Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Disc brake maintenance tips
Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2024 22:33:07 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 103
Message-ID: <v6fj54$ms5e$2@dont-email.me>
References: <7d9f8jhl4vpb0n7p8bodavodbrob28rd8p@4ax.com>
 <q7mf8jd39j94gkjvpmdg5ubsb5mhph5ric@4ax.com>
 <0mnf8j1od86gq027k6bbas1ioeam2a6l6b@4ax.com> <v691hf$3aqcm$3@dont-email.me>
 <c3jg8jh2ilmnt81bbucki78fc44sjiciiq@4ax.com>
 <uf6h8jp8i6ogq9odo7o52eth5s3m1fe78v@4ax.com> <v6a6tk$3ggeu$6@dont-email.me>
 <v6a9mp$3l2np$1@dont-email.me> <v6aau3$3l7ug$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6be64$3qc85$1@dont-email.me> <v6bnfi$3rvtv$1@dont-email.me>
 <h6ri8jl980fkg01h56603l5htkj168k7u2@4ax.com>
 <g8nj8jl3i63ku5hib2ccach3p3q9j2mv2j@4ax.com> <v6d3rn$6gvj$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6ebb0$cgrt$2@dont-email.me> <v6enlj$emn4$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6erht$f4d3$2@dont-email.me> <v6fb8m$husq$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6fcbi$i61t$2@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: frkrygow@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2024 04:33:09 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c78d5f3ad3e0e9b7ac78c02da25cb9a5";
	logging-data="749742"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+hXIlPT2lTgPrj9ZGSeD6kFXyaQcsvCRU="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:PIRTqzQiqPhJk2+yV3t4YHAXpzs=
In-Reply-To: <v6fcbi$i61t$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6286

On 7/7/2024 8:37 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 7/7/2024 7:18 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 7/7/2024 3:50 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> On 7/7/2024 1:44 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 7/7/2024 11:13 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> On 7/6/2024 10:59 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>> As I've said before, our constitution was groundbreaking. But it 
>>>>>> was never perfect, and in many ways it was and is faulty.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Other nations were able to examine our constitution, note its 
>>>>>> faults and correct them when writing theirs. One common correction 
>>>>>> is not letting every whacko buy and use rapid fire weaponry 
>>>>>> designed for military use.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What's rapid?  A revolver?
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzHG-ibZaKM
>>>>
>>>> We've discussed this at length. Before we could have any hope of 
>>>> numbers we can agree upon, we'd first have to have a rational 
>>>> discussion on the legitimate uses of firearms by members of the public.
>>>>
>>>> I doubt that's going to happen here - in part because on one hand, 
>>>> you (justifiably) excoriate punks doing things like blasting away at 
>>>> convenience stores with AR rifles; but on the other hand, you say 
>>>> that almost anyone should be able to buy an AR rifle at will.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think there's a way to get past that cognitive dissonance. 
>>>> But if you want to try, tell me what firearm uses by ordinary 
>>>> citizens you consider legitimate.
>>>>
>>>>> I can't think of anything on earth which hasn't been applied to 
>>>>> military purposes (David, sling, 5 stones...)
>>>>
>>>> My phrase was clearly not condemning public use of _everything_ ever 
>>>> designed for military use. Read again and see.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes that's exactly right.
>>>
>>> Automobile crashes kill some 44,000-ish people a year here (plus 
>>> carbon monoxide deaths, autos crushed aspiring mechanics in driveways 
>>> and so on).
>>>
>>> In theory, we regulate pilot behavior*.  Again in theory, we track 
>>> vehicle ownership*. In theory, we even regulate who may* pilot one on 
>>> public roads.
>>>
>>> Yet there's no serious discussion (outside the loony left) of banning 
>>> autos altogether.
>>
>> And as also discussed at length: The benefits of widespread car 
>> ownership in America greatly and obviously outweigh the detriments.
>>
>> As a thought experiment:
>>
>> What would be the result of making every privately owned car in 
>> America suddenly disappear? The benefit would be somewhat lower 
>> pollution. The detriment would probably be societal collapse. Almost 
>> all Americans could not get to work, could not buy food, could not get 
>> to medical care, etc. The economy would crash due to roughly zero 
>> consumer activity.
>>
>> What would be the result of making every privately owned gun in 
>> America suddenly disappear? The detriments would be the avid hunters 
>> in John's favorite state would have to switch to bow hunting; and 
>> target shooters would have to get their fun using BB guns. The 
>> benefits would include murder and suicide rates plummeting. Armed 
>> robberies would essentially end. Gang wars among thugs would no longer 
>> kill innocent bystanders... etc.
>>
> 
> Extend your hypothesis.
> 
> As it is, criminals use firearms for violence to a much greater extent 
> than do the citizenry in defense. And you want to disarm the law abiding 
> citizens? How does that make any sense?

Easily! Law abiding citizens, except for hunters and hobbyists, rarely 
use their guns at all. (How many times have you, Mr. Tricycle, John or 
Tom actually shot a gun for defense?) If their guns were to suddenly, 
magically vanish, most law abiding citizens wouldn't notice until weeks 
later.

But as you say, criminals use their guns to a much greater extent. 
Imagine the punk on his way to stick up a convenience store. If his gun 
suddenly vanished, he'd certainly notice and doubtlessly change his 
plan. As would whoever pulled this off:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/4-killed-3-injured-mass-200424699.html
and the other 276 perps alluded to in that article.

So you're arguing for keeping guns available for crime use, so 
never-used guns can be kept ready ... um, just in case??

(For the record, I'm citing a news article only because you constantly 
do so. I prefer properly collected data. But the mass shooting count is 
readily available. https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting)



-- 
- Frank Krygowski