warpedskydiver 0 #151 October 25, 2007 For someone who is involved in a sport where we must all take personal responsibility, you then show a lack of consitancy in that you are willing to shift blame to an inanimite object. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #152 October 25, 2007 Quote2004 unintentional: firearm deaths = 649 so you are stuck on that? Yes I am , especially if any one of them were kids.7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #153 October 25, 2007 QuoteFor someone who is involved in a sport where we must all take personal responsibility, you then show a lack of consitancy in that you are willing to shift blame to an inanimite object. I am sorry you see it that way. Edit Add: Not one inanimite object in skydving is designed to cause death.7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #154 October 25, 2007 QuoteBullshit. Please post the findings of the investigation, reduced force to fire is no accident, someone had to squeeze a trigger. Unless you are speaking of the brown bess you carried as a lad. Please will you indicate exactly where I said that "someone" was not involved? Calling my post "Bullshit" without your having ANY knowledge of what happened just makes you look foolish and hostile.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #155 October 25, 2007 QuoteQuote2004 unintentional: firearm deaths = 649 so you are stuck on that? Yes I am , especially if any one of them were kids. So why aren't you crusading against safe storage of household cleaning supplies and replacement of bathtubs with showers since those claim a _lot_ more children's lives? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #156 October 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuote2004 unintentional: firearm deaths = 649 so you are stuck on that? Yes I am , especially if any one of them were kids. So why aren't you crusading against safe storage of household cleaning supplies and replacement of bathtubs with showers since those claim a _lot_ more children's lives? Because: 1. That'snot what this post is about 2. The items you named have a purpose besiudes killing, threatning o kill, or protecting yourself by threatning to KILL.7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #157 October 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote2004 unintentional: firearm deaths = 649 so you are stuck on that? Yes I am , especially if any one of them were kids. So why aren't you crusading against safe storage of household cleaning supplies and replacement of bathtubs with showers since those claim a _lot_ more children's lives? Because: 1. That'snot what this post is about 2. The items you named have a purpose besiudes killing, threatning o kill, or protecting yourself by threatning to KILL. As someone said earlier. Damn I've killed a lot of pieces of paper and tin cans! And I threatened 'em too. Hey, I had to protect myself! Would it be better if I just shot to injure them rather than kill them? Bleus, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #158 October 25, 2007 Quote ***Bullshit. I find it quite peculiar a PHYSICS professor is of the opinion that the gun "just went off" due to reduced trigger pull via a nickel plating. Please indicate where I wrote that the gun "just went off" in my post. You just look foolish when you attribute yur own words to others, and then blow your cork over them. Quote I do not care if it was silicon nickel, if the firearm discharged someone was touching a trigger. How do you know that? Were you there? Quote Do not think for yourself, you can just be told things and believe them as if they are true.Were the parts nickel plated just to be more Ghetto or Gangsta? I believe that was the case, but it was more than 20 years ago. Quote I will give you a hint SOMEONE WAS TOUCHING THE TRIGGER Or maybe they dropped it and the modifications had made it out of spec. Quote I abhor people who do not observe trigger discipline, they are NEGLIGENT and a THREAT to SAFETY. Yes, they give gun owners a bad name. However, you went way overboard in response to my post.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #159 October 25, 2007 QuoteGuns are stupid. Chris Rock had it right when he said the cost of each bullet shuold be $5,000. That way you really have to consider if you want to spend that kinda money before shooting someone. Why should hunting a deer cost $5,000? Why should my 88-shot high-power rifle matches cost $440,000 each? Guns do not have the capability of being "stupid" - they are inanimate objects. Only gun users can be stupid. And just because some few gun owners are stupid, does not mean that all the others who aren't, should be punished with $5,000 per bullet punitive costs. Your exhortations continue to prove that your knowledge of this gun issue is waaay behind the learning curve of most people here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #160 October 25, 2007 Why should hunting a deer cost $5,000? --are you familiar with Chris Rock? are you familiar with comedy Why should my 88-shot high-power rifle matches cost $440,000 each? --cuse you dont need it. Guns do not have the capability of being "stupid" - they are inanimate objects. Only gun users can be stupid. -- the idea oif guns is stupid. the idea of developing somwething that's designed to kill is morbid. And just because some few gun owners are stupid, does not mean that all the others who aren't, should be punished with $5,000 per bullet punitive costs. -- its the stupid one that worry me...and again...are you familir with chris rock? Your exhortations continue to prove that your knowledge of this gun issue is waaay behind the learning curve of most people here. Good to see you reading the dictionary. Big words for a man who needs a gun to protect himself.7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #161 October 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSome years ago (at least 20, maybe 25) we were involved in a lawsuit (in that they used our lab to do the testing) that involved a gun that had been modified by a previous owner, and had discharged unexpectedly, killing the current owner. It's a long time ago so I may remember incorrectly, but I believe the modification involved nickel plating some of the parts. It turned out the modification had significantly changed the force needed to fire the gun. Bullshit. Please post the findings of the investigation, reduced force to fire is no accident, someone had to squeeze a trigger. Admit it, you just want to argue with anything he says. He has a good point for that argument. Regardless of how much the pull force had been reduced by nickel plating some parts, he still had to point a loaded gun at someone while touching the trigger. So regardless of the pull force, he was still grossly negligent in his handling of the firearm. While it is true that anyone that shoots themselves is either negligent or suicidal, that in no way invalidates my post, nor is his hostile "Bullshit" response appropriate. As for the discharge being unexpected, if a gun owner is expecting a pull force within normal operating standards, but an unapproved modification has reduced it to 10% of that value, wouldn't the discharge at the lower force be unexpected, regardless of any negligence involved in having the weapon pointing at himself?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #162 October 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteI *DID* say "for this purpose" and I *do* believe that an 18-22 year old CCW holder is going to (generally) be more mature than his age-mates. I think that's wrong. He'll be better "trained" on responsible gun use that his nonCCW age-mates. But you can't delete the fact that he's still only 18-20. Why are you people talking about this age range? CCWs only apply to handguns, which have a floor of 21.... Actually, I looked it up and was surprised to see that ~15 states give them (CCW's) to 18 yo's. "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #163 October 25, 2007 QuoteYou say tomato, i say tomatoe.....we are still left with an unnecessary death. Guns are stupid. Chris Rock had it right when he said the cost of each bullet shuold be $5,000. That way you really have to consider if you want to spend that kinda money before shooting someone. so you think the situation would be improved by having people run around with guns without the benefit of any practice on their accuracy. Yeah, that's a step forward on your war against accidental shootings. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #164 October 25, 2007 QuoteGuns do not have the capability of being "stupid" - they are inanimate objects. Only gun users can be stupid. -- the idea oif guns is stupid. the idea of developing somwething that's designed to kill is morbid. Grow up, man.Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pop 0 #165 October 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteYou say tomato, i say tomatoe.....we are still left with an unnecessary death. Guns are stupid. Chris Rock had it right when he said the cost of each bullet shuold be $5,000. That way you really have to consider if you want to spend that kinda money before shooting someone. so you think the situation would be improved by having people run around with guns without the benefit of any practice on their accuracy. Yeah, that's a step forward on your war against accidental shootings. I dont beleive guns should be legal, unless say for example you make your living or put bread on the table by hunting. To me that's a legitimate NEED for an object developed and used to kill.7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #166 October 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou say tomato, i say tomatoe.....we are still left with an unnecessary death. Guns are stupid. Chris Rock had it right when he said the cost of each bullet shuold be $5,000. That way you really have to consider if you want to spend that kinda money before shooting someone. so you think the situation would be improved by having people run around with guns without the benefit of any practice on their accuracy. Yeah, that's a step forward on your war against accidental shootings. I dont beleive guns should be legal, unless say for example you make your living or put bread on the table by hunting. To me that's a legitimate NEED for an object developed and used to kill. Alcohol is involved in 20,000 motor vehicle fatalities each year. No one outside the medical community needs alcohol. Do you think beer should be illegal, and if not why the discrepancy? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #167 October 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou say tomato, i say tomatoe.....we are still left with an unnecessary death. Guns are stupid. Chris Rock had it right when he said the cost of each bullet shuold be $5,000. That way you really have to consider if you want to spend that kinda money before shooting someone. so you think the situation would be improved by having people run around with guns without the benefit of any practice on their accuracy. Yeah, that's a step forward on your war against accidental shootings. I dont beleive guns should be legal, unless say for example you make your living or put bread on the table by hunting. To me that's a legitimate NEED for an object developed and used to kill. If a President ever refuses to step down from office at the end of his term, restricts our newspapers and news programs to only publishing government-approved stories, requires adherence to a specific religion, and institutes martial law to prevent public assembly and discourse, I think you'll be happy that some of your fellow citizens are armed. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #168 October 25, 2007 QuoteI dont beleive guns should be legal, unless say for example you make your living or put bread on the table by hunting. To me that's a legitimate NEED for an object developed and used to kill. well, there are other countries that are more in line with that way of thinking. You might prefer them. Our's was founded with a different set of principles. Right now you appear to be freeloading off them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #169 October 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou say tomato, i say tomatoe.....we are still left with an unnecessary death. Guns are stupid. Chris Rock had it right when he said the cost of each bullet shuold be $5,000. That way you really have to consider if you want to spend that kinda money before shooting someone. so you think the situation would be improved by having people run around with guns without the benefit of any practice on their accuracy. Yeah, that's a step forward on your war against accidental shootings. I dont beleive guns should be legal, unless say for example you make your living or put bread on the table by hunting. To me that's a legitimate NEED for an object developed and used to kill. Why take away existing rights? The government is already doing enough of that. You can exert much better control than we do now without taking away people's rights.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,990 #170 October 25, 2007 Pop, JohnRich, Lefty - your one warning. Cut it out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #171 October 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou say tomato, i say tomatoe.....we are still left with an unnecessary death. Guns are stupid. Chris Rock had it right when he said the cost of each bullet shuold be $5,000. That way you really have to consider if you want to spend that kinda money before shooting someone. so you think the situation would be improved by having people run around with guns without the benefit of any practice on their accuracy. Yeah, that's a step forward on your war against accidental shootings. I dont beleive guns should be legal, unless say for example you make your living or put bread on the table by hunting. To me that's a legitimate NEED for an object developed and used to kill. Nothing wrong with that opinion, many share it, but they are legal and they will always be here. While not interested in "converting" you, I do hope you can understand that the vast majority of gun owners are responsible, law abiding people. If there were no guns in the US, I have no doubt that there would be a much lower murder rate, but the guns are not the root cause of the murders. I say fix the root cause. Doing anything else is not fixing the real problem. Have you ever gone out shooting? "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 798 #172 October 25, 2007 Personally, I prefer Ted Nugent's opinions on guns, he's waaaaaaay more intelligent than Chris Rock could ever wish to be. Nugent rocks! since we're following the thoughts of media stars for some odd reason. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #173 October 26, 2007 Quote Edited to add: In the end it is a word game, with those in favour of guns prefering negilgent over accident to show that some form of interaction is needed and therefor guns are intrinsicly safe. I am surprised how those of you who are usually so vehemently opposed to political correctness have suddenly embraced PC speech when it suits your agenda. "Negligent Discharge" poppycock. It just suits you better than "Accidental Shooting". How PC. I expect next you'll be calling illegal aliens "paperwork-challenged guests".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #174 October 26, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteAgreed - but you HAVE heard of pilot error or mechanical failure. His point (which I agree with) is that, barring mechanical failures (which I've never heard of any instances of) all the accidental shootings are 'pilot error'.... NEGLIGENT discharges, which is MUCH different than ACCIDENTAL discharges. I am not getting your point. Are you saying that humans can't have accidents, only things can have accidents? No Sir, I am not - let me try to explain my analogy. [hypothetical]If you are taking off from O'Hare, and you pitch your Mooney up to a 60 degree climb while simultaneously pulling the throttle back to idle - would the FAA call the mishap pilot ERROR or pilot ACCIDENT?[/hypothetical] The point is that, failing a mechanical problem with the weapon (which, again, I have never heard an example of during a shooting), it is the HUMAN that decides to cause the weapon to fire. That, Sir, is not ACCIDENTAL...that is NEGLIGENT. Hopefully I've made my point clear. You are stuck on a dictionary. I am stuck on people dying for no reason, be it “accident” or “negligence”. It doesn’t make a difference which vocabulary term you use....the result is still unnecessary death Edited for spelling to avoid being called an asshole...asshole. No, you're on a pet project, just like I am - if you TRULY wanted to reduce the number of deaths, you'd be advocating getting rid of private automobiles, which cause MANY times the number of deaths and injuries that firearms do.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #175 October 26, 2007 Quote Quote Edited to add: In the end it is a word game, with those in favour of guns prefering negilgent over accident to show that some form of interaction is needed and therefor guns are intrinsicly safe. I am surprised how those of you who are usually so vehemently opposed to political correctness have suddenly embraced PC speech when it suits your agenda. "Negligent Discharge" poppycock. It just suits you better than "Accidental Shooting". How PC. I expect next you'll be calling illegal aliens "paperwork-challenged guests".No, I said what I mean - an accident is *usually* out of the person's control - I don't think that ANY gun "accidents" are truly accidental in that respect. As said above, it still takes a person to pull the trigger - that's NEGLIGENCE, not unfortunate chance.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
