Tick Tock
 

On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 19:30:19 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/24/2018 6:44 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 16:32:43 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/24/2018 4:18 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 14:39:58 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/24/2018 2:25 PM, justan wrote:
Wrote in message:
On Sat, 24 Feb 2018 09:36:12 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I'll betcha it's not so much a case of being anti-gun as it is legal
beagles recognizing that litigation could extend not only to the
shooter, the store that sold him the firearm (already happens) and to
the financing agency that made the purchase possible. I'll bet more
credit card issuers will start prohibiting the use of their cards for
firearm purchases in the future.

There is legislation in place that shields sellers and manufacturers.
The left really wants to change that but not with much success so far.
This credit card thing is just kubuki theater. Like you say, once the
water calms down I bet it goes away, particularly if a number of big
chains decide to tell them to **** off.
Like someone said before, where does this stop? Are they going to stop
processing charges for dangerous food next? Far more people die from
obesity related disease than from guns, by a couple orders of
magnitude


Why don't we just ban everything the ATF people regulate and be
done with it. Of the three, I don't know which is
deadliest.



Greg seems to think that all of our society problems are mutually
inclusive, meaning you can only fix 'em if you fix *all* of them at
once. It's ok to take one or two at a time.


Certainly true but why start with the one that causes a few hundred
deaths and ignore the ones that cause tens of thousands or even
millions?
Oh I forgot, they aren't news and the fix would be inconvenient for a
lot of people.



I give you this. You're amazing. :-)

(not trying to bust your chops but I am very, very thankful that not all
share your logic.)

You are pretty amazing yourself. You say you want to stop the killing
and then you say you will start with the weapon that kills the least
number of people.
You top that by saying this is not a slippery slope.
After the ARs are gone and the killers move to Mini 14s or Harry's
Scorpion, they will have to go. Then will it be shotguns or pistols
next.

Just as a sanity check, when you look into that bogus "18 school
shootings in 2018" (most were not any kind of actual murder attempt
and some were not even at an open school)
THEY WERE ALL HANDGUNS except Parkland.



Ok, ok Greg. Calm down. I am not busting your chops. But, I think
there's an element of the purposeful slaughter of a bunch of innocent
kids regardless of the weapon involved that maybe I am oversensitive to.
I can't septically (sp?) step away from that and compare it to auto
accidents or gangland slayings and arrive at a conclusion that it really
isn't all that bad, all things considered.

I think that ultimately the USA would be better off with no guns in the
hands of civilians, other than those purely designed for
recreational/competitive shooting or hunting. Certainly no need for
semi-automatic, copies of military weapons. But I don't think it will
be anytime soon. The "slippery slope" argument always comes up.
I like to believe that as generations go by each gets a little smarter
and wiser and at some point concepts that originated almost 250 years
ago have become a bit outdated.

Unfortunately if you think getting older is making us smarter and
having more capable guns is dumb, we are going the other way.

I do blame Hollywood for the increase of the lethality of the guns we
buy because people buy what they see. The same peace loving gun
grabbing Hollywood types can't seem to make a movie without machine
guns, massive explosions and lots of gratuitous violence. I have given
up on "action" movies altogether They are just roadrunner cartoons
with more realistic killing.

The need for a "regulated militia" is a crock now-a-days, IMO. I accept
moving on with the times when the time is right. I think too many
people are clinging to miss-interpreted words, excuses and reasons that
are more obsolete than your Win 98 computers. :-)

Heller affirms that this is not about a well regulated militia any
more than the war on religion is about "laws" "congress" makes.

I still have guns and will renew my permit later this year when due. My
only reason for having them is because of the world we live in and the
very remote but possible potential that I may need a gun as a last
resort means of defense for me and my wife still exists. I'd much
rather live in a world ... and pass on to my grandchildren a world ...
that owning a gun for self defense is no longer needed or even thought
about.

I still have some too but only 2 are really for any kind of self
defense (a pistol and a shotgun)
The rest are stuffed away. I probably should divest myself of the ones
I may never use again. I am just not sure which ones they would be
since I don't really have any duplicates.

Tick Tock
 

On Sun, 25 Feb 2018 00:40:45 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

I did sustaining engineering for one company. Fixed lots of design
errors. Made a really nice living. Worked my way through fixing
mainframes. Also a decent income.

Of all the jobs I had, mainframes were my favorite thing to fix, I was
real good on just about any kind of big printer, 1403 and 3800 in
particular (little ones, not so much) and I became pretty good on
check sorters but they were never my favorite thing to do. Check
sorters are not that much "fixing" as just replacing parts
preemptively by the box load. We started using our drill drivers and
mass attacking them 2 or 3 guys at a time.
I also liked the instructor job but I didn't want to work in DC or
Atlanta. Plant jobs (service planning) were fun for a while but I got
bored. I did not want to be Dilbert in a cube.
It was better when I could do it remotely from Ft Myers (then called
service delivery) and it was just logistic planning. Unfortunately all
of that went away along with the 6 man territory I was managing at the
time.