Pointy Sticks are next

Page 2 of 4  

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 06:06:56 -0500, the inscrutable Prometheus

No, bubble wrap could cause suffocation death and tea could cause drownings. They'll have none of that! I hope to Buddha that the USA never becomes as PC as that. What a crock!
------------------------------------------------------------ California's 4 Seasons: Fire, Flood, Drought, & Earthquake -------------------------------------- http://www.diversify.com NoteSHADES(tm) glare guards
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 05:52:45 -0700, Larry Jaques

It sure seems like it's on it's way some days. I remember when I was a little kid (not so long ago, really) we had rusty steel jungle gyms set over asphalt at school, and liked to shoot one another with bb guns on the weekends. Imagine the lawsuits that would ensue if any of that was still going on today.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 30 May 2005 15:09:41 GMT, the inscrutable "toller"

Unarmed victims like the Brits and Aussies? Now that's scary.
I hope charlieb reads some books like "The Coming Anarchy", Crichton's "State of Fear", and anything by Gary Kleck, such as "Armed--New Perspectives on Gun Control" for a bit of perspective. I used to be anti-handgun until I did more research on it. Talk about a lot of propaganda to cut through before finding the truth. Michael Crichton blows away all sorts of other false truths in his book. It's quite a ride, and though it's a work of fiction, it is LOADED with sources for getting to the truth.
--
If you turn the United States on its side,
everything loose will fall to California.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
charlie b wrote:

Same rule for the police? After all, with all their training they should only need one shot shouldn't they? And I guess that they should quit teaching police the double-tap?
And I presume from your comment about size that you favor legalizing open carry?

Define "armor piercing bullet" in such a way that it does not subsume the majority of bullets.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
charlie b wrote: <snip>

Well, some is heavily restricted: http://www.atf.gov/firearms/legal/armor.htm
Of the ammo that isn't restricted, which ones are you curious about?
Maybe I'm reading too much into your question, but are you suggesting that if people can't prove that they need something, then that's sufficent reason to ban it? I've got an awful lot of power tools that I might not be able to prove a need for.
R, Tom Q. Remove bogusinfo to reply.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

As if there was any real difference in practice. That's akin to saying it's ok to let people have hammers, but we're going to have to ban nails.

That's nonsense. *People* kill people. The gun, or the bullet if you prefer, is simply a tool, the implement by which the intent to kill is made a reality.

Which obviously renders it useless.

Easy for you to say - but it's obvious you've never been in a situation where you felt threatened enough to need to draw a gun. When the adrenaline gets pumping, it's tough to aim carefully, especially when there's very little time to do so.

Obviously making you an even easier target, encumbered by all that hardware. No, one large-capacity semiautomatic handgun would be a much more practical method of defending against multiple assailants.

Defense against a) criminals wearing body armor b) invading foreign troops c) our own government, should it prove a greater threat to liberty than the hypothetical foreign invaders in b) above
and also in target practice, to prepare for any of the above cases.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Right. If guns (and bullets) are for killing, I must be using all of mine wrong. Anyone have a cite on how many rounds of ammo are produced in the US in a year, vs. the number of murders using a gun?

Well, that's not the biggest problem - it comes down to the fact that the criminals are already doing something illegal, and will just add a possession crime to the other things they're doing wrong. Criminals, by definition, _ignore laws_. That's why/because they're criminals, y'see.

Not to mention the above problem about criminals and laws.

Well, OK, but that's not the only reason. Another reason is that you can define "armor piercing" as pretty much any rifle bullet, and many handgun bullets. Then, you just have to outlaw "expanding, flesh ripping bullets", and you've got everything banned.
If a criminal wants to commit a crime, they won't be dissuaded from doing so by the fact that they're using a bullet that is or isn't of any particular variety. Last I checked, not a lot of them are into the intricacies of ballistics.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Banning swimming pools would save far more lives each year than banning guns, and after all, they are not constitutionally protected, nor could many people justify a "need" for one.
--

Larry Wasserman Baltimore, Maryland
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

<SNIP>
AH yes - then we can be like Japan where the guy on the street does not have guns but the gangsters do . . .
<SNIP >
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
BillyBob wrote:

Its not much different in the UK either, the russian mafia have been and at the moment its the turn of yet another former eastern bloc lot to run the brothels/drug trade etc etc, killing the previous lot along the way if they have to.....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Because ANY projectile could be deemed as "armor piercing" if travelling fast enough. It's a back door way to ban everything.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It is not "quite" as silly as it sounds. I have used chef's knives for 30 years and have never used the point; occasionally on one of the smaller knives, but never on the big ones. If the point serves no purpose, and eliminating it would prevent a few crimes of passion; why not?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
[...]

It would also keep you from having some nasty accidents, and there are very nice knifes without a point, e.g http://www.dick.biz/cgi-bin/dick.storefront/429b3093002e0b86273f50f33609061b/Product/View/719040 or http://www.dick.biz/cgi-bin/dick.storefront/429b3093002e0b86273f50f33609061b/Product/View/719055
--
Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.de/~hannappe
mailto: snipped-for-privacy@physik.uni-bonn.de Phone: +49 228 73 2447 FAX ... 7869
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 30 May 2005 17:21:01 +0200, Juergen Hannappel

Yeah, neither one of *those* knives could do any damage to someone during a "crime of passion". Seems that someone who is angry and seeking to do mayhem would not be deterred by the lack of a sharp point. I can see it now, person in rage, rummaging through kitchen drawer, "Where are those points, dang it! Ah well, guess I'll just have to enroll in anger management instead. Sorry honey, please forgive me." Far more likely they will grab one of the above and use it in a slicing motion about various important body parts of the victim. As the second item above indicated, "... have blades with a straight cutting edge and a shape similar to early *Japanese swords* (dating from the Nara period). ... and are truly razor sharp." Nope, no chance of serious damage there.
I'm amazed that there are people who actually see this idea as a rational response to violence. The fact that one person may not have used the point in years of using chef's knives does not mean that no others do. In my original posting, the link indicated that there were a number of English chefs (recognizing of course the oxymoron in the preceding) who felt that this was an essential tool being taken away from them.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

[...]
[...]
See? No point in this discussion...
--
Dr. Juergen Hannappel http://lisa2.physik.uni-bonn.de/~hannappe
mailto: snipped-for-privacy@physik.uni-bonn.de Phone: +49 228 73 2447 FAX ... 7869
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
writes:

<SNIP>
they
rational
point
In Japan the guy on the street cannot own a gun - murder is rare by guns to say the least - knives and all other manner of other "impliments" are used however - during the bubble in Japan a "agressive" realitor who could not get some people to move so he could sell the property killed them and ground them up with an industrial size meat grinder to get rid of the bodies -
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
BillyBob wrote:

See, guns don't kill people, realtors do.
Dave in Fairfax
--
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
    Greetings and Salutations...

    Well, I have to say that it does not sound silly at all to me...but it DOES sound rather sinister and misguided. It is part of that continuing trend towards making life "safe" and not scary. However, the problem with that is that life *IS* dangerous and scary and that will never change. I think it is a far better course of action for us to accept that, and learn to use caution and treat dangerous things with respect, and, to find ways to build impulse control in our citizens. That will go a lot further towards truely making life safer for all of us.     Too...there is the problem that the last time I looked, the criminal elements that would misuse tools as weapons are not deterred by laws making it illegal. The danger of punishment is simply looked upon as a cost of doing business, and, in some cases, being caught and punished cranks up their reputations.     As for using the point or not...I, too, have been cooking and baking for decades, and, while I might not use the point EVERY time I pick up a knife, I have to say that I DO use it to start cuts quite often. So...my solution, if this silly law were to go through, and if I happened to NEED a new knife, would be to go out to the shop, and put a nice point on it with my grinders, etc.     Just remember that it is NOT doing anyone a favor to wrap them in cotton wool to "protect" them from the difficulities and dangers of life. At some point they will have to deal with it, and, the older they are when that happens, the harder it will be for them to adapt to the needs of the moment. Teaching folks about the uses and dangers of a tool, and, its proper use is very important. Also, of course, as mentioned earlier, teaching impulse control from a very early age is vital, otherwise we will become a herd of animals, randomly and instinctively striking out when irritated...not dealing with other folks on a more rational level.     Regards from the voice crying in the wilderness.     Dave Mundt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

<SNIP>
Gee does that mean that the $30 BILLION dollars spent by the TSA at airports is wasted? I'm shocked to hear that there is waste in our government!
<SNIP>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not defending the TSA and the "let's confiscate lighters" thinking, but that money was spent on either goods or services, right? So, it employed people, when all is said and done, right?
I'm just sayin... your argument sounds a lot like the people griping about "shooting all that there money off into space", without considering the direct and secondary benefits of space research.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.