Select Page ::

MCW: Medical School

Posted on January 31, 2017 by Danzig

At MCW, our alumni lead the pack in providing top quality care and the latest medical innovations for their patients and their communities.

We offer numerous choices for students to select the medical education experience that best fits your lifestyle, whether you prefer to live in a large city featuring numerous arts and entertainment options or in Northern and Central Wisconsin where a rich cultural offering combines with limitless outdoor recreation opportunities. We also offer a Master of Science in Anesthesia Anesthesiologist Assistant Program at our Milwaukee campus, which you can learn about here.

Our innovative model of medical education, offering both three and four year degree options, combines more than a century of rich traditions with cutting-edge technologies and team-based learning models. Additionally, early clinical experience at some of the regions highest-quality hospitals and clinics will allow you to experience a large variety of patient cases and learn from leading physicians in the community.

Please wait while we gather your results.

Key Concepts of Libertarianism | Cato Institute

Posted on January 31, 2017 by Danzig

The key concepts of libertarianism have developed over many centuries. The first inklings of them can be found in ancient China, Greece, and Israel; they began to be developed into something resembling modern libertarian philosophy in the work of such seventeenth- and eighteenth-century thinkers as John Locke, David Hume, Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, and Thomas Paine.

Individualism. Libertarians see the individual as the basic unit of social analysis. Only individuals make choices and are responsible for their actions. Libertarian thought emphasizes the dignity of each individual, which entails both rights and responsibility. The progressive extension of dignity to more people to women, to people of different religions and different races is one of the great libertarian triumphs of the Western world.

Individual Rights. Because individuals are moral agents, they have a right to be secure in their life, liberty, and property. These rights are not granted by government or by society; they are inherent in the nature of human beings. It is intuitively right that individuals enjoy the security of such rights; the burden of explanation should lie with those who would take rights away.

Spontaneous Order. A great degree of order in society is necessary for individuals to survive and flourish. Its easy to assume that order must be imposed by a central authority, the way we impose order on a stamp collection or a football team. The great insight of libertarian social analysis is that order in society arises spontaneously, out of the actions of thousands or millions of individuals who coordinate their actions with those of others in order to achieve their purposes. Over human history, we have gradually opted for more freedom and yet managed to develop a complex society with intricate organization. The most important institutions in human society language, law, money, and markets all developed spontaneously, without central direction. Civil society the complex network of associations and connections among people is another example of spontaneous order; the associations within civil society are formed for a purpose, but civil society itself is not an organization and does not have a purpose of its own.

The Rule of Law. Libertarianism is not libertinism or hedonism. It is not a claim that people can do anything they want to, and nobody else can say anything. Rather, libertarianism proposes a society of liberty under law, in which individuals are free to pursue their own lives so long as they respect the equal rights of others. The rule of law means that individuals are governed by generally applicable and spontaneously developed legal rules, not by arbitrary commands; and that those rules should protect the freedom of individuals to pursue happiness in their own ways, not aim at any particular result or outcome.

Limited Government. To protect rights, individuals form governments. But government is a dangerous institution. Libertarians have a great antipathy to concentrated power, for as Lord Acton said, Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Thus they want to divide and limit power, and that means especially to limit government, generally through a written constitution enumerating and limiting the powers that the people delegate to government. Limited government is the basic political implication of libertarianism, and libertarians point to the historical fact that it was the dispersion of power in Europe more than other parts of the world that led to individual liberty and sustained economic growth.

Free Markets. To survive and to flourish, individuals need to engage in economic activity. The right to property entails the right to exchange property by mutual agreement. Free markets are the economic system of free individuals, and they are necessary to create wealth. Libertarians believe that people will be both freer and more prosperous if government intervention in peoples economic choices is minimized.

The Virtue of Production. Much of the impetus for libertarianism in the seventeenth century was a reaction against monarchs and aristocrats who lived off the productive labor of other people. Libertarians defended the right of people to keep the fruits of their labor. This effort developed into a respect for the dignity of work and production and especially for the growing middle class, who were looked down upon by aristocrats. Libertarians developed a pre-Marxist class analysis that divided society into two basic classes: those who produced wealth and those who took it by force from others. Thomas Paine, for instance, wrote, There are two distinct classes of men in the nation, those who pay taxes, and those who receive and live upon the taxes. Similarly, Jefferson wrote in 1824, We have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious. Modern libertarians defend the right of productive people to keep what they earn, against a new class of politicians and bureaucrats who would seize their earnings to transfer them to nonproducers.

Natural Harmony of Interests. Libertarians believe that there is a natural harmony of interests among peaceful, productive people in a just society. One persons individual plans which may involve getting a job, starting a business, buying a house, and so on may conflict with the plans of others, so the market makes many of us change our plans. But we all prosper from the operation of the free market, and there are no necessary conflicts between farmers and merchants, manufacturers and importers. Only when government begins to hand out rewards on the basis of political pressure do we find ourselves involved in group conflict, pushed to organize and contend with other groups for a piece of political power.

Peace. Libertarians have always battled the age-old scourge of war. They understood that war brought death and destruction on a grand scale, disrupted family and economic life, and put more power in the hands of the ruling class which might explain why the rulers did not always share the popular sentiment for peace. Free men and women, of course, have often had to defend their own societies against foreign threats; but throughout history, war has usually been the common enemy of peaceful, productive people on all sides of the conflict.

It may be appropriate to acknowledge at this point the readers likely suspicion that libertarianism seems to be just the standard framework of modern thought individualism, private property, capitalism, equality under the law. Indeed, after centuries of intellectual, political, and sometimes violent struggle, these core libertarian principles have become the basic structure of modern political thought and of modern government, at least in the West and increasingly in other parts of the world.

However, three additional points need to be made: first, libertarianism is not just these broad liberal principles. Libertarianism applies these principles fully and consistently, far more so than most modern thinkers and certainly more so than any modern government. Second, while our society remains generally based on equal rights and capitalism, every day new exceptions to those principles are carved out in Washington and in Albany, Sacramento, and Austin (not to mention London, Bonn, Tokyo, and elsewhere). Each new government directive takes a little bit of our freedom, and we should think carefully before giving up any liberty. Third, liberal society is resilient; it can withstand many burdens and continue to flourish; but it is not infinitely resilient. Those who claim to believe in liberal principles but advocate more and more confiscation of the wealth created by productive people, more and more restrictions on voluntary interaction, more and more exceptions to property rights and the rule of law, more and more transfer of power from society to state, are unwittingly engaged in the ultimately deadly undermining of civilization.

From Chapter 1, The Coming Libertarian Age, Libertarianism: A Primer, by David Boaz (New York: The Free Press, 1998). See also http://www.libertarianism.org.

See the article here:

Key Concepts of Libertarianism | Cato Institute

Genetic Engineering – News – Science – The New York Times

Posted on January 31, 2017 by ev1

Look and Feel More Youthful with Anti Aging Medicine in …

Posted on January 31, 2017 by ev1

SERVING BEVERLY HILLS AND LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

At Rejuvalife Vitality Institute, Medical Director, Dr. Andre Berger takes a holistic and comprehensive approach to helping patients improve their current state of health, prevent age-related diseases, and gain more enjoyment and fulfillment out of life. Dr. Berger firmly believes that achieving and maintaining good health requires a balanced, integrative approach to wellness that cares for the whole person. He is dedicated to helping you prevent many of the illnesses and diseases associated with the imbalance of hormones and help patients age healthy and gracefully.

Dr. Berger helps each patient individually address age-related concerns. Our philosophy of individual monitoring and safe medical management is woven throughout every facet of our practice Because this process is unique to every individual, an in-person consultation with Dr. Berger is crucial to help develop your customized treatment plan to address your unique needs. Please call 310-276-4494 today to schedule a consultation at our Beverly Hills Office.

Your personalized treatment plan will help slow the aging process to help you look and feel better. Dr. Bergers anti-aging program can address a wide range of age-related issues.

Dr. Berger offers a wide range of anti-aging services to ensure all your goals are fully addressed. Depending on your unique needs, your customized treatment plan may include:

We offer a comprehensive age management program that treats your entire body in order to combat the effects of aging. Our anti-aging program is a customized treatment plan that combines the best of Eastern and Western medicine. Dr. Berger will address numerous issues including lifestyle, hormone imbalances, lack of sexual interest, hot flashes, menopausal symptoms, low testosterone, low energy levels, mood swings, sleep issues, and reduced muscle mass with or without weight gain. These problems may occur on their own or in combination with each other and other age-related issues such as body contouring struggles and skin imperfections all of which can be addressed through a personalized treatment plan from Dr. Berger.

Click here to learn more about our Anti Aging treatment program.

In order to honor his commitment of helping you attain and maintain total health and wellness and because his philosophy requires a balanced approach that cares for the whole person, Dr. Berger invests the time needed with each patient. He believes that patient and physician develop a clear understanding of and respect for each other as he listens carefully and sensitively to your concerns. Realistic goals will be set, trust established and a treatment plan will be developed. Dr. Berger employs a comprehensive approach to help maximize your youthful life span and achieve a more energetic, beautiful health body and radiant appearance.

Dr. Berger is a leader in anti-aging, wellness and cosmetic medicine, he possesses a unique combination of skills that make him a true specialist in his field. He is also a teacher/trainer to other global physicians who choose to sit under his tutelage and learn his life-changing methods. His techniques, for rejuvenating your health and appearance, effectively integrate Eastern philosophies with world-class Western medical technologies. With an artistic eye, keen sense of aesthetics and his knowledge of science, Dr. Berger offers transformative results that will not only help you look great, but also help you feel your absolute best.

You can learn more about Dr. Bergers anti-aging principles by reading Dr. Bergers book, The Beverly Hills Anti-Aging Prescription. We also recommend that you read our Anti-Aging FAQ page for additional information.

Please contact Rejuvalife Vitality Institute using the form at the right side of the page or call 310-276-4494 today to learn how to begin the process with an anti-aging consultation. Dr. Andre Berger serves patients in Beverly Hills and Los Angeles, California

See the rest here:
Look and Feel More Youthful with Anti Aging Medicine in ...

50 Years of Presidential Visions for Space Exploration

Posted on January 30, 2017 by Danzig

By Mike Wall, Space.com Senior Writer | February 18, 2013 07:00am ET

Credit: NASA

Kennedy's speech, which came just six weeks after cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first person to reach outer space, had a huge impact on NASA and space exploration. It jump-started the agency's Apollo program, a full-bore race to the moon that succeeded on July 20, 1969, when Neil Armstrong's boot crunched down into the gray lunar dirt.

Kennedy, of course, isn't the only leader who had a vision for the nation's space program. Since NASA's founding in 1958, every president from Eisenhower to Obama has left his mark. Take a look at how each U.S. commander-in-chief helped shape and steer American activities in space.

Credit: NASA

However, Eisenhower didn't get too swept up the short-term goals of the space race. He valued the measured development of unmanned, scientific missions that could have big commercial or military payoffs down the road.

For example, even before Sputnik, Eisenhower had authorized a ballistic missile and scientific satellite program to be developed as part of the International Geophysical Year project of 1957-58. The United States' first successful satellite, Explorer I, blasted off Jan. 31, 1958. By 1960, the nation had launched and retrieved film from a spy satellite called Discoverer 14.

Credit: NASA

The Soviets had launched Sputnik I in 1957, and cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin had become the first person in space on April 12, 1961, just six weeks before the speech. On top of those space race defeats, the U.S. plan to topple the Soviet-backed regime of Cuban leader Fidel Castro the so-called Bay of Pigs invasion had failed miserably in April 1961.

Kennedy and his advisers figured they needed a way to beat the Soviets, to re-establish American prestige and demonstrate the country's international leadership. So they came up with an ambitious plan to land an astronaut on the moon by the end of the 1960s, which Kennedy laid out in his speech.

The Apollo program roared to life as a result, and NASA embarked on a crash mission to put a man on the moon. The agency succeeded, of course, in 1969. By the end of Apollo in 1972, the United States had spent about $25 billion on the program well over $100 billion in today's dollars.

Credit: NASA

As Senate majority leader in the late 1950s, he had helped raise the alarm regarding Sputnik, stressing that the satellite launch had intiated a race for "control of space." Later, Kennedy put Johnson, his vice president, in personal charge of the nation's space program. When Johnson became commander-in-chief after Kennedy's assassination, he continued to support the goals of the Apollo program.

However, the high costs of Johnson's Great Society programs and the Vietnam War forced the president to cut NASA's budget. To avoid ceding control of space to the Soviets (as some historians have argued), his administration proposed a treaty that would outlaw nuclear weapons in space and bar national sovereignty over celestial objects.

The result was 1967's Outer Space Treaty (OST), which forms the basis of international space law to this day. The OST has been ratified by all of the major space-faring nations, including Russia and its forerunner, the Soviet Union.

Credit: NASA.

By the late 1960s, NASA managers had begun drawing up ambitious plans to set up a manned moon base by 1980 and to send astronauts to Mars by 1983. Nixon nixed these ideas, however. In 1972, he approved the development of the space shuttle, which would be NASA's workhorse space vehicle for three decades, starting in 1981.

Also in 1972, Nixon signed off on a five-year cooperative program between NASA and the Soviet space agency. This deal resulted in 1975's Apollo-Soyuz Test Project, a joint space mission between the two superpowers.

Credit: NASA

Ford also signed off on the creation of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) in 1976. The OSTP advises the president about how science and technology may affect domestic and international affairs.

Credit: NASA

While Carter wanted to restrict the use of space weapons, he signed a 1978 directive that stressed the importance of space systems to national survival, as well as the administration's willingness to keep developing an antisatellite capability.

The 1978 document helped establish a key plank of American space policy: the right of self-defense in space. And it helped the United States military view space as an arena in which wars could be fought, not just a place to put hardware that could coordinate and enhance actions on the ground.

Credit: NASA

Consistent with his belief in the power of the free market, Reagan wanted to increase and streamline private-sector involvement in space. He issued a policy statement to that effect in 1982. And two years later, his administration set up the Office of Commercial Space Transportation, which to this day regulates commercial launch and re-entry operations.

Reagan also believed strongly in ramping up the nation's space-defense capabilities. In 1983, he proposed the ambitious Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), which would have used a network of missiles and lasers in space and on the ground to protect the United States against nuclear ballistic missile attacks.

Many observers at the time viewed SDI as unrealistic, famously branding the program "Star Wars" to emphasize its supposed sci-fi nature. SDI was never fully developed or deployed, though pieces of it have helped pave the way for some current missile-defense technology and strategies.

Credit: NASA

Bush had big dreams for the American space program. On July 20, 1989 the 20th anniversary of the first manned moon landing he announced a bold plan called the Space Exploration Initiative. SEI called for the construction of a space station called Freedom, an eventual permanent presence on the moon and, by 2019, a manned mission to Mars.

These ambitious goals were estimated to cost at least $500 billion over the ensuing 20 to 30 years. Many in Congress balked at the high price tag, and the initiative was never implemented.

Credit: NASA

According to the policy, the United States' chief space goals going forward were to "enhance knowledge of the Earth, the solar system and the universe through human and robotic exploration" and to "strengthen and maintain the national security of the United States."

This latter sentiment was consistent with other space policy statements from previous administrations. However, some scholars argue that the 1996 document opened the door to the development of space weapons by the United States, though the policy states that any potential "control" actions would be "consistent with treaty obligations."

Credit: NASA

Bush also dramatically shaped NASA's direction and future, laying out a new Vision for Space Exploration in 2004. The Vision was a bold plan, calling for a manned return to the moon by 2020 to help prepare for future human trips to Mars and beyond. It also instructed NASA to complete the International Space Station and retire the space shuttle fleet by 2010.

To help achieve these goals, NASA embarked upon the Constellation program, which sought to develop a new crewed spacecraft called Orion, a lunar lander named Altair and two new rockets: the Ares I for manned missions and the Ares V for cargo. But it was not to be; Bush's successor, President Barack Obama, axed Constellation in 2010.

Credit: NASA/Bill Ingalls

A year later, Obama announced his administration's space policy, which represented a radical departure from the path NASA had been on. The new policy canceled George W. Bush's Constellation program, which the Augustine Commission had found to be significantly behind schedule and over budget. (Obama did support continued development of the Orion spacecraft for use as a possible escape vehicle at the space station, however.)

In place of Constellation, Obama's policy directed NASA to focus on getting humans to an asteroid by 2025 and then on to Mars by the mid-2030s. This entails, in part, developing a new heavy-lift rocket, with design completion desired by 2015.

The new policy also seeks to jump-start commercial spaceflight capabilitites. Obama's plan relies on Russian Soyuz vehicles to ferry NASA astronauts to the space station in the short term after the space shuttles retire in 2011.

But over the long haul, Obama wants this burden shouldered by private American spaceships that have yet to be built. So Obama promised NASA an extra $6 billion over five years, which the agency would use to help companies develop these new craft.

1 of 13

2 of 13

3 of 13

4 of 13

5 of 13

6 of 13

7 of 13

8 of 13

9 of 13

10 of 13

11 of 13

12 of 13

13 of 13

Michael was a science writer for the Idaho National Laboratory and has been an intern at Wired.com, The Salinas Californian newspaper, and the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory. He has also worked as a herpetologist and wildlife biologist. He has a Ph.D. in evolutionary biology from the University of Sydney, Australia, a bachelor's degree from the University of Arizona, and a graduate certificate in science writing from the University of California, Santa Cruz. To find out what his latest project is, you can follow Mike on Google+.

The rest is here:

50 Years of Presidential Visions for Space Exploration

Psychedelics | Pharmacological Reviews

Posted on January 30, 2017 by Danzig

Abstract

Psychedelics (serotonergic hallucinogens) are powerful psychoactive substances that alter perception and mood and affect numerous cognitive processes. They are generally considered physiologically safe and do not lead to dependence or addiction. Their origin predates written history, and they were employed by early cultures in many sociocultural and ritual contexts. After the virtually contemporaneous discovery of (5R,8R)-(+)-lysergic acid-N,N-diethylamide (LSD)-25 and the identification of serotonin in the brain, early research focused intensively on the possibility that LSD and other psychedelics had a serotonergic basis for their action. Today there is a consensus that psychedelics are agonists or partial agonists at brain serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine 2A receptors, with particular importance on those expressed on apical dendrites of neocortical pyramidal cells in layer V. Several useful rodent models have been developed over the years to help unravel the neurochemical correlates of serotonin 5-hydroxytryptamine 2A receptor activation in the brain, and a variety of imaging techniques have been employed to identify key brain areas that are directly affected by psychedelics. Recent and exciting developments in the field have occurred in clinical research, where several double-blind placebo-controlled phase 2 studies of psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy in patients with cancer-related psychosocial distress have demonstrated unprecedented positive relief of anxiety and depression. Two small pilot studies of psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy also have shown positive benefit in treating both alcohol and nicotine addiction. Recently, blood oxygen leveldependent functional magnetic resonance imaging and magnetoencephalography have been employed for in vivo brain imaging in humans after administration of a psychedelic, and results indicate that intravenously administered psilocybin and LSD produce decreases in oscillatory power in areas of the brains default mode network.

This research was supported by the National Institutes of Health National Institute on Drug Abuse [Grant R01DA-02189] and the Robert C. and Charlotte P. Anderson endowment.

dx.doi.org/10.1124/pr.115.011478.

Continued here:

Psychedelics | Pharmacological Reviews

A Resource Based Economy – worldsocialism.org

Posted on January 30, 2017 by Danzig

This is the chapter by Kelly Mitchell omitted from his book Gold Wars, and we publish it here alongside his letter to us.

Economy means efficiency - a lack of waste Peter Joseph

Imagine a world without telemarketers, without advertising, without someone trying to sell you something constantly, without a propaganda industry trying to convince everyone their empty lives will be filled by the latest gadget/fragrance/object, without logos, and without soulless consumption. Imagine a world without money. Money is useful as a medium of exchange, but a world where all human needs (and most reasonable desires) are readily fulfilled is only possible without money. We are the sole species that pays to live on this planet. This society would simply terminate private property as an arcane, useless and even wasteful fixation. The age of ownership would recede into memory a necessary, but immature phase in our societal growth. Sounds insane, right? But if all human needs can be met, if most non-harmful and physically possible desires can be universally met, then property would be pointless - merely a pathetic, failed means to bolster the self-worth of adult children. Such a world moves through purpose, not paper. It is sustainable. Its called a Resource Based Economy (RBE). The ethic of the resource based economy is to align with natural law. We cannot consume past the earths ability to provide. An RBE catalogs and utilizes planetary resources in the most efficient method we can create for the good of all humanity. Money is not necessary and everyone has access to all goods and services. Planetary resources cannot be claimed by individuals, but are publicly owned. Many proponents of the system now exist, most notably the Zeitgeist Movement.

Conceptual cities have been detailed with full energy independence, complete food self-sufficiency, and awesomely convenient public transportation. Designed cities can have immensely higher efficiencies than the ad hoc ones currently in use. They can maximize human satisfaction through good planning, clean air, water, and organic food. This would not restrict anyone living in the country and fully utilizing technology, either. All choices are voluntary - there is no coercion. If someone is using property, it is not available for others, of course. But no one could own immense tracts of land, letting them lie fallow with no public access.

Certain mandatory measures toward a more sustainable direction must be met the economy must change from a growth to a steady state economy. 1) The monetary system must be eliminated - it creates scarcity. 2) We must move from a competitive to a collaborative model. This will eliminate redundant products, just for monetary competition. It will also eliminate inferior products because all players have full knowledge access and there is no financial incentive to build junk. In a collaborative world, every innovation can draw on all knowledge - nothing is proprietary or withheld. 3) Total open source knowledge. Centralization of knowledge requires distribution of production, but in a coordinated manner. Locally produced goods would be available for all needs. Earth could be catalogued and inventoried as per resources and energy supplies. Action could be taken well ahead of time to avert crisis. A simple form of this is feasible right now, but knowledge is proprietary and resources are owned by elites. Open-source knowledge would eliminate duplication of efforts and mass resource wasting. It would allow for the best understanding and processes to emerge without the current artificial constraints. Global collaboration would overcome the barriers of competition and proprietary knowledge. Humanity would experience an explosion of progress in knowledge, ideas, ideologies, and technology. Eliminating the monetary system would remove the need to suppress competitive technologies like alternative energy (which threatens big oil). Without the need to create energy scarcity for oil profits, those technologies would no longer be restricted.

4) Deliberate automation. The economy is headed to automation already. Artificial means of creating jobs exist (largely as public sector workers), just because the capitalist system demands work for pay. Virtually all factory workers could be replaced in a few years. All jobs with no social benefit (Wall street, finance, and so many public sector jobs) would be pointless. 65% of all jobs could be eliminated with current knowledge right now. Productivity is inverse to employment. The higher the productivity, the lower the employment. Its a marketplace function - people are much more expensive than machines. They need a house, food, car, etc. Machines only need their raw energy inputs and maintenance. Some machines can even repair themselves.

5) Eliminate property rights in favor of universal access for all goods and services. If all goods and services are freely available, multiple problems are instantly eliminated. Shared resources create abundance nothing is owned by individuals without ever being used. Nothing sits idle, so all that idle time is now useful time, requiring only a tiny percentage of current material goods to fully satisfy all human needs. Hoarding uses an enormous amount of resources. A car in constant use takes care of 20 people instead of 1. The problem of theft is entirely eliminated - if no one owns anything (or everyone owns everything) theft is pointless. 98% of all crime would disappear overnight. We can provide an excellent quality of life for all humans many times over, while eliminating war, crime, poverty, destitution and displacement. There is no need for any of that.

Many people have the feeling that the idea of a resource based economy is actually quite good, but it could never work. Obviously, an unlimited list of tedious procedural problems can be drafted what about people wanting land to homestead, for example? Rural versus urban vehicle use? Vandalism? But such a list are merely wrinkles to iron out through human ingenuity. The most common significant objections are some variation of the following: 1) This is communism. 2) Its utopian. 3) Its dystopian - a machine governed, totalitarian prone society/ technocracy. 4) Owning private property is fundamental to human life and society. 5) People will not be motivated to do unpleasant and dangerous jobs. 6) Its overwhelming. 7) The powers will never let it happen.

Some of these are valid concerns; some are merely philosophical dislikes. Its difficult to give complete answers because we are talking about a total restructure of society on a global level. Lets take the objections one at a time.

1) This is Communism! An RBE is not communism. First, capitalism and communism are not mutually exclusive systems - they work in tandem within a society. If we call any socialized project a shade of communism (as some do), then the military is a perfect example. It performs, in theory, a societal benefit - it defends the country. All the people pay for it through taxes. The military is the ultimate socialist institution. Roads, schools, hospitals, courts, police - many of the things we take for granted are socialized - paid for by the public and there (ostensibly) for the public good. Most people drive, want clean air, land and water in their town, need to feel safe, and believe in education as a right. These are socialist values, and they can exist right alongside of capitalist values of earning a living, owning property, and engaging in the marketplace economy. In fact, every family is communist do children pay rent? Do they work? No in a family, the unspoken rule is from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. One parent makes the money, the other takes care of the house, and the kids eat and live for free and go to school. Capitalism simply makes no sense for the internal operating structure of a family.

More to the point of the resource based economy, however it is not Communism because the labor supply side is totally missing. The labor is supplied primarily by machines. Certainly, some workers will be needed for planning and maintenance, but many, many people simply enjoy these activities. They will volunteer. People like work and they love to feel meaning in their work. Moreover, its not to each according to his needs. Each person has full access to anything they currently have - and a whole lot more. Because goods are well-made and communally owned, they are always available and far more durable.

2) Its utopian. This criticism stems from the fact that people do not have to work and have all needs provided. While true, there is far more needed for a utopian society. People will still have to deal with innate meaning, relationships, personal development and other social concerns. An RBE could never hope to solve such issues, but it can create far better opportunities for us to work on them, rather than being imprisoned in an increasingly senseless monetary system.

3) Its dystopian. This comes from the notion that it will be a centrally planned system, subject to political tyranny by controllers. While the need for central administration is obvious in terms of resource logistics, distribution and manufacturing, it need not translate into a political control. In any system, preventing dictators from seizing political control is incumbent on the population itself. People must remain aware. No economic system is immune. In fact, the monetary system of control allows for far easier dictatorial control because it creates an impossibly disproportionate distribution of wealth. A few people who control trillions of dollars and even the creation of currency exert so much control that the citizenry is rendered powerless. That is the current situation and it is a definition of oligarchical dictatorship. The people have no true voice, only the illusion.

4) Owning property is fundamental to humans. This is completely false. Ownership is largely an illusion - all you have is temporary possession and use. Even pre-historical societies were completely egalitarian all possessions were commonly owned. Societies exist now without individual property rights all resources are communally owned. They function on a tribal scale, so the challenge is to scale up. It is a formidable challenge, no doubt, but it is doable, if we all see the virtue and strive toward it. People do not need property or possessions, they need and desire the benefits of these things. If you always have access to a home and privacy within that, or to a sailboat, why would you want the individual expense of owning it? Even property taxes would cease - no one would complain about that. A limited ownership would still exist mainly the right to use something as long as needed. What other point is there to ownership?

5) Motivation. The basic problem is conceiving of an RBE through the lens of current reward system programming. As Dan Pinks book Drive showed, monetary incentives create a detrimental effect in terms of motivation and creativity. True motivators are autonomy, mastery and purpose. In an RBE, a sense of civic duty toward humanity would be easy to cultivate. Many people have such a desire already - its why we have philanthropy and volunteerism. Most difficult, dangerous and unpleasant jobs would be machine-doable anyway. All we would need is the technological push, which would come readily through complete open-source knowledge.

6) Its overwhelming. Very true - the project is inconceivably massive. Most people drop it initially but if they come across the ideas again, it seems more appealing. The concept is so alien to our current social programming that it feels a bit repugnant, strange, incomprehensible, or absurd. All I can do is encourage you to take an open mind and just ponder it dream a bit about the profound human potential. Any large task can seem overwhelming, but with many people, it becomes possible. And with enough people, it becomes inevitable. Even a total restructure of society can be done if we all wish it.

Now is the time for a change. As Barack Obama told the banking CEOs, My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks. People are angry. The system is teetering. Power is shifting. The world is almost ready for a major change. If a determined global movement pushes, a simple move of capitalist power from West to East can be diverted to a more fundamental paradigm shift.

7) The powers will prevent it. This assumes they can prevent it. They can certainly hinder it, but powerful ideas, when they take hold, live longer than people. The current leaders will die and be replaced. Eventually a more conciliatory group will emerge, subject to a nascent ideology. From that perspective, we make a better world not for ourselves, but our children. We will never see it, but it is worth all the more for that. On a more immediate frame - leaders cannot resist a truly determined, awakened populace. Our leaders have ruled by some assumption that they (or a persons chosen subset) have better insights into managing society. That illusion is failing fast. Politicians are almost universally despised and seen as corrupt. No one trusts them to make decisions that honestly benefit society. They are no better than the average person and often they are far, far worse. All it will take is the people to unify under a greater vision and thats the real challenge of a resource based economy. People have enormous resistance based on previous societal conditioning. However, in a very immediate sense (the next few years), a paradigm shift is happening. Political power is being drained from the corrupted West and headed to an East anxious to prove its integrity to gain the worlds trust so that it can take the mantle of leadership by popular approval. In such a power shift, ideological doctrines have a way of inserting themselves and gaining serious traction. At a deeper level, capitalism may be unsustainable for the reasons listed above, especially on a planet with a ballooning population. From that perspective, all that is needed is to wait for the real collapse, educating as many people as we can in the meantime.

It may sound too good to be possible, but that is just a thought. It may be the only rational solution to our current predicament - for all its power, the monetary system has become open failure, detrimental to humanity. We may be forced to develop an RBE just to maintain a decent standard of life. We have based our society on enlightened self-interest, only to find that is a chimera a totally self-interested society devolves into narcissism and vulgar consumption. Our choice may boil down to global abundance or global destruction. In the end, all that limits us is our ability to transcend our social programming. If we can see a better world, one where basic goodness is known to live in every being, one where global abundance exists by the simple generosity of sharing like we teach children to do, one where conservative means to not waste resources and destroy the place, one where we do not own the Earth because you cannot own your mother, one where hubris becomes humility and greed becomes gratitude if we can visualize such a world, we can make it real.

Comment:

Much of this of course, we can agree with. Except we would point out that the type of society described here has always accurately been referred to as socialism or communism, as they mean the same thing the social or common ownership of the means of living. That so-called Communist countries (really systems of state-run capitalism) like the former USSR, China, East Germany, etc abused the term is not in our view a reason to disassociate ourselves from it. After all, these states called themselves democratic too!

Regarding, the Zeitgeist Movement, we agree there are a number of positive features of this loosely structured organization, but there are sadly many problems with it too. Not the least of which is its lack of democratic internal attitudes and structures, as well as the fact a great many TZM members arguably the majority have views more focused on attempts to reform capitalism (and its banking system, etc) than on the only solution to the social and economic problems of our time real socialism.

Editors

Visit link:

A Resource Based Economy - worldsocialism.org

Resource-based economy and pay-it-forward | The Moneyless …

Posted on January 30, 2017 by Danzig

The resource-based economy (RBE)

Whilst the term resource-based economy could just as easily apply to the localised gift economy I advocate, its now more commonly understood to be a high-technology, globalised version of a non-monetary economy. Proponents of such an economy include Peter Joseph of the phenomenally popular The Zeitgeist Movement (TZM)(38) and Jacques Fresco of The Venus Project (TVP),(39) two projects which up until 2011 had been strongly associated with each other.

Their central premise is that in order to enjoy what these members perceive to be a high standard of living, people dont need money, but instead resources such as food, water, minerals and other materials. In fact, they claim that monetary economics actually prevents the fair distribution of such necessities of life. Advocates of such a system argue that the world is abundant, and that all of its resources could be utilised much more wisely and shared equally amongst all of humanity, not just those with financial prowess. Fresco advocates using the high levels of technology that humans are capable of creating, but within a resource-focused, economic model in which built-in obsolescence(40) makes zero sense. It is an economic model in which machines do any job that can be automated, and are used not to replace human labour in a way that leads to unemployment and all the social implications of that, but instead to shorten the working day for all, meaning much more leisure time and complete and free access to all the resources of the Earth and the technologies that are produced. It is a design where human ingenuity is tapped to collectively create the most efficient and sustainable technologies based on best practice and highest quality, and not reduced by the pressures of the competitive market where duplication and waste are inherent and rife. The monetary economy, they argue, and again I agree, is based on scarcity, whereas a resource-based economy is based on collective abundance.

Much of this I find admirable, especially the intentions behind it. Peter Joseph,(41) in particular, is a fascinating man whose analysis of many of the major problems we face today is insightful and his courage and dedication in raising awareness of the destructive consequences of monetary economics is exemplary. Yet I feel that by aiming for a high technology, highly complex version of a non-monetary economy, both TZM and TVP are making their vision almost impossible to realise.

Why? Aside from the fact that high technology has proven to be entirely counter-productive to our sense of happiness and connection to local place and community, a point Ill explain a little further on, for it to happen would require the entire worlds nations to get on board before we could even begin to think about achieving such a grand plan, as many of the minerals and materials that would be used (to make all the high technology products that RBE proponents want) come from all over the planet oil from the Middle East, copper from China, minerals from Africa, rubber from South America. Unless all of these diverse countries and regions signed up to such an economic model and philosophical perspective, it would be unworkable. Considering the complexities of the world and its nations, politics, cultures, laws and religions that I outlined earlier, this is highly unrealistic.

With a localised economy, anyone can start living in the non-monetary economy fairly immediately without having to wait for the political and corporate leaders of the US, Iran, Namibia and Mexico to relinquish their control and unite with their entire populations under a new moneyless world order. Not that I am suggesting that TZM or TVP are advocating that we ask permission from our governments to start enacting elements of their vision they certainly arent, and again on that I agree.

Even if a unification of world ideologies was possible, within this version of a resource-based economy there seems to lie the assumption that advanced technologies make us happy. If this were true, why is it that in easily the most technologically advanced period of human history, humankind has never been more depressed? Ive no doubt proponents of a globalised non-monetary economy would point out that the reasons for our current unhappiness are much more complex than that, and theyd be right, they are. At the same time, it is widely documented that those who live in low technology societies, past and present, express stronger feelings of happiness, contentment and connection to community and place than those of us in the global West, who survive on a collective diet of quick-fix antidepressants, escapism and self-help gurus.

Research such as The Happy Planet Index(42) by the New Economics Foundation (NEF)(43) backs up much anecdotal evidence to that effect. I and many people I know have travelled the length and breadth of undeveloped countries (the only thing developing about them is their debts to the International Monetary Fund and their cronies) and have encountered people in every village and town much happier, and more generous with their time, food and material possessions, than the vast majority of people I encounter in the advanced country I live in. A twenty year study by Helena Norberg-Hodge(44) of the modernisation of the Ladakhi people, as documented by her film Ancient Futures Learning from Ladakh,(45) powerfully demonstrates the effect of technology and its potent ability to destroy the very fabric of our communities. In their experience, after modernisation they had many more time-saving gadgets, yet somehow much less time. The story has been the same everywhere, and we all have experienced this to some extent.

Having lived both a high and low technology life myself, I can unequivocally state that my physical, mental, spiritual and emotional health increased as the role of high technology in my life decreased and the degree to which my life was localised increased. I dont want my table to be made by a machine, I want to make it with my own hands, or at least by the hands of my friend. Using our hands is crucial to our well-being, our sense of creativity, our relationship with the land. The only argument for a high technology non-monetary economy would be if it enabled us, and the rest of life on Earth, to live happier, more meaningful and freer lives. I have yet to see any evidence of that being the case, whilst our history is littered with examples of the opposite.

I would also argue that the separation from the rest of Nature that such high technology would inevitably cause would further diminish the lack of understanding of ecology and natural cycles, while simultaneously heightening the trauma that we endure from having no interaction with Nature in its wildest states. This disconnection would lead to the very same problems we have today and the deluded sense of self that gives rise to them. If humanity has no daily relationship and intimate connection with the Earth, how can it develop any sense of interdependence with it, or care or respect for it?

That said, there is still much we could learn from both the philosophy and practical solutions proposed by RBE advocates, and it all adds into the mixing pot of new ways of viewing economics and how we meet our needs in a more caring, sustainable and life-affirming manner. It is certainly not my intention to be unjustly critical of high technology RBEs (as I have nothing but the utmost respect for many of its intentions and efforts), but instead to help refine our collective thinking and unite us to some cause that we can actually achieve to some meaningful extent in our lifetimes.

Pay-it-forward

Pay-it-forward is a beautiful idea, popularised by a Hollywood film of the same title. It is a perspective that when you do something for somebody, and they ask you what they can do to help you in return, you tell them not to pay you back, but instead to look out for an opportunity to pay the favour forward by doing something useful for someone else, possibly someone theyve never even met before. Whilst there is still the tiniest element of conditionality about it (i.e. a request has still been made), its the most generous, loving form of conditionality I know of.

Regardless of whether you want to start applying some of these ideas, to various degrees, in the inner city or the woods, there will be both internal and external challenges to overcome, and Ill examine these, along with proposing transition strategies to navigate them successfully, in chapter four. These challenges will take time to overcome however, even if you do want to fully live beyond the need for money. To help you make the transition, or to simply incorporate degrees of moneylessness into your life, Ive co-created a tool to help you: the Progression of Principles (POP) model.

Hedonism II Community | Home

Posted on January 30, 2017 by Danzig

Please select your airport: Argentina Australia Austria Bahamas Belgium Brazil Canada Chile Colombia Costa Rica Denmark Ecuador Finland France Germany Greece Honduras Iceland Israel Italy Japan Luxembourg Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Norway Panama Paraguay Peru Portugal Puerto Rico Republic Of Ireland Republic Of Korea South Africa Spain Sweden Switzerland Turks And Caicos Islands United Kingdom United States Uruguay Venezuela

Select Departure City Albany, Ny [ALB] Albuquerque, Nm [ABQ] Allentown, Pa [ABE] Amarillo, Tx [AMA] Anchorage, Ak [ANC] Appleton, Mn [AQP] Arcata, Ca [ACV] Asheville, Nc [AVL] Aspen, Co [ASE] Atlanta, Ga [ATL] Atlantic City, Nj [ACY] Austin, Tx [AUS] Baltimore, Md [BWI] Bangor, Me [BGR] Beaumont, Tx [BPT] Bethel, Ak [BET] Billings, Mt [BIL] Binghamton, Ny [BGM] Birmingham, Al [BHM] Bismarck, Nd [BIS] Bloomington, Il [BMI] Boise, Id [BOI] Boston, Ma [BOS] Brownsville, Tx [BRO] Brunswick, Ga [BQK] Buffalo, Ny [BUF] Burbank, Ca [BUR] Burlington, Vt [BTV] Calgary [YYC] Cedar Rapids, Ia [CID] Charleston, Sc [CHS] Charleston, Wv [CRW] Charlotte, Nc [CLT] Charlottesville, Va [CHO] Chicago (Midway), Il [MDW] Chicago (O'Hare), Il [ORD] Cincinnati, Oh [CVG] Cleveland, Oh [CLE] College Station, Tx [CLL] Colorado Springs, Co [COS] Columbia, Mo [COU] Columbia, Sc [CAE] Columbus, Oh [CMH] Cordova, Ak [CDV] Corpus Christi, Tx [CRP] Dallas Love Field, Tx [DAL] Dallas/Fort Worth, Tx [DFW] Dayton, Oh [DAY] Denver, Co [DEN] Des Moines, Ia [DSM] Detroit, Mi [DTW] Duluth, Mn [DLH] Durango, Co [DRO] Edmonton Intntl [YEG] Eastern Iowa, Ia [CID] El Paso, Tx [ELP] Erie, Pa [ERI] Eugene, Or [EUG] Eureka, Ca [EKA] Fairbanks, Ak [FAI] Fargo, Nd [FAR] Flint, Mi [FNT] Fresno, Ca [FAT] Ft. Lauderdale, Fl [FLL] Ft. Myers, Fl [RSW] Ft. Walton/Okaloosa [VPS] Ft. Wayne, In [FWA] Gainesville, Fl [GNV] Grand Forks, Nd [GFK] Grand Rapids, Mi [GRR] Great Falls, Mt [GTF] Green Bay, Wi [GRB] Greensboro, Nc [GSO] Greenville, Sc [GSP] Gulfport, Ms [GPT] Halifax Intntl [YHZ] Harlingen [HRL] Harrisburg, Pa [MDT] Hartford, Ct [BDL] Helena, Mt [HLN] Hilo, Hi [ITO] Hilton Head, Sc [HHH] Honolulu, Hi [HNL] Houston Hobby, Tx [HOU] Houston Busch, Tx [IAH] Huntington, Wv [HTS] Huntsville Intl, Al [HSV] Idaho Falls, Id [IDA] Indianapolis, In [IND] Islip, Ny [ISP] Ithaca, Ny [ITH] Jackson Hole, Wy [JAC] Jackson Int'L, Ms [JAN] Jacksonville, Fl [JAX] Juneau, Ak [JNU] Kahului, Hi [OGG] Kansas City, Mo [MCI] Kapalua, Hi [JHM] Kauai, Hi [LIH] Key West, Fl [EYW] Knoxville, Tn [TYS] Kona, Hi [KOA] Lanai, Hi [LNY] Lansing, Mi [LAN] Las Vegas, Nv [LAS] Lexington, Ky [LEX] Lincoln, Ne [LNK] Little Rock, Ar [LIT] Long Beach, Ca [LGB] Los Angeles, Ca [LAX] Louisville, Ky [SDF] Lubbock, Tx [LBB] Lynchburg, Va [LYH] Montreal Mirabel [YMX] Montreal Trudeau [YUL] Madison, Wi [MSN] Manchester, Nh [MHT] Maui, Hi [OGG] Mcallen, Tx [MFE] Medford, Or [MFR] Melbourne, Fl [MLB] Memphis, Tn [MEM] Miami, Fl [MIA] Midland/Odessa, Tx [MAF] Milwaukee, Wi [MKE] Minneapolis/St. Paul [MSP] Missoula, Mt [MSO] Mobile Regional, Al [MOB] Molokai, Hi [MKK] Monterey, Ca [MRY] Montgomery, Al [MGM] Myrtle Beach, Sc [MYR] Naples, Fl [APF] Nashville, Tn [BNA] New Braunfels, Tx [BAZ] New Orleans, La [MSY] New York Kennedy, Ny [JFK] New York Laguardia [LGA] Newark, Nj [EWR] Norfolk, Va [ORF] Ottawa Mcdonald [YOW] Oakland, Ca [OAK] Oklahoma City, Ok [OKC] Omaha, Ne [OMA] Ontario, Ca [ONT] Orange County, Ca [SNA] Orlando, Fl [MCO] Palm Springs, Ca [PSP] Panama City, Fl [PFN] Pensacola, Fl [PNS] Peoria, Il [PIA] Philadelphia, Pa [PHL] Phoenix, Az [PHX] Pittsburgh, Pa [PIT] Port Angeles, Wa [CLM] Portland Intl, Or [PDX] Portland, Me [PWM] Providence, Ri [PVD] Quebec Intntl [YQB] Raleigh/Durham, Nc [RDU] Rapid City, Sd [RAP] Redmond, Or [RDM] Reno, Nv [RNO] Richmond, Va [RIC] Roanoke, Va [ROA] Rochester, Ny [ROC] Rockford, Il [RFD] Sacramento, Ca [SMF] Saginaw, Mi [MBS] Salem, Or [SLE] Salt Lake City, Ut [SLC] San Antonio, Tx [SAT] San Diego, Ca [SAN] San Francisco, Ca [SFO] San Jose, Ca [SJC] Santa Barbara, Ca [SBA] Santa Rosa, Ca [STS] Sarasota/Bradenton [SRQ] Savannah, Ga [SAV] Seattle/Tacoma, Wa [SEA] Shreveport, La [SHV] Sioux City, Ia [SUX] Sioux Falls, Sd [FSD] Spokane, Wa [GEG] Springfield, Il [SPI] Springfield, Mo [SGF] St. Louis, Mo [STL] St. Petersburg, Fl [PIE] Syracuse, Ny [SYR] Toronto Pearson [YYZ] Tallahassee, Fl [TLH] Tampa, Fl [TPA] Traverse City, Mi [TVC] Tucson, Az [TUS] Tulsa, Ok [TUL] Vancouver Intntl [YVR] Victoria Intntl [YYJ] Winnipeg Intntl [YWG] Washington Natl, Dc [DCA] Washington/Dulles, Dc [IAD] Wenatchee, Wa [EAT] West Palm Beach, Fl [PBI] White Plains, Ny [HPN] Wichita, Ks [ICT] Wilkes-Barre/Scranton [AVP]

Go here to read the rest:

Hedonism II Community | Home

SpringHill Suites Houston NASA/Seabrook: Suite Hotel in …

Posted on January 30, 2017 by Danzig

Best Available Rate Guarantee assures you receive the best rates when you book directly with us. If you find a lower publicly available rate within 24 hours of booking, we will match that rate plus give you 25% off the lower rate, subject to guarantee terms and exclusions. Guarantee does not apply to Ritz-Carlton Montreal, The Ritz London, Ritz-Carlton Residences, and Starwood-Branded Hotels, including Four Points Hotels, Sheraton Hotels, Aloft Hotels, W Hotels, Le Meriden Hotels, Luxury Collection Hotels, Element Hotels, Westin Hotels, St. Regis Hotels, Tribute Portfolio Hotels and Design Hotels. Marriott Rewards and The Ritz-Carlton Rewards members (Rewards Members) who book rooms through a Marriott Direct Booking Channel, authorized travel agents or select corporate travel partners ("Eligible Channels") at hotels that participate in Marriott Rewards and The Ritz-Carlton Rewards loyalty programs will receive an exclusive, preferred rate (Marriott Rewards Member Rate). Member Rates are available globally at all hotels that participate in Marriott Rewards, excluding hotels in Mainland China, Macau, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Exclusions apply. See our Terms & Conditions for additional details related to our Best Available Rate Guarantee and Marriott Rewards Member Rate. Hotels shown on Marriott.com may be operated under a license from Marriott International, Inc. or one of its affiliates.

Continued here:

SpringHill Suites Houston NASA/Seabrook: Suite Hotel in ...

THC – Psychedelics

Posted on January 29, 2017 by Danzig

THC is the crystalline substance that forms on the outside of the marijuana plant. It is the substance in marijuana responsible for its euphoric effects.

THC is known scientifically as tetrahydrocannabinol and it is the active chemical found in marijuana. THC is the most widely abused drug in the United States and continues to be controversial in both cases of personal consumption and in cases of being appropriate for certain medical uses.

THC comes from the marijuana plant also known as cannabis sativa. Tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC is the active ingredient in the marijuana plant and the primary ingredient responsible for producing the euphoric effects of the drug.

THC resembles a crystaline that forms on the outside of the buds of the marijuana plant. Some people believe that THC can be used for medical purposes while others believe that there are no known medical uses that are considered safe. Regardless, THC is found in all variations of marijuana though medical marijuana often contains lower or higher levels of THC depending on the preference of the user and why it is being used.

The effects of THC vary from one user to the next but generally include sedation and relaxation. As the THC enters the bloodstream the user will feel the effects of the drug which can last up to 3 hours following the initial onset of effects. If marijuana is not smoked but is rather ingested, the user will feel the effects of THC about thirty minutes after it is consumed and the effects will generally last about 4 hours.

THC causes the dopamine release that takes place in the body to occur more quickly which can lead to heightened euphoria. Many users experience heightened awareness and sensitivity to sound, light and color. Perception of time is normally reduced and the user will feel as if time is taking longer to pass.

Smoking THC will lead to increased thirst and feelings of dehydration. The user will have dry mouth and may experience intense hunger while under the influence of THC. Many people experience heightened anxiety and even panic when under the influence of THC.

Using THC or marijuana can lead to an array of complications for the user. If the drug is regularly smoked, complications include damage to the lungs, susceptibility to infection, lung cancer and other serious side effects. Ingesting THC will not lead to respiratory problems but can still have implications in terms of increasing fear and anxiety, increasing risk of depression and altering appetite.

Sustained marijuana use, even in low doses, will cause the user to feel a lack of coordination and a lack of concentration. Over time, people who abuse marijuana are more likely to experience memory loss, coordination loss and additional problems related to impaired short term memory. Studies have proven that marijuana causes difficulty and impairment for students that can last for up to a full month after the drug is used, in some cases the aftermath will continue for many months after the last use of the drug.

Increased risk of psychosis and schizophrenia has been reported with chronic marijuana use. THC use can cause adverse problems in work, home and school. Social effects include isolation and may lead to depression. Heavy marijuana users suffer great damage to their social status and may require long term counseling in order to fully turn their lives around post marijuana addiction.

Is THC addictive? Yes!

Marijuana is an addictive substance that will lead to erratic drug-seeking behavior and a series of withdrawal symptoms when the user tries to quit. Although the symptoms of marijuana withdrawal are not dangerous or potentially deadly for the user, there are a number of risks associated with marijuana addiction.

Becoming addicted to THC will likely cause problems in the users relationship and may lead to financial implications that make quitting even more difficult. People who regularly smoke pot are likely to suffer an array of consequences including health problems, emotional problems, family and relationship problems, legal trouble, social isolation and individual isolation as a result of their addiction to THC.

The best way to prevent addiction to THC is to not smoke pot. With all of the controversy that is taking place about marijuana and the intended medical uses of the drug, its easy to fall into a mindset in which it would seem like smoking pot is ok to some degree but this can lead to physical and psychological dependence which will result in an array of consequences for the user.

Treatment is often required when a user becomes addicted to THC. Counseling and therapy are the most effective means of treatment but medication may be necessary if dopamine levels have been depleted to a point in which they cannot be restoredthis is yet another reason to avoid smoking pot.

Here is the original post:

THC - Psychedelics

Immortal but Damned to Hell on Earth – The Atlantic

Posted on January 29, 2017 by Danzig

Imagine a supercomputer so advanced that it could hold the contents of a human brain. The Google engineer Ray Kurzweil famously believes that this will be possible by 2045. Organized technologists are seeking to transfer human personalities to non-biological carriers, extending life, including to the point of immortality. My gut says that theyll never get there. But say Im wrong. Were it possible, would you upload the contents of your brain to a computer before death, extending your conscious moments on this earth indefinitely? Or would you die as your ancestors did, passing into nothingness or an unknown beyond human comprehension?

The promise of a radically extended lifespan, or even immortality, would tempt many. But it seems to me that theyd be risking something very much like hell on earth.

Their descendants might damn them to it.

* * *

Let us begin by noticing that justice, as most people presently conceive it, permits or even requires that at least some crimes be punished as far after the fact as is now possible. Take Hans Lipschis, who had far-exceeded his life expectancy by 2013, when the 93-year-old made headlines. He was living in southwestern Germany at the time. Police arrested him there. Prosecutors wanted to charge him with murders perpetrated seven decades prior. He had served as a guard at Auschwitz.

Now imagine an alternative scenario. Technology advances more quickly than expected; an elderly Holocaust perpetrator uploads his consciousness next year, before being found out; then, five or six years from now, evidence of his crimes comes to light. I suspect that a strong majority would favor punishing him for his mass-murdering, and would quickly settle on some alternative to physical incarceration. Perhaps the consciousness would be denied new information, or the ability to interact with others; or perhaps there would be some degree of torment inflicted.

For how long?

With the consciousness of Adolf Hitler in our possession, 6 million years of disembodied punishment would still constitute just one year for every murdered Jew.

Yet Ghengis Khan, who perpetrated all manner of atrocity less than a millenia ago, would inspire some sympathy, I think, if it were discovered that his contemporaries had imprisoned his consciousness upon his death as punishment for mass murder. Were he discovered in mental chains after eight centuries of suffering, there would be demands for his release and debates about applying morality across time. And utilitarians would debate the consequences of his military victories across the centuries. Perhaps hed be freed due to his unfathomably long punishment and the fact that his victims seem so remote to us. Or maybe hed be forgotten in prison, as is done to so many individuals in our existing system.

These are wild thought experiments, but with them I only mean to illustrate a narrow point: Radical life extension would so scramble and confound our normal notions of justice that theres no telling how future Americans would react to the new reality. Historic monsters might be punished for 6 million years or just three or four times longer than a 150-year sentence a U.S. court imposed on this obscure money-launderer. Its hard to speculate even when confining ourselves to descendants of ours, in this country, with moral codes closely resembling our own.

In fact, it isnt clear how wed react right now.

If todays Americans magically took custody of servers containing the disembodied consciousnesses of every figure ever mentioned in the countrys newspapers, going back to the beginning, would we stop at punishing former Nazi leaders? Would there be a protest movement to hold Native American killers and slaveholders accountable? What about the folks behind the Tuskegee syphilis experiment? Or the city leaders of towns in the Jim Crow South that subjugated blacks?

Answering as a thought experiment is comparatively easy.

Future Americans will face countless actual controversies just like those if whole generations start uploading themselves. And it isnt outlandish to imagine futures where the masses look at us with the disdain that we have for Bull Connor and his analogs. Perhaps the Americans of 2215, with their laboratory-grown synthetic meat, will look in horror at those of us who had animals killed throughout our lives in order to eat them. Maybe theyll regard a years punishment per animal killed to be fair, with a 10-year enhancement for animals kept in cruel conditions before death.

Maybe everyone in the fossil-fuel era will be condemned to punishments corresponding in length to the years of destruction that we wrought on a fragile planet.

Perhaps people who had abortions, or people who bore more than two children, will find themselves in disfavor. Perhaps an ISIS-like brand of sharia law will prevail, and most everyone who uploaded their consciousness in the West will be tortured for a millennia, until the course of history changes and new rulers take control.

Of course, its possible that future generations will be less punitive than I imagine. But will that last forever? In any case, humans will be forced to make a decision about whether to upload their consciousnesses before knowing what the far future holds.

Admittedly, the living dont know the near future even today.

Nuclear war could come tomorrow. Those of us who survive it might spend the rest of our days in misery. But that misery would be relatively short. Radical life extension via mind uploads would seem to risk inconceivably long, possibly endless misery. And this holds even if no future generation deliberately inflicts that misery.

Its hard to imagine a civilization of highly adept network administrators who manage, century after century, to maintain uncorrupted data and functioning equipment.

But maybe theyll excel.

So let us imagine inconceivably durable hardware that holds a human consciousness. This computer is attached to a generator that runs off of nuclear waste as it decays. Thus it is deep in a vault in the earth, but attached to the rest of humanity via cables. For 100 years, the disembodied mind revels in all she can explore: the sum of human knowledge; every other uploaded consciousness; and this universe of diverting data just keeps expanding with every day.

Then a super-volcano explodes.

All embodied human life is extinguished. Most disembodied life is destroyed too. But not the computer deep in the bunker of nuclear waste. Its connections to other computers have been severed. But the consciousness endures with nothing stored locally save the original upload and McAfee anti-virus software that no one could figure out how to uninstall. As time wears on, this human endures the long twilight of the species on earth: 15.7 million years imprisoned with herself until the Iodine-I29 powering her computer is exhausted. As they say, What a way to go!

Strange as it may seem, the most important hedge for those seeking immortality just might be declining radical life extension unless theyre assured a suicide switch.

Libertarian Candidates Expose Themselves as Anti-Trump …

Posted on January 29, 2017 by Danzig

Weld defended Hillary Clinton on her private email scandal and playedattack dog on Donald Trump.

Johnson seemed sleepy, but he answered a question at length about THC amounts in marijuana and another from a young man asking about legalized prostitution. Johnson onlylightly and perfunctorily criticized Clinton, instead focusing most of his low-energy attacks on Trump. He also revealed a personal gluten allergy and said that he himself would not patronize the services of prostitutes.

These two marginal politicians are clearly enjoying the spotlight that the pro-Clinton media arefinally giving them in their effort to stop Trump. (Something tells me the folks at CNN have not secretly been reading Reason magazine all these years.)

The Johnson-Weld team seems to think that libertarianism is mostly about admitting as many immigrants to the United States as possible. This is a far cry from Ron Pauls pro-borders libertarian movement of a few years ago. The libertarian movement has shifted to the progressive globalist Left.

Bill Weld has called Clinton by and large a good secretary of state, and Johnson has called her a wonderful public servant.

When Johnson criticizes Clinton, he often goes after her for big government spending in a bald-faced attempt to sound conservative and to peel off Trumps support with the #NeverTrump crowd.

A top Clinton-supporting official at the libertarian Niskanen Center think tank (which advocates for more Syrian refugee settlement in America) spelled out the strategy in no uncertain terms: the Libertarians need to adopt a Right-sounding platform so they can take some of Trumps support and prop up Clinton.

Did you notice that the mainstream networks began touting a Clinton lead in a new 3-Way Poll.

But what about Jill Stein? Will CNN give Green Party candidate Jill Stein the same primetime platform?

Libertarian insiders, by their own admission, went into their convention in Orlando with one modest goal: to nominate Gary Johnson against various insurgent challengers, including Gonzo software recluse John McAfee, and then to get fivepercent of the popular vote in November to get the party on future state ballots. This could be the year, the insiders said. The fivepercent year!

Everyone who gets paid by the Kochs says so, longtime Libertarian insider Tim Cavanaugh quipped when the Johnson-Weld ticket was taking shape.

See, Gary Johnson does not just have a weed habit. He also has a Koch problem. As Breitbart News first reported, the Kochs secret Beltway bank pulled out of the race as soon as it became clear Trump was going to be the nominee, but they left the door open to supporting Clinton.

Indeed, a source within the Johnson campaign wanted people to think that Johnsonhad a Koch connection, leaking to the Daily Caller that tens of millions were heading Johnsonsway. They were not hiding it. The Libertarian party chairman begged like a dog for Koch money in a press conference in Orlando.

The Libertarians are finally showing their hand: theyre globalist Clintonites.

This is what happens when Koch-funded activists straight out of liberal arts college join Koch-funded Washington advocacy groups that throw happy hours aimed at Conservatariansbecause Libertarian Koch-funded people are totally friendly to the tea party!

The Kochs run the tea party, dont they? Thats certainly how the Kochs made it seem in the mainstream media after they started funding, funding, funding things attached to what was once a leaderless tea party revolution in this country that aimed to disrupt the power of the elites.

And then when the chips are down and Hillary Clinton goes for the White House, the Kochs roll over. And William Weld defends Clintonon the emails.

Congratulations, Libertarian movement. You guys finally went Left enough on immigration to make it onto CNN in primetime!

Maybe Don Lemon will come to the next happy hour. Just tell him not to bring gluten.

See the original post here:

Libertarian Candidates Expose Themselves as Anti-Trump ...

Evolution (2001 film) – Wikipedia

Posted on January 28, 2017 by Danzig

Evolution is a 2001 American comic science fiction monster film, directed by Ivan Reitman and starring David Duchovny, Orlando Jones, Seann William Scott, Julianne Moore and Ted Levine. It was released by DreamWorks in the United States and by Columbia Pictures internationally.

The plot of the film follows college professor Ira Kane (David Duchovny) and geologist Harry Block (Orlando Jones), who investigate a meteor crash in Arizona. They discover that the meteor is harboring extraterrestrial life, which is evolving very quickly into large, diverse and outlandish creatures.

Evolution was based on a story by Don Jakoby, who turned it into a screenplay along with David Diamond and David Weissman. The movie was originally written as a serious horror science fiction film, until director Reitman re-wrote much of the script. Shooting took place in California with an $80million budget, and the film was released in the United States on June 8, 2001. The movie grossed $98,376,292 internationally. Reviews for the film were mixed, as the movie review aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes gave the film a 42% positive rating.

A short-lived animated series, Alienators: Evolution Continues, loosely based on the film, was broadcast months after the movie was released.

Wayne Grey (Seann William Scott), a fireman trainee practicing in a shack in the desert near Glen Canyon, Arizona, sees a meteor strike his car and land in an underground cavern. College professor Ira Kane (David Duchovny) and his colleague, geology professor Harry Block (Orlando Jones), investigate, taking a sample of strange blue liquid that oozes from it. Ira discovers that it harbors extraterrestrial single-celled nitrogen-based organisms multiplying exponentially, condensing millions of years of evolution within a matter of hours. The next day, they take the science class to survey the meteor site and find it already surrounded by evolved oxygen-converting fungi and alien flatworms. Ira and Harry discover that the cells and organisms reproduce rapidly through mitosis after seeing one of the flatworms they collected in a jar split into another.

Soon, the site is sealed off by the Army, who set up a base. Ira and Harry take General Russell Woodman (Ted Levine) and the clumsy Dr. Allison Reed (Julianne Moore) to court for the right to be part of the research of their discovery, but their efforts fail when it's revealed Ira was discharged from the army after creating an anthrax vaccine that led to terribly debilitating side effects, which the soldiers dubbed "The Kane Madness". Woodman steals Ira and Harry's research, forcing them to infiltrate the base to get another sample; they find an alien rainforest teeming with life. They are caught by Allison as a mosquito-like alien gets inside Harry's body; they are forced to rectally remove the mosquito, which then dies.

Wayne arrives at the college and shows the two the dead body of an amphibian alien which killed a country club owner, much to his delight; they later investigate an animal attack, finding a dead dog-like alien in a woman's home and more dead flatworms. They find a valley behind the home filled with dead flying dinosaur-like aliens; Ira and Harry theorize the aliens are spreading through the caves connected to the main cavern, but can't breathe oxygen. One of the dying creatures spits out a pod containing a newborn, which then hatches into an oxygen-tolerant alien. The alien attacks a mall, where it nearly takes a shoplifter for a meal before Ira, Harry, and Wayne shoot it down.

Unfortunately, other alien encounters have made the news; this forces the Governor of Arizona (Dan Aykroyd) to demand answers. Allison explains the aliens will engulf the United States in two months. Woodman attempts to blame Ira, when he, Harry and Wayne arrive. However, the governor demands a solution; Woodman suggests evacuating the area and burn the aliens with napalm. At that moment, primate-like aliens attack them, but are fought off. The shaken governor approves Woodman's plan against protests from Ira and Allison that they don't know how the aliens will react. Allison quits the CDC and leaves the site, procuring Ira's original research and samples for him.

At the college, Harry accidentally tosses a match into a petri dish of alien liquid, causing a mass of flesh to rapidly grow from it. Ira realizes heat causes the aliens to evolve, and the meteor crashing to earth activated the alien DNA. Alison attempts to warn Woodman that napalm will only make the aliens stronger, but he ignores her call. Looking at the positions of nitrogen and carbon on the periodic table, Ira theorizes selenium might be poisonous to the aliens, since they are nitrogen-based, as arsenic is poisonous to Earth's carbon life. Much to Ira's surprise, his dumbest students Deke and Danny (Ethan Suplee and Michael Ray Bower) recall selenium sulfide is the active ingredient in Head & Shoulders. This makes Ira award the Donald brothers with an A, much to their excitement. So Wayne procures a firetruck and the team fills it with the shampoo, with help from the Donald Brothers, who tag along with them.

Just as the team arrives at the cave and prepare to fire the shampoo, Woodman's napalm strike causes the aliens to merge into an enormous amoeba-like creature, which reabsorbs the aliens in the cave. As it prepares to divide, the team drives under the organism, finds what looks like its rectal hole, and Harry (intending to settle a score for the insect incident) pumps a firehose of shampoo into the beast, causing it to explode. Governor Lewis declares Ira, Harry, Wayne and Allison heroes, making Wayne a fully credentialed firefighter while Ira and Allison skip the festivities for romance in the fire truck. Later, Harry, Ira and Wayne are shown chasing the flying alien from earlier and promoting Head & Shoulders for both hair care and fighting aliens.

Kyle Gass, Sarah Silverman, Richard Moll, Tom Davis, Jerry Trainor, Miriam Flynn, Caroline Reitman, Steven Gilborn and John Cho have smaller roles.

The film's music score was composed by John Powell, conducted by Gavin Greenaway, and performed by the Hollywood Symphony Orchestra. The soundtrack to Evolution was released on June 12, 2001 and is available on Varse Sarabande.

Soundtrack references:[2][3]

Evolution received mixed reviews from critics. Review aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes gives the film a rating of 43%, based on 134 reviews, with an average rating of 4.9/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "Director Reitman tries to remake Ghostbusters, but his efforts are largely unsuccessful because the movie has too many comedic misfires."[4] On Metacritic, the film holds a score of 40 out of 100, based on 32 critics, indicating "mixed or average reviews".[5]

Evolution was made into an animated series called Alienators: Evolution Continues, which ran on Fox Kids from 2001 to 2002.

Visit link:

Evolution (2001 film) - Wikipedia

Test Automation Services for Development of Regression …

Posted on January 28, 2017 by Danzig

Gallop is a leader in providing test automation services and has built a dedicated Automation Center of Excellence (ACoE) backed by a decade of experience in executing test automation engagements for global clients & a large pool of test automation experts. Gallop Test Automation Accelerator Kit (GTAAK) comprises of pre-built test automation scripts, utilities, process assets and frameworks, and has helped many companies in implementing successful test automation initiatives.

Gallops test automation strategy enables organizations to increase release velocity, reduce time to market and reduce overall testing effort resulting in significant return on investment (ROI). Gallop has developed a tool and technology agnostic, plug-and-play test automation framework with pre-built interfaces to CI servers, application lifecycle management tools and defect management tools that fully support the majority of test automation tools adopted by organizations.

Gallop invests over a $1mn annually to develop intellectual property and has committed partnerships with industry leading automation tool vendors to complement innovation. Gallop is also an active contributor in open source platforms for test automation and is a silver sponsor of Selenium. Gallop has also developed a host of pre-built automated test suites for industry leading 3rd party products like SAP, Oracle, PeopleSoft, Salesforce, SAP Hybris, MS Dynamics CRM, and Work Day.

Go here to read the rest:

Test Automation Services for Development of Regression ...

Automation | Food Engineering

Posted on January 28, 2017 by Danzig

Preventive & Predictive Maintenance

A computerized maintenance management system helps keep assets running and assists with meeting food safety audit requirements.

A computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) can help food and beverage facility owners plan and schedule assets and labor to optimize overall plant efficiency and minimize downtime.

Automation Series

Remember the early days of data acquisition/collection systems?

TECH FLASH

Industrial security specialists will monitor industrial facilities around the world.

The company has joint locations in Europe and the US.

Automation

Better safe than sorry since "sorry" could cost you downtime, product quality or safety and/or your brands reputation.

According to the ICS-CERT (Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team) fiscal year 2015 final incident response statistics, the food and agriculture segment reported only two cyberattacks last year.

TECH FLASH

Pumped production lines can prove difficult for traditional inspection systems.

Installing a robust, reliable pipeline X-ray system can help.

TECH FLASH

Attracting more than 80,000 high school students, the 2016 FIRST Robotics Competition began earlier this month.

As partners of FIRST, the Automation Federation and ISA are encouraging their members to support the range of FIRST education programs.

Smart Manufacturing

The technology connecting people, machines, suppliers and processors is rapidly changing the manufacturing industry.

The concepts and technologies encompassed by the term Internet of Things are rapidly changing the world.

Tech Update: Collaborative Robots

Some robots find new freedom as they become aware of their surroundings and act accordingly.

For good reasons, robots have been kept behind safety fences as they perform jobs that are potentially dangerous and back-breaking to humans.

Tracking Systems

Once your product leaves the shipping dock, what happens in the supply chain could negate all your efforts to make it food safe and the high-quality brand leader it is.

Its 3:00 a.m. Do you know where your trailer of strawberries is?

Butterballs Corporate Project Manager Matt Giroux discusses line efficiency, technological advancements of line design, automation of lines and robotics on packaging lines.

See the rest here:

Automation | Food Engineering

Automation – Mazak Corporation

Posted on January 28, 2017 by Danzig

Automation can enhance your productivity through increased machine tool utilization. However, to reap the significant competitive advantages that coincide with automation, you must efficiently and effectively integrate it into your operations.

We are a single source provider for all your automation needs. And to ensure you have the right automation for your facility, we have developed 4 various levels of automation to fulfill your specific production needs.

Bar feeders offer immediate increases in productivity. However, while they are a basic form of automation, its important to select the right one to ensure you achieve increased material utilization as well as gain the highest levels of productivity, throughput and quality from your turning operations.

Gantry loaders provide fast, high-production loading and unloading. They bring more versatility, flexibility and productivity when managing chuck and shaft work by offering a variety of loading stations and robotic hands. Gantry loader systems are easy to install and operate, providing a quick, turnkey system that results in immediate increases in productivity.

Offering amazing production flexibility, our PALLETECH system brings high levels of efficiency to high-mix, low-volume production as well as high-volume operations. Compatible with our range of horizontal machining centers, Multi-Tasking machines and ORBITEC 20 machining center for large parts, the PALLETECH is available in single, double and triple level pallet stocker configurations. Because of its modular, pre-engineered construction, PALLETECH easily expands along with your growing business. In fact, it can accommodate up to 16 machines, 6 to 240 pallets and up to 8 loading stations.

A highly advanced alternative to traditional production, articulated robots provide automation for one or multiple machines as well as part transfers to peripheral operations. They also eliminate the challenges that come with handling large, heavy or cumbersome parts. Articulated robots use rotary joints to achieve an increased change of motion. From simple 2-joint robots to complex 10-joint robots, you have the power to choose just how much range of motion is necessary to gain the competitive advantage.

See the rest here:

Automation - Mazak Corporation

Automationtechies | Automation Engineering Recruiting

Posted on January 28, 2017 by Danzig

7 Questions Candidates Should ask During an #Interview: shar.es/1OwO6X via @Visually #infographic #interviewtips #jobinterview

About 3 days ago from automationtechies's Twitter reply retweet favorite

Controls Technician #jobs! Mfg company, unlimited career advancement, state-of-the-art facility, & NO travel: bit.ly/2jNLniP #MNjob

About 4 days ago from automationtechies's Twitter reply retweet favorite

20 New Jobs: Engineers, Technicians, Sales, and others! Check 'em out: eepurl.com/cx94X9 #engineerjob #engineering #automation #jobs

About 5 days ago from automationtechies's Twitter reply retweet favorite

Did you miss the results of @automation_com's 2016 salary survey? Check them out here: automation.com/salary-survey- #engineeringsalary

About 2 weeks ago from automationtechies's Twitter reply retweet favorite

New Job for a New Year! Check out our current openings in automation, manufacturing, and engineering: eepurl.com/cwxiCf #engineerjob pic.twitter.com/fqqyE6am6h

About 3 weeks ago from automationtechies's Twitter reply retweet favorite

106 job openings across the US! Use our map to view open positions near you or run a search to find your next move: jobs.automationtechies.com

Last month from automationtechies's Twitter reply retweet favorite

Process Controls Engineer Job in San Jo job at automationtechies - San Jose indeed.com/viewjob?jk=4f8 #Indeed #jobs

About a month ago from automationtechies's Twitter reply retweet favorite

Automation Engineer I - Medical Devices job at automationtechies - Rockville indeed.com/viewjob?jk=e4a #Indeed #jobs

About a month ago from automationtechies's Twitter reply retweet favorite

Sales Engineer (Systems Integrator - fo job at automationtechies - United States indeed.com/viewjob?jk=729 #Indeed #jobs

About a month ago from automationtechies's Twitter reply retweet favorite

12 things successful people do in the last 10 minutes of the workday read.bi/2f9Zpbr via @BI_Careers #careeradvice

About a month ago from automationtechies's Twitter reply retweet favorite

See more here:

Automationtechies | Automation Engineering Recruiting

Werner Electric | Automation

Posted on January 28, 2017 by Danzig

Automation technology can make your work easier and company more productive. The Werner Electric Automation Team is staffed with experienced and highly-trained personnel that can assist you in achieving success with your automation needs, and deliver value to your manufacturing lifecycle. Rely on our team to provide a full scope of capabilities to deliver the solutions and services you need now and are anticipating in the future.

Werner Electric partners with the premier Suppliers of the industry and delivers products to support your business. See Product Lines to browse our product offerings.

Contact the Werner Automation Support Center at 1-800-POWER99 (800-769-3799) or TSC@WernerElec.com to experience our TSC team and get answers to all your questions quickly and accurately. One call to the TSC puts you in touch with technicians trained by the manufacturers to give you application support, help with technical troubleshooting, and provide onsite assistance if needed.

Updates, webinars, news, tips, videos, new products, case studies, etc.

Panduit now helps you eliminate poor cable management and insufficient cooling problems.

Hoffman now offers a fully-automated line for Wall-Mount Enclosures. The automated line provides rapid delivery, reliable technology, and repeatable results.

Hormel Foods Corporation has recently honored 26 suppliers with its prestigious Hormel No. 1 Award for their 2011 2015 performance.

Showing 3 of 50 articles

Link:

Werner Electric | Automation

Parsing the Second Amendment – CBS News

Posted on January 28, 2017 by Danzig

Any discussion of the right to bear arms has to take note of the Second Amendment. Here's Anthony Mason:

At the heart of the debate over guns in America is a single, inscrutable sentence: The Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights, whose wording is unusual.

Simon & Schuster

"It's unusual. It's short. It's clogged with commas," said Michael Waldman, who heads the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University Law School, and is the author of a biography of "The Second Amendment."

"The Second Amendment says, 'A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.' What does that mean?"

The most-disputed clause in the Constitution is the phrase about militias, which were a great concern when the Bill of Rights was written in 1792.

"At the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, there was a very big controversy about how to allocate military power," said Nelson Lund, professor of constitutional law at George Mason University. He says the states feared the new government would try to disarm the 13 state militias, which required every white male over 16 to own a musket.

"The anti-Federalists were very worried that the states would be deprived of their power to resist federal tyranny," Lund said.

"The militia, sir, is our ultimate safety," Patrick Henry argued. "We can have no security without it."

While guns were commonplace then, so were gun regulations. New York and Boston prohibited the firing of guns within city limits.

And in the notes for the Constitutional Convention, Waldman says, "There's literally not a word about it protecting an individual right for gun ownership for self-protection, hunting, or any of the other things we think about now."

"There's one side that believes that this amendment refers specifically and only to militias," said Mason.

"Well, I know people say that, but it just can't be true," replied Lund. "If you look at what the words say, it says 'The right of the people to keep and bear arms.' It does not say, 'The right of the states' or 'The right of the militias.' It says 'the right of the people.'"

The debate over the Second Amendment came to a head at the Supreme Court in 2008, in a case filed over the Capital's gun laws, called District of Columbia v. Heller. In a 5-4 vote, the court affirmed an individual's right to keep and bear arms, striking down D.C.'s ban on handguns in the home.

'The inherent right of self-defense," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the majority opinion, "has been central to the Second Amendment right."

But, Scalia added, "The right ... is not unlimited," also leaving room for gun regulation.

Lund said, "It is absolutely a continuing grey area."

Another grey area is how the court might rule on future Second Amendment issues after the sudden death of Justice Scalia in February.

"So, you know, a lot depends on who replaces Justice Scalia," said Lund.

For more info: