So they are asking a country that elected chump to use proven facts to alter their driving behavior for the social good.

He didn't have full auto, he used a bump fire stock.
Full auto fires around 20hz. Well practiced bump firing is around 10hz. Well practiced semi auto pull is around 6hz.

Bump firing also sprays so bad it's not aimable beyond a few feet distance. The gun community is even more surprised than other people, most considered the bump stock as a joke doo dad for making noise and wasting money.





All vendors, even at a gun show, must do background checks.

All private sellers, regardless of where (at home, gun show, on the street, wherever), are not required to do checks - but are in practice held liable for subsequent gun crimes if they can't prove they had no idea the buyer was shady.

There is absolutely nothing special about gun shows. The gun show loophole is an entirely imaginary issue (I explained this earlier).




A traceable gun is just as capable of shooting a person as an untraceable gun.



Yes, anyone can put together that arsenal.
Especially anyone with a squeaky clean record who qualifies to be a gun owner no matter what the restriction - like the Vegas shooter.

Hence why *nothing proposed* would have had *any impact* on the Vegas events, short of confiscation raids nation wide and capital punishment for possession.





The reply was to : "You are more likely to be killed by a criminal if you have a gun than if you don't."

I have two interpretations of that chart

1) (my initial thought)
Assault understood as the legal meaning (brandishing, threatening, not necessarily killing).
Discharge understood as firing.
This is what the original math was based on.
But yes, it seems senseless because how can you die to brandishing?

You are correct regarding the "per year".
The original math does include the mistake of thinking it was cause of death, not per year chance of death.
That alters the result from 350'000 lifetimes for a 50/50 chance, down to 350'000 years for a 50/50 chance. AKA 4600 lifetimes worth of years for a 50/50 chance in the next year.

2) (your [likely correct] thought)
Assault understood as being fired upon.
Discharge understood as accidental (what else could it mean?)
This variant is computed below.
However, this challenges conventional assertion, because the common assertion is that accidents kill more than intentional. Maybe that assertion is crap.

1/24974 as caused by assault
That's a 99.995995835669095859694081845119% chance of dying by a cause OTHER than firearms.
Which requires around 17'000 trials for the chance of the next death to be 50% by firearm.
I.E. 99.995995835669095859694081845119% ^ 17'000 = 50.625%, or about 50/50.
AKA 226 lifetimes worth of years to have a 50/50 chance of death by firearm in the next year.

Referring to the study I linked earlier :
http://service.prerender.io/http://polstats.com/?_escaped_fragment_=/life#!/life
#2 version has a similar death chance to the polstats link, so the #2 variant is likely the appropriate understanding (not my initial understanding).

-schehearzade

In open warfare of govt vs people, drones don't matter, just like jets don't matter. I already covered this above.



Nowhere is an oppressive dictatorship - until it is.
[redacted]
I feel like people are too distracted with instagram and other B.S. to bother learning about how the world works.
History is long. The current peace is an anomaly. When things go bad, there is little warning. If you're lucky, a year or so of build up. If you're not lucky, weeks or days. Shit likes to spiral.
In bad times, you have only what you have on hand.


Most western countries with [regardless of gun ownership] don't have a population that's F'd in the head.
Nothing stops a German gun owner from taking his AR15 and shooting up a concert.
Storing his guns in a safe that he can open doesn't mean anything.
Paying for a new license card for every few guns doesn't alter the guns.

Gun laws, as proposed, are fluff. Nothing that makes people safer, nothing that prevents ownership, but plenty to crap on collectors.
* 10 round limit = 2 second pause to reload
* Gun show loophole is a misnomer.
* (re. above) Only private sales (gun show or not) don't require checks - but you still end up in court if the buyer does something bad.
* Assault weapons ban only bans pistol grips and threaded barrels. Cosmetics. Just google "California compliant AR15" (they already have a de-facto AWB).
* There's already laws against straw purchase.
* There's already laws against crazy people buying (already part of the background check)
* Registration is pointless as gun control. Doesn't alter the guns or who has them (background check already tells gov who, when, and where bought a gun).

(I'd sooner vote for mandatory roll cage and 6 point harness in every car. Could eliminate 90+% of car fatalities in one rule - if people cared enough.)


By the way, gun owners hate people like the Vegas shooter even more than anti-gunners hate people like him.
Precisely because assholes like that shooter make anti-gunners turn on their frustration on innocent gun owners.

The call to "do something" is the phrase that perfectly describes the sentiments that led to actions, that in turn became described by either "famous last words" or "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".





We had shit health insurance before Obama. We had shit insurance during Obama (only you're required by law to buy it, even if it's not a good value), we continue to have shit health insurance during Trump, and no matter what trump does, it will still be shit.
Problem is that the insurance company lobbyists draft the language of the law (no matter the party in charge), and it's not for our benefit.





Re. Minorities, most are living normal lives. The white eutopia that the few vocal people complain about, doesn't exist. At least I have yet to see it. Don't let a few thousand people in a nation of millions guide your thoughts about overall social norms.

I'm happy to see them protest. Frankly, I wish white people had the same solidarity that black people have. When a black gets shot by a cop, they come together. When a white is shot by a cop, other whites say "he probably deserved it". I wish the black community good luck and success.





Yes, I wish we weren't jailing more people than anywhere else on the planet, over things that harm nobody.
I wish we had the drug laws of Portugal (decriminalization)
I wish we had the legal system of Sweden (no jail before conviction).

Know how I said that most countries don't have as many people that are F'd in the head? Same applies for people in government.
None of this shit will get fixes.
Republicans are bible thumping retards that funnel money to defense contractors and campaign donors.
Democrats are buck-passing censors that funnel money to insurance companies and campaign donors.
And people just pick a team and bark at the other team, while each gets fleeced by their very own side.

-scheherazade

Yeah, but ignore all the benefits society gave him to make those things easy and beneficial...forget that (forced) hard work, work ethic, and obedience are hallmarks of black history, forget that God and family are far more deeply ingrained in black culture than white (yeah, I expect you'll counter with 'they don't have families', and ignore the reason why so many are missing the father....disproportionate prosecutions and sentences, and ignore that poor whites are in the same boat but with a white life preserver that often keeps them out of prison, so in society and home). Forget that embodying none of these has helped them, because historically those traits are easy to exploit, and 'white America' has historically exploited them in black Americans....but you won't see that.

Edit: put more simply, doing those things isn't white privilege, but being secure in the knowledge that they'll benefit you is.

What gives me the right to know things about southern white people? Being one...born and raised in Texas. I notice you deleted "many" from my statement then lied by saying I "placed an entire group in derogatory terms", typical Bob.

You must be either unbelievably dumb or just frantically trolling again, Bob, your choice, but I would hate to see you banned.....but you calling someone racist for a quote you altered...oh Bob. That's terribly sad even from you.

I certainly see the artistic sensibility there. It's cool and unique, but in the end it left me feeling disturbed. Modifications to public infrastructure should be strictly discouraged.

Yes, I understand that a handful of 3" lag bolts to hold up your shelf and table are unlikely to affect the structural integrity of the bridge, but bridges and supports span the gamut from earthquake-ready to collapsing under their own poor construction.

This guy's modifications are unlikely to cause a serious problem, but what about the next guy who decides to make more serious alterations? The potential risk for serious cost and injury aren't worth the coolness factor.

Holy Fuck!! Google "Trump Bonwit Teller":

https://www.fastcodesign.com/90137202/hey-remember-when-trump-destroyed-precious-art-history

New York Times:
"Plain as the building might be, the entrance was like a spilled casket of gems: platinum, bronze, hammered aluminum, orange and yellow faience, and tinted glass backlighted at night. In 1929 American Architect magazine called it “a sparkling jewel in keeping with the character of the store.”


"Upon learning about the historic building’s imminent demolition, and recognizing the cultural value of its ornamentation, the Metropolitan Museum of Art convinced Trump to remove portions of the historic facade and donate them to the institution."

"Soon he was backpedaling, after realizing that it would take two more weeks and $32,000...to properly take the reliefs off the building. Using his fake alter ago, a “Trump spokesperson” named John Baron, he told the New York Times in 1980: “The merit of these stones was not great enough to justify the efforts to save them.” His construction workers chopped up the metalwork with torches and let the sculptures fall to the ground to crack into smithereens."

Two, 15 foot high, irreplacable, Art Deco bas-relief sculptures smashed by Trump to save $32,000 in costs to remove them.

You mean apart from the explanation that the speed required to run a marathon is close to a flat-out sprint for most people, and that the maximum speed that you can sustain over two hours depends on the three factors that they explained in the video? It was discussed around 2:10 in the vid.

The handful of people have physiology that gives them unusually high oxygen uptake, lactate thresholds, and running efficiency.

It's slightly clickbaity because Nike... and despite serious cheating their attempt on the sub-2 hour marathon to sell shoes failed by 26 seconds.

p.s. The Grauniad had an article on what the rest of us can learn from these elite runners https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/may/06/secrets-two-hour-marathon-men-alter-running

I would just say that if you're impaired by drugs, don't drive. The drug itself is irrelevant.

@SeesThruYou, there's nothing wrong with brain-altering drugs, provided you're doing it for fun and not dependent on them.

"My brain altering drug is safer than your brain altering drug, so nyah nyah." Kinda like saying jumping from the 30th floor of a building is "safer" than jumping from the 31st floor. There's a bigger picture you're completely missing, dumbasses.

I saw this movie in the theater when it came out and have watched it several times since then and only now I just noticed that the scream sounds suspiciously like an altered Wilhelm scream.

Again,

If you want to take a book of rules and ignore it take American law and only read a portion of it like:
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death

I suppose that in isolation suggests that American law justifies citizen's pulling out a gun and shooting people providing comfort to Americas enemies. Of course, if you read the WHOLE of American law you find there are things about due process and courts and other checks and balances in place. In fact, that the naive original reading is completely the anti-thesis of what American law advocates.

The point of course being that is EXACTLY the same thing you've done with the bible by entirely ignoring the existence of other parts in that address alter, or provide context on the pieces you picked out. You know, like some guy named Jesus that came along later and some folks have made a big deal about following the teachings of.

I do wonder a lot whether one of the main problems we have is all the restrictive associations we have with gender. Now I get that some people are completely repulsed by the genitals they were born with, but it seems a far greater number of transgendered people are perfectly content to "live as" their preferred gender without making major alterations.

Do we really need 200 genders or do we just need to accept that the guy who likes to put on an evening gown and go ballroom dancing is still a man?

This is all speculative pondering on my part -- I don't know anyone transgendered who I could ask. If I'm way off base, I apologize to anyone who may find this offensive.

Have you met kids? It's pretty common for kids, even "normal" kids, to play with toys of the opposite gender. Boys play with dolls; girls play with toy soldiers. Boys put on sparkly dresses; girls put on football helmets.

http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/meet-avery-9-year-old-transgender-girl-who-made-it-cover-national-geographic-54412

When you've got a 4 year old boy asking how to kill himself, but putting on a dress makes him feel better, maybe he's on to something.

While I agree it's absurdly complicated, I suspect that gets worse as you get older and more firmly affixed in your pigeonhole. Plus, if Avery decides to undergo physical alteration, whether it be hormone treatment or full surgical reassignment, it goes a lot better if you start that process at or before puberty starts making its own changes.

I really need to figure out how to change the title of your video without having to opt out of the beta... Anyway, the title has been altered so so that it is indeed the SNES.

Thank you Artician and it is nice to meet you.

See, there are plenty of things we can disagree on and have a rational conversation about.

Are important services better provided by private corporations or government departments?
Does your right to free expression override other people's right to freedom from harassment?
How can we manage the economy while protecting the environment?
Most of these come down to individualism vs collectivism, and that's far from a settled question; I personally doubt it can be settled... life is too nuanced.

But there are some questions that are settled. The vote is in and the answer is known, and if you disagree, well, you're just on the wrong side of history. You are the Catholic church arguing the earth is the centre of the universe.

If you think that it's ok to discriminate against gay people.... you're a moron.
If you think climate change is a hoax... you're a moron.
If you're a creationist... you're a moron.
If you believe in homeopathy... you're a moron.

I don't have to "convince" you that those things are true. Your opinion on them is irrelevant. So is mine. They are done. If I change my mind tomorrow and decide that creationism is real, it won't alter reality one bit.

This is the problem with Trump.

I disagreed with Romney. I didn't like him and I felt a lot of his ideas were bad. Hell, I'm not a huge fan of Clinton either. But it's possible to have a rational discussion on their stances.

Trump may have one or two semi-reasonable positions, but so what? They are completely overshadowed by all his awful positions.