RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun"

RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BamaD -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/8/2014 9:30:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Finger prints can change. For example when in college my finger got caught in a hedge trimmer putting a scar across my finger print. Having a scar on your finger print does not change your finger print.[8\|] Wouldn't that depend on the scar? Do you think that you have the same finger prints on both hands?

thompsonx -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/8/2014 9:31:40 PM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD That was the centerpiece of my problem with this. Radio wave get screwed up. So far you have shown zero validation for this bullshit for this gun. Finger prints can change. For example when in college my finger got caught in a hedge trimmer putting a scar across my finger print. No fingerpringts do not change. Finger prints don't show through gloves. Fingerprints have nothing to do with this gun. The ones based on hand size and pressure ignore the fact that pressure will vary Hand size has nothing to do with this gun. greatly depending on the situation and that even a 10 lb weight change or a change in muscle mass can alter the size of the hand. Has nothing to do with this gun If as many on here have claimed kids can figure out gun safe codes or "steal" the keys how much easier to "steal" a watch or ring.j Or what if they read your mind as to where you hid it...jeeezzz talk about picking flyshit out of the pepper??? Teaching gun safety and handling would be much harder. Only for the mentally challanged. Gun sharing would be difficult. That is the primary purpose of a smart gun...ya know to limit it's use to the owner...duuuhhh. I think procedures insure safety better than gadgets. Good thing the gun manufacturers dont feel that way otherwise they might not have put those safety gadgets on their guns. It is something else to go wrong. Yup a govt mdl .45 has three of them gadgets. For the near future it represents an astronomical increase in price and will for a very long time. two thousand dollars for a .22 no fucking shit... But first and foremost I object to it being mandatory. You have been shown that it is not manditory If it becomes dependable and reasonably priced people won't have to be forced to use them. No one is being forced to use them. Make them perfect them just don't force them on people. How many times do we have to tell you that they are not manditory?

thompsonx -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/8/2014 9:39:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Finger prints can change. For example when in college my finger got caught in a hedge trimmer putting a scar across my finger print. Having a scar on your finger print does not change your finger print.[8\|] Wouldn't that depend on the scar? Do you think that you have the same finger prints on both hands? When they take your fingerprints they take them all. Now if you scar your fingerprint that does not change your finerprint. Cut your motherfucking fingers off I dont give a shit it wont change your fingrprints. Once again fingerprints have nothing to do with this gun. Getting a scar on one of your fingers does not change your fingerprints.

kdsub -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/8/2014 9:54:32 PM)
quote: jeeezzz talk about picking flyshit out of the pepper lol...I'll have to remember that.

thompsonx -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/9/2014 8:29:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD I read the thing. It still makes it mandatory which is the biggest problem I have had with the whole thing. Perhaps you could quote for us the relevant parts that make it manditory? Dependable is subjective. Subjective only in your mind and not in the real world. The Attorney General is permitted, not required, to consult independent sources. So what? Car makers tell us they are all safe, you trust gun makers less, but this takes their word for it that these are dependable. If they don't the state will charge them to do their own testing. Why shouldn't the state do that? The gunmaker makes a claim and shows their data...why would you prohibit the state from verifying and charging the gun maker? If the guns are so good, and affordable why do they have to force them on the market? You are the only one who thinks 2 thousand dollars is affordable for a .22. You are the only one who is saying these guns are being forced on the market. If we were not so deep into this discussion it might be possible for you to be mistaken. This though is a flat out lie. You know that they cost two thousand so why are you lieing. You know that they are not manditory so why are you lieing? Some of these systems are just stupid. One great example is the one where they measure the size and pressure of your hand. Weight change either way will affect hand size and anyone should be able to see that the pressure will change in a crises situation./b] That technology is not the gun we are talking about so why are you lying once again?

MercTech -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/9/2014 8:51:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Finger prints can change. For example when in college my finger got caught in a hedge trimmer putting a scar across my finger print. Having a scar on your finger print does not change your finger print.[8\|] Wouldn't that depend on the scar? Do you think that you have the same finger prints on both hands? Just an FYI; working with some types clearance means they take your prints again every few years to update any damage or wear and tear on the hands. At least it is electronic these days and the distribution and approval comes back quickly. I had to go give fingerprints for a clearance on Monday. The FBI background check was done and notification in my email before I got home.

BamaD -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/9/2014 9:40:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Finger prints can change. For example when in college my finger got caught in a hedge trimmer putting a scar across my finger print. Having a scar on your finger print does not change your finger print.[8\|] Wouldn't that depend on the scar? Do you think that you have the same finger prints on both hands? When they take your fingerprints they take them all. Now if you scar your fingerprint that does not change your finerprint. Cut your motherfucking fingers off I dont give a shit it wont change your fingrprints. Once again fingerprints have nothing to do with this gun. Getting a scar on one of your fingers does not change your fingerprints. Evasion. If the gun is tooned to the print on your right hand you can't fire with the left.

BamaD -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/9/2014 9:42:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: jeeezzz talk about picking flyshit out of the pepper lol...I'll have to remember that.

BamaD -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/9/2014 9:48:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD I read the thing. It still makes it mandatory which is the biggest problem I have had with the whole thing. Perhaps you could quote for us the relevant parts that make it manditory? Dependable is subjective. Subjective only in your mind and not in the real world. The Attorney General is permitted, not required, to consult independent sources. So what? Car makers tell us they are all safe, you trust gun makers less, but this takes their word for it that these are dependable. If they don't the state will charge them to do their own testing. Why shouldn't the state do that? The gunmaker makes a claim and shows their data...why would you prohibit the state from verifying and charging the gun maker? If the guns are so good, and affordable why do they have to force them on the market? You are the only one who thinks 2 thousand dollars is affordable for a .22. You are the only one who is saying these guns are being forced on the market. If we were not so deep into this discussion it might be possible for you to be mistaken. This though is a flat out lie. You know that they cost two thousand so why are you lieing. You know that they are not manditory so why are you lieing? Some of these systems are just stupid. One great example is the one where they measure the size and pressure of your hand. Weight change either way will affect hand size and anyone should be able to see that the pressure will change in a crises situation./b] That technology is not the gun we are talking about so why are you lying once again? I have stated repeatedly that they are not. The law says that three years after they go on sale only smart guns can be sold in NJ, so it will be mandatory that all new guns will be smart guns. I never said it was on the gun in question so once again you are declaring a lie based on your lack of reading comprehension. Not being able to sell conventional guns on the market is forcing the smart guns on the market.

VndictivBish -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/9/2014 10:01:26 AM)
[/quote] Do you think that you have the same finger prints on both hands? [/quote] Um...if I may interject here, but as a biomedical engineer, your fingerprints, while changing only minutely from birth to adulthood, you do NOT have identical prints on every finger. If you did, the cops would only ever need one print per person, and no cuts change your prints just as a cut on your leg leaves only a scar...it doesnt change the fact that it is a leg still. Oh and by the way, I make skin in a lab so burn victims dont have to suffer the additional trauma of a graft.

MercTech -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/10/2014 12:18:00 PM)
How did this get on fingerprints anyway? The smart gun is a small arm and is a RF proximity mechanism. The only "gun" I've ever heard of you had to have fingerprints to fire were some missile control systems and chain guns. (Fire control biometric authentication of a fire order)

thompsonx -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/10/2014 12:19:39 PM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD The law says that three years after they go on sale only smart guns can be sold in NJ, so it will be mandatory that all new guns will be smart guns. The law says that the "smart gun" may not go on sale until it is proved to be equivilant with 'dumb guns" It has not done that and does not seem like it is liable to. I never said it was on the gun in question so once again you are declaring a lie based on your lack of reading comprehension. It is not my lack of reading comprehension that tells me that bringing this extranious bullshit into this conversation is irrelevent to the discussion of this gun. This discussion is about this gun. Why are you bringing something that is not part of this discussion into this discussion? Not being able to sell conventional guns on the market is forcing the smart guns on the market. When they have been proved to be equivilant,which they havn't and show no signs of ever being. This coupled with the fact that you live in alabama make this pretty much a non issue.

thompsonx -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/10/2014 12:21:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech How did this get on fingerprints anyway? The smart gun is a small arm and is a RF proximity mechanism. The only "gun" I've ever heard of you had to have fingerprints to fire were some missile control systems and chain guns. (Fire control biometric authentication of a fire order) It was one of the bullshit reasons why this gun would not work from another poster,telling us why this gun would not work.

MercTech -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/13/2014 9:54:30 AM)
EnGadget has a good summary on the smart guns... http://www.engadget.com/2014/05/12/smart-gun-explainer/?ncid=rss_truncated

BamaD -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/13/2014 10:17:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: VndictivBish Do you think that you have the same finger prints on both hands? Um...if I may interject here, but as a biomedical engineer, your fingerprints, while changing only minutely from birth to adulthood, you do NOT have identical prints on every finger. If you did, the cops would only ever need one print per person, and no cuts change your prints just as a cut on your leg leaves only a scar...it doesnt change the fact that it is a leg still. Oh and by the way, I make skin in a lab so burn victims dont have to suffer the additional trauma of a graft. My point exactly, if the smart gun has your right hand finger prints can you use it with your left hand? To be fair since asking that question I found an article on the Intelilock smart gun which allows you to program more than one user.

BamaD -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/13/2014 10:19:34 AM)
The law says that three years after they go on sale only smart guns can be sold in NJ, so it will be mandatory that all new guns will be smart guns. The law says that the "smart gun" may not go on sale until it is proved to be equivilant with 'dumb guns" It has not done that and does not seem like it is liable to. I don't think so either.

BamaD -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/13/2014 10:21:13 AM)
I never said it was on the gun in question so once again you are declaring a lie based on your lack of reading comprehension. It is not my lack of reading comprehension that tells me that bringing this extranious bullshit into this conversation is irrelevent to the discussion of this gun. This discussion is about this gun. Why are you bringing something that is not part of this discussion into this discussion? I considered this a discussion of smart guns in general.

BamaD -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/13/2014 10:25:39 AM)
Not being able to sell conventional guns on the market is forcing the smart guns on the market. When they have been proved to be equivilant,which they havn't and show no signs of ever being. This coupled with the fact that you live in alabama make this pretty much a non issue. So you admit that if NJ decides it is dependable it becomes mandatory. Typical of you double standard I live in Alabama so it is a not a viable issue for me but it is a viable issue for you when you live in California?

thompsonx -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/14/2014 3:36:15 PM)
My point exactly, if the smart gun has your right hand finger prints can you use it with your left hand? Not the gun in question so why keep bringing up shit that does not apply?

thompsonx -> RE: right-wing douche bags stalk CEO that developed a "safer gun" (5/14/2014 3:37:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The law says that three years after they go on sale only smart guns can be sold in NJ, so it will be mandatory that all new guns will be smart guns. The law says that the "smart gun" may not go on sale until it is proved to be equivilant with 'dumb guns" It has not done that and does not seem like it is liable to. I don't think so either. So why have you got your knickers in a twist over something you do not believe will work?

Page: << < prev 12 13 [14] 15 16 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625