Knowing both is sort of useful. Not knowing excel makes you useless.
inane little opines
Agree completely. I taught myself excel playing fantasy baseball
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Building a formula in excel sort of already means you know the math behind it, but there is validity in having students do work manually every now and then as a refresher and to make sure they perfectly understand what's going on. But having them do it manually without teaching them fast and efficient ways to do it mentally is a waste of time.
So if concealed carry was illegal, that guy wouldn't have shot up the cinema?AussieReaper wrote:
Concealed carry should be illegal in all states, unless you're a police officer or law enforcement official.
imo
You wouldn't let anyone carrying a weapon into a cinema (or any public area), and if they are caught carrying concealed weapon(s) would face fines+ potential loss of gun licence. Or a prison term.
That doesn't make any fucking sense. The only people that would effect would be people like me.
What's wrong with an average law abiding citizen carrying concealed? I have a concealed carry permit. How would making that illegal stop a crazy dude from shooting a bunch of people?
Baba Booey
Nope, not knowing the basics makes you useless.Shocking wrote:
Knowing both is sort of useful. Not knowing excel makes you useless.
Then again, on a real engineering course you don't waste time on pointless exercises filling out equations with numbers and units, you spend your time learning how to derive the equations to gain a proper understanding of what you're doing.
Pulling equations out of books and plugging numbers into them is what technicians do.
Fuck Israel
What's the big deal with law abiding citizens carrying concealed weapons?
To anybody opposed to that please tell me how a weaker person is supposed to defend themselves.
To anybody opposed to that please tell me how a weaker person is supposed to defend themselves.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
In any population there will be stupid, angry, senile, jumpy, hormonal, psychotic, juvenile etc etc people.
Maybe its better for no-one to have a gun than be guaranteed there will be millions of stupid, angry, senile, jumpy, hormonal, psychotic, juvenile people wandering the streets with guns.
Maybe its better for no-one to have a gun than be guaranteed there will be millions of stupid, angry, senile, jumpy, hormonal, psychotic, juvenile people wandering the streets with guns.
Fuck Israel
my god you're stupidDilbert_X wrote:
In any population there will be stupid, angry, senile, jumpy, hormonal, psychotic, juvenile etc etc people.
Maybe its better for no-one to have a gun than be guaranteed there will be millions of stupid, angry, senile, jumpy, hormonal, psychotic, juvenile people wandering the streets with guns.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
Yes of course, if anyone steps out of line there'll be a Sh1fty ready to blow them away with his budget riot-shotgun, at least before the casualties get into triple figures.
Fuck Israel
Owning a firearm should be like driving a car.
It should be a privilege, not a right. That being said, you should still be able to purchase what your heart desires (minus artillery, grenades and such.)
There should be enough regulation to prevent the mentally unstable and anyone with a criminal back round involving armed robbery, assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a major drug (like heroin, meth, coke.) things like that. Not things like possession of marijuana or minor offenses.
We don't need fucking vigilantes, we don't need trigger happy young kids with 12 gauge shotguns. A gun is a tool, not a toy and it needs to be respected.
When you're looking down the sights at someone shifty, you have a choice of letting them live or ending a life. I hope you can make that decision and live with it. Not very Christian to kill someone over some tangible and replaceable items.
It should be a privilege, not a right. That being said, you should still be able to purchase what your heart desires (minus artillery, grenades and such.)
There should be enough regulation to prevent the mentally unstable and anyone with a criminal back round involving armed robbery, assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a major drug (like heroin, meth, coke.) things like that. Not things like possession of marijuana or minor offenses.
We don't need fucking vigilantes, we don't need trigger happy young kids with 12 gauge shotguns. A gun is a tool, not a toy and it needs to be respected.
When you're looking down the sights at someone shifty, you have a choice of letting them live or ending a life. I hope you can make that decision and live with it. Not very Christian to kill someone over some tangible and replaceable items.
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
That's already the law in the US. Actually, we go farther and say anyone with a felony (violent or not) is a prohibited person.UnkleRukus wrote:
There should be enough regulation to prevent the mentally unstable and anyone with a criminal back round involving armed robbery, assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a major drug (like heroin, meth, coke.) things like that. Not things like possession of marijuana or minor offenses.
Considering that holders of CCW permits have some of the lowest crime rates (including lower than police officers in some states), I don't see why you think that would help. Carrying in legal "no carry zones" already results in things like loss of the permit, fines, and jail time.AussieReaper wrote:
Concealed carry should be illegal in all states, unless you're a police officer or law enforcement official.
imo
You wouldn't let anyone carrying a weapon into a cinema (or any public area), and if they are caught carrying concealed weapon(s) would face fines+ potential loss of gun licence. Or a prison term.
The theater in CO was posted as a "no carry" zone, although that was the owner's choice, not a prohibition in the law.
Anyone walking into a cinema wearing a gas mask, tac gear, and 4 firearms is going to gain some attention...
Last edited by RAIMIUS (2012-07-30 05:29:43)
Lots of people in MA have gotten their licenses revoked because of incidents that happened 10+ years ago (like drunk driving, drunk in public, stupid shit like that.) People who have had LTCs for 20+ years now are denied because of those mistakes they've made and paid for.RAIMIUS wrote:
That's already the law in the US. Actually, we go farther and say anyone with a felony (violent or not) is a prohibited person.UnkleRukus wrote:
There should be enough regulation to prevent the mentally unstable and anyone with a criminal back round involving armed robbery, assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a major drug (like heroin, meth, coke.) things like that. Not things like possession of marijuana or minor offenses.
I'm not saying the laws aren't there. I just don't think the laws are working as intended.
Also around here, CCWs are allowed. Yet no one does it because people are so paranoid up here they call the cops at the slightest hint that someone is carrying. People have such gall.
Last edited by UnkleRukus (2012-07-30 05:33:40)
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
But then the middle east would be so very boring!Dilbert_X wrote:
In any population there will be stupid, angry, senile, jumpy, hormonal, psychotic, juvenile etc etc people.
Maybe its better for no-one to have a gun than be guaranteed there will be millions of stupid, angry, senile, jumpy, hormonal, psychotic, juvenile people wandering the streets with guns.
Oh, wait.. you're not taking away their IEDs and suicide bomber vests?
Which didn't catch James Holmes either.RAIMIUS wrote:
That's already the law in the US. Actually, we go farther and say anyone with a felony (violent or not) is a prohibited person.UnkleRukus wrote:
There should be enough regulation to prevent the mentally unstable and anyone with a criminal back round involving armed robbery, assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a major drug (like heroin, meth, coke.) things like that. Not things like possession of marijuana or minor offenses.
Fuck Israel
So you'd prefer a lady have no equalizer against a rapist even if she's had the proper training and has no criminal record?Dilbert_X wrote:
In any population there will be stupid, angry, senile, jumpy, hormonal, psychotic, juvenile etc etc people.
Maybe its better for no-one to have a gun than be guaranteed there will be millions of stupid, angry, senile, jumpy, hormonal, psychotic, juvenile people wandering the streets with guns.
Well one could argue that there are many other "equalizers" out there. Blades, tazers, pepper spray, hand to hand defensive teqniques.
Guns are a tool in defense, but they are not the only tool one can use.
Guns are a tool in defense, but they are not the only tool one can use.
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
Not the only, just the most effective, as per Kleck's study.UnkleRukus wrote:
Well one could argue that there are many other "equalizers" out there. Blades, tazers, pepper spray, hand to hand defensive teqniques.
Guns are a tool in defense, but they are not the only tool one can use.
Well, before his crime, he wasn't a criminal.Dilbert_X wrote:
Which didn't catch James Holmes either.
You honestly see any of those stopping a 200lbs+ man trying to rape, assault, rob, or murder somebody smaller? What if somebody like that went up against me? You think I'd stand a chance against him with any of that shit? hell no I need a gunUnkleRukus wrote:
Well one could argue that there are many other "equalizers" out there. Blades, tazers, pepper spray, hand to hand defensive teqniques.
Guns are a tool in defense, but they are not the only tool one can use.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
man with baseball/cricket bat > basically any kind of unarmed man, unless they have like martial arts training or something
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
or you could close the distance between your attacker and be willing to take one good hit that will probably shatter your arm then you could gouge out his eyes and rip out his jugular with your teeth and jerk off over the corpse with your unbroken arm
Tu Stultus Es
How many fights have you ever been in?Spark wrote:
man with baseball/cricket bat > basically any kind of unarmed man, unless they have like martial arts training or something
The data is a bit dated, but interesting.
some asshole used a tire iron against me in a fight when i was 16 and still whooped his ass
Tu Stultus Es
What, a taser sending thousands of volts of electricity will take down most if not anyone.-Sh1fty- wrote:
You honestly see any of those stopping a 200lbs+ man trying to rape, assault, rob, or murder somebody smaller? What if somebody like that went up against me? You think I'd stand a chance against him with any of that shit? hell no I need a gunUnkleRukus wrote:
Well one could argue that there are many other "equalizers" out there. Blades, tazers, pepper spray, hand to hand defensive teqniques.
Guns are a tool in defense, but they are not the only tool one can use.
You say pepper spray wont take down a 200 pound man. Wait until basic when they spray that shit on the tiniest motherfucker (you) to the biggest guy in the platoon. It doesn't matter how big your are when you get any amount of capsicum in your eye.
Hand to hand combat is extremely effective at close range. Anyone with any reasonable amount of training can take down an assailant.
If you think a gun is your only line of defense, you are going to flunk out of basic really fucking quick.
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.