New Tactical Cycling Maneuver

On 9/25/2020 8:47 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/25/2020 3:28 PM, wrote:
On Friday, September 25, 2020 at 11:00:04 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/25/2020 9:59 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/24/2020 10:50 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 21:13:26 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/24/2020 8:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
To the larger issue:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/nkvd.jpg

... as if that's a daily occurrence in all other
prosperous westernized
countries that have reasonable gun control?

Given that the photo shows an official of some sort
executing two
individual I don't see that it involves gun control at
all. Unless, of
course, you don't think that officials should be armed.

I think Andrew's implication is that if (say) America
introduces universal background checks and restricts the
purchase of rapid fire assault-style weapons, that police
will begin executing civilians on the streets.

IOW, the implausible connection to gun control was not mine.

You mistake my position. The Second was clearly and
tersely written with a definitive and final period after
'shall not be infringed' by men whose memory of Lexington
was fresh.

Automatic weapons have been severely restricted since 1934.
One might argue that the National Firearms Act is an
unconstitutional abridgement but the courts are not
interested in that argument. So here we are, some 80+ years
later in a nation where firearm ownership is widespread,
voluminous and growing. Yesterday, virtually all of them
passed another day nicely oiled and cased without incident.

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/gun...s-by-state/13/

which comes to just under 5 million firearms in Ohio.


In the USA firearms kill about 100 people per day.Â* Does that meet
your "virtually all of them passed another day nicely oiled and cased
without incident." criteria?Â* I guess the number of people dying by
firearms is only one tenth the number dying by Covid-19 each day.Â* So
its irrelevant.Â* Trump and the Republicans think Covid-19 is a hoax
and is going to go away very soon, so one tenth as many dying by
firearms each day is surely immaterial.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/s...ty/firearm.htm
Sum of DEATHS
YEARÂ*Â*Â* Total
2014Â*Â*Â* 33,508
2015Â*Â*Â* 36,132
2016Â*Â*Â* 38,551
2017Â*Â*Â* 39,673
2018Â*Â*Â* 39,615
TotalÂ*Â*Â* 187,479

Funny thing is about 3000 fewer people died in the USA from vehicle
accidents each year.Â* I'd have guessed vehicle deaths were much higher
than firearm deaths.Â* But NO.Â* Americans love to shoot people to
death!Â* Even more than they like to run them over.Â* Of course keep in
mind all these deaths by guns and cars are one tenth as many as the
Covid-19 is killing each day.


Yes, a roughly similar range for firearm and automobile deaths. Both
include suicides and accidents along with homicides.Â* Both together do
not even approach heart disease.

Back to Frank's comment, there are less than a half million automatic
weapons, vintage and modern, in the whole country:

https://law.justia.com/codes/califor...050-21070.html

One would be hard-pressed to find more than a handful per year used in
any crime.

My comments have not been limited to fully automatic weapons.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 9/25/2020 9:26 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/25/2020 7:30 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, 25 September 2020 16:28:46 UTC-4, Â* wrote:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/s...ty/firearm.htm
Sum of DEATHS
YEARÂ*Â*Â* Total
2014Â*Â*Â* 33,508
2015Â*Â*Â* 36,132
2016Â*Â*Â* 38,551
2017Â*Â*Â* 39,673
2018Â*Â*Â* 39,615
TotalÂ*Â*Â* 187,479

Funny thing is about 3000 fewer people died in the USA from vehicle
accidents each year.Â* I'd have guessed vehicle deaths were much
higher than firearm deaths.Â* But NO.Â* Americans love to shoot people
to death!Â* Even more than they like to run them over.Â* Of course keep
in mind all these deaths by guns and cars are one tenth as many as
the Covid-19 is killing each day.

Any two years on that list equals more firearm deaths than the Vietnam
Conflict had in total.


sorta kinda but not really.

Hint: Subtract the suicide and negligent discharges from firearms deaths.

Why subtract them? Is that to pretend they didn't happen?


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 9/25/2020 10:30 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 20:17:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/25/2020 7:11 PM, John B. wrote:

Timothy McVeigh carried out the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing that
killed 168 people and injured more than 680 others and is considered
the deadliest act of terrorism in the United States prior to the
September 11 attacks and remains the deadliest act of domestic
terrorism in the history of the U.S., using fertilizer and diesel
fuel.

In contrast the 2017 Las Vegas shooting killed 60 and wounded 411.

Interesting point about the Oklahoma City bombing. Yes, 168 dead is a
lot for one criminal act.

But in five days, you'd exceed that with U.S. gun homicides. Is that
really supposed to make those OK?

So? Using 2013 (as I have details for that year) there were 33,169
firearm deaths, including some 21,175 suicides,During the same period
there were 32,893 highway deaths.

So apparently you are getting excepted about some 278 deaths, or at
least I've never heard you lament highway deaths so I assume that you
accept them, And, during 2013 there were 749 bicycle deaths.

So essentially you are getting all excepted about firearm deaths which
exceeded highway deaths, a subject that you seem to ignore, by a 278
and totally ignore the 746, nearly 3 times, bicycle deaths during the
same period.

You've raised that point before - but then, you didn't misuse the word
"excepted." (I'm not sure what meaning your intending for that.)

I suppose you could start a thread to philosophically examine each and
every cause of death. We could discuss methods of ranking, appropriate
raactions, etc. If you like that idea, have at it.

But as to your direct comparison of motoring deaths vs. gun deaths: I
don't blithely accept either, and neither does society as a whole.
However, there are important differences.

Motoring deaths, looked at in general, are a sad byproduct of an
otherwise beneficial system, since transport is necessary for human
interaction and commerce. It's extremely uncommon for people to claim we
can run a modern and prosperous society without use of motor vehicles.
So there are fortunes spent annually to learn how to retain motor
transportation but reduce its fatality count and rate.

On the other hand, gun deaths are a result of the design function of
guns, not a sad byproduct. In essence, guns exist to kill people or
things. And except for extremely isolated rural and wilderness locations
they are not necessary for human interaction and commerce. (Please
recall I am strongly in favor of hunting.) It's obviously possible to
run a prosperous society with far, far fewer man-killing guns than the
U.S. has. And furthermore, in the U.S. the gun lobby has put fortunes
into passing legislation _prohibiting_ research on reducing gun fatality
counts and rates.

The two cases are not very similar at all.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 9/26/2020 10:20 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/25/2020 9:07 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/25/2020 6:54 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/25/2020 12:00 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/25/2020 9:59 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/24/2020 10:50 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 21:13:26 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/24/2020 8:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
To the larger issue:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/nkvd.jpg

... as if that's a daily occurrence in all other
prosperous westernized
countries that have reasonable gun control?

Given that the photo shows an official of some sort
executing two
individual I don't see that it involves gun control at
all. Unless, of
course, you don't think that officials should be armed.

I think Andrew's implication is that if (say) America
introduces universal background checks and restricts the
purchase of rapid fire assault-style weapons, that police
will begin executing civilians on the streets.

IOW, the implausible connection to gun control was not
mine.


You mistake my position.

Perhaps, then, you should explain more clearly why you
linked a photo of a Nazi officer murdering captives.

The Second was clearly and tersely written with a
definitive and final period after 'shall not be infringed'
by men whose memory of Lexington was fresh.

I think it's obvious that the 2nd amendment has never been
interpreted as complete and total license to own any and all
firearms - at least, not by anyone with at least two
functioning brain cells. The current radical interpretation
is rather new and is at odds with many decades of
interpretation and practice. It's even at odds with the
NRA's historic positions. It's a product of a campaign to
line the pockets of LaPierre and others like him.

Automatic weapons have been severely restricted since
1934. One might argue that the National Firearms Act is an
unconstitutional abridgement but the courts are not
interested in that argument.

Please. The courts saw through that argument long ago. They
are not interested for very sound reasons.

So here we are, some 80+ years later in a nation where
firearm ownership is widespread, voluminous and growing.
Yesterday, virtually all of them passed another day nicely
oiled and cased without incident.

My guess is the majority of guns in the U.S. pass multiple
years while stored away. In other words, they are not
necessary, except to comfort certain paranoid individuals.

In particular, it's essentially never necessary to have a
gun capable of firing more than about five rounds in one
minute. Given that rapid fire guns have the proven detriment
of facilitating horrible illegal behavior, the balance of
benefits vs. detriments is heavily against them.

(BTW, only a tiny fraction of red light running causes
fatalities. That's not justification for allowing red light
running.)


Image is not a National Socialist but rather NKVD
(International Socialist) for those who see any difference
whatsoever among the sorry lot of socialists all together.

Five rounds per minute? WTF?
My .38 Police Special does all five in about 3 to 4
seconds when actually concentrating on a target. Guys
who are good at that sort of thing use 8-shot revolvers
and the record is one second.

I've never been to a two-way range, and I hope never to
experience that, but many things can transpire in a very
long full sixty second minute. Your
off-the-top-of-the-head 'standard' is idiotic.

I can tell you don't like my standard. But your post
contains no real rebuttal, except for what Jim Jeffries
notes from about 1:45 to 2:00 in this clip:
https://youtu.be/0rR9IaXH1M0?t=102

I've never claimed that lots of guns can shoot more than
five rounds in a minute. I know they can. I've shot several
myself.

Instead I'm saying (outside of military combat, of course)
that capability isn't needed. It's detriments to society far
outweigh it's benefits.

We rode by a shooting range just a few days ago. Among the
normal reports of normal target practice we could hear one
guy's occasional "pop pop pop pop pop." What do you suppose
he was pretending?


Pretending my ass. Probably home defense training which is
popular and like anything else deserving of practice in
order to be effective. This from Tuesday:

https://abc7chicago.com/waukegan-new...mpted/6506524/

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

On 9/26/2020 11:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/25/2020 10:52 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 17:30:57 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, 25 September 2020 16:28:46 UTC-4,
wrote:
On Friday, September 25, 2020 at 11:00:04 AM UTC-5,
AMuzi wrote:
On 9/25/2020 9:59 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/24/2020 10:50 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 21:13:26 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/24/2020 8:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
To the larger issue:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/nkvd.jpg

... as if that's a daily occurrence in all other
prosperous westernized
countries that have reasonable gun control?

Given that the photo shows an official of some sort
executing two
individual I don't see that it involves gun control at
all. Unless, of
course, you don't think that officials should be armed.

I think Andrew's implication is that if (say) America
introduces universal background checks and restricts the
purchase of rapid fire assault-style weapons, that police
will begin executing civilians on the streets.

IOW, the implausible connection to gun control was not
mine.

You mistake my position. The Second was clearly and
tersely written with a definitive and final period after
'shall not be infringed' by men whose memory of Lexington
was fresh.

Automatic weapons have been severely restricted since
1934.
One might argue that the National Firearms Act is an
unconstitutional abridgement but the courts are not
interested in that argument. So here we are, some 80+
years
later in a nation where firearm ownership is widespread,
voluminous and growing. Yesterday, virtually all of them
passed another day nicely oiled and cased without
incident.

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/gun...s-by-state/13/


which comes to just under 5 million firearms in Ohio.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

In the USA firearms kill about 100 people per day. Does
that meet your "virtually all of them passed another day
nicely oiled and cased without incident." criteria? I
guess the number of people dying by firearms is only one
tenth the number dying by Covid-19 each day. So its
irrelevant. Trump and the Republicans think Covid-19 is
a hoax and is going to go away very soon, so one tenth
as many dying by firearms each day is surely immaterial.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/s...ty/firearm.htm

Sum of DEATHS
YEAR Total
2014 33,508
2015 36,132
2016 38,551
2017 39,673
2018 39,615
Total 187,479

Funny thing is about 3000 fewer people died in the USA
from vehicle accidents each year. I'd have guessed
vehicle deaths were much higher than firearm deaths.
But NO. Americans love to shoot people to death! Even
more than they like to run them over. Of course keep in
mind all these deaths by guns and cars are one tenth as
many as the Covid-19 is killing each day.

Any two years on that list equals more firearm deaths
than the Vietnam Conflict had in total.

Cheers

I don't know whether you consider it significant or not
but in most
years suicides account for more then half of the firearm
deaths.
In 2017, for example, some 23,854 committed suicide with a
firearm.

If you had a family member who committed suicide by firearm,
you might not write those deaths off quite so cavalierly.



Yes, some are tragic but of all the suicides I've known most
made the best decision for themselves and more importantly
those around them. If not firearm then something else, the
method being secondary in most cases.

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

On 9/26/2020 11:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/25/2020 8:47 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/25/2020 3:28 PM, wrote:
On Friday, September 25, 2020 at 11:00:04 AM UTC-5, AMuzi
wrote:
On 9/25/2020 9:59 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/24/2020 10:50 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 21:13:26 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/24/2020 8:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
To the larger issue:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/nkvd.jpg

... as if that's a daily occurrence in all other
prosperous westernized
countries that have reasonable gun control?

Given that the photo shows an official of some sort
executing two
individual I don't see that it involves gun control at
all. Unless, of
course, you don't think that officials should be armed.

I think Andrew's implication is that if (say) America
introduces universal background checks and restricts the
purchase of rapid fire assault-style weapons, that police
will begin executing civilians on the streets.

IOW, the implausible connection to gun control was not
mine.

You mistake my position. The Second was clearly and
tersely written with a definitive and final period after
'shall not be infringed' by men whose memory of Lexington
was fresh.

Automatic weapons have been severely restricted since 1934.
One might argue that the National Firearms Act is an
unconstitutional abridgement but the courts are not
interested in that argument. So here we are, some 80+ years
later in a nation where firearm ownership is widespread,
voluminous and growing. Yesterday, virtually all of them
passed another day nicely oiled and cased without incident.

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/gun...s-by-state/13/


which comes to just under 5 million firearms in Ohio.


In the USA firearms kill about 100 people per day. Does
that meet your "virtually all of them passed another day
nicely oiled and cased without incident." criteria? I
guess the number of people dying by firearms is only one
tenth the number dying by Covid-19 each day. So its
irrelevant. Trump and the Republicans think Covid-19 is
a hoax and is going to go away very soon, so one tenth as
many dying by firearms each day is surely immaterial.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/s...ty/firearm.htm

Sum of DEATHS
YEARÂ Â Â Total
2014Â Â Â 33,508
2015Â Â Â 36,132
2016Â Â Â 38,551
2017Â Â Â 39,673
2018Â Â Â 39,615
Total   187,479

Funny thing is about 3000 fewer people died in the USA
from vehicle accidents each year. I'd have guessed
vehicle deaths were much higher than firearm deaths.Â
But NO. Americans love to shoot people to death! Even
more than they like to run them over. Of course keep in
mind all these deaths by guns and cars are one tenth as
many as the Covid-19 is killing each day.


Yes, a roughly similar range for firearm and automobile
deaths. Both include suicides and accidents along with
homicides. Both together do not even approach heart
disease.

Back to Frank's comment, there are less than a half
million automatic weapons, vintage and modern, in the
whole country:

https://law.justia.com/codes/califor...050-21070.html


One would be hard-pressed to find more than a handful per
year used in any crime.

My comments have not been limited to fully automatic weapons.


In that case I apologize.

I assumed when you first wrote "rapid fire assault-style
weapons" (morning of 25 September) that you meant rapid fire
assault type weapons.

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

On 9/26/2020 12:18 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/25/2020 10:30 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 20:17:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/25/2020 7:11 PM, John B. wrote:

Timothy McVeigh carried out the 1995 Oklahoma City
bombing that
killed 168 people and injured more than 680 others and
is considered
the deadliest act of terrorism in the United States
prior to the
September 11 attacks and remains the deadliest act of
domestic
terrorism in the history of the U.S., using fertilizer
and diesel
fuel.

In contrast the 2017 Las Vegas shooting killed 60 and
wounded 411.

Interesting point about the Oklahoma City bombing. Yes,
168 dead is a
lot for one criminal act.

But in five days, you'd exceed that with U.S. gun
homicides. Is that
really supposed to make those OK?

So? Using 2013 (as I have details for that year) there
were 33,169
firearm deaths, including some 21,175 suicides,During the
same period
there were 32,893 highway deaths.

So apparently you are getting excepted about some 278
deaths, or at
least I've never heard you lament highway deaths so I
assume that you
accept them, And, during 2013 there were 749 bicycle deaths.

So essentially you are getting all excepted about firearm
deaths which
exceeded highway deaths, a subject that you seem to
ignore, by a 278
and totally ignore the 746, nearly 3 times, bicycle deaths
during the
same period.

You've raised that point before - but then, you didn't
misuse the word "excepted." (I'm not sure what meaning your
intending for that.)

I suppose you could start a thread to philosophically
examine each and every cause of death. We could discuss
methods of ranking, appropriate raactions, etc. If you like
that idea, have at it.

But as to your direct comparison of motoring deaths vs. gun
deaths: I don't blithely accept either, and neither does
society as a whole. However, there are important differences.

Motoring deaths, looked at in general, are a sad byproduct
of an otherwise beneficial system, since transport is
necessary for human interaction and commerce. It's extremely
uncommon for people to claim we can run a modern and
prosperous society without use of motor vehicles. So there
are fortunes spent annually to learn how to retain motor
transportation but reduce its fatality count and rate.

On the other hand, gun deaths are a result of the design
function of guns, not a sad byproduct. In essence, guns
exist to kill people or things. And except for extremely
isolated rural and wilderness locations they are not
necessary for human interaction and commerce. (Please recall
I am strongly in favor of hunting.) It's obviously possible
to run a prosperous society with far, far fewer man-killing
guns than the U.S. has. And furthermore, in the U.S. the gun
lobby has put fortunes into passing legislation
_prohibiting_ research on reducing gun fatality counts and
rates.

The two cases are not very similar at all.


Maybe, maybe not. We just had another across-the-center-line
suicide near here this week.

Worse, this being Wisconsin and all, the victim not only
watched the idiot die right in front of him, not only was
seriously injured, not only had his own vehicle totaled but
was charged in the hospital for DUI.

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

AMuzi wrote:
On 9/26/2020 11:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/25/2020 10:52 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 17:30:57 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, 25 September 2020 16:28:46 UTC-4,
wrote:
On Friday, September 25, 2020 at 11:00:04 AM UTC-5,
AMuzi wrote:
On 9/25/2020 9:59 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/24/2020 10:50 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 21:13:26 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/24/2020 8:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
To the larger issue:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/nkvd.jpg

... as if that's a daily occurrence in all other
prosperous westernized
countries that have reasonable gun control?

Given that the photo shows an official of some sort
executing two
individual I don't see that it involves gun control at
all. Unless, of
course, you don't think that officials should be armed.

I think Andrew's implication is that if (say) America
introduces universal background checks and restricts the
purchase of rapid fire assault-style weapons, that police
will begin executing civilians on the streets.

IOW, the implausible connection to gun control was not
mine.

You mistake my position. The Second was clearly and
tersely written with a definitive and final period after
'shall not be infringed' by men whose memory of Lexington
was fresh.

Automatic weapons have been severely restricted since
1934.
One might argue that the National Firearms Act is an
unconstitutional abridgement but the courts are not
interested in that argument. So here we are, some 80+
years
later in a nation where firearm ownership is widespread,
voluminous and growing. Yesterday, virtually all of them
passed another day nicely oiled and cased without
incident.

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/gun...s-by-state/13/


which comes to just under 5 million firearms in Ohio.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

In the USA firearms kill about 100 people per day. Does
that meet your "virtually all of them passed another day
nicely oiled and cased without incident." criteria? I
guess the number of people dying by firearms is only one
tenth the number dying by Covid-19 each day. So its
irrelevant. Trump and the Republicans think Covid-19 is
a hoax and is going to go away very soon, so one tenth
as many dying by firearms each day is surely immaterial.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/s...ty/firearm.htm

Sum of DEATHS
YEAR Total
2014 33,508
2015 36,132
2016 38,551
2017 39,673
2018 39,615
Total 187,479

Funny thing is about 3000 fewer people died in the USA
from vehicle accidents each year. I'd have guessed
vehicle deaths were much higher than firearm deaths.
But NO. Americans love to shoot people to death! Even
more than they like to run them over. Of course keep in
mind all these deaths by guns and cars are one tenth as
many as the Covid-19 is killing each day.

Any two years on that list equals more firearm deaths
than the Vietnam Conflict had in total.

Cheers

I don't know whether you consider it significant or not
but in most
years suicides account for more then half of the firearm
deaths.
In 2017, for example, some 23,854 committed suicide with a
firearm.

If you had a family member who committed suicide by firearm,
you might not write those deaths off quite so cavalierly.



Yes, some are tragic but of all the suicides I've known most
made the best decision for themselves and more importantly
those around them. If not firearm then something else, the
method being secondary in most cases.


That seems uncharacteristically cold of you, Andrew. I’m no expert on
suicide, but I see it as a result of a temporary loss of all optimism. The
one person that I know attempted suicide is still alive and quite happy
now. Perhaps if they had used a gun, the story wouldn’t have had quite so
happy of an ending.

On 9/26/2020 2:30 PM, Ralph Barone wrote:
AMuzi wrote:
On 9/26/2020 11:58 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/25/2020 10:52 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 17:30:57 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Friday, 25 September 2020 16:28:46 UTC-4,
wrote:
On Friday, September 25, 2020 at 11:00:04 AM UTC-5,
AMuzi wrote:
On 9/25/2020 9:59 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/24/2020 10:50 PM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 21:13:26 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 9/24/2020 8:25 PM, AMuzi wrote:
To the larger issue:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/photosfromthepast/nkvd.jpg

... as if that's a daily occurrence in all other
prosperous westernized
countries that have reasonable gun control?

Given that the photo shows an official of some sort
executing two
individual I don't see that it involves gun control at
all. Unless, of
course, you don't think that officials should be armed.

I think Andrew's implication is that if (say) America
introduces universal background checks and restricts the
purchase of rapid fire assault-style weapons, that police
will begin executing civilians on the streets.

IOW, the implausible connection to gun control was not
mine.

You mistake my position. The Second was clearly and
tersely written with a definitive and final period after
'shall not be infringed' by men whose memory of Lexington
was fresh.

Automatic weapons have been severely restricted since
1934.
One might argue that the National Firearms Act is an
unconstitutional abridgement but the courts are not
interested in that argument. So here we are, some 80+
years
later in a nation where firearm ownership is widespread,
voluminous and growing. Yesterday, virtually all of them
passed another day nicely oiled and cased without
incident.

https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/gun...s-by-state/13/


which comes to just under 5 million firearms in Ohio.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

In the USA firearms kill about 100 people per day. Does
that meet your "virtually all of them passed another day
nicely oiled and cased without incident." criteria? I
guess the number of people dying by firearms is only one
tenth the number dying by Covid-19 each day. So its
irrelevant. Trump and the Republicans think Covid-19 is
a hoax and is going to go away very soon, so one tenth
as many dying by firearms each day is surely immaterial.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/s...ty/firearm.htm

Sum of DEATHS
YEAR Total
2014 33,508
2015 36,132
2016 38,551
2017 39,673
2018 39,615
Total 187,479

Funny thing is about 3000 fewer people died in the USA
from vehicle accidents each year. I'd have guessed
vehicle deaths were much higher than firearm deaths.
But NO. Americans love to shoot people to death! Even
more than they like to run them over. Of course keep in
mind all these deaths by guns and cars are one tenth as
many as the Covid-19 is killing each day.

Any two years on that list equals more firearm deaths
than the Vietnam Conflict had in total.

Cheers

I don't know whether you consider it significant or not
but in most
years suicides account for more then half of the firearm
deaths.
In 2017, for example, some 23,854 committed suicide with a
firearm.

If you had a family member who committed suicide by firearm,
you might not write those deaths off quite so cavalierly.



Yes, some are tragic but of all the suicides I've known most
made the best decision for themselves and more importantly
those around them. If not firearm then something else, the
method being secondary in most cases.


That seems uncharacteristically cold of you, Andrew. I’m no expert on
suicide, but I see it as a result of a temporary loss of all optimism. The
one person that I know attempted suicide is still alive and quite happy
now. Perhaps if they had used a gun, the story wouldn’t have had quite so
happy of an ending.


Yes, you're exactly right that some are unrealistically
despondent and impulsive which is tragic and a heartbreak to
those who cared and are left feeling as if we have failed.

Then there are those who, after a (short) lifetime of
indolence, theft, abuse, self abuse, mooching, assaults,
petty crime, chronic lies and so on are now no longer with us.

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

On Friday, September 25, 2020 at 5:08:57 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/25/2020 4:26 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Thursday, September 24, 2020 at 9:25:39 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/24/2020 12:00 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Thursday, September 24, 2020 at 8:37:23 AM UTC-7, Tosspot wrote:
On 24/09/2020 15.59, AMuzi wrote:
https://nypost.com/2020/09/24/a-seat...s-head-during/

Why are the cops riding bikes at night with no lights? Is that not
illegal?
Why are you unaware that police are not subject to traffic regulations? Are you supposing that the police are going to pursue someone while staying within the speed limit?
I can see good reasons police are allowed to exceed the speed limit in a
pursuit situation. That doesn't justify cops violating any law they like
any time they like.

I've witnessed cops in patrol cars violating red lights apparently at
will - no speeding involved, no warning lights, no indication it was any
official business.

I'm pretty sympathetic to cops, but they shouldn't be using their
position to break the law for their own convenience.

This is why when you were young enough not to have bones broken someone should have slapped the holy **** out of you.
Gosh, Tom, you're trying to sound so manly and fearsome! But I wonder if
anyone here is impressed? I'm certainly not.
Exactly how did you know that a cop wasn't responding to something?
The two incidents I remember most clearly were at the same traffic
light, one that I'll admit tries my patience. It's badly timed,
unnecessarily long and with almost never any cross traffic.

In both cases, the cop came to a stop, then proceeded - one pretty
quickly, the other after maybe ten or fifteen seconds. In both cases,
there was absolutely no hurry. They motored on at a relaxed pace, and of
course their patrol cars were not lit up nor running sirens.
Cops not being subject to traffic laws is NOT cops doing anything they like without rules.
I can see why you failed to graduate high school.

And I can see why you never succeeded in private industry. The word is going around that your boy Biden intends not to show up for the Debate. If that is the case, the only votes he will be getting is from the illegal harvesting that the Democrats are planning on doing and which at least one court has already warned them about.