If your children are capable of getting into one of these safes, they are capable of being taught not to mess with daddy's guns.
There are ~ 50 million households with guns in them. Accidental gun deaths by children (most of whom were not educated on guns by their parents, and found access to completely unlocked guns) are in the range of 200-300 a year. ie, not even appearing on the top list of accidental causes of child death.
In short, teach your children, and get a quick open safe that requires some strong intent to open. This is almost entirely a non-issue with basic precautions.
Just FYI - the first google search you will make for children killed by gunshots will come up with a much higher number, because the Brady campaign defines "children" as anyone up to 19. Including teenage gang members shot while running drugs. While their deaths are also a tragedy, they are not relevant to whether your 3-year-old is going to try to sneak into your gun safe to play.
The infamous "Gun Show Loophole" is complete nonsense.
Every commercial seller at a gun show is *already* required to do a background check on all guns sold.
The only thing that closing the "gunshow loophole" can do is make it illegal for me to sell my gun to my dad without taking the gun to a store and paying them to a run a background check first.
Which will be *completely* unenforceable without a universal firearms registry, which is both not going to happen and a horrible idea.
There is still a *lot* of empty space. Also, if we managed to convert even a fraction of the developing world to the level of output that US farms have, we have plenty of food. Mostly the issue is water and sanitation.
But even then... the real issue is energy. We can deal with getting water to where it is needed if energy is cheap enough.
It used to be that the start menu had a direct click to program files, which had a nice list of shortcuts to what you had installed.
Then installer crammed a million things into it, making it an unusably long list.
So they change it to be a scrolling window, that required multiple clicks to do exactly the same thing. Which makes it generally kind of a huge waste of time compared to windows button + start typing.
I used to use the start menu all the time, but they made it slower to use, so I don't any more.
That is the most important lesson of wikipedia - not that wikipedia is unreliable, but that all sources are unreliable to some degree. Research should never stop at a single source.
Nearly every study I've seen shows STEM fields as some of the most consistent returns on investment for a college degree. Essentially only MBA's, Lawyers, and Doctors do better, and those are either a much higher up front cost, or are a strong tournament system (with the top people making out, and lots of people failing at the bottom).
I think STEM is broad enough that it's difficult to make general statements.
CS is generally considered STEM. My wife and I had no problems finding jobs to put us in the top 10% of our area and pay off the college debt in a couple years. We're doing much better at this point in time than our friends with medical degrees (although I'm sure they will catch up).
You don't need gimmicks, people! You need interesting experiments that kids can connect with.
It's hands-on science experiments. Let the kids blow stuff up, get dirty, smash something, or shock each other and they'll be interested. The gimmicks don't matter.
"almost certainly help".... do you realize how little the existing gun registries have done to actually help solve crimes? Canada had a long gun registry for 14 years - it was never used to solve a single murder.
All this is ever going to tell you is that "hey, this guy was shot with a gun someone reported stolen five years ago." Just like almost every other gun used to shoot someone was.
That assuming that the stamping is still legible. With current technology, after just a few hundred or thousand rounds through the gun (ie, one or two trips to the range), half of the case stampings were illegible.
Phlogiston: how else could there be fire if stuff wasn't made of it? Spontaneous Generation: Or do you want to believe in invisible animals? Telegony: Are you saying that previous husbands *don't* influence their ex-wifes? The Four Humors: Questioning this is certainly only someone with too much black bile would do.
Questioning theories is the very heart of science. Because we are *always* wrong. That is the nature of science. We're hopefully less wrong than we were a hundred years ago, but we're still *wrong*.
The important thing is that these questions come in a form that accepts the main principle of science - that every theory be testable and observable by someone else.
I think if more teachers understood this and taught it instead of handing down scientific wisdom like Moses on the mountainside, we'd have fewer of these issues.
I think that "people skills" is really too vague as far as it actually matters for development.
You don't care if most of your IT people can give a good presentation or talk to clients. You care if they can work with the other developers without making them want to strangle each other. You care about whether they're going to derail meetings, or never share what they're working with their code.
People skills as it applies to a successful programmer or IT worker are very different from people skills as they apply to a manager or a salesman.
Exactly. It's not an instantaneous thing. Eventually, if those really are mission critical processes, they're either going to pay more to hire someone with expertise or find someone with less expertise who'll take the money.
This is exactly what market-driven wage increases look like.
It's the way the system works. Even if you want to get anti-lobbying legislation passed, the only functional way to do this is to start an anti-lobbying lobby.
The NRA is effective because their membership of 4 million supports the rights of the roughly 40% of households that own a gun. Those 4 million do the work and the donations for a cause that the rest care about.
That's how any successful popular movement works. You have a small dedicated core who does the lobbying, writes the legislation, and vets the candidates, and a larger group that is willing to generally listen to their advice on that issue.
If it's "brainwashing" to protect an important right that has existed since this country was formed, I'm all for it.
Seriously? You honestly think that people only care about the right to defend themselves because the miniscule firearms industry told them to? Do you realize how small the US firearms industry actually is compared to any other consumer industry? Ruger has a yearly revenue of $136 million. Smith & Wesson has $300 million. That's not even sniffing fortune 500. That's less than a quarter of the size of Harley Davidson... guess I'd better watch out for the all powerful motorcycle lobby.
Ok, screw the NRA. Buckeye Firearms. Funded almost entirely by individual donations. Run by a volunteer who has to read briefs for his day job in between committee meetings. Has completely rewritten Ohio concealed carry laws over the last ten years.
Both what I describe and what you describe are part of the design. Most federal legislation, and indeed most state legislation, is based on previous state or local legislation that has been in use for some time.
For example, Ohio recently passed a law allowing concealed carry of firearms in restaurants that serve alcohol. One of the strongest arguments in favor of it was that other states had already passed similar laws, and those laws did not have significant negative effects.
So part of the goal of federalism is to allow local control, and part of it is to limit the scope of your potential failures.
While I agree with you in principle, there's a fair argument that this case *does* fall under those limited protections. It's fairly well established that there are constitutional limits on statutory damages to prevent abuse, and there are reasonable arguments that this case falls beyond that. No reason not to work both angles.
Because hitting the streets has been so effective.
Groups of people have money. You think the NRA is funded by gun industry big wigs? Ha. It's funded by the 40-50% of the country who owns guns. Combined action generates money, and gets your cause access.
How many people download songs? They may have been idiot teenagers and college students to start, but they're growing up, getting jobs, starting companies. Go get involved and maybe you'll have a lobby useful enough to write some legislation.
Slashdot Mirror
If your children are capable of getting into one of these safes, they are capable of being taught not to mess with daddy's guns.
There are ~ 50 million households with guns in them. Accidental gun deaths by children (most of whom were not educated on guns by their parents, and found access to completely unlocked guns) are in the range of 200-300 a year. ie, not even appearing on the top list of accidental causes of child death.
In short, teach your children, and get a quick open safe that requires some strong intent to open. This is almost entirely a non-issue with basic precautions.
Just FYI - the first google search you will make for children killed by gunshots will come up with a much higher number, because the Brady campaign defines "children" as anyone up to 19. Including teenage gang members shot while running drugs. While their deaths are also a tragedy, they are not relevant to whether your 3-year-old is going to try to sneak into your gun safe to play.
The infamous "Gun Show Loophole" is complete nonsense.
Every commercial seller at a gun show is *already* required to do a background check on all guns sold.
The only thing that closing the "gunshow loophole" can do is make it illegal for me to sell my gun to my dad without taking the gun to a store and paying them to a run a background check first.
Which will be *completely* unenforceable without a universal firearms registry, which is both not going to happen and a horrible idea.
There is still a *lot* of empty space. Also, if we managed to convert even a fraction of the developing world to the level of output that US farms have, we have plenty of food. Mostly the issue is water and sanitation.
But even then... the real issue is energy. We can deal with getting water to where it is needed if energy is cheap enough.
It used to be that the start menu had a direct click to program files, which had a nice list of shortcuts to what you had installed.
Then installer crammed a million things into it, making it an unusably long list.
So they change it to be a scrolling window, that required multiple clicks to do exactly the same thing. Which makes it generally kind of a huge waste of time compared to windows button + start typing.
I used to use the start menu all the time, but they made it slower to use, so I don't any more.
That is the most important lesson of wikipedia - not that wikipedia is unreliable, but that all sources are unreliable to some degree. Research should never stop at a single source.
It's amazing how many teachers miss that.
Nearly every study I've seen shows STEM fields as some of the most consistent returns on investment for a college degree. Essentially only MBA's, Lawyers, and Doctors do better, and those are either a much higher up front cost, or are a strong tournament system (with the top people making out, and lots of people failing at the bottom).
I think STEM is broad enough that it's difficult to make general statements.
CS is generally considered STEM. My wife and I had no problems finding jobs to put us in the top 10% of our area and pay off the college debt in a couple years. We're doing much better at this point in time than our friends with medical degrees (although I'm sure they will catch up).
Because every time I hear that buzzword, I expect to see a middle aged man in a bad super-hero costume trying to rap about particle physics...
When they read "engaging students in a fun way."
You don't need gimmicks, people! You need interesting experiments that kids can connect with.
It's hands-on science experiments. Let the kids blow stuff up, get dirty, smash something, or shock each other and they'll be interested. The gimmicks don't matter.
Use someone *else's* face as your unlock.
Like Teddy Roosevelt.
And then put that picture as your login screen, so it'll log you in if you point at a mirror.
It'll still be a problem if Zombie Teddy Roosevelt steals your phone, but how likely is that...
Indeed. It's not as though there are no non-GM non-Monsanto seeds to buy and plant. The Monsanto ones are just that much better.
"almost certainly help".... do you realize how little the existing gun registries have done to actually help solve crimes? Canada had a long gun registry for 14 years - it was never used to solve a single murder.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/291304/death-long-gun-registry-john-r-lott-jr#
All this is ever going to tell you is that "hey, this guy was shot with a gun someone reported stolen five years ago." Just like almost every other gun used to shoot someone was.
That assuming that the stamping is still legible. With current technology, after just a few hundred or thousand rounds through the gun (ie, one or two trips to the range), half of the case stampings were illegible.
It massively fails the cost benefit analysis test. Is that good enough for you?
It imposes significant costs and annoyances on every single legal gun owner, while only catching a few of the dumb criminals.
Phlogiston: how else could there be fire if stuff wasn't made of it?
Spontaneous Generation: Or do you want to believe in invisible animals?
Telegony: Are you saying that previous husbands *don't* influence their ex-wifes?
The Four Humors: Questioning this is certainly only someone with too much black bile would do.
Questioning theories is the very heart of science. Because we are *always* wrong. That is the nature of science. We're hopefully less wrong than we were a hundred years ago, but we're still *wrong*.
The important thing is that these questions come in a form that accepts the main principle of science - that every theory be testable and observable by someone else.
I think if more teachers understood this and taught it instead of handing down scientific wisdom like Moses on the mountainside, we'd have fewer of these issues.
I think that "people skills" is really too vague as far as it actually matters for development.
You don't care if most of your IT people can give a good presentation or talk to clients. You care if they can work with the other developers without making them want to strangle each other. You care about whether they're going to derail meetings, or never share what they're working with their code.
People skills as it applies to a successful programmer or IT worker are very different from people skills as they apply to a manager or a salesman.
Exactly. It's not an instantaneous thing. Eventually, if those really are mission critical processes, they're either going to pay more to hire someone with expertise or find someone with less expertise who'll take the money.
This is exactly what market-driven wage increases look like.
It's the way the system works. Even if you want to get anti-lobbying legislation passed, the only functional way to do this is to start an anti-lobbying lobby.
The NRA is effective because their membership of 4 million supports the rights of the roughly 40% of households that own a gun. Those 4 million do the work and the donations for a cause that the rest care about.
That's how any successful popular movement works. You have a small dedicated core who does the lobbying, writes the legislation, and vets the candidates, and a larger group that is willing to generally listen to their advice on that issue.
If it's "brainwashing" to protect an important right that has existed since this country was formed, I'm all for it.
Seriously? You honestly think that people only care about the right to defend themselves because the miniscule firearms industry told them to? Do you realize how small the US firearms industry actually is compared to any other consumer industry? Ruger has a yearly revenue of $136 million. Smith & Wesson has $300 million. That's not even sniffing fortune 500. That's less than a quarter of the size of Harley Davidson... guess I'd better watch out for the all powerful motorcycle lobby.
Ok, screw the NRA. Buckeye Firearms. Funded almost entirely by individual donations. Run by a volunteer who has to read briefs for his day job in between committee meetings. Has completely rewritten Ohio concealed carry laws over the last ten years.
Both what I describe and what you describe are part of the design. Most federal legislation, and indeed most state legislation, is based on previous state or local legislation that has been in use for some time.
For example, Ohio recently passed a law allowing concealed carry of firearms in restaurants that serve alcohol. One of the strongest arguments in favor of it was that other states had already passed similar laws, and those laws did not have significant negative effects.
So part of the goal of federalism is to allow local control, and part of it is to limit the scope of your potential failures.
While I agree with you in principle, there's a fair argument that this case *does* fall under those limited protections. It's fairly well established that there are constitutional limits on statutory damages to prevent abuse, and there are reasonable arguments that this case falls beyond that. No reason not to work both angles.
Because hitting the streets has been so effective.
Groups of people have money. You think the NRA is funded by gun industry big wigs? Ha. It's funded by the 40-50% of the country who owns guns. Combined action generates money, and gets your cause access.
How many people download songs? They may have been idiot teenagers and college students to start, but they're growing up, getting jobs, starting companies. Go get involved and maybe you'll have a lobby useful enough to write some legislation.
Theoretically, this is one of the arguments in favor of Federalism. Local communities can beta-test new ideas before they go into general deployment.
Doesn't always quite work that way, but that's the idea.
I would be much happier if we just didn't put anyone in power, rather than trying to pick the smarter monkey.