A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #141  
Old August 8th 19, 02:03 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
SMS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,477
Default Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets

On 8/7/2019 7:43 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:

snip

But it isn't a straw man argument. You bemoan the so called "mass
shootings" and argue for stringent gun laws while at the same time
accepting the facts that about 100 die daily on the Nation's roads.

But than, I guess the road deaths are all accidents, just
happenstance, one might say.


While my keyboard is now covered with coffee as a result of having a
mouthful of it while reading Frank, the undisputed king of straw man
arguments, complain about straw man arguments, the reality is that there
is no equivalency between road deaths and mass shootings. The road
deaths are rarely intentional, even when the result of road rage, poor
driver training, and poor infrastructure.
Ads
  #142  
Old August 8th 19, 02:49 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
JBeattie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,870
Default Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets

On Wednesday, August 7, 2019 at 11:41:08 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 20:33:45 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Wednesday, August 7, 2019 at 7:43:50 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 21:20:16 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/7/2019 8:54 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 11:28:24 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:


Your portrayal of me accepting bombs is far less accurate and WAY less
witty than Jim Jeffries bit on gun nuts.

But in an effort to seek agreement, here's what I propose: Let's make
U.S. gun laws exactly as strict as U.S. bomb laws. Will that satisfy you?


You mean that fertilizer and diesel fuel have strict laws to control
them in the U.S. ? Amazing! I had not known that..

You're really not very knowledgeable on these issues, John.

"Under federal explosives law, it is illegal to engage in the business
of manufacturing explosives without a license; to improperly store
explosives; to sell or distribute explosives to any person who does not
hold an ATF license or permit." You may want to read this information:
https://www.atf.gov/explosives

Yes, I'm sure that you are correct, but the manufacture of an
explosive from fertilizer and diesel fuel can be very much a home
project. It is also, I discovered when working at a major copper mine
in Irian Jaya a commonly used explosive in open pit mining and is
mixed "on the spot" by the explosive guys. And, I might add,
instructions for making fertilizer/diesel fuel bombs is all over the
Internet. It is not, as they say, rocket science.


Sure, you can make up any snide little saying that you wish. But do
you really feel that it is more horrifying to shoot 22 people than to
kill outright 160 people and injure another 600?

No, and I didn't say that. Again, when someone sinks exclusively into
straw man arguments, they must have no really logical argument remaining.

But it isn't a straw man argument. You bemoan the so called "mass
shootings" and argue for stringent gun laws while at the same time
accepting the facts that about 100 die daily on the Nation's roads.

But than, I guess the road deaths are all accidents, just
happenstance, one might say.


There is no equivalency between mass shootings and traffic accidents. Traffic accidents are an unfortunate consequence of an activity with high utility. Mass shootings are simply murder. You know that. Everybody knows that.

-- Jay Beattie.

I see. You are implying that if everyone actually complied with the
traffic code that "accidents" would remain the same as today?
--

Cheers,

John B.


I'm not implying anything. I am saying that a traffic ACCIDENT is an accident and in no way equivalent to an intentional mass shooting -- or intentional killing of any sort. Why even waste the bandwidth arguing about something so obvious?

Can one intentionally kill with a car? Sure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle-ramming_attack That, however, is not the method of choice for the 251 mass-shooters this year. https://tinyurl.com/yxlb7j4r

-- Jay Beattie.
  #143  
Old August 8th 19, 03:17 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Radey Shouman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,747
Default Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets

John B. Slocomb writes:

On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 23:35:43 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/6/2019 10:02 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
AMuzi writes:

On 8/6/2019 1:34 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2019 2:09 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/6/2019 12:46 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
John B. Slocomb writes:

On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 14:34:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/5/2019 12:23 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/5/2019 9:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/5/2019 4:07 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 00:13:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/4/2019 8:47 PM, John B. wrote:
rOn Sun, 4 Aug 2019 11:06:33 -0400, Frank
Krygowski wrote:

On 8/4/2019 1:37 AM, John B. wrote:


Well, of course. After all everybody knows that
"guns
kill" so
logically if there no guns there would be no
"killed".

I don't know of anyone who seriously believes that.

But to be more realistic: What are the gun laws
in the
country where you
now live? And what's the gun murder rate per
100,000?
What's the total
murder rate per 100,000? IOW, how are your gun laws
working out?

The gun laws in Thailand are essentially that guns
are
banned...
except in some cases. You can't legally carry a
pistol
in your pocket
in Bangkok but no one will object to your having a
shotgun over our
shoulder in some remote jungle area where wildlife
is a
danger.

Yes, nobody much objects to long guns in the woods
here.
But "can't
legally carry a pistol in a pocket"? Some here
would say
that's akin to
slicing off a man's ... um, masculinity. (And it's
true
that some men
seem to confuse their guns with their genital organs.)

As for gun deaths it would be rather misleading to
quote
them as the
UNODC murder rate in Thailand is 3.24/100,000 and
in the
U.S.
5.30/100,000 so obviously whatever criteria you
care to
define murder
rates in the U.S. will likely be higher than in
Thailand.

Ah. 3.24 vs. 5.30.

But you don't think the differences in gun laws are a
factor?

I was pointing out that the table I saw was based on
UNODC
rates.

But I'm not sure whether gun laws, specifically, are
really a factor
in Thai homicide rates. Certainly the news is full of
knife, club,
whatever, (even by hand), murders and illegal
ownership of
firearms is
extremely common so I'm not sure what effect the rather
strict gun
laws in Thailand have on homicide rates.

As an aside I might mention that the CDC homicide
numbers
in the U.S.
seem to be all - homicides - 19,510, Firearms -
14,542 so
about 75% of
homicides in the U.S. age gun related. But!

According to the Centers for Disease Control, using
data
available for
analysis on September 5, 2018, there were a reported
70,652 deaths
attributed to drug overdose in the US for the year
ending
December
2017. Some deaths were still under investigation.
The CDC
projects
that the total for 2017 will be 72,222.

It makes the 14,542 gun deaths seem a bit.... well one
might say
somewhat less than urgent :-)

According to Statistia some 43% of U.S. households
owned
one or more
guns in 2017. That is (I believe) some 126,220,000
households with
guns and 14,000 gun deaths (not, I believe,
including self
inflected
death) or a rate of 1 gun death per 9,015.7 households.

And Auto Deaths? Some 37,133 deaths in 2017 - the same
year as the
14,000 gun deaths. Or one traffic death per 3,399
families.

But than, we all know that they are "traffic
accidents",
which seem to
be acceptable and "GUN DEATHS!" which are horrifying.


We just had two mass murders within about half a
day,
one in Texas, the
next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where you live?

You seem to be "proving" my stated point that "guns
kill", unless of
course then guys in Texas were waving swords.

You seem to be sidestepping my question. How often
_does_
that happen
where you live?

Well, I gave you the figures, about 61% of the U.S.
numbers.

No, John, you didn't give me the numbers I asked for.
Nice
try at sidestepping, though.

Here was my question: "We just had two mass murders
within
about half a day, one in Texas, the next in Ohio.
Does that
happen a lot where you live?" And I repeated: "How often
_does_ that happen where you live?"

I'm not surprised you have occasional killings using
knives,
clubs and hands, as you describe. But how many _mass_
killings? How many instances of a guy with a knife
quickly
slaying, say, 20 people who were shopping and injuring a
couple dozen more?



I don't know from Thailand but in Chicago it's all day
every day:
https://maggionews.com/
https://heyjackass.com/

I see very few reports of mass killings using knives.

Well, of course not. these are modern times and modern
man is too lazy
to undertake "mass killings" with a butcher knife but in
years gone
my, when man kind was a bit more energetic...

For example:
In the year 390 when Roman Emperor Theodosius I sent
troops to
Thessalonica in order to quell some civil unrest. and
7,000 were
killed.

On May 20, 1645Â Qing troops led by Prince Dodo of the
Qing Dynasty
killed as many as 80,000 people.

Machetes were prominent during the Rwandan genocide much
more recently.


Machete murders were once big news. Now we have a term for
that, "Tuesday":

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...17&t=h_&ia=web

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...8&t=h_&ia=news

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...19&t=h_&ia=web

Readers of delicate countenance should not click "images"
on the search menu.

Anyone know the annual count of U.S. machete killings?


No idea but I'm sure each and every victim thought there was one too
many.

If we're doing this by numbers alone now, I'll watch for your
impassioned pleas about medical ineptitude and hospital-acquired
infection which kill more people than either car wrecks or ODs.

Also, by numbers, US homicides have decreased markedly since the 90's.
If total numbers are your thing then mass shootings should be of no
particular interest.


I challenge you to attend the next memorial service for these victims,
carrying that on a sign. I can guarantee lots of attention. Would you do
that?


Why memorial services for those shot with guns and total ignore the
several times as many killed on the roads? Or that die of hospital
acquired diseases, or those killed by illegal narcotics, or, or, or?


My point was a little finer -- why concentrate on those deliberately
killed 20 at a time, when those killed in ones or twos are really a much
bigger problem?

Frank is constantly reminding us to rely on data, for example on the
relative scarcity of car bike collisions from behind. That does not
mean I will attend a memorial service for the next unfortunate killed in
that way with a sign belittling "fear from the rear".
  #144  
Old August 8th 19, 03:21 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Radey Shouman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,747
Default Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets

Ralph Barone writes:

Radey Shouman wrote:
AMuzi writes:

On 8/6/2019 1:34 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/6/2019 2:09 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/6/2019 12:46 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
John B. Slocomb writes:

On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 14:34:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/5/2019 12:23 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/5/2019 9:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/5/2019 4:07 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 00:13:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/4/2019 8:47 PM, John B. wrote:
rOn Sun, 4 Aug 2019 11:06:33 -0400, Frank
Krygowski wrote:

On 8/4/2019 1:37 AM, John B. wrote:


Well, of course. After all everybody knows that
"guns
kill" so
logically if there no guns there would be no
"killed".

I don't know of anyone who seriously believes that.

But to be more realistic: What are the gun laws
in the
country where you
now live? And what's the gun murder rate per
100,000?
What's the total
murder rate per 100,000? IOW, how are your gun laws
working out?

The gun laws in Thailand are essentially that guns
are
banned...
except in some cases. You can't legally carry a
pistol
in your pocket
in Bangkok but no one will object to your having a
shotgun over our
shoulder in some remote jungle area where wildlife
is a
danger.

Yes, nobody much objects to long guns in the woods
here.
But "can't
legally carry a pistol in a pocket"? Some here
would say
that's akin to
slicing off a man's ... um, masculinity. (And it's
true
that some men
seem to confuse their guns with their genital organs.)

As for gun deaths it would be rather misleading to
quote
them as the
UNODC murder rate in Thailand is 3.24/100,000 and
in the
U.S.
5.30/100,000 so obviously whatever criteria you
care to
define murder
rates in the U.S. will likely be higher than in
Thailand.

Ah. 3.24 vs. 5.30.

But you don't think the differences in gun laws are a
factor?

I was pointing out that the table I saw was based on
UNODC
rates.

But I'm not sure whether gun laws, specifically, are
really a factor
in Thai homicide rates. Certainly the news is full of
knife, club,
whatever, (even by hand), murders and illegal
ownership of
firearms is
extremely common so I'm not sure what effect the rather
strict gun
laws in Thailand have on homicide rates.

As an aside I might mention that the CDC homicide
numbers
in the U.S.
seem to be all - homicides - 19,510, Firearms -
14,542 so
about 75% of
homicides in the U.S. age gun related. But!

According to the Centers for Disease Control, using
data
available for
analysis on September 5, 2018, there were a reported
70,652 deaths
attributed to drug overdose in the US for the year
ending
December
2017. Some deaths were still under investigation.
The CDC
projects
that the total for 2017 will be 72,222.

It makes the 14,542 gun deaths seem a bit.... well one
might say
somewhat less than urgent :-)

According to Statistia some 43% of U.S. households
owned
one or more
guns in 2017. That is (I believe) some 126,220,000
households with
guns and 14,000 gun deaths (not, I believe,
including self
inflected
death) or a rate of 1 gun death per 9,015.7 households.

And Auto Deaths? Some 37,133 deaths in 2017 - the same
year as the
14,000 gun deaths. Or one traffic death per 3,399
families.

But than, we all know that they are "traffic
accidents",
which seem to
be acceptable and "GUN DEATHS!" which are horrifying.


We just had two mass murders within about half a
day,
one in Texas, the
next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where you live?

You seem to be "proving" my stated point that "guns
kill", unless of
course then guys in Texas were waving swords.

You seem to be sidestepping my question. How often
_does_
that happen
where you live?

Well, I gave you the figures, about 61% of the U.S.
numbers.

No, John, you didn't give me the numbers I asked for.
Nice
try at sidestepping, though.

Here was my question: "We just had two mass murders
within
about half a day, one in Texas, the next in Ohio.
Does that
happen a lot where you live?" And I repeated: "How often
_does_ that happen where you live?"

I'm not surprised you have occasional killings using
knives,
clubs and hands, as you describe. But how many _mass_
killings? How many instances of a guy with a knife
quickly
slaying, say, 20 people who were shopping and injuring a
couple dozen more?



I don't know from Thailand but in Chicago it's all day
every day:
https://maggionews.com/
https://heyjackass.com/

I see very few reports of mass killings using knives.

Well, of course not. these are modern times and modern
man is too lazy
to undertake "mass killings" with a butcher knife but in
years gone
my, when man kind was a bit more energetic...

For example:
In the year 390 when Roman Emperor Theodosius I sent
troops to
Thessalonica in order to quell some civil unrest. and
7,000 were
killed.

On May 20, 1645Â Qing troops led by Prince Dodo of the
Qing Dynasty
killed as many as 80,000 people.

Machetes were prominent during the Rwandan genocide much
more recently.


Machete murders were once big news. Now we have a term for
that, "Tuesday":

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...17&t=h_&ia=web

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...8&t=h_&ia=news

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...19&t=h_&ia=web

Readers of delicate countenance should not click "images"
on the search menu.

Anyone know the annual count of U.S. machete killings?


No idea but I'm sure each and every victim thought there was one too
many.

If we're doing this by numbers alone now, I'll watch for your
impassioned pleas about medical ineptitude and hospital-acquired
infection which kill more people than either car wrecks or ODs.


Also, by numbers, US homicides have decreased markedly since the 90's.
If total numbers are your thing then mass shootings should be of no
particular interest.


And just to tie two current threads together, the guys who wrote
Freakonomics made the assertion that the drop in murder (and crime rates in
general) in the US was caused by the drop in unwanted children created by
Roe vs Wade.


Nice. Crime goes down, every mayor, police chief, legislator, and
prison warden takes credit; nobody seems to really know. If crime goes
up, naturally it's those bloodthirsty illegal aliens.

Another theory is that phasing out leaded gasoline caused a rash of
better decision making.

  #145  
Old August 8th 19, 03:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Radey Shouman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,747
Default Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets

AMuzi writes:

On 8/7/2019 1:57 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/7/2019 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/7/2019 9:25 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/7/2019 1:08 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 23:28:25 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/6/2019 9:02 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
rOn Tue, 6 Aug 2019 20:11:03 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/6/2019 7:43 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 14:34:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/6/2019 2:09 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/6/2019 12:46 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
John B. Slocomb writes:

On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 14:34:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/5/2019 12:23 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/5/2019 9:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/5/2019 4:07 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 00:13:04 -0400, Frank
Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/4/2019 8:47 PM, John B. wrote:
rOn Sun, 4 Aug 2019 11:06:33 -0400, Frank
Krygowski wrote:

On 8/4/2019 1:37 AM, John B. wrote:


Well, of course. After all everybody knows
that "guns
kill" so
logically if there no guns there would be
no "killed".

I don't know of anyone who seriously
believes that.

But to be more realistic: What are the gun
laws in the
country where you
now live? And what's the gun murder rate
per 100,000?
What's the total
murder rate per 100,000? IOW, how are your
gun laws
working out?

The gun laws in Thailand are essentially
that guns are
banned...
except in some cases. You can't legally
carry a pistol
in your pocket
in Bangkok but no one will object to your
having a
shotgun over our
shoulder in some remote jungle area where
wildlife is a
danger.

Yes, nobody much objects to long guns in the
woods here.
But "can't
legally carry a pistol in a pocket"? Some
here would say
that's akin to
slicing off a man's ... um, masculinity. (And
it's true
that some men
seem to confuse their guns with their genital
organs.)

As for gun deaths it would be rather
misleading to quote
them as the
UNODC murder rate in Thailand is
3.24/100,000 and in the
U.S.
5.30/100,000 so obviously whatever criteria
you care to
define murder
rates in the U.S. will likely be higher than
in Thailand.

Ah. 3.24 vs. 5.30.

But you don't think the differences in gun
laws are a
factor?

I was pointing out that the table I saw was
based on UNODC
rates.

But I'm not sure whether gun laws,
specifically, are
really a factor
in Thai homicide rates. Certainly the news is
full of
knife, club,
whatever, (even by hand), murders and illegal
ownership of
firearms is
extremely common so I'm not sure what effect
the rather
strict gun
laws in Thailand have on homicide rates.

As an aside I might mention that the CDC
homicide numbers
in the U.S.
seem to be all - homicides - 19,510, Firearms
- 14,542 so
about 75% of
homicides in the U.S. age gun related. But!

According to the Centers for Disease Control,
using data
available for
analysis on September 5, 2018, there were a
reported
70,652 deaths
attributed to drug overdose in the US for the
year ending
December
2017. Some deaths were still under
investigation. The CDC
projects
that the total for 2017 will be 72,222.

It makes the 14,542 gun deaths seem a bit....
well one
might say
somewhat less than urgent :-)

According to Statistia some 43% of U.S.
households owned
one or more
guns in 2017. That is (I believe) some
126,220,000
households with
guns and 14,000 gun deaths (not, I believe,
including self
inflected
death) or a rate of 1 gun death per 9,015.7
households.

And Auto Deaths? Some 37,133 deaths in 2017 -
the same
year as the
14,000 gun deaths. Or one traffic death per
3,399 families.

But than, we all know that they are "traffic
accidents",
which seem to
be acceptable and "GUN DEATHS!" which are
horrifying.


We just had two mass murders within about
half a day,
one in Texas, the
next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where
you live?

You seem to be "proving" my stated point
that "guns
kill", unless of
course then guys in Texas were waving swords.

You seem to be sidestepping my question. How
often _does_
that happen
where you live?

Well, I gave you the figures, about 61% of the
U.S. numbers.

No, John, you didn't give me the numbers I
asked for. Nice
try at sidestepping, though.

Here was my question: "We just had two mass
murders within
about half a day, one in Texas, the next in
Ohio. Does that
happen a lot where you live?" And I repeated:
"How often
_does_ that happen where you live?"

I'm not surprised you have occasional killings
using knives,
clubs and hands, as you describe. But how many
_mass_
killings? How many instances of a guy with a
knife quickly
slaying, say, 20 people who were shopping and
injuring a
couple dozen more?



I don't know from Thailand but in Chicago it's
all day every day:
https://maggionews.com/
https://heyjackass.com/

I see very few reports of mass killings using
knives.

Well, of course not. these are modern times and
modern man is too lazy
to undertake "mass killings" with a butcher knife
but in years gone
my, when man kind was a bit more energetic...

For example:
In the year 390 when Roman Emperor Theodosius I
sent troops to
Thessalonica in order to quell some civil unrest.
and 7,000 were
killed.

On May 20, 1645Â Qing troops led by Prince Dodo
of the Qing Dynasty
killed as many as 80,000 people.

Machetes were prominent during the Rwandan genocide
much more recently.


Machete murders were once big news. Now we have a
term for that, "Tuesday":

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...17&t=h_&ia=web



https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...8&t=h_&ia=news



https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...19&t=h_&ia=web



Readers of delicate countenance should not click
"images" on the search
menu.

Anyone know the annual count of U.S. machete killings?

A nice end run around the facts. Rather a "Tom" effort.

Geez, nobody will answer a question any more!

But what facts do you think I'm avoiding? It seems to
be a fact that
guns are used in far, far more murders than knives or
machetes. (Feel
free to correct me if you do find that machete number.)
What other facts
are you using?

Certainly, and I believe that I made that point in
another post. Yes,
in the U.S. guns are used in many more homicides that
machetes.

Thank you. Maybe you'll stop the machete talk now?

But, as I pointed out, the actual number of deaths in
firearm
homicides is far lower than in auto crashes or even
illegal drug
deaths, so I ask again, is it the number of deaths that
upsets you? Or
is it the fact the deaths are carried out with those
horrible firearms
and concerns you.

From your comments to date it certainly appears that
it is the
firearms that concerns you, or at least I don't see your
posts
descrying the carnage on the highways or even due to
illegal use of
drugs. Which, again as I commented on, are far, far
greater then
firearm deaths.

I just posted a reply to Andrew that attempted to explain
people's
attitudes toward deaths from various causes. Read it. But
as I said,
death by murder has always raised outrage. That's part of
human nature.
Deal with it.

I see. is not the fact that people are killed that is
important but
rather the method that caused their death. Killing someone
with a ton
and a half automobile is "perfectly normal" ...

That's a deliberate and dishonest fabrication. Nobody has
said that but you. If you have to sink to such a tactic,
your position is lost.



Did you peruse the links I post regularly to the Chicago
homicide count? Death in the street by firearm is all day
every day and yet no outcry, no change.

https://maggionews.com/
http://heyjackass.com/

Just keeping the tally engages several websites full time.
For Chicago, that's like Elizabeth Warren's #1 fan Mr
Betts in Dayton Ohio every week (except with more wounded).

But hey nothing to see here, move along.

I also mentioned in years past that Chicago has some of
the most restrictive draconian weapons ordinances in a
State with highly restrictive statutes, so much so that
The US Supreme Court slapped them down [Otis McDonald,
plaintiff] and yet they defied the Court for years after.

If merely writing laws could change behavior...

https://www.alibris.com/Three-Feloni...228?matches=23



The obvious problem with city-wide firearm laws is that
cities stopped being surrounded with gated walls very long
ago. When surrounding areas (like Indiana in this case) have
a Wild West philosophy (anyone who can breathe can practice
open carry) there's not much way of reducing the number of
guns a few miles away.

And I know your recurring claim that laws don't change
anything. I'm sorry, but it's false. Laws are imperfect and
enforcement can never be 100%. Some laws are ineffective and
some are just mistakes. But that doesn't justify the
alternative, which is total anarchy, no laws at all.

The prohibition against hand grenades and other bombs works
pretty well. So do the restrictions on machine guns. Very
few own mortars or flame throwers. We should be able to
apply reasonable restrictions to guns. Let the pretend
soldier boys play with virtual military arms in computer
games. That should be enough to satisfy their fantasies. It
works in most countries.


Well, when you're not busy look at the situation in Mexico regarding
firearms, regulation and actual incidence. If you think USAians (a
notoriously defiant bunch overall) will comply any differently than
with the heroin ban, think again. For the interested reader, States
and localities with more restrictive firearms regulation experience
greater firearm mayhem.


Naturally so, since firearm violence causes gun laws.

Juarez, Mexico, which lies just across the border from El Paso, has a
horrific problem with violence. It's sad, I used to go there fairly
often as a youth, but would be afraid to now. In Mexico it's close to
impossible for a civilian without connections to legally own a firearm,
and civilian possesion of a anything using "military" ammunition,
meaning a caliber used by a military anywhere in the world, or of the
ammunition itself, is strictly prohibited.
  #146  
Old August 8th 19, 04:23 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets

On 8/8/2019 4:54 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 8 Aug 2019 06:43:41 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Thu, 08 Aug 2019 08:45:13 +0700, John B. Slocomb wrote:


Actually I have few complaints of much more stringent gun laws that any
that you have stipulated so far. I am merely trying to point out to a
very opinionated and generally ignorant of the subject individual that
over simplistic laws are not very effective.


GovCo says that the Australian Laws have prevent any further mass
shootings since the Port Arthur event. The result has been to require
people wishing to use firearms to have a valid reason undertake some firm
are education courses.

Now, we tend to have mtor vehciles as the weapon for mass events.



But from your posts, I wonder if there are _any_ gun laws you would not
consider "ludicrase" [sic].

I asked about the gun laws where you now live. You seemed give data
indicating they work. Is it hell on earth living under those laws?
Should we adopt them in the U.S.? Or are there others that you would
propose?

Well, to apply Thai Gun laws to the U.S. would require the removal of
the 2nd amendment to the Constitution, probably a largely impossible
action.


Not So. The emphais would just need to shift towards "well regulated" and
requirements for identity checks and and basic firearm safety performance
could be enforced.

But doesn't the U.S. have a well regulated militia. I had assumed that
was what the National Guard was/is. I think that they even send them
overseas these days.


And if someone wants to play soldier, they should join the National
Guard, an _actual_ well regulated militia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...National_Guard

According to that site, they have about 450,000 members. But in the U.S.
there are close to 400 million privately owned guns.

I have no problem with guns used for hunting, but it's a sure bet that
those are the minority of that 400 million. That means hundreds of
firepower fetishers for every actual militia member.

--
- Frank Krygowski
  #147  
Old August 8th 19, 04:48 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets

On 8/8/2019 2:17 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 22:22:54 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 8/7/2019 9:57 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 14:57:33 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:


The prohibition against hand grenades and other bombs works pretty well.
So do the restrictions on machine guns. Very few own mortars or flame
throwers. We should be able to apply reasonable restrictions to guns.
Let the pretend soldier boys play with virtual military arms in computer
games. That should be enough to satisfy their fantasies. It works in
most countries.

Perhaps in the U.S. where apparently the citizens are too complacent
to make their own bombs but here, in a less well developed country, we
just has a rash of some 6 bombs that exploded (and 1 "dud") in Bangkok
in the past few days. All "home made" bombs. In the South home made
bombs are so common that they have recently banned metal LPG tanks (a
common container used in home bomb making).


As you know, I'm interested in data. How many bomb deaths per year?


It is hard to say as I can't find any statistics.


That _should_ make you realize that the problem is relatively tiny! IOW,
bomb control works pretty well.

But I did find a
Times report dated August 2016 that stated that the bombings had
"ground on for more than a decade and killed more than 5,000 people".
https://time.com/4449653/thailand-bombing-what-to-know/


So maybe 500 per year? Less than one bomb fatality per 100,000
population during an insurgency, i.e. a low-level attempt at war.

The U.S. more than triples that rate using guns, with no need for any
insurgency.



The report stated:

On Thursday, a bomb exploded in a market in the southern province of
Trang, killing one person and injuring six.

Later, on Thursday night, two bombs exploded 20 minutes apart in the
resort city of Hua Hin, killing one Thai woman and injuring at least
20, including ten foreign nationals.

Hours later, on Friday morning two more blasts killed another person
and injured four more according to Thai authorities. Thai media
reports that the woman killed was a street food vendor.

Also on Friday morning, another two bombs exploded in Surat Thani
outside police stations, killing one and injuring several others,
according to local media.

Two bombs also exploded in Phuket around 8 a.m. local time in front of
a hotel and a police booth in the tourist area of Patong, injuring one
person, reports local media.

About 200 kilometers north in Phang Nga province, two bombs went off
in Khao Lak and another in Khuek Khak around 9 a.m. local time. Hours
earlier, over 80 shops were gutted by a fire in the Takua Pa market
frequented by tourists.


Those accounts total four deaths.

Thailand's population is roughly the same as those of California plus
Texas. If someone wrote an article about a total of four Californians
plus Texans getting killed by guns, nobody would publish it. Too
ordinary, too boring.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #148  
Old August 8th 19, 05:16 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets

On 8/8/2019 2:38 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 22:41:51 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/7/2019 9:45 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 11:41:48 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/7/2019 2:31 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
... how else do you measure any sort
of speed of fireing in order to make a rule?

Hmm. Wow, that IS difficult. Because there's no possible way any
government official could take a sample firearm to a shooting range,
fill it and/or its magazine with its maximum round capacity, start a
stopwatch and see how many rounds could be fired in a minute. That would
be so darned complex!

Ah, O.K. So it is what is usually called "effective rate of fire" or
the number of rounds that can be fired in a specific length of time.


You've got it. See, it wasn't so hard.

But I used to shoot with a State Police Sergeant who used to shoot the
Practical Police Course (PPC) now called something different and he
could, with a S&W 6 shot revolver, fire 5 rounds, reload and fire 5
more in 10 seconds or less. The 5 rounds was simply because 10 rounds
was one target's worth.

If you extend that a little and disregard the need for aimed shots one
could probably easily fire 12 rounds in 10 seconds, or less, or about
72 rounds in one minute.

So is a firearm that can be fired 72 rounds a minute all right?


Since you're asking my opinion, I'd say no, it's not all right. Perhaps
in the hands of a law enforcement officer or an enlisted man. But I'd
say hunters or those who fancy themselves home defenders have no need
for that. Why _would_ you realistically need that?


But Frank, this is a standard S&W revolver, just like the ones that
have been manufactured for what? a Hundred and sixty years?

And now you say that they should be banned?


Why not?

Limiting that
speed to say, five or ten rounds in a minute would be no inconvenience
to any hunter or target shooter. In my view, the most likely reasons
firing more rounds in one minutes would be a) to kill people in a crowd,
or b) to pretend to kill people in a crowd. We don't need either of those.


But Frank, the standard "bulls eye" match consists of Slow fire - 10
rounds in 10 minutes, Timed Fire - 5 rounds in 20 seconds and Rapid
fire - 5 rounds in 10 seconds.


Thank you, John. As my favorite seven year old could explain, that could
be done by a firearm that shoots no more than ten rounds in one minute.

(In case we couldn't _bear_ to change those rules to help reduce gun
mayhem.)

But Frank that is a record, fired with a standard S&W revolver. Are we
to ban all revolvers?


My idea would be: You can keep your revolver if it's fitted with a speed
limiting device.


How in God's World will you fit a timing device to as rudimentary
mechanism as a revolver.


I'm going to assume that's a joke.

Ah well, I guess we can throw away all the revolvers made since the
1800's.


If you love to look at it, put it in a locked case. If you love to
fondle it, modify it so it can't shoot. You'll be all right. Really!

The [2nd] amendment is clearly worded and is rather exact for
the period in which it was written. You are simply arguing that
"things have changed" since 1791 and so we ought to chuck out the Bill
or Rights? Or do you mean simply the parts that you don't agree with?


You are the "things have changed" phrase on its head here!

For 200 years, the Supreme Courts held that the phrase "A well regulated
militia" was a critical part of the 2nd amendment - that the right to
bear arms was related to or contingent on militia membership. Only in
2008 did so-called "conservative" justices overturn that logic. It was
the complete opposite of "originalist" judicial philosophy that so many
conservatives espouse.

Nonetheless, in today's column George Will - who, in case you forget, is
an intelligent conservative writer - notes that the Heller decision
"permits many measures regulating certain kinds of weapons and
ammunition magazines." I'd say among those are 100 round magazines,
extended rapid fire, and other quasi-military features that have no
practical civilian use.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #149  
Old August 8th 19, 05:27 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets

On 8/8/2019 10:17 AM, Radey Shouman wrote:

My point was a little finer -- why concentrate on those deliberately
killed 20 at a time, when those killed in ones or twos are really a much
bigger problem?


You're complaining about elementary human nature. One murder is
regrettable and raises outrage. 20+ murders at once naturally incites
much more outrage. The situation is closely paralleled whenever there's
a traffic crash that kills many, a landslide that kills many, etc.

If a semi truck rammed a school bus and killed 29 kids, you'd be ill
advised to show up saying "It's OK, kids get killed in cars all the
time." It would be far more productive to say "Let's look into measures
to reduce _all_ motoring deaths."

Frank is constantly reminding us to rely on data, for example on the
relative scarcity of car bike collisions from behind. That does not
mean I will attend a memorial service for the next unfortunate killed in
that way with a sign belittling "fear from the rear".


But it does appear that you're belittling almost 30 people killed in
just a few hours.


--
- Frank Krygowski
  #150  
Old August 8th 19, 06:10 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
AMuzi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,447
Default Trek/Bontrager Wavecell Technology Helmets

On 8/7/2019 9:22 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/7/2019 9:57 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 7 Aug 2019 14:57:33 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/7/2019 1:20 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/7/2019 9:25 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/7/2019 1:08 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 23:28:25 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/6/2019 9:02 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
rOn Tue, 6 Aug 2019 20:11:03 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/6/2019 7:43 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 14:34:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/6/2019 2:09 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/6/2019 12:46 PM, Radey Shouman wrote:
John B. Slocomb writes:

On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 14:34:51 -0400, Frank
Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/5/2019 12:23 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 8/5/2019 9:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 8/5/2019 4:07 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 00:13:04 -0400, Frank
Krygowski
wrote:

On 8/4/2019 8:47 PM, John B. wrote:
rOn Sun, 4 Aug 2019 11:06:33 -0400, Frank
Krygowski wrote:

On 8/4/2019 1:37 AM, John B. wrote:


Well, of course. After all everybody
knows
that "guns
kill" so
logically if there no guns there would be
no "killed".

I don't know of anyone who seriously
believes that.

But to be more realistic: What are the gun
laws in the
country where you
now live? And what's the gun murder rate
per 100,000?
What's the total
murder rate per 100,000? IOW, how are your
gun laws
working out?

The gun laws in Thailand are essentially
that guns are
banned...
except in some cases. You can't legally
carry a pistol
in your pocket
in Bangkok but no one will object to your
having a
shotgun over our
shoulder in some remote jungle area where
wildlife is a
danger.

Yes, nobody much objects to long guns in the
woods here.
But "can't
legally carry a pistol in a pocket"? Some
here would say
that's akin to
slicing off a man's ... um, masculinity.
(And
it's true
that some men
seem to confuse their guns with their
genital
organs.)

As for gun deaths it would be rather
misleading to quote
them as the
UNODC murder rate in Thailand is
3.24/100,000 and in the
U.S.
5.30/100,000 so obviously whatever criteria
you care to
define murder
rates in the U.S. will likely be higher
than
in Thailand.

Ah. 3.24 vs. 5.30.

But you don't think the differences in gun
laws are a
factor?

I was pointing out that the table I saw was
based on UNODC
rates.

But I'm not sure whether gun laws,
specifically, are
really a factor
in Thai homicide rates. Certainly the news is
full of
knife, club,
whatever, (even by hand), murders and illegal
ownership of
firearms is
extremely common so I'm not sure what effect
the rather
strict gun
laws in Thailand have on homicide rates.

As an aside I might mention that the CDC
homicide numbers
in the U.S.
seem to be all - homicides - 19,510, Firearms
- 14,542 so
about 75% of
homicides in the U.S. age gun related. But!

According to the Centers for Disease Control,
using data
available for
analysis on September 5, 2018, there were a
reported
70,652 deaths
attributed to drug overdose in the US for the
year ending
December
2017. Some deaths were still under
investigation. The CDC
projects
that the total for 2017 will be 72,222.

It makes the 14,542 gun deaths seem a bit....
well one
might say
somewhat less than urgent :-)

According to Statistia some 43% of U.S.
households owned
one or more
guns in 2017. That is (I believe) some
126,220,000
households with
guns and 14,000 gun deaths (not, I believe,
including self
inflected
death) or a rate of 1 gun death per 9,015.7
households.

And Auto Deaths? Some 37,133 deaths in 2017 -
the same
year as the
14,000 gun deaths. Or one traffic death per
3,399 families.

But than, we all know that they are "traffic
accidents",
which seem to
be acceptable and "GUN DEATHS!" which are
horrifying.


We just had two mass murders within about
half a day,
one in Texas, the
next in Ohio. Does that happen a lot where
you live?

You seem to be "proving" my stated point
that "guns
kill", unless of
course then guys in Texas were waving
swords.

You seem to be sidestepping my question. How
often _does_
that happen
where you live?

Well, I gave you the figures, about 61% of
the
U.S. numbers.

No, John, you didn't give me the numbers I
asked for. Nice
try at sidestepping, though.

Here was my question: "We just had two mass
murders within
about half a day, one in Texas, the next in
Ohio. Does that
happen a lot where you live?" And I repeated:
"How often
_does_ that happen where you live?"

I'm not surprised you have occasional killings
using knives,
clubs and hands, as you describe. But how many
_mass_
killings? How many instances of a guy with a
knife quickly
slaying, say, 20 people who were shopping and
injuring a
couple dozen more?



I don't know from Thailand but in Chicago it's
all day every day:
https://maggionews.com/
https://heyjackass.com/

I see very few reports of mass killings using
knives.

Well, of course not. these are modern times and
modern man is too lazy
to undertake "mass killings" with a butcher knife
but in years gone
my, when man kind was a bit more energetic...

For example:
In the year 390 when Roman Emperor Theodosius I
sent troops to
Thessalonica in order to quell some civil unrest.
and 7,000 were
killed.

On May 20, 1645 Qing troops led by Prince
Dodo
of the Qing Dynasty
killed as many as 80,000 people.

Machetes were prominent during the Rwandan
genocide
much more recently.


Machete murders were once big news. Now we have a
term for that, "Tuesday":

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...17&t=h_&ia=web



https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...8&t=h_&ia=news



https://duckduckgo.com/?q=machete+mu...19&t=h_&ia=web



Readers of delicate countenance should not click
"images" on the search
menu.

Anyone know the annual count of U.S. machete
killings?

A nice end run around the facts. Rather a "Tom"
effort.

Geez, nobody will answer a question any more!

But what facts do you think I'm avoiding? It seems to
be a fact that
guns are used in far, far more murders than knives or
machetes. (Feel
free to correct me if you do find that machete
number.)
What other facts
are you using?

Certainly, and I believe that I made that point in
another post. Yes,
in the U.S. guns are used in many more homicides that
machetes.

Thank you. Maybe you'll stop the machete talk now?

But, as I pointed out, the actual number of deaths in
firearm
homicides is far lower than in auto crashes or even
illegal drug
deaths, so I ask again, is it the number of deaths that
upsets you? Or
is it the fact the deaths are carried out with those
horrible firearms
and concerns you.

 From your comments to date it certainly appears
that
it is the
firearms that concerns you, or at least I don't see
your
posts
descrying the carnage on the highways or even due to
illegal use of
drugs. Which, again as I commented on, are far, far
greater then
firearm deaths.

I just posted a reply to Andrew that attempted to
explain
people's
attitudes toward deaths from various causes. Read it.
But
as I said,
death by murder has always raised outrage. That's
part of
human nature.
Deal with it.

I see. is not the fact that people are killed that is
important but
rather the method that caused their death. Killing
someone
with a ton
and a half automobile is "perfectly normal" ...

That's a deliberate and dishonest fabrication. Nobody has
said that but you. If you have to sink to such a tactic,
your position is lost.



Did you peruse the links I post regularly to the Chicago
homicide
count? Death in the street by firearm is all day every
day and yet no
outcry, no change.

https://maggionews.com/
http://heyjackass.com/

Just keeping the tally engages several websites full
time. For Chicago,
that's like Elizabeth Warren's #1 fan Mr Betts in Dayton
Ohio every week
(except with more wounded).

But hey nothing to see here, move along.

I also mentioned in years past that Chicago has some of
the most
restrictive draconian weapons ordinances in a State with
highly
restrictive statutes, so much so that The US Supreme
Court slapped them
down [Otis McDonald, plaintiff] and yet they defied the
Court for years
after.

If merely writing laws could change behavior...

https://www.alibris.com/Three-Feloni...228?matches=23


The obvious problem with city-wide firearm laws is that
cities stopped
being surrounded with gated walls very long ago. When
surrounding areas
(like Indiana in this case) have a Wild West philosophy
(anyone who can
breathe can practice open carry) there's not much way of
reducing the
number of guns a few miles away.

And I know your recurring claim that laws don't change
anything. I'm
sorry, but it's false. Laws are imperfect and enforcement
can never be
100%. Some laws are ineffective and some are just
mistakes. But that
doesn't justify the alternative, which is total anarchy,
no laws at all.

The prohibition against hand grenades and other bombs
works pretty well.
So do the restrictions on machine guns. Very few own
mortars or flame
throwers. We should be able to apply reasonable
restrictions to guns.
Let the pretend soldier boys play with virtual military
arms in computer
games. That should be enough to satisfy their fantasies.
It works in
most countries.


Perhaps in the U.S. where apparently the citizens are too
complacent
to make their own bombs but here, in a less well developed
country, we
just has a rash of some 6 bombs that exploded (and 1
"dud") in Bangkok
in the past few days. All "home made" bombs. In the South
home made
bombs are so common that they have recently banned metal
LPG tanks (a
common container used in home bomb making).


As you know, I'm interested in data. How many bomb deaths
per year?


Don't know from Thailand but Sweden has really super duper
anti-hand grenade laws. Oh, and they even had an amnesty
program to turn in spare grenades which was not successful:

https://quillette.com/2019/06/11/its...nal-emergency/

Grenades are more interesting and romantic but their firearm
murders are also up by a magnitude. Time to rephrase those
statutes as it obviously reflects poor grammar in the text
of the laws which can solve any problem when artfully crafted.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trek X01/Bontrager Race wheels GrandTheftVelo Techniques 7 August 16th 08 12:48 AM
Trek Fuel superior technology LIBERATOR Mountain Biking 1 September 1st 06 09:58 PM
FS: Trek/Bontrager carbon fork Charles Stickle Marketplace 0 October 3rd 05 12:22 AM
Stock Trek Tires (Bontrager) Badger_South General 5 June 2nd 04 07:24 PM
The secret of Trek's OCLV technology . . . Stan Shankman Techniques 21 May 12th 04 02:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.