misteraven

Safest place for a gun is on my person. I don't keep any of my guns in a safe because I wouldn't want have to scramble for my gun when its needed. In fact I have a shotgun by the door and can say from first hand experience that if a grizzly is charging one of my dogs or one of my kids, I'd be hard pressed to pull it into action at only a couple steps away. Unlikely that someone would break into my house where I live, but same applies there. Perhaps I would reconsider the situation in a different environment, if I believed that my house was a likely target to be robbed. But then again if I lived in an area like that, I'd also likely double down on guns as well. My kids understand what guns are and I know that they respect what they are capable of. We're very involved in their day to day lives and don't count on the school system to raise our children. We talk to them often and go to great lengths to raise stable, compassionate little humans. I live in a place where gun ownership is far more common than average and maybe its coincidence, but people here are also a lot more polite and friendly on average as well.

Sorry, I'll try and answer that question specifically. First of all, you'd have to investigate where the guns used in the majority of crimes are coming from to begin with. Though I'm sure guns are occasionally stolen, I'd be willing to bet the vast majority doesn't come from that or it would be a big talking point. Also, you'd probably have to differentiate between mass murders and standard gun violence as I'd postulate that the guns used in both are likely very different and very likely procured in different manners. But looping back to your question... I can't speak for everyone on this topic, but as a gun owner I would say, you're looking at the wrong demographic for a solution. The overwhelming vast majority of gun owners aren't any type of problem. They aren't even in the chain of events that ultimately culminate into the problem. With many thousands of gun laws on the books at the Federal level and many thousands more on the books at the state level, why would you look at the responsible gun owner as a subject for a question like that? That's similar to blaming the NRA for the mass shootings, when no mass shooter has ever been even remotely tied to that organization, rather than looking at the mass shooter and the actual circumstance that led to what made them go crazy. How often are those kids the victims of bullying or some sort of social alienation or extremely marginalized (not a valid excuse, but seems to be a pretty common theme), yet the knee jerk response is to blame gun owners and the NRA. Another interesting comparison is how often we decide to hold religion responsible, when someone conducts violence on behalf of some religious belief. Should we hold all muslims accountable for the actions for the few extremists that are responsible for mass murder? Should we expect the average practitioner of the faith to modify their religion somehow as a possible preventative measure for those few that wind up becoming extremists and decide to conduct violence due to some skewed interpretation of that religion? As I've been stating all along a gun is simply a tool and the tool isn't the issue. It's the deeper, more complex issues that nobody cares to address, like socioeconomics and the state of healthcare and all the stuff that stems out of both that is the problem.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-43610936 https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/04/03/londons-murder-rate-higher-than-new-york-citys/480860002/

Same issue here... Its not about the tool used, its about the intent and the circumstance that drives that intent. Huge disparity with socioeconomics provides a fertile breeding ground for gangs, which in turn leads to gang violence. So only London has that issue because that's where the socioeconomic disparity is concentrated. As that extends outwards, and it most certainly will most of the time, so does that circumstance. Left unchecked, the gangs will push outwards, even if the environment that leads to their birth does not. Get rid of that circumstance and give people a reason to care for themselves and their achievements and you largely eliminate that particular issue. But in the meantime and always, the people that live around all that shit (and not), have a natural right to defend themselves in the best way they can.

P.S. Here's a link to the NRA's 2017 Tax Return. Kind of busy, but you guys can google and link 2018. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5300476-NRA-2017-990.html

Not to spiral the debate, but the UK is also discussing banning knives because your knife violence is growing at such a rapid rate. In fact, London had more murders this last year than New York City. Not that I agree with banning knives, or guns, and absolutely believe the right to personal protection is a natural right that supersedes any and all government, as well as the fact that we also have a right to the best tool available to us for personal defense, but there's no putting that genie back in the bottle and try as we might, you can't legislate away evil. Man has been finding innovative ways to more efficiently inflict violence since before we figured out how to make fire.

I'll take a jab at this... In the entire history of mass shootings, not a single one was conducted by an NRA member. In fact, I'm unable to even find a unjustifiable homicide attributed to an NRA member after searching extensively. Likewise, if we simply look into the idea that guns are the problem, then logic would dictate where there are more guns, there are more gun problems. Yet, there are never any acts of violence, ever, when you look at gun ranges, gun shows, gun trade shows, etc. Likewise, I've posted several times that according to the NICS system, which is a requirement when buying a gun from any commercial dealer, that gun ownership has grown as a massive pace. Not just incremental gun ownership, but exponential. In just 2019 alone, there has been 22,562,956 NICS checks with two months left to report. Not all necessarily conclude in a final purchase transaction, but likewise, it does include transactions where multiple guns were purchased during a single transaction and since this isn't something you submit for fun... This is a fairly accurate representation of US gun sales. So this being said, if the idea is that guns are the problem and more guns equal more problems, than why is gun violence statistically on the decline, year over year for decades, despite the explosive growth in firearms purchases (no pun intended)? Further, why are most mass acts of violence conducted in 'gun free' zones and why are areas of the country with the highest gun ownership per capita, most often (and almost entirely consistently) the places with the least gun crime (or any crime for that matter)? All of this points to a different driving force behind those acts of violence. At the same time, note the consistency with mass shootings... Almost always a young white male on a rampage in a gun free zone. Then note the statistical probability for gun crime in general... Overwhelming a young black male in the inner city and most often one of a handful of key cities that also most often have strict gun control laws. Real issue is that this topic is low hanging fruit for politicians that really have no interest in solving the issue or they'd approach it pragmatically and with an evidence / fact based approach instead of the emotionally driven arguments that dominate that conversation. Reality is that it doesn't even make up the top 10 of what kills Americans prematurely and when compared to what does, gun murder in its entirety is hardly a rounding error by comparison (appx 30,000* versus 2.8 million). *This 30,000 figure also includes justifiable homicide and suicides which represent 66%+ of that full figure. Side note... The NRA is a legal non profit. As such, they're required to post their tax returns. If anyone takes the time to review it, you'll note the over whelming majority of their income are membership dues and not the dark money from the gun industry. In fact, when you consider the NRA round up program where most gun and outdoor companies allow you to round up your purchase and donate it to the NRA, that accounts for the majority of even that small revenue percentage. Sources: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/nics_firearm_checks_-_year_by_state_type.pdf/view

Got that giant mother ship (Battle Cruiser) with the detachable mini ships that I got for Christmas one year. Loved these things. Also had the spaceship that looked like a hornet. This was all pre Star Wars.

Think we need to prepend some of these with fake news / meme or actually published news. Shit is getting harder and harder to keep straight.

Just deleted a bunch of stupid comments. Hate to come off heavy handed in regards to discussion but if we can't figure out a way to keep conversations civil, got no choice but to pump the breaks a bit and start closing the political threads. I know shit can get contentious and we all have different perspectives on all the nonsense out there, but this is 12oz... We should be able to work out our differences to a tolerable degree without shit falling to shit. If that's not possible than those conversations are a waste of bandwidth since there no hope for the general public to every work out differences on a broad scale if we are unable to do so on our limited scale here.

Crazy shit.

I wouldn't take any of it back... So good. Fascinating to see the cultural differences between then and now. So much more innocent / naive and also so much more positive and ambitious in my opinion.

Dug this up after a reference posted in the Halloween 19 thread. Crazy to see this after so many years.

Damn, I have the vaguest recollection of this show. Havent thought of this in decades.

Saw this posted to the Hypebeast feed and thought it was super interesting. Not so much what it said, but what seemed glaringly missing, in my mind. Apparently the US Government is hugely concerned about the social network TikTok due to the fact that its owned by the Chinese and can be used to data mine the habits of Americans on that platform. That statement all but acknowledges that social networks are used to data mine its users, but the concern isn't whether ti can happen, but that instead its their 'competition' is doing it instead. Maybe I'll see if I can dig up an article on it somewhere online so we can read the official statement, but I don't doubt the validity of it. Also going to link you to a very awesome Podcast episode I recently caught that very much relates to this subject. Very much worth a listen. Link: https://www.jrepodcast.com/episode/joe-rogan-experience-1368-edward-snowden/

Rewatching Yellowstone Season 2. So good.

Or just buff the wood first?

Honestly, I wouldn’t do it unless you have a friend. I know back in our days we did it and plenty of other dumb shit and maybe I’m just old, but way too much can go wrong. I’d have at least one friend and really make sure they can watch your back. Also, dress in layers with the outside layer being muted and dark. Layer under it should be the opposite of that, light and bright. If you get chased, shed a layer when you get to a safe spot. Always have your rally points figured out if it’s not just you by yourself. No matter what, never ever admit to any wrong doing, even if they saw you doing it. Just stick to your story, no matter what. A good one is you were talking to a girl you just met and she dissed you so you’re making your way home and got turned around.

That’s mobile satellite. Not as common as it used to be since content is usually streamed over cellular but you still see it on vehicles that go out of range often enough to qualify the expense of it. Though I bet it’s fairly cheap these days.

Really cool. Reminds me of some of the mashup stuff the VLOK kids are doing...

Freedom comes with consequences. Not that you're expressly saying it, but I'm not okay with them tracking the entire world under the premise that its required in order to keep us safe. Evil is a part of the human condition and will always exist. Only thing we can hope to do is confront it when it presents. Can't be legislated away and its a very slippery slope when you start implementing systems that are intended to be 'for the greater good'.

You do much fishing?

Obviously everyone has a right to their opinion, but just because someone grew up doing something like graffiti, I can't see how that would exclude them from adopting a position in life that boils down to just leave me alone. Seems to me that people hold individuals like politicians and police officers in some mythical position of somehow being more qualified create law or enforce the law than anyone else. End of the day they're really no different than your co-workers or the individuals you bump into in the street as you go about your day. Politicians don't have any magical talent to govern others. In fact, to be a plumber you need to take specific classes, receive specific accreditations and often apprentice before you can be considered professional and proceed to unclog a persons toilet. There's no such requirement to be a politician. From AOC going from waitress to congresswoman through to Donald Trump going from reality tv star and questionable business man to President of the most powerful nation in the history of the planet, this should be obvious. What would you suppose either of them knows about foreign policy and the complexities of stepping into dynamics like the middle east? Likewise, what do you think either of them knows about a lifestyle that might necessitate the need to walk out your door with a gun on you? Seems there's a pretty healthy dislike of both those politicians, depending on what team you've rallied behind, yet at the end of the day, both are making decisions and implementing legislation that has a profound impact on we live. Neither is in any way qualified to understand, let alone govern what I might need or not need to live a healthy, happy and productive life out in NW Montana or to be spending tax money to fly sons and daughters across the world to wage wars, yet there they are... Living under a different set of rules, largely operating outside the law, getting paid sums of money that go far, far beyond that of the average person despite being funded by the taxes taken from them. They're people just like you and I... If you feel comfortable randomly pickling a person off the street, handing them your car and house keys and inviting them over to start managing your income and bills for you, then I suppose you can trust politicians. Even though at the end of the day politicians actually have more affect on your life than a stranger with your keys and bank account. So @Hua Guofangat the end of all this you've just dropped out under the belief that at least you don't live in North Korea and fuck the world, you're going for yours? Your prerogative, but hard to not see that as a cop out after reading so many other intelligent and insightful responses from you. I'm not saying I'm hell bent on changing the world, but I maintain this community with the continued belief that it makes a difference and as it gains power and prominence once again that we can use it to help each other out, even if its just learning something new about a person or place that exists on the other side of the world. I've made decisions and taken actions that have completely rocked my own reality that ultimately boil down to moving to the mountains to live a more wholesome lifestyle... To understand where my food comes from, walk the earth a little more lightly and focus on me and my family with the hopes of living a better life and raising good human beings. I don't care what other people want to do, whether its go through life dressed as the opposite sex, marry the same sex, not eat meat or worship the sun. I believe everyone should be free to pursue their own version of happiness, but that the consequences of it are wholly their own as is the cost of living it. That government, most especially that which exists thousands of miles away and has never set foot in the day to day reality I live has very little business creating laws I'm expected to live by. It's insult to injury when they largely don't live within the same laws and then extort money from me to pay themselves for the privilege and extort more money to enforce their will on me and good many others around the world. Hard to see why anyone would be okay with that, but to each their own. I just would rather be left alone.

My mistake, I somehow read NRA as the beneficiary of public funds. (Long day, my bad). I don’t think any tax payer money should do towards arts or entertainment to be honest. Government has enough stuff its tasked with doing that isn’t being done properly. But further, it’s just ripe for abuse and fact of the matter is I don’t think it’s fair to forcefully steal the productivity of an individual and redistribute it. Honestly don’t care if it’s arts or war. I also don’t care how educated an individual is in the context of this conversation. I have no doubt that Hillary Clinton is very well educated, but I rarely agree with her politics. Same for Bernie Sanders and so many others. They might hold advanced degrees and be brilliant scholars, doesn’t mean they’re necessarily qualified to decide how everyone else should be living. Likewise, because someone might not be as educated, doesn’t mean they aren’t smart, nor does it mean they’re necessarily less capable of leadership or governing. You’ve been around long enough to know that my position is people should just mind their own business and people need to relearn how to be accountable for themselves. Less government the better and ‘smart’ people have a tendency to think they know what’s best for everyone. But back to the topic... Yes, bias is inherent to being human. My criticism is that media hardly even makes efforts at trying to maintain balance, let alone an impartial reporting of facts and context. It’s a ridiculous argument to think NPR is impartial in regards to the second amendment as their track record plainly speaks otherwise. So for them to reach at something like, ‘shooting guns might possibly lead to lead poisoning’ is suspect by default once the topic turns guns. I’d find it equally ridiculous if the topic was cell phones lead to brain cancer, but at least it wouldn’t raise a red flag of skepticism since they don’t have a track record of criticizing cell phone ownership. Not saying cell phones don’t cause cancer and perhaps some researchers can look into that too, but since I can’t point to any obvious cases of it, I’m not going to worry about that either since cell phones are everywhere and by now the evidence should be pretty obvious. Not familiar with Steel Manning but have mentioned before the importance of what you’ve described. As such, to answer your question... NPR is free to talk about anything they want, it’s not place to dictate what other people talk about. I’m merely saying they are clearly biased and considering their track record at advocating against gun rights, any conversation coming from them on the subject of guns will come off to me as extremely suspect. Double so when its not clearly prefaced or framed as another reason to not own a gun and instead presented like a new discovery that we should suddenly be concerned with. Regardless of all that, I don’t see why any of the money I earn, that is forcefully taken from me by way of taxes, should be redistributed to them so they can continue putting out content that I just don’t give a shit about. I really enjoy Recoil magazine... Don’t think they should be subsidized with my (or any other) tax money either.