There IS a reason why curling irons have the warning "Do not insert into orrifice"

Is it because they pinch? :(

Also, Mikey, I have to say that I really don't mind Brady's "political bullshit." I don't agree with it too often, but it's a refreshing read and he obviously cares about it. Ain't no harm in letting him have his pedestal.

tl;dr isn't refreshing to read in my eyes but to each his own.

I've got no problem with opposing arguments, but I do have a problem with somebody spamming pictures of gold standard as if it was an actual point. Don't ack like u don't know.

I've got no problem with you and Mikey, for instance (except I think Mikey is kindof a jerk but I luv 'im ;))

Well, nothing if you really think about it. Banning internet hunting hasn't made it any harder for somebody to start hunting people through the internet. Mechanically, I mean. Even then it's not like murder isn't illegal.

So how many records have you downloaded this month, Dev?

No, I said it doesn't exist as a sport, and therefore doesn't present a real problem.

Are we next going to put forward bills concerning cyborg behavior?

What I'm really trying to allude to with this, and nobody make this an issue, concerns items like gay marriage. States and the Feds have proactively attempted to ban the practice before it's even recognized because the idea of it violates social mores. Internet hunting was banned for the same reason, only it was done so with a lack of any debate.

Without internet hunting actually happening, there's no way to determine whether or not it actually presents a problem worth legislating. The debate ultimately lies in how much you think of animal rights, but the problem is that there was no debate, period.

My point isn't that internet hunting shouldn't be banned, but that it's being banned for all the wrong reasons.

Reasons like:

Oh, I don't think anyone was spamming pictures of gold standard as if that was a point. But, far be it for me to speak for anyone.

What difference does it make what reasoning is being used? I am sure all will agree that its not good to be able to kill people over the internet (or otherwise), regardless of political perspective or context. If you really need a solid reason as to why its not okay to kill someone over the internet, then there is little else to say...

Oh right. So I suppose we should wait until the t800 destroys civilization before we decide to do something about it...

There is nothing wrong with thinking ahead. In this case, it seems prudent to ban something before it has the chance to become problematic.

Wait, you think we're talking about hunting people?

No. I meant to say that most would agree that its not good to be able to kill anything over the internet with the touch of a button, people included.