Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #281   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 51
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Jeff R." wrote in message
u...
I'm still getting repeats on Letterman. Are the writers still on strike?


Yes, but Letterman is striking a separate deal with the Writers' Guild and
he'll probably be back on the air soon.

--
Ed Huntress


Thanks Ed. I'll keep waiting (for Letterman), but I'll still pass on South
Park. I *do* appreciate some of the satire, but the rest I find too painful
to endure.

--
Jeff R.


  #282   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"Jeff R." wrote in message
u...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Jeff R." wrote in message
u...
I'm still getting repeats on Letterman. Are the writers still on
strike?


Yes, but Letterman is striking a separate deal with the Writers' Guild
and he'll probably be back on the air soon.

--
Ed Huntress


Thanks Ed. I'll keep waiting (for Letterman), but I'll still pass on
South Park. I *do* appreciate some of the satire, but the rest I find too
painful to endure.


No prudent adult would watch it. But then, prudent adults usually go for
Leno over Letterman, so you have some of the right attitude for South Park.

Sometimes there's nothing else worth watching on cable, and we have around
300 channels. I can only watch re-runs of "Pale Rider" once a month or so.
We don't get Al-Jazeera on our cable system so I can't keep up with the
news. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress


  #283   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 580
Default Take yer gun to the mall

In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

Few police have ever been shot at


Forty-two were killed with handguns in 2005; 8 were killed with other guns.


50 police out of how many hundred thousand? More dangerous being a
farmer.

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/
  #284   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"nick hull" wrote in message
.. .
In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

Few police have ever been shot at


Forty-two were killed with handguns in 2005; 8 were killed with other
guns.


50 police out of how many hundred thousand? More dangerous being a
farmer.


That was the number killed, not the number shot at. Most criminals don't hit
what they're aiming at.

DOJ says that, in one year (early '90s), over 1,400 police officers were
injured in firearms assaults and 67, in that year, were killed with firearms
while responding to a crime. Overall statistics, including cops, say that
the ratio of victims hit with a gunshot to those shot at was 3:8. So
something like 3,000 police officers, very roughly, are shot at in the
course of a year.

--
Ed Huntress


  #285   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 506
Default Take yer gun to the mall

Don Foreman wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:50:13 -0700, Lew Hartswick
wrote:

nick hull wrote:

Few police have ever been shot at


We just had a female state police shot dead in Las Cruces
recently. I supose that dosent count. :-(
...lew...


It counts. Bummer that an LE officer was KIA in line of duty.

Why did you specify that this officer was female, rather than simply
saying that a competent officer was KIA. Do you think that equal
opportunity doesn't cut both ways? Do you think that she would have
wanted that?

Turns out it was her son that is being held for it. Maybe that
makes it "domestic". I included the female because that is how the
release was worded. There aren't that many female state police that
it isn't at least a little unusual.
...lew...


  #287   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 382
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:49:40 -0600, Don Foreman wrote:

Most folks here also think they don't. The vast majority of them (us)
will live their full lives turning out to be right about that. A few
feel it prudent to have what they probably won't need than not to have
what they might conceivably someday need. They each should have the
right to make their own choices. In the U.S., we do.


Yup. Look at it a similar way. Not everyone has the training and
inclination to use a fire extinguisher on an appropriately sized fire.
Even fewer know how to use the public-access defibrillators which are
being installed in schools, malls, and workplaces. Yet, those of us who
are trained and willing to use them for their intended purpose, by

proxy, protect dozens or hundreds of others by doing so.
In VK3 land,
you don't. Your choice. In VK3 land one may not even have an
incandescant lightbulb! It's easy to see why Andrew can only
understand what he is given to understand by the sensational media.


Yup.

"Awash with guns" indeed. What poppycock -- and such persistent
poppycock it seems to be!


The county I'm in almost certainly has more guns than residents. And
our last murder was (googles) 1995, as far as I know. Actually there
might have been one or two since now that I think about it. Doesn't
change the point that guns are a deterrant to violent crime, simply
because so many more good people are armed, than there are bad people.
At least here, where we're not forbidden from defending ourselves from
bad people who will always be armed.

The hotbutton here is the notion of having those who don't think they
need or want firearms wanting to decide that since they don't like
them, nobody should have them.


Yup. Feel free to drive your car without a spare tire if you want, but
don't you DARE tell me I'm not allowed to. My spare tire and tire iron
aren't hurting anyone, even though it's true that some people have been
attacked by others using a tire iron.

  #288   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 204
Default Take yer gun to the mall

In , on Thu, 20 Dec 2007
06:06:06 -0500, Ed Huntress, wrote:

Yes, but Letterman is striking a separate deal with the Writers' Guild and
he'll probably be back on the air soon.


Hopefully that means Craig Ferguson will be back
soon too.
  #289   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,380
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Dec 20, 8:11*pm, Dave Hinz wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:49:40 -0600, Don Foreman wrote:
Most folks here also think they don't. *The vast majority of them (us)
will live their full lives turning out to be right about that. *A few
feel it prudent to have what they probably won't need than not to have
what they might conceivably someday need. *They each should have the
right to make their own choices. *In the U.S., we do.


Yup. *Look at it a similar way. *Not everyone has the training and
inclination to use a fire extinguisher on an appropriately sized fire.
Even fewer know how to use the public-access defibrillators which are
being installed in schools, malls, and workplaces. *Yet, those of us who
are trained and willing to use them for their intended purpose, by

proxy, protect dozens or hundreds of others by doing so.

* In VK3 land,
you don't. *Your choice. *In VK3 land one may not even have an
incandescant lightbulb! *It's easy to see why Andrew can only
understand what he is given to understand by the sensational media.


Yup.

"Awash with guns" indeed. *What poppycock -- and such persistent
poppycock it seems to be! * * * *


The county I'm in almost certainly has more guns than residents. *And
our last murder was (googles) 1995, as far as I know. *Actually there
might have been one or two since now that I think about it. *Doesn't
change the point that guns are a deterrant to violent crime, simply
because so many more good people are armed, than there are bad people.
At least here, where we're not forbidden from defending ourselves from
bad people who will always be armed.

The hotbutton here is the notion of having those who don't think they
need or want firearms wanting to decide that since they don't like
them, *nobody should have them. *


Yup. *Feel free to drive your car without a spare tire if you want, but
don't you DARE tell me I'm not allowed to. *My spare tire and tire iron
aren't hurting anyone, even though it's true that some people have been
attacked by others using a tire iron.


What if a law is passed that makes carrying a spare tire/tire iron
illegal?

Will you as a law abiding citizen follow the law of the land or become
one of those that break the law?

Would the Government have the right and responsibility to enforce this
law to the extent the law allows?

TMT
  #290   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,380
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Dec 20, 8:37*pm, Steve Ackman
wrote:
In , on Thu, 20 Dec 2007
06:06:06 -0500, Ed Huntress, wrote:

Yes, but Letterman is striking a separate deal with the Writers' Guild and
he'll probably be back on the air soon.


* Hopefully that means Craig Ferguson will be back
soon too.


I don't know about that....the networks are hurting (ratings way down)
so they are trying to get the late night people (who use the fewest
writers and supporting staff) to break ranks.

It will be interesting to see who wins this one...it is already
apparent who makes the difference in Tinseltown.

TMT


  #291   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,138
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:35:23 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:



What if a law is passed that makes carrying a spare tire/tire iron
illegal?


What if pigs could fly? New sport for shotgunners, upland bacon! Need
a BIG dog to retreive, though.

  #292   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 558
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:38:03 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

On Dec 20, 8:37*pm, Steve Ackman
wrote:
In , on Thu, 20 Dec 2007
06:06:06 -0500, Ed Huntress, wrote:

Yes, but Letterman is striking a separate deal with the Writers' Guild and
he'll probably be back on the air soon.


* Hopefully that means Craig Ferguson will be back
soon too.


I don't know about that....the networks are hurting (ratings way down)
so they are trying to get the late night people (who use the fewest
writers and supporting staff) to break ranks.

It will be interesting to see who wins this one...it is already
apparent who makes the difference in Tinseltown.


Note: I don't have a dog in this fight.

There are a few details to remember: Letterman owns his own show
through "Worldwide Pants", and if he can come to a separate agreement
with the writers and get back in high gear it might well break the
negotiations log-jam.

And it's the AMPTP's game plan to starve out the writers and the
rest of the industry, and try to get a contract that's even cheaper
than the one they had. Because if they cave to the writers, the
directors are next, then the Talent, then the technical people...
They might be able to pressure Letterman to NOT sign a separate deal.

Leno and Conan are hired help - very expensive hired help. They
have stayed out because they don't have to cross a picket line, but
the pressure is on to keep their other show staff from being fired.

I say let all the talk shows and daytime go back and let the shows
royally suck without any writing work being done. They won't be able
to get the A-list talent to cross the picket line, they'll only get
the B- and C-listers. And far fewer clips and cut-aways, because
that's all researched and worked out in advance - by writers.

And as the ratings plunge and all the advertisers demand refunds and
make-goods, the TV Networks will throw the shows back into re-runs to
try and salvage their finances. That's how the Networks and Studios
get hurt - the TV revenues and the Movie Box Office goes into the
dumper. Then they'll come back to the table and start talking
seriously.
  #293   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 580
Default Take yer gun to the mall

In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

Few police have ever been shot at

Forty-two were killed with handguns in 2005; 8 were killed with other
guns.


50 police out of how many hundred thousand? More dangerous being a
farmer.


That was the number killed, not the number shot at. Most criminals don't hit
what they're aiming at.


And how many farmers had near misses?

Free men own guns - www(dot)geocities(dot)com/CapitolHill/5357/
  #294   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:15:16 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

Yes, its a good summary of your situation. I have no issue with that.


Then why do you presume to inject your irrelevant fantasy world into
reality so frequently?


How many times have you had to pull your gun in "reality," Dave? In other
words, what kind of cockeyed reality do you live in? A shooting gallery, and
you're the duck?


Pity you need to, though. Glad I don't have to be armed and ready to
do the same.


Yeah, like that. The point I'm making, which you're missing, is that I
don't care that you don't get it. Really. But when I do care is when
peole who, like you, don't get it, want to stop me from dealing with
reality.


It sounds like Andrew lives in reality; you live in the fantasy. Do you do a
lot of dry fire practice before going to bed? Do you keep your gun handy
when you watch movies with bad guys on TV?

For that matter, what suggestion has Andrew made that he wants to stop you
from dealing with "reality"? Have you been feeling paranoid lately?

Funny that the same leftists who want to take my guns away,
are also the ones trying to rehabilitate and "give another chance" to
the very people I need the ability to protect myself from.

It makes me wonder whose side those leftists are on. Because it's
certainly not MY best interests that they are protecting.


You could ease your tensions by getting more target practice. Make up a big
puppet and label it "Liberal." Stuff with straw. Fire away.

--
Ed Huntress


  #295   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,380
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Dec 21, 2:18*am, Bruce L. Bergman
wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:38:03 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools





wrote:
On Dec 20, 8:37*pm, Steve Ackman
wrote:
In , on Thu, 20 Dec 2007
06:06:06 -0500, Ed Huntress, wrote:


Yes, but Letterman is striking a separate deal with the Writers' Guild and
he'll probably be back on the air soon.


* Hopefully that means Craig Ferguson will be back
soon too.


I don't know about that....the networks are hurting (ratings way down)
so they are trying to get the late night people (who use the fewest
writers and supporting staff) to break ranks.


It will be interesting to see who wins this one...it is already
apparent who makes the difference in Tinseltown.


* Note: *I don't have a dog in this fight.

* There are a few details to remember: *Letterman owns his own show
through "Worldwide Pants", and if he can come to a separate agreement
with the writers and get back in high gear it might well break the
negotiations log-jam.

* And it's the AMPTP's game plan to starve out the writers and the
rest of the industry, and try to get a contract that's even cheaper
than the one they had. *Because if they cave to the writers, the
directors are next, then the Talent, then the technical people...
They might be able to pressure Letterman to NOT sign a separate deal.

* Leno and Conan are hired help - very expensive hired help. *They
have stayed out because they don't have to cross a picket line, but
the pressure is on to keep their other show staff from being fired.

* I say let all the talk shows and daytime go back and let the shows
royally suck without any writing work being done. *They won't be able
to get the A-list talent to cross the picket line, they'll only get
the B- and C-listers. *And far fewer clips and cut-aways, because
that's all researched and worked out in advance - by writers.

* And as the ratings plunge and all the advertisers demand refunds and
make-goods, the TV Networks will throw the shows back into re-runs to
try and salvage their finances. * That's how the Networks and Studios
get hurt - the TV revenues and the Movie Box Office goes into the
dumper. *Then they'll come back to the table and start talking
seriously.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Good assessment.

Letterman may or may not be successful...and I doubt either way it
will make a difference.

It is time to redistribute the wealth...and that is always a messy
effort.

I expect to see the strike last for a long time...and there only so
many reality tv shows the public will stomach.

TMT


  #296   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,380
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Dec 21, 8:45*am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Dave Hinz" wrote in message

...

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:15:16 -0800 (PST),
wrote:


Yes, its a good summary of your *situation. I have no issue with that..


Then why do you presume to inject your irrelevant fantasy world into
reality so frequently?


How many times have you had to pull your gun in "reality," Dave? In other
words, what kind of cockeyed reality do you live in? A shooting gallery, and
you're the duck?



Pity you need to, though. Glad I don't have to be armed and ready to
do the same.


Yeah, like that. *The point I'm making, which you're missing, is that I
don't care that you don't get it. *Really. *But when I do care is when
peole who, like you, don't get it, want to stop me from dealing with
reality.


It sounds like Andrew lives in reality; you live in the fantasy. Do you do a
lot of dry fire practice before going to bed? Do you keep your gun handy
when you watch movies with bad guys on TV?

For that matter, what suggestion has Andrew made that he wants to stop you
from dealing with "reality"? Have you been feeling paranoid lately?

*Funny that the same leftists who want to take my guns away,
are also the ones trying to rehabilitate and "give another chance" to
the very people I need the ability to protect myself from.


It makes me wonder whose side those leftists are on. *Because it's
certainly not MY best interests that they are protecting.


You could ease your tensions by getting more target practice. Make up a big
puppet and label it "Liberal." Stuff with straw. Fire away.

--
Ed Huntress


Dave..... Ed makes a very good point....your response?

TMT
  #297   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"nick hull" wrote in message
.. .
In article ,
"Ed Huntress" wrote:

Few police have ever been shot at

Forty-two were killed with handguns in 2005; 8 were killed with other
guns.

50 police out of how many hundred thousand? More dangerous being a
farmer.


That was the number killed, not the number shot at. Most criminals don't
hit
what they're aiming at.


And how many farmers had near misses?


I don't know. How many farmers wear blue jeans?

--
Ed Huntress


  #298   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 382
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 01:31:08 -0600, Don Foreman wrote:
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:35:23 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:

What if a law is passed that makes carrying a spare tire/tire iron
illegal?


What if pigs could fly? New sport for shotgunners, upland bacon! Need
a BIG dog to retreive, though.


I see TMT is still an idiot. Of course, I'd violate a law banning me
from having a tire iron, fire extinguisher, first aid kit, or any other
piece of safety equipment.

  #299   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 75
Default Take yer gun to the mall


wrote


Yes, its a good summary of your situation. I have no issue with that.
Pity you need to, though. Glad I don't have to be armed and ready to
do the same.

Andrew VK3BFA.


Too bad that gladness will turn to sadness when the day comes that you need
self defense and don't have it. Or you have to watch helplessly while you
and yours or friends or people you don't even know have to take it in the
neck. At least go buy a decent sized can of pepper spray.

Enjoy your Pollyannish Utopia. And remember, reality always sneaks in just
to keep things straight. Don't ferget yer rose colored glasses when you to
out.

Steve


  #300   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 75
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"cavelamb himself" wrote

I personally own many firearms and have never felt the need to carry
concealed.

TMT


I won't make a habit of it, but I completely agree hee.

Richard


All it takes is one bad experience, Richard. BTW, how's those stainless
projects coming? I am going to Vegas over the next few weeks. Need any
more?

Steve




  #301   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 75
Default Take yer gun to the mall


wrote in message
...
On Dec 19, 5:47 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

"Awash with guns" indeed. What poppycock -- and such persistent
poppycock it seems to be!


Well, if not "awash," what the hell do you call a society of 300 million
people and 250 million guns? Askew? g

--
Ed Huntress


I don't think "awash" is the right word. You wouldn't say that we are
awash with cars, would you? Awash implies that there are more than
what anyone knows what to do with the large quanity.

Say one has one 12 gauge pump or automatic shotgun to use for hunting
waterfowl. And another 12 gauge over and under for hunting upland
birds. And a twenty gauge pump or automatic for shooting skeet in the
20 gauge class. I am assuming you can get by with using one of your
12 gauge shotguns for the 12 gauge class and that you don't compete
in the 28 gauge and .410 classes.

Then you might want a .22 and a .38 target pistol. A .22 target
rifle, a .22 to plink with, a .22 center fire for varmit shooting.
Say a .243 for deer hunting and a larger rifle for bigger game.

Well that get you up to 10 guns. And while that may seem like a lot,
they are all suited for different things. So I wouldn't say you were
awash in guns. And none of these are what you would want to have to
carry concealed. And none of them are assault rifles. Also no black
powder guns , collectors guns, or Saturday night specials.

Would you say someone was awash with machine tools because he has a
lathe, drill press, vertical mill, and a bandsaw?

Dan



So, you have roughly one gun per person in the US. If they would ONLY count
the people who own NO guns, that is a figure I would find more reality
based, as in my household, we have enough for about 25 people............
more or less. Does that mean I'm awash?

Steve




  #302   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 733
Default Take yer gun to the mall

SteveB wrote:

"cavelamb himself" wrote


I personally own many firearms and have never felt the need to carry
concealed.

TMT


I won't make a habit of it, but I completely agree hee.

Richard



All it takes is one bad experience, Richard. BTW, how's those stainless
projects coming? I am going to Vegas over the next few weeks. Need any
more?

Steve



Sure Steve!


I cut exactly two of them so far.
Really impressive light show with an abrasive blade in the chop saw!
LOUD too.
But I CAN cet then stripped out.

Can they slice 1" wide strips?

If possible...


Richard

See, beggars CAN be choosie!

BTW,

New interior sketch is up.
I never did like the clunky port side appliance.

Scroll down about 3 screens...

http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb/c18-cab.htm

  #303   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,210
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:49:40 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:


The U.S. originated as a quest for liberty and independence. It is
part of our culture to want to decide for ourselves as long as we
don't encroach on the rights of others to decide for themselves.
If one doesn't want firearms, he is quite free not to have them. If
another does want them, he is free to have them with varying
restrictions in various locales.



One should note..that the straw that broke the camels back, was an
attempt by the Government, to take the guns away from the People.

The events at Concord ultimately led to the overthrow of the
Government.

Seems that those that ignore history, are doomed to repeat it.

Gunner
  #304   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,210
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:50:13 -0700, Lew Hartswick
wrote:

nick hull wrote:

Few police have ever been shot at


We just had a female state police shot dead in Las Cruces
recently. I supose that dosent count. :-(
...lew...



One is "few"

The leading cause of death among police officers, is traffic
accidents.

The majority of police shootings, are shootings done with their own
weapon, after having it taken away from them by the suspect, who didnt
have one of his own.

Shall we disarm all police officers for their own safety?

Gunner
  #305   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,210
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:39:45 -0800 (PST), Too_Many_Tools
wrote:


You could ease your tensions by getting more target practice. Make up a big
puppet and label it "Liberal." Stuff with straw. Fire away.

--
Ed Huntress


Dave..... Ed makes a very good point....your response?

TMT


To be an accurate representation of a Liberal, , the dummy has to be
stuffed with straw already run through the bull.

Gunner


  #306   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,210
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:12:03 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Dec 19, 5:15 am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 04:37:40 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Dec 18, 6:50 am, Don Foreman wrote:
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:22:03 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Dec 10, 5:05 pm, "SteveB" wrote:
I saw a clear full body picture of the Omaha shooter. Anyone who had a
concealed weapon and who could shoot decently could have lessened the
carnage. If you got a CCW, carry your weapon.


Put your bias aside for a moment, as difficult as I imagine it may be
for you.


No. I enjoy illogical non factual rants to reinforce my long held
prejudices. And honesty enuff to admit it.

Why would you have, seat belts, smoke alarms, fire extinguishers and
first aid kits in your home or vehicle?

Are you expecting a fire or injury or auto accident? Very very few
people ever experience such in their lives. Since they are
exceedingly rare, is it paranoid to have them around or to use them?

By your criteria, it would appear to be so.


Fire alarms - if I go off my brain in the mall, can I pull out my fire
alarm and kill people with it. No. A gun would be better.
Seat belts - they have been compulsory here since the 1970's. Rate of
fatal car crashes has declined by 50% per head of population. I
suppose I could unbolt the seat belt from my car and ram it down
someones throat and so kill them....but a gun would be better.


Im aware of a case where a nutter beat 2 people to death with a fire
extinguisher, and maimed a third.
On the other hand, the FBI and Department of Justice research
indicates that firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens stops
between 800,000 and 1.5 million crimes a year in the US.

There was something else, but its getting too unwieldy to track back
and see what it was.

Others, from the Government, to Insurance companies, to the homeowner
or driver themselves, think that while rare....the lack of the above
tools on hand, is really bad. And indeed, it is. Its not always the
risks, but the stakes.

If you screw up, and set the shop afire, or mum sets the stove top
afire..the lack of a fire extinguisher and smoke detectors may cost
you everything you own, including your or your families lives.


But a gun in my hand will not prevent this.....so what precisely is
your logic Gunner - I have my philosophy 101 textbook here somewhere,
if you like, I will dig out the section on illogical conclusions from
a sound premise...


A smoke detector, seat belt or fire extinguisher wont prevent a fire
or auto accident either. They are tools to be used AFTER the event is
underway.

Seems your bias has blinded you badly.

Seatbelts. Ive only been involved in one moderate vehicle accident,
some 35 yrs and perhaps 6 million miles of driving. So why should I
or anyone else bother with them? Same with seat belts on aircraft. I
have actually been in 2 air crashes, but they were shoot downs in
combat, so why should I bother wearing a seat belt while flying a
commercial or private airplane? To do so, by your criteria, would be
utter paranoia. After all, flying is about the safest mode of
transportation.


Agreed - and congratulations on surviving the car crash and the
shootdowns. I havent been shot down, but a seatbelt enabled me to
survive a horrific car crash. Sure, I got a broken collar bone,
cracked ribs, and a bung knee - the first two from the seatbelt, the
last from my knee hitting a steel sub panel under the dash. So, does
that even out the seatbelt/no seatbelt argument? - you were lucky, I
was not.


I wasnt lucky..I was prepared.

My choice to regularly carry a firearm on my person, is no different
than my choice to wear a seat belt, or have a fire extinguisher at
hand, or smoke detectors etc. Its just another tool to be used in a
"just in case" mode.


OK, assuming you not some crazed PTSD vet who holds extreme views, is
slightly nutty, and may go off his brain sometime and shoot someone....
(with his smoke detector) - this probably isnt you, but can you vouch
for the rest of the population?.


No. Nor can I vouch for drunk drivers, sleepy drivers, poor
electricians etc. I can only prepare for the results of their actions.

Gunner, its the sheer number of guns in the US thats the issue - thats
the only point I wanted to make.


You say that like its a bad thing? Frankly..I think with 300 Million
plus firearms in civilians hands, the safety record is exemplary each
year. far far better than motor vehicles, aircraft or doctors.

Yes, we have violent crime here, and its increasing. The use of knives
is increasing, almost certainly because the perps cant get guns. We
have largely controlled them. Shooting crimes are rare. Even the
domestic "crime of passion" using Granpas old shotgun from the back of
the wardrobe is getting rare. Kids killed by getting access to
firearms is also very rare.


Actually, gun crime is on the rise in the UK.

people kill people - and if they have access to guns, they can do it
more efficiently and in larger numbers.


Or a gallon of gasoline, a motor vehicle, or Semtex on buses.




As for obscure cites...what may be obscure to a Brit, may well be
common in the US. Speaking of obscure...ask any American what Test
Cricket is and is it popular?


Your probably correct - I have no interest in test cricket, its an
unimaginably boring game that can go for 3 days and result in a draw.
I don't understand it. Likewise, I don't have the cultural background
to understand the gun thing.

G Yet at least one nation is mad about it.


true. other nations are mad about guns..I dont understand that either.

Now you can turn your obvious bias back on and go on another snit.


nah. But will shut up, its obviously pointless. Will stick to
metalwork.


Your bias is pointless indeed, when you are not a Yank. Yanks
btw..who after an attempted gun grab by their government, tossed the
******s out and formed a new government. And have repeatedly sent you
lads guns when you didnt have enough of your own.

Seems you are doomed to repeat history. One need only review British
history for the bloody periods when arms were only for the highborn
and their minions.

Be well

Gunner


Andrew VK3BFA.


G

Gunner

  #307   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 733
Default Take yer gun to the mall

Gunner wrote:

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:50:13 -0700, Lew Hartswick
wrote:


nick hull wrote:

Few police have ever been shot at


We just had a female state police shot dead in Las Cruces
recently. I supose that dosent count. :-(
...lew...




One is "few"

The leading cause of death among police officers, is traffic
accidents.

The majority of police shootings, are shootings done with their own
weapon, after having it taken away from them by the suspect, who didnt
have one of his own.

Shall we disarm all police officers for their own safety?

Gunner


I dunno.

I think _I_ would feel safer.

The English Bobbies really impressed me.
They were approachable.

They didn't seem like tough guys - which many police officers here seem
to want to be.

And, since they are never around when a crime is being comitted...

  #308   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,210
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 02:56:16 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Dec 18, 3:24 am, Gunner wrote:
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:22:03 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Dec 10, 5:05 pm, "SteveB" wrote:
I saw a clear full body picture of the Omaha shooter. Anyone who had a
concealed weapon and who could shoot decently could have lessened the
carnage. If you got a CCW, carry your weapon.


Steve


OK. I will probably regret the flames I get BUT


Are you saying that the populace needs to be armed when they go out to
get a bottle of milk, lest they encounter a "bad guy" and need to
defend themselves?


What if the "bad guy" gets the drop on you, and kills you. Is it YOUR
fault as you were not quick enough to "defend" yourself? (seems to be
a common thread by some here...)


Do you want to be in a combat ready state of paranoia when you leave
your house?


Are you happy living in a society where such things see to be a
frequent occurrence?


How come you Yanks are so obsessed with guns? -


Your otherwise decent people - what gives with this gun nuttiness?


Andrew VK3BFA


One assumes you not only dont wear your seat belt, but incourage
others to not wear theirs. And have removed all the batteries from
your residential smoke detectors and have stored away all your fire
extinguishers and first aid kits.

After all..to actually have them at hand, is the sign of paranoia and
an obsession.

Gunner


. Well. I remembered what the last thing Gunner mentioned - it was the
fire extinguisher, and how if you don't have a gun, a fire
extinguisher is no good to you.


Blink blink....waa????

On the face of it, this is a nonsensical statement - but I thought,
mm, there must be a logic here I cant understand, after all, Gunners
views are similar to many other pro-gun people here, they cannot all
be nutters. Besides, no one has beaten him to death yet, so he cant be
too bad....In GunnerLand, things are simple, so I came up with this
amplification of Gunners fire extinguisher beliefs, based directly on
my own life experiences.

When I got married, many years ago, I hadn't realised that my lovely
wife had a tendency to set fire to the kitchen. This has happened
twice, and both times I was able to put the fire out, then rebuild the
kitchen. After the first one, I counselled here on this extensively,
stressed the need to be safety conscious and not walk away from the
chip pan and start having long phone conversations with her
girlfriends. I thought I had got my point across, she promised it
would not happen again.

After the second time, I decided more drastic efforts were needed. In
GunnerLand, the solution would have been simple, expeditious, and
direct. Shoot her - she was a proven danger to my life, and the lives
of others. Ergo, I had a Right to shoot her in Self Defence. She was
an unlicensed person who had, somehow, in spite of all the checks and
balances, manged to get hold of a kitchen and was behaving in a
dangerous manner.


Actually...having a fire extinguisher at hand would have been much
better and more in line with what I actually wrote, rather than what
you wanted to read.

But, call me a sentimental softy, I couldn't do this - besides, she is
a great cook and good with the kids.

So I went and bought a fire extinguisher and a fire blanket. This
proved to be a total solution, the mere presence of them on the
kitchen wall has averted any more incidents. And my wife is still
here.


OOO...so the right tool for the job is a good thing?

So, my conclusions. You don't NEED to carry a gun and be prepared to
use it, a fire extinguisher will do just as well. I have proved this
beyond reasonable doubt (see above - no lie) - just the very presence
of a fire extinguisher will avert any life threatening situations.

I rest my case. Its entirely consistent with the logic of the group.

Andrew VK3BFA.



Andy..you are a very wierd animal.

Gunner
  #309   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 733
Default Take yer gun to the mall

SteveB wrote:

"cavelamb himself" wrote in message
...

SteveB wrote:


"cavelamb himself" wrote



I personally own many firearms and have never felt the need to carry
concealed.

TMT


I won't make a habit of it, but I completely agree hee.

Richard


All it takes is one bad experience, Richard. BTW, how's those stainless
projects coming? I am going to Vegas over the next few weeks. Need any
more?

Steve


Sure Steve!


I cut exactly two of them so far.
Really impressive light show with an abrasive blade in the chop saw!
LOUD too.
But I CAN cet then stripped out.

Can they slice 1" wide strips?

If possible...


Richard

See, beggars CAN be choosie!

BTW,

New interior sketch is up.
I never did like the clunky port side appliance.

Scroll down about 3 screens...

http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb/c18-cab.htm



I'll dig through the scrap barrel. Hopefully they'll have more this time.
I just returned today from Vegas. Had a colonoscopy at ten then we drove
back about three. My wife drove. I really didn't feel like going and
digging through scrap today and making a mess in their yard. Literally.

Next trip, I'll try to get over there. If it's a lucky day, they have a
BUNCH, maybe even some small strips like you need.

Steve




Uhm, my condolences - but way too much detail!!!



Feel better soon. That's an order.

Richard
  #310   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,138
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:45:56 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:15:16 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

Yes, its a good summary of your situation. I have no issue with that.


Then why do you presume to inject your irrelevant fantasy world into
reality so frequently?


How many times have you had to pull your gun in "reality," Dave? In other
words, what kind of cockeyed reality do you live in? A shooting gallery, and
you're the duck?


Irrelevant. The right to own something confers no obligation to
defend a need to own it, to you or anyone else.


Pity you need to, though. Glad I don't have to be armed and ready to
do the same.


Yeah, like that. The point I'm making, which you're missing, is that I
don't care that you don't get it. Really. But when I do care is when
peole who, like you, don't get it, want to stop me from dealing with
reality.


It sounds like Andrew lives in reality; you live in the fantasy. Do you do a
lot of dry fire practice before going to bed? Do you keep your gun handy
when you watch movies with bad guys on TV?


It sounds like Andrew's perception of reality is more in line with
yours.

For that matter, what suggestion has Andrew made that he wants to stop you
from dealing with "reality"? Have you been feeling paranoid lately?


Reread, please. He said "people like [Andrew]". Does that fit you?

You could ease your tensions by getting more target practice. Make up a big
puppet and label it "Liberal." Stuff with straw. Fire away.


That is gratuitous patronization unworthy of your ability to
contribute.


  #311   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 75
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"cavelamb himself" wrote in message
...
SteveB wrote:

"cavelamb himself" wrote


I personally own many firearms and have never felt the need to carry
concealed.

TMT


I won't make a habit of it, but I completely agree hee.

Richard



All it takes is one bad experience, Richard. BTW, how's those stainless
projects coming? I am going to Vegas over the next few weeks. Need any
more?

Steve


Sure Steve!


I cut exactly two of them so far.
Really impressive light show with an abrasive blade in the chop saw!
LOUD too.
But I CAN cet then stripped out.

Can they slice 1" wide strips?

If possible...


Richard

See, beggars CAN be choosie!

BTW,

New interior sketch is up.
I never did like the clunky port side appliance.

Scroll down about 3 screens...

http://www.home.earthlink.net/~cavelamb/c18-cab.htm


I'll dig through the scrap barrel. Hopefully they'll have more this time.
I just returned today from Vegas. Had a colonoscopy at ten then we drove
back about three. My wife drove. I really didn't feel like going and
digging through scrap today and making a mess in their yard. Literally.

Next trip, I'll try to get over there. If it's a lucky day, they have a
BUNCH, maybe even some small strips like you need.

Steve


  #312   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,924
Default Take yer gun to the mall

SteveB wrote:

So, you have roughly one gun per person in the US. If they would ONLY count
the people who own NO guns, that is a figure I would find more reality
based, as in my household, we have enough for about 25 people............
more or less. Does that mean I'm awash?



Properly equipped.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
  #313   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,138
Default Take yer gun to the mall

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:45:56 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

Do you do a
lot of dry fire practice before going to bed?


Uh oh! How much is a lot? Is this one of the ... shudder... telltale
signs?
  #314   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"SteveB" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On Dec 19, 5:47 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

"Awash with guns" indeed. What poppycock -- and such persistent
poppycock it seems to be!

Well, if not "awash," what the hell do you call a society of 300 million
people and 250 million guns? Askew? g

--
Ed Huntress


I don't think "awash" is the right word. You wouldn't say that we are
awash with cars, would you? Awash implies that there are more than
what anyone knows what to do with the large quanity.

Say one has one 12 gauge pump or automatic shotgun to use for hunting
waterfowl. And another 12 gauge over and under for hunting upland
birds. And a twenty gauge pump or automatic for shooting skeet in the
20 gauge class. I am assuming you can get by with using one of your
12 gauge shotguns for the 12 gauge class and that you don't compete
in the 28 gauge and .410 classes.

Then you might want a .22 and a .38 target pistol. A .22 target
rifle, a .22 to plink with, a .22 center fire for varmit shooting.
Say a .243 for deer hunting and a larger rifle for bigger game.

Well that get you up to 10 guns. And while that may seem like a lot,
they are all suited for different things. So I wouldn't say you were
awash in guns. And none of these are what you would want to have to
carry concealed. And none of them are assault rifles. Also no black
powder guns , collectors guns, or Saturday night specials.

Would you say someone was awash with machine tools because he has a
lathe, drill press, vertical mill, and a bandsaw?

Dan



So, you have roughly one gun per person in the US. If they would ONLY
count the people who own NO guns, that is a figure I would find more
reality based, as in my household, we have enough for about 25
people............


As I have enough for around 10 (eight guns). Which makes me scratch my head
over the claim that 60% of US households have at least one gun. But I
haven't looked into the methodology of that claim. I think it comes from a
Census survey or something.

more or less. Does that mean I'm awash?


Countries can be awash with guns. Individuals are bristling. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress


  #315   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"SteveB" wrote in message
...

wrote


Yes, its a good summary of your situation. I have no issue with that.
Pity you need to, though. Glad I don't have to be armed and ready to
do the same.

Andrew VK3BFA.


Too bad that gladness will turn to sadness when the day comes that you
need self defense and don't have it. Or you have to watch helplessly
while you and yours or friends or people you don't even know have to take
it in the neck. At least go buy a decent sized can of pepper spray.

Enjoy your Pollyannish Utopia. And remember, reality always sneaks in
just to keep things straight. Don't ferget yer rose colored glasses when
you to out.


DOJ says that in one really foul gun-crime year (1982), the proportion of US
citizens who were victims of a gun crime (non-injury, non-fatal, and fatal
combined) was 4.0 per 1,000. The very large majority of those were people
who live in gang-ridden and drug-ridden ghettos.

Who is the Pollyanna here? What is the "reality"?

--
Ed Huntress




  #316   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:49:40 -0600, Don Foreman
wrote:


The U.S. originated as a quest for liberty and independence. It is
part of our culture to want to decide for ourselves as long as we
don't encroach on the rights of others to decide for themselves.
If one doesn't want firearms, he is quite free not to have them. If
another does want them, he is free to have them with varying
restrictions in various locales.



One should note..that the straw that broke the camels back, was an
attempt by the Government, to take the guns away from the People.

The events at Concord ultimately led to the overthrow of the
Government.

Seems that those that ignore history, are doomed to repeat it.

Gunner


And the lesson is...don't stand up and wear red coats if people are shooting
at you. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress


  #317   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:50:13 -0700, Lew Hartswick
wrote:

nick hull wrote:

Few police have ever been shot at


We just had a female state police shot dead in Las Cruces
recently. I supose that dosent count. :-(
...lew...



One is "few"

The leading cause of death among police officers, is traffic
accidents.


Not true. In 2006, 38 were killed in traffic accidents. In the same year, 46
were killed in felonious assaults with guns.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/2006/index.html



The majority of police shootings, are shootings done with their own
weapon, after having it taken away from them by the suspect, who didnt
have one of his own.


Also not true. The FBI's LEOKA (Law Enforcement Officers Killed or
Assaulted) data says that, in the ten years from 1994 to 2003, 499 officers
were feloniously killed with guns. Of those, 42 of those guns were the
officers' own weapons.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/leoka03.pdf (Table 11, page 16)


Shall we disarm all police officers for their own safety?


First, run a bronze bristle brush dipped in Hoppe's No. 9 in one of your
ears and out the other, to clean out the crap in your head. Then re-fill it
with the facts.

--
Ed Huntress


  #318   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:12:03 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Dec 19, 5:15 am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 04:37:40 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Dec 18, 6:50 am, Don Foreman wrote:
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:22:03 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Dec 10, 5:05 pm, "SteveB" wrote:
I saw a clear full body picture of the Omaha shooter. Anyone who
had a
concealed weapon and who could shoot decently could have lessened
the
carnage. If you got a CCW, carry your weapon.


Put your bias aside for a moment, as difficult as I imagine it may be
for you.


No. I enjoy illogical non factual rants to reinforce my long held
prejudices. And honesty enuff to admit it.

Why would you have, seat belts, smoke alarms, fire extinguishers and
first aid kits in your home or vehicle?

Are you expecting a fire or injury or auto accident? Very very few
people ever experience such in their lives. Since they are
exceedingly rare, is it paranoid to have them around or to use them?

By your criteria, it would appear to be so.


Fire alarms - if I go off my brain in the mall, can I pull out my fire
alarm and kill people with it. No. A gun would be better.
Seat belts - they have been compulsory here since the 1970's. Rate of
fatal car crashes has declined by 50% per head of population. I
suppose I could unbolt the seat belt from my car and ram it down
someones throat and so kill them....but a gun would be better.


Im aware of a case where a nutter beat 2 people to death with a fire
extinguisher, and maimed a third.
On the other hand, the FBI and Department of Justice research
indicates that firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens stops
between 800,000 and 1.5 million crimes a year in the US.


Which DOJ is that, Gunner? The DOJ of Swaziland? Here's what the United
States DOJ says:

"On average in 1987-92 about 83,000 crime victims per year used a
firearm to defend themselves or their property."

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/hvfsdaft.txt

That's about 0.00027 of the US population -- less than 3 for every 10,000
people. Your accuracy average has really been in a slump lately. It's
dropped from around 35% to about 5%.

--
Ed Huntress


  #319   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:45:56 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:15:16 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

Yes, its a good summary of your situation. I have no issue with that.

Then why do you presume to inject your irrelevant fantasy world into
reality so frequently?


How many times have you had to pull your gun in "reality," Dave? In other
words, what kind of cockeyed reality do you live in? A shooting gallery,
and
you're the duck?


Irrelevant. The right to own something confers no obligation to
defend a need to own it, to you or anyone else.


Don't start the bait-and-switch, Don. We aren't talking about rights. We're
talking about Dave's definition of "reality." His reality appears to be
pretty weird one, in terms of actual events.

You know full well that I have no problem with his right to defend himself.
What I have a problem with is his idea of what the real probabilities are.
Andrew seems to be living in the real world. Dave appears to be living in a
bad movie.



Pity you need to, though. Glad I don't have to be armed and ready to
do the same.

Yeah, like that. The point I'm making, which you're missing, is that I
don't care that you don't get it. Really. But when I do care is when
peole who, like you, don't get it, want to stop me from dealing with
reality.


It sounds like Andrew lives in reality; you live in the fantasy. Do you do
a
lot of dry fire practice before going to bed? Do you keep your gun handy
when you watch movies with bad guys on TV?


It sounds like Andrew's perception of reality is more in line with
yours.


It also seems to be more accurate, unless you're a gang-banger drug dealer
who lives in a crack alley on the bad side of Memphis.


For that matter, what suggestion has Andrew made that he wants to stop you
from dealing with "reality"? Have you been feeling paranoid lately?


Reread, please. He said "people like [Andrew]". Does that fit you?


People "like Andrew" doesn't include Andrew? Are you reading your own words,
Don? It sure sounds to me like he's including Andrew himself. By what logic
is he not? And I'll ask you what I asked him: By what twisted logic do you
come to the conclusion that Andrew wants to grab your guns?

Andrew seems to have his head screwed on straight. Dave is living a paranoid
fantasy and Gunner has a head full of mush fed to him by the loony-tunes at
Guncite.

You want to run some numbers, and see what's real? Or would you rather live
in a fantasy world, like them?

Here's an example: Gunner's "data" on the number of times guns are used in
defense is based on a study by Gary Kleck, which I know well, and about
which I wrote an analysis in 1994 (no, I don't still have it; it went the
way of old hard disks). There was an attempt to repeat some of it by the
DOJ/National Institute of Justice in 1997, reported by Philip J. Cook and
Jens Ludwig:

http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles/165476.pdf.

It's unlikely that Gunner has ever read that study, but he's probably read
the Guncite summaries and Kleck's commentary about it. In fact, unless he
continues to pretend he doesn't read my posts, he'll find some way to
respond to my recent one with DOJ figures and he'll probably quote this,
unless he reads this post first g:

"There are approximately two million defensive gun uses (DGU's) per year by
law abiding citizens. That was one of the findings in a national survey
conducted by Gary Kleck, a Florida State University criminologist in 1993.
Prior to Dr. Kleck's survey, thirteen other surveys indicated a range of
between 800,000 to 2.5 million DGU's annually. However these surveys each
had their flaws which prompted Dr. Kleck to conduct his own study
specifically tailored to estimate the number of DGU's annually.

"Subsequent to Kleck's study, the Department of Justice sponsored a survey
in 1994 titled, Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and
Use of Firearms (text, PDF). Using a smaller sample size than Kleck's, this
survey estimated 1.5 million DGU's annually."

But what Guncite doesn't tell you is that the DOJ study (NSPOF) fairly
obliterates Kleck's study. Here, they're talking about how they closely
copied his methodology and got equally ridiculous results:

"For other crimes listed in exhibit 8, the results are almost as absurd: the
NSPOF estimate of DGU robberies is 36 percent of all NCVS [National Crime
Vicitimization Survey] -estimated robberies, while the NSPOF estimate of DGU
assaults is 19 percent of all aggravated assaults. If those percentages were
close to accurate, crime would be a risky business indeed! [What they're
saying here is that repeating Kleck's study leads to the conclusion that
people defended themselves with a gun in 19 percent of aggravated assaults
and 36 percent of robberies. Considering that actual defensive use of a gun
as reported by police in actual crimes runs between 1% and 3%, the
conclusion is that the Kleck study gives you crap results to the tune of
10:1 or even much more. That agrees with the relative numbers Gunner and I
cited in a recent post. He's at least 10:1 full of crap, in other words.]

"NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed
by civilian gun defenders. That number also appears completely out of line
with other, more reliable statistics on the number of gunshot cases."

Gaackk! Yeah, I'll say it's out of line, unless something over 100,000
gunshot victims per year are self-medicating. Maybe they're doing
self-surgery with a Bowie knife and a bottle of whiskey. d8-) What I didn't
repeat here is the statistic that Kleck's study, and the NSPOF duplicate of
it, indicate that women defend themselves with guns in rape attempts, in
more cases than all of the rapes AND ATTEMPTED RAPES reported in the
National Crime Victimization Survey. There sure must be a lot of
pistol-packing mommas out there! Cloud-cuckooland, anyone?

Kleck makes a few good points in his response but unfortunately they address
the wrong issue. He gives reasons that the NSPOF study underreports the
numbers. But the NSPOF actually came up with numbers almost as ridiculous as
his. The real issue is that the methodology leads to demonstrably ridiculous
results. Kleck's study was very carefully done, very scientific...crap. Read
the NSPOF study and you'll get a clearer picture of what this is all about.

Of course, Guncite tells you none of this and Gunner probably has never
heard it before. That's why his head is full of mush. As for Dave, it's
harder to characterize his fantasies but he seems to think the world is out
to get him. Maybe he wears Nomex suits when he drives his car, too; it would
make a lot more sense, statistically speaking.

The bottom line here is that rights are one issue: I believe that anyone has
a right to defend him- or herself, and that can include defense with a
concealed-carry gun if they reasonably believe that's what is required. I'm
not quibbling over percentages in terms of rights.

But don't try to tell me that it makes sense in terms of real threats, or
that it's "reality." That, simply put, is nuts. Reality is that you're four
times more likely to be killed in a car accident, even if you don't count
where you live. If you live and work in a decent community, it's probably
more like 50 times more likely, or even more. But few people who claim
they're carrying a gun to defend themselves against "reality" would even
consider wearing five-point seatbelts, having a full rollcage, and wearing a
firesuit. Any of those things is far more likely to protect them from injury
or death, in reality, than carrying a gun. Reality is the numbers.


You could ease your tensions by getting more target practice. Make up a
big
puppet and label it "Liberal." Stuff with straw. Fire away.


That is gratuitous patronization unworthy of your ability to
contribute.


Dave lives and breathes gratuitous patronization. It's time to toss a little
back at him.

--
Ed Huntress


  #320   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 75
Default Take yer gun to the mall


"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 09:45:56 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

Do you do a
lot of dry fire practice before going to bed?


Uh oh! How much is a lot? Is this one of the ... shudder... telltale
signs?


In my last CCF class (4th), the instructor stressed that we should wear an
unloaded (duh) gun around the house in the same configuration we would when
going out. And to practice pulling it out slowly and quickly to see if
there were any restrictions or malfunctions of equipment, such as snaps,
potential hangups, and just things one would want to know before being in a
tactical situation. It made sense to me. I do it occasionally, and it's
kinda fun. Sometimes me and my girlfriend have this game ............ but I
digress ................

Steve


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hot deals at Planet Mall! ABS Home Repair 0 August 18th 07 09:19 PM
china culture mall Chelsea Metalworking 0 August 3rd 07 06:42 PM
O.T. Make Way For Yet Another Shopping Mall G Henslee Home Repair 5 June 25th 05 12:14 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:45 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"