no no nooo. dude you and him are sooooooooo LAME. Ive lost all respect for you ( never had any for you anyway,HA!) watch FOX its a sinking ship!!!! especially mar 20, and 21st you all go go to demand and laugh!
Somewhere over the rainbow,,,,,,,,, Floating around on his little pink cloud,,,,,is the Ultimate Gun Banner .....
The Data Banks required to successfully perform Universal Background checks would take at least 18 months to construct and make active. We will be invaded by China by then demanding the Trillions we owe their country.
How come gun haters do not hate cars also and want them banned. PLEASE take a look at deaths by auto acc. for small kids or older kids compared to gun deaths, the differance is almost unbievable, but we (gun owners) never hear a word from you about car control no less auto ban. I know it sounds like a stupid statement but it is no less the same thing, death of children, which is your beef. Or you do not fight to get full roll cages, 4 point harnesses. You think a death by auto is just an accident and have to learn to live with that right. The problem I have with ALL OF THIS is where does it stop. Sometimes I just wonder to myself why don't the people who want total gun control just move to where they can live where someone tells them what they can own and what type of car they have to drive. MOST of all, WHY do we not have the right to vote on passing of gun laws, that one realy gets me. This is among one of the biggest rights fight in American history I think, but just my opinion. ONE last thing,,,,,,
PIERCE MORGAN, he belongs to CNN, yes belongs, from what I can find on him he IS NOT a U.S. citizen and should not be able to use CNN to fight so hard on something and use CNN to push his own desires like he does. Reporting or making statements backed by CNN is fine, but read the fine print, THESE OPINIONS ARE NOT THOSE OF CNN. In closing, I am 100 percent in favor of sending Morgan back to where he is not wanted, and his fellow news person have said so, read about him, send him back to U.K.
you 'd*mbmot*erfu*ker' Pierce Morgan: I'd like to see you with your "2 second chance "to try to disarm a criminal before he reloads and blow your ugly 'fa6-a*s-away'. I'll tell you what I'll give you 10 seconds, how is that? My point is , if you are unarmed and criminal holds a gun, he can take his sweet time and reload. From 10-20 feet away he would reload before you could take 2 steps toward him ....
I like the comment someone made that, IF YOU had no guns and someone shows up to your house with a gun to take your life or a loved one what is the first thing you do? Call the police so they can come with there guns with LOTS of bullets, someone exsplane to me how that makes things better for an unarmed or unprepared law biding citizen, think about that one you gun and magazine haters. YESSSS send Morgan HOME to U.K.
Hi Cris,I know you inherited our language, it's not your own,so I'll respectfully point out 'exsplane' is spelt 'explain'.
Yours Pedantically,Bonnie Prince Charlie.
Don't you have a better thing to do than pointing out a typo? Don't tell me you have never ever misspelled a word... we all have. Your comment doesn't add anything to the conversation. It just makes you look silly.
so 2 secs makes a difference- so lets give the disadvanatge to the lawful guns owners who will be the only ones who follow that stupid law thats also illegal per the const+tution
Just for argument's sake, let's assume " 2 seconds makes a difference". Doesn't it go both ways? If a grandma (120 lb, 80 years old) runs out of ammo after firing 7 shots missing a few times, an only lightly wounded assailant with a knife (200 lb, 20 years old) can take advantage of the 2 seconds and overpower and kill her while she was trying to reload... Remember, the home invasion in Georgia, after receiving 5 shots, the criminal managed to flee the house in a vehicle. What if there were two intruders, the woman and her 9-year-old twins could have not survived the attack!
Or what if the criminal had a gun also? If we couldn't successfully incapacitate an armed attacker or attackers with the number of the bullets that the government thinks we should have, we could end up dead!! Are all those antigun politicians really that stupid and never thought of that possibility???
Thank you for your diligence on this gun safety issue, Piers Morgan. I feel you're doing a great service to our country as well as the world to spearhead the issue on television.
I just wanted to come to the board on behalf of my mom, brother, and myself and say that as an American, I'm extremely offended watching these American gun lobbyists and the like coming on TV and insulting you to your face as well into the public's eye for being British, as if that's a bad thing. There is an obsessive talking point that is frankly disgusting and smells of small-minded racism that is decidedly anti-British, and obviously the point of it is to attempt to dilute what you're trying to say. Makes me sick to my stomach. But I appreciate how you respond with grace and don't play into that hate tactic. Thanks in advance for keeping the conversation going. We can't let that so-called Connecticut Effect die out like they are insidiously hoping for, not this time. Kind regards.
How could anyone who is FOR "saving lives" be anti-gun? (To me, anti-gun means anti-self-defense.) More people are saved every year by the usage of a gun than victimized. 800,000 vs 10,000... Isn't it clear when you compare the numbers?
Here's an article that was introduced by another thoughtful pro-gun poster in another thread that I think everyone can learn something from. This psychiatrist's analysis on anti-gun mentality is intriguing. She rephrases the term gun-control, "victim disarmament." And yes, that's what our governments (both at local and federal levels) are trying to do, which is very unnerving to law-abiding citizens!
Raging Against Self Defense: A psychiatrist Examines The Anti-Gun Mentality
What do a fork, a car and a gun, have in common? It takes a person to operate all three. You don't blame the fork for obesity problems. It takes a person. You don't blame the car for drunk driving. It takes a person. So why blame the gun for gun violence? It takes a person.
A fork is for eating, a car is for transportation, an AR-15 is specifically designed for killing.
an AR-15 is specifically designed for effectively incapacitating multiple attackers and saving your life and others'. It all depends on who uses the gun just like anything else.
Does "cm" stand for small mind? There is 100 million gun owners in this county, which way do you think they are going to vote? I have voted for Dems my whole life but that will be changing next November, they make me sick now! So cm we will see who gets voted in but it's the Dems that are running scared!
"How To Street Fight With A Pistol" by Wayne R. Lippert , learn to use barricade cover, What barricade cover stops bullets, 50 pgs. Learn to shoot in the dark. Can handle this extreme high stress. 280 pgs. 440 photos.
Fair Winds Inc. Box 2987 , Ferndale , WA 98248 1-360-384- 0954 COMBAT HANDGUNS June issue 1983
I'm older than you Piers, My father joined the U.S. Army at age 16 Piers. I'm that mans 1st born son Piers. So what is all this nonsensical garbage about Americans are too untrained to shoot and fight ??????????????????????
screw all the Cops!
The law is the 2nd amendment and that says it alllllllllllllllll
All American who own guns.....its time to defend ur 2nd an call ur reps.....and also time to vote these people out an time to send this british nazi home back to his own homeland and let us the True American defend his 2nd
he dosent have to like guns if he dosen't want to thats his choice. He better hope criminals dont watch his show and find out where he lives. Easy picking for them, since they know they wont get shot breaking in. Good luck buddy! Keep your guns loaded people. its going to be a tough fight.
I'll answer Senator Dianne Feinstein's question, "Do you need a bazooka?"
Yes, ma'am, we do. IF the Mexican cartels ever start invading American ranchers' land with bazookas and we couldn't afford to station a military unit to protect each and single one of our ranchers, we should give them a bazooka and train them on it. It's all about being on a par with the criminals who attack us, so we can successfully fight against them.
Amazingly crazy scenarios used to justify no new gun control measures. Sanity and clear thought would make one realize that the chances of Mexican cartels invading US ranches with bazookas...and our own military and law enforcement not acting to protect ranchers are zero. Has it happened? No. I'm worried monsters from the planet Neptune will infiltrate our cities and can only be stopped by shoulder fired missiles.
Seriously, Ranchers living near the Mexican border with no law enforcement in close proximity need protection. They should be able to own guns. Sportsmen,Hunters, people that feel they need a gun for protection should be able to own guns. I hear few that dispute that. I don't see any legislation on the horizon banning all guns. That said, stricter background checks, banning of assault type weapons, etc. should be issues most can find compromise on. I know, when the Martians land and take over they will use those foot in the door laws to take all of our guns away 🙂
"Sanity and clear thought would make one realize that the chances of Mexican cartels invading US ranches with bazookas..."
That's my point exactly! So why in the world did Feinstein ask such a silly question?? You should doubt her sanity. And her proposal for a so-called assault weapons ban will take away high-cap rifles from ranchers. How is that morally right when we know those cartels have the likes of AR15s.
"law enforcement not acting to protect ranchers are zero"
Oh, I know law enforcement will act, but are their actions always 100% effective? Do they always come before it's too late? .....I didn't think so. How can you support a ban that makes law-abiding good citizens vulnerable and gives the advantage only to criminals?
BTW, IF monsters from the planet Neptune EVER start invading our airspace, we should all have RPGs. 🙂
Please ask these people that insist they have the 2nd amendment right to own a guns about my RIGHT to NOT own a gun and still feel safe in my country.
I have an 88 year old Mother that says she doesn't want a gun, she weights 90 lbs. and wouldn't know how to use it anyway! Are we getting pressured by these people to get a gun to live in this country?
No one is telling you that you have to have a gun, right?
Also, what if Amish people say they have a right not to get hit by a car or breathe clean air?
And what if people who never fly say they have a right not to be fearful of another terrorist attack?
Should we all stop driving and flying??
We must stop the arming of the citizens of this country. Eventually...it will all be turned against law and order. It's
already starting. Read the news!!! Yes...I am afraid.


text:
The elite's obsessive pursuit of immortality is a new tool of class enslavement
Paul Joseph Watson
June 20, 2013
Futurist Ray Kurzweil's prediction that humans will be uploading their minds to computers by 2045 and that bodies will be replaced by machines before the end of the century, currently receiving a new wave of media attention, overlooks the fact that such technology will likely be monopolized by the elite as a way of enslaving the rest of humanity on an industrial scale.
Kurzweil, recently hired by Google, repeated his forecast at the Global Futures 2045 International Congress in New York this past weekend but newspaper reports concerning the issue were absent a key disclaimer which Kurzweil admits in his book – such technology will not be available to the general public and instead will be controlled by a technocratic elite who will attempt to become super beings by merging with machines.
"We're going to become increasingly non-biological to the point where the non-biological part dominates and the biological part is not important any more," said Kurzweil. "In fact the non-biological part – the machine part – will be so powerful it can completely model and understand the biological part. So even if that biological part went away it wouldn't make any difference."
"We'll also have non-biological bodies – we can create bodies with nano technology, we can create virtual bodies and virtual reality in which the virtual reality will be as realistic as the actual reality. The virtual bodies will be as detailed and convincing as real bodies," he added.
However, when Kurzweil says "we" he isn't referring to you or I, he's referring to the 1 per cent – the monied elite who will have privileged access to technology that will allow them to eliminate all forms of disease, dispense with the need for a human body and eventually achieve immortality by existing as a computer program on the world wide web.
It is important to emphasize the extreme likelihood that Kurzweil's transhumanist utopia will not be available to the entirety of humanity but instead will be the domain of a wealthy aristocracy, creating yet another class system. Kurzweil admits this in his 1999 book The Age of Spiritual Machines, labeling those who refuse or are incapable of cybernetically augmenting themselves as MOSHs – Mostly Original Substrate Humans.
This will create a future that more closely resembles the upcoming dystopic Matt Damon movie Elysium than a true technological nirvana for all mankind, with the mass of humanity trapped in their limited organic bodies while the elite become vastly more intelligent thanks to cybernetic brain-interface upgrades.
People involved in unskilled labor will become superfluous when their jobs are replaced by machines and, "There is almost no human employment in production, agriculture, and transportation," writes Kurzweil.
Humans who resist the pressure to alter their bodies by becoming part-cyborg or are unable to afford such procedures will be ostracized from society. "Humans who do not utilize such implants are unable to meaningfully participate in dialogues with those who do," writes Kurzweil.
As Kurzweil entertains in his book, this will inevitably lead to the very situation described by none other than Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski – widely quoted by Kurzweil and fellow futurist Bill Joy – where the elite will see the mass of humanity as worthless parasites and either prevent them from reproducing via mass sterilization programs or simply slaughter them outright.
"Due to improved techniques the elite will have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless they may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving the world to the elite," wrote Kaczynski in his manifesto, a key passage quoted in Kurzweil's book.
Another aspect that Kurzweil has not touched upon in his public appearances is the downright creepy ending to his 2099 prediction which features in chapter 12 of his book. Throughout the book, Kurzweil communicates with a fictional character called Molly who is living through all the different time periods Kurzweil anticipates, from 2009 to 2099.
By 2029 Mollly has dumped her loving but pathetically human husband Ben and chosen instead to pursue an intimate relationship – including virtual reality fornication – with her artificially intelligent lover George – a computer program.
By 2099, Molly has uploaded her own brain into a computer program and merged with George to create a hive mind – one that now has sex with itself.
When Kurzweil questions 'Molly' about whether or not the new creation truly represents the original Molly – whose human body has long since perished and been replaced by a virtual reality projection, the Molly/George hive computer mind gets defensive and swears that it really is the original Molly.
The dialogue ends with Kurzweil basically insinuating that he too would like to have sex with the Molly/George assimilation, leaving the reader with the impression that Kurzweil's obsessive pursuit of singularity is not merely a desperate attempt to hide from the fear of death, but also a weird kind of sexual fetish.
While everyone would welcome some of the technological advancements predicted by Kurzweil, most notably the virtual elimination of all diseases, his fixation with cheating death by achieving technological singularity has several dark spiritual and practical overtones that have not been properly debated.
Moral considerations are once again being cast aside in the feverish pursuit of technological progress at all costs.
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.
The Emergency Election Sale is now live! Get 30% to 60% off our most popular products today!

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Emerson Inn by the Sea
Classic, Turn-of-the-Century, New England Inn with magnificent view of the Atlantic Ocean
Addison Choate Inn
Nestled in the seacoast village of Rockport, this 1851 Greek-Revival home offers comfort and relaxation year round.
Tuck Inn
Tuck Inn B&B of Rockport, MA. Superb Bed and Breakfast lodging accommodations on Cape Ann.
Stay at a Andover, Massachusetts Bed and Breakfasts and Inns for the personal attention you desire. A Andover B&B is a great alternative to hotels or motels while visiting the state of Massachusetts!
Visit our Andover, Massachusetts bed and breakfast directory of historic, romantic, and adventure B&B's. You can browse through our detailed listings of Andover, Massachusetts bed and breakfasts and inns with nearby city listings that include pictures, room rates, booking information and area activities. Every Andover, Massachusetts b&b inns has complete contact information and a direct link to the innkeepers.


text:
Knowing "what the government is up to" is often the first step in ensuring that the government respects the civil liberties of its citizens. Transparency is especially important given the government's increasingly secretive use of new technologies for law enforcement and national security purposes. From cell phone location tracking, the use of surveillance drones, secret interpretations of electronic surveillance law, and the expanding use of biometrics, EFF wants to hold the government accountable and uphold your digital rights.
To that aim, EFF's transparency work is dedicated to using federal and state freedom of information laws, the courtroom, and our megaphone to shine light on government activities.
One of the major tools we use is the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), a federal law that gives people the right to request information kept by federal government agencies. Our team of FOIA lawyers also submit requests on a variety of digital civil liberties issues and often take cases to court when we believe the government is unduly withholding information. But anyone can make a request under FOIA, and you can go here to learn how you can submit your own.
While emerging technologies give the government new tools that threaten citizen civil liberties, technology also has the potential to create a more democratic relationship between public institutions and the citizens they serve. Today, a broad range of new tools are allowing the public to more closely examine government and corporate entities and to hold them accountable for deception, censorship, and corruption. In addition to using freedom of information laws to shed light on government actions, EFF also wants to highlight technologies that help the transparency process —whether it's making it easier to file and track FOIA requests, websites dedicated to whistleblowing, or open government initiatives that can improve access to information.


text:
Quote:Rob C
My old Woodlands PE teacher - a very sad loss.
Quote:mrfear (Matt Fearn)
Steve would have definitely taught Danny Grewcock as he trained the rugby teams in our first year (1984-85) when Dan was an ever present in a strong first XV. Steve was a really lovely guy who had time for everyone, whatever the standard of their rugby skills. I seem to recall he left to become a police officer? RIP.
Total users online:
Most users online:
Users on this site:


text:
Ocean Plastics
|Ocean-Bound Plastics: Breaking cycles
According to some estimates, there are more than 5 trillion pieces of plastics in the oceans right now – equivalent to 5 grocery bags full of plastic stacked upon every foot of every nation's coastline around the world. The vast majority of the debris is less than 5 mm in size.
That's because the plastics break down into ever smaller pieces (despite what you may have heard, it never breaks down completely).
The numbers are nearly unfathomable and the effects are far reaching:
|Infograph/The dangers of ocean plastics
There are over five trillion plastic particles floating in our oceans. This is a problem, a big problem.
Read More
|Infograph/How Dell collects and recycles plastics
We're keeping plastics from ever reaching the ocean in coastal areas. See how we're doing it.
Read More
|White paper/Identifying sources of ocean plastics
Where does Dell source its ocean-bound plastics?
Read the Paper
|Video/Dell and The Lonely Whale Foundation are teaming up
Actor Adrian Grenier, The Lonely Whale Foundation and Dell are collaborating to up-cycle plastics pulled from our oceans
View the Video
|Here's how it works:
Entrepreneurial pickers, volunteer groups and professional recycling organizations collect the plastics, which are aggregated and sorted by various waste processors. After the plastics go through processing and refinement (to ensure a clean supply), Dell mixes the ocean-bound plastics with other recycled HDPE plastics in a 1:3 ratio. Mixing like this ensures impurities within the recycled plastics do not affect the quality or chemical composition of the end plastic. The resin is made entirely from recycled-content plastics, 25% being ocean plastics.
|The mix is then molded into trays that get stamped with the illustration and the #2 recycling symbol. The trays – initially launching with the XPS 13 2-in-1 notebook - are curbside recyclable in many places, helping ensure they remain a viable resource in the economy. The trays will ship globally and the initial run will keep 16,000 pounds of plastics out of the oceans. Our aim is to scale the project to 160,000 pounds by 2025 and we will continue to look for ways to use the material for both packaging and products in the future.
|How did Dell get involved in ocean-bound plastics?
Dell's first social good advocate, actor and entrepreneur Adrian Grenier, helped us understand the breadth of challenges our oceans face today. We first collaborated with him and the Lonely Whale Foundation on "Cry Out – The Lonely Whale VR Experience," a three-minute underwater VR expedition created by 3D Live with Dell Precision, Alienware, AMD and HTC technology. The experience is almost like a ride, where participants get the sensation of diving deep into the sea and are greeted by shoals of fish – but also by carpets of plastic pollution and the damaging noise of seismic probes.
|The pollution problem was particularly worrisome and together we began to look at ways to make a difference.
Our pipeline of innovative packaging ideas seemed like a natural place to start.
Dell has long focused on reducing the impact of packaging by optimizing the size of our packaging and seeking out sustainable materials.
Increasingly, the focus has been on delivering in a circular way – where another person's waste becomes a material input for someone else. This keeps the materials in the economy and out of landfills.
|Dell has made switching to a circular economy approach a priority. We began working with recycled-content materials more than 10 years ago and we continue to build a global supply chain based around sustainability at scale. Using recycled-content materials from our take-back operations, purchased from others' recycling efforts, or collected from other materials streams usually considered waste all help us break free of the linear march of materials to landfills when they reach the end of their lives that has characterized the global economy for too long.
Ocean-bound plastics are the perfect example of how a resource can go from linear to circular. If the plastics wind up in the ocean, they break down into small pieces and the ability to recover them is greatly diminished, while the havoc they wreak grows. This is the case of much of the contents of the giant ocean garbage gyres – swirling areas of broken-down waste that becomes too contaminated to be currently usable.
When Dell uses plastics from the beach, shorelines, waterways and coastal areas, we bring them back into the economy and stop them from breaking down and becoming part of a bigger problem. It gives us an affordable resource, creates jobs for the recyclers, provides a template for others to follow and helps put a dent in the vast problem of plastics entering the ocean.
|The Next Wave is here
In partnership with The Lonely Whale Foundation, we have helped convene Next Wave, an open-source initiative that brings leading technology and consumer-focused companies together to develop a commercial-scale ocean-bound plastics and nylon supply chain. The first companies to commit include Bureo, General Motors, Herman Miller, Humanscale, Interface, Trek, and Van de Sant. Each has agreed to test integration of ocean-bound materials into products and to reduce source plastic across their operations and supply chain. The group anticipates that together we will divert more than 3 million pounds of plastic and nylon-based fishing gear from entering the ocean within 5 years – the equivalent of keeping 66 million water bottles from washing out to sea.
|What you can do
If Dell and these other manufacturers can commit, so can other businesses. Any companies interested in joining the initiative should visit the NextWave.Plastics web site. Additionally, when considering your next purchase, look for products made with recycled-content materials.
|Virgin plastics use approximately 8 percent of the world's oil supply. By using recycled-content plastics, we become less reliant on "linear" resources that cannot be regenerated – all while making sure those plastics we've already created get used to their fullest potential.


text:
Breast Feeding Gear
Essential Breastfeeding Gear for All Mommies
From comfortable nursing clothes to nursing bras, find only the best quality gear from us
What a new mother needs is the best breast feeding gear, expertly designed for maximum comfort, support and convenience. Find comfortable yet stylish breast feeding baby gear and breast feeding bras that are comfortable enough to sleep in and provide any pregnant mom with the much needed support, all at great prices from our online store. Pink Taffy Designs also covers a wide range of breast feeding bras that are also suitable for night time wear. Apart from an amazing selection of styles and colors, our breast feeding bras are designed to provide additional support to lactating mothers while also providing a discreet and convenient way to breastfeed. Find the best breast feeding gear and breast feeding bras for new mommies from our large range of maternity and nursing bras, which offers the perfect mix of comfort, support and style. Shop for the best breast feeding bras in a variety of designs, colors and sizes from our online store today! Our breast feeding baby gear and bras are from selected from top quality choices; get the best deals from Pink Taffy Designs when you shop with us for all breast feeding gear needs today.
Sort By
Sort By


text:
Discover for free which first names would suit you or your baby !
Meaning of name Brygida
Etymology : Polish form of BRIDGET
Saint :
Origin : Polish
Rate this first name :
Gender : girl
Country :
Numbers :
Meaning of those numbers?
Share this page :
Who are they?
Sociable, friendly and communicative, Brygida and Mildgyð are very charming, seductive women who are also rather image-conscious. This could be expressed by the way they dress (often with originality), or by the choices they make in life and their personal views. Elegant, refined, accommodating, and imbued with a certain distinction, their intense desire to please and be liked is usually expressed through kindness, helpfulness and a conciliatory spirit. They can transform themselves into capable and responsible women when necessary, both where their personal and professional lives are concerned. Idealists, they are dedicated to quality and can get upset when they realize they aren´t perfect in every way. With the karmic 6, they are often confronted with familial difficulties: the family being either the focus of their lives to the point where they are capable of making huge personal sacrifices; or their home life is disharmonious, feels like a burden, and is characterized by an urge to escape provoked by the fear of allowing oneself to be smothered or to suffer, and this is not without repercussions in the emotional sphere. If they take matters into their own hands and act in line with their responsibilities, they will certainly reap the rewards. However there will also be constraints - which at times can be extremely cumbersome - in the endless quest for perfection. Brygida and Mildgyð are protective by nature, and are therefore very good at comforting and supporting others, usually forgetting about themselves in the process. If the opposite is true, and they are hesitant and apathetic, then something is making them mightily unhappy, and they surely seek the support that they are temporarily unable to provide. As children, it would be desirable to give them a certain amount of autonomy relatively early on in life. They need love, can be exclusive and are very frightened by aggressive or violent behavior. Their parents should also take care to maintain a peaceful and harmonious environment around them, otherwise it won´t be long before they start looking elsewhere for a better world. A creative or artistic hobby (sewing, music, dance...) would be of great benefit and is to be encouraged.
What do they like?
As a general rule, Brygida and Mildgyð STRONG> love freedom, independence, novelty and the unknown. They are very fond of change and enjoy travelling, whilst they bitterly resent constraints and the routine. They like to get on with things and can be impatient, quickly becoming discouraged when faced with an obstacle on the road to their goals. Romantically, they are idealistic and elitist and can be very fussy when choosing a partner. They are capable of hesitating for a long, long time, either through fear of commitment, or because they keep finding too many imperfections in their quest for the perfect man.
Get your free Personality test card now !!
What do they do?
There could be a connection with the family, in one way or another, and in any case they are likely to exert a certain amount of influence on the professional choices of these women. Otherwise, they could be interested by occupations related to travel (representation, journalism...), related to beauty, art, comfort, gastronomy, or providing support for others (medical, paramedics, justice, humanitarian aid).
Discover others girls first names : Bracha Braelyn Braidy
*To note: :
It sometimes happens that two different first names have the same meaning. This has nothing surprising: both first names have the same figures of numerology. It is as in astrology: two persons belonging to the same sign present the same characteristic...
Names compatibility
Test the compatibility of your names to know if your love relation is lucky to succeed. Friendship, love or passion?
Discover fast what waits for you...
Verify now if your names are compatible!
The last comments about "Brygida "
Post your comment
Your Name Horoscope !
Thanks to the numerology, we propose you daily a horoscope personalized for your first name. Love, money , Shape: discover what waits for you for today. In Bonus every day find your daily lucky figure .. Horoscope of the first names
Love :Couples: The complicity between the two of you will be reinforced. Singles: An admirer will make themselves known.
Money :You are trying to decide whether or not to make a property investment. Take your time.
Health:You won't see any results without some effort Brygida .
Your Lucky number : 80


text:
Ultimate Adventure Clubs, Parks & People
Special Thanks For All The Help
Putting together The Ultimate Adventure is no easy task. Lucky for us, we found a collection of outstanding clubs, parks, and individuals who all went above and beyond to help make UA 2011 a reality. We thank everyone for all of their hospitality and support throughout the trip. From Nevada, Missouri, to Atoka, Oklahoma, and everywhere in between, if the places we went on the adventure sound like future destinations to you, then grab up this year's park's contact info and start planning your own Ultimate Adventure today.
Kansas Rocks
Located just over the Missouri state line near Fort Scott, Kansas, was our first wheeling destination, Kansas Rocks Recreation Park. With its seemingly endless mazes of handmade trails ranging from easy to hardcore, we got a great feel for the challenging wheeling that Kansas has to offer. Rocks, mud, loose hillclimbs, and technical wheeling are all to be expected at the park, and when you thrown in a rain shower, get ready to throttle down and have a blast! A very special thanks to Jake Good and all of the Kansas Rocks crew for helping get everyone through the day and treating us with a delicious BBQ dinner.
Kansas Rocks Recreation Park
Wheelin' World
With a name like Wheelin' World you know you're in for a fun time! Located just outside of Eureka Springs, Arkansas, Wheelin' World 4x4 Offroad Park is one of Arkansas's premier wheeling destinations. As on most of the trails on this year's UA, we found ourselves immersed in tight and twisty pathways under a thick tree canopy. At Wheelin' World you may be cruising over monster boulders in the creek bed one minute and hammering up a loose and sandy hillclimb the next. We had an absolute blast at the park and are especially grateful for the hospitality that Dale Backs and his crew showed for us.
Wheelin' World 4x4 Offroad Park
Jones Mudfest & Trails
Day 2 of the adventure dropped us into Lockwood, Missouri, and through the gates of Jones Mudfest & Trails. Jones Mudfest plays host to competition mud bogs and hole-and-hill mud races throughout the year. And while the Mudfests make the working cattle ranch a staple in the bogging world, Jones' intricate system of beginner, intermediate, and hardcore trails provides a wide array of 4x4 fun for just about every wheelers appetite. Thanks again to Brad Jones and family, along with the official Jones park crew, for all their help and incredible wheeling land.
Jones Mudfest
D-Day Adventure Park
While D-Day Adventure Park may be known for the world's largest paintball competition, the exciting trails and incredible (some insane) hillclimbs are quickly giving the park a name in the off-road community. Though the rugged and unique park has plenty of loose dirt and mild rocks for those just looking to get their cleats dirty, it also has a heavy helping of topnotch obstacles that can challenge the most well-built off-road machines. Located near Wyandotte, Oklahoma, the 1,000-acre wheeling and paintball Mecca is owned by Dewayne Convirs. Special thanks go out to Convirs and Director of Operations Ed Covey, along with the entire D-Day crew for opening up their topnotch facility to our adventure posse.
D-Day Adventure Park
Buck Creek Ranch & Off-Road Park
Ask anyone around Atoka, Oklahoma, where the best wheeling is and they will say Buck Creek Ranch. Often referred to as Daisy for its close proximity to the town, Buck Creek is a 1,000-plus-acre wheeling park that's privately owned and operated by Charlie Brown. As our final wheeling destination for the 2011 Ultimate Adventure, Buck Creek had each wheeler on his or her toes as we navigated the monster rocks littered throughout the park. Buck Creek manager and Toy Soldiers shop owner Joe Eaves was kind enough to lead us on our final wheeling day and rocky trail expedition. Thanks again to both Eaves and Brown. We had a blast at the park and couldn't think of a more fitting place to end this year's epic trail tour.
Buck Creek Off-Road Park
512.585.1954 (Charlie Brown)


text:
Good things...
come to those who sign up for our emails.
The latest from the worlds of fashion, art, architecture and automotive direct to your inbox.
By registering, you agree to the OPUMO Privacy Policy.
The iconic Ögon Cacao one eye poster was designed by the well-known Swedish illustrator Olle Eksell in 1956. The famous eyes of cacao was part of Sweden's first design program that Olle designed for the company Mazetti. Since then, the poster has become a real design classic.
Olle Eksell was the creative designer ahead of his time. This could be seen in the famous eyes of cacao, which was part of Sweden's first design program that Olle designed for Mazetti back in 1956. Since then, the poster has become a real design classic.
Environmentally friendly lithographic printing on 200g quality uncoated paper with "gold". Printed in Sweden. Art print.
Cardboards included.
Size: 50 cm x 70 cm.
This item ships worldwide.
Olle Eksell take the satisfaction of their customers very seriously. Every product is inspected to the highest possible quality standards before dispatch. However, if you are not totally satisfied with your purchase you can return it to them within 14 days for an exchange or full refund.
Olle Eksell was a Swedish graphic designer and poster artist, and a professor until 2001, who gave shape to the classic 'eyes' on the chocolate packages for Ögon Cacao and famously wrote the book Design = Economy.
Olle was seen as a creative designer that was ahead of his time and his most famous illustrations are known to include everything from the crazy and the fantasy-filled to abstract geometric shapes and intricate cityscapes.


text:
Nielsen's Whiting Joins MarkMonitor Board
Brand protection company MarkMonitor has named Nielsen Co. vice chair Susan Whiting to its board of directors. MarkMonitor offers services that help protect companies from online fraud, brand abuse and cybersquatting. Its "Brandjacking Index" also provides an in-depth review of online risks.
MarkMonitor will leverage Whiting's insights to help forge the growing brand protection category. Her "decades of experience working with the marketing organizations of the world's leading brands is a compelling addition to the MarkMonitor board," said Irfan Salim, president and CEO of MarkMonitor, San Francisco.
Whiting, who joined Nielsen in 1978, was named vice chair in November 2008. She shares oversight of the company with chairman and CEO David Calhoun in the Office of the CEO.
MarkMonitor's other board members include: Salim; Dave Barrett, general partner, Polaris Venture Partners; Stephen J. Harrick, managing director and partner, Institutional Venture Partners; Jim Sayre, president, Cargill Ventures; and Warren Weiss, general partner, Foundation Capital.
"It is crucial in today's economic climate for companies to protect the integrity of their brands and ensure the Internet is a safe place for consumers to transact business," said Whiting. "The MarkMonitor value proposition of connecting customers to brands in a way they can trust is a necessity in a growing and evolving online world. I'm excited to join the MarkMonitor board to help transform the company's vision into reality."
MarkMonitor's clients comprise more than half of the Fortune 100 brands and include Epson, FedEx and Time Warner.
Adweek is a unit of the Nielsen Co.


text:
This site is the archived OWASP Foundation Wiki and is no longer accepting Account Requests.
To view the new OWASP Foundation website, please visit https://owasp.org
OWASP Summer of Code 2008
From OWASP
|Projects Above 50% Completion
|OWASP Orizon Project
|Paolo Perego
|OWASP Application Security Desk Reference (ASDR)
|Leonardo Cavallari Militelli
|OWASP Application Security Tool Benchmarking Environment and Site Generator refresh
|Dmitry Kozlov
|OWASP Education Project
|Martin Knobloch
|OWASP Python Static Analysis
|Georgy Klimov
|Projects Below 50% Completion
|OWASP WeBekci Project
|Bunyamin Demir
|OWASP Positive Security Project
|Eduardo Vianna de Camargo Neves
|Inactive Projects
|OWASP Corporate Application Security Rating Guide
|Parvathy Iyer
|OWASP Interceptor Project - 2008 Update
|Justin Derry
Historical Information
- OWASP is now launching the Summer of Code 2008 (SoC 2008), following the previous OWASP Spring of Code 2007 (SpoC 07), in which 21 projects were sponsored with a budget of US$117,500, and the OWASP Autumn of Code 2006 (AoC 06), in which 9 projects were sponsored with a budget of US$20,000.
- The SoC 2008 is an open sponsorship program were participants/developers are paid to work on OWASP (and web security) related projects.
- The SoC 2008 is also an opportunity for external individual or company sponsors to challenge the participants/developers to work in areas in which they are willing to invest additional funding.
- The Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP) is a worldwide free and open community focused on improving the security of application software. Our mission is to make application security "visible," so that people and organizations can make informed decisions about application security risks.
Who Can Apply?
- The only requirement is that the candidate shows the potential to accomplish the project's objectives/deliveries and the commitment to dedicate the time required to complete it in the appropriate period.
- Current active OWASP Project Contributors (including Project leaders) are encouraged to apply.
- No member of the OWASP board is allowed to apply for a SoC 2008 sponsorship.
- There are no any other restrictions on who can apply for a SoC 2008 sponsorship.
How To Participate (To Developers)
- Ideas to work can be chosen from:
- Participants/developers' own interest and choice, as long as the OWASP main objectives are considered;
- Projects prioritized by the OWASP Board to be done with SoC 2008 funds;
- Existing OWASP Projects;
- Projects directly linked to external individual or company sponsorship.
- To submit a project you have to post it on the OWASP Summer of Code 2008 Applications Page.
- Once your application is published on the WIKI, send an email to Paulo Coimbra with the following details:
- Project name;
- Contact details, i.e., full name, postal address and email.
- Both Paulo Coimbra and Dinis Cruz can also be contacted for further discussion on issues related to SoC 2008 applications, i.e., project ideas, review of draft applications, etc..
- 3rd March – SoC 2008 season of code is officially launched. Start date for submitting applications.
- 25th March - Deadline for project applications.
- 16th April – Publishing of selected applications and start of SoC 2008 projects.
- 29th June - Participants to report on project status.
- 15th September - Project completion. Participants should deliver final project report.
- The new SoC's deadline will be the first day of the Summit, that is to say November 4.
Jury and Selection Criteria
- Jury: OWASP Board Members (Jeff Williams, Dave Wichers, Tom Brennan, Sebastien Deleersnyder and Dinis Cruz).
- There are two methods to select SoC 2008 projects:
- By direct majority vote (3 out of 5) by the Jury;
- By selection rating using the criteria defined below.
- Each project will receive a rating from 1 to 5 on the following categories by each Jury. The final result will be the total value.
- On the Project:
- Complete status - What will be the final Completeness State?
- Complexity - What is the project Complexity and Size?
- Member Value - How big is the potential added value to Owasp Members?
- Brand Value - How big is the potential added value to the Owasp Brand?
- On the Candidate:
- Past Work - Value of past contributions to OWASP Projects;
- Deliverability - Proven capability to deliver;
- Qualitty of Proposal - Global quality of the proposal submited.
- On the Project:
- Each project will receive a rating from 1 to 5 on the following categories by each Jury. The final result will be the total value.
Operational Rules
- Whenever possible the participant should suggest a SoC 2008 Project Reviewer, which will be responsible for reviewing the project's deliverables and authorize payments.
- All and each Project Reviewer suggested by participants has to be confirmed by majority vote of the OWASP Board.
- Whenever the participants fail to suggest a SoC 2008 Project Reviewer, the OWASP Board, by majority vote, will appoint one. The same will happen whenever the reviewer suggested by the participant does not have the required approval.
- Each and every project should have its Project Progress page always completely updated with all information regarding the project status.
- The Project Reviewer will provide his assessment twice for each project, respectively with 50% and 100% claimed completion. The Project Reviewer will deliver his evaluation filling in his Project Reviewer Page.
- Each new project should obtain Reviewers' agreement that, at least, a Beta Quality stage was achieved.
- Each project built on previous work done within OWASP (Existing OWASP Projects) should obtain Reviewers' agreement that a Release Quality stage was achieved.
- Projects Final Deliveries will be evaluated by an assigned SoC 2008 Reviewer. However, the Jury will provide final oversight.
- Payments will be made, via Pay Pal, in two instalments, respectively 50% halfway and 50% on completion of the project.
- Basically, if you do not deliver you will NOT be paid.
General Rules
- By taking part on SoC 2008, the participant will authorize OWASP to host and advertise without any limitations his participation and all related contents including proposal and all deliveries.
- All tools, documentation, or any other materials whatsoever, created by the participants within SoC 2008 context must be released under an Open Source Initiative approved license. However, the participant may mirror development on her/his personal infrastructure at her/his option.
- Participants and OWASP is free to use the results, including code, of the SoC's 2008 code in any way they choose provided it is not in conflict with the license under which the code was developed.
- OWASP reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to revoke any, and all, privileges associated with participating in this program, and to take any other action it deems appropriate, for no reason or any reason whatsoever. OWASP reserves the right to cancel, terminate or modify the program if it is not capable of completion as planned for any reason.
- Any situation arising not included in the above mentioned set of rules will be decided according to the discretionary judgement of OWASP Board.
SoC 2008 Budget
- The initial Budget for SoC 2008 will be US$100,000, and it is funded by OWASP.
- In parallel with the Request for Proposals, OWASP is also doing a membership drive where all membership fees committed during that period will be allocated to SoC 2008 projects (the new members have the option to choose which projects they would like to sponsor).
- The funds available will be allocated to select projects. However, strong proposals will be accepted by majority vote of the OWASP Board before the final project selection. Remaining budget will be allocated to remaining projects.
- Note: The referred budget allocation is just a guideline and the final values will be adjusted based on the successful proposals.