The NRA still does a lot of firearms education and training. The rabid anti-gun folks stand in the way of these efforts at every opportunity however. Firearms-related accidents are good for the anti-gun agenda
Now, try attending a city council or school board meeting and proposing that you have the NRA come in and give a firearms safety presentation to the school kids.
In many places, people will be screaming at the top of their lungs at the idea of having anything NRA-related coming anywhere near the schools.
The NRA didn't suddenly get "whacked out" and shift its focus. The 1960s is when the big push for new federal anti-gun legislation came along. The last thing the federal government wanted at the time was a bunch of well armed black people demanding equality.
" My theory is that once the government comes knocking -- I'm already f*cked "
You're right. However, if the government is maliciously kidnapping and murdering racial or religious minorities and/or using kidnapping and murder to suppress peaceful political dissent, it's your duty to take as many of them with you as possible.
If all of the victims of genocide and mass incarceration had put up armed resistance, the governments would have quickly run out of thugs and millions of lives could have been saved.
Bloomberg is a pompous, gun grabbing, authoritarian, elitist, fucktard 99.99% of the time. However, he was able to accumulate a fortune, so I guess he knows about money. On this point, he's right. As of now, trade schools are probably some of the best deals around in terms of ROI for education. I'd rather be a plumber or an electrician than have a sociology, political science or ethnic studies degree (and the associated debt) from a prestigious university. If anyone asks my advice, I tell them to look in the medical field. Going for MD is a long, hard, debt-laden road of course. Many jobs can be had with only a 2 or 4 year degree however.
Re:funny comparing to "high speed rail" elsewhere
on
Amtrak Upgrades Wi-Fi
·
· Score: 1
The problem is that the federal government killed the railroads by subsidizing the automobile and petroleum industries. Rail didn't stand a chance when government was funneling billions into projects that boosted their competitors. Then, when, government nationalized the railroads during WW1, they never recovered.
Automobiles and all the associated problems (emissions, urban sprawl, accidents, etc.) are the "central planning" solution to transportation. If the auto and petroleum industries had been forced to compete against rail on a level playing field, the transportation system in the USA would have evolved much differently.
The good thing about sheriffs is that they are elected. The citizens should demand that their county sheriff opt-out of this snitch system or face the consequences at the next election.
Attempting to influence national elections is hopeless. At the county level, some determined activists could make a real difference. Come on Floridians. How about giving us a few small victories for civil liberties?
Unfortunately, it will probably be something like:
"Suspicious Terrorist Activity Reporting System"
With a promotional campaign showing cartoon characters telling you how you can be a STAR by ratting on your neighbors or even your parents and siblings.
If you want to know what it's like to live under a totalitarian government...
The problem with this global warming stuff is the implicit assumption that it's something that can only be handled by government. If the "solution" to the "problem" of global warming is bigger and more powerful government, I don't care what the "climate scientists" have to say.
If you have a contract with an insurance company which covers specified services, actuaries might determine the premiums, but I don't see how they would make life and death decisions. A service is covered, or it isn't.
"can you point to an example where a free market has increased the life span in a country? "
That could be the subject of a doctoral thesis. Lifespan is easily quantified, but if lifespan = f (x, y, z... fm) how do you quantify 'fm'? Is the invention of antibiotics and vaccines market-driven? That could be a debate in and of itself.
I don't claim free markets solve everything. I do believe that markets are the method by which we can maximize the total amount of services provided. In my ideal system, the local doctors and hospitals have to compete like all other retailers. I want to see a flier and coupons in the Sunday newspaper advertising weekly specials on EKGs or a 2-for-1 deal on routine physicals. Price transparency is desperately needed in healthcare so consumers can make choices.
Government can help by making sure medical service providers obey the same anti-trust and anti-price discrimination laws that every other business must follow.
I agree wholeheartedly with your solution of getting federal government OUT of the healthcare business and letting the states do their own thing. That's how the Canadian system started. A single province. I'd like nothing better than to observe what happens as various states try various approaches and I'll vote with my feet to find the system I like best.
Point taken. I momentarily forgot that the discussion was being observed by third parties. I'll keep that in mind.
I don't think a rational argument works with a person who has openly stated their intent to impose their will on you under the threat of violence which they claim is justified on the basis of their superior intelligence.
"...when everyone is unemployed or earning pitiful wages, who's going to buy their products?"
People will borrow money from banks to consume. When the people reach their maximum debt-carrying capacity, government will borrow money to give to the people to consume. When the government reaches its maximum debt carrying capacity the banking cartel will print money to loan to the government to give to the people to consume.
The next chapter in U.S. history has yet to be written, but we'll know soon enough.
If you're one of the 20% of Americans that struggle with basic arithmetic, buy some of those flash cards, open a Jr. High math textbook or take some remedial education courses. STUDYING and PRACTICE improve math ability. No brain zapping required.
The idea that there is some physiological impairment which causes 20 freakin' percent of the population to be handicapped in math ability is ridiculous. Brain zap the bureaucratic idiots in charge of our public school system instead.
"professional snipers in the world's most-funded army are going to use an off-the-shelf commercial product, "
The military has used and continues to use the Remington 700 bolt action rifle as a sniper rifle. Exactly the same weapon as many big game hunters use. The optics are what cost big $$$, but I'd be surprised if civilians couldn't buy something on par with military stuff. A lot of the optics in the civilian market are sophisticated enough so that they are considered ITAR restricted.
At 500m? I don't think so. Are you talking about firing from a standing position? You're not going to be hitting any bulls-eyes at 500m using your "move the rifle while firing" method in the standing position. Even TRYING that would be a good way to embarrass yourself. Maybe you could hit *somewhere* on the 38" diameter MR-65 target using your technique, but a bulls-eye? Ridiculous.
It's not "impossible" to hold the rifle steady when you fire from the prone position or with a bench rest. Which is exactly what you would do for a target at 500m. Even then, you've got to guess for windage and adjust for bullet drop. You've got to watch your breathing and be careful when you squeeze the trigger. Depending on your ammo, you're going to have a little or a lot of inconsistency in each round.
Don't listen newbs. Learn from someone who knows WTF they're doing, and worry about SAFETY more than hitting a bulls-eye. Start out with shorter distances too.
Ever heard of a "sniper" numbnuts? Only a few months ago "American Rifleman" profiled a Marine Corps sniper and his rifle. They also frequently have reviews of advanced optics and rifles which are effective at long range. This is just an advanced sniper rifle and would be rather useless in most combat engagements.
Furthermore, neither the NRA as an organization, nor the vast majority of the 5 million members have any profit motive whatsoever when it comes to sales of firearms or ammo.
Most of the standard military rifles these days fire semi-auto or 3 round burst, precisely because of the ineffectiveness of the "spray and pray" habit that soldiers developed in VIetnam.
Gun manufacturers (like every other industry) have their own lobbying group called the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF). The NRA by contrast is a grassroots organization that raises the vast majority of its funds from members AND spends most of its money on direct communication with members, not lobbying and not campaign contributions.
Didn't your parents explain to you that violence is only justified in response to aggression? I thought liberals were peaceful people? What justification do you have for imposing your beliefs on others with threats of violence? Having delusions about the superiority of your intelligence doesn't qualify.
A healthcare system where the user pays no marginal cost for services will create nearly infinite demand for services. Government cannot possibly pay for this. Therefore, services must be rationed and limited to constrain costs. Yes, "death panel" is emotional rhetoric, but it has an element of accuracy. In a government-run healthcare system, bureaucrats will inevitably be making life and death decisions.
The benefits of socialized medicine are that everyone has access to services at no marginal cost, the role of the middle man is very limited and billing procedures are simplified.
The negatives are too numerous to list in this comment, but it's essentially the same as every other socialistic scheme. Everyone is equal and equally miserable.
The free market is the solution for providing the most services to the most people at the lowest cost and with the highest quality. The free market WORKS when government doesn't wreck it. The drawback is that some people will not be able to afford services. That's where WE, as individuals or as part of charitable organizations (not the F&*%ing government) have a moral responsibility.
"...enormous failure of the "free market" solution to a social issue of health care"
It never ceases to amaze me that we can have a situation where the big government "solution" has been an utter and complete catastrophe, but the government worshipers INSIST that the evil "free market" is the problem.
Government implemented Medicare. They implemented Medicaid. They ordered hospitals to treat everyone at the ER regardless of whether or not they could pay. They mandate what services insurance policies must cover. They encourage and facilitate cartel behavior in both healthcare and insurance. They ban competition in the drug and medical device markets.
Obviously this system sucks, and it's a direct result of the fact that government destroyed the free market through price fixing, cost shifting, unfunded mandates and stupid regulations.
The only sectors of the economy that even compare to the healthcare disaster are housing and higher education, which the government has also ruined with their stupid policies.
"we're going to drag you kicking and screaming in to the future"
"you're too stupid to do so yourself."
You arbitrarily assert your intellectual superiority and thus decide that you're going to steal my wealth and coerce my behavior under threat of violence? For my own good?
Medicare is "cheaper"? Yeah, because government fixes the prices they pay. Nothing is "free". Government stiffs the hospital by price fixing Medicaid/Medicare services, so hospitals just shift that cost onto everyone else, especially the uninsured. Government forces hospitals to treat people at emergency rooms regardless of their willingness or ability to pay, but does not fund this mandate, so that also translates into higher bills for everyone else. Government bans re-importation of prescription drugs & medical devices, thus forcing Americans to subsidize R&D for the rest of the world and guarantee profits for big pharma.
With all of this cost shifting, retail prices are insanely expensive, so people are compelled to buy insurance. There's how your worthless middle man enters the picture, and now you MUST buy his product or the IRS will be after you.
Government has been heavily involved in the healthcare system for 50 years. What's the result? Costs have exploded, millions are unable to afford basic services, quality of service is poor for the price paid, etc. etc. Yet people think that even more government is the "solution"? That's how Einstein defined "insanity".
Eliminating a middle man would reduce costs. Competition and innovation would also drive down costs and increase quality. Government price controls and mandates do exactly the opposite.
We should shrink the FEDERAL government. It's up to people to decide what sort of government (if any) that they want, but even if you believe in a huge role for government it should be created in a "bottom up" fashion. Perform as many services as possible at the local or country level, do some at the state level and only as an absolute last resort, give the central government power.
This country is F*&^%$ up because we have a bunch of A$$#0!z in Washington D.C. trying to micro-manage the lives of 330 million people in a very large and diverse country. It's not working for the benefit of the people.
Time to empty our nuclear arsenals in the deserts and kick up enough dust and sand to cool off the planet. Then, we'd achieve nuclear disarmament and cure the "global warming" problem at the same time. Hell, maybe empty them into the population centers and make sure that humans can't warm the earth any more.
There is a certain contingent of narrow-minded partisan scumbags who make excuses for "their" guy and criticize the "other" guy no matter what. You pick on "repubs"(with some justification), but tell me there aren't an equal or greater number of people on "your" side who were intensely critical of the last admin but take a "hands off" policy toward this one for exactly the same policies? The glaring absence of the "peace" movement and peace demonstrations in the past 4 years is a good example.
Traffic control is probably just a pretense for the acquisition of drones that can easily be re-deployed or weaponized. They are also much harder to vandalize than cameras.
Slashdot Mirror
The NRA still does a lot of firearms education and training. The rabid anti-gun folks stand in the way of these efforts at every opportunity however. Firearms-related accidents are good for the anti-gun agenda
Check out the Eddie Eagle program:
http://www.nra.org/Article.aspx?id=1353
Now, try attending a city council or school board meeting and proposing that you have the NRA come in and give a firearms safety presentation to the school kids.
In many places, people will be screaming at the top of their lungs at the idea of having anything NRA-related coming anywhere near the schools.
The NRA didn't suddenly get "whacked out" and shift its focus. The 1960s is when the big push for new federal anti-gun legislation came along. The last thing the federal government wanted at the time was a bunch of well armed black people demanding equality.
" My theory is that once the government comes knocking -- I'm already f*cked "
You're right. However, if the government is maliciously kidnapping and murdering racial or religious minorities and/or using kidnapping and murder to suppress peaceful political dissent, it's your duty to take as many of them with you as possible.
If all of the victims of genocide and mass incarceration had put up armed resistance, the governments would have quickly run out of thugs and millions of lives could have been saved.
Bloomberg is a pompous, gun grabbing, authoritarian, elitist, fucktard 99.99% of the time. However, he was able to accumulate a fortune, so I guess he knows about money.
On this point, he's right. As of now, trade schools are probably some of the best deals around in terms of ROI for education. I'd rather be a plumber or an electrician than have a sociology, political science or ethnic studies degree (and the associated debt) from a prestigious university.
If anyone asks my advice, I tell them to look in the medical field. Going for MD is a long, hard, debt-laden road of course. Many jobs can be had with only a 2 or 4 year degree however.
The problem is that the federal government killed the railroads by subsidizing the automobile and petroleum industries. Rail didn't stand a chance when government was funneling billions into projects that boosted their competitors. Then, when, government nationalized the railroads during WW1, they never recovered.
Automobiles and all the associated problems (emissions, urban sprawl, accidents, etc.) are the "central planning" solution to transportation. If the auto and petroleum industries had been forced to compete against rail on a level playing field, the transportation system in the USA would have evolved much differently.
" really become the eyes and ears of law enforcement ... in their homes"
Their HOMES ? Kids ratting out their parents for doing home improvement projects involving pipe, electrical wire or fertilizer?
The good thing about sheriffs is that they are elected. The citizens should demand that their county sheriff opt-out of this snitch system or face the consequences at the next election.
Attempting to influence national elections is hopeless. At the county level, some determined activists could make a real difference. Come on Floridians. How about giving us a few small victories for civil liberties?
Oh, that's perfect. +1 funny & insightful
Unfortunately, it will probably be something like:
"Suspicious Terrorist Activity Reporting System"
With a promotional campaign showing cartoon characters telling you how you can be a STAR by ratting on your neighbors or even your parents and siblings.
If you want to know what it's like to live under a totalitarian government...
The problem with this global warming stuff is the implicit assumption that it's something that can only be handled by government. If the "solution" to the "problem" of global warming is bigger and more powerful government, I don't care what the "climate scientists" have to say.
If you have a contract with an insurance company which covers specified services, actuaries might determine the premiums, but I don't see how they would make life and death decisions. A service is covered, or it isn't.
"can you point to an example where a free market has increased the life span in a country? "
That could be the subject of a doctoral thesis. Lifespan is easily quantified, but if lifespan = f (x, y, z ... fm) how do you quantify 'fm'? Is the invention of antibiotics and vaccines market-driven? That could be a debate in and of itself.
I don't claim free markets solve everything. I do believe that markets are the method by which we can maximize the total amount of services provided. In my ideal system, the local doctors and hospitals have to compete like all other retailers. I want to see a flier and coupons in the Sunday newspaper advertising weekly specials on EKGs or a 2-for-1 deal on routine physicals. Price transparency is desperately needed in healthcare so consumers can make choices.
Government can help by making sure medical service providers obey the same anti-trust and anti-price discrimination laws that every other business must follow.
I agree wholeheartedly with your solution of getting federal government OUT of the healthcare business and letting the states do their own thing. That's how the Canadian system started. A single province. I'd like nothing better than to observe what happens as various states try various approaches and I'll vote with my feet to find the system I like best.
Point taken. I momentarily forgot that the discussion was being observed by third parties. I'll keep that in mind.
I don't think a rational argument works with a person who has openly stated their intent to impose their will on you under the threat of violence which they claim is justified on the basis of their superior intelligence.
"...when everyone is unemployed or earning pitiful wages, who's going to buy their products?"
People will borrow money from banks to consume. When the people reach their maximum debt-carrying capacity, government will borrow money to give to the people to consume. When the government reaches its maximum debt carrying capacity the banking cartel will print money to loan to the government to give to the people to consume.
The next chapter in U.S. history has yet to be written, but we'll know soon enough.
If you're one of the 20% of Americans that struggle with basic arithmetic, buy some of those flash cards, open a Jr. High math textbook or take some remedial education courses. STUDYING and PRACTICE improve math ability. No brain zapping required.
The idea that there is some physiological impairment which causes 20 freakin' percent of the population to be handicapped in math ability is ridiculous. Brain zap the bureaucratic idiots in charge of our public school system instead.
"professional snipers in the world's most-funded army are going to use an off-the-shelf commercial product, "
The military has used and continues to use the Remington 700 bolt action rifle as a sniper rifle. Exactly the same weapon as many big game hunters use. The optics are what cost big $$$, but I'd be surprised if civilians couldn't buy something on par with military stuff. A lot of the optics in the civilian market are sophisticated enough so that they are considered ITAR restricted.
"It is easy to shoot accurately..."
At 500m? I don't think so. Are you talking about firing from a standing position? You're not going to be hitting any bulls-eyes at 500m using your "move the rifle while firing" method in the standing position. Even TRYING that would be a good way to embarrass yourself. Maybe you could hit *somewhere* on the 38" diameter MR-65 target using your technique, but a bulls-eye? Ridiculous.
It's not "impossible" to hold the rifle steady when you fire from the prone position or with a bench rest. Which is exactly what you would do for a target at 500m. Even then, you've got to guess for windage and adjust for bullet drop. You've got to watch your breathing and be careful when you squeeze the trigger. Depending on your ammo, you're going to have a little or a lot of inconsistency in each round.
Don't listen newbs. Learn from someone who knows WTF they're doing, and worry about SAFETY more than hitting a bulls-eye. Start out with shorter distances too.
Ever heard of a "sniper" numbnuts? Only a few months ago "American Rifleman" profiled a Marine Corps sniper and his rifle. They also frequently have reviews of advanced optics and rifles which are effective at long range. This is just an advanced sniper rifle and would be rather useless in most combat engagements.
Furthermore, neither the NRA as an organization, nor the vast majority of the 5 million members have any profit motive whatsoever when it comes to sales of firearms or ammo.
Most of the standard military rifles these days fire semi-auto or 3 round burst, precisely because of the ineffectiveness of the "spray and pray" habit that soldiers developed in VIetnam.
Gun manufacturers (like every other industry) have their own lobbying group called the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF). The NRA by contrast is a grassroots organization that raises the vast majority of its funds from members AND spends most of its money on direct communication with members, not lobbying and not campaign contributions.
Didn't your parents explain to you that violence is only justified in response to aggression? I thought liberals were peaceful people? What justification do you have for imposing your beliefs on others with threats of violence? Having delusions about the superiority of your intelligence doesn't qualify.
A healthcare system where the user pays no marginal cost for services will create nearly infinite demand for services. Government cannot possibly pay for this. Therefore, services must be rationed and limited to constrain costs. Yes, "death panel" is emotional rhetoric, but it has an element of accuracy. In a government-run healthcare system, bureaucrats will inevitably be making life and death decisions.
The benefits of socialized medicine are that everyone has access to services at no marginal cost, the role of the middle man is very limited and billing procedures are simplified.
The negatives are too numerous to list in this comment, but it's essentially the same as every other socialistic scheme. Everyone is equal and equally miserable.
The free market is the solution for providing the most services to the most people at the lowest cost and with the highest quality. The free market WORKS when government doesn't wreck it. The drawback is that some people will not be able to afford services. That's where WE, as individuals or as part of charitable organizations (not the F&*%ing government) have a moral responsibility.
"...enormous failure of the "free market" solution to a social issue of health care"
It never ceases to amaze me that we can have a situation where the big government "solution" has been an utter and complete catastrophe, but the government worshipers INSIST that the evil "free market" is the problem.
Government implemented Medicare. They implemented Medicaid. They ordered hospitals to treat everyone at the ER regardless of whether or not they could pay. They mandate what services insurance policies must cover. They encourage and facilitate cartel behavior in both healthcare and insurance. They ban competition in the drug and medical device markets.
Obviously this system sucks, and it's a direct result of the fact that government destroyed the free market through price fixing, cost shifting, unfunded mandates and stupid regulations.
The only sectors of the economy that even compare to the healthcare disaster are housing and higher education, which the government has also ruined with their stupid policies.
"we're going to drag you kicking and screaming in to the future"
"you're too stupid to do so yourself."
You arbitrarily assert your intellectual superiority and thus decide that you're going to steal my wealth and coerce my behavior under threat of violence? For my own good?
"We're liberals."
Oh really? Never would have guessed.
Medicare is "cheaper"? Yeah, because government fixes the prices they pay. Nothing is "free". Government stiffs the hospital by price fixing Medicaid/Medicare services, so hospitals just shift that cost onto everyone else, especially the uninsured.
Government forces hospitals to treat people at emergency rooms regardless of their willingness or ability to pay, but does not fund this mandate, so that also translates into higher bills for everyone else. Government bans re-importation of prescription drugs & medical devices, thus forcing Americans to subsidize R&D for the rest of the world and guarantee profits for big pharma.
With all of this cost shifting, retail prices are insanely expensive, so people are compelled to buy insurance. There's how your worthless middle man enters the picture, and now you MUST buy his product or the IRS will be after you.
Government has been heavily involved in the healthcare system for 50 years. What's the result? Costs have exploded, millions are unable to afford basic services, quality of service is poor for the price paid, etc. etc. Yet people think that even more government is the "solution"? That's how Einstein defined "insanity".
Eliminating a middle man would reduce costs. Competition and innovation would also drive down costs and increase quality. Government price controls and mandates do exactly the opposite.
We should shrink the FEDERAL government. It's up to people to decide what sort of government (if any) that they want, but even if you believe in a huge role for government it should be created in a "bottom up" fashion. Perform as many services as possible at the local or country level, do some at the state level and only as an absolute last resort, give the central government power.
This country is F*&^%$ up because we have a bunch of A$$#0!z in Washington D.C. trying to micro-manage the lives of 330 million people in a very large and diverse country. It's not working for the benefit of the people.
"reproducible results"
Please repeat the experiment of warming the planet and shifting the earth's poles.
OK, this is SERIOUS!
Time to empty our nuclear arsenals in the deserts and kick up enough dust and sand to cool off the planet. Then, we'd achieve nuclear disarmament and cure the "global warming" problem at the same time.
Hell, maybe empty them into the population centers and make sure that humans can't warm the earth any more.
There is a certain contingent of narrow-minded partisan scumbags who make excuses for "their" guy and criticize the "other" guy no matter what. You pick on "repubs"(with some justification), but tell me there aren't an equal or greater number of people on "your" side who were intensely critical of the last admin but take a "hands off" policy toward this one for exactly the same policies? The glaring absence of the "peace" movement and peace demonstrations in the past 4 years is a good example.
Traffic control is probably just a pretense for the acquisition of drones that can easily be re-deployed or weaponized. They are also much harder to vandalize than cameras.