This is good for semi-auto pistols... but what about revolvers?

Have I mentioned how much I like reading pieces by Thomas Frank?

He had a piece in the Guardian two days ago about the Podesta emails and it's just brilliant. Excerpt:

This genre of Podesta email, in which people try to arrange jobs for themselves or their kids, points us toward the most fundamental thing we know about the people at the top of this class: their loyalty to one another and the way it overrides everything else. Of course Hillary Clinton staffed her state department with investment bankers and then did speaking engagements for investment banks as soon as she was done at the state department. Of course she appears to think that any kind of bank reform should “come from the industry itself”. And of course no elite bankers were ever prosecuted by the Obama administration. Read these emails and you understand, with a start, that the people at the top tier of American life all know each other. They are all engaged in promoting one another’s careers, constantly.

Everything blurs into everything else in this world. The state department, the banks, Silicon Valley, the nonprofits, the “Global CEO Advisory Firm” that appears to have solicited donations for the Clinton Foundation. Executives here go from foundation to government to thinktank to startup. There are honors. Venture capital. Foundation grants. Endowed chairs. Advanced degrees. For them the door revolves. The friends all succeed. They break every boundary.

But the One Big Boundary remains. Yes, it’s all supposed to be a meritocracy. But if you aren’t part of this happy, prosperous in-group – if you don’t have John Podesta’s email address – you’re out.

I disagree. Police are not supposed to be our masters, we are not supposed to bow and scrape before them in the hopes we don't get sent to the stocks (or worse). Police are simply supposed to enforce the laws that we, as a society, have decided that we all should follow.

The problem is, we have allowed the police to become more than that through our own lack of care and mismanagement. A policeman should have to undergo more rigorous training and background checks, mental and physical, than any other service we provide to ourselves. Instead we pay them about the same as teachers and we let bullies into the system. We also allow people with significant evidence that they should never have positions of authority due to mental issues to become police. We do not rigorously punish the bad cops, nor prevent them from seeking work elsewhere, leading to the same type of thing that led to catholic molesters being shuffled about to molest again.

As far as police fearing others, can we finally say that the number of police fatalities are far less than the the ones inflicted by police? Yes, we have many guns in the USA, but the few times I recall of a police person being killed by one seem to revolve around them experiencing a retaliation style attack when you would least expect it (and not on a call), or when they are alone and on a remote call location. Yet most of these controversial police shootings of suspects seem to happen when they are in a group of officers with weapons drawn, which I would consider far less of a jumpy situation than being alone on a highway. If I am an officer, with multiple other officers nearby, I have weapons on the suspect (taser or otherwise), why am I more worried than if I am alone with a suspect? It simply doesn't make sense.

Finally, referring back to your resisting comment, have we not seen lately that you can still be shot while doing absolutely no resisting? One man was laying on the ground, hands in the air, while telling a mentally ill patient of his not to do anything that would get him shot, and the man on the ground got shot. Here in Austin we had a mentally ill man running naked in the street and he was shot and killed versus being tasered or taken down. The use of force, and the extremity of it, have not been shown to be merited. So if you can be shot and killed for not resisting, or simply not understanding the commands in the short time you are given to do so, what can we do? Should we carry a pair of handcuffs and a taser so we can pre-apply these items and give the cops less to fear?

I think corn would be doable, but the advantages would be less efficient compared to short plants.

At some level of efficiency, there is a break even point (which can also take into consideration shipping costs and fossil fuel usage to major metro areas). I'm pretty convinced that vertical farming could be a significantly good / efficient idea for those plants that it is best suited for, but I do think there would be some early-adoption issues that would make it less practical for tall stuff like corn. At least until it has been done enough to work out the kinks and economy of scale kicks in.

So at least for the time being, I think we'll see it first be applied to leafy plants and tuber / root plants. But I could definitely be a biased opinion since my family revolves around conventional corn farming on irrigated fields...

It doesn't work like that. What you end up with is something akin to Australia's gun laws, which 'technically' still allow certain people to own guns, realistically most won't or can't

Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), circuit loaded firearms. shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles including semi automatic, and paintball gun. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm. [AKA, you have to prove you have a reason to own these weapons. Newsflash, the majority of police will automatically deny you. Oh yeah, for a PAINTBALL gun as well.]

Category B: Centrefire rifles including bolt action, pump action, circuit loaded, and lever action (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. [Same as Cat A, must have a 'genuine reason' to own one, be registered, have a fee, ton of other limitations, so basically hard to own]

Category C: Pump-action or self-loading shotguns having a magazine capacity of 5 or fewer rounds and semi automatic rimfire rifles. [Only Primary producers, farm workers, firearm dealers, firearm safety officers, collectors and clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.]

Category D: Self-loading centrefire rifles, pump-action or self-loading shotguns have a magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds. [Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies, occupational shooters and primary producers in some states. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.]

Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. [This class is available to target shooters and certain security guards whose job requires possession of a firearm. To be eligible for a Category H firearm, a target shooter must serve a probationary period of 6 months using club handguns, after which they may apply for a permit. A minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun and be a paid-up member of an approved pistol club. Target shooters are limited to handguns of .38 or 9mm calibre or less and magazines may hold a maximum of 10 rounds. Participants in certain "approved" pistol competitions may acquire handguns up to .45", currently Single Action Shooting and Metallic Silhouette. IPSC shooting is approved for 9mm/.38/.357 sig, handguns that meet the IPSC rules, larger calibres such as .45 were approved for IPSC handgun shooting contests in Australia in 2014. Barrels must be at least 100mm (3.94") long for revolvers, and 120mm (4.72") for semi-automatic pistols unless the pistols are clearly ISSF target pistols; magazines are restricted to 10 rounds.]

Category R/E: Restricted weapons, such as machine guns, rocket launchers, full automatic self loading rifles, flame-throwers, anti-tank guns, howitzers and other artillery weapons [Obviously this class is right out...]

You can own some muzzleloading weapons without restrictions, although percussion cap pistols are restricted. In addition to these minor rules, all guns must be secured in a safe or other similar location, all must be fully registered so that the government knows the location of every single weapon/owner, and you can't sell them to another person, only to a dealer or the law to be destroyed.

After a few years of de-fanging and getting the citizens used to not having weapons, the Australian government and law enforcement routinely quietly hold gun buybacks to persuade more people to give up their weapons. They also do amnesty turn ins now and then.

So, that is the AMAZING suite of laws Australia put in place to stop mass shootings. Forgive me if, when combined, those type of laws would basically neuter the 2nd amendment. We've already neutered the 1st with 'hate speech' and the ability to sue over getting your feelings hurt. The 4th has been steadily under attack, because GOOD citizens shouldn't mind if the government rummages through everything you own or do. We haven't messed with the 5th amendment too much, so we could look at that next, maybe allow torture of everyone for confessions.

I'm getting tired of listing points, so let me just say this. I am incredibly sorry that people died, they shouldn't have and it is an utter shame. However, we are already fighting on a daily basis to keep a facsimile of the rights that were fought for when we built this country. Watering them down further only helps our government tighten the bonds of enslavement upon us. I can't agree with that.

I think a lot like you do -- big government is a problem. But, while the GOP loudly and constantly *declares* that it is the party opposed to big government, to me it seems pretty clear that that is no longer even remotely true (if it ever was).

Is Clinton even more in bed with all of that than Trump? Probably, yeah. But this isn't an issue that revolves around Republican vs Democrat lines. It absolutely does revolve around corporations.

Yay for Capitalism and everything, but if Capitalism is the ultimate motivator, it stands to reason that these giant corporations *must* be getting a return on their investment when they funnel huge sums of money into politics. Otherwise, as Capitalist enterprises, they wouldn't be doing it.

So while I tend to agree that big government tends to be worse than small government for quite a few reasons (harder to monitor for corruption, less efficient, etc.), I think that big corporations and big government represent a feedback loop that feed off of each other. Thinking that the problem lies in one but not the other is doing yourself a disservice.

Did you see that 20-shot pinfire revolver? Fancy indeed...

Yeah, I used to like Maher too, but I'm kinda over him now. Even when I agree with him, he makes his point in such a douchey way that I find myself wanting to NOT agree with him.

As to the points, in each instance you've basically said that if the child is behaving badly, they should be corrected. Of course they should.

But a child is not automatically in the wrong.

A parent might have good reasons for siding with a child. I'm grateful my parents did when I was a kid. I stood up to a bully and got in trouble for fighting, and I refused to accept punishment for it. My parents listened to me and accepted that I was defending myself.

A child can talk with adults as long as they realise the whole conversation doesn't revolve around them. My friends 4 year old is really excited about learning to ski and she will often sit with her dad and I as we talk about snowboarding trips and ask to see pictures or ask about mountains. She knows not to interrupt, but she also knows we won't tell her to be quiet either.

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.

Your video, A Revolver That Fires More Than 25 Cartridge Types, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Actually, all of the actual bullets are in the 9mm width category. Even the .357 is actually .38 but they didn't want to call it a .38 magnum. The difference is in the size of the case. For instance, a 9mm is simply a longer cased .380 with more powder and slightly thicker case walls. This is why the cylinder has tapered chambers, so that the cases can all fit correctly, and the chamber mouths have the little spring projection.

Therefore it is quite accurate, at least as much as any other revolver.

To more directly respond to the video though, the answer, as they already talked about is the media's fault. Bernie, despite his open socialism, is not very controversial. He's nuanced, shown that he can give complex answers to complex problems and actually seems to be interested in governance.

THOSE THINGS ARE BORING! Doing your job well is often boring. Media doesn't like boring. The media has their profits to think about, so they're going to generate controversy.

This is not groundbreaking at all. I call it the Cartman effect. South Park episodes usually focus on what crazy thing Cartman is going to do next. The show revolves around it. He does completely insane, amoral, disgusting things that no one should ever do...but the audience laps it up. Similar thing occurs with Sheldon of The Big Bang Theory. As I've already compared it to, Reality shows do the exact same thing. The contestant who everyone hates is kept on as long as possible, who otherwise would have been eliminated long ago. People love to hate that person. They keep watching to see what they'll do next.

This perfectly describes Trump. People who will never vote for him in a million years still follow what he does just to see what happens next. This also describes Fox "News" It recently just got ranked the highest in viewership for 2015 again. The right loves to pretend that means that their views are popular. No, that just means everyone wants to watch the trainwreck.

This is also why the Republican debates got more press than the Democratic ones. All the Republican candidates were fighting each other tooth and nail. All were going after Trump. There were a lot of catfights and lots of drama. Meanwhile, in the Democrat debates, everyone gets along. Even when they disagree, they do so in a constructive manner and everyone gets along. No drama, therefore no press. Being serious is boring and that doesn't generate ad revenue for media.

Having an outrageous, controversial candidate is still not enough to get elected though, in fact it cuts both ways. When you put forth a "Cartman" candidate, sure it rallies lots of supporters. But it also rallies lots of opponents (or more) against the candidate. This is exactly what happened with Palin.

Elections have turned into being more about voting against the person you don't want than voting for the person that should be in office. "Anybody but X"

I find it curious that there's nearly twice as many males accosting him as females....are some of them just lookyloos?

How did these people make it into college? They've obviously been incredibly coddled and 'protected' their entire lives, and can't understand why the college isn't being their helicopter parent.
When I went, you had to prove you had not just the academics, but the brain, and the ability to live with competing ideas. In fact, being exposed to competing ideas was a main part of the plan. Apparently now it's just about the money, because these kids couldn't have the grades, and obviously don't have the brain or willingness to learn.
These infants need to go back to preschool and learn that the world doesn't revolve around them.

Oh no! They're going to leave and transfer? 'Please...please do...do it today' is almost certainly what he's thinking.

Ok, so Disney behaves like a big corporation and fucks people over. Same shit, different day.
But doing it to fuck with Quentin? No. Fuck you, Quentin. No. The universe doesn't revolve around that man. It's neither about Hateful Eight nor the guy himself, it's about money and ticketsales.
I love Quentin's movies but that man's egomania really stinks.

1. I believe all gays should be forced to own guns. No gay marriage without the exchange of revolvers!
2. Gerry Mander deserved better than this.
3. Apparently that's the freedom those muslim terrorists hate. First WTC, now Paris. Go figure.