Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Kelvin Mace

Kelvin Mace's Journal
Kelvin Mace's Journal
May 22, 2013

The age of consent needs to be set at eleven!

Want a drink?

You need to be eleven.

Want to smoke?

You need to be eleven.

Want to join the Marines?

You need to be eleven.

Want to vote?

You need to be eleven.

Want to have sex or get married?

You need to be eleven.

Want to drive a car?

You need to be eleven.

Want to hold state/federal office?

You need to be eleven.

Why eleven you ask?

Because since we have insisted on trying children as young as eleven as "adults", children as young as eleven should be entitled to all the perks of adults.

I am freakin' tired of the age of consent being whatever is convenient for adults. So either set the "legal age" to eleven, or set it to twenty-one.

Yes, I realize that there are arguments for certain responsibilities at certain ages due to differing maturity levels, but when we can seek the death penalty, life imprisonment, and 15 years sentences for crimes committed for ages ranging from 11 to 17, then the age needs to be either 11 or 21.

Children in our society are precious jewels in utero, yet fair game once ex utero. Society allows then to be slaughtered once out of the womb, with little ramifications if it involves a gun, yet when a child commits a crime with a gun, American society goes medieval on their ass.

Child physical and sexual abuse is institutionalized and accepted, but when children strike back, severe punishment is demanded.

What am I so angry about?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-kentucky-boy-accidental-fatal-shooting-sister-20130501,0,2768797.story

http://www.politicususa.com/bill-donohue-church-abuse-victims-were-active-participants.html

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/sex-abuse-scandal-did-archbishop-ratzinger-help-shield-perpetrator-from-prosecution-a-684970.html

http://www.thenation.com/blog/172841/media-play-down-pope-benedicts-role-sex-abuse-scandals#

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/20/worst_horrifying_new_trend_posting_rapes_to_facebook/

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/21/aclu-condemns-prosecution-of-florida-teen-over-lesbian-relationship/

And the list goes on...

The age of consent should be eleven until such time as society's adults stop acting like two year-olds.

May 6, 2013

‘World’s first 3-D printable handgun’ under fire

Source: Yahoo News

The creator of what's being called the world's first 3-D-printed handgun is coming under fire from lawmakers concerned that anyone with a 3-D printer and an Internet connection will be able to print an untraceable arsenal.

Cody Wilson, the 25-year-old founder of Defense Distributed, is expected to release his controversial blueprint for the gun—called the "Liberator"—online this week, according to Forbes.

“Security checkpoints, background checks and gun regulations will do little good if criminals can print plastic firearms at home and bring those firearms through metal detectors with no one the wiser," Israel said in a statement on Friday. "When I started talking about the issue of plastic firearms months ago, I was told the idea of a plastic gun is science-fiction. Now that this technology is proven, we need to act now."

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/3d-printable-gun-153109290.html



Oops, forgot the link, fixed.

So far the media seems to be missing a key aspect of this story: Once a person can print their own gun, they don't need to buy one from the gun manufacturers. This means that the NRA will soon have to shift gears and come out against 3-D guns at the behest of their masters, Colt, Armalite, et al. Coming out AGAINST guns is something the NRA has never done, and I don't see the average 2nd Amendment extremist being very forgiving about any nuanced argument the NRA will offer up.

In order to protect its profits, gun makers will have to forcefully and vocally oppose 3-D guns.

Then there are all the other troubling aspects of this technology:

1) Guns will have no serial numbers.

2) Guns will be easy to destroy, thus eliminating ballistics comparisons. Print your gun, kill your target, melt the gun down.

3) Guns will be able to pass through metal detectors easily (though you will still have to get the bullets through).

4) Plastic bullets are next on the list (though I don't think it is possible, at least not now, to make usable plastic casing) further reducing the weapons magnetic signature. (Taggants in the gun powder would seem the only possible way of tracing such a weapon).

5) How reliable will these weapons be? A "misprint" could mean the safety does not work.

These are just a few of the ramifications, I am sure I am overlooking quite a few others.

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Home country: USA
Member since: 2003 before July 6th
Number of posts: 17,469
Latest Discussions»Kelvin Mace's Journal