new bike lane hazard

On Thursday, March 5, 2020 at 6:16:57 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, March 5, 2020 at 11:35:01 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Thursday, March 5, 2020 at 11:25:43 AM UTC-8, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, 5 March 2020 14:07:13 UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Thursday, March 5, 2020 at 3:03:26 AM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:

Actually not. The AR-15 type is used in target shooting. BCM sells an
AR-15 type that shoots Minute of angle groups at 100 yards right out
of the box, and they sell a little better model that shuts sub MOA
groups.

I'm a shooter and I will say this outright - there's no day on Earth that you were ever able to hold one minute of angle. Even with a telescopic sight the crosshairs cover the V ring at 100 yards.

When you were in the Air Force the standard rifle was an M1A1 carbine which might be able to hit the target at 50 yards.

Sorry Old Boy but that's absolutely false (what else is new?)about the accuracy of the M1 carbine. I had an M1 carbine made by Rockola and that carbine could hit a tin can bouncing down a steep embankment, in a gravel pit, at 100 yards without problem.

Are you sure that the standard RIFLE wasn't the M1 GARAND which is a totally different weapon and cartridge from the M1 Carbine?

Cheers

Firstly I would like to know how you could hit a damn thing with an M1 carbine since they used a .30 caliber pistol round 7.62 x 33mm that had no range and a trajectory like a rainbow?

The M1 Garand was a 30-06 that was good up to 200 yards with match ammo..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjy6FRWOmhc I own a M-1 carbine, which makes me super-macho. I can't recall who made my particular gun -- maybe IBM or the Sheinhardt Wig Company. It's pretty wimpy compared to a 30.06, but plenty of firepower to push back the invading hordes of Girl Scouts trying to sell me cookies.

-- Jay Beattie.

-- Jay Beattie.

It was made for people who weren't normally engaged in combat. Officers would carry them as would truck drivers and Air Force personnel on air bases who would not normally be engaged in combat but might have to be pressed into service. It is perfectly OK for a 100 yard plinking but you have to be very good to hit anything since the accuracy of it varied so much from gun to gun that you had to get used to each one.

On Thursday, March 5, 2020 at 6:26:17 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/5/2020 8:16 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, March 5, 2020 at 11:35:01 AM UTC-8, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Thursday, March 5, 2020 at 11:25:43 AM UTC-8, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, 5 March 2020 14:07:13 UTC-5, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Thursday, March 5, 2020 at 3:03:26 AM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:

Actually not. The AR-15 type is used in target shooting. BCM sells an
AR-15 type that shoots Minute of angle groups at 100 yards right out
of the box, and they sell a little better model that shuts sub MOA
groups.

I'm a shooter and I will say this outright - there's no day on Earth that you were ever able to hold one minute of angle. Even with a telescopic sight the crosshairs cover the V ring at 100 yards.

When you were in the Air Force the standard rifle was an M1A1 carbine which might be able to hit the target at 50 yards.

Sorry Old Boy but that's absolutely false (what else is new?)about the accuracy of the M1 carbine. I had an M1 carbine made by Rockola and that carbine could hit a tin can bouncing down a steep embankment, in a gravel pit, at 100 yards without problem.

Are you sure that the standard RIFLE wasn't the M1 GARAND which is a totally different weapon and cartridge from the M1 Carbine?

Cheers

Firstly I would like to know how you could hit a damn thing with an M1 carbine since they used a .30 caliber pistol round 7.62 x 33mm that had no range and a trajectory like a rainbow?

The M1 Garand was a 30-06 that was good up to 200 yards with match ammo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjy6FRWOmhc I own a M-1 carbine, which makes me super-macho. I can't recall who made my particular gun -- maybe IBM or the Sheinhardt Wig Company. It's pretty wimpy compared to a 30.06, but plenty of firepower to push back the invading hordes of Girl Scouts trying to sell me cookies.

-- Jay Beattie.

-- Jay Beattie.


Embrace (figuratively only, of course) the Girl Scouts!

I just love this time of year. Every day incrementally
brings a minute and a half more sunlight. Hardly noticeable
until one day it's light when one awakes. Then the always
surprising announcement 'Pitchers and Catchers' on the
radio, then Girl Scouts appear in grocery and restaurant
parking lots. Within just a few weeks the snow will melt
and we enjoy a change of season.

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

I don't want to get anywhere near them while my dust allergies might be something more serious.

On 3/6/2020 6:17 AM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 11:36:43 -0800 (PST), Sir Ridesalot
wrote:

On Thursday, 5 March 2020 11:45:34 UTC-5, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/5/2020 8:42 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/4/2020 8:19 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/4/2020 7:16 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 13:42:30 -0800 (PST),
"
wrote:

According to Business Insider (why is a business
website/magazine writing about mass shootings?) there
were 340 mass shootings and 373 deaths from said
shootings in 2018 in the USA. The definition of mass
shooting is not exactly settled. Roughly its 4 or more
people killed or wounded at about the same time in about
the same location. Roughly. Everyone defines it
differently. Note, a mass shooting does not mean anyone
has to die. Shot and injured is good enough.

Bicycle deaths are about 2.5 times more than mass
shooting fatalities. Drunk driving deaths are probably
250 times mass shooting deaths. Mass shootings always
get lots of attention. But they are really pathetic when
it comes to killing people. Cigarettes were/are killing
ten or a hundred times more people. Suicides are the
number one use of guns for killing people every year.
But that is a good use for guns I guess.

Yes ciggies killed a lot of people and as a result there
is a move to
ban smoking. Mass shootings are vilified and the concept
that "if we
ban guns there will be no more mass killings" seems to be
quite
popular.

Straw man arguments are also popular. But AFACT, nobody has
ever said we should ban all guns, or that banning guns
optimized for rapidly firing in combat situations will stop
all mass killings.


I am merely applying exactly the same reasoning to bicycle
deaths,
which you admit are even greater than mass shooting
deaths, some 250%
greater, and yet you leap to defend bicycles.

How can that be? Ciggies kill people so cigarettes are
bad. Guns kill
people so guns are bad. Bicycles kill people so bicycles
are good?

The logic seems a bit awkward.... to say the least.

Logic comes with different levels of sophistication. For a
step up, try listing benefits vs. detriments.

Regarding benefits of free sale of guns optimized for
killing people (as opposed to hunting for meat or trophies,
protecting gardens from pests, etc.) what exactly are the
benefits? (And how do other countries manage without them?)

Benefits: The guns look cool, especially to flabby guys who
are afraid to try for the Reserves.

The guns can shoot lots of bullets really fast. It's fun for
some people to shoot that way.

The guns are easy to customize so you can make them even
cooler, in your own mind.

The guns are a sales gimmick for an industry that sees fewer
hunters buying real long guns every year. (And really,
that's probably the big one.)

Detriments: They tend to be less accurate than many true
hunting arms.

They're not as reliable as a bolt action long gun.

You're paying for features that have no real practical use.

They regularly get used to kill bunches of people at once.

The benefit to detriment balance for bicycling is far
different. AFAICT there has never been a study that found
bicycling was a net detriment to health.

Cigarettes fail badly at any benefit vs. detriment tests,
which is why there are serious restriction on who can buy
them, how they can be advertised, where they can be used.
There's also massive publicity against their use.

Motoring deaths? Yes, they are very regrettable. And partly
because of that, weeks of instruction and passing a couple
tests are required before you're allowed to operate a motor
vehicle on public roads. And there is constant work done to
reduce those death counts - an endless succession of design
changes and laws.


Finally, like it or not, all deaths are not treated equally.
If grandma dies of a stroke at 95 in a nursing home, the
family is typically sad but accepting. If the same grandma
at the same age has her throat slit in a nursing home, there
will be hell to pay, and rightly so. Every rational person
should understand that, although some gun fans do not.

Getting blown away with several other congregation members
or fellow students tends to rank very low on the scale of
acceptable deaths.



sigh.
I'll try once more even though you seem willfully in denial based on
your fashion sense.

Nobody has ever accused me of "fashion" anything. Its not how my mind
works.

[snip irrelevant matters I did not raise]

A perusal of our founding era from original documents will make clear to
even the most resistant that our beloved 2d is not written for tin can
plinking nor for hunting. The world is miserably and devastatingly full
of examples of tyranny over unarmed populations which we will never be.

Well, having lots more combat-optimized guns per person sure has stopped
those aggressive Canadians massed at our northern border!

But regarding well armed populations and tyranny, I recommend _Call Me
American_ by Abdi Nor Iftin. It's an autobiography of a guy growing up
in Somalia, in the conditions that are still current there. A truly
horrifying account of what it's like when there are plenty of
unrestricted guns and not enough government.

Details on request.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Okay, I'll bite just this one time on this which will quickly degenerate into yet another anti-gun rant by others.

When I was younger I had a LEGITIMATE collection of British Long Guns that spanned the time from the Breech Loading Snider Enfield, a Martini Henry as used in the Boer War, a Lee Enfield No. 1 Mk V rifle (very rare) and a lee Enfield No. V Jungle Carbine, plus a Lee Enfield No.4 sniper rifle from WW2, and a match-grade .22 caliber Lee-Enfield target rifle plus a .22 caliber Lee Enfield training rifle (used a lot in armoury basements for target shooting) all the way to the L1A1 rifle. I also had a legitimate M1 carbine made by Rockola, an AR-15 and few other rifles of historical interest. Then one day the Federal Government of Canada decided to change the rules and a lot of LEGITIMATELY PURCHASED firearms became illegal. They included my Snider Enfield, my Lee-Enfield No. V Jungle Carbine,my M1 carbine, my Ar-15 and my L1A1. Yet it was NOT long guns that were the source of most shootings in Canada, it was pistols smuggled in from the USA and still is.

Gun Control is hitting what you aim at.

Cheers

What was the reasoning behind making some guns illegal? The AR-15 and
the L1A1, and the M1 I suppose might have had full auto capability,
depending on the model, but the Snider?

But then, California used to/maybe still do, have a list of acceptable
pistols and on another group someone was bitching because the blued
version was legal but his stainless, or maybe chromed, version was
illegal :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


Fashion.
As I noted yesterday. The blue finish makes it a magic
deadly weapon.

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

On Friday, March 6, 2020 at 5:04:23 AM UTC-8, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, 6 March 2020 07:06:14 UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 17:15:16 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Thursday, March 5, 2020 at 3:15:07 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 11:07:10 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Thursday, March 5, 2020 at 3:03:26 AM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:

Actually not. The AR-15 type is used in target shooting. BCM sells an
AR-15 type that shoots Minute of angle groups at 100 yards right out
of the box, and they sell a little better model that shuts sub MOA
groups.

I'm a shooter and I will say this outright - there's no day
on Earth that you were ever able to hold one minute of angle. Even
with a telescopic sight the crosshairs cover the V ring at 100 yards.


Tom, you must be hallucinating. I had a part time business while in
the A,F. building precision varmint rifles and I would guarantee, and
provide a target and reloading data, for a maximum of 1 MOA for every
gun I built,

When you were in the Air Force the standard rifle was an M1A1 carbine which might be able to hit the target at 50 yards.

Nope. Again you just don't know what you were talking about. True,
when I enlisted we "qualified" with the M-1 but certainly by the time
Vietnam came along the standard was the M-16. And how do I know? Well
they issued me one when I cleared into Nha Trang AFB.

(eyes rolling) the AF standard arm until half way through Vietnam was the M1A1 carbine. Keep up making it deeper. I was out of the AF before they changed over.


Air Force Vice Chief of Staff General Curtis LeMay, who had documented
the need for a more effective small arms weapon. When he became Air
Force Chief of Staff in the summer of 1961, he applied his $2-million
budget to an order of 80,000 AR-15 rifles to be procured over the next
five years.

Vietnam War " a conflict in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia from 1
November 1955 to the fall of Saigon on 30 April 1975." Half way
through would be 1965, and by that time the A.F. had approximately
14,000 M-16/AR-15 rifles in hand.
--
cheers,

John B.

IIRC, there technically was no such thing as the Vietnam WAR sine war was never declared. Thus it was known for years as the Vietnam Conflict.

Cheers

You're correct but tell that to someone who was flying on a B52 with SAMs bursting all around you.

On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 13:42:30 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

There have been 47 mass shootings in the US since 1/1/20. Few of them
made the news beyond local. 51 killed and 183 wounded. So far.

In 2019 there were 39,428 victims of gun violence in the US (all
causes). 15,338 were homicides, 24,090 were suicides. There were 626
murder-suicides. There were 418 mass shootings and 31 mass murders.
209 children and 776 teenagers lost their lives; 487 children and 2302
teens were injured. 71 officers were killed and 302 injured; officers
killed 1284 people and injured 791. 1577 people were shot in
self-defense or defense of others, 1874 were shot unintentionally.

In 2018 there were 55,291 shooting incidents in the US with 14,814
deaths and 28,234 injuries. 667 children and 2874 teenagers killed
or injured. There were 337 mass shootings, 280 officers shot or killed
and 2188 people shot or killed by officers.

In 2017 there were 59,806 shootings with 15,961 deaths and 31,275
injuries. In 2016 there were 56,787 shootinngs with 15,115 deaths and
30,667 injuries. In 2015 it was 49,698 shootings with 13,563 deaths and
27,004 injuries. 2014: 41,006 shootings with 12,389 deaths and 22,587
injuries.

Interesting to note the huge spike in shootings during the first two
years of the Trump Administration, but at least last year there was a
drop in the horrific numnbers. Hopefully that trend will continue this
year.

You're far safer on your bike than around guns.

On 3/6/2020 11:57 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/6/2020 6:17 AM, John B. wrote:

But then, California used to/maybe still do, have a list of acceptable
pistols and on another group someone was bitching because the blued
version was legal but his stainless, or maybe chromed, version was
illegal :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


Fashion.
As I noted yesterday. The blue finish makes it a magic deadly weapon.

A) I may be wrong, but John's anecdote sounds like someone's overactive
imagination. A citation of the law would be helpful, if it could be found.

B) Andrew's comment is precisely backwards, based on the anecdote John
related.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 3/6/2020 11:36 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/6/2020 11:57 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/6/2020 6:17 AM, John B. wrote:

But then, California used to/maybe still do, have a list
of acceptable
pistols and on another group someone was bitching because
the blued
version was legal but his stainless, or maybe chromed,
version was
illegal :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


Fashion.
As I noted yesterday. The blue finish makes it a magic
deadly weapon.

A) I may be wrong, but John's anecdote sounds like someone's
overactive imagination. A citation of the law would be
helpful, if it could be found.

B) Andrew's comment is precisely backwards, based on the
anecdote John related.



I may have been wrong, can't recall the statute clearly. Is
it chrome which makes the magic juju? California Attorney
General's page on this:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regagunfaqs

Gives me 'access denied' when I click the link to defined
weapons list:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/awlist

So not only magic killer features, it's a secret!

Meanwhile although I haven't seen the figures in a few years
it used to be that the #1 round for death by firearm was .22LR.

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

On Fri, 06 Mar 2020 13:17:44 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 3/6/2020 11:36 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/6/2020 11:57 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/6/2020 6:17 AM, John B. wrote:

But then, California used to/maybe still do, have a list
of acceptable
pistols and on another group someone was bitching because
the blued
version was legal but his stainless, or maybe chromed,
version was
illegal :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


Fashion.
As I noted yesterday. The blue finish makes it a magic
deadly weapon.

A) I may be wrong, but John's anecdote sounds like someone's
overactive imagination. A citation of the law would be
helpful, if it could be found.

B) Andrew's comment is precisely backwards, based on the
anecdote John related.



I may have been wrong, can't recall the statute clearly. Is
it chrome which makes the magic juju? California Attorney
General's page on this:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regagunfaqs

Gives me 'access denied' when I click the link to defined
weapons list:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/awlist

So not only magic killer features, it's a secret!

Meanwhile although I haven't seen the figures in a few years
it used to be that the #1 round for death by firearm was .22LR.

Well it wasn't exactly an anecdote, rather a mention of something I
read. and yes, the California state law does specify a listing of all
pistols legal to be sold in the state.
To quote:

"As of January 1, 2001, no handgun may be manufactured within
California, imported into California for sale, lent, given, kept for
sale, or offered/exposed for sale unless that handgun model has passed
firing, safety, and drop tests and is certified for sale in California
by the Department of Justice. "

For further detail read:
https://tinyurl.com/uft5cbo
--
cheers,

John B.

On 3/6/2020 4:51 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 06 Mar 2020 13:17:44 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 3/6/2020 11:36 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/6/2020 11:57 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/6/2020 6:17 AM, John B. wrote:

But then, California used to/maybe still do, have a list
of acceptable
pistols and on another group someone was bitching because
the blued
version was legal but his stainless, or maybe chromed,
version was
illegal :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


Fashion.
As I noted yesterday. The blue finish makes it a magic
deadly weapon.

A) I may be wrong, but John's anecdote sounds like someone's
overactive imagination. A citation of the law would be
helpful, if it could be found.

B) Andrew's comment is precisely backwards, based on the
anecdote John related.



I may have been wrong, can't recall the statute clearly. Is
it chrome which makes the magic juju? California Attorney
General's page on this:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regagunfaqs

Gives me 'access denied' when I click the link to defined
weapons list:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/awlist

So not only magic killer features, it's a secret!

Meanwhile although I haven't seen the figures in a few years
it used to be that the #1 round for death by firearm was .22LR.

Well it wasn't exactly an anecdote, rather a mention of something I
read. and yes, the California state law does specify a listing of all
pistols legal to be sold in the state.
To quote:

"As of January 1, 2001, no handgun may be manufactured within
California, imported into California for sale, lent, given, kept for
sale, or offered/exposed for sale unless that handgun model has passed
firing, safety, and drop tests and is certified for sale in California
by the Department of Justice. "

For further detail read:
https://tinyurl.com/uft5cbo
--
cheers,

John B.


found this banned list:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/de-certified-handguns

Which does indeed list some models in certain
finishes(chrome, stainless, blued) but not in other
finishes. Need to use 'search in page' because the list
isn't in any particular order. Entries seem to indicate
it's current through early this year.

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

On Friday, March 6, 2020 at 3:12:26 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/6/2020 4:51 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 06 Mar 2020 13:17:44 -0600, AMuzi wrote:

On 3/6/2020 11:36 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/6/2020 11:57 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/6/2020 6:17 AM, John B. wrote:

But then, California used to/maybe still do, have a list
of acceptable
pistols and on another group someone was bitching because
the blued
version was legal but his stainless, or maybe chromed,
version was
illegal :-)
--
cheers,

John B.


Fashion.
As I noted yesterday. The blue finish makes it a magic
deadly weapon.

A) I may be wrong, but John's anecdote sounds like someone's
overactive imagination. A citation of the law would be
helpful, if it could be found.

B) Andrew's comment is precisely backwards, based on the
anecdote John related.



I may have been wrong, can't recall the statute clearly. Is
it chrome which makes the magic juju? California Attorney
General's page on this:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regagunfaqs

Gives me 'access denied' when I click the link to defined
weapons list:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/awlist

So not only magic killer features, it's a secret!

Meanwhile although I haven't seen the figures in a few years
it used to be that the #1 round for death by firearm was .22LR.

Well it wasn't exactly an anecdote, rather a mention of something I
read. and yes, the California state law does specify a listing of all
pistols legal to be sold in the state.
To quote:

"As of January 1, 2001, no handgun may be manufactured within
California, imported into California for sale, lent, given, kept for
sale, or offered/exposed for sale unless that handgun model has passed
firing, safety, and drop tests and is certified for sale in California
by the Department of Justice. "

For further detail read:
https://tinyurl.com/uft5cbo
--
cheers,

John B.


found this banned list:
https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/de-certified-handguns

Which does indeed list some models in certain
finishes(chrome, stainless, blued) but not in other
finishes. Need to use 'search in page' because the list
isn't in any particular order. Entries seem to indicate
it's current through early this year.

Nothing prohibits a person from owning any of those guns. They are not certified safe for sale in Ca., but you can buy them somewhere else. The banned weapons are explained he https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/regagunfaqs#1 The finish may correspond to mechanical differences -- or may just represent another revenue opportunity. Who knows.

-- Jay Beattie.