Well, here's a thought. Say the original cancer is killed off. So far so good. But the loose cells are still cruising the bloodstream, and they're still looking for that happy-home location. Maybe it's that much easier for them to reinfect (so to speak) the original site... so the cancer "comes back". Rinse and repeat until the patient is worn out and dies.
If that's how it works, then killing off the circulating cells is just as critical as killing off the original cancer.
How does that stop me from taking it back by force?? I'd say the state actually *prevents* me from doing that, whether they plan to recover my property for me or not.
Wow, thanks for the link. I can see how my own high school (Great Falls HS, GtF MT) was patterned after it, albeit on not so grand a scale -- but the same general style and layout, including the balcony and chandeliers (if not nearly so fancy) in the auditorium. It was a great place to learn in.
The way it was explained to me was that the bigger engine doesn't have to work as hard, which makes it more efficient, pound for pound.
That's pretty much the case with my two trucks -- the F100 with the 5L engine gets 12-14mpg empty and 6mpg towing; its most efficient speeds are around 55mph and 50mph, respectively. The F350 (which weighs 1400 pounds more) with the 7.5L gets 12-14mpg empty and 8-10mpg towing twice as much weight as the F100 can handle in the first place, and its sweet spots are around 65mph and 55mph. (Both trucks run at relatively low RPMs, around 600 idling and 1400 to 2200 at highway speeds.)
It's occurred to me that the 7.5L put into a lighter-mass truck might wind up being really efficient.
And I suppose it depends on the experience level of the shooter, too. I've never fired anything rougher than a shotgun, so I wouldn't be your first choice in the fully-auto assault team:)
Oh, I wasn't thinking exact, there being sufficient nutjobs here to keep the asylums busy for decades to come... I'm in the Bozeman vicinity myself. You'd never find me in a million years from that.:)
I understand that some cities don't count gang killings as murders, for this very reason. It doesn't affect anyone but the gangs.
As to incidents like Columbine, what no one (other than one Canadian priest and maybe Marilyn Manson) seems to notice is that these aren't massacres as such. They are loud, messy *suicides*. "I'm gonna show you all how much you hurt me, and hurt you all back on the way out."
Example: Almost everywhere, to get a business license that requires some sort of inspection process, you have to give up your 4th Amendment rights; a condition of the license is typically unannounced, invasive inspections (and occasionally, seizures of anything the inspector doesn't like).
One problem is that the Constitution didn't say "The gov't is prohibited from doing anything not specifically allowed". So over the years it's come to believe it can do anything we don't actively fight against.:(
I actually come here largely because in the various comments are other folks' research, which save me a bother I'm not really motivated enough to do for myself, yet am happy to learn if it's presented to me. It's a form of relaxation. The rest of the time I have other work to do. If I had to do all the research myself, that tips it over into 'work' and that defeats part of the purpose.
To repeat what I just said in another post -- I doubt that has anything to do with it. Rather, those higher-end guns are expensive, and criminals are cheapskates by definition -- why spend $500 on a nice rifle when a $50 cheapo pistol will do just as well, especially when you plan to rob a convenience store that probably has $50 or less on hand??
More likely it's just that no matter where you get 'em, cheap pistols still suffice, and criminals are by definition cheap. They're not gonna spend $500 to rob a convenience store that might have $50 on hand.
So let the gangs kill each other, and let natural selection do its job.
But don't blame the rest of us for *their* culture. Me and my guns have never swaggered around the 'hood looking for a rival to blow away so I can take over his drug market.
That actually sounds like a good principle to me -- would put a halt to galloping regulation/legislation that mostly serves to inflate the appearance of need for more regulations and legislation.
Maybe we need an amendment that says "No government entity may contravene any part of the Constitution, no matter how much smarter they think they are.":/
A great deal of the problem is that back then, the recommended interval for oil changes was 6000 to 7500 miles. That's enough time for the oil to break down and get real dirty, so it's more like sandpaper than lubricant.
When I got my '78, brand new, even then the owner's manual said "every 6000 miles". (Conversely, my '91's says 3000 miles.)
But even back-when, every mechanic I knew insisted that the oil be changed every 3000 miles... funny thing, even really old cars' engines last a long time if you do that.
My mechanic in SoCal mostly saw newish cars. My '78 F100 was the only older rig among his regular customers.
I'd come in, point at something with a hole or leak or busted in half, and say, "See this? It's worn out. Fix it." and that was all there was to the diagnostics. Something was busted and leaked or dangled or quit, any idiot could see the problem, replace it, done. And the engine and everything else was hanging right out there for all the world to see. Easy to see, easy to get at.
Meanwhile, every other bay in his large shop was occupied by a newish car hooked to a diagnostic computer, and even after a long session half the time they still didn't know quite what was wrong with it, or they'd fix what it said was broken and it STILL didn't run right. And you had to dismangle half of what was under the hood just to FIND the engine. Made repair costs skyrocket. (He told me they very rarely escaped with less than a $1200 bill even for relatively 'simple' issues. My most-major repairs were half that.)
Slashdot Mirror
Well, here's a thought. Say the original cancer is killed off. So far so good. But the loose cells are still cruising the bloodstream, and they're still looking for that happy-home location. Maybe it's that much easier for them to reinfect (so to speak) the original site... so the cancer "comes back". Rinse and repeat until the patient is worn out and dies.
If that's how it works, then killing off the circulating cells is just as critical as killing off the original cancer.
How does that stop me from taking it back by force?? I'd say the state actually *prevents* me from doing that, whether they plan to recover my property for me or not.
Baby monitors for grown-ups.
Wow, thanks for the link. I can see how my own high school (Great Falls HS, GtF MT) was patterned after it, albeit on not so grand a scale -- but the same general style and layout, including the balcony and chandeliers (if not nearly so fancy) in the auditorium. It was a great place to learn in.
Well, I imagine the Mustang weighs at most 2/3rd of what the F150 does, so...
The way it was explained to me was that the bigger engine doesn't have to work as hard, which makes it more efficient, pound for pound.
That's pretty much the case with my two trucks -- the F100 with the 5L engine gets 12-14mpg empty and 6mpg towing; its most efficient speeds are around 55mph and 50mph, respectively. The F350 (which weighs 1400 pounds more) with the 7.5L gets 12-14mpg empty and 8-10mpg towing twice as much weight as the F100 can handle in the first place, and its sweet spots are around 65mph and 55mph. (Both trucks run at relatively low RPMs, around 600 idling and 1400 to 2200 at highway speeds.)
It's occurred to me that the 7.5L put into a lighter-mass truck might wind up being really efficient.
And I suppose it depends on the experience level of the shooter, too. I've never fired anything rougher than a shotgun, so I wouldn't be your first choice in the fully-auto assault team :)
Oh, I wasn't thinking exact, there being sufficient nutjobs here to keep the asylums busy for decades to come... I'm in the Bozeman vicinity myself. You'd never find me in a million years from that. :)
How did the Founders envision its enforcement, anyway??
Howdy, neighbor! Where are ya? I'm a bit outside of Three Forks. :)
I understand that some cities don't count gang killings as murders, for this very reason. It doesn't affect anyone but the gangs.
As to incidents like Columbine, what no one (other than one Canadian priest and maybe Marilyn Manson) seems to notice is that these aren't massacres as such. They are loud, messy *suicides*. "I'm gonna show you all how much you hurt me, and hurt you all back on the way out."
Example: Almost everywhere, to get a business license that requires some sort of inspection process, you have to give up your 4th Amendment rights; a condition of the license is typically unannounced, invasive inspections (and occasionally, seizures of anything the inspector doesn't like).
One problem is that the Constitution didn't say "The gov't is prohibited from doing anything not specifically allowed". So over the years it's come to believe it can do anything we don't actively fight against. :(
I actually come here largely because in the various comments are other folks' research, which save me a bother I'm not really motivated enough to do for myself, yet am happy to learn if it's presented to me. It's a form of relaxation. The rest of the time I have other work to do. If I had to do all the research myself, that tips it over into 'work' and that defeats part of the purpose.
No problem, I'll just shoot you back first. ;)
To repeat what I just said in another post -- I doubt that has anything to do with it. Rather, those higher-end guns are expensive, and criminals are cheapskates by definition -- why spend $500 on a nice rifle when a $50 cheapo pistol will do just as well, especially when you plan to rob a convenience store that probably has $50 or less on hand??
More likely it's just that no matter where you get 'em, cheap pistols still suffice, and criminals are by definition cheap. They're not gonna spend $500 to rob a convenience store that might have $50 on hand.
Also, I'm wondering how much of that 3-second burst would wind up going into the ceiling.
But that's basically regulatory overreach. As to whether what they're doing would stand up to a Constitutional challenge....??
Compared to all the other ways you can die, murder doesn't look like anything special.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/acc-inj.htm
So let the gangs kill each other, and let natural selection do its job.
But don't blame the rest of us for *their* culture. Me and my guns have never swaggered around the 'hood looking for a rival to blow away so I can take over his drug market.
That actually sounds like a good principle to me -- would put a halt to galloping regulation/legislation that mostly serves to inflate the appearance of need for more regulations and legislation.
Maybe we need an amendment that says "No government entity may contravene any part of the Constitution, no matter how much smarter they think they are." :/
A great deal of the problem is that back then, the recommended interval for oil changes was 6000 to 7500 miles. That's enough time for the oil to break down and get real dirty, so it's more like sandpaper than lubricant.
When I got my '78, brand new, even then the owner's manual said "every 6000 miles". (Conversely, my '91's says 3000 miles.)
But even back-when, every mechanic I knew insisted that the oil be changed every 3000 miles... funny thing, even really old cars' engines last a long time if you do that.
My mechanic in SoCal mostly saw newish cars. My '78 F100 was the only older rig among his regular customers.
I'd come in, point at something with a hole or leak or busted in half, and say, "See this? It's worn out. Fix it." and that was all there was to the diagnostics. Something was busted and leaked or dangled or quit, any idiot could see the problem, replace it, done. And the engine and everything else was hanging right out there for all the world to see. Easy to see, easy to get at.
Meanwhile, every other bay in his large shop was occupied by a newish car hooked to a diagnostic computer, and even after a long session half the time they still didn't know quite what was wrong with it, or they'd fix what it said was broken and it STILL didn't run right. And you had to dismangle half of what was under the hood just to FIND the engine. Made repair costs skyrocket. (He told me they very rarely escaped with less than a $1200 bill even for relatively 'simple' issues. My most-major repairs were half that.)