it seems from the examples given and and it is an obvious conclusion that the only people who might benefit from such information being withheld are liars who speed

the only people who might benefit from such information being withheld are liars who speed

There is always the argument that the only people who benefit from privacy are the criminals, so everybody should be under constant surveillance. The trouble is, we don't always agree on what is criminal and what should be monitored.

For example, when you're overtaking someone on the highway, you're not technically allowed to go over the speed limit, but in reality you have to in order to make it safely. That, however, would get you a ticket if the event was recorded and shown to the police.

An event recorder can be used much like a GPS device because knowing the speed of a car, steering wheel position, travelled distance etc. can be used to reconstruct where the car has been, who is the likely driver, were they carrying passengers... etc. and that information can be stolen by anybody who has access to the service port of the car's computer.

An event recorder can be used much like a GPS device because knowing the speed of a car, steering wheel position, travelled distance etc. can be used to reconstruct where the car has been, who is the likely driver, were they carrying passengers... etc.

This obviously depends how much information and from how long a time they record such information. If, as the article states, this is only for under a minute, then this data has less relevance for other than accident review.

If, as the article states, this is only for under a minute, then this data has less relevance for other than accident review.

If, but it can be made longer.

But there's a second problem: what if the sensors fail? What if they falsely report that you were driving without your seatbelt on, and your insurance claim gets dismissed on the black box data as evidence of your negligence?

It is pointless to argue the nuts and bolts of it. This gov should have zero to do with it. If insurance providers wants to give deductions for such equipment with free choice, then fine.

As soon as big government advocates fool you into such debates, they've won,.., because their social statistics are fact based. There will be endless statistically valid reasons for increasing government control and intrusiveness, into your lives.

They either don't understand or don't care that a truely free society by definition requires such social problems to be left as such. In fact it is the cost of freedom itself.

With each new generation of naive 'social progressives' is the thought that They've discovered ways to "fix" society, without having a clue that such struggles over freedom, that have been going on for hundreds of years, are the reason they've inherited the supposed problems.

The greatest threat to liberty, is the 'liberal progressive' and their army of statisticians.

@ Noumenon

If they incorporate remote reporting into the black box along with other data, such as GPS, speed limits, and stop signs, the liberal progressives can REALLY make the highways safe by fining you every time you do something improper. Think of the revenue that could be generated...

That's where we're headed, mark my words.

The greatest threat to liberty, is the 'liberal progressive' and their army of statisticians.

Indeed information and facts are always a dire threat to conservatives, who prefer hiding in the dark. Even when there are corpses on the street.

Think of all the speeding you won't be able to do when you take your self driving car to work.

Something like this could work IFF there were an independent agent to validate such boxes have limits as to what is documented and how and who the data could be accessed.
Some sort of systems like this will be needed to pay for roads as more cars are on roads and not paying fuel taxes.
A smart toll road system could dynamically change tolls to encourage use of alternate roads and distribute traffic during rush hours.
The system must be made voluntary and be an alternate method to pay fuel taxes.
State rapid toll systems are not being used by some for security reasons. I would be reluctant to let NJ, NY, MA have direct access to my bank account.

Will the black box record freethinking's homosexual liaisons?

Damn! Ice burn.

I agree that "serious criminals" being sent back to society for recovery should have a black box in their cars for a period of time and it should record everything 24/7 because it's useful and appropriate. If you are naïve enough to believe that this information is useful to the car industry I feel sorry for you, and for me too since you have a vote. Putting those boxes in everyone's vehicle is only good information to attorneys and overly controlling governments. It's getting a little perverted I must say.

The fact is that this technology will not prevent accidents, only help to punish the people responsible. Drivers dont speed because they think they can get away with an accident, but because they dont believe an accident will happen. As such it does not have much merit to have it mandated by law.

For example, when you're overtaking someone on the highway, you're not technically allowed to go over the speed limit, but in reality you have to in order to make it safely. That, however, would get you a ticket if the event was recorded and shown to the police.

You're not supposed to pass if doing so requires speeding.

Therefore technically you are supposed to get a ticket.

" The provision was removed during House-Senate negotiations on the measure at the behest of House Republican lawmakers who said they were concerned about privacy."

Those evil Republicans!

Wasn't it Thomas Jefferson who said "Those who would trade freedom for safety deserve neither."

I think a lot of the responders to this post need to move to China, Russia or Venezuela for a year or 2. Let them get a taste of what its really like when you hand over your freedoms to the government.

Anyone driving in Russia understands the utility of data recording: https://www.youtu...YvNDtHKU

I think a lot of the responders to this post need to move to China, Russia or Venezuela for a year or 2.

Would you please buy me a ticket? I could make a flight back for catholic christmas. http://aeroflot.c.../booking

Or anyone who would like to follow you as you drive around.

"and that information can be stolen by anybody who has access to the service port of the car's computer." - Eikka

Are those cameras required to be installed in Serbian cars?

If so, then very useful. Absolutely. Not only for documenting accidents but fantastic for showing people how not to drive.

"Anyone driving in Russia understands the utility of data recording:" - Kochevnik

I find them seriously educational.

No, it was Thomas Dolby.

Hasn't everyone except the child molesters given up their freedom to molest children to keep children safe from molestation?

I'm sure you can find many other examples of similar loss of freedom if you actually apply yourself.

It takes only a few active neurons.

"Wasn't it Thomas Jefferson who said "Those who would trade freedom for safety deserve neither." " - Dav

Filthy, scumbag Republicans. It seems that they will do almost anything to keep Americans dying in car accidents.

"Those evil Republicans!" - RyggTard

And the problem with this is?

"Then all the passengers in any car can be identified to local police transponders as the cars snitch on them in real time." - Osiris

It occurs to me that anything you do in public is done in public.

If you don't like that, then don't do it in public.

Don't you think that the people responsible for accidents should be held responsible for those accidents?

A black box which also records dashboard video would be most helpful for that.

"The fact is that this technology will not prevent accidents, only help to punish the people responsible." - ShotMan

I support their mandatory deployment without reservation, as all rational, thinking people do.

Well. You design the car so that it can't be started without the seat belt engaged.

No doubt the Automotive industry will want to use the worst possible means of detecting closure of the seat belt mechanism.

Sue them out of existence if they do.

"What if they falsely report that you were driving without your seatbelt on" - Eikka

Yes, this is also the Libertarian position on Child Molestation.

"This gov should have zero to do with it." - NeumenTard

If the child is willing then it isn't molestation according to the Libertarian Party Platform.

Your Liberty ends where my rights begin.

"That's where we're headed, mark my words." - ScooTard

Where your behaviour impacts on my life, I will create laws that limit your ability to damage my life.

Suck it up... Whiner.

Yes, this is also the Libertarian position on Child Molestation.

"This gov should have zero to do with it." - NeumenTard

If the child is willing then it isn't molestation according to the Libertarian Party Platform.

BS, as usual you say way over the top non-sense, then expect people to take you seriously.

Liberals eat puppies.

Under Libertarian party doctrine, children have the same rights as adults, and according to the Libertarian party platform, children can at any time declare themselves as adults and take on all the rights and responsibilities of an adult.

Also under the Libertarian party platform Prostitution is protected, sacred commerce.

It immediately follows then that children need only declare themselves as adults for them to have the legal libertarian right to prostitute themselves.

Hence, according to the Libertarian Party Platform, child molestation isn't molestation if the child is willing.

Poor NumenTard. This is the third or forth time he has made the same mistake. It is almost as if he is unwilling to accept the reality of his own sick political ideology.

Anyone who owns a vehicle with a black box without knowing it is at a disadvantage and it may be a violation of their legal rights. Just like the hard drive in your computer or your personal files the data stored on a black box recorder should require a court order to search it and you and your lawyer should be able to read the data directly from the device. Auto safety is being used to promote these devices to the public but revenue collection is behind this, Every time you speed, do not use blinkers ,turn your lights on, your car excedes emmissions and the list is long for the things that could be recorded over time and you could be nailed with huge fines by this tool of entrapmemnt. The truth is nobody is a perfect driver and billions could be collected from otherwise safe drivers with no accidents.

Telekinetic Dec 07, 2012 Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
Send PM to this user PERSONAL INFORMATION First Name: Last Name: Username: lite Member since: June 28, 2012, 7:07 am PROFILE Q&A Birthday: Location: Affiliation: About yourself: ScooterG = Estevan57 = obama_socks = PussyTard & coTards.
Above is the profile page of lite. The only poster that uses or has ever used the term "pussytard" is GhostofOtto1923. Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury...- Telekinetic

Hey noob per the physorg guidelines, crossposting is Verboten. The pussytard moniker is vendicars, not mine, as everyone knows. I just find it very applicable.-GhostofOtto1923

Well then, let's put the question out to Vendicar Decarian, are you the user of the sock puppet "lite"? Or are you comfortable being backstabbed by TheGhostofOtto1923?- Telekinetic

Are those cameras required to be installed in Serbian cars?

I'm splitting a place in LA now with a Serbian and he says no.
I use a dashcam in Russia because if you watch the videos you will see that some jump in front of your car and claim injury. Also it's common to stand in the middle of the street while crossing. I'm guilty of that too. But some can't time their crossings at all and you're constantly at risk of hitting someone who miscalculates their timing. Also old women may jump in front of traffic out of a combination of fear, stoicism and bad reflexes.

This only came about with the advent of insurance. Before there was no profit motive in jumping into traffic.

" The provision was removed during House-Senate negotiations on the measure at the behest of House Republican lawmakers who said they were concerned about privacy."

Those evil Republicans!

Evil for wanting to remove this provision:

"A transportation bill passed by the Senate earlier this year would have required that all new cars and light trucks have recorders"

or this:

"...and designated a vehicle's owner as the owner of the data."

A reasonable compromise version would have included the ownership provision, IF a recorder was installed by the manufacturer.

In effect, those evil goddam RepCons did nothing to serve --much less preserve-- personal privacy, so don't try to paint them as galant Freedom Fighters defending the individual and civil liberties of their fellow Citizens.

Just the opposite. By failing to see to it that provision was adopted, they've left the door open for any and all abuse of the technology.

PROFIT UBER ALLES!

My favorite is the dump truck forcing the little car off the road, it's an experience I have shared with him. I see those infamous words; "Change You Can Believe In" or "Forward (to Marxism)" on the back bumper and that jackass is doomed.

I think that Tards are what Tards do. I also think that labeling a Tard a Tard is a public service.

Finally: Most of your post was incomprehensible.

"Well then, let's put the question out to Vendicar Decarian, are you the user of the sock puppet "lite"? Or are you comfortable being backstabbed by TheGhostofOtto1923?- Telekinetic"

IF a recorder was installed by the manufacturer.

"A transportation bill passed by the {DEMOCRAT} Senate earlier this year would have REQUIRED that all new cars and light trucks have recorders"

Why didn't the DEMOCRAT senate compromise to NOT require recorders be installed?

IF a recorder was installed by the manufacturer.

"A transportation bill passed by the {DEMOCRAT} Senate earlier this year would have REQUIRED that all new cars and light trucks have recorders"

Why didn't the DEMOCRAT senate compromise to NOT require recorders be installed?

Last time I checked, it required BOTH houses to enact legislation. Why didn't the REPUBLICAN controlled House not work out a compromise NOT requiring mandatory installation?

Don't try to turn the question back at me --answer it!

"Don't try to turn the question back at me --answer it!" - Caliban

RyggTard doesn[t answer questions.

He claims to be a "free thinker", and the last thing a Libertarian/Randite "free thinker" wants to do is think.

If car manufacturers need all that information about drivers and passengers, et al, then they should also gather medical data from the driver to record pulse, blood pressure, and a breathalyzer to prevent DWI (driving while intoxicated). There are people who may not realize that they are close to having a heart attack or stroke. If it happens while they're driving, the results can be deadly not just for the driver and passenger, but for pedestrians and other drivers, as well as destruction of property.
If a medical alert system were to be incorporated into the car's computer, if and when a driver has an ongoing heart attack or stroke, the car can then come to a stop, shut the engine down, turn on the hazard lights and relay a message to 911 or to the nearest hospital emergency room to aid the driver ASAP, especially if the driver is unconscious. Other devices like OnStar can't help much unless the driver is aware of his condition and has called in to get help.

I think that Tards are what Tards do. I also think that labeling a Tard a Tard is a public service.

VD aka "the original tard"

Quite often, VendicarD's own peTARDs blow back on him, which is a good form of Social Justice.

"Well then, let's put the question out to Vendicar Decarian, are you the user of the sock puppet "lite"? Or are you comfortable being backstabbed by TheGhostofOtto1923?- Telekinetic"

-VD

The question shouldn't be too hard for you to understand, VD. Why do you refuse to provide an 'honest' answer. Is it because you're so used to telling lies that you find it impossible to answer with the truth?

Theghostofotto1923 has implicated you as the originator of the word 'pussytard'. Do you plan to defend yourself as innocent of the charge...or are you truly guilty of being the first to use the term, 'pussytard? Everyone knows that Blotto hates pussy and is all for gay marriage and killing babies.

And, are you the owner of the sock puppet called lite?

I think that Tards are what Tards do. I also think that labeling a Tard a Tard is a public service.

Finally: Most of your post was incomprehensible.

"Well then, let's put the question out to Vendicar Decarian, are you the user of the sock puppet "lite"? Or are you comfortable being backstabbed by TheGhostofOtto1923?- Telekinetic"

Obama's_Socks (which are more aware than the user of the handle) hopped on the comment section with a couple sock-puppets found here: (http://phys.org/n...99.html) and proceded to accuse others of owning puppets when he outed himself.

it required BOTH houses to enact legislation

When has Harry Reid made any comprise lately? He can't pass a budget.
Also, there is a socialist in the White House who signs legislation.

"The bill then goes on to describe the "limitations" on information retrieval. Basically, while there will be a "Big Brother" style recording device in all new vehicles, the data recorded on the device will be the property of the owner of the vehicle.

"http://www.pcworl...ars.html

Another twisted concept of property rights by a socialist state.
The data is the property of the owner but not the data collection device. It is the property of the state since they are forcing its installation.
Socialism: state control of 'private' property.

I think that Tards are what Tards do. I also think that labeling a Tard a Tard is a public service.

Finally: Most of your post was incomprehensible.

"Well then, let's put the question out to Vendicar Decarian, are you the user of the sock puppet "lite"? Or are you comfortable being backstabbed by TheGhostofOtto1923?- Telekinetic"

I'm asking you if you are the user of the sockpuppet "lite", because TheGhostofOtto1923 is implying that you are. It's either a "yes" or a "no".

it required BOTH houses to enact legislation

When has Harry Reid made any comprise lately? He can't pass a budget.
Also, there is a socialist in the White House who signs legislation.

When has Boehner compromised in the last two years?

And what if the data in the black box is wrong? We all know how infallible this stuff is.

Another thing the proponents here are missing is that these things are always a foot stuck in a partially open door that keeps the door from closing and slowly makes it open wider. When you give up a right it NEVER stops there.

September 4, 2012, 8:06 pm
4.3 NotParker | HarshMistress | zz5555 | lite | GhostofOttoLickeeUranus | defactoseven | VendicarD |

The above is from the old account of "VendicarDecarian", where he votes for himself using the new and improved "VendicarD", and I see "lite" is also in there. So really, TheGhostofOtto1923 may have uncovered the real owner of the sockpuppet "lite".

it required BOTH houses to enact legislation

When has Harry Reid made any comprise lately? He can't pass a budget.
Also, there is a socialist in the White House who signs legislation.

""Boehner has never won a negotiation battle with the White House or Senate—and he's been nothing short of an embarrassing spokesman for the Conservative Movement. It's time for him to go.""
http://www.capita...congress

I think that Tards are what Tards do. I also think that labeling a Tard a Tard is a public service.

Finally: Most of your post was incomprehensible.

"Well then, let's put the question out to Vendicar Decarian, are you the user of the sock puppet "lite"? Or are you comfortable being backstabbed by TheGhostofOtto1923?- Telekinetic"

Obama's_Socks (which are more aware than the user of the handle) hopped on the comment section with a couple sock-puppets found here: (http://phys.org/n...99.html) and proceded to accuse others of owning puppets when he outed himself.

-shinobi

Nope...you are a liar...and I have said this many times already...that I only have THIS user name for commenting on general topics such as defending Christianity and American Conservatism and one other name that I use for commenting on highly technical topics that relate to my profession.
Shinobi is most likely either just another one of Theghostofotto1923's many sock puppets, OR a stupid toad

Shinobi is most likely either just another one of Theghostofotto1923's many sock puppets

inb4 another sock puppet shows up for bamasocks circle jerk <3

""Boehner has never won a negotiation battle with the White House or Senate—and he's been nothing short of an embarrassing spokesman for the Conservative Movement. It's time for him to go.""
http://www.capita...congress

I agree that Boehner is an embarrasment, but I will commend him for stripping power from teabaggers because he finally realized how assbackwards the movement is.

Under Libertarian party doctrine, children have the same rights as adults, and according to the Libertarian party platform, children can at any time declare themselves as adults and take on all the rights and responsibilities of an adult.

-VD

Wrong! Children who are KNOWN by authorities to be victims of molestation AT HOME, are given the option -around the age of 15 to establish IN COURT that they are mature enough to take on a lawful children's emancipation. An emancipated child is required BY LAW to PROVE that he/she is lawfully and gainfully employed and has an established domicile, but also MUST pursue an education. The law does NOT protect child prostitution...which is only a part of VD's wishful thinking.
IF the child does not or cannot give proof to the court of law that he/she is capable to be emancipated, then Child Services will take over for the welfare of the child. Libertarians abide by the law, and prefer child protection.

VD...stop lying.

Also under the Libertarian party platform Prostitution is protected, sacred commerce.

-VD

There is "legalized" prostitution, notably in Liberal Blue states such as Nevada.
Libertarians have no argument with consenting adults as to whichever way they wish to harm their bodies and brains. That is strictly the decision of said consenting adults, but it is also the decisions in the courts whether or not such behavior is legal, and in which districts.
Emancipated children are exempt from legal prostitution since they MUST answer to a court of law as to their behaviors.
Any child indulging in prostitution is doing so illegally, and most are runaways, never having been legally emancipated. The laws are strictly followed, but unemancipated children who indulge in prostitution are most often enslaved by criminals who FORCE the child into prostitution.

VD knows this...but has memory lapses, sometimes deliberately.
We know him so well. LOL

Also, there is a socialist in the White House who signs legislation.

You only enhance the prestige of socialism by way of your own sordid, troglodytical writings

It immediately follows then that children need only declare themselves as adults for them to have the legal libertarian right to prostitute themselves.

-VD

Wrong...children are NEVER declared "as adults", even when emancipated within the Law.

Hence, according to the Libertarian Party Platform, child molestation isn't molestation if the child is willing.

-VD

A willing child does not advertise that he/she is being molested. Thus, the Law cannot protect the child until he/she accepts the protection of the courts and accepts being removed from the source of the molestation.

Poor NumenTard. This is the third or forth time he has made the same mistake. It is almost as if he is unwilling to accept the reality of his own sick political ideology.

-VD

Poor VDturd...is still unable to drag himself out of his cesspool of hatred and lies. VD and Blotto make excellent bedfellows. Even dogs don't lay in their own shiit

Also, there is a socialist in the White House who signs legislation.

You only enhance the prestige of socialism by way of your own sordid, troglodytical writings

-kochevnik

Oh come on, koch...do you still not know that after a bill gets passed in BOTH the House of Representatives AND the Senate, that bill MUST be signed by the Socialist in the White House? IF the Socialist POTUS disagrees with the bill, he can veto it and send it back for both Senate and House to fight over whatever he disapproves. As it is unlikely that the House and Senate will both agree on certain bills, those bills will die in committee.
Obama will not sign any bill that is detrimental to his agenda of establishing complete Socialism and ENSLAVEMENT of the working taxpayer to the needs of the Welfare lazy who don't want to work and pay taxes. Liberal/Socialists who work will also get hit by higher taxes, but they don't care anyway as long as America is fundamentally changed.
Blotto says EMPIRE

From RyggTard's source

"After purging four conservative House members from key Committees, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) threatened Republican members of Congress on Wednesday by telling them Republican leaders are "watching" their votes to determine future committee assignments."

"Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS), who was removed from the Budget Committee, said Boehner warned those in his conference that "there may be more folks that will be targeted" and the Republican leadership is "watching all of your votes."

This Republican party sounds like the party of Freedom and Liberty to me.

Ahahahahahahahah....... Suckers.

"Wrong...children are NEVER declared "as adults", even when emancipated within the Law." - Sox

From the National Platform of the Libertarian Party, Section Families and Children...

"However, children always have the right to establish their maturity by assuming administration and protection of their own rights, ending dependency upon their parents or other guardians, and assuming all responsibilities of adulthood. A child is a human being and, as such, deserves to be treated justly."

Poor Sox. He is even ignorant of his own parties political platform.

What a moron.

...that bill MUST be signed by the Socialist in the White House?

Obama is far to the right of Nixon

If anyone argues that Social Security is also a Socialist entitlement...I will now remind you that aside from all those who did not pay into S.S. in the early days before it was established as Law, and still were paid monthly S.S. checks afterwards, ALL others who worked were paying a certain amount of their salary into Social Security to help them after retirement. Their is no opt-out of that program.
Social Security WAS and IS a pyramid scheme (or scam) b/c it is dependent on enough births to sustain the program, and enough deaths of retirees to save more of that money for future retirees. It is different from a Ponzi scheme in that it is not necessarily run by a criminal element, but subsequent generations are, and will be paying out of THEIR salaries to pay for the S.S. checks of those who are already retired.
It is the same with Medicare.
Medicare and S.S. should have been our ONLY Socialist programs. But then...there's Welfare who now depend on Santa Claus in the White House.

In other words, as long as the child wants to prostitute herself/himself for candy/dollars/a puppy etc and thinks that is is a good exchange, and doesn't call the police afterward, then the molestation is sacred, legally protected Libertarian commerce.

"A willing child does not advertise that he/she is being molested. Thus, the Law cannot protect the child until he/she accepts the protection of the courts and accepts being removed from the source of the molestation."

I thank Sox for providing me with yet another opportunity to show how much Libertarians like him lie, and show how mindless and morally corrupt the Libertarian political platform is.

"Poor VDturd...is still unable to drag himself out of his cesspool of hatred and lies." - Sox

They don't call the Libertarian Party the Pedo Party for nothing.

That would be the "liberal" state from which a single Republican casino owner paid over 100 million bucks to get Ronmey elected.

"There is "legalized" prostitution, notably in Liberal Blue states such as Nevada." - Sox

He Gambled with that 100 million. He lost.

But even in Nevada Child prostitution is illegal, even though it is legal, protected commerce according to the Libertarian Party Platform.

"children always have the right to establish their maturity by assuming administration and protection of their own rights, ending dependency upon their parents or other guardians, and assuming all responsibilities of adulthood. A child is a human being and, as such, deserves to be treated justly." - National Platform of the Libertairan Party (Pedo Party)

"Libertarians have no argument with consenting adults as to whichever way they wish to harm their bodies and brains." - Sox

And according to the Libertarian Party Platform, not problem with children doing the same.

Would you like some Candy, Little Girl?

Prostitution is legal in Nevada.

What court are these adult children going to answer to when they have the same rights as adults under Libertarian (pedo) political doctrine?

"Emancipated children are exempt from legal prostitution since they MUST answer to a court of law as to their behaviors." - Sox

Do children not have the same rights as adults to engage in commerce? Doesn't Libertarian moral doctrine dictate that such a right is fundamental and universal to all free people?

"Wrong...children are NEVER declared "as adults", even when emancipated within the Law." - Sox

From the National Platform of the Libertarian Party, Section Families and Children...

"However, children always have the right to establish their maturity by assuming administration and protection of their own rights, ending dependency upon their parents or other guardians, and assuming all responsibilities of adulthood. A child is a human being and, as such, deserves to be treated justly."

-VD

Of course they have the right, but ONLY WITHIN a LEGAL framework such as child emancipation.

Poor Sox. He is even ignorant of his own parties political platform.

What a moron.

-VD

I'm not a Libertarian. Washington state and Colorado are full of Libertarians who are now celebrating the legalization of smoking marijuana INDOORS which means in private. As I don't use dope, I'm not concerned with mind altering behaviors unless it affects me directly.

And yet Indentured servitude is perfectly legal under Libertarian law, particularly if the slave is being motivated to act by the invisible hand of the marketplace.

"unemancipated children who indulge in prostitution are most often enslaved by criminals who FORCE the child into prostitution." - Sox

As a Libertarian, certainly you must agree with the idea that indentured servitude is a form of protected, sacred, Libertarian Commerce.

No such wording appears in the Libertarian party platform.

Further, no such idea is compatible with the Libertarian concept that all fundamental human rights are fundamental to all people and can not be restricted by the evil thing called government.

"Of course they have the right, but ONLY WITHIN a LEGAL framework such as child emancipation. " - Sox

Lying is a way of life for you, isn't it?

"4.3 NotParker | HarshMistress | zz5555 | lite | GhostofOttoLickeeUranus | defactoseven | VendicarD |" - Telekenetic

Incoherent drivel.

Sadly, all of Telekinetic's thoughts are similarly jumbled and garbled.

Yes. It is a perpetual tactic among Conservative criminals to attempt to hide their own crimes by accusing others of committing them.

"Obama's_Socks (which are more aware than the user of the handle) hopped on the comment section with a couple sock-puppets found here: (http://phys.org/n...99.html) and proceded to accuse others of owning puppets when he outed himself." - shin

RyggTard is correct on this one. Republicans are preventing Reid from passing a budget.

"When has Harry Reid made any comprise lately? He can't pass a budget." - RyggTard

Why are Republicans preventing budgets from being passed in Congress?

I thank Sox for providing me with yet another opportunity to show how much Libertarians like him lie, and show how mindless and morally corrupt the Libertarian political platform is.

Sure. Banksters love the libertarrians because they cry out for a liquidation of public assets into the hands of the monied eliete with cozy government connections. These backdoor deals are conducted in closed-door meetings well out of public sight, just as the loan-for-shares scam in Russia sponsored by these same libertarians. That's why Russia is increasingly recognizing the American mental disease, based upon a stupid and twisted interpretation of a Russian national Ayn Rand, herself deflecting blame and guilt on Jews for the rampant zionist Bolshevism that overran her country.

Like any blood-sucking parasite, Rand fled her host country when the blood ran dry.

Prostitution is legal in Nevada.

Only for adults.

What court are these adult children going to answer to when they have the same rights as adults under Libertarian (pedo) political doctrine?

Libertarians are not the ones making the Laws. Legislators make Laws and the courts interpret those Laws. Children are not adults, however much you want them to be.

"Emancipated children are exempt from legal prostitution since they MUST answer to a court of law as to their behaviors." - Sox

Very true. Child Emancipation can only be legal under the courts. Anything else is illegal.

Do children not have the same rights as adults to engage in commerce? Doesn't Libertarian moral doctrine dictate that such a right is fundamental and universal to all free people?

Prostitution cannot be defined as commerce even if quid pro quo. That is why a "sin tax" is often levied on legal prostitution. Children are not included in its legality until they are, indeed legally adult.

The lisence plate on your car isn't owned by you either. Nor is the VIN number identifying it.

The software being used to compose your messages? You don't own that either. Neither do you own the OS that runs the computer you are using, or the software that records you keystrokes and displays them here.

You don't even own the money that is in your wallet.

"Another twisted concept of property rights by a socialist state. The data is the property of the owner but not the data collection device" - RyggTard

Poor RyggTard. You are such a confused old man.

I have exactly 0 sock puppets, for rationalism always prevails.

"I'm asking you if you are the user of the sockpuppet "lite"" - Telekinetic

I thank Sox for providing me with yet another opportunity to show how much Libertarians like him lie, and show how mindless and morally corrupt the Libertarian political platform is.

VD has a mental block again...as I already said that I'm not Libertarian, but he still insists on calling me one. Sad, isn't he.

A valid concern.

"And what if the data in the black box is wrong?" - Moebius

I strongly suggest that the system be designed so that the probability of being wrong is essentially zero.

It isn't rocket science.

CRC's are your friend.

Prostitution is legal in Nevada.

"Only for adults." - Sox

And as we have been told by the National Platform of the Libertarian Party, Children need only declare themselves as adults to be legally treated as one.

Candy, little girl?

I thank Sox for providing me with yet another opportunity to show how much Libertarians like him lie, and show how mindless and morally corrupt the Libertarian political platform is.

Sure. Banksters love the libertarrians because they cry out for a liquidation of public assets into the hands of the monied eliete with cozy government connections. These backdoor deals are conducted in closed-door meetings well out of public sight, just as the loan-for-shares scam in Russia sponsored by these same libertarians. That's why Russia is increasingly recognizing the American mental disease, based upon a stupid and twisted interpretation of a Russian national Ayn Rand, herself deflecting blame and guilt on Jews for the rampant zionist Bolshevism that overran her country.

Like any blood-sucking parasite, Rand fled her host country when the blood ran dry.

-koch

As I recall, Ayn Rand lived in Russia w/her parents as a child...nothing to do with Banksters OR libertarians.

I wonder how many Libertarian Pimps would emancipate some street children for some legal child(adult)/adult(child) Rumpy pumpy in Nevada.

Hmmm.. What would libertarians call a chicken ranch that pimps children? Ah, yes.... a place of "Sacred, Libertarian, Commerce".

"Child Emancipation can only be legal under the courts. Anything else is illegal." - Sox

As I recall, Ayn Rand was a welfare queen who stole vast amounts of money from the American taxpayer to pay for her Lung Cancer Treatments and hospitalization during her later years of life after a lifetime of smoking 3 packs a day and claiming that the doctors who warned her of the risks were nothing more than Communist dupes who were scamming the American people for money.

She was certainly a piece of filth, wasn't she?

"As I recall, Ayn Rand lived in Russia w/her parents as a child." - Sox

It is certainly defined as commerce in Nevada where it is legal.

"Prostitution cannot be defined as commerce even if quid pro quo" - Sox

You poor Tard you.

Lying is a way of life for you Conservatives, isn't it?

The lisence plate on your car isn't owned by you either. Nor is the VIN number identifying it.

The software being used to compose your messages? You don't own that either. Neither do you own the OS that runs the computer you are using, or the software that records you keystrokes and displays them here.

You don't even own the money that is in your wallet.

"Another twisted concept of property rights by a socialist state. The data is the property of the owner but not the data collection device" - RyggTard

Poor RyggTard. You are such a confused old man.

-VD

License tags are issued by the state for I.D. purposes. Same with the VIN.
Software use is permitted by making an agreement with the software company. Standard practice.
Money buys "things". It is YOURS until you PAY for those things.
Possession of property is a fleeting concept, but it is to be enjoyed while it lasts. Eventually, when VD dies, he will no longer OWN property, except for the dirt that buries him.

It is certainly defined as commerce in Nevada where it is legal.

"Prostitution cannot be defined as commerce even if quid pro quo" - Sox

You poor Tard you.

Lying is a way of life for you Conservatives, isn't it?

-VD

Show me the source for Nevada issuing a statement defining legal prostitution as commercialism. If it is, indeed, labeled as such, it would have to be a very old piece of legislation, perhaps from 19th century when miners and cowboys spent their money on prostitutes and gambling.

Money buys "things". It is YOURS until you PAY for those things.

Money is never yours. It is a note of a debt assumed by the state given by the banksters which is in your possession. Read what the note says. In court rulings possession of bearer shares does not necessarily connote ownership.

As I recall, Ayn Rand was a welfare queen who stole vast amounts of money from the American taxpayer to pay for her Lung Cancer Treatments and hospitalization during her later years of life after a lifetime of smoking 3 packs a day and claiming that the doctors who warned her of the risks were nothing more than Communist dupes who were scamming the American people for money.

VD

No, she wasn't on welfare. She had paid into Social Security and Medicare, thus she was entitled to those things for which she had already paid when she was self-employed or had a real job. Medicare and supplemental health insurance took care of her health needs. Of course she was wrong about tobacco. Who wasn't back then?

She was certainly a piece of filth, wasn't she?

-VD

How unkind and uncivil of you.

"As I recall, Ayn Rand lived in Russia w/her parents as a child." - Sox

-VD

I read her books. Apart from that, I wasn't too interested in her social and private life - or her income.

Money buys "things". It is YOURS until you PAY for those things.

Money is never yours. It is a note of a debt assumed by the state given by the banksters which is in your possession. Read what the note says. In court rulings possession of bearer shares does not necessarily connote ownership.

-koch

LOL..tell that to the guy who is forced at knife or gunpoint by a robber who relieves the victim of all HIS money. The victim will NEVER say that the money isn't HIS, so that it's OK with him to be robbed of it.
Money is money and whoever has it in his possession is the owner of that money...until such time that the money is SPENT on goods or services.
VD says that money spent on prostitutes in Nevada is commerce. If that's the case, then the money goes from one's possession into another one's possession who then OWNS that money after having gotten it in payment for a service.

Sox is correct. Americans do not own the lisence plates on their cars, or the vin numbers stamped on their engines. Neither do they own the software they use to write email, or instant messages, or posts to this or any other service.

Just like the black box in the car, the mesage you compose is yours, but not the software that you used to compose it.

"License tags are issued by the state for I.D. purposes. Same with the VIN. Software use is permitted by making an agreement with the software company. Standard practice." - Sox

RyggTard is one confused old man.

Commerce: Definition

COMMERCE
The exchange of commodities for commodities. Considered in a legal point of view, it consists in the various agreements which have for their object to facilitate the exchange of the products of the earth or industry of man, with an intent to realize a profit.

In a narrower sense, commerce signifies any reciprocal agreements between two persons by which one delivers to the other a thing, which the latter accepts and for which he pays a consideration. If the consideration be money, it is called a sale; if any other thing than money, it is called exchange or barter.

http://www.lectla...c253.htm

"Show me the source for Nevada issuing a statement defining legal prostitution as commercialism." - Sox

According to Libertarians and Randites, Social Security is Welfare.

Why Social Security is welfare

http://www.washin...926.html

Middle-class welfare
Redefining Social Security

http://www.econom...-welfare

Paul Ryan Calls Social Security a Welfare Program

http://www.youtub...dDotrb_M

"No, she wasn't on welfare. She had paid into Social Security" - Sox

Money is money and whoever has it in his possession is the owner of that money...

You cannot OWN a debt. You can only OWE it. Only the banksters can legally own the debt notes you call "money" because the debt is owed to THEM. You are nothing but a courier delivering wealth to your handlers.

And yet those dollars in your pocket and those pennies in your piggy bank are not owned by you. They are owned by the Federal Government.

"Money is money and whoever has it in his possession is the owner of that money." - Sox

Poor, Confused Sox. He keeps meandering off topic.

Commerce: Definition

COMMERCE
The exchange of commodities for commodities. Considered in a legal point of view, it consists in the various agreements which have for their object to facilitate the exchange of the products of the earth or industry of man, with an intent to realize a profit.

In a narrower sense, commerce signifies any reciprocal agreements between two persons by which one delivers to the other a thing, which the latter accepts and for which he pays a consideration. If the consideration be money, it is called a sale; if any other thing than money, it is called exchange or barter.

http://www.lectla...c253.htm

"Show me the source for Nevada issuing a statement defining legal prostitution as commercialism." - Sox

-VD

You omitted the state of Nevada legislation re: legal prostitution as commerce or a commercial venture. That is the source I asked for. Wake up, VD

I have provided the legal definition of the term "commerce". It is your failure if you insist on denying it.

"That is the source I asked for." - Sox

Money is money and whoever has it in his possession is the owner of that money...

You cannot OWN a debt. You can only OWE it. Only the banksters can legally own the debt notes you call "money" because the debt is owed to THEM. You are nothing but a courier delivering wealth to your handlers.

-koch

I did not say that you can OWN a debt, BUT you CAN eliminate that debt by paying it off with the money in YOUR possession. The only ones who can OWN the debt, are the ones to whom YOU OWE the debt.
Your "Banksters" DO own the money after they are in possession of it...simply because you have paid them. So, the ones whom you paid are now the owners of that money. When the debt is paid, THEN AND ONLY THEN is the money not only in THEIR possession, but it is theirs to do with whatever they wish. It is no longer your money since you have PAID your debt for the goods or services that you bought with that money.
This is Economics 101

I have provided the legal definition of the term "commerce". It is your failure if you insist on denying it.

"That is the source I asked for." - Sox

-VD

No you did not. All you gave me is the DICTIONARY definition of the term "commerce". I could have gotten that myself.
I asked you for the definition provided by the state of Nevada as to their regarding legal prostitution IN THE STATE OF NEVADA as "commerce".

""Show me the source for Nevada issuing a statement defining legal prostitution as commercialism." - Sox"

I'm waiting for VDs answer to my request for his source.
While I'm waiting, I will check my Activity.
Hmmmm...all ONES from FrankHerbert and VendicarD for this thread. Can't imagine why. Sour grapes, perhaps?

Banksters love the libertarrians

That makes perfect sense! I always wondered why banksters give millions to the Libertarians while the Democrats and Republicans struggle to buy even one commercial in many districts. It must be because the banksters support the Libertarian platform, which opposes cronyism i.e. corruption.

Nothing gets Nascar hicksters more upset than mandating improvements to the worthless junkers they call cars.

Their real worry is that there will be less room in the back seat for them to get their first cousins / sisters pregnant.

Banksters love the libertarrians

That makes perfect sense! I always wondered why banksters give millions to the Libertarians while the Democrats and Republicans struggle to buy even one commercial in many districts. It must be because the banksters support the Libertarian platform, which opposes cronyism i.e. corruption.

LOL...obviouly
;D

Nothing gets Nascar hicksters more upset than mandating improvements to the worthless junkers they call cars.

Their real worry is that there will be less room in the back seat for them to get their first cousins / sisters pregnant.

-VD

You still haven't answered my request, VD
Don't evade.

I have provided the legal definition of the term "commerce". It is your failure if you insist on denying it.

"Don't evade." - Sox

Wrong again Sox. It is you who is evading the fact that according to the Libertarian Party Platform, Child molestation is legal if the child is willing.

Do I need to quote the relevant portion of the platform to you yet again?

VD...You are evading my request even after I said: "No you did not. All you gave me is the DICTIONARY definition of the term "commerce". I could have gotten that myself. I asked you for the definition provided by the state of Nevada as to their regarding legal prostitution IN THE STATE OF NEVADA as "commerce".

""Show me the source for Nevada issuing a statement defining legal prostitution as commercialism." - Sox""

Where is the statement (or amendment)?

Poor Sox. He needs to evade the issue at hand which is the support for legalized child molestation in the Libertarian Party Platform.

Sox will say or do anything to evade the inherent immorality of his political ideology.

Here...this may help you wrt children under the age of 18 becoming prostitutes anywhere in the U.S.

http://prostituti...shments/

VD...you have evaded my request for proof of legal prostitution in Nevada as labeled 'commerce'. And now you choose to forget all I have said in the previous page regarding Emancipated Children and that children, whether emancipated or not, cannot indulge in legal prostitution.

You betray yourself as someone who is intent on one obsession out of many. Your obsession with child molestation leads me to question your possible involvement and indulgence in such practices.

Yes, fortunately for American children, the Libertarian party ideology has not yet been implemented by the Tea baggers.

But given their predelection for impregnating their own sisters and first cousins, we know that the legalization of child molestation is on their agenda, as it is on the Libertarian Party, AKA. Pedo party, Agenda.

"Here...this may help you wrt children under the age of 18 becoming prostitutes anywhere in the U.S." - Sox

Odd how soon Republicans forget that they spent years calling Bill Clinton a pedophile for getting a BJ from a girl who was over 18.

Can you explain that discontinuity, Sox?

From the National Platform of the Libertarian Party, Section Families and Children...

"However, children always have the right to establish their maturity by assuming administration and protection of their own rights, ending dependency upon their parents or other guardians, and assuming all responsibilities of adulthood. A child is a human being and, as such, deserves to be treated justly."

"A willing child does not advertise that he/she is being molested. " - Sox

And under the Libertarian doctrine of Freedom, when this child proclaims itself as having all the rights as an adult, the molestation is legal.

http://www.youtub...A7DCwZ9c

Yes, fortunately for American children, the Libertarian party ideology has not yet been implemented by the Tea baggers.

I know a few Libertarians and TEA Party members, and they don't know anything about an ideology that promotes child molestation. They think you're hallucinating.

But given their predelection for impregnating their own sisters and first cousins, we know that the legalization of child molestation is on their agenda, as it is on the Libertarian Party, AKA. Pedo party, Agenda.

Predilection? Where is your proof? Statistics? Is there a study somewhere?

Odd how soon Republicans forget that they spent years calling Bill Clinton a pedophile for getting a BJ from a girl who was over 18.

He was never called a "pedophile" and she was 19. In fact, BC was lauded by European men who couldn't understand why Americans were so 'uptight' that he was a philanderer.

Can you explain that discontinuity, Sox?

Discontinuity of what? Explain your question.

Legalization of child molestation is all in your mind, VD. Do you really think that U.S. and state legislators would even THINK of legalizing something that is so foreign and detrimental to a child's mind and body?
I don't think you even believe it yourself; I think that you say such things for shock value...just like a neglected child is naughty to get attention.
If these thoughts continue to plague you, I suggest that you make an appointment with a good mental health clinic and see what is your problem(s). You may still come out of it and live a normal and decent life. Maybe

Ignorance and denial of reality are the hallmarks of Conservatives and Teabaggers and Libertarian/Randites in particular.

"I know a few Libertarians and TEA Party members, and they don't know anything about an ideology that promotes child molestation." - Sox

No thinking person is surprised by your observation.

These are, after all, the same mindless retards who still think that cutting taxes will increase government revenue.

@VD
Since you seem to actually believe that TEA Party members and Libertarians are all out to get children molested, then perhaps your should CONFRONT them in person and tell them what it is you believe to be their agenda. Ask a media reporter to come with you so that he/she may put it on the 6 o'clock news. Wouldn't that be fun to see yourself on TV accusing Party members and Libertarians TO THEIR FACE, of wanting to pass a bill that is pro-child-molesting parties? You could pretend to be dead set against such a bill and lobby legislators to prevent such a bill from passing.

Just think of all the cool publicity you would receive and the adulation of Liberals everywhere.

"Predilection? Where is your proof? Statistics?" - Sox

Alabama has the highest level of Incest in America followed by Alaska.

Both Red states.

And your signed affidavits or news articles for that are......where?

And yet in America, Mormon sects have been caught marrying 12 year old girls to 60 year old men.
Isn't Ronmey a Mormon?

"Legalization of child molestation is all in your mind, VD. Do you really think that U.S. and state legislators would even THINK of legalizing something that is so foreign and detrimental to a child's mind and body?" - Sox

If the legalization of Child Molestation is not one of the goals of the Libertarian Party, then you have to wonder why their own National Party platform contains language that would legalize it.

Poor Sox. He seems entirely unable to comprehend the fact that the legalization of child molestation is right there in the Libertarian Party Platform.

I didn't put it there.

"Since you seem to actually believe that TEA Party members and Libertarians are all out to get children molested.."

It is my expectation that Libertarians are so fond of their ideology that they are in denial about it's consequences, and that removing the legalization of child molestation from their platform would necessitate them altering their position on the universality of human rights, and commerce.

Since that claim of universality is the core belief from which all of their other beliefs stem, it would automatically negate all other conclusions in their sick ideology.

So they would rather legalize child molestation and deny the reality than challenge their political ideology, much like the fools deny the scientific reality of global warming.

You know.. The same way you are in denial about the subject.

Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers

http://www.newsci...ers.html

I haven't read the party platform of Libertarians, but I will not take your word for it. Therefore, I will have to research that somewhat. California is the third highest in incestuous incidences. I suppose that it happens everywhere in the world and not every family group can be policed to prevent it from happening. But I highly doubt that TEA Party members promote such lascivious and salacious behaviours since it goes against Christian values.

The language should be changed ASAP. Either that, or declare that Libertarians OWN it. But I have misgivings that Libertarians have all read what it is they're supposed to believe in...and if they KNEW, they would change the wording in a heartbeat.

"Newt is a genius in many way and susceptible to getting tangled in personal issues just like most of us. Holy shit talk about a double standard Bill Clinton is a pedophile and a kinky ass pervert." - Fox New's Criminal Pundants -http://forums.fug...063.html

"He was never called a "pedophile" and she was 19" - Sox

The claim that Clinton was a Pedophile was commonly made by Lying Conservatives when Clinton was in office, and the years immediately afterward.

"I haven't read the party platform of Libertarians, but I will not take your word for it." - Sox

Since I have quoted it to you on multiple occasions you should have read it unless you have been replying to my comments without reading them.

It is common for Republicans to simply read the title of an article and presume they know everything in the article. This form of Republican ignorance is used with great success by people like Mat Druge who often alters the titles of the articles he links to in order to dupe his Conservative audience.

"But I highly doubt that TEA Party members promote such lascivious and salacious behaviours since it goes against Christian values." - Sox

How old was Mary when the Christian God raped her? 12? 14? 16?

There are numerous examples of incest in the Bible. The most commonly thought-of examples are the sons/daughters of Adam and Eve, Abraham marrying his half-sister Sarah), Lot and his daughters, Moses' father Amram who married his aunt Jochebed, and David's son Amnon with his half-sister Tamar .

Really? I had never read such a claim, but if it happened, it was a false claim since Monica was not underage.
I just read a few sites about Libertarians and child labor. It seems that there are some Libs who equate child labor with sexual matters. Whoever those Libertarians are...and I have no names...any decent human being should hold them in contempt and they need to be reviled for seeking to destroy young minds. It's not just young bodies, although that too is important. It's the psychological destruction of a child that matters most.

"The taxpayer - that's someone who works for the federal government but doesn't have to take the civil service examination." -Ronald Reagan

I personally read hundreds of them, made by Proto-Tea-Baggers, claiming that Clinton's relationship with Monica was child molestation.

The poor girl was just a child...

Several years earlier.

"Really? I had never read such a claim" - Sox

Ignorance is bliss.

"But I highly doubt that TEA Party members promote such lascivious and salacious behaviours since it goes against Christian values." - Sox

How old was Mary when the Christian God raped her? 12? 14? 16?

I have no clue. Obviously some time past the onset of puberty.

There are numerous examples of incest in the Bible. The most commonly thought-of examples are the sons/daughters of Adam and Eve, Abraham marrying his half-sister Sarah), Lot and his daughters, Moses' father Amram who married his aunt Jochebed, and David's son Amnon with his half-sister Tamar .

-VD

And this makes it ok? Of course, such behaviours are part of the iniquity that is prevalent in some societies...and not just in America. I doubt that ALL Libertarians think child labor or molestation is fine with them. Most are probably ignorant that their Party believes in these evil ideas. Not many of them actually KNOW what it's about...they just follow.

Yes it is...in some cases.
But Bill was respected by European men...and probably Asians and Africans. Muslims pray to thank God that they weren't born female. It's no surprise that it would be men...of whatever political persuasion who wouldn't feel too offended at the thought of sex with a female minor.

It is to the Conservative Mormon cults who are marrying 60 year old men to 12 year old girls.

"And this makes it ok?" - Sox

I don't know of any Liberal Democrats living in polygamist sects and marrying children.

"But Bill was respected by European men" - Sox

And by Americans too since he was re-elected for a second term. The Republican trash who spent millions trying to slander him and eventually managed to expose some part of his personal life, were punished by the American Electorate for their disgusting behaviour.

The confusion among Republicans at the time was very much like the Republican confusion over Obama's re-election.

It is what happens when you live in an alternate universe created by your own propaganda.

I'm waiting for VDs answer to my request for his source.
While I'm waiting, I will check my Activity.
Hmmmm...all ONES from FrankHerbert and VendicarD for this thread. Can't imagine why. Sour grapes, perhaps?

More likey tiring of banging their heads against a wall having to repeat their points.

I know a few Libertarians and TEA Party members, and they don't know anything...

You could have stopped typing here. =^-^=

California is the third highest in incestuous incidences.

Only if you consider Mexicans to be Californians.

Great. In addition to offending for "Driving While Black", we will have offending by "Driving while thinking impure thoughts about Grover Norquist". They are also known as Pre-action-arrests! This work well in North Korea, where some impure though by your Grandfather will make you into a permanent official slave of the state.

Black box is a great idea to control rash and illegal vehicles on the road.

Great. In addition to offending for "Driving While Black", we will have offending by "Driving while thinking impure thoughts about....

I think you misapprehended the article title, "Black boxes in cars raise privacy concerns",... they didn't mean black women drivers privacy concerns. 8P