Solutions - page 3. | Bitcointalksearch.org

fatsy

jr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 1

Quote from: BADecker on December 16, 2019, 05:38:45 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 05:28:40 PM

Quote from: BADecker on December 16, 2019, 05:21:24 PM

My solution for gun control is a combination of several lubricants to make the gun fire easier, thereby reducing drag on the trigger, and giving the shooter better controle that way.

I have many solutions in the medical research arena... depending on the kind of research we are doing. A simple glucose solution will do for calibrating (zeroing out) a standard gas chromatograph. See Medicine man (1992), with Sean Connery and Lorraine Bracco.

Cheesy

Cool. Thanks for sharing.

Devil's advocate question: How will your idea save lives?

Well, there are two ideas... the gun idea, and the research idea.

Common people with the gun solution will have a better chance of hitting the terrorist before he can kill more people.

The glucose solution will make it so that the gas chromatograph readings are more accurate, thereby making more accurate medicine the research outcome... saving more lives medically.

Cool

So, several lubricants on guns will save lives? Cause that's what I was referring to. Not the glucose thing.

fatsy

jr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 1

Quote from: Artemis3 on December 16, 2019, 05:35:11 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 14, 2019, 11:09:18 PM

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 14, 2019, 07:54:32 PM

Part two of impossible: Let's say this gun plan had a snow balls chance. How do you implement it? How do you get the 393 million current guns out of the public's hands? Many of these current guns are not on any 'registry' or ownership list. Some states do not require any FFL involvement in transferring of long guns. Some guns have been passed down from family, which also requires no FFL. Some guns have been possessed since prior to any transfer laws. Some guns are manufactured without a serial number (still perfectly legal today), or have been in existence since prior to serial number requirements.

The law could require the gun manufacturers to make replicas of all their models with the Smart Gun Technology. And owners of the guns could simply exchange their guns at no cost. The manufacturers already made their profit when they sold the original. All guns without the Smart Gun Technology, could be made illegal.

And then only criminals would own these "dumb" guns that work perfectly fine without authentication. You might as well forbid weapons and end with the same result.

Only criminals would also import them, or manufacture them, which gives them the instant advantage. Your "solution" is only making it harder for the honest folk. It reminds me of copy protection, and their authenticated garbage. Enjoy your "Genuine Advantage".

There is no middle ground, either you ban it or not. And banning them won't end it, same as amendment 18...

Really? No middle ground? Isn't that what everyone wants?

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 05:28:40 PM

Quote from: BADecker on December 16, 2019, 05:21:24 PM

My solution for gun control is a combination of several lubricants to make the gun fire easier, thereby reducing drag on the trigger, and giving the shooter better controle that way.

I have many solutions in the medical research arena... depending on the kind of research we are doing. A simple glucose solution will do for calibrating (zeroing out) a standard gas chromatograph. See Medicine man (1992), with Sean Connery and Lorraine Bracco.

Cheesy

Cool. Thanks for sharing.

Devil's advocate question: How will your idea save lives?

Well, there are two ideas... the gun idea, and the research idea.

Common people with the gun solution will have a better chance of hitting the terrorist before he can kill more people.

The glucose solution will make it so that the gas chromatograph readings are more accurate, thereby making more accurate medicine the research outcome... saving more lives medically.

Cool

Artemis3

legendary

Activity: 2030

Merit: 1569

CLEAN non GPL infringing code made in Rust lang

Quote from: fatsy on December 14, 2019, 11:09:18 PM

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 14, 2019, 07:54:32 PM

Part two of impossible: Let's say this gun plan had a snow balls chance. How do you implement it? How do you get the 393 million current guns out of the public's hands? Many of these current guns are not on any 'registry' or ownership list. Some states do not require any FFL involvement in transferring of long guns. Some guns have been passed down from family, which also requires no FFL. Some guns have been possessed since prior to any transfer laws. Some guns are manufactured without a serial number (still perfectly legal today), or have been in existence since prior to serial number requirements.

The law could require the gun manufacturers to make replicas of all their models with the Smart Gun Technology. And owners of the guns could simply exchange their guns at no cost. The manufacturers already made their profit when they sold the original. All guns without the Smart Gun Technology, could be made illegal.

And then only criminals would own these "dumb" guns that work perfectly fine without authentication. You might as well forbid weapons and end with the same result.

Only criminals would also import them, or manufacture them, which gives them the instant advantage. Your "solution" is only making it harder for the honest folk. It reminds me of copy protection, and their authenticated garbage. Enjoy your "Genuine Advantage".

There is no middle ground, either you ban it or not. And banning them won't end it, same as amendment 18...

fatsy

jr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 1

Quote from: BADecker on December 16, 2019, 05:21:24 PM

My solution for gun control is a combination of several lubricants to make the gun fire easier, thereby reducing drag on the trigger, and giving the shooter better controle that way.

I have many solutions in the medical research arena... depending on the kind of research we are doing. A simple glucose solution will do for calibrating (zeroing out) a standard gas chromatograph. See Medicine man (1992), with Sean Connery and Lorraine Bracco.

Cheesy

Cool. Thanks for sharing.

Devil's advocate question: How will your idea save lives?

fatsy

jr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 1

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 16, 2019, 05:11:31 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 05:04:37 PM

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 16, 2019, 04:45:49 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 04:30:44 PM

Quote from: eddie13 on December 16, 2019, 04:20:23 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 03:16:41 PM

What freedom and liberty? The freedom to shoot and kill anybody at will?

Ok, you are just a troll..
By

Why are you calling me a troll? What am I doing that's troll-ish?

Ive been nothing but honest, respectful and logical with responses to your ideas and theories. The reason this fellow is calling you a troll is your dismissive attitude towards any contrary logic or facts. You've done absolutely nothing to show how this will actually work/succeed, and offer defensive retorts to opposing thoughts. There have been zero replies supporting your ideas working, and a plethora indicating otherwise.

Like the statistics I posted above. Your response is "think it doesn't matter to that .0038% ?". Thats simply an assanine response. You are being shown facts that clearly indicate your perceived solutions for a problem dont work, will not work, and really isnt a statistical issue in the grand scheme of things.

You want to save a few kids from irresponsible parents, fine. I'm cool with that. Maybe this will help in that department. But we've already shown you it has major flaws, even for that application.

That's your opinion.

I've asked others to share their ideas, including you, and have gotten no replies.

Perhaps others are afraid to voice their ideas in fear of getting flamed.

Me, I don't give a shit what other people think of me. So I'll just keep posting until I don't feel like it or I get banned (It wouldn't be the first time.)

^^^^^ exactly what I'm talking about. You shared an idea. It wont work. You've been shown it wont work. Yet you still defend it. And you never requested ideas from others. This is your thread, about your ideas.this is why liberals are laughed at. Your liberal ideas seem wonderful in theory to yourselves. But when you take the first step of implementation, the implosion occurs.

If my opinion, and the opinion of literally everyone else who responded, are wrong..... then go ahead and implement your grand solution and prove us wrong.

How do know for sure that my ideas won't work if they'd never been tried?

Again, WHAT ARE YOUR IDEAS? LET'S HEAR THEM. Please.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

My solution for gun control is a combination of several lubricants to make the gun fire easier, thereby reducing drag on the trigger, and giving the shooter better controle that way.

I have many solutions in the medical research arena... depending on the kind of research we are doing. A simple glucose solution will do for calibrating (zeroing out) a standard gas chromatograph. See Medicine man (1992), with Sean Connery and Lorraine Bracco.

Cheesy

PopoJeff

full member

Activity: 414

Merit: 182

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 05:04:37 PM

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 16, 2019, 04:45:49 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 04:30:44 PM

Quote from: eddie13 on December 16, 2019, 04:20:23 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 03:16:41 PM

What freedom and liberty? The freedom to shoot and kill anybody at will?

Ok, you are just a troll..
By

Why are you calling me a troll? What am I doing that's troll-ish?

Ive been nothing but honest, respectful and logical with responses to your ideas and theories. The reason this fellow is calling you a troll is your dismissive attitude towards any contrary logic or facts. You've done absolutely nothing to show how this will actually work/succeed, and offer defensive retorts to opposing thoughts. There have been zero replies supporting your ideas working, and a plethora indicating otherwise.

Like the statistics I posted above. Your response is "think it doesn't matter to that .0038% ?". Thats simply an assanine response. You are being shown facts that clearly indicate your perceived solutions for a problem dont work, will not work, and really isnt a statistical issue in the grand scheme of things.

You want to save a few kids from irresponsible parents, fine. I'm cool with that. Maybe this will help in that department. But we've already shown you it has major flaws, even for that application.

That's your opinion.

I've asked others to share their ideas, including you, and have gotten no replies.

Perhaps others are afraid to voice their ideas in fear of getting flamed.

Me, I don't give a shit what other people think of me. So I'll just keep posting until I don't feel like it or I get banned (It wouldn't be the first time.)

^^^^^ exactly what I'm talking about. You shared an idea. It wont work. You've been shown it wont work. Yet you still defend it. And you never requested ideas from others. This is your thread, about your ideas.this is why liberals are laughed at. Your liberal ideas seem wonderful in theory to yourselves. But when you take the first step of implementation, the implosion occurs.

If my opinion, and the opinion of literally everyone else who responded, are wrong..... then go ahead and implement your grand solution and prove us wrong.

fatsy

jr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 1

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 16, 2019, 04:45:49 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 04:30:44 PM

Quote from: eddie13 on December 16, 2019, 04:20:23 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 03:16:41 PM

What freedom and liberty? The freedom to shoot and kill anybody at will?

Ok, you are just a troll..
By

Why are you calling me a troll? What am I doing that's troll-ish?

Ive been nothing but honest, respectful and logical with responses to your ideas and theories. The reason this fellow is calling you a troll is your dismissive attitude towards any contrary logic or facts. You've done absolutely nothing to show how this will actually work/succeed, and offer defensive retorts to opposing thoughts. There have been zero replies supporting your ideas working, and a plethora indicating otherwise.

Like the statistics I posted above. Your response is "think it doesn't matter to that .0038% ?". Thats simply an assanine response. You are being shown facts that clearly indicate your perceived solutions for a problem dont work, will not work, and really isnt a statistical issue in the grand scheme of things.

You want to save a few kids from irresponsible parents, fine. I'm cool with that. Maybe this will help in that department. But we've already shown you it has major flaws, even for that application.

That's your opinion.

I've asked others to share their ideas, including you, and have gotten no replies.

Perhaps others are afraid to voice their ideas in fear of getting flamed.

Me, I don't give a shit what other people think of me. So I'll just keep posting until I don't feel like it or I get banned (It wouldn't be the first time.)

PopoJeff

full member

Activity: 414

Merit: 182

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 04:30:44 PM

Quote from: eddie13 on December 16, 2019, 04:20:23 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 03:16:41 PM

What freedom and liberty? The freedom to shoot and kill anybody at will?

Ok, you are just a troll..
By

Why are you calling me a troll? What am I doing that's troll-ish?

Ive been nothing but honest, respectful and logical with responses to your ideas and theories. The reason this fellow is calling you a troll is your dismissive attitude towards any contrary logic or facts. You've done absolutely nothing to show how this will actually work/succeed, and offer defensive retorts to opposing thoughts. There have been zero replies supporting your ideas working, and a plethora indicating otherwise.

Like the statistics I posted above. Your response is "think it doesn't matter to that .0038% ?". Thats simply an assanine response. You are being shown facts that clearly indicate your perceived solutions for a problem dont work, will not work, and really isnt a statistical issue in the grand scheme of things.

You want to save a few kids from irresponsible parents, fine. I'm cool with that. Maybe this will help in that department. But we've already shown you it has major flaws, even for that application.

fatsy

jr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 1

Quote from: eddie13 on December 16, 2019, 04:20:23 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 03:16:41 PM

What freedom and liberty? The freedom to shoot and kill anybody at will?

Ok, you are just a troll..
By

Why are you calling me a troll? What am I doing that's troll-ish?

eddie13

legendary

Activity: 2296

Merit: 2262

BTC or BUST

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 03:16:41 PM

What freedom and liberty? The freedom to shoot and kill anybody at will?

Ok, you are just a troll..
By

fatsy

jr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 1

Quote from: eddie13 on December 16, 2019, 03:02:28 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 12:28:31 PM

So, you think those statistics matter to the less than 1%?

Probably to many of them still..
I highly doubt a freak accident would change my views enough to reject freedom and liberty..

What freedom and liberty? The freedom to shoot and kill anybody at will?

eddie13

legendary

Activity: 2296

Merit: 2262

BTC or BUST

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 12:28:31 PM

So, you think those statistics matter to the less than 1%?

Probably to many of them still..
I highly doubt a freak accident would change my views enough to reject freedom and liberty..

fatsy

jr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 1

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 16, 2019, 01:41:40 AM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 01:17:43 AM

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 15, 2019, 10:44:39 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 15, 2019, 10:13:23 PM

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 15, 2019, 09:35:18 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 15, 2019, 08:19:33 PM

Right, the gun can't be fired without human interaction. Again, the problem comes from the gun ending up in the wrong hands. We, as humans, can't always control that.

Ok. You're arguing in a circle and missing your exit. But that's ok. We agree that the human factor is the issue. You're looking to "baby-proof" the gun to restrict access. But wouldn't it be more effective to fix the human? Instead of a "crap, can't use that gun, where's the knife?" result..... what if we fix the root cause so their thought process is now "geez, I can't do that, imagine the death destruction and misery I'd cause". Or "can't do that, it's illegal". Your idea is putting a bandaid on an arterial bleed.

I certainly don't have the answer to fixing the gang mentality, criminal appeal, lack of respect and mental health issues that cause 99% of shootings. But I do know we proved your idea will not work, based simply on cell coverage gaps.

You can't be there all the time to make sure your gun or any gun doesn't end up in the wrong hands. A five year old who got a hold of his daddy's gun for example. How do you stop the kid from firing the gun?

Same way I stopped my 3 kids from getting anything I didn't want them to have. The gun, locked up. My money, phone, beer, cigarettes... told them no and enforced consequences.

I've got about 30 different firearms right now. And have had guns since about 1988. Guess how many of my kids were harmed. Zero. Guess how many were stolen. Zero.

Which is another point I mentioned a few pages ago. When you enact new laws/restrictions on guns, the only people it affects are the legal gun owners. The criminals don't care what your law says.
We already have laws to punish a parent if the kid kid gets hold of a gun.

Congratulations. You are one of the smart and responsible gun owners.

Tell that to a family that wasn't so lucky and lost someone because someone wasn't as careful as you.

Or, the victims of mass shootings like Sandy Hook.

And about 99% of gun owners are like me. Why do you keep trying to punish us for the actions of the other 1%.
Actually less. Just checked some stats.
383,000,000 guns in the US.
14,500 homicides (2017)

What is that? About .0038 %

Compare to 1,250,000 car crash deaths per year avg

Which machine is really more dangerous to the populace?

So, you think those statistics matter to the less than 1%?

I'm not trying to punish anyone. Just sharing and defending my ideas.

fatsy

jr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 1

Quote from: TECSHARE on December 16, 2019, 01:21:13 AM

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 01:03:16 AM

Quote from: TECSHARE on December 15, 2019, 11:21:52 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 15, 2019, 07:46:47 PM

No, just more vigilant and use some common sense. Be street smart. Unfortunately that can't be taught in school.

Too bad you are neither street smart not book smart. What is stopping people form just making their own guns? Importing unlocked guns? Using explosives, fire, vehicles, knives, airguns, to kill people? Are you not getting any kind of clue why "your ideas" are half baked failures? The world is not your science experiment. You have to prove ideas before they are implemented, especially when the safety of hundreds of millions is at risk.

Uh, I don't know. Because it's easier to buy (off the street) or steal a gun than to make one?

So, how do I go about to try to prove my ideas? Where do I start?

You can't even form a coherent reply to my question, but you claim to have the solution to all the worlds problems. They are "your ideas" jackhole, you tell me.

You seem to know everything like an expert, that's why I asked you.

PopoJeff

full member

Activity: 414

Merit: 182

Quote from: TECSHARE on December 16, 2019, 03:31:51 AM

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 16, 2019, 01:40:10 AM

I'd say they were put in a no win situation. Do you see where that truck stopped? Don't take out the shooters, and you or others are dead at the hands of the shooters. Take them out, and possibly hit nearby innocents.

Lets be honest here, they were absolutely put in a bad position, but they most certainly did fuck up. If they wanted cover they should have used their cruisers, not the random occupied vehicles of bystanders. They didn't even bother telling the bystanders to exit the vehicles. Also as you know as a trained police officer, one of the primary things they drill into your head in training is to be aware of what is down range and behind your target. This was an utter failure of basic police procedure and tactics. If this was a civilian who acted this way with these results in self defense, he would absolutely be going to prison.

You're correct there. And I can actually show you one of our SOP's on the use of deadly force that says we cannot take a shot in that situation.

TECSHARE

legendary

Activity: 3318

Merit: 2008

First Exclusion Ever

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 16, 2019, 01:40:10 AM

I'd say they were put in a no win situation. Do you see where that truck stopped? Don't take out the shooters, and you or others are dead at the hands of the shooters. Take them out, and possibly hit nearby innocents.

Lets be honest here, they were absolutely put in a bad position, but they most certainly did fuck up. If they wanted cover they should have used their cruisers, not the random occupied vehicles of bystanders. They didn't even bother telling the bystanders to exit the vehicles. Also as you know as a trained police officer, one of the primary things they drill into your head in training is to be aware of what is down range and behind your target. This was an utter failure of basic police procedure and tactics. If this was a civilian who acted this way with these results in self defense, he would absolutely be going to prison.

PopoJeff

full member

Activity: 414

Merit: 182

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 01:17:43 AM

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 15, 2019, 10:44:39 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 15, 2019, 10:13:23 PM

Quote from: PopoJeff on December 15, 2019, 09:35:18 PM

Quote from: fatsy on December 15, 2019, 08:19:33 PM

Right, the gun can't be fired without human interaction. Again, the problem comes from the gun ending up in the wrong hands. We, as humans, can't always control that.

Ok. You're arguing in a circle and missing your exit. But that's ok. We agree that the human factor is the issue. You're looking to "baby-proof" the gun to restrict access. But wouldn't it be more effective to fix the human? Instead of a "crap, can't use that gun, where's the knife?" result..... what if we fix the root cause so their thought process is now "geez, I can't do that, imagine the death destruction and misery I'd cause". Or "can't do that, it's illegal". Your idea is putting a bandaid on an arterial bleed.

I certainly don't have the answer to fixing the gang mentality, criminal appeal, lack of respect and mental health issues that cause 99% of shootings. But I do know we proved your idea will not work, based simply on cell coverage gaps.

You can't be there all the time to make sure your gun or any gun doesn't end up in the wrong hands. A five year old who got a hold of his daddy's gun for example. How do you stop the kid from firing the gun?

Same way I stopped my 3 kids from getting anything I didn't want them to have. The gun, locked up. My money, phone, beer, cigarettes... told them no and enforced consequences.

I've got about 30 different firearms right now. And have had guns since about 1988. Guess how many of my kids were harmed. Zero. Guess how many were stolen. Zero.

Which is another point I mentioned a few pages ago. When you enact new laws/restrictions on guns, the only people it affects are the legal gun owners. The criminals don't care what your law says.
We already have laws to punish a parent if the kid kid gets hold of a gun.

Congratulations. You are one of the smart and responsible gun owners.

Tell that to a family that wasn't so lucky and lost someone because someone wasn't as careful as you.

Or, the victims of mass shootings like Sandy Hook.

And about 99% of gun owners are like me. Why do you keep trying to punish us for the actions of the other 1%.
Actually less. Just checked some stats.
383,000,000 guns in the US.
14,500 homicides (2017)

What is that? About .0038 %

Compare to 1,250,000 car crash deaths per year avg

Which machine is really more dangerous to the populace?

PopoJeff

full member

Activity: 414

Merit: 182

Quote from: fatsy on December 16, 2019, 12:51:43 AM

Quote from: Mometaskers on December 16, 2019, 12:22:12 AM

Quote from: fatsy on December 15, 2019, 03:20:08 AM

Quote from: Mometaskers on December 15, 2019, 01:13:32 AM

Legal guns not firing in public just means criminals using illegal guns don't have to worry about a gun-wielding public. I believe there were already several incidents in the US where people shot down mass shooters. Imagine if you actually have to wait for the police to come.

Sure you can make it so that in the event that a mass shooting happens all the other guns unlock but there will be a delay between the center receiving information that one is indeed happening and them being able to deactivate the block.

Not to mention they'd probably spend even more time "confirming" the incident before being forced to unlock guns coz "Guns Bad!".

Quote from: Spendulus on December 14, 2019, 11:28:59 PM

Since criminals follow the law and don't do things that are illegal, that sounds great!

Wait...

Wait they don't follow the law? I'm shookt!

Taking down a shooter in public is the job of cops; not fellow bystanders. Law enforcement don't need preauthorization to fire their guns. Unless, we change the law so that cops can't just shoot anyone when they feel like it. Maybe they should get an "ok" from a superior before they can shoot.

Look, this is far from being a reality because of too much red tape and organizations like the NRA. No one has the balls to initiate change. We will continue to have mass shootings and accidental gun deaths. This is the world we live in unless we truly want change.

Awww, that's cute. Yeah, I'm so totally just gonna sit there and wait for the cops while someone have a gun pointed at me. Those gun-owning bystanders can go pound sand, I don't need their help! Roll Eyes

For a taste of what a disarmed police force is go look at the all those cops knifed down in the UK. Now before you point out that UPS hostage incident, it were the cops that were stupid, not the guns.

PopoJeff, you're a cop. You agree with that? That the cops were stupid?

I'd say they were put in a no win situation. Do you see where that truck stopped? Don't take out the shooters, and you or others are dead at the hands of the shooters. Take them out, and possibly hit nearby innocents.

Topic: Solutions - page 3. (Read 1028 times)