Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
October 23, 2014, 02:16:52 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: 24/7 Ventrilo Voice chat -click for instructions and free software here
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Keep your hands off my rights and my guns!  (Read 13199 times)
BlueBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4260

Location: Mid Michigan


« Reply #80 on: December 19, 2012, 08:02:54 PM »

S Rummings writes like he knows what he’s talking about. applause

It might be time for the doubters to listen to Sir Isaac Newton:  A body in motion tends to stay in motion.

A human NOT wearing a seat belt in a car going at 30mph tends to keep going at 30mph even if the car suddenly stops due to a crash.  Human bodies can only survive so many Gs going from 30mph to 0mph.  Cry
Logged
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6128

Location: Randleman, NC


« Reply #81 on: December 19, 2012, 08:20:13 PM »

And the human head will do the same if the body stops. That is what killed Dale Earnhart.
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
S.Rummings
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 82

Location: Houtzdale, PA


WWW
« Reply #82 on: December 19, 2012, 09:31:49 PM »

If you were honest, I am sure you have also seen people crawl out of destroyed vehicles when not wearing seat belts, and have unstrapped dead bodies from seemingly minor wrecks, but you're leaving those out.

You are right, I have seen it both ways, but I am talking about the rule, not the exception. It certainly isn't true 100% of the time but I will guarantee your odds are better wearing a seat belt. I have yet to hear any valid argument that shows your odds are better unbelted. Even if it didn't help, it wouldn't make things worse. (Please don't use examples you have seen on TV  rolleyes ) Another rule that seems to exist is that drunks rarely seem to get hurt when they crash seat belt or not. It always seems to be the innocent person that gets hurt. That being said, the last drunk I pulled out of his pickup truck was not wearing a seat belt and he died at the hospital even though he was protected by alcohol.

If you want to debate helmet laws, my experience shows that a helmet doesn't seem to make much difference when it comes to survival. You have about 50/50 odds either way. Most motorcycle crashes that will kill you are bad enough to kill you even with a helmet. This is not from a government funded scientific study, just my personal experience with what I have seen. How is that for talking like a politician?

I have walked away from 3 wrecks totally destroying the vehicle. All three had the roof touching the seat. I was NOT wearing a seat belt either time.
I am not sure this statement adds a great deal of credibility to your judgement.   I dunno
« Last Edit: December 19, 2012, 10:02:46 PM by S.Rummings » Logged
S.Rummings
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 82

Location: Houtzdale, PA


WWW
« Reply #83 on: December 19, 2012, 09:55:07 PM »

A human NOT wearing a seat belt in a car going at 30mph tends to keep going at 30mph even if the car suddenly stops due to a crash.  Human bodies can only survive so many Gs going from 30mph to 0mph.  Cry

I once saw a nylon jacket melted by a seat belt because the force of the head on crash was so great. You could see a perfect imprint of the belt across the front of the jacket. I wonder how many Gs that was? It had to be quite a bit to melt the jacket. Yes, he survived.
Logged
luvin honey
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1540

Location: Central WI


« Reply #84 on: December 19, 2012, 10:09:43 PM »

All of which is fascinating, but a distraction, purposeful or not, from the main topic. I honestly didn't realize that the value of seat belts was still under debate by some. I thought it was up there with "veggies are good for you," kind of just understood.
Logged

The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson
S.Rummings
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 82

Location: Houtzdale, PA


WWW
« Reply #85 on: December 19, 2012, 10:28:33 PM »

OK, sorry for the distraction. Back to the topic at hand.



Logged
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6128

Location: Randleman, NC


« Reply #86 on: December 19, 2012, 10:29:05 PM »

Yes, seat belts are good. It's just that we know of things much better. The powers that be could prevent many more injuries and deaths if they wanted to, and with things not earning them millions in fines when not used. Roll bars and governors just being 2 examples.

""I am not sure this statement adds a great deal of credibility to your judgement."'

The middle statement was the point. The roof would have crushed me if I had been wearing a shoulder type seatbelt. I would not have walked away. In this case, the exception kept me alive 3 times.
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6128

Location: Randleman, NC


« Reply #87 on: December 19, 2012, 10:31:15 PM »

Very good post of supporters, Mr. Rummings. And very true.
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
S.Rummings
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 82

Location: Houtzdale, PA


WWW
« Reply #88 on: December 19, 2012, 10:48:26 PM »

I was always told "Those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it." Somewhere along the way I learned I was greatly outnumbered by those people and came up with my own quote, "Those who study history are doomed to watch it being repeated."

History tells us that every time a government disarms it's citizens it is a first step in stripping all other rights as well. See the photo in my post above for reference.

History also tells us that democracy can not survive and that all governments will move toward socialism and communism until the government finally collapses under the burden of everyone receiving benefits and nobody paying for them. This is not fear mongering and I am not making wild, unrealistic projections about the future. I am talking about history. Why is it that all these self-righteous and highly educated liberals  act like they have never taken a history class?

So where do you want to be in 20 years? Unarmed, defenseless, rightless, and living in the USSA?
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15195


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #89 on: December 19, 2012, 10:52:23 PM »

Quote
"Those who study history are doomed to watch it being repeated."

this is so.  seems there ought to be enough of us to overcome that.

Quote
Why is it that all these self-righteous and highly educated liberals  act like they have never taken a history class?

because they took history classes in those bastions of liberalism called university. 
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
BlueBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4260

Location: Mid Michigan


« Reply #90 on: December 19, 2012, 11:08:56 PM »

Pol Pot also belittled formal education.

Did you learn about him in Fox News history 101 too?
Logged
BlueBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4260

Location: Mid Michigan


« Reply #91 on: December 19, 2012, 11:18:10 PM »

I’m not opposed to rational gun ownership, but as with all things there are rational limits and too many irrational people.

The NRA kooks think there should be no limits on guns.  So would we all be safer if we could own automatic machine guns?  Or how about RPGs?  What about small nucs?  Where do you draw the line and WHY?

You know there is a reason for the nuclear proliferation treaty.  The reason is if enough kooks get the bomb, somebody will use it.  Same with these rapid killing guns.  If enough kooks get a hold of them, somebody will use them.  We have seen this over and over and over.  That is what we call HISTORY my friends.
Logged
S.Rummings
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 82

Location: Houtzdale, PA


WWW
« Reply #92 on: December 19, 2012, 11:45:37 PM »

I’m not opposed to rational gun ownership, but as with all things there are rational limits and too many irrational people.

The NRA kooks think there should be no limits on guns.  So would we all be safer if we could own automatic machine guns?  Or how about RPGs?  What about small nucs?  Where do you draw the line and WHY?

You know there is a reason for the nuclear proliferation treaty.  The reason is if enough kooks get the bomb, somebody will use it.  Same with these rapid killing guns.  If enough kooks get a hold of them, somebody will use them.  We have seen this over and over and over.  That is what we call HISTORY my friends.

I agree about rational ownership. Some people should not have guns. The hard part is who are these people and who decides? I had to have a psych eval to be able to carry a gun for work. Maybe that standard is too high for everyone to carry a gun...or is it?

If the NRA wants no limits on guns it is because they are smart enough to know both sides have to give in an negotiation to meet in the middle. You always start out asking for more than you hope to receive. Actually, the NRA supports reasonable limits on gun ownership. If you check you will find their positions available on their website.

I have more bad news for you. The kooks already have the guns and they aren't willing to give them up no matter what changes are made in the law. Now when private gun ownership is outlawed and all the "good" people give up their guns who does that leave with guns?  Everyone acts like gun control is about preventing the wrong people from getting guns and some seem to forget that we still need to be able to deal with the wrong people who already have them.
Logged
luvin honey
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1540

Location: Central WI


« Reply #93 on: December 19, 2012, 11:48:44 PM »

Agree completely with bluebee. I'm tired of the slippery slope argument. The NRA has kept its power by fearmongering and convincing its supporters that ANY gun regulation is the first step towards disarmament by the gubmint. I know because DH used to get their literature. They sound like a bunch of crazies, not a group of people I'd like writing our gun laws. They outspend their proponents by 100s to 1000s of times. If their logic is so correct, their stance so proper, why is there a need for so much money pouring into their campaigns?

I don't want to see guns stripped of all Americans, but I do want Americans to have access to regular guns, the kind used to kill deer, elk, even large bears. I want only sane, properly trained Americans buying these guns. I'd even like to see them re-licensed each year, kind of like we do for cars, CPR, nursing licenses, etc. I'd like there to be a proper tax on these guns and ammunition. This tax could help fund the funerals of the 1000s of Americans who die of accidental gun death every year, as well as gun use safety education. And I'd like to see gun owners held accountable for the whereabouts of their guns at all times, or risk prosecution.

Every single one of these things would affect my own household, and I'd be fine with that. Can't speak for husband, though Smiley

The NRA just offers false arguments--you can't do anything, because doing anything (gun control) would be to do everything (remove guns entirely from society). I'm not buying it. But I am definitely looking forward to their press conference on Fri. Hope they have the sense to not have Ted Nugent as their spokesperson, or actually maybe I hope they DO have him.  evil

And, bummer Kathy, but I didn't get any history at university. I've had to re-do all my own history education. One sucky thing about being so liberal and open minded is I'm even reading Ayn Rand at your recommendation, or in that case are you okay with ongoing education?
Logged

The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson
S.Rummings
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 82

Location: Houtzdale, PA


WWW
« Reply #94 on: December 20, 2012, 12:09:10 AM »

Quote
"Those who study history are doomed to watch it being repeated."

this is so.  seems there ought to be enough of us to overcome that.

Quote
Why is it that all these self-righteous and highly educated liberals  act like they have never taken a history class?

because they took history classes in those bastions of liberalism called university. 

Sorry Kathy, I think we are outnumbered and everyone gets to vote.

The history class where I learned this happened to be in a university and the professor was what I would call rabidly liberal. He was so liberal I thought he was a nut that dreamed of the day the US would become communist so I failed to believe what he had to say. As the years passed I kept thinking back to this class as current events seemed like deja vu to me. Is it possible the predictions this nut made were coming true just as he said they would? I thought other civilizations that fell were ancient history and that could never happen in the modern world but all the warning signs are there. Turns out these weren't predictions at all. It is kind of like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day. You don't have to guess what is going to happen if you have seen it before.

The class didn't make me a liberal and the liberal professor did not fail to mention what leads to the collapse of democracy. I certainly can't blame the universities or at least not mine.  I guess some of us learned and others did not. It is probably like that in every college class. It is a shame I did not realize the importance of that gen ed history class at the time. I guess it takes a few years of life after the degree for the learnin' to sink in.
Logged
S.Rummings
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 82

Location: Houtzdale, PA


WWW
« Reply #95 on: December 20, 2012, 12:56:32 AM »

I don't want to see guns stripped of all Americans, but I do want Americans to have access to regular guns, the kind used to kill deer, elk, even large bears.
Those are the kind of guns that will go right through a police officer's "bulletproof" vest. That same vest can stop several rounds from a semiautomatic handgun before failing.

I want only sane, properly trained Americans buying these guns. I'd even like to see them re-licensed each year, kind of like we do for cars, CPR, nursing licenses, etc. I'd like there to be a proper tax on these guns and ammunition. This tax could help fund the funerals of the 1000s of Americans who die of accidental gun death every year
You have to renew your driver's license every year? Glad I don't live in your state. In PA you renew your driver's license and concealed carry permit with about the same frequency. Guns and ammunition are already heavily taxed.
What portion of your driver's license fee goes to pay for the funerals of the millions of people killed in car accidents every year? I hope you are not one of those irresponsible drivers who leaves your car somewhere with gas in it where someone could take it and use it to kill someone.  I know when I park my car I drain the gas out of it and lock it up in a separate location... ya know, for safety. I have seen so many people senselessly killed by cars somebody really should do something about it. Someone getting shot is really uncommon by comparison.

Every single one of these things would affect my own household, and I'd be fine with that. Can't speak for husband, though Smiley
You can't speak for me either. You are welcome to do as you please in your house. Keep a gun or don't. I don't care either way. Why do you want to try to tell me what I am allowed to do?
Logged
luvin honey
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1540

Location: Central WI


« Reply #96 on: December 20, 2012, 10:16:28 AM »

I'm not a lawmaker, so these are obviously just my opinions. All laws are made to tell other people what they're allowed to do. Part of being a member of society is being under the law, some of which you agree with, some of which you don't. Good laws attempt to find the sweet spot where the most people benefit.
Logged

The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6128

Location: Randleman, NC


« Reply #97 on: December 20, 2012, 10:40:18 AM »

""Good laws attempt to find the sweet spot where the most people benefit.""

And others attempt to find the sweet spot where the lawmakers benefit most.
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
iddee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6128

Location: Randleman, NC


« Reply #98 on: December 20, 2012, 10:41:17 AM »

THE TAX SYSTEM EXPLAINED IN BEER
 
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...


The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.


The fifth would pay $1.


The sixth would pay $3.


The seventh would pay $7..


The eighth would pay $12.


The ninth would pay $18.


The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.


So, that's what they decided to do.


The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20."  Drinks for the Ten men would now cost just $80.


The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would . . . Get his fair share?


They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.


So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).


The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).


The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).


The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).


The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).


The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).


Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.


"I only got a dollar out of the $20 savings," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got $10!"
 
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
 
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"
 
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.


The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important . . . They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the Bill!


And that, boys and girls, journalists, and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.


by David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics.


For those who understand, no explanation is needed . . .


for those who do not understand, no explanation is possible!!!
Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15195


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #99 on: December 20, 2012, 11:36:40 AM »

Quote
The NRA kooks think there should be no limits on guns.

you have a tendency to make statements that are untrue...as if they were fact.

Quote
You know there is a reason for the nuclear proliferation treaty.

and it doesn't work, does it?

Quote
I'm tired of the slippery slope argument. The NRA has kept its power by fearmongering and convincing its supporters that ANY gun regulation is the first step towards disarmament by the gubmint.

again, untrue.  however, the slippery slope argument if a valid one and it is demonstrated by all other countries that have had progressively tighter gun control laws over the year.  the first step was registration and everything after that was easy.  if you can demonstrate a thing and repeat the demonstration with the same results, it seems to me that meets bluebees definition of fact?
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.47 seconds with 21 queries.

Google visited last this page October 12, 2014, 12:05:52 PM