On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 00:17:30 -0800 (PST), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 8:52:05 PM UTC-6, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 2/18/2022 8:24 PM, russell...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> > On Friday, February 18, 2022 at 7:05:28 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 02:10:45 -0800 (PST), "russell...@yahoo.com"
>> >> <ritzann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 11:56:43 PM UTC-6, John B. wrote:
>> >>>> On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 20:04:26 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
>> >>>> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On Thursday, February 17, 2022 at 6:34:14 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> For Remington Arms, the charges alleged incitement in their
>> >>>>>> advertising, an unique CT statute and I agree it was poorly
>> >>>>>> done (although I didn't see it as criminal, merely stupid. I
>> >>>>>> am not a CT legislator).
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Trouble is, Remington Arms is in bankruptcy (a regular
>> >>>>>> process in the boom-bust arms industry) so the four
>> >>>>>> insurance carriers decided it was in their best interests to
>> >>>>>> settle. I do not know their analyses. Nor do you.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Interesting side note: The AR-15 style rifle was chambered
>> >>>>>> .22LR.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Fired fast enough, .22 LR can kill a lot of kids.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>> >>>> I think that is a fundamental difference between the U.S., today, and
>> >>>> some other countries.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> About a year an Thai Army Sergeant checked a M-16 out of the armory
>> >>>> and went into Korat City and first went to a Buddhist Temple and shot
>> >>>> some people and then went to a large shopping complex and shot some
>> >>>> more. The final score was 30 dead and (I believe) 50 wounded.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> And nobody even mentioned the rifle, rather the entire blame was
>> >>>> placed squarely on the shoulders of the guy that did the shooting. In
>> >>>> the U.S., as in the case of the Remington Rifle, the blame seems to be
>> >>>> somehow attributed to the inert object rather then the human that
>> >>>> actually did the deed.
>> >>>
>> >>> I am assuming your second "paragraph" above should be "About a year ago a Thai Army Sergeant..."
>> >>>
>> >>> Thailand (you ae in Thailand right?) has about 70 million people. A little under one fourth the USA population of 330 million. A year ago you had a big mass killing. In the USA we have had a similar mass killing every few years. Double yours in 2017. One and half times more in 2016. Equal to yours in 2007, 2012, 2017. And half or so in many other years.
>> >>>
>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_States
>> >>>
>> >>> Looking at the number of mass killings in the USA, and the body count at each, I'd bet the USA is still way ahead of Thailand in mass killing events. And because the USA is so far ahead of Thailand, we look at why that is so. Is it real easy to do a mass killing in the USA because its so easy to get a good gun to go mass killing with? I bet if Thailand has one or two or three of similar mass killings every single year, then Thailand would also look at why its so easy to do these mass killings. And if its determined that all the perpetrators are using M-16 rifles, then the government might restrict the access to these good mass killing guns. Also, because your mass killing was an Army Sergeant using an Army M-16 rifle, focusing on the gun would be analogous to focusing on the speed or racing car in a crash at the Indianapolis 500 race. The Army M-16 rifle used in wars by soldiers is too good at killing people? Why would you have any questions about the rifle? Access to it by
>> >>> an Army Sergeant? No. Ability to take it off base without lots of checks and balances and paperwork and explanations? Yes.
>> >> You are rationalizing things. But, if you wish to do that then:
>> >>
>> >> Using your reference there have been, from 1949 until 2018 some 442
>> >> killed in mass shootings while during the same period there were
>> >> 51,613 killed while riding bicycles.
>> >>
>> >> If you want to talk about devices that kill people I do believe that
>> >> you really do need to consider bicycles... 116.77 times as many deaths
>> >> as deaths in mass shootings. and on an annual basis in 2018 rifles
>> >> killed 305 while bicycles killed 854.
>> >>
>> >> I and certainly Andrew have pointed out that homicides committed with
>> >> these incredibly dangerious semi-automatic rifles is only a bit more
>> >> then half those committed with hands and feet.
>> >> https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls
>> >>
>> >> But, of course, that wasn't the point at all. I was pointing out the
>> >> fallacy, in the U.S. of pointing at some inanimate object and saying,
>> >> "Gee if we just get rid of those dangerious things, why, there'd be no
>> >> crime at all."
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> And this attributing a crime to an inert object instead of the
>> >>>> individual that actually carried out the act seems to be a relatively
>> >>>> recent phenomena,
>> >>>
>> >>> No. In the USA the government banned machine guns from civilians back in 1934 with the National Firearms Act. The federal government thought that inert object (machine gun) was too deadly for non military to have at their disposal. Mobsters back in the 1920s and 30s thought machine guns were real good at killing people. And they were. Government thought they could reduce the ease of killing by banning that inert object.
>> >> Nope, they didn't ban machine guns. Read the act. They required a $100
>> >> license to poses a "machine gun"
>> >
>> > OK. Its $200 for the National Firearms Act stamp. And a whole lot of federal forms and investigation too.
>> > https://www.therange702.com/blog/can-you-legally-own-a-machine-gun/
>> >
>> > But the USA licenses and regulates explosives too. Everyone buying, selling, using explosives has to have federal license. Why do we do that? Shouldn't everyone have the right to use explosives whenever they want? Isn't it a constitutional right? Explosives are inert objects too. Why should they be regulated and controlled? I don't recall anytime in history where the bad guys were blowing everyone and everything up with dynamite. FREEDOM to BLOW things UP!!!!!!!!!!!
>> > https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/fact-sheet/fact-sheet-explosives-united-states
>> >
>> > Or did some freedom hating government bureaucrat decide to take that freedom away from Americans? He thought blowing things up was not a good thing for the average Joe on the street to do. Even though explosives are an inert object. And do lots of good things in activities like mining. Kind of like M-16 and AR-15 are appropriate for the military to have and use because they are good at killing people. Which the military does. But do bums walking on the street need to be able to kill people so easily? Or blow people and things up easily with explosives?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>> When I was growing up we didn't have a lot of
>> >>>> shootings but I do remember one as I went to school with the policeman
>> >>>> that did the shooting.The "victim" attacked the Cop with a garden hoe
>> >>>> and the cop shot him. There was a big to-do and a Grand Jury and the
>> >>>> newspapers were full of it and never a mention of a gun at all.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The old saying that "guns don't shoot people, people shoot people"
>> >>>> really is true.
>> >>>
>> >>> True. Except its also true that people can shoot LOTS of people if they have a gun that shoots lots of bullets real fast.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Cheers,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> John B.
>> >> --
>> >> Cheers,
>> >>
>> >> John B.
>> Well, then! Glad to know the regulatory system and all the
>> experts are saving us from dynamite:
>>
>> https://www.fox43.com/article/news/nation-world/atm-explosions-thefts-philadelphia/507-bb610727-636c-4d54-ba70-87350a7a99af
>>
>> Works about as well as the century old worldwide Heroin ban.
>>
>> Arresting the guy (link above) is good policy. Death by
>> paperwork for innocent mining engineers isn't all that helpful.
>> --
>> Andrew Muzi
>> <www.yellowjersey.org/>
>> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
>
>But Andy, your story is about someone who was arrested for selling home made dynamite. I am not a chemist, but I assume a competent chemist could acquire the various chemicals needed to make dynamite. Not sure if that is regulated under the federal laws or not. Maybe it only applies to corporate manufactured explosives.

To make nitroglycerine you need Nitric acid (and I believe a bit of
sulphuric) and glycerine. To convert this to dynamite you simply add
some sort of "filler" such as diatomaceous earth, which, I believe is
used in commercial dynamite.

When I was in grade school I and a Mate used to "make" nitroglycerine,
with our chemistry set, in the guy's cellar. We used to package it in
empty rifle cases and throw it down into an abandoned mine shaft...
and once in a while one you go bang.
--
Cheers,

John B.