News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

NRA's enemies list.

Started by Brian37, February 14, 2013, 10:39:53 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Thumpalumpacus

Quote from: "Brian37"It is not just mentally disturbed and this isn't just about mass shootings. EVERY SINGLE DAY, on average 32 people die from everything, suicide, family murder, and gang violence, because of guns.

Most of this is caused by economic distress and an industry that does not care about the amount of guns in the hands of a climate of economically unstable society.

I'd argue that treating the root causes of the violence would not only provide results at least as useful as passing another law banning this or that gun-type, it would also do the human beings involved a world of good.
<insert witty aphorism here>

Alaric I

Quote from: "Mathias"I know  that's healthier, the same way that drinking water from an iceberg or sowing and harvesting fruits and vegetables, and I doubt that anyone who hunts like that. I'm talking about people who like to kill or do without using hunting for food. But I doubt it's as cheap as many here claim.

Are you saying that people don't hunt for the food?  You are sorely mistaken if that is your stance.  There are few "trophy" hunters out there.  My mom grew up on hunted meat, I feed my kids on hunted meat.  As far as your "I doubt it's as cheap as people say" theory, I broke what I pay every year to hunt and feed my family for one year.

Mathias

#212
Quote from: "Alaric I"Not 100% sure what you are trying to say here (sorry, language barrier) but it sounds as if you are asking if hunting is economical.  It is quite economical, hamburger meat here is averaged at around $1.15 per pound (2.25 Brazilian Real per pound).  I can get two animals butchered for around $80, factor in my ammo at around $12, the license for $30, and I have a years worth of meat for $122. This is way less than you would pay at the grocery store.


You are taking into consideration, purchase and maintenance of the weapon; license fees for hunting and possessing the same; transport costs and social cost (time spent which gets you out of the house)???
Here in my country is not so simple to go out with a gun and hunt due to distance and lack of places allowed animals to hunt worthwhile. Since fish is very easy, but as I said, I find it very annoying.

 
QuoteNot at all, in fact hunting is keeping the numers from exploding.  The Dept of Fish and Game are there to regualte it.  If a species is low or balanced than they remove hunting rights for that species.  If they are high then they limit the number you can get.


QuoteThis is your choice and completely fine with me, however if you have seen how they treat animals in captivity vs how hunters treat them, you might change your mind.

QuoteI see my opinion in this regard is even somewhat biased and wrong. But I still do not understand how a country as industrialized may have many wild animals as well!
For all I know the forest areas and the like are becoming smaller due to farmland, livestock and urbanization.

Even so, I would prefer that cattle would be created by the old fashioned way and leave the wildlife alone, because if there are many to hunt because there is an imbalance that causes this, showing that something is very wrong. I do not see hunting as something fun and would otherwise be spent on necessities.
"There is no logic in the existence of any god".
Myself.

Thumpalumpacus

#213
Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"No, it wasn't. It was a subargument about the knowledge about how to hack a smart gun would eventually disseminate. Part of that argument is realizing that gunsmiths would have backdoors into the smart guns for maintenance purposes, backdoors which will eventually be compromised.

Here's what you wrote:

QuoteOh, that reminds me of another set of people who could take apart a gun: gunsmiths.

Are you now adding to this quote the idea that gunsmiths will share the knowledge of their craft?  That doesn't seem very sensible to me.

Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"Why do you assume that the security system and its details will remain hidden forever? Are you expecting all licensed gunsmiths to remain on the good side of the law forever, and be able to —without fail— keep that information 100% secure at all times, when that's never happened before?

I dont' assume that.  As I've written already, several times, I don't expect this to be a panacea.  It is not a magic bullet.  This is another example of you lading my points down with consequences I'm not saying will arise.  In this case, I am not assuming that it will remain hidden forever.

Just as an aside, I'm not big on absolutes like "never", "always", "forever", "everyone" -- things like that set off my bullshit detector, so I avoid those sorts of constructs.

The corollary to that is that when you're reading my posts, if you are summarizing it using one of those terms, you're almoost certainly reading it wrong, because I don't think or write in terms of absolutes.

Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"You keep concentrating on the technological aspect of smart guns, when the weakest link is and will always be the hairless apes that operate them.

I'm focusing on the technological aspects because I think it's much easier to change gun design than human nature.  Don't you agree?

Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"Well, I now believe you when you say that you don't have any technical expertese of the problem.

There's a fundamental flaw in your thinking, in that all levels and stages within the firing electronics are going to perform this verification. This is not the case. Between the chemical reaction that fires the bullet down the barrel and the electical signal to fire, there is an elementary electical element called a transducer. A transducer turns electrical energy into a physical action (or vice versa, but we'll get to that). It will not do any sort of decoding of the signal, because it is the energy of the electical pulse that is being transformed. A hot wire igniter would trigger the chemical reaction through Ohmic heating; a solenoid would trigger the reaction by turning into an electromagnet and slamming an iron core carrying a pin into the primer.

At no point in the transducer does any analysis take place of the signal. So if you can get rid of everything upstream of the tranducer and replace it with a dumb circuit that delivers the required electrical pulse to the transducer, then the gun will fire.

I'll have to digest this further, because I'm indeed not a technician.



Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"Yes, but that means that the gun will have to be sent back to the manufacturer for refurbishing if you make that mistake. Even if the manufacturer provides that service free of charge, that's still a few weeks you're not going to have your gun. It's an inconvenience that many gun owners aren't going to stand for.

I agree, they won't like it.  No rights are untrammelled, and if you're a responsible gun-owner, you won't need to worry about this.

Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"No amount of want or determination will create a gun or bullets out of thin air. That's why you don't yet have your magic smart guns that fulfill all of your wants and needs — because such things can only come through research and then manufacturing of the weapons and ammunition.

Homemade guns are a fact.  [See also:  http://improguns.blogspot.com/, http://mikecooperbooks.com/2011/10/homemade-guns/]

Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"We wouldn't have so many gun problems if we weren't flush with guns. We're flush with guns because so many people want them that it is profitable for arms manufacturers to sell them to civilians, and it is legal to sell them to civilians. An effective gun law is actually directed against the manufacturers, not individuals. If it is illegal for civilians to own assault rifles, then their manufacturers cannot net much profit for providing them to civilians, because they couldn't provide them legally, and at the same time exposes them to legal peril for distributing guns illegally. The result is those assault rifles will never be made in quantity to be used to commit all those crimes. Anti-gun laws keep guns out of circulation by keeping them from being made in the first place.

Indeed.  Do you know the difference between an assault rifle and a semi-automatic rifle?

Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"With smart guns, the guns still exist in approximately the same quantity as the dumb guns, they're just muzzled in a special way. So what happens when people find ways to take those muzzles off? Then you're back to the same problem with dumb guns.

And yet another law that criminals won't abide will put us right back into the same problem too, don't you think?  Simply demanding that manufacturers stop building this or that class of weapons is not going to make the extant weapons vanish.  

Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"That's the other thing: seeking a technological answer for what is actually a human problem, and furthermore seeking a future, speculative technological answer to solve a present, exant human problem. You see the problem I'm having with this?

I think changing human nature is much more difficult.

Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"Because all batteries lose their charge over time, and rechargable batteries have a recharge limit on top of having a lesser energy density. I don't know of a single battery type that will take pulsed recharging well.

I agree that I've never heard of or read about pulsed recharge like that.  But even if it does come down to having the recharger located outside the gun, and plugging the gun in to recharge the battery, and every couple of years buying a new battery, that doesn't strike me as any real problem.  We already do that with cell phones.

Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"Moore's law is starting to bump up against hard physical limits as we speak. One of the more important ones is that capacitance and heat production is becoming an issue in ICs. Also, Moore's law does not apply outside of computers. We got those men to the moon by strapping them to a big-ass rocket over a tenth of a kilometer tall, because no smaller rocket could do the task.

My point is that in both fields, the technological speed of advance took people very much by surprise.

Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"The problem with your smart guns solution is that, so far, it's a bullet that's entirely mythical.

The word you're looking for is "hypothetical", not "mythical".  This is a point I've already acknowledged several times, so, yes.

Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"You're putting forward ideas that even my meager knowledge of electrical engineering and electronics say "definitely impossible," such as your "coded signal to the transducer" malarky. You are putting forward technological solutions when all of them require humans to act, at various times, like perfect machines or complete drooling imbiciles when they quite manifestly are neither.

No, I'm not.  But your own notions about how to approach this issue are probably coloring your interpretations of my points, as noted above when I've had to point out several times that I'm not utilizing absolutist verbiage.  

That's not a slam, either, because I freely admit I am subject to my own biases as well.  I tend to think that this can be done, with research.  You clearly disagree, and that's cool.

Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"Then you need to avoid such statements like the following:

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"It's particularly so for me, because the extremists on both sides of the issue refuse to consider that there may well be a solution that can satisfy the demands of both camps, in the form of smart guns.
Last time I checked, the bringing of gun violence way down is part of the anti-gun camp, and that won't happen without a severe curtailment of gun violence.

I'm not sure how you got from that quote that I think this would make gun violence impossible.

Once again, this is absolutist verbiage that you're applying to my points that is not in them.
<insert witty aphorism here>

Alaric I

Quote from: "Mathias"
Quote from: "Alaric I"Not 100% sure what you are trying to say here (sorry, language barrier) but it sounds as if you are asking if hunting is economical.  It is quite economical, hamburger meat here is averaged at around $1.15 per pound (2.25 Brazilian Real per pound).  I can get two animals butchered for around $80, factor in my ammo at around $12, the license for $30, and I have a years worth of meat for $122. This is way less than you would pay at the grocery store.


You are taking into consideration, purchase and maintenance of the weapon; license fees for hunting and possessing the same; transport costs and social cost (time spent which gets you out of the house)???
Here in my country is not so simple to go out with a gun and hunt due to distance and lack of places allowed animals to hunt worthwhile. Since fish is very easy, but as I said, I find it very annoying.

Read the bolded portions again and then get back to me.

 

Quote from: "Mathias"I know a lot of people (including me) that don't have this physiological reaction. I feel like a coward pointing a gun to kill another being that I would not be harming or threatening.

 
Even so, I would prefer to be created by cattle the old fashioned way and leave the wildlife alone, because if there are many to hunt because there is an imbalance that causes this, showing that something is very wrong. I do not see hunting as something fun and would otherwise be spent on necessities.


You seem to have two stance here that contradict each other.  On one hand you don't want to harm an animal and are admit to being too cowardly to point a gun at one.  On the other you want to eat cattle, which are treated poorly, held in captivity, and then brutally slaughtered vs. a quick clean kill.  So are you you against harming them or aren't you?

Bibliofagus

#215
Quote from: "Alaric I"
Quote from: "Bibliofagus"Nukes don't kill people. People with nukes kill people.
So there's no reason at all whatsoever to ban nukes.


I think this is one of the most inconstrued sayings ever.  

Yes! I put some effort into that. Thank you for noticing.

Quote from: "Alaric I"It is poorly written and one that people love to use.  

Yes! I put some effort into that. Thank you for noticing.

Quote from: "Alaric I"Sure, bad unscrupulous people kill people, but the [s:17wru6ng]gun[/s:17wru6ng] nuke helps.

Fify and... Erm... Confused over here. Maybe you've misinterpreted what I said?

Quote from: "Alaric I"There definitely needs to be better regulation, but I don't see any reason to ban [s:17wru6ng]guns[/s:17wru6ng] nukes.

Me neither. Nukes are okay. There is no reason at all these should not be sold to the likes of timothy mcveigh ;)
Quote from: \"the_antithesis\"Faith says, "I believe this and I don\'t care what you say, I cannot possibly be wrong." Faith is an act of pride.

Quote from: \"AllPurposeAtheist\"The moral high ground was dug up and made into a walmart apparently today.

Tornadoes caused: 2, maybe 3.

stromboli

Like I said many pages back-
Hunting serves the purpose of game conservation. Managed herds, where a certain amount of hunting permits per unit are allowed, keeps the herds at optimum numbers to avoid overgrazing. Also keeps animals from needing to come down into human territory, which lowers the number of car/deer related incidents.
From Wikipedia:
QuoteIn 2000, of the 6.1 million lightweight motor vehicle collisions reported in the US, 247,000 crashes involved deer-vehicle collisions.[1] Deer-vehicle collisions lead to about 200 human deaths and $1.1 billion in property damage every year.[2] State and federal governments, insurance companies, and drivers spend an addition $3 billion in an effort to reduce and manage the increasing number of deer-vehicle collisions.[3] The term "deer-vehicle collision" is commonly annotated throughout safety agencies as DVC.
Annual hunts are one of the best ways to control this. They also PAY FOR THEMSELVES, providing income that supports animal control and game management. That dude in the hunter orange is SAVING YOU TAXPAYER DOLLARS, WHILE HELPING TO CONTROL OVERPOPULATION OF ANIMALS, get it?

Meat hunters outnumber trophy hunters by a wide margin. Meat hunting is as economical as you make it. I fed my family with deer meat, which is much healthier than beef, btw. Figure the cost of a rifle over length of ownership (many decades) initial purchase of gear, only needing to be bought once and consumables (mostly gas) Over time, the cost of hunting ends up being about the same as super market costs for less quality meat.

Like I said, Ducks Unlimited is the NUMBER ONE SOURCE of care for waterfowl flyways and reserves. They fund it, and they spend countless hours physically working on it. We have an excellent population of waterfowl and fine waterfowl reserves thanks to them. The fucking problem is that the animal lovers get all boo hoo about, oh gees, shooting Bambi, until Bambi is starving and eating out of your back yard, and maybe killing your dog in self defense.

Knee jerk responses don't solve problems or generate the whole story. Learn the facts first.

Alaric I

Quote from: "Bibliofagus"
Quote from: "Alaric I"Sure, bad unscrupulous people kill people, but the [s:302j4pup]gun[/s:302j4pup] nuke helps.

Fify and... Erm... Confused over here. Maybe you've misinterpreted what I said?

Apparently I did.  I thought you were trying to be sarcastic, what did you mean?

Quote from: "Bibliofagus"
Quote from: "Alaric I"There definitely needs to be better regulation, but I don't see any reason to ban [s:302j4pup]guns[/s:302j4pup] nukes.

Me neither. Nukes are okay. There is no reason at all these should not be sold to the likes of timothy mcveigh.

Oh, I get it now, you just want to mess with new guy. Cool story bro.

Mathias

Quote from: "Alaric I"Read the bolded portions again and then get back to me.

Ok, It's healthier and cheapest, but even in a city like New York or Boston, for example?
 

Quote from: "Mathias"I know a lot of people (including me) that don't have this physiological reaction. I feel like a coward pointing a gun to kill another being that I would not be harming or threatening.

 
Even so, I would prefer to be created by cattle the old fashioned way and leave the wildlife alone, because if there are many to hunt because there is an imbalance that causes this, showing that something is very wrong. I do not see hunting as something fun and would otherwise be spent on necessities.

Quote from: "Alaric I"You seem to have two stance here that contradict each other.  On one hand you don't want to harm an animal and are admit to being too cowardly to point a gun at one.  On the other you want to eat cattle, which are treated poorly, held in captivity, and then brutally slaughtered vs. a quick clean kill.  So are you you against harming them or aren't you?


I am against the way they treat animals and hunting. I doubt that anyone who hunts would stop hunting. I don't like processed hamburgers, but never had the habit (like my father and grandfather didn't ) to hunt (at most fishing).
I know the evil that livestock make to the world and I think the only solution would be civilized hunting for food and severe punishment for those who mistreat livestock.
I try to eat meat created loose (don't know the correct term) and is even more expensive, as well as organic vegetables. This world is very wrong in several aspects and my contradictions only prove it. :)
"There is no logic in the existence of any god".
Myself.

Bibliofagus

#219
Quote from: "Alaric I"Oh, I get it now, you just want to mess with new guy. Cool story bro.

Nope. My original post was not adressed to you.
Funny thing is that in many ways what I actually did say is supportive to your position.
Quote from: \"the_antithesis\"Faith says, "I believe this and I don\'t care what you say, I cannot possibly be wrong." Faith is an act of pride.

Quote from: \"AllPurposeAtheist\"The moral high ground was dug up and made into a walmart apparently today.

Tornadoes caused: 2, maybe 3.

wolf39us

Quote from: "Mathias"I am against the way they treat animals and hunting. I doubt that anyone who hunts would stop hunting. I don't like processed hamburgers, but never had the habit (like my father and grandfather didn't ) to hunt (at most fishing).
I know the evil that livestock make to the world and I think the only solution would be civilized hunting for food and severe punishment for those who mistreat livestock.
I try to eat meat created loose (don't know the correct term) and is even more expensive, as well as organic vegetables. This world is very wrong in several aspects and my contradictions only prove it. :)

U TAKE AWAY MY BACON???

GRRRRRRR    :x

Alaric I

Quote from: "Mathias"
Quote from: "Alaric I"Read the bolded portions again and then get back to me.

Ok, It's healthier and cheapest, but even in a city like New York or Boston, for example?

People in the big citites usually will not hunt.  They have gotten away from their primal feelings.  Technology isn't always a good thing.

Quote from: "Mathias"I know a lot of people (including me) that don't have this physiological reaction. I feel like a coward pointing a gun to kill another being that I would not be harming or threatening.

 
Even so, I would prefer to be created by cattle the old fashioned way and leave the wildlife alone, because if there are many to hunt because there is an imbalance that causes this, showing that something is very wrong. I do not see hunting as something fun and would otherwise be spent on necessities.

Quote from: "Alaric I"You seem to have two stance here that contradict each other.  On one hand you don't want to harm an animal and are admit to being too cowardly to point a gun at one.  On the other you want to eat cattle, which are treated poorly, held in captivity, and then brutally slaughtered vs. a quick clean kill.  So are you you against harming them or aren't you?


Quote from: "Mathias"I am against the way they treat animals and hunting. I doubt that anyone who hunts would stop hunting. I don't like processed hamburgers, but never had the habit (like my father and grandfather didn't ) to hunt (at most fishing).
I know the evil that livestock make to the world and I think the only solution would be civilized hunting for food and severe punishment for those who mistreat livestock.
I try to eat meat created loose (don't know the correct term) and is even more expensive, as well as organic vegetables. This world is very wrong in several aspects and my contradictions only prove it. :)


If you could please explain what you mean by the word "loose"?  I don't understand this and wish to get a better idea of what you mean.

Thumpalumpacus

I think he means "free", as in "free-range" or perhaps even "wild".
<insert witty aphorism here>

Alaric I

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"I think he means "free", as in "free-range" or perhaps even "wild".
Aha, that makes sense.  But even then they have to be slaughtered, either with a quick shot like you would a deer, or brutaly like is the case with commercial meats.  Either way his stance makes sense.  Most people that feel the way he describes are vegeans, vegetarians at best.

Mathias

Quote from: "wolf39us"
Quote from: "Mathias"I am against the way they treat animals and hunting. I doubt that anyone who hunts would stop hunting. I don't like processed hamburgers, but never had the habit (like my father and grandfather didn't ) to hunt (at most fishing).
I know the evil that livestock make to the world and I think the only solution would be civilized hunting for food and severe punishment for those who mistreat livestock.
I try to eat meat created loose (don't know the correct term) and is even more expensive, as well as organic vegetables. This world is very wrong in several aspects and my contradictions only prove it. :)

U TAKE AWAY MY BACON???

GRRRRRRR    :x


Pork is my favorite, but you can try tempeh to calm your nerves ... :)
"There is no logic in the existence of any god".
Myself.