It’s a skill that some people apparently don’t have. Most are born with it, but too often don’t even try to use it. Especially against their own views.

Yes, and I could pay more to keep those services free. Maybe not all of them, but in general I would support more free services.

Money to the government is money to the nation. Money to the nation invests itself back generating wealth and more taxes. That’s how it tends to work in countries with high percentage of goods imported. Money allows exports and domestic production to keep up, or even grow.

It’s always the most vocal anti-gun people, who are also the most uninformed, blinded by ideology or just stuck in their belief that guns are ultimate evil. Don’t know about the United States, but I suppose it’s the same there.

I don’t think he would’ve had much option to say otherwise. If he thought otherwise he could’ve stayed silent.

His pay comes from the Foundation, although he may be able to retire with his savings if he wants. The Linux Foundation being controlled and financed by corporations he would be kicked for saying otherwise. Her daughters not denouncing their father for his opinions would have a bad effect on their careers, especially if they are on certain industries which don’t allow for such diverse and rich opinions.

Yes, I would too be very worried if I found that shit air pressure meter from my relatives jacket that they wear when biking. Those type tend to never work long and they are not very accurate in my experience. I would get her a better one.

Thanks for the insight. Sound like the states have a lot of good going on about guns, except for arguably stupid laws of some supposed red flag. I don’t believe such red flags exist or give enough insight to determine right to gun.

I’ve never seen a gun as a right, because I’ve never been deprived of one. Coming from that viewpoint seeing a right to gun related to right to voice is a bit distant. But I believe I can relate, especially when comparing the demanded restrictions on free speech and why some demand it. Free speech has power of good and evil, some don’t want what they believe to be evil, but it’s just an attempt to control the discussion.

Thanks for a well thought answer. Czech model sounds good, as gun control is a compromise between rights and dangers.

US is a whole different story. They have their admirable ideals and rights, like many other nationalities. When it comes to guns, I see very little common between Europe as a whole or even individual countries. Their history and current situation with criminal rates and every criminal who can afford or steal having some kind of firearm is problematic. Even without the national values, people really need guns there a lot more on self-defence basis than in Europe in general.

I can get a gun easily, legal with some requirements. And I don’t see a reason to limit guns more. Situations and such my opinion may vary between places, where more guns is good, somewhere not so. Gun laws attempt to control that balance where guns end up in good hands, rather than bad. Czech model sounds reasonably good at that.

I don’t fully agree on your opinion about having guns without real current threat or other good reason. Mainly because too many of those guns would end up in bad hands and influece more illegal gun use. Police seizing guns would have zero effect on illegal gun availibility and illegal uses of guns when legal guns would be so commonplace. Legal guns would get stolen or loaned for criminal use to replace seized ones.

I see benefits too if more people had guns. Those guns in hands of good common folk, using their gun for themselves and others. I’m lucky that those good chances are so slim in my country, that the possible bad results outweigh the good.

I also believe that there are reasonably large amount of people who would qualify for gun ownership, but should not have them. One too many beers, fit of anger or just general hot temperament, irresponsible people leaving their guns loaded or unlocked are all too common. We see how people drive a car and wonder how they got their license. Same applies here, once resposible gun owner turns into irresposible.

And too many people have that switch on their head where reason does not apply when they get angry. I personally have a questionable honor to know a guy who has no mentionable criminal or mental record to my knowledge, but gets agitated and has himself fuming with rage. He is what could be called a nutjob, but not in a way that would prevent him owning a gun. One day he can tolerate and be tolerated, out of the blue start pushing wanting to fight based on what delusions he has agitated himself with. I know that if he comes to my home it’s most likely to attack me with range from insults to starting a fight, possibly with something more than bare hands.

I still would take my chances without a gun knowing it’s relatively unlikely that it happens. And he does not have a legal gun, nor would get an illegal one (I hope).

I respect your views and I believe they come from a place where the threat of getting into a random shootout is larger. What I meant when I blamed the ones getting shot is those people, who get into criminal life and hang out with them. Most violent gun crimes here start by people with some argument and they are not excactly best law-abiding citizens. Thus I would blame the people too who get too much mixed with them and end up shot at. I consider the chance of outsiders getting shot at small, but one to take into account.

Also sorry, I didn’t mean to imply that you defended full-auto. You did not mention gun types at all, the topic just came to my mind since we are on the topic.

Let’s hope the shit does not go down, no matter how we see gun ownership and gun rights. In some cities gun violence is getting out of hand and I really would like to see less bad neighborhoods and less gangs wielding guns.

If pro-gun is defined as gun availibility to everyone, I don’t support it in general. All the unstable people would have gun access and I believe that would lead to more violence, more bad than good. Different countries and even areas have different laws and assumptions on guns. Speaking of my part of the Europe, it’s better to keep guns only for officials, hunters and gun club shooters.

That said your place sounds worrying if there’s gangs with full-auto guns. Luckily for me the local criminals have some illegal guns, but they rarely if ever use them and even then it’s usually in a fight between criminals or people associated with them. Gun related crimes get better investigation and higher punishments, it’s just not worth it for our criminals. Guns are more of a thing for new gangs who try to look cool or intimidating, not individuals. The more stupid, the more likely they are to use a gun.

I would surely be cautious if everyone could get guns cheap and with almost no restrictions, I know too many people I wouldn’t trust with a kitchen knife. They need protection too, but from themselves and other people like them.

I could support unrestricted gun ownership in different situations. Wartime, when there’s martial law or when the officials can’t maintain sufficient order. If someone here gets threatened with a gun they can usually blame themselves for getting into that situation. Except when it’s the new type of gangs who are all about trying to look tough. They are crazy and stupid, but in the most pathetic sense. They should be eradicated in ways that they will not form again.

I’ve been interested in solo hunting which would mean owning at least a rifle or a shotgun. There’s mostly no stigma about guns here unless it’s people who’s only viewpoint about guns is the media, movies, games. Many people have some contact to people who hunt etc. There’s no American style self-defence or my rights ideas here. Guns are just guns, used by the law and military, tool for a hunter, hobby item for people who value guns for their beauty, history and mechanics or who just like to shoot good at track.

I support gun control, but to what degree is that anyone, who actually needs one and is fit (crime history, mental evaluation) under somewhat relaxed rules should be able to own a gun. Solely for self-defence could be allowed, maybe based on profession or other real threats. No guns for people with certain crimes committed, or likely danger of harming themselves or the public.

Absolutely no guns for people who want to look tough with guns. It just breeds wrong mentality and bad image about guns and gun owners.

Gun types matter too, I don’t think any proper guy owner needs full-auto in self-defense situation. It could scare some attackers off, but semi-auto or single shot is well suited when one has to defend themselves. Fully automatic is just more likely to cause secondary unnecessary damage. And threat to outsiders, especially in public shootings.

Car. There’s really no alternative for me. I use the bicycle occassionally, but that’s mostly for fun and can hardly be used for my actual travel needs. By car, I can move anything in any weather.

It’s essential to deconstruct ones thought process to form better based beliefs. This could be taught in schools and would help everyone who internalizes this.

With that information on the case it seems like gross misuse of court fueled by ideological motives and politics. Dont know about Polish courts, but at my country the lower courts often have questionable verdicts. It’s relatively often required to escalate to higher court for a verdict that neither party no longer contests.

Been utilising that for years. Sometimes I doubt how accurate it is, I believe it counts some strikes multiple times. There’s also a good FOSS app on F-droid with more defined map and alarms: https://f-droid.org/packages/org.blitzortung.android.app/

As I was browsing the wider fediverse today this came to my mind: Don’t appear too confident with your opinions. It leaves no room for others voice. This might not apply to internet, but in face-to-face it has been good.

People are more open to discuss and reason their thoughts. They are also more open to hear and see your reasons fairly. Discussion tends to lead to more understanding and promotes respect. It also leads a way to both parties to be closer the truth of matter discussed.

Listening to other options even in controversial strongly felt topics has helped me in adjusting my opinions. Often my opinion is strengthened, but with important insight and understanding of different reasoning. Sometimes I’ve had to abandon my previous assumption based on new information. And that is good.

Horde mentality and confrontional minds are poison to this and I don’t know if there’s any single right solution to these. But I believe striving for this is still the way to go.

TL;DR: appear and discuss at same level if possible

Another news of reduced food supply. With the Ukraine situation and various problems around the world the global food availibility was forecast to this over a year ago. Meanwhile my country has a lot of extra food producing capability but nothing was done to avert the rising food costs and scarcity. That’s the global markets and politics at work.

Without right to strike, there’s hardly anything to safeguard workers rights. In different countries the workplace availibility and options for moving to other workplace can be limited or nonexistent. Then the strikers personal economy should also be secured during the strike. The workers-company balance can exist. It just needs both parties to acknowledge where they need each other and discuss the situation when both parties are on fair ground.

This could go both ways. If the child-parent relationship is so bad, that the child could not disclose their thoughts to parents it might cause a conflict that benefits no one. It is also important to not withhold such thoughts to work it out.

I hate buying a new phone. I wish there were more alternatives for people who want functional ROMs with as free and open code as possible. At least the batteries will be replaceable soon.

Maybe the guy didn’t understand/see that the doors on the back were open. No need to throw over the side.

Can’t eat that without a few raw eggs as drink.

What we really need is a way to transfer data without teleoperators. We see how Cubans have managed with their restricted Internet, using wlan networks and organized copying and distribution of USB sticks. Those are neither long-range or resilient ways to move data.