Search results

Congrats on finishing :D Thoughts on the paper: Analytical was the absolute biggest fluke - the question was more or less exactly the same as the one we had in the trials, about choice + circumstance, so I nailed the essay luckily. Creative I'm not so sure, the stimulus didn't fit very well...

Re: BOS political compass scatterplot Your political compass Economic Left/Right: -5.88 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.97 Sounds about right

As jellybelly said, stats and quotes are both good examples of evidence. However, I often find that the 'EEL' process of PEEL often consists of general reasoning. Of course, it is imperative that you use statistics, quotes in this reasoning process, but the good thing about modern history...

Not so much. Year + month is generally enough. Although BOS don't really care so much if you can't remember the date; they're focussed more on knowledge application. Importance rating: 2/10 Reasonably. Basically they show that you've considered alternating perspectives (syllabus...

d/dx = 1/2(v^2) Use that to find v^2 by integrating a = -16x Or something. I'd have to check the question again.

But, you see, they don't. http://www.unicri.it/wwk/publications/books/series/understanding/19_GUN_OWNERSHIP.pdf This is a piece of research that would appear to suggest what I've been saying all along:

'Criminals' are not just a homogenous group. Its a question of quantity. Minimising access to guns = minimising amount of criminals who can obtain guns. It's not a case of either the 'criminals' (whoever they might be) have guns or everyone does. As I said before, there are several reasons...

For the second time, I never said government would entirely eradicate firearm usage, That is an unrealistic aim. False dichotomy again. The intention is to minimise the level of people, criminals or otherwise, with access to guns. I've said this over and over. Possibly, but there are...

Sorry if you feel I have misinterpreted this point - perhaps I have. But the way I see it, one has a choice between two 'coercive influences' - the coercive influence of the state in banning the widespread possession of firearms, or the coercive influence of people using those firearms. I guess...

Just quickly, before I trot off to bed: No, what I believe in is the potential for good policing to remove the threat of such weapons being used against me by removing ways to procure such weapons as well as confiscating them from those who illegally possess them. I agree, expecting the...

In a word, yes. http://www.jturkoski.com/Home%20Page/Beat-your-kid/image001.jpg

Simple moral decency, I would assume. Human rights are not forfeit in wartime. Otherwise: "oh, there's a war on, so therefore, since we're locked in a battle for supremacy, we are free to rape the women and children of our opponent's nation, coz we are gonna be VICTORIOUS!!!!!1111. Then...

Obviously, laws must be enforced. The solution to your scenario is: good policing. The idea is not simply to say 'oh, guns are illegal' as you are suggesting may be the case, but to a) make the law, b) enforce it properly and c) try those who disobey it. If you cannot see any positive freedom...

Rule of law > Rule of the gun. The whole 'defence against aggression' tag can be subject to incoherence; what constitutes 'defence'? Is lethally wounding someone who is brandishing a stick at you 'self-defence'? If you allow more leniency for the use of lethal or non-lethal weaponry for self...

No way in hell should Australians have a constitutional right to bear arms. That US provision was more applicable in the days of the Wild West and would be in no way good for Australia. Except, perhaps, the Shooters Party. If you increase the availability of lethal weaponry, you increase...

The man announced that he thinks terrorists are coming to Australia....masquerading as asylum seekers! Rudd slams Tuckey's 'terrorist' asylum seeker comments Even in the extremely unlikely scenario that this were true, I think it's time someone booted the man out of Parliament. Does...

Verbose. Could probably say the same for the last couple of years as well I guess.

Thanks for allaying my irrational fears guys :)

Hey guys had a sudden realisation: When I was writing on my exam booklet for Q 26 (biz report), I accidentally wrote that it was in Section IV as opposed to Section III, though I still correctly wrote that the question number was 26. Is this a major concern?