Skier speed trap hell

[Smellytele]

I'm sorry Jim, but that's simply not true in my case. I spend on average 20 hours a week driving; probably closer to 25. As an example, it's 6.5 hours to Ft Kent, Maine from where I live. I have a fair amount of business up there. My job requires a tremendous amount of time doing market research, writing proposals and negotiating via email in addition to the phone, which I try and limit even while using Bluetooth behind the wheel. I could be doing all of that while enroute to my customers with a fully autonomous vehicle. Instead much of that work gets pushed into the evenings and weekends. It would add an enormous amount of free time to my life that I could devote more of to my family, skiing etc.

And I'm someone who truly loves driving. I don't even care for automatic transmissions, so wanting full auto is all about improved work efficiency and productivity for me.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

I would use it to drink, do drugs and jerk off as reading in a moving vehicle gets me sick.

 

[abc]

I use none. My post was poorly written and was referring back to the autonomous car part of this ever changing thread.

But yes, I do not use trains, planes, or buses. I like my car controlled by me.

Jim, I read it as you don’t like others responsible for your movement. That’s why I listed planes and buses. Most people had to use one of those. Or their life would be rather limited.

I hope you get to use those before you ride your heresy.

 

[abc]

I would use it to drink, do drugs and jerk off as reading in a moving vehicle gets me sick.

If the software gets to be as good as the average driver, I’ll take a nap. Just like if I’m sharing the driving with a companion.

After a day of skiing, I want to eat then sleep. I can eat while driving, but can’t nap unless “someone” else is driving.

 

[BenedictGomez]

Do I think I will ever need a gun for self defense? Probably not. But if it ever comes to that I am quite happy that I live in a country that guarantees me the right to protect myself.

Amen.

We're talking violent crimes here. I'm sure you're not going to cap someone for stealing a garden gnome off your lawn.
And yes, there are many places where crime is near zero, you should be able to find them with a little sleuthing.

Again you go back to this same "point", which I see very little validity to. By nature, unless you live in some festering hell-hole or near war zone (parts of Chicago, parts of St. Louis, Newark, etc..), violent crimes are typically black swan events.

 

[BenedictGomez]

What stands out about that list is two of the cities experienced some of the most notorious violent crimes of the past 20 years.

Alternatively; this.

I could have easily done that at 4 or 5, but for the lack of motivation (my cousin coming to visit). I dissembled a lock about 4 or 5 according to my parents. (didn't have the skill to put it back together).

Very doubtful. I think your story is difficult to believe as is at age 6, let alone age 4. Most 4 year olds wouldn't even know the numbers 47, 38, 19, let alone even understand what a turn pattern is on a combination safe. I dont even think the average 4 year old could reach the dial on a typical gun safe; mine's about 4 feet off the ground I'd guess (without measuring).

 

[abc]

Very doubtful. I think your story is difficult to believe as is at age 6, let alone age 4. Most 4 year olds wouldn't even know the numbers 47, 38, 19, let alone even understand what a turn pattern is on a combination safe. I dont even think the average 4 year old could reach the dial on a typical gun safe; mine's about 4 feet off the ground I'd guess (without measuring).

I obviously didn’t open the safe at 4. But I knew about the dial pattern many months before the “event”. As for the number, that’s typically taught no later than 5. (counting at 5, reading & writing at 6)

As for my real age for the incident? It was before I went to school (because we moved the summer before my 1st grade. —the guns didn’t follow the move). I started 1st grade a little after 7.

It was recounted by my parents in detail, including the approximate age. I provided my side of the story, most significantly how I overheard the instruction on how to open a dial safe by putting two & two together.

 

[deadheadskier]

End of the day, I come back to this fact. Statistics don't lie. Households without guns in the US are safer than those that have them. That's why I don't own one.



Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[BenedictGomez]

End of the day, I come back to this fact. Statistics don't lie.

Statistics sometimes dont do anything other than lie, even if unintentionally.

Guns are one such case.

Any time there is a death resultant from a gun, it is captured. LITERALLY. Every time. You cannot escape a body bag.

But MOST times when a gun is successfully used in self-defense it isn't captured. This is for two-fold reasons. First, most "confrontations" with a bad guy end as soon as the defender brandishes his/her weapon, and these encounters are typically not counted, because nothing actually "happened" there. Nobody pulled a trigger, nobody was shot or wounded or killed, etc.... Secondly, even if a criminal is shot in the committing of a crime, ending the potential killing, if that criminal isnt killed it isnt recorded as such (SEE: body bag). There is no national database or requirement for the recording of self-defense matters. The only "requirement" is the recording of deaths from firearms. Until/unless that is changed, there will always be a DRAMATIC and systemic bias against guns in terms of data capturing nationally.

When adjusting for these situations (mostly #1), the script is flipped. The reality is in the overwhelming number of successful uses of a gun in self-defense in America, NEITHER party pulls a trigger, and none of these instances are counted.

 

[deadheadskier]

The reality is in the overwhelming number of successful uses of a gun in self-defense in America, NEITHER party pulls a trigger, and none of these instances are counted.

If they aren't counted, how can you make that claim? Lol

But, I got it Charlie Heston. More guns = more safe society.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-crimes-evidence-shows/

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[Scruffy]

Originally Posted by Scruffy

We're talking violent crimes here. I'm sure you're not going to cap someone for stealing a garden gnome off your lawn.

Again you go back to this same "point", which I see very little validity to. By nature, unless you live in some festering hell-hole or near war zone (parts of Chicago, parts of St. Louis, Newark, etc..), violent crimes are typically black swan events.

The conversation about guns started with self defense, you don't 'self' defend against petty crimes. You're circle jerking the conversation around to all crimes and defenders brandishing a gun to ward off a crime. What crime are you imagining here? A home invasion at night while you're sleeping? A dog is a much better, and safer deterrent.

You are proving my point with your quote "By nature, unless you live in some festering hell-hole or near war zone (parts of Chicago, parts of St. Louis, Newark, etc..), violent crimes are typically black swan events." Thank you.
The media FUD machine has people living in fear, was and is my only point here. Some of the fearful believe they need guns to defend themselves. I am a gun owner so I have no natural aversion to guns in general. I'm simply of the mind that most people who get a gun for self defense only are misguided. But that is simply my opinion and how I wish to live my life.

I'm out of this conversation. This is just another one of those polarized topics where there is no meaningful back and forth; simply each side justifying their stance.

 

[abc]

This is just another one of those polarized topics where there is no meaningful back and forth; simply each side justifying their stance.

Scruffy, I agree with all your basic points.

Though I’d say this is one of the most polite gun discussion I’ve seen in a long while. It helps most of us own guns at one time or another.

To the many who never owned a gun and never used one, all gun owners are seen as the same. But when gun violence and accidents happened, it doesn’t discriminate whether the victim is a pro gun or not.

If we don’t speak out against the fear marketing mechine, who will?

But to circle back to the discussion earlier, whether guns and cars are NEEDS...

If it’s a “need”, one must accept many people own them reluctantly (because they “need” to). The expectation of their behavior will have to be lower, to allow those who “need” it the ability to have them even if they aren’t entirely capable of operating them safely. Because otherwise we will be depriving some people’s “normalcy”.

But if it’s just a want, than society can demand they take the necessary responsibility for doing what they WANT without endangering others.

 

[Hawk]

Amen.



Again you go back to this same "point", which I see very little validity to. By nature, unless you live in some festering hell-hole or near war zone (parts of Chicago, parts of St. Louis, Newark, etc..), violent crimes are typically black swan events.

I don't think that crimes like burglary and home invasions are always in nasty urban areas. They occur everywhere but not as frequent as in the urban areas. I think the Petit family from CT would not agree with this assessment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheshire,_Connecticut,_home_invasion_murders

People I ski with at Sugarbush lived down the street from these people. This event changes that community forever. Also there have been 3 break ins in my town in the last 3 months. We are a city of 40K, 25 miles from Boston and mostly a quiet place. The point is that these things happen. I have never owned but now I find myself seeing the need just incase. I am sure I am not by myself in this thought process.

 

[BenedictGomez]

If they aren't counted, how can you make that claim? Lol

Because it's a factually correct statement. No such database currently exists; as such there is no "hard count" of successful usages of weapons for self-defense, which is why researchers must estimate them.

But, I got it Charlie Heston. More guns = more safe society.

More guns certainly dont = less safe society given the violent crime rate in America has decreased steadily at precisely the same time as total guns in America has absolutely skyrocketed, contrary to the anti-gun crowd's beliefs.

And this time, that's a factually accurate statement that can be easily proven via FBI data.

This fact is ignored and swept under the rug, but if you graph "total guns in America" against "violent crime" it's like an 'X' shape with guns going up and crime going down.

 

[BenedictGomez]

But to circle back to the discussion earlier, whether guns and cars are NEEDS...

I feel it's better to have a gun that you dont need, than to need a gun that you dont have. My 2¢.

I don't think that crimes like burglary and home invasions are always in nasty urban areas. They occur everywhere but not as frequent as in the urban areas.

That was my point. If I wrote somehow wrote something seemingly to the contrary, that was not my intention.

 

[abc]

I feel it's better to have a gun that you dont need, than to need a gun that you dont have. My 2¢.
.

I don’t have anything against people WANT to own gun they don’t NEED.

I don’t need a car but I choose to own one because I like to own one. I don’t need a gun except I enjoy target shooting...

But the expected care they must bare should be proportinal to the potential risk owning poses. So mislabeling a want to be a need is a cop out to bear responsibility for the safe storage and operation.

The drive skill required to get (and keep) a driver license is very low because it’s considered essential for most communities, i.e. almost a need. For gun, there’s no license. In other words, the standard is nonexistent. You can only be forbidden from owning a gun AFTER you are convicted a crime! Even if you are so blind you can’t tell a man from a tree 3 feet away, you are still fit to own and operate a gun!

 

[Smellytele]

End of the day, I come back to this fact. Statistics don't lie. Households without guns in the US are safer than those that have them. That's why I don't own one.



Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

Well not a gun owner myself and this maybe true but where are these households with guns? If more people own guns in cities that are already know to be dangerous than this maybe misleading.

 

[JimG.]

Jim, I read it as you don’t like others responsible for your movement. That’s why I listed planes and buses. Most people had to use one of those. Or their life would be rather limited.

I hope you get to use those before you ride your heresy.

April I've done the plane, train, and bus thing sometimes all 3 on one trip.

I was lucky to have parents who traveled extensively and who brought me with them to share these experiences. I've been all over Europe and have been blessed to ski in the Alps many times. I spent 3 months in France living with a French family and spoke fluent French by the time I left. I've also been skiing at many places out west in CO, UT, WY, etc. I have also fished in the US and Canada extensively.

My personal wanderlust has been satisfied many times over. My impression of mass transit is that it is way less comfortable and enjoyable than it was years ago. And due to our current geopolitical situation it has also become more dangerous to both take mass transit or visit foreign countries. Let's face it, Americans wear a bulls eye on our backs.

My preference for being personally in charge of my transport comes from that recent lack of trust and the fact that I have no burning desire to go anywhere that requires me to use mass transit. So I don't. In addition, I love driving. Like deadheadskier, I prefer a manual transmission (with a foot activated clutch, no paddle shifters for me). My dream is to own a new Z06 Corvette. Not far off from reality at this point.

 

[Scruffy]

More guns certainly dont = less safe society given the violent crime rate in America has decreased steadily at precisely the same time as total guns in America has absolutely skyrocketed, contrary to the anti-gun crowd's beliefs.

And this time, that's a factually accurate statement that can be easily proven via FBI data.

This fact is ignored and swept under the rug, but if you graph "total guns in America" against "violent crime" it's like an 'X' shape with guns going up and crime going down.

cum hoc ergo propter hoc :grin:

 

[Edd]

My personal wanderlust has been satisfied many times over. My impression of mass transit is that it is way less comfortable and enjoyable than it was years ago. And due to our current geopolitical situation it has also become more dangerous to both take mass transit or visit foreign countries. Let's face it, Americans wear a bulls eye on our backs.

We should face that, and the reasons why, I agree.

 

[BenedictGomez]

cum hoc ergo propter hoc :grin:

Which doesn't apply in this specific case given causation isn't required for refutation.