More mass shootings

[billvon 2,380]

>I do not acknowledge the right of the fundamentally mediocre to subject me to their limitations.

Do you have a pilot's license? If so, when you fly, do you follow the FAR's?

[kallend 1,620]

billvon

>I do not acknowledge the right of the fundamentally mediocre to subject me to their limitations.

Do you have a pilot's license? If so, when you fly, do you follow the FAR's?

Meh - FARs are for the little people.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[gowlerk 1,902]

kallend

***>I do not acknowledge the right of the fundamentally mediocre to subject me to their limitations.

Do you have a pilot's license? If so, when you fly, do you follow the FAR's?

Meh - FARs are for the little people.



But.....without them all the great pilots would be in danger from the fundamentally mediocre ones. The whole world is poisoned with mediocrity.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[winsor 185]

billvon

>I do not acknowledge the right of the fundamentally mediocre to subject me to their limitations.

Do you have a pilot's license? If so, when you fly, do you follow the FAR's?

Wait a minute, I need a license?

I thought it was like a boat - if you own it, you just have to keep it registered.

I'll look into it, thanks.

[Bob_Church 7]

winsor

***>I do not acknowledge the right of the fundamentally mediocre to subject me to their limitations.

Do you have a pilot's license? If so, when you fly, do you follow the FAR's?

Wait a minute, I need a license?

I thought it was like a boat - if you own it, you just have to keep it registered.

I'll look into it, thanks.

Just a word of warning, like with boats they've started cracking down on drinking while piloting a plane.

[gowlerk 1,902]

Quote

Wait a minute, I need a license?

I thought it was like a boat - if you own it, you just have to keep it registered.

Don't be all mediocre about it. Drive it like you stole it.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[jcd11235 0]

winsor

I was simply using a different statistic than the one in which GUNS killed more Americans than did the ENEMY!

Yes, you offered an irrelevant statistic, presented ambiguously. It doesn't change the fact that "that more Americans have been killed with civilian owned 'my 2nd Amendment rights' guns in the past 50 years alone than in all the wars the USA has fought combined since the founding of the nation," as Kallend posted.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[riggerrob 558]

billvon

>I do not acknowledge the right of the fundamentally mediocre to subject me to their limitations.

Do you have a pilot's license? If so, when you fly, do you follow the FAR's?

———————————————————————————————

Yes, I follow FARS and CARS when flying airplanes because I know that those regulations are written in blood!
I reached that conclusion after reading hundreds of aircraft accident reports. Back in the early days of aviation, they wrote a new regulation every time they saw a trend in accidents. Nowadays there is little incentive to write new FARS because current pilots merely repeat old mistakes.
Accident reports in PARACHUTIST Magazine teach us similar lessons. BSRs are written in the blood of skydivers whom died 60 or 70 years ago!

[riggerrob 558]

Mental health is a valid reason for restricting access to guns.

Since my father was diagnosed with altzheimer’s - a few years back - police took away his driver’s license. My brothers have been quietly selling off his guns.

A few years back I was diagnosed with PTSD and severely depressed during an 8-year-long court battle, workplace bullying, 15 months unemployment, repeated retraumatization, intimidation inside court, intimidation outside court, delayed knee surgery, infection, swollen leg, deep vein thrombosis, inability to buy prescription medication, too poor to buy food, impending eviction, etc. I was too poor to buy a bullet! I contemplated suicide, but concluded suicide would be an admission that bullies in silk robes had gotten the better of me. I am too stubborn to allow lawyers to win!

[riggerrob 558]

I do not worry about being shot in Canada, not to even when I drove a bus through Vancouver’s notorious downtown east side.

Statistically, 75 percent of gang murders involve guns, but only 21 percent of civilian murders involve guns. Most gang murder victims are already “known to police.”

[BartsDaddy 4]

riggerrob

I do not worry about being shot in Canada, not to even when I drove a bus through Vancouver’s notorious downtown east side.

Statistically, 75 percent of gang murders involve guns, but only 21 percent of civilian murders involve guns. Most gang murder victims are already “known to police.”

Since when are gangs not civilians? Are gangs now millitary?

Handguns are only used to fight your way to a good rifle

[billvon 2,380]

>Yes, I follow FARS and CARS when flying airplanes because I know that those regulations
>are written in blood!

Me too.

But Winsor, like many skydivers, does not - because he knows such rules are for the fundamentally mediocre, and they merely subject Winsor to their own mediocre limitations. He is special.

[DJL 232]

yoink

***
People will keep dying because we keep waiting for these magical "gun laws" which, never having helped in the past, are going to save us somehow.
We'll never look for the real problems, just blame it on something, anything, that we can say we don't have. .

Would you accept mandatory psychological testing every 6 months for every single American past the age of 8?

Could you imagine a DMV equivalent of someplace you have to go to get your head examined?

I found some test footage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Umc9ezAyJv0

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[winsor 185]

billvon

>Yes, I follow FARS and CARS when flying airplanes because I know that those regulations
>are written in blood!

Me too.

But Winsor, like many skydivers, does not - because he knows such rules are for the fundamentally mediocre, and they merely subject Winsor to their own mediocre limitations. He is special.

Your one warning.

[billvon 2,380]

>Your one warning.

Sounds like you really like those rules for the mediocre to follow - as long as you benefit from them.

[winsor 185]

billvon

>Your one warning.

Sounds like you really like those rules for the mediocre to follow - as long as you benefit from them.

Much of the discussion on this thread reminds me of grey haired men holding forth on the merits of abortion. My sentiment is that if, say, Newt Gingrich was to get pregnant, I would applaud his decision to keep the baby.

Maybe a better analogy is having whuffos write BSRs. Having a whuffo tell me that I have a death wish or whatever does have a lot of impact, and their conclusion that I am all for a free-for-all approach because I do not seek their input may not be based in fact.

If someone opines on a subject with which I am intimately familiar, such that it is clear they have no Idea about what they are talking, don't expect me to treat them as credible. Suffice it to say that we are certain to disagree.

Given that you can be pretty bright, it concerns me to see you flailing. You can do better.

[DJL 232]

We're all laptop experts as far as most of these issues go. The people actually experiencing it (school children) seem to get shouted down as liberal puppets when they speak their minds. Anyway, they'll all be voters soon and it's obvious they can't depend on us to solve the problem that is real to them but only hypothetical to most of us.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[BIGUN 1,048]

Luv you, both... Back on topic, please.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[gowlerk 1,902]

Quote

If someone opines on a subject with which I am intimately familiar, such that it is clear they have no Idea about what they are talking, don't expect me to treat them as credible. Suffice it to say that we are certain to disagree.

You are intimately familiar with firearms, and the laws governing them in the USA. You have no familiarity with having one of your children fall victim to random gun violence. Or with the advantages countries with reasonable gun laws enjoy. Like not having motorists waving firearms at them in road rage incidents.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[winsor 185]

DJL

We're all laptop experts as far as most of these issues go.

Wrong. Some of us have VERY extensive professional credentials in various subjects.

There is a difference in standing between someone who had their gall bladder removed and the Head of Surgery at Johns Hopkins, or between a Camaro owner and the Chief Design Engineer at Chevrolet.

Admittedly, the 'authority' can be wrong and the novice correct on an issue, but the odds generally don't favor such a scenario.

[DJL 232]

winsor

***We're all laptop experts as far as most of these issues go.

Wrong. Some of us have VERY extensive professional credentials in various subjects.

There is a difference in standing between someone who had their gall bladder removed and the Head of Surgery at Johns Hopkins, or between a Camaro owner and the Chief Design Engineer at Chevrolet.

Admittedly, the 'authority' can be wrong and the novice correct on an issue, but the odds generally don't favor such a scenario.

I contend that the Chief Design Engineer at Chevrolet is wrong about allowing a 4 cylinder option. That's something that should not exist.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[winsor 185]

gowlerk

Quote

If someone opines on a subject with which I am intimately familiar, such that it is clear they have no Idea about what they are talking, don't expect me to treat them as credible. Suffice it to say that we are certain to disagree.

You are intimately familiar with firearms, and the laws governing them in the USA. You have no familiarity with having one of your children fall victim to random gun violence. Or with the advantages countries with reasonable gun laws enjoy. Like not having motorists waving firearms at them in road rage incidents.

Oddly enough, I do have a marked familiarity with random violence that drops children, have lived in sundry countries that have laws that I suspect you would term 'reasonable.'

I have been spared any incidents involving motorists waving firearms in road rage incidents; the only motorists that have ever made firearms known in my experience have been cops, and I have had the odd submachine gun stuck in my face (as I GINGERLY pulled out my passport...). I don't count the .380 slug that hit my windshield, since it was from long enough range to be arbitrary.

Your guess regarding my familiarity is entirely wrong. Should I trust your instincts about much of anything else?

[winsor 185]

DJL

******We're all laptop experts as far as most of these issues go.

Wrong. Some of us have VERY extensive professional credentials in various subjects.

There is a difference in standing between someone who had their gall bladder removed and the Head of Surgery at Johns Hopkins, or between a Camaro owner and the Chief Design Engineer at Chevrolet.

Admittedly, the 'authority' can be wrong and the novice correct on an issue, but the odds generally don't favor such a scenario.

I contend that the Chief Design Engineer at Chevrolet is wrong about allowing a 4 cylinder option. That's something that should not exist.

When Alfa does it, it works brilliantly.

By and large, when you get an abortion on wheels it's more often than not the result of the Marketing Department over the objections of Engineering (the V-8 Monza is a prime example).

[gowlerk 1,902]

Quote

I contend that the Chief Design Engineer at Chevrolet is wrong about allowing a 4 cylinder option. That's something that should not exist.

A friend of mine recently bought a new Ford heavy work van. He tows a large trailer with tools and materials often and the van is always loaded with lots of carpentry tools. I assumed it would have the big block V10. No way. It has V6 and plenty of power. Engine technology has changed a lot.

Still, I agree that a Camaro with a 4 banger seems wrong.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[billvon 2,380]

>Maybe a better analogy is having whuffos write BSRs.

Fortunately, whuffo's don't write BSR's, even though people who do not like new BSR's often claim that such people are effectively whuffos. They are written by people with decades of experience. Sometimes they are even people who don't skydive any more due to age or desire.

However, you mostly follow them, even though they were written largely to keep mediocre people alive. (For example, pull altitudes.) Same goes for FAR's. You follow them because they tend to work, and because they were written in blood - even if it the blood of the mediocre who made foolish mistakes that led to consideration of the new rule, the NPRM, the vote etc etc that led to the new rule.

So you very much do acknowledge the right of the fundamentally mediocre to subject you to their limitations - when it suits you.

As this applies to new regulations on guns -

I have been extremely clear that I am not in favor of bad gun regulations, nor am I in favor of _just_ gun regulations to reduce the incidents of gun deaths in the US. I am in favor of some as a PART of the overall approach. (Just as I am in favor of research into advanced nuclear reactors despite not being a nuclear physicist.)

You may consider me a clueless whuffo when it comes to guns; I will have to find a way to live with that disappointment.

However, the American Pediatrics Association are not "whuffos" when it comes to the risks guns pose to their patients - even if you and I are effectively whuffos in that area.

The American Hunters and Shooters Association are not "whuffos" when it comes to what sort of regulation will be onerous (or not onerous) to gun owners.

Florida police chiefs are not "whuffos" when it comes to the use of guns to prevent crime - and you not liking their stance on assault weapons bans does not make them whuffos.

The police group Prosecutors against Gun Violence are not "whuffos" when it comes to the risks of an armed populace - even if you do not like their stance on expansion of CCW permits.

So blaming every gun law you don't like on "whuffos" doesn't really work. There are people in this debate with far more knowledge on the risks of guns (and the consequences of wide ownership, and how to ameliorate the dangers) than you or I, and your wholesale dismissal of any such person who disagrees with you isn't helpful.

As a suggestion, perhaps you could use your knowledge of weapons to help come up with mitigations that _do_ work. That would probably be a better use of your time than denigrating others.