Seli

Members
  • Content count

    4,862
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Seli

  • Rank
    Social Justice Trainee
  • Birthday 05/26/1976

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Netherlands

Recent Profile Visitors

5,631 profile views
  1. A wider issue in the last decades. Now slowly getting to a boil it seems. In the Netherlands we keep electing the party of big business in power, while a large proportion of people who don't feel government works for them vote for the xenophobes. And the 'oh shiny outspoken outsider, let's vote for them' has been an issue since the early 2000's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pim_Fortuyn).
  2. I was never a huge fan of IPA, but I do really enjoy the current crop of the juicy version that is currently (finally?) showing up here. It might help that those are now brewed relatively locally, and my local store makes sure they are fresh.
  3. Here we have the reason I personally feel that anyone who wants to carry a concealed firearm should by definition be stopped from owning firearms. Of course that won't happen in the USA. Second law of thermodynamics.
  4. This is important because the only reason to carry a concealed weapon is for the carrier to use it at moment's notice. Which means they need to be able to get a very good situational overview, and have superb weapons handling. Because if that is not the case they will be a danger to those around them. But of course in recent decades the bar for concealed carry has been lowered in many US states. Who is initiating the danger? It there an objective danger or is it just the concealed gun carrier who is scared? Given the tendency for people to pull guns over property crimes, or even arguments, that seems an important question. Very insufficient. Trying to solve issues after the damage has been done is inherently inefficient. It is much easier to solve the problem at the source, which in that case would have been people walking around with guns.
  5. If I remember correctly the lack of diversity and too large coherence in his nations/blocks. A thing that tends to get on my nerves in alt-historical scenarios.
  6. There are plenty of books that fall to the wayside of 'oh more shiny' but I refuse to admit I could not get through them. One I actually decided not to finish was "The years of rice and salt" by Kim Stanley Robinson another one "Song of Kali" by Dan Simmons; while his "The Terror" is one that drifted away.
  7. Small nitpick, there is only a small minority that use them in lethal violent offences. I don't think we have proper statistics of how many use guns in non-lethal offences. And as far as I understand in the current climate even research into that is difficult. There are some small older data samples though eg: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use-2/ or https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/youth-and-guns/
  8. The split/conflict that has become clear in many communities between a prescriptive, authoritarian, door-keeping, listen-to-me, libertarian-ish wing and a descriptive, inclusive, egalitarian, listen-to-everyone (shut up for a second), liberal-ish wing is also present in the atheist/humanist/sceptics movements. Mythcon was a convention in that movement that insisted on inviting the gamergate types and giving them a podium.
  9. The tor.com novella line includes some nice horror (adjacent) stories. Examples I've read and liked are The Murders of Molly Southborne by Tade Thompson Hammers on Bone as well as A Song for Quiet by Cassandra Khaw (her Rupert Wong novellas also are worth checking out) The Sin du Jour novellas by Matt Wallace are a bit lighter.
  10. Not quite the foundation garments intended I think, but the 99 percent invisible design podcast had an episode on the development of the sports bra. Basically interviews with the women who were fed up with the lack of support of existing bras who ended up designing their own solution. https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/the-athletic-brassiere/
  11. There is no vote on your right to own arms. But there is a sub-discussion on why some people own arms, what they think they need it for, and why they are wrong. And you volunteered the case study this time around.
  12. There is an basic issue, in most self-defence scenarios you already start at a disadvantage. Range practice might be enough in a situation where you are fully aware and certain that an armed individual with full intent to harm you is on their way. In any other situation you will need time to asses, to switch modes, to convince yourself, to wake up, to actually stop what you were doing. All while the other person is already focussed and ready. edit: And a nice abstract of a (limited study) showing how inefficient unprepared gun-carriers can be in self-defence: from this abstract: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2008.143099?journalCode=ajph
  13. Not to forget sleepy, unsuspecting, unprepared.
  14. Nearly every single one of those 70% claim they are ready to kill another human being. To me this is the very scary bit about US culture, and the thing that I think has to change to decrease the level of violence in its society. The fact that it is acceptable that people kill to protect mere property, because they are scared, seems insane.
  15. I am not calling myself a liberal, but am a close enough fit for US purposes. Personally, because I want a future where I can still exist and express myself. Which means we need to protect society against those who would destroy it, kill the likes of me, etc. This means limiting the speech of those who want to destroy the framework, social pressure works for some groups for others limiting is necessary. It is a dangerous balance between killing freedom by not protecting it enough and using too strong methods to protect it and destroying it that way. But we know from history the dangers of racists, nazis, theocrats, so we know we need to be very wary of them.