Lol. Lebowski.

I'm studying mechanical engineering (hons) with masters in biomedical engineering. It's a head fuck. I don't think anyone offers firearm design as a major itself.

The trigger finger is the primary safety (debatable), and there is usually a secondary safety and sometimes a tertiary safety. It's true that not having it is different than removing it but sometimes they are redundant. For example the palm safety (a tertiary safety on most guns) is often pinned to turn it off permanently because it didn't add any real benefit.

The particular gun in question looks like a CZ-75. A little hunting in the Youtube comments and other people agree. This particular model originally had a firing pin block which was eventually removed on later models (that have the same internals) because it wasn't needed (probably because they also have a thumb safety). This allowed for the short reset disconnector to be put in place (which is a factory part). So CZ ships two lines of the same gun - one with the firing pin block and one without. You're not suddenly unsafe if you remove it from the model that has it. With the quality of the video the way it is though, it could end up being another gun entirely.

Yes, x-ray diffraction is not the only method. It was an example only. The point being that your average gun owner and gunsmiths don't use these sorts of techniques as regular preventative maintenance. And they don't need to, guns are cheap and replacement parts are cheap. If something breaks you replace it. Some parts are replaced on a maintenance schedule (springs spring to mind). Most people never fire enough rounds through their firearms to need to replace anything.

Factory condition firearms malfunctioning is not rare. Factory condition firearms self firing is quite rare. But several model firearms have been affected over the years (meaning millions of firearms). But usually the problem is with a small batch of firearms from within those millions but they always do a blanket recall.

I agree, unintentional firing of a gun is almost always user error.

I still don't believe their is enough information from the video and accompanying text to make a judgment call on this guy.

Here is the problem, Mr. Schlosser is a journalist, not a Nuclear Scientist. He does not understand, or has chosen to ignore for propaganda reasons, that an unarmed warhead is EXTREMELY unlikely to perform the exact sequence of events that need to take place to have a nuclear reaction happen.

Yes, he is fully correct in that we have had numerous 'butt-clenching' moments in which we could have started WW3 due to a malfunction or human error. But in the other cases he mentions, such as the bombs that landed on Spain, the lightning bolt on the tower, and the wrench on the rocket, the chance of the warhead going up while being unarmed is infinitesimal. They simply don't go 'boom' because of a collision or explosion. Now you could have a 'dirty bomb' type incident where the radioactive materials could be spread and come into contact with humans, but that is about it.

The cases that have been officially listed as Broken Arrows were because they involved an active bomb, like the one in Florida. Everything else he mentions in this video is his 'belief' and is conjecture.

Now, before I get unloaded on, I wish we didn't have nuclear weapons. I don't agree with Trump that we should renew the arms race, I think he is nuts since we have more than enough weapons to blanket the cities of the world more than a couple of times. If you add all the nukes from the Big 3 (USA/Russia/France...yes, France) there are enough to cover every single inch of the world.

The problem is, who bells the cat? If we give up all of our weapons, we are at risk. I wish we weren't, but we would be. If we bring down our numbers gradually, there are still other countries that may not, like North Korea. How do we trust the other country is actually following through? In a perfect world, we would all lay down our weapons and sing kumbaya, but as Heinlein wrote: "...Anyone who clings to the historically untrue and thoroughly immoral doctrine that violence never settles anything I would advise to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler could referee and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk, and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and their freedoms."

PS...Yes, I know Starship Troopers is a controversial novel with overtones of Militarism and Fascism. However, there are quotes that ring true no matter what 'ism' people attach to the overall story. If you doubt that, look at the utter disbelief and depression that overcame liberals when Trump won. "He simply was supposed to, it was impossible, not like this, we have no hope, etc" were the feelings of the people who gave him no hope of winning. I, having lived and read enough to get a fair picture of how fucked up we are as a species, had little doubt he could pull it off. We elected a former Wrestler as governor, a former actor as governor, and a former actor as President. We overlook mass genocide in other countries. We ignore climate change. We spend hundreds of billions on defense and less than 10 on space exploration, all the while living on a planet that is already critically overpopulated (and is growing almost exponentially).

Thanks, but don't be sorry, my life is good even with my issues.

Yes, unethical is still unethical, and lying is always unethical. Stop lying (by omission or exaggeration) and tell the whole truth about these things, even when some of that truth works against your goals/narrative, and I'll stop contradicting you. Your insistence on pretending the worst practices are the norm, and that ethical animal treatment is an outlier is my issue, because I know it's not true from actual experience, not propaganda. Read my comments carefully and you'll see my issue is with your exaggeration and hyperbolic blanket statements, not your goal to lessen animal suffering.

I think using exaggeration and lies to make a point is an admission that you have no honest point to make, or that you don't believe that the facts support you.
Since there is an issue with bad practices, I see the exaggeration and hyperbole as working AGAINST proper animal treatment....you offer people the opportunity to dismiss you completely when you do that. Tell the truth, the whole truth, and the clear truth, and I won't discredit anything, I won't be able to. The younger people need correct information, not exaggerated propaganda and lies. Only then can they make a real informed choice.
It's my same issue with the "truth" campaign against smoking. They lie and exaggerate, obfuscate and fabricate, and convince themselves the ends justify the means. I can almost never agree with that sentiment. Lies are lies and should be exposed at every chance, IMO.

'White people are afraid of black people because of violent tendencies' says the white officer that just violently manhandled a 98 lb woman ostensively for being black.
OK, so then he agrees that people should absolutely fear the police then, right? Because FAR more of them commit violent acts per capita, and overall, than black people. And if 'fear' is an excuse for trained, well equipped police with backup to kill unarmed black men, do not armed black men have more reason to fear police and kill them? They really need to rethink their MO, and the thought process behind excusing homicide with the blanket excuse of 'fear', because that excuse goes both ways.

Your video, Fleece Blanket Foils Snake Getaway, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I think his engine was just blown, looked like water vapor to me. I worked in a garage once and the owner had me drive an audi around to burn off the oil that had collected in the exhaust system. At full throttle it would have blanketed a two lane road completely for 200+ yards.

Later, giving them blankets for the evening battle.....

Then I misunderstood, I thought you were saying no one on the planet HAS to eat meat by necessity and likely never will, so I pointed out two large groups that historically have and do eat ONLY meat.
I nit pick because when people make public blanket statements that are false, they need to be corrected.

This is showcasing the New Generic. Blizzard used to push the boundaries for hyper-realism in CG, but everything from designs to animations in this is wrapped tightly in a security-blanket of technical and conceptual cliche.

Sign of the times, but I'm still filing a formal complaint...

OMG...I was SOOOO hoping you would make that argument.
The 'blanket' minimum wage is the minimum we have decided that those living in the cheapest places to live should be paid. I agree, it should be based on cost of living...but the $15 an hour standard is what we've said should be the minimum in back woods Appalachia, and in larger cities it should be well over $20. Reduce the pay at the top to a reasonably high level and that won't cost most businesses another penny.

OK, bay area....you said ""those who choose to live there need to consider their income" ....ignoring the majority of people who are 'stuck' there without sufficient income; those who've lost financial stability, or those born there to poor parents who have never made any choice, and usually their parents who no longer have a choice to make at this point. They simply can't afford to move. The same goes for most low income people anywhere, they don't "choose" to live there, they don't have the luxury of a 'choice'. ...or are you lobbying for free moving and relocation services for the poor?

10 years ago, $15 an hour was not a living wage in many places, the bay area for one. I left there 20 years ago, and $15 an hour was pretty hard to live on as a single man sharing an apartment THEN, I can't imagine how it is now, especially for those with children.

No, you didn't say ONLY kids living at home have minimum wage jobs, but you did mention them as if they are a large percentage of minimum wage workers, and the group we should focus on, and implied that wages should be determined (at least in part) by THEIR needs. They are in fact the smallest group of minimum wage workers, and even they need more money to eventually move out.

Really? " those unwilling to put in the effort and gain the skill required to actually do a decent service to society." If you really believe a large percentage of people working for minimum wage are "unwilling to put in effort" to better themselves, I just don't know what to say. That's completely batshit insane, they work insanely hard for little compensation, with little respite, and absolutely no respect. Most are putting out more than a reasonable maximum effort just to go deeper into debt constantly, there is no amount of effort that makes more time to make more money to pay for training, or an amount of effort that makes tuition free. Also, who do you think will take over for them if they all put in the effort and gain the skill required to actually do a decent service to society"...(whatever the hell that insulting statement is supposed to mean besides implying they aren't decent or serving society today...by choice)?
What are you talking about "Complacency shouldn't be allowed to make life more difficult for all of us"? WHAT?!? OK, yes, so stop being so complacent about the horrendous way we treat those at the bottom of the financial system because that makes life more difficult for all of us by forcing those with 'more' (but not enough 'more' to avoid taxes) to pay higher taxes for welfare, prisons, policing, housing, etc....by making the nation more crime ridden because it's the only way to make a living for so many...by overtaxing our medical system because so many can't afford to be preemptive with their health and only accept medical help when it's at emergency stage...etc.

If the funds to raise the lowest wages don't come from the extravagant pay that goes to the top and are instead being transferred directly to consumers, yes, it's a vicious cycle. That's why you have to ALSO lower top compensation by law, like maybe tie it to the lowest paid worker in the company. That would stop inflation from being a feedback loop with wages.

We can't just make a blanket min wage. Some places cost unnecessarily a lot for cost of living. You mentioned the bay area. I would never live there first of all, but those who choose to live there need to consider their income. There are far cheaper places to live. Then, $15/hr becomes a lot more viable.

And 99 cent cigarettes and 79 cent gas was a lot less recent than the time to which I was referring, which was closer to just 10 years ago.

I also never stated that only kids work for minimum wage. Make assumptions on your own time. I don't agree that we all should be responsible for those who don't actually mean to work at their jobs. Meaning, those unwilling to put in the effort and gain the skill required to actually do a decent service to society. There needs to be a motivator for that--something worth reaching for. Complacency shouldn't be allowed to make life more difficult for all of us. Afterall, you know that when companies start raising prices, suddenly everyone's purchasing power drops. Then everyone needs a raise again. Etc. etc. It's a vicious cycle.

Curbing inflation should be a focus, if that's even possible, along with preventing megapowers from abusing the financial system. Getting corporations out of government would be a start.

Blanket white noise generators are why God gave us laser interferometer microphones.

@CrushBug

Related story: during the later years of the war, when Allied air and sea supremacy made the Bay of Biscay a deathtrap, Allied torpedo boats took up ambush positions at the entrances to U-Boot bases, particularly La Rochelle. They'd get into position at night and stay just outside of range of the coastal defence batteries. Before outgoing submarines could reach deep water, they'd be plastered with hand grenades by these speed boats.

It wouldn't be able to sink a sub, but a lucky hit might damage the periscope and it did reduce the sub's sonar abilities by massive amounts, covering the entire exit area in a blanket of noise. Not to mention the psychological effect...

Anyway, just small bits of history.

Now, about this video: that small chance to be hit by a grenade chunk is surpassed by the rather noticable chance to be hit by one of roughly 6500 steel balls within a run-of-the-mill frag grenade used over here. Doesn't make the underwater experience any better though...

OK, it was poorly said, and yes Bill's getting hyperbolic in his old age, but I think the sentiment is correct.
Every time you coddle a child (at the expense of the public) and make it think the world revolves around it and other people don't matter, you take a step towards creating a narcissist with no empathy like Drumpf. That's bad for them and us.
One instance of non-parenting does not a Trump make, but a consistent pattern can.
I actually took an interest in food at about 4years old when my parents sent me to jr cooking class. Pigs in a blanket, crepes, and cherry tarts, so simplistic cooking, but it got my interest in food started.
I also constantly questioned my teachers, but I did it because I wanted to know the why of what they just said, not because I thought I knew better than they did....usually.

What's the difference between a pet pig and a livestock pig though?
They both want blankets and cookies. Or at the very least neither of them wants to stand in a tiny metal and concrete cage and be pumped full of antibiotics, hormones and god knows what else for their short miserable lives. Neither of them want to be bruised because they have only enough room to face one direction their entire lives. Neither of them want their testicles ripped out without anesthetic while they are piglets. Neither of them want to be beaten when they don't eat.

Also, despite what the marketing people say, humans are not omnivores, everything healthwise and physiologically suggests we are somewhere between herbivores and frugivores. It's also backed up historically too by analyzing fossilized poop!

Here is a quite simplified chart, but I think it does a pretty good point of showing how far away we are from typical mammalian omnivores http://www.whale.to/c/10013268_676368449097110_1949968139_n.jpg

I'm not having a go at you, but I just hope you aren't acting according to a few labels that some organisation has set.