Treated lumber for bird house

[Rob Stokes]

Sigh.....voting NDP Bill?

Rob

[Rob Stokes]

Ayup...but I was particularly proud when I put 3 of 6 rounds on the paper at

100 yards...with a S&W .44 Mag. I was even prouder when SWMBO said "let me see that", Stood strong and letter rip....

2 on the paper and one in the post. :)

'twas a fun day.

Rob

[Rob Stokes]

I'm sorry? are you referring to me?

Rob

[BillNorris]

I'm not up on the latest but I believe it's based on barrel length. New minimum required barrel lengths for long guns relegated the AR7 to the restricted list several years ago.

[BillNorris]

Most likely. They may hold the balance of power in a minority government. I consider that to be a good thing. I'm not sure the NDP will ever be fit to govern. Too many school teachers and not enough business people to be trusted with the purse strings. They were completely out of their depth in BC. How they got sucked into building those white elephant fast ferries is hard to understand. Business clueless but their heart is in the right place. We will never be a truly civilized country while we have thousands of our citizens (many mentally ill) sleeping on sidewalks every night.

[J. Clarke]

Price a customized target rifle.

[Dave Balderstone]

Of course he is.

"Useful Idiot", is he.

[Dave Balderstone]

No doubt! Good on ya, and yer sheila!

[Dave Mundt]

Greetings and Salutations....

On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 18:40:10 GMT, [e-mail] wrote:

Not trying to throw gasoline on the fire here, but, this is an amazing thread. It only took five or six posts to turn into a useless flamewar over whether or not folks should have the right to possess guns. Got to love the Net. For what it is worth, I think that using pressure treated wood for much of anything except building sills and uses that contact the ground directly is a bad idea. There are enough sources of toxins in the bird's environment now, we don't need to add an even closer one. Also, of course, the dust is pretty nasty for humans too. As for the gun control argument that takes up the other hundreds of posts... #1 - Gun control is a 1/2" group at 50 yards. #2 - While it is true enough that America has problems, they are related more to the culture of mindless violence fostered by foolish mistakes in child rearing by parents, the weakening of standards in schools, and, the pervasive influence of television. #3 - Americans "love" guns...and fight to preserve the shrinking abilities to own them without hindrance not because we are all homocidal maniacs, just waiting with bated breath for the chance to blow a hole in another citizen, but, because our founders realized that the only true protection that the citizens have against a government out of control is the last resort of armed rebellion. It may be true that this resort is getting further and further away from reality, but, it IS the way that this country was founded. "Working within the system", negotiations, diplomacy, were all tried and failed. About the only GOOD thing that came from all that effort was that Ben Franklin had a great time (and quite a number of them, if the records are anywhere near accurate). #4 - many statistics have been bandied about in this, and, I am sure that everyone has had a grand time doing it. The fact is that there are vast areas of America where a person being shot and killed is a very rare occurence. There are parts of America where it seems the rule is that we can't have breakfast until somebody gets blown away. Interestingly enough, there seems to be a real correlation between population density and killings. How about this...Let's agree that those of us in America who want to own guns, will buy guns. Those of us in America who DON'T want to own guns, can NOT buy guns. The rest of the world can do what ever their laws allow. Now...let's go back to debating Norm and his influence on woodworking. I, for one, think that Norm, while he might have some lacks as a woodworker, performs a valuable service, in that he makes the hobby approachable and understandable, and, in some cases, helps folks understand that what I do in the workshop is difficult, requires skill and takes time Regards Dave Mundt

[Dave Hinz]

Nope, I'm not class 3.

This is a Springfield Armory M1-A (civilian, semi-auto version of the M14) with a large degree of accurization work. Not all of the "assault weapons" encumbered by the ban are AK-47 derivatives. There's no functional difference, of course, between this gun and any other semi-auto, but it has a bayonet lug so the anti's call it an assault weapon.

[Dave Hinz]

Doug, did we go to school together? I've been saying this since college.

Yup.

[Carl Nisarel]

Bjórrúnar skaltu Larry Jaques rista --

Larry's upset that he can't beat up his children.

[Carl Nisarel]

Bjórrúnar skaltu Larry Jaques rista --

You just demonstrated that you are lying by omission.

Articles published by Ayers & Donohue, Rubin & Dezhbakhsh prove otherwise, among many other researchers who have published journal articles on the subject.

Heh. His database is full of holes and coding errors.

...

You think so? Here's what Kleck thinks about Lott's MGLC work:

"One can always speculate that criminals' perceptions of risk outran reality, but that is all this is--a speculation. More likely, the declines in crime coinciding with relaxation of carry laws were largely attributable to other factors not controlled in the Lott and Mustard analysis." Gary Kleck, "Targeting Guns: Firearms and their Control", Aldine de Gruyter, New York, 1997, p. 372

See above, your opinion about Kleck is wrong.

It's a published research article, Larry. Did you actually read the article?

Chris Mooney is informed and he clearly demonstrates that Lott lied.

Did you actually read the article?

Michael Maltz is a former colleague of John Lott who published research on that dataset.

You can't rebut a single point in his statement.

Heh. His claim that he lost data in a computer crash is irrelevant. In fact, his claim that he lost it makes it worse since he is stating that he knew he didn't have the data upon which his 98% DGU claim is based. It is considered fraudulent research to make a claim without the data to back it up.

People are not disregarding the hard data. Ayers & Donohue use the hard data, Rubin and Dezhbakhsh use the hard data, Michael Maltz use the hard ata.

The only 'studies' that confirm Lott's work are studies produced by Lott and his collaborators.

I have. You should read the vast amount of research that contradicts Lott's book.

Heh. You know you can't counter with facts so, once again, you're running away like a whining little boy.

[Doug Miller]

Not as far as I know :-). I picked that up from a guy I used to carpool to work with. His name's Randy Wahl. Great guy. Into doing Civil War reenactments. Maybe you went to college with him?

FWIW, in about 1998 I met a man who was the head of the DEA's Columbia River Valley Drug Task Force, in Wenatchee WA. Fascinating fellow, full of amazing stories. I mentioned this idea to him, and after he stopped laughing, he said "I love it! My agents would sure have to spend a lot less time in court!"

-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

[Lawrence Wasserman]

I'm thinking now, that the splinters alone would be reason enough not to give the PT lumber to the kids.

[Brikp]

No, I would not reccomend using PT wood to build a bird house.

[Carl Nisarel]

Bjórrúnar skaltu Larry Jaques rista --

I'll bet that you are unable to identify a single confirmatory study that was not co-authored by Lott and his collaborators.

I know that you won't because:

a) you are not well-informed on this subject. b) no such studies exist.