Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Feb 10, 2013, 03:39 PM   #126
TPadden
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
Yet I didn't address that question at all.

The question I addressed is below, bolded in red ...... making mistakes ... cutting corners ... poor planning ... poor craftsmanship ... using poor materials ... or buying defective products.

None of those things is avoided simply because one spends $100,000 on a home.
None of those things are avoided simply because there are building codes either. I don't see either the question or the point .
TPadden is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 03:43 PM   #127
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TPadden View Post
For me it all boils down to where you see the solution to the problem, whether building a house or preventing firearm deaths, increasing regulation or increasing enforcement of current regulation.
One word ... asbestos.



Damn those gummint regulations.

They never do any good.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by TPadden View Post
None of those things are avoided simply because there are building codes either. I don't see either the question or the point .
You don't think things would be worse without building codes?

Seriously?
citizenzen is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 03:54 PM   #128
palmharbor
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
What's the fuss?

According to the FBI, 30,000 people a year are killed by private firearms...one returned Vet, shots himself each year...so let's see
since the wars started, 300.000 Americans died (30K x 10}by private firearms...but what the hell its a small price to pay to support the second amendment, as long as it is not you getting shot or your family member.
Now in Austria where the glock handgun is manufactured, you as an Austrian national, cannot own one of the Glocks but law.
Belgium makes extensive automatic and semi-automatic weapons but, again Belgian nationals are forbidden from owning one.
These Europeans just don't know what they are missing....wait...someone is at the door...it could be "the government coming to take my UZI...got to go.
palmharbor is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 03:57 PM   #129
TPadden
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
One word ... asbestos.



Damn those gummint regulations.

They never do any good.

----------



You don't think things would be worse without building codes?

Seriously?
You are taking things out of context. Once asbestos was shown to be dangerous to health it was law suit damages rather than governmental building codes that really removed it from construction.

I've built in Florida and California with strict building codes and Missouri with none. I greatly preferred and got a better product for my money in Missouri. That's just my experience .......

If you are asking whether I trust my own judgement, my builder, my banker, my realtor, my used car salesman, my mother in law, or my building code inspector to be looking out for my welfare the most ... the building code inspector comes in a distant last place
TPadden is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 04:26 PM   #130
TPadden
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by palmharbor View Post
According to the FBI, 30,000 people a year are killed by private firearms...one returned Vet, shots himself each year...so let's see
since the wars started, 300.000 Americans died (30K x 10}by private firearms...but what the hell its a small price to pay to support the second amendment, as long as it is not you getting shot or your family member.
Now in Austria where the glock handgun is manufactured, you as an Austrian national, cannot own one of the Glocks but law.
Belgium makes extensive automatic and semi-automatic weapons but, again Belgian nationals are forbidden from owning one.
These Europeans just don't know what they are missing....wait...someone is at the door...it could be "the government coming to take my UZI...got to go.
....... ahhhhh, a drive-by, but at least it's on topic .
TPadden is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 04:44 PM   #131
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TPadden View Post
You are taking things out of context. Once asbestos was shown to be dangerous to health it was law suit damages rather than governmental building codes that really removed it from construction.
Source please. Here's one that I find interesting ...

Quote:
Asbestos

Discovery of toxicity

The first documented death related to asbestos was in 1906.[citation needed] In the early 1900s researchers began to notice a large number of early deaths and lung problems in asbestos mining towns. The first diagnosis of asbestosis was made in the UK in 1924. By the 1930s, the UK regulated ventilation and made asbestosis an excusable work-related disease, followed by the U.S about ten years later. The term mesothelioma was first used in medical literature in 1931; its association with asbestos was first noted sometime in the 1940s.

Approximately 100,000 people in the United States have died, or will die, from asbestos exposure related to ship building. In the Hampton Roads area, a shipbuilding center, mesothelioma occurrence is seven times the national rate. Thousands of tons of asbestos were used in World War II ships to wrap the pipes, line the boilers, and cover engine and turbine parts. There were approximately 4.3 million shipyard workers in the United States during WWII; for every thousand workers about fourteen died of mesothelioma and an unknown number died from asbestosis.

The United States government and asbestos industry have been criticized for not acting quickly enough to inform the public of dangers, and to reduce public exposure. In the late 1970s court documents proved that asbestos industry officials knew of asbestos dangers since the 1930s and had concealed them from the public.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbestos


----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by TPadden View Post
....... ahhhhh, a drive-by, but at least it's on topic .
We could always ask a mod to spilt this discussion to another thread.
citizenzen is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 04:54 PM   #132
TPadden
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
Source please. Here's one that I find interesting ...----------
Same as yours ...... but yours didn't mention building codes.... so I still don't see your point !

In fact yours contradicts your point for the US:

"The use of asbestos in new construction projects has been banned for health and safety reasons in many developed countries or regions, including the European Union, Australia, Hong Kong, Japan, and New Zealand. A notable exception is the United States, where asbestos continues to be used in construction such as cement asbestos pipes."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbestos#United_States

Mine:
"The first lawsuits against asbestos manufacturers were brought in 1929. Since then, many lawsuits have been filed. As a result of the litigation, manufacturers sold off subsidiaries, diversified, produced asbestos substitutes, and started asbestos removal businesses."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbestos_and_the_law

Last edited by TPadden; Feb 10, 2013 at 05:11 PM.
TPadden is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 05:22 PM   #133
MuddyPaws1
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
What the hell does building codes have to do with gun bans?


The discussion...In reality, removed from emotion, what good, at this point in time would a ban on any weapon that has been legal to purchase for years do?

It won't remove those weapons from the public.
It won't stop private party sales.
It won't reduce the numbers in public significantly without expensive buy back programs.
It won't stop a criminal from getting one and using it.
It won't stop a mental case from taking an unsecured weapon and killing people.

I do not see what the benefit will be save for a symbolic gesture to tell people that those weapons are dangerous. Well duh.

Guns are not like coffee makers and computers. They are not throw away items. If they break, they get fixed. The bans do not cover repair parts and even if it did, in this day and age the parts could be ordered from a different country. A ban will not reduce the current number of weapons in a tangible way. Even if you stopped ALL new sales, a hundred years from now there would still be guns, and they would still shoot.
MuddyPaws1 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 05:29 PM   #134
TPadden
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuddyPaws1 View Post
What the hell does building codes have to do with gun bans?.
Increased regulation or increased enforcement of current? Centralized governmental control or localized?

To be honest you are correct ....... Not much... Sorry .
TPadden is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 05:55 PM   #135
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TPadden View Post
Mine:
"The first lawsuits against asbestos manufacturers were brought in 1929. Since then, many lawsuits have been filed. As a result of the litigation, manufacturers sold off subsidiaries, diversified, produced asbestos substitutes, and started asbestos removal businesses."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asbestos_and_the_law
Cool. I'm glad you think that's a good solution.

perhaps then you'd suggest the same remedy could apply to gun manufacturers as well ... except ...

Quote:
New York Times

Congress Passes New Legal Shield for Gun Industry
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG, Published: October 21, 2005

WASHINGTON, Oct. 20 - The Republican-controlled Congress delivered a long-sought victory to the gun industry on Thursday when the House voted to shield firearms manufacturers and dealers from liability lawsuits. The bill now goes to President Bush, who has promised to sign it.

"It's a historic piece of legislation," said Wayne LaPierre, the association's chief executive, who said the bill was the most significant victory for the gun lobby since Congress rewrote the federal gun control law in 1986. "As of Oct. 20, the Second Amendment is probably in the best shape in this country that it's been in decades."

While opponents of the measure said it singles out the gun industry for special protection, Mr. LaPierre said the protection is necessary because, unlike auto manufacturers or pharmaceutical companies, American firearms makers "don't have deep pockets," and the industry would be at risk simply from the cost of fighting the lawsuits.

"We're going to argue that this statute is literally unprecedented in American history," Mr. Henigan said, "because it is the first time that the federal government will be stepping in and retroactively depriving injured people of their vested legal rights under state law, without providing them any alternative."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/21/politics/21guns.html
Quote:
The Washington Post

NRA-backed federal limits on gun lawsuits frustrate victims, their attorneys
By Tom Hamburger, Peter Wallsten and Sari Horwitz,January 31, 2013

A legal shield written by Congress to benefit the firearms industry is posing unexpected hurdles for parents in Newtown, Conn., and victims of other mass shootings, who want to use the courts to hold gun makers accountable and push them to adopt stricter safety standards.

The law, approved in 2005 after intense lobbying by the National Rifle Association, grants gun companies rare protection from the kind of liability suits that have targeted many other consumer product manufacturers.

Attorneys for victims of mass shootings, such as the massacre Dec. 14 at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown and last summer’s rampage in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater, say they have been surprised by the legal constraints they would face in challenging the gun industry.

“It makes no logical sense. . . . If their wallets were threatened, they would have a greater interest in making firearms safer,” said Veronique Pozner, whose 6-year-old son, Noah, was one of the 20 children killed at Sandy Hook.

“We looked at the gun industry, but they were able to insulate themselves with this law,” Bern said. “It is absolutely outrageous that the gun industry is not accountable when virtually every other industry in this country is accountable.”

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2...-gun-companies
So you support companies being held accountable with lawsuits, but gun companies are afforded special protection from those lawsuits.

Since you're so against government regulation, would you support leveling the playing field and allowing gun companies to be sued—just as asbestos manufacturers were—in order to protect public safety?

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by MuddyPaws1 View Post
What the hell does building codes have to do with gun bans?
I believe I just tied the two together.

Enjoy.
citizenzen is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 06:21 PM   #136
TPadden
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
Cool.
I believe I just tied the two together.

Enjoy.
Not even close; asbestos use in construction is not a constitutional right; gun possession is not an inherent health problem.
TPadden is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 06:31 PM   #137
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by TPadden View Post
Not even close; asbestos use in construction is not a constitutional right; gun possession is not an inherent health problem.
Of course.

citizenzen is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 06:42 PM   #138
Technarchy
macrumors 68040
 
Technarchy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by TPadden View Post
Not even close; asbestos use in construction is not a constitutional right; gun possession is not an inherent health problem.
I want the ability to sue knife makers, car makers, beer makers, baseball bat makers...etc etc etc

If we are going to hold manufacturers accountable for what dumb asses and criminals do, then it should be a level playing field then I want to to sue Coors, Smirnoff, and every wine maker for every drunk driver on the streets.

Better yet, I really want to be able to sue pot growers for the upcoming deluge of DUI's in certain states...

Makes perfect sense? No it doesn't.

Then there is that whole constitution thing...
__________________
Steve Jobs, January 9th 2007, 10:44am: "We filed for over 200 patents for all the inventions in iPhone and we intend to protect them."
Technarchy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 06:50 PM   #139
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Technarchy View Post
I want the ability to sue knife makers, car makers, beer makers, baseball bat makers...etc etc etc
Dude.

You can.

You have that ability.

You may not have a case.

But you have the ability.
citizenzen is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 10, 2013, 09:10 PM   #140
PracticalMac
macrumors 68020
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Screw Gold, Platinum, Palladium or Silver!

I should have invested in Gun Metal!

BTW, she take Gold for that AR-15?
__________________
FireWire 1394 Intelligent network guaranteed data transfer, 1500mA power, Ethernet compatible
Read: 160 files, 650MB total, FW400 70% faster then USB2
Write: 160 files, 650MB total, FW400 48% faster
PracticalMac is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2013, 01:05 AM   #141
Happybunny
macrumors 65816
 
Happybunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 's-Hertogenbosch Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by palmharbor View Post
According to the FBI, 30,000 people a year are killed by private firearms...one returned Vet, shots himself each year...so let's see
since the wars started, 300.000 Americans died (30K x 10}by private firearms...but what the hell its a small price to pay to support the second amendment, as long as it is not you getting shot or your family member.
Now in Austria where the glock handgun is manufactured, you as an Austrian national, cannot own one of the Glocks but law.
Belgium makes extensive automatic and semi-automatic weapons but, again Belgian nationals are forbidden from owning one.
These Europeans just don't know what they are missing....wait...someone is at the door...it could be "the government coming to take my UZI...got to go.
I would like to see some credible source for that claim, you know as per forum rules.

Oh just click on the links below and find two local gun shops, you know like you said didn't exist.

http://www.dorhoutmees.nl/winkel/wapenwinkel

http://www.wapenhandelpodevijn.be/
__________________
'You cannot undo history, but you can learn from it'
Happybunny is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2013, 03:08 AM   #142
Technarchy
macrumors 68040
 
Technarchy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by palmharbor View Post
These Europeans just don't know what they are missing....wait...someone is at the door...it could be "the government coming to take my UZI...got to go.
That's really interesting...













__________________
Steve Jobs, January 9th 2007, 10:44am: "We filed for over 200 patents for all the inventions in iPhone and we intend to protect them."
Technarchy is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2013, 06:15 AM   #143
eric/
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Ohio, United States
Switzerland confirmed for God-tier country

an assault rifle in my Apple store?
eric/ is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 11, 2013, 08:07 AM   #144
fat jez
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Glasgow, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by eric/ View Post
Switzerland confirmed for God-tier country

an assault rifle in my Apple store?
Since you mentioned Switzerland, I thought this article would make for interesting reading on how the Swiss manage gun ownership.

http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss_ne...l?cid=34876700
__________________
'11 MBP 2.3GHz 16GB RAM 240GB SSD 15" Anti-Glare screen OS X 10.9.2
iPhone 5S 64GB
iPad Air 32GB
fat jez is offline   0 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
To Sell or Not to Sell - iMac 27" Mid-2011 Foreverbfc Buying Tips and Advice 0 Feb 5, 2013 12:12 PM
Sell MBP Procedures? Sell recently? HELP! vpro MacBook Pro 9 Dec 3, 2012 01:22 PM
Sell iPhone today or wait to Unlock then sell? lionfleet Buying Tips and Advice 3 Oct 2, 2012 09:18 PM
Best place to sell/sell back 4S? aquadisiac iPhone 0 Sep 20, 2012 05:45 AM
Sell Early 2011 MBP - but where's the best place to sell (UK)? iBrody Buying Tips and Advice 7 Jun 16, 2012 01:45 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:09 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC