Best Coolpix for HD and low light too?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Jane Galt on 21 Jun 2010 01:58 "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote : > And, the Libertarian theory has proved itself so wonderfully where? > > Would you not say that a people without a government is basically in a > Libertarian state? No, that would be anarchy. Libertarianism rightly applied would be most of the way up the freedom scale, not anarchy. http://lakewoodcolorado.net/Sarah/CHART.jpg > > And, how stable has any country ever been without a government? > > Don't make me laugh... > Your premise is false so it's a logical fallacy to begin with. Straw man. -- - Jane Galt
From: Jane Galt on 21 Jun 2010 01:58 Die Wahrheit <diewahrheit(a)somewherehonest.net> wrote : > On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 00:24:25 -0500, Jane Galt <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote: > >>Die Wahrheit <diewahrheit(a)somewherehonest.net> wrote : >> >>> On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 04:56:27 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" >>><dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy >>>>of God and the rule of law: >>> >>> Which god? I have a book titled "Encyclopedia of 1500 Gods & >>> Goddesses". All of them valid in their cultures that believe in them. >>> Most all of >>them >>> much older and wiser than any immature god that was recently invented >>> in the middle-east. Do you respect others' gods as much as you do your >>> own? >>Or >>> are you saying that your god doesn't know anything about respect. And >>> if that god of yours knows nothing about respect, it knows nothing >>> about >>love >>> either. Because love is a false love without respect. You cannot love >>> unless it is first based on respect. Respect is more important and >>> more powerful than love. Unfortunately that little tidbit has been >>conveniently >>> left out of all of the middle-east's versions of god, otherwise they >>> wouldn't have spanned the globe trying to kill all others in the name >>> of their god. >>> >>> Which "laws"? Laws are only someone's opinion put on paper. It doesn't >>> matter how many people might agree, the majority has never been right. >>> As the old saying goes: "If even 5 billion people say and believe a >>> foolish thing, it remains a foolish thing." The number of people >>> agreeing is >>never >>> an affirmation of them being right. >>> >>> >> >>"A man is none the less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new >>master once in a term of years. Neither are a people any the less slaves >>because they are permitted periodically to choose new masters. What >>makes them slaves is the fact that they are now, and are always >>hereafter to be, in the hands of men whose power over them is, and >>always is to be, absolute and irresponsible." --Lysander Spooner, 'No >>Treason'. >> >>"Two men have no more natural right to exercise any kind of authority >>over one, than one has to exercise the same authority over two. A man's >>natural rights are his own, against the whole world; and any >>infringement of them is equally a crime; whether committed by one man, >>or by millions; whether committed by one man, calling himself a robber, >>(or by any other name indicating his true character), or by millions >>calling themselves a government." - Lysander Spooner >> >>Or as someone else taught me, no government has any right to do anything >>I have no right to do myself. > > Since you are a fan of quotables, you might like this one: > > "Authority isn't something that someone else has. It's something that > you've freely, foolishly, and irresponsibly given away -- all by your > little self." (author: myself) > Truth. :) -- - Jane Galt
From: Jane Galt on 21 Jun 2010 02:10 "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote : >>> >>> I thought you'd come back with the populist babble of the NRA as your >>> ideological doctrine, but am rather surprised that, as a republican >>> American, you quote instead from communist doctrine, a Doctrine which >>> was the basis of the Russian Federation. >> >> I never said I was a Republicrat, nor have I ever been one. >> >> There are only two parties I've ever joined in my life, the LP and more >> recently the Objectivist Party. > > Sorry, my mistake, but you fit the profile... Someone who disagrees with you marxists? LOL Gotta be a Republicrat! A bushite! LOL >>> Do you remember how the USSR came to an end? It was overthrown, not >>> by guns, but by peaceful democratic ideals. Where was the necessity >>> for an armed citizenry, even in one of the most totalitarian regimes? >> >> I was just stating it in terms that I thought a comrade like yourself >> might >> relate better to. Socialists have never objected to guns, they only use >> such objections to dupe "useful idiots" into helping them disarm their >> intended victims. Good job with that, comrade. > > You confuse democratic socialism for communism... "There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism - by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide." -- Ayn Rand, from "Foreign Policy Drains U.S. of Main Weapons" The reality is that for the last 110 years or so, we're facing "Progressivism". "Elect progressive candidates for every office - for jobs, security, democracy, and peace, vote Communist!" - "Progress and Democracy for Rhode Island.", 1938 "I don�t want to punish anybody but there are an extraordinary amount of people whom I want to kill. I think it would be a good thing to make everybody come before a properly appointed board and say every five or every seven years, just put them there and say "Sir or Madam, will you be kind enough to justify your existence?� If you�re not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more then clearly we cannot use this big organization of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive because your life does not benefit us and it can�t be of very much use to yourself."" - George Bernard Shaw, 20th Century Progressive icon Oh, at the end of that video by Shaw, he gave the nazi salute. Seems he was a big fan of Hitler too. "I prefer the word progressive, which has a real American meaning, going back to the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th Century. I consider myself a modern progressive." - HILLARY CLINTON, JULY 23, 2007 http://reason.com/archives/2006/05/05/when-bigots-become-reformers >>> Also, the Chinese communist doctrine you so freely quote is also >>> slowly being undermined, not by an armed citizenry, but by peaceful >>> democratic ideals... >> >> Like I said in another post, I certainly wouldnt equate democracy with >> freedom. > > But, as a Libertarian, you simply exchange the vote for physical / armed > might... Nope. I'd not allow a government to initiate force, that would cure the whole system. Then we'd be voting on things like what color to paint the courthouse, not whether to enslave or kill people. You see, no matter what the labels, the real contest here is between individual rights and forced-collectivism. With inalienable individual rights, no one would be allowed to initiate force against others or delegate its initiation ( by the vote ). The only reason voting is so popular is because the systems are forced- collectivism. People can vote themselves other peoples' money and freedom. Without that, "democracy" would be much less meaningful. >>> Your country chose the armed revolution to free itself from British >>> tyranny, Canada chose peaceful diplomacy. We both ended up in the >>> same place, but with a fair bit less bloodshed.. north of the border. >> >> I believe that diplomacy didn't work in our case. Read your history >> books. >> > > It's not so much that it didn't work, but that the right process was > never discovered... LOL! > But, I can understand how that might be a sore point with you... You're one of the people who think that tyrants can be led to change their minds, if only you have the right arguments. You should be sent to Iran or North Korea to test your theory. LOL >> The founders of this country appealed to King George for years in such >> efforts. They sailed back and forth doing it, to no avail. > > In spite of my sarcastic scribble above, I actually sympathize with > pre-revolutionary Americans... LOL > It was a different time, a different place. Canada and the States were > on different paths, and the British Crown seemed to adopt different > approaches to the colonies. > > The breaking point was reached, and history took its course. "The tree of Liberty needs to be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." > I salute the fact that your Founding Fathers directed your country in a > direction more oriented to the welfare of the masses than had the former > Empire. That wasnt the intent. >>> BTW, I can't help but notice you don't have any links to statistics on >>> how peaceful Dodge City was in comparison to modern day London... >> >> An armed society is a polite society. >> >> Has anyone got stats on violent crime before and after the various >> states passed their concealed carry laws? >> >> Things have sure tamed down here since 2003 when concealed carry was >> passed >> in Colorado. People are much more polite and less likely to be surly >> and rude to others in public, because you just never know who's armed. >> > > But, as I've pointed out, that situation isn't necessarily going to be > the same once a critical mass of hidden weapons is reached... Will the weapons break out and start killing people? LOL Sounds like a leftist horror movie. Maybe you could get Michael Moore! "Night of the Living Weapons!" -- - Jane Galt
From: Pete on 21 Jun 2010 07:31 On 2010-06-13 20:19:13 +0100, Jane Galt said: > I'd like to consider a newer purse sized Coolpix. I have the 4500 which is > nice, but not exactly purse sized. > > I like to do a bit of low-light shooting without flash, so it looks like the > S8000 isnt up to that, though the 10x optical zoom sounds nice. > > I enjoy mostly scenery and non-flash shots of our shoulder pet birds. > > My purse cam is now a Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-S750 but the image quality isnt as > nice as the Coolpix. I suspect Nikon makes better quality lenses? > > So suggestions? > > I need to keep this in the under $300 street price range. From the way this thread has progressed I would say a Nikon is not your best choice. A cannon would be more suitable. -- Pete
From: Dudley Hanks on 21 Jun 2010 08:45
"Pete" <available.on.request(a)aserver.invalid> wrote in message news:2010062112311959231-availableonrequest(a)aserverinvalid... > On 2010-06-13 20:19:13 +0100, Jane Galt said: > >> I'd like to consider a newer purse sized Coolpix. I have the 4500 which >> is >> nice, but not exactly purse sized. >> >> I like to do a bit of low-light shooting without flash, so it looks like >> the >> S8000 isnt up to that, though the 10x optical zoom sounds nice. >> >> I enjoy mostly scenery and non-flash shots of our shoulder pet birds. >> >> My purse cam is now a Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-S750 but the image quality isnt >> as >> nice as the Coolpix. I suspect Nikon makes better quality lenses? >> >> So suggestions? >> >> I need to keep this in the under $300 street price range. > > From the way this thread has progressed I would say a Nikon is not your > best choice. A cannon would be more suitable. > > -- > Pete > LOL... Love your humour, Pete... Take Care, Dudley |