Acme

Yes, it is rather subjective. I responded as I did because you used the term 'syndrome', described some symptoms, and asked for thoughts. A thing by any other name would be a thing. I think your ideas of recognizing your limitations and living with them is practical and that thinking any and all limitations can be overcome is impractical. I don't think you are going to get better answers for your enquiry as to 'what the thing is' on a forum than from the professionals, but if talking about the 'thing' helps then the anonymity of a forum may be more comfortable than conventional group therapy where you have to be face-to-face with people. Trying to live up to the standards of others is a recipe for discontent.

No, it isn't. Yes, it is. But of course you can't recognize it and that's your catch 22.

It's an interesting idea but I see some problems. First, it would amount to a gun registry and unlike an auto which is regularly out and about where it can be stopped and the owner ticketed for expired tags and the driver checked for insurance, guns are less often out and about and can be easily hidden and so never subject to scrutiny until or unless used in some form. Second, the gun insurance might only be called to use in a claim that in many places the claimable injury is a crime. (And which should be a crime in all places as I and TenOz suggested in regards to injuring/killing of or by children due to negligence in storage or access.) I don't know if auto insurance pays a claim if the incident results in criminal charges and conviction. For example, if someone wrecks their car, kills someone in the wreck, and is convicted of vehicular homicide, will their insurance pay to fix their car? Lastly, folks who have been convicted of violent offenses are usually prohibited from owning or possessing firearms under the current laws. So too, people adjudicated for mental illness, where adjudicated is the operative factor. That is to say, mental illness and treatment in or out of a facility on its own is not enough to keep someone from owning a gun; a judge has to commit the person to a facility and treatment. Lot of problems then with the required insurance idea, although there may be some kind of liability insurance people can buy voluntarily that covers accidental (not illegal) gun injuries or deaths.

I think it sounds very similar to Aspergers syndrome. The blued text is a link if that's not obvious and the link is to an article at Wikipedia.

Update: Seems the story Swansont posted has got some traction. One note, this story I'm posting says I-5 runs along the coast, which it does not. It runs between the coast range and the Cascade range on average 100 miles from the coast. Not that it's bridges get an all clear, just that I feel compelled to pick a nit. Will talk of the 'Big One' shake the US into quake prep?

'Good stalkers', like 'circus folk', is an oxymoron.

Sort of a binks instead of a ban.

You're welcome. I was reading about the gates on the Panama canal and they started using hydraulic arms to open and close the gates in '98. Panama Canal locks

I too have a love of guns and freely admit my new one has little to no hunting value and gives me the satisfaction of a false sense of security while not causing the back & hip pain of a large-frame model. Were it illegal to own it I would give it up. And speaking of giving up guns, around here there are regular gun turn-ins sponsored by law enforcement and people get reimbursed for each gun surrendered. [usually gift certificates as I recall.] Each event has netted hundreds of guns, all of which are destroyed. At 11 years old I joined a gun club sponsored by the NRA and the local Optimist club. We trained and competed with .22 rifles on a 50 foot range. Safety was always first. The dues included membership in the NRA and a subscription to American Rifleman or American Hunter. The NRA then is not the NRA now, which I view with considerable disdain. So sad. On the target shooting, I did take it to the public gun range to try it out. They didn't look at the gun but I did have to show picture ID, read 2 pages of rules, and sign a register. Among their rules was no human silhouette targets and no rapid fire. Not particularly cheap either as it was $20 for the day and 100 rounds of ammo cost me $40. It shoots nice & is quite accurate. On the rats, we had a minor infestation last year, drawn to the bird seed falling from the feeder. As I live in a suburban setting I bought an air rifle to dispatch the rat family and stopped feeding the birds.

Indeed. And not only a child-proof switch on a gun, but a people-proof lock. I earlier mentioned such a switch on my gun and that I thought the manual mentioned it conforming to California law. In review the manual just says "some states". This switch is an internal lock and the key hole is round & about 1/8". In addition to disengaging the trigger it locks the safety and so the slide. Loaded or unloaded, when the switch is activated the gun will not operate. As I also related, I was first drawn to this gun by an advertisement and before I even went into the store I looked up a number of reviews. I was chagrined to see some reviewers actually complaining about the many safety features.

The warnings are in the gun manual and are warning the gun owner about states that do in fact have such laws. I agree with you completely. I was looking at I's opening post and he quoted a statistic that guns are the #2 killer of teens ages 15 to 19. The article I cited on drowning says, "Drowning is the leading cause of unintentional death among children 1 to 4 years of age and it is the second leading cause of death for children from 5 to 14 years old". I suspect a fair number of children survive near-drowning with brain damage.

No. It's about you thinking you have written clearly when in fact you have not. That's a point that was germane in the study MonDie cited. You only think you write clearly. More's the point that you blame everyone else for the misunderstanding. Why would that be anyone's point? Exactly. The problem seems to be fear of targeted confiscations and targeted government violence justified by advance knowledge of armaments. As with the three or four examples mentioned, you know, to illustrate and prevent "seeming"? The fear is unwarranted paranoia. Of course. Unfortunately, specific proposals always seem to be set up to abet paranoia and instigate reflexive rejection - with enforced and documented purchases of safes, inspections of private houses for compliance, that kind of thing. Do you suppose it's because of whom they are set up by? Let's see some citations for such draconian proposals. I mean an actual reference with quotes and all that sorta stuff that is more than your assertion. I had nothing of the sort you describe in mind, rather what I had in mind were laws to hold people accountable after the fact of an injury just as we have attractive nuisance laws wherein if your swimming pool isn't fenced and a neighbor kid drowns in it you are liable. With these laws no one is tracking swimming pool purchases or inspecting private homes beyond what a passerby might see. And speaking of drowning and children: Tragic Tally: More Than 200 Reported Child Drownings In Pools and Spas This Summer Addendum: I was reading my gun manual as I recalled there was something in there about some of the safety features of the pistol that were required in California. What I didn't remember was a list of notices to meet requirements for new guns sold in multiple states and that those notices are of the character of the attractive nuisance laws as I was just suggesting. Here's a sample: There are similar warnings of laws for Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin. I think a federal law along these lines is reasonable.

Interesting, but not particularly of bearing on the gun issues here. Well, except the off-topic parts concerning individuals ability to make and/or understand arguments and accept criticsm. To whit: Can we regard forum posting as a hobby? Might as well because if it was paid work then the most unskilled -according to this study- would overestimate their skill even more. Anecdote: As familiar with guns as I am, [think I am?] when I was looking over the gun I wanted to buy I worked the slide which locks open when the magazine is empty. After a few uncomfortable & overconfident seconds trying to release it as I had just seen the salesman do, I had to ask him how it was done. A bit more germane to the discussion is the role of gun safety played by the manufacturers. While I was initially drawn to my gun because it was on sale at a significant discount, I was sold on all the safety features. It will not fire if the magazine is removed even if there is a round in the chamber, there is a pop up indicator to show by sight & feel that there is a round in the chamber, chambering a round only puts the hammer in half-cock and it only fully cocks when the trigger is pulled, it has a manual safety that locks the slide, there is a special key that fits in the side of the gun that disconnects the trigger, and it comes with a long-shank padlock that goes through the receiver and through the magazine channel which renders the gun unusable. One final anecdote. Gun accidents with children is not only a civilian problem. A couple years back a local deputy's toddler got ahold of his loaded and unsecured handgun and shot a sibling to death. No charges were filed as there is no law about securing guns. Is that a kind of legislation that would make sense? I mean holding gun owners liable for harm caused by their unsecured weapons?

There is no accurate statement about the country overall, but I guess I'll let it go this time. Not really. We have recent examples, after all - Katrina, some of the instigating circumstances of famous standoffs, the police handling of the Black Panthers not that long ago, the behavior of various US authorities since 9/11, that kind of thing. None of which come close to the entire US population which seems to be the threat you keep saying is so dangerous. Then too, some standoffs -Ruby Ridge and Waco come to mind- were in my opinion justified actions by the authorities, the loss of any innocents notwithstanding. Background checks does not equal a registry, if that is your point. But again even a complete list is worthless if the government doesn't have the manpower and finances to go around making confiscations. As soon as it started people would hide their guns, hide themselves, and for all intents & purposes it would be civil war. Phht! Boogy man fear mongerage of the kind the survivalists and related nutters gobble up like pablum. I don't know if states share their concealed permit lists with the feds or not, but I do know that in Oregon there was some attempt to force sheriffs to make public their list(s) and those holding the permits put the kibosh on that as an invasion of privacy. The permit holders weren't afraid of the cops -obviously-, they were afraid they'd be targets of thieves who would now have their addresses and a shopping list. I don't recall if that was a statewide thing or just county. Then too there is the open carry, which my state and county allows and there is no permitting issue there.

Since our existence is the only life we know of and because we don't know the exact circumstance of its starting, I don't think we have enough information to make a judgment about whether we're early or not. The solar system is 4.5 billion years old and this planet is likely to get roasty in another 4 billion years, so in the 14 billion years of the universe there's plenty of room for other existences to have come and gone. For them we have come too late.

You present that as if it was universal in the US and as I just posted, these laws vary by state. This variance is one reason folks are pushing for a federal standard. Fear mongering plain & simple. This 'ingrained suspicion' is pretty much an aspect of the exceptionalism reported* in the gun violence study I posted FWIW last week. I freely admit my own gun ownership and use is culturally rooted, but so is my adherence to the law and the law trumps. Since reporting your guns is voluntary, nothing short of a house to house search of the entire country would even come close to getting a count & record. Not gonna happen 'cause it won't work. Continually suggesting that it's not only possible but likely is fear mongering.* Note: The study in post #359 did not use the term 'exceptionalism', they said "Those factors include a chronic and widespread gap between Americans' expectations for themselves and their actual achievement, Americans' adulation of fame, and the extent of gun ownership in the United States." In this I'm cynical of fame, but I have owned and used lots of guns since childhood and find that my expectations -or reach if you will- exceeds my grasp. And to clarify further, that article is about mass murders and in no way is my identifying with those qualifications meant to suggest or imply that I'm going off the deep end. I may be crazy, but I'm not nuts.

Yeah, like it's over. The background checks procedures vary from state to state. I recently bought a handgun and had to fill out about 3 pages of information which was checked by 3 different employees. Then they submitted it to [presumably] law enforcement and told me I had to wait up to a week before picking up my gun. As it was the check was completed in 1 1/2 days and they called me to come in. Before I could take possession and pay for it they had 2 employees check my ID and had me go over the paperwork again and initial it to confirm no errors. This is not the case at least in my state, i.e. the police do not keep a record of who owns guns. They do keep records of who has concealed carry permits however. For one I don't think they have the legal authority to essentially have a registry and for another there would have to be a system to report & track when people move. Again this varies by states and some states do have loopholes vis-à-vis gun shows. Oregon just enacted a law requiring background checks for all sales, even private, that must be run through a registered gun dealer. Exceptions are sales and/or gifts to family members and a person can borrow a gun to hunt with and not have to go through a permitting process. None of these regulations do anything to stop the theft of guns, which is a major contributing factor in folks having guns illegally. I have no problem with this kind of control, though I doubt the number of folks that shouldn't have guns and apply is small. Neither do these regulations do anything toward preventing the childrens' injuries and deaths that this thread started with. That problem is one of responsible ownership and parenting just as keeping the little ones out of the cleaners and medicines, not leaving them alone in the tubby and other such lethal dangers as children face. On the drift this has taken I have no problem with changing the constitution, abiding by the supreme court's interpretations of it, or abiding by the laws of my state. The idea that my government is going to pry my gun from my cold dead hand is a red herring because no matter what arsenal of small arms I or anyone else has, my government has artillery.

I get longies too, but they're usually coarser than their siblings. The eyebrows are the worst 'cause I think there's a bug on me. I hate that! Hairs grow in cycles & here's a take on the longies which attributes them to an unusually long growth cycle. Sometimes ONE single hair on my body is really long.. What does that? @ ask a Biologist As to color: Human hair color

We give links to specific sources that pertain to particular arguments all the time. For the persistent and indignant posters of the ilk under discussion here, such 'lists' fall on deaf ears. And stop looking at my nose! Addendum: I think Mordred's signature succinctly sums up the 'you should learn' idea as well as providing lists concerning cosmology. I don't see his sig at his profile page so here's a post of his. Mordred post

I have to believe it IS worth the trouble, my friend. Some of these guys talk about spending 30 years on their "theory"! Well my friend, we better just agree to disagree on the worth of it. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Good luck.

From my first computer clocking 8Mhz and sporting 2 -count 'em 2- 5 1/4" floppy drives to my current lappy clocking IDK* and sporting tera bytes of drive storage, my need for speed is driven by math calculations. I have been running one search 24/7 for the last 17 months. Maybe that's not average. Ya think? I do like the power in the photography area compared to the old film and darkroom days, but all the e-mail, videos, games, and forums are just gravy. *Looks like my computer runs @ 2.3 GHz

Certainly you can forestall your own aggression, but you have no control over aggression in others. Tell me about it. You may have noticed from time-to-time a modicum of aggravated patience in moi. Who we gonna call? Again, that's the poster's problem and not ours. Not your/our fault. You can't squeeze blood out of a turnip. Well, just say that. No amount of warm-fuzzy wrapped around it is gonna breech stubbornness, or arrogance, or whatever suitable descriptor matches some entrenched someone. If the aggravation gets problematic, disengage. It's just not worth the trouble, or so I have been telling myself.

How can I avoid this kind of reaction when talking about the importance of studying mainstream science? ... I don't think you or any of us can avoid such supercilious reactions in most cases such as the one you cite. The fault is not ours and in such cases it is not we throwing the lack of education in their face it is they throwing it in ours. If we present the facts -as you did and often do- and they persist then we have the reputation system at our disposal and ultimately the staff to administer remediation. Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

Avatar shaming hurts everyone. Tant pis for Mr. Swanson who has chosen such a ridiculous caricature to represent his persona.

Thnx Imat. Yeah, typo was what it was when some sweat dripped into my eye. If we supposed using thermocouples behind the heat shield as I earlier suggested, then we could get a real voltage from their rating and then we could get amps from the watts and voltage and then knowing the amp/hr capacity of storage batteries on board we could talk about storing amp/hrs in 6 minutes. Oui? But of course in all practicality we can't and so we resort to the practicality of the springs earlier invoked. The energy in that system would be rated in boings, or more likely tera-boings.