Jump to content

Sonea

Members
  • Posts

    344
  • Joined

Posts posted by Sonea

  1. 4 hours ago, yuna628 said:

    My husband's boss has been 3D printing some stuff for me (mostly little statues) as he's learning how to use it.. it's really easy to screw stuff up..

     

    But a couple things I pointed out to them: 1) it's illegal to make a bomb or drugs, but you can find how to do that and nutcases do it all the time online. It'll be no different with a gun.. so a judge doing this stops nothing.

     

    2) I'm wondering if it's slightly overconcern. The devices required to properly make a fullscale 3D gun (note not just mere parts) would be extremely expensive devices with a big learning curve. It would have to be constructed properly to ensure the gun could actually fire without incident.

     

    3) And largely it's to my understanding that it's not a literal blueprint to a gun, but merely just component parts that still must be mated to bolts, a barrel, have working triggers and stocks, and other stuff. The Liberator model is the closest thing that could literally be a printed gun, but it still requires additional parts.

     

    4) This is all not cheap, so I don't believe the average gang-banger or gang is going to have a machine mass producing guns in their basements. Bigger baddies though? Hard to say.  Not even the person who invented the tech thinks this would be a very long term viable way to make a firearm. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a22604405/3d-printed-guns/

     

    You are right as far as the USA. 3D printing really is less efficient than many other options in the US. For instance for 100 bucks you can buy a mold kit to make your own polymer ar15 lower and then fill it with a legal parts kit. A better option than saying making a liberator for 1000s is to spend 250.00 for a cap and ball revolver and have it shipped to your door without background check (you get 5-6 shots at least).

     

    However, for countries like the UK or Japan its a serious problem and will undermine their entire gun control matrix.

  2. On 7/17/2018 at 9:48 AM, Steeleballz said:

       In Vancouver, I saw the local government had purchased and converted some old hotels into low rent interim housing for homeless people. Not free, but supposedly it's a low cost lease, and managed by a group that addresses issues like drug abuse and mental health. Other cities should at least be giving this method a look and seeing if it's viable.

     

     

    SF did this years ago. Most of the older hotels in the Tenderloin have been low income bedsits for years.

    On 7/17/2018 at 11:12 AM, Nature Boy Flair said:

    got to love liberal elitist cities. Living misery for the poor.

    All cities are liberal elitist cities right? Are there any cities that vote conservative?

  3. 19 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

    Also because SF allows them to do this and goes out of their way to give them whatever they want and accede to their demands. 

     

    But you are right about your income figures unless they are in subsidiZed housing. Which there has already been a lawsuit where the tenants won basically saying that their landlord can not force them out just to raise the rent. 

     

    https://missionlocal.org/2017/10/sf-tenants-win-record-setting-award-in-jury-trial-against-landlord/

    Yeah rent control doesn't really solve the problem, though the landlord in that case was in the wrong at the end of the day....

     

    I've seen the flip side of this too, where a guy, who is worth 4-5 million and in his 30s still maintain's his rent controlled flat in North beach and pays less than 1000.

  4. I think the whole thing went down perfectly. The owner refused to provide service and she had a fairly classy Twitter response.

     

    The government didn’t get involved and the owner has to deal with (probably) the unwanted attention.

     

    for the record, I would refuse service to some of the administration including trump.

  5. 6 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

    Yeah I found out today about that tax on the radio. I used to live in LA County for 5+ years and only moved in January.  So I am well aware of what's been going on. It is sad that the NorCal office of where I work can not keep people employed there at all and it's a federal job. They are trying to pay $68k a year to work out of Moffett Field which is basically poverty wages. 

    I've lived here for about 11 years now. 68k would have been okay pay up until about 2013 when localized inflation (ie housing) started to roar. We rented back then and a 2 bedroom house was about 1900 in most of the East Bay, 2 bedroom apartments were 1600. Now they are 3100 and 2500 respectively.

  6. 10 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

    They openly advocated for raising more taxes to help fund Healthcare for all even Illegals, a house/room for every homeless, and how they need to raise your gas taxes to fund the roads. When they haven't even used the current gas tax to help fund the roads at all it has all been diverted to the general fund.

    They also pushed a regressive tax in the bay area which won this week. For those who don't know, the majority of the wealth in the bay area is in Santa Clara, San Mateo, San Francisco, and Marin whereas Solano County and Contra Costa county is poorer. Basically housing costs have forced much of the workforce east and they commute via 5 major bridges. The poorer counties voted against tolls, the rich voted for them. 

  7. 6 minutes ago, Sonea said:

    I give him 3/10

     

    Good

     

    Nomination of Gorsuch

    Potential peace deal with NK

    ICE enforcement (though much of everything else I disagree with).

     

    Bad

     

    Everything related to Trade - Its one thing to focus on the trade balance with China, but its illogical to target countries like Canada who we actually have a surplus with. The policies lack direction. We could easily pull out the book on how China treats our exports and do a ####### for tat which would make it harder for China to reciprocate against.

     

    Immigration

     

    The wall fiasco, the muslim ban, reneging on DACA. The only thing I support is more enforcement from ICE. 

     

    Syria

    Inconsistency, we are in, we are out etc. (Personally, I support slow withdraw).

     

    Tax Cuts

    Whilst I personally am enjoying it, its sped up an already ticking time bomb of deficit spending.

     

     

    Personally I don't think he'll run for reelection. Also where is the 4% GDP people are mentioning coming from? I've only seen 2.2 to 3.2 percent. 

     

    Previous presidents (with hindsight for reference) Obama - 6/10, Bush - 5/10, Clinton 6/10, Bush Sr. 8/10, Reagan 6/10, Carter, 4/10, Ford 5/10, Nixon 5/10, LBJ 4/10, JFK DNF,  Eisenhower, 9/10, Truman 5/10, 

    Interesting. Apparently I can not use a term related to a nipple here. Weird.

  8. I give him 3/10

     

    Good

     

    Nomination of Gorsuch

    Potential peace deal with NK

    ICE enforcement (though much of everything else I disagree with).

     

    Bad

     

    Everything related to Trade - Its one thing to focus on the trade balance with China, but its illogical to target countries like Canada who we actually have a surplus with. The policies lack direction. We could easily pull out the book on how China treats our exports and do a ####### for tat which would make it harder for China to reciprocate against.

     

    Immigration

     

    The wall fiasco, the muslim ban, reneging on DACA. The only thing I support is more enforcement from ICE. 

     

    Syria

    Inconsistency, we are in, we are out etc. (Personally, I support slow withdraw).

     

    Tax Cuts

    Whilst I personally am enjoying it, its sped up an already ticking time bomb of deficit spending.

     

     

    Personally I don't think he'll run for reelection. Also where is the 4% GDP people are mentioning coming from? I've only seen 2.2 to 3.2 percent. 

     

    Previous presidents (with hindsight for reference) Obama - 6/10, Bush - 5/10, Clinton 6/10, Bush Sr. 8/10, Reagan 6/10, Carter, 4/10, Ford 5/10, Nixon 5/10, LBJ 4/10, JFK DNF,  Eisenhower, 9/10, Truman 5/10, 

  9. 18 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

    Why would someone not be looking if there, are more jobs than people. 

     

    There are a handful of reasons. The top two are:

     

    1. Aging population. Boomers are retiring so its natural that the participation rate drops but....

    2. Its dropping more than it should. They key demographic are males without a degree - skills mismatch.

     

    We haven't been able to hire any new employees for a year. This is partially due to housing costs vs wages.

  10. Personally I thought shutting down the show was a bit extreme myself but her statement was unacceptable. That being said, Samantha Bee is now in hot water over comments yesterday. Its starting to make the news rounds. I wonder what Time Warner's response will be. You would think, given the actions of ABC recently and the political climate, she would at the very least be pulled from the air for a short period and required to make an apology.

     

     

  11. 10 minutes ago, Sonea said:

    Yes its honestly hard to break apart EU data right now because, while it has seen an increase in attacks its mostly driven through Daesh recruiting or sympathizers (of course this is also likely driven by media, especially social media so there is something of a relation I suppose). This is still a minority for the US (three attacks in the past 2 years I think).

     

    It is true that many countries don't have nearly enough attacks to even show a cluster, and if we assume it takes a number of attacks to create a catalyst for quick repeats then they don't have the fuel to really start a chain. Some of this is lack of gun ownership - ie the UK has a total handgun ban (apart from antique blackpowder firearms like mid 19th century cap and ball), a ban on semi automatics, and the ownership is class driven - ie. only the wealthy can really own them due to costs. On the other hand its likely also population driven as well. Switzerland has infrequent mass shootings but their population is only the size of say New Jersey. 

     

    As to US shootings affecting other countries, something I noticed as I am surrounded by family that watch the BBC and SkyNews, is that while both cover US attacks they don't remain in the news cycle for very long. CNN, Fox, and social media carry the information for weeks. I do think in say 30 years, looking back trends will start to show up across other nations - especially Canada.

    Just out of curiosity I just compared New Jersey to Switzerland for mass shootings.

     

    Switzerland has had three for a death toll of 27. New Jersey has had one for a death toll of 13. 

     

×
×
  • Create New...