raz-0

What does being a gimmick have to do with common use? I think you are mistaking commonly applied in practical situations for common use.

As much as you may not be into them, there were apparently a LOT of bump stocks created and sold just based on the numbers that were destroyed while still in the possession of the manufacturer. Unless they were warehousing decades of inventory, they are in common use.

It went to court. The court said there was no taking because they weren't taken and the notion of you being deprived of the benefit of your property was fantasy. It was a bullshit ruling, but a ruling it was. People tried to fight it, but gun grabber judges plus interestbalancing means we lost. It got GVRed back down after Bruen.

It's not really the solution. No wars? No reason to fund lake city. As for non government owned manufacturers, there is global demand, it'll go to where the global demand is regardless. Realistically the answer for what Ukraine or Israel has done for us is that they both provide proxies in areas we don't necessarily want to engage in directly, so we pay them off to do so.

People want to panic over all sorts of things. You get panic, you get price spikes from people panic buying. Available ammo is likely to decrease as we are providing small arms ammo to two conflicts. There's a lot of shmucks out there trying to stir the shit to get people riled up over this pretending they have access to all sorts of secret info. It is definitely a time for proof or shens rather than believing every grifter looking for clicks.

The reporting on this has been ass. With that in mind, my understanding is this is about appeal regarding injunction rather than hearing the actual case.

If it's an app store app, a part of the problem may be that it's not dynamically served from the web and getting an new app version approved can take way longer than it should.

Not even close. Some counties in CA are over $1000.

I see people saying go maytag. I had an absolute shit experience with maytag top loading HE washer. It last 2 years and sucked every minute of that. My $0.02 If you are going HE, front load is the only reasonable option, and you should be getting a direct drive front loader to boot. My LG has been going strong for about 9 years now, but it is a direct drive. If you insist on a top loader, you do not want an HE top loader if you can avoid. it. The general consensus is that if you want a non HE washer, speedqueen top loaders are the last best choice.

You are missing the point I think. Namely that the RU gun violence research program has been going on for years with almost nothing to show for it. I suspect that is because they went into it with a couple key differences from most gun control research. First is that it was formed via a bureaucratic process to figure out how to spend grant money that could be grabbed easily. This means it isn't some academic's pet project, but a team of researchers that have to worry about being stabbed in the back by their fellow academics. Second is that it was formed with one of the goals being scientific rigor. Which makes that a tool for stabbing your fellow academic in the back. They aren't our friends, but I do think they thought they would storm in and rapidly get some very strong and convincing numbers that satisfied academic rigor. I don't think they are getting them because this is the first article of real significance they have produced and it's also virtually treason to the current gun grabbers unless there is a strategy shift coming. Because the line that was to be toed currently is that there are WAY less gun owners than you think and that it just looks like more because half of them are super gun nuts that own a bajillion guns and also guns are disposable goods duh. Their current premise is that there are less guns out there, and most of them are in the hands of "super owners". If you actually care about data driven research, it's very easy to show that even the larger common number for guns in circulation is pessimistic. For it to be true, gun manufacturers would have to be sitting on warehouses of guns, and we know from panic buying shortages, that they just aren't. They insist that the NSSF numbers are overly optimistic because guns leave circulation. I think they imagine they are disposable. Some have tried to argue numbers as low as 285 million guns owned. Realistically, NSSF numbers are missing a lot and represent home builds and pre-68 guns poorly. Then you have the grabbers cherry picking owner rates and household ownership rates and seeing them not match up with less agenda driven polling or historic trend lines. They REALLY don't jibe with minting 8-10 million new gun owners. This paper is basically confirming that not only do the straight forward numbers not add up and contradict the official position that gun ownership is dying out, but that all the statistical math you can do to try to verify your sample is a good sample and can be extrapolated with the population just doesn't jibe and that the simplest answer is that gun owners know you aren't their friend and will lie to you to keep you from knowing they are gun owners. And there really isn't an alternative theory that works. You can't, for example, say southern, rural, country fans that own trucks (lets call them type A owners) used to report an ownership rate of X and now it is X minus a lot and claim all those massive amounts of newly manufactured guns aren't owned by a different demographic that just isn't showing up in the data. If you can't show the loss of ownership by type A owners was offset by an increase in type B owners, your only theory is that those owners must be destroying their guns. The problem with that is we are selling record numbers of guns. Which means that either type A owners are lying to you or type B owners are lying to you or you are just totally missing some population, or demolition ranch sized collections are becoming the norm. ATF numbers tell us we've been making a hell of a lot of guns because most gun manufacturers report each gun made and have for a while and it adds up to a really big number that does not account for 1) the increasing number of smaller manufacturers that don't participate in the voluntary reporting 2) self made guns which have been exploding in volume 3) a shit ton of pre-68 guns. This paper basically says that the standard bloomberg position to explain away these numbers has to be wrong and that the real reason is that the target population is self selecting out of being surveyed. The RU researchers I'm sure see this as an article saying "we have to figure out how to reach these people so we can finally prove they are wrong and explain it to them that they are wrong and thus end gun ownership". What they really wound up saying is "gun control researchers are a bunch of liars and we can prove they have to be lying about something."

"Life Hacker reports that your average incandescent bulb costs $2 to $3. LEDs price out in the neighborhood of $5 to $7 a pop. Life Hacker says that according to the DOE, LED bulbs use 75% less energy than incandescent bulbs and last 25 times longer." What's everyone's experience with this? I've never really seen the numbers put in articles represent either real world numbers or the actual real world comparisons people are doing. First I'll say I hate incandescent bulbs generally. Mostly because everything had become sylvania grade dog shit. But that dog shit, in my experience, was about a buck a bulb unless you bought them in two packs. They also MAYBE lasted a year. I was living in a place where I had a lamp near the front door. Those sylvania bulbs would burn out if you closed the door to hard. IMO peak incandescent was late 80s and early 90s when you could still get the funny shaped phillip's bulbs. Those things lasted like 3+ years if you didn't abuse them. Second, most people aren't deciding between incandescent and LED, they are deciding between CFL and LED. Cost wise, incandescent was about a buck, CFL and led cost about the same and seem to have settled at about $2-3 a bulb and they took a similar cost path to get there (starting out being rare and scarce and about $30 a bulb to ~$15-20 to ~$5-7 to ~$4 then about $2). As for lifespan, IMO CFL wins. The cheap ones were the longest lasting as lifespan was something that improved over time. having them last 4+ years for the non ultra compact versions wasn't uncommon. The LEDs started out great. I jumped in at like the $15 ish dollar mark for the fixtures they would fit in, and those things lasted well over 10 years. The new ~$2 ones? Maybe 2 years. Energy savings are much bigger. Incandescent to LED is huge. But most people were shifting from CFL to LED. And the energy savings there was not huge.

I've been putting together ARs for like 20 years and never heard of them. I don't think I'm the only one who hasn't heard of them, and thus the general silence.

That's Ghislaine's little black book. The problem with considering that his client list is that pimping out teens was the side hustle that helped them main hustle, which was gaining influence. It's going to be their clients, their mundane contacts, and their aspirational contacts all mixed in unless they kept things very deliberately separated. And there's no way to tell if that's the case or not.

This is stupid. So much of NJ electricity comes from natural gas. All that banning gas appliances will do is power electric appliances with natural gas plus transmission losses. Unless they build more nuclear, that's pretty much going to be the deal. Maybe it'd make some kind of sense if they redid solar subsidies and rules for net metering. Like if you are going to get subsidies and/or net metering you have to convert to all electrical appliances with the solar install. That would require them to get rid of the caps based on prior usage though.

I've had long relationship with turbo 4 engines and driving them hard. A well designed setup with a reasonably chosen turbo will last well past 150k. I did about 9 years and 170k in both of my last two. I think the worst thing I had to replace engine or turbo on them was a leaky main seal at around year 7 on one of them. But I wasn't towing anything. Realistically, most truck owners won't be either.