(Bear Creek Reservoir Specific)
9 messages
Updated 11/3/2023 6:12:58 AM
Lakes Online Forum
83,916 messages
Updated 9/8/2024 1:34:46 PM
Lakes Online Forum
5,200 messages
Updated 8/23/2024 12:20:47 PM
(Bear Creek Reservoir Specific)
0 messages
Updated
Lakes Online Forum
4,171 messages
Updated 6/27/2024 7:05:46 AM
Lakes Online Forum
4,261 messages
Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM
Lakes Online Forum
2,979 messages
Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM
Lakes Online Forum
98 messages
Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM
|
|
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/20/2013 7:28:30 PM
|
All of this has gotten me to
thinking about guns and i wondered about how many new guns were coming into the
marketplace each year. Since there is
no official registry, all i could find was how many new gun permits were made…
and the results were pretty astonishing.
Quoting from the source:
The
figures show that there have been 16,808,538 applications in 2012 so far to the
end of November. if they were approved, that would be enough weapons to
stock a member of Nato's armed forces nearly five times over. The system
has received 156,577,260 applications since 1998 and the US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world.
(http://www.businessinsider.com/number-of-guns-sold-in-us-each-year-2012-12#ixzz2iYwU9cHJ)
156,577,260 new gun permits
issued since 1988.
As amazing as that number is, there is
another question that pops up: How
long is the lifespan of the average gun?
Looking around my house, i have 2 shotguns 50+ and 70+ years old, a pistol at built in
the 1940’s, and a musket built in the
1850’s. All but the musket still work,
and i expect the only reason that any of them will be rendered inoperative in
the future will be if the ammunition isn’t available. That’s the thing. Guns don’t wear out and they don’t break
very often. We don’t throw them away,
we pass them down from generation to generation. i
can’t think of any appliances in my home or tools in my shop that have a life
expectancy like that. is there another example of a consumer product that's sold in this volume and has an operational life so long that it has to be passed from generation to generation?
So, if you take the new guns introduced
to the US each year, and combine that with the existing number of weapons that
continue to be operational for exceptionally long periods of time, you can see
that we really are armed to the teeth already.
Just an observation. Everybody will draw their own conclusions.
|
Name: |
alahusker
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/20/2013 8:04:15 PM
|
All of your post may be correct.. Plus, I might suggest, entirely consistent with the original intent of the framers??
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/20/2013 8:25:42 PM
|
I doubt the framers could have ever imagined these numbers. 300 years later, I can barely imagine them myself.
|
Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/20/2013 10:17:49 PM
|
One of the faults in modern times is to overthink an issue. Contrary to your conclusion, I think our forefathers would have doubled down on the second amendment. Now, more than ever, the Goverment must understand that its real power is in the people, and that any shenanigans could be met with armed resistance. That is a powerful deterrent, because such shenanigans (i.e., an attempted hostile takeover) would most likely be couched in terms of "the people want it", and armed resistance would destroy that facade.
|
Name: |
wix
-
|
|
Subject: |
Copper
|
Date:
|
1/20/2013 10:22:23 PM
|
What event could you imagine that would spur the unprecedented number of guns purchased the past few years?
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
Copper
|
Date:
|
1/20/2013 11:02:03 PM
|
I don't know. What are you thinking?
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/20/2013 11:23:29 PM
|
If you're right and there is a need to prepare to defend ourselves against hostile government forces, and I don't agree that there is, then there appears to be plenty of guns available in the US to take up arms with. But since we the people could not win in a scenario like that, the best and only course would be to avoid it.
I guess that's where we really can't agree right now, I just can't buy that this danger exists from the US govt. To me, its the wrong risk to be preparing for. Economic disruption, over population, climate change are all far more likely to threaten the safety of the nation than the US government suffering a coup.
|
Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/20/2013 11:38:39 PM
|
And you are not hearing me. The threat is not there in part because those who might threaten us know it wouldn't be a cakewalk. No, our present government, while becoming far more intrusive into our lives than most of us like, isn't an immediate threat for a tyrannical takeover. But with a disarmed populace some might toy with that idea.
Again, the Government is not a threat, in part because of the Second Amendment and I salute our forefathers for their wisdom in implementing it.
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 12:59:47 AM
|
i’m
trying to understand how you see it. i
think you mean that an armed populace presents a natural counter-weight against
a potentially authoritarian government, and that when people have the right to
bear arms the government is less likely to turn against them. i guess
i can agree with that. i have always thought that is what the
Constitution meant to say.
Just
how much an armed civilian US population prevents an authoritarian swing in
govt is something i’m not so sure about….. but fundamentally, yes… governments
can and do dominate people throughout history, and the powers of government need
to be kept in check by the rule of law based on Democratic principles of
freedom, self-determination, etc .
But
because we are citizens of the largest, most successful, most politically
stable, most powerful and richest economy in the world, i don’t think the
threats exist in the same way you do. An armed populace may serve to keep the
government in check in theory, but …..how much? And is the historical influence of an armed
population still as much of a deterrent to tyranny now as it was in 1776? i
just don’t think it would be.
i
am just saying that we get more far protections from our right to vote,
assemble, and speak out than from our right to bear arms. … and that this round
of gun control efforts will not compromise any part of the 2nd
Amendment.
|
Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 8:14:42 AM
|
Your first sentence sums it up. As to the current round of measures, the natural concern is that it is only the first step in a multiple step campaign by the current adnministration, run by folks who, IMHO, could care less about the second amendment. Where are the measures to counter the film and gaming industry and their products that at the same time celebrate violence and desensitize our children to its terrible consequence? Being somewhat cynical about the current band of hypocrityes in the Obama administration, I would say it is all about politics and not what is good for the country. It has always been that way with this group and I predict another four years of the same if not more.
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 9:45:58 AM
|
Copperline, If you have trouble with these numbers, what do you make of 16 trillion? (and counting) One explanation of humans and religion is the ability of man to concieve of the infinite - do you think this could be a step towards our new national religion?
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 10:50:50 AM
|
Regarding all the influences that de-sensitize the kids to violence, I completely agree we should be concerned about this. But what can we do about violent video games? I don't know much about them, but I really can't imagine how we could write a policy that changes their content. Maybe someone here has ideas that we can talk about.
A few days ago, I posted a conversation I had with a computer repairman who was really into on-line gaming. He flatly stated his view that any efforts by the government to control the content of video & on-line games was a violation of the constitutional right of free speech.
Do you think that would be true?
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 10:55:25 AM
|
I don't think I understand what you mean. But the idea of a national religion based on gun ownership is either A) the most cynical thing I have heard today or B) the scariest idea since the Holocaust.
|
Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 1:49:15 PM
|
Not guns, but religion based on the servitude to an un-redeemable debt.
|
Name: |
alahusker
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 1:52:19 PM
|
Copper, a previous post of yours was a bit sanguine in my estimation. Indeed, this is World's greatest Nation, however describing our economy as the 'richest in the world' is a stretch. We are in fact broke, $16 trillion + in debt, and borrow 50 cents of every dollar we spend -- higher interest than a payday loan shark. So let me ask you, is this sustainable or is total enonomic collapse a likely possibility? In the event of widespread economic failure is anarchy also a possibility? Desperate people do desperate things. Remember NOPD's first reaction to domestic violence, post Katerina?? Sieze the people's weapons.. You may think this scenario is BS, I do not.
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 2:01:08 PM
|
I think you guys are switching the topic of
this thread to the national debt.
|
Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 2:54:17 PM
|
I find it hard to make that connection, but the way the religious freedom right has been twisted and perverted would tend to make it so.
I, too agree that we need to take reasonable and prudent steps to identify potential "nut cases" and restrict their access to weapons. I don't believe it is possible to do that with any where near 100% accuracy, but some of the executive orders that improve sharing of the identities of known threats (persons) are a step in the right direction. Trying to restrict availability to sane, law abisding citizens is not.
You will never be able to thwart the truly diabolical individual...take away his or her guns and he or she will use a car or a bomb, or a toxic agent. BTW, in your experience have you ever run across a female serial killer or mass murderer? I don't recall any.
|
Name: |
wix
-
|
|
Subject: |
Copper
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 3:01:54 PM
|
You're a big smart adult. Guess. Just think, what event has caused the greatest sales increase in guns in the history of America. You are probably proud!
|
Name: |
Lifer
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 3:30:34 PM
|
IMHO they can't be separated because the debt is what will bring economic collapse and anarchy. Anyone that doesn't believe that is the goal of the left is either totally delusional or invincibly ignorant. Google Cloward-Pivin and educate yourself as to what is happening. It has been a decades long plan that is finally coming to fruition. I posted a link to a video in a post below that takes statements straight from the tenets of communism. If you can't relate them to our current situation then you must be way out of touch.
And Copperline, your stock went way down with me when in this thread you stated climate change and overpopulation as valid issues of the day. Sorry, but that is to much bovine feces to me. First the planet is approximately 4.5 BILLION years old. Only one thing has remained constant throughout those 4.5 billion years, and that is that the climate has changed!! Please alert me when it stops cuz that's when I will worry about weather other than is it going to rain during my daily walk tomorrow.
Overpopulation is another red herring. I haven't done the math recently, but when the population of the planet was around 6.2 billion every man, woman and child could fit in Texas with a 2000sqf home on about a 1/4 acre lot. Just a few years ago I read that there was enough housing in Florida alone to house every family on the planet using the 2.3 members per family. As long as democrats and chinese continue to kill the not yet birthed (I refuse to call them unborn, as I have seen them yawn, grasp and kick in utero) at the rate they do today, we will never fill the planet to capacity.
And why do you think that the Chinese enforce a one child policy? I assure you it isn't for concern of overpopulating the planet.
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 5:40:05 PM
|
I think the only well known female serial killer was Elaine Warhous (sp?).... she was a prostitute that started killing her johns, and a movie about her was made starring Charlize Theron...which is the only reason I remember that little factoid. I've heard some discussions that suggests that female serial killers may exist more often than we know, but their methods are less likely to get them caught. The thinking was that men tend to use really violent means, females may use subtle and less obvious means that make them harder to track and apprehend. Warhous was getting picked up at truck stops and shooting her victims in isolated areas when they stopped for sex. Her use of a gun made her an unusual perpetrator as I understand it.
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 6:02:52 PM
|
To me, the problems of a growing population & climate change tie directly into economic stability over time. A few hundred years ago, Hurricane Katrina and Sandy would have not done the damage that they did because population density made fewer people (and a smaller portion of the economy) vulnerable to incredibly damaging weather. So whether the storms are getting worse due to climate changes, or they are striking places where more people live...either way, large scale economic disruptions are a growing risk as population grows & climate changes, I think. For one thing, the impact of a large scale event now is more likely to spread effects across the nation because we are so interconnected by our economy. That wasn't as true a hundred years ago, either.
And sure, even if you could house every man, woman and child on the planet in the state of Texas.... where would they grow their food, how would you get enough water to them? Population density matters.
I don't know, but my guess is that the Chinese one-baby policy was driven purely by their desire to protect their economy from the effects of over-population.
|
Name: |
Lifer
-
|
|
Subject: |
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/22/2013 10:20:52 AM
|
Goggle the Galveston Texas hurricane of 1900. You will find that that storm took over 6000 lives. The storms are no 'stronger' now than throughout history. The difference is global communication with live video feeds. Storms circa 1900 got one photograph and few hundred words of description in papers that were not in the affected area, if at all. The 24hr news cycle has magnified many events into global phenomenon. A toddler falls down a well in Texas and it is global news with saturation coverage til the next 'big' story comes along.
As for population density, your questions show and ideology, not a thoughtful response. Where would they grow their food? Anywhere else on the planet cuz it would be void of buildings and people. How would they get there water? in pipes, just like now, only maybe from further away. But that is an absurd scenario used to illustrate a point. There are plenty of resources to support humans for eons to come. Climate change AKA global warming is a scam to line the pockets of a few intellectuals and pseudo scientists.
As for the Chinese one child policy, it is totally about population control. But not for altruistic reasons of overpopulation and depletion global resources. it is a totalitarian society and there aren't enough makers to support the takers. ironically, probably not for much longer with all the tax dollars of the makers here in the good ole USA pouring into their treasury. But sadly most of those dollars are certainly going to enrich the politically connected, not the needy.
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
maybe we should take this to a new thread...
|
Date:
|
1/22/2013 8:08:26 PM
|
The Galvaston storm was terrible, and i agree that the Media now changes a lot
about how we see catastrophes. But the
impact of Sandy was $60 billion (i think that’s the figure, but who really
knows?) because so many people live on the coasts. This was far more than the costs of storms
from 50 yrs ago. The impact of $60 billion damage to the economy every couple
of years is going to be a lot to deal with.
|
Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
Subject: |
maybe we should take this to a new thread...
|
Date:
|
1/22/2013 10:01:57 PM
|
Is there scientific proof that this supposed global warming caused Sandy to hit an area that should have known the risk?
I'd be willing to bet that there are way too many other variables involved for anyone to try to pin the two together. Sandy wasn't that big a storm, it just hit an area that didn't believe it would be hit by a storm of Sandy's middle of the road magnitude.
I am not a global warming disbeliever, I just am not a believer. The climate has cycled over history many times. That might mitigate against the globsl warming theory. But, at the same time it is a proven fact that certain gases let direct sunlight in, but tend to block the re-radiation back toward space. The question, then, is whether the amount of those gases humans are responsible for producing have a measurable effect on the overall climate. There are scientists who believe the answer is yes, while others say no.
What I don't understand is this: Why is the US putting itself at such a competitive disadvantage with the rest of the world by all these onerous regulations that drive up the price of our products while the rest of the world ignores them and produces those same goods at a much reduced price? Shouldn't our efforts and money be spent on a worldwide basis vice nation-centric? Its kind of like trying to make our clothes a pristeen white while we engage in a mud fight with the rest of the world.
|
Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
Subject: |
Topic metamorphis
|
Date:
|
1/23/2013 11:20:28 AM
|
I didn't follow this thread until I read it this morning. It is kind of amazing to watch it change from gun longevity all the way to hurricanes and global warming.
Y'all know what I think about globaloney but at least I can assure you that the American Meteorological Society has demonstrated that there is no correlation between the two. Simply put, whether or not global climate change is occurring or not, there is no evidence that hurricanes are any bigger than ever. Reference here: Pielke, Jr., R.A., C. Landsea, M. Mayfield, J. Laver and R. Pasch, 2005. Hurricanes and global warming, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 86:1571-1575. This is peer reviewed, and by the way Pielke does believe there has been warming of the climate up until the last decade but does not believe the source is anthropogenic.
But as Copper rightly points out our population density is much greater along the coasts which increases the potential for property damage to occur. I wonder if anyone has estimated what property damage the Galveston hurricane of 1900 would cause today. I bet more than $60 billion.
|
Name: |
copperline
-
|
|
Subject: |
Topic metamorphis
|
Date:
|
1/23/2013 12:25:08 PM
|
LOL.... these threads are becoming more like episodes of free associations and stream of conciousness conversations. Reminds me of college and all those smoke-filled rooms.
|
Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
Subject: |
True enough....and what were they smoking? :-)
|
Date:
|
1/23/2013 3:48:09 PM
|
|
|
|