Driver to drive?

Am 17.03.2018 um 21:16 schrieb Castorp:
I've used a number of 89410A devices, and they have exhibited some spread in the noise floor. Usually the flat part is around 8-9 nV/sqrtHz, and the 1/f corner could be in the kHz or tens of kHz. One device had popcorn-like noise in one channel.

That would actually be good news, that the noise comes from the input
amplifiers. That would mean that one can use cross correlation on the
two channels. I had some fear that it might be phase noise from the
sampling clock since it is probably synthesized. That would be common
to both channels and would not average away.


> With a preamp built of 4 paralleled ADA4522s and LT5400 resistor arrays, I managed to get noise floor of about 5 nV/sqrtHz flat down to a few mHz. If there's interest, I can dig up those measurements. I used it to measure excess 1/f noise in resistors hooked up in a biased

Yes, especially the setup of the 89410.

Wheatstone bridge, like this:
https://dcc.ligo.org/public/0002/T0900200/001/current_noise.pdf

Another nice trick with the 2-channel FFT is cross-spectrum measurement. With two good preamps and some patience it buys you another 10-20 dB downwards:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3622215_Measurement_of_voltage_noise_in_chemical_batteries

Thanks to plowing with the power of a thousand chicken my setup is only
abt. 10 dB worse than that of Fred Walls, but without cross
correlation. I still can add that.
1000 chicken means averaging over 20 ADA4898 op amps :).

If you want numbers on batteries that you actually can buy and not some
anonymous thingies that they happened to have in the lab, there is

<
http://www.hoffmann-hochfrequenz.de/downloads/NoiseMeasurementsOnChemicalBatteries.pdf
>

It is still limited by the 1/f of the 89410A and the undersized input
capacitor of the preamp (160 uF foil). I have replaced the foil caps
with wet slug tantal, 4700 u IIRC, but that is only a good decade
better, just a drop in the bucket.

An array of organic polymer electrolytics was too leaky. An array of
wet slug tantals costs too much if I have to pay for it from my own
money. :-(

BTW, two 3.7V Panasonic lithiums are quite OK, noisewise. They seem
hard to top.
<
https://www.flickr.com/photos/137684711@N07/39056813010/in/album-72157662535945536/
>
0 dB is 1nV / rt Hz, DC voltage is 7.3V. The 60 Ohm 1nV/rt Hz reference
resistor and the short switch are on the amplifier side of the coupling
capacitor, so everything looks much better.

The picture of the batteries is to the right.

cheers, Gerhard
 
On Sunday, 18 March 2018 00:20:48 UTC+1, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:
Am 17.03.2018 um 21:16 schrieb Castorp:
I've used a number of 89410A devices, and they have exhibited some spread in the noise floor. Usually the flat part is around 8-9 nV/sqrtHz, and the 1/f corner could be in the kHz or tens of kHz. One device had popcorn-like noise in one channel.


That would actually be good news, that the noise comes from the input
amplifiers. That would mean that one can use cross correlation on the
two channels. I had some fear that it might be phase noise from the
sampling clock since it is probably synthesized. That would be common
to both channels and would not average away.


With a preamp built of 4 paralleled ADA4522s and LT5400 resistor arrays, I managed to get noise floor of about 5 nV/sqrtHz flat down to a few mHz. If there's interest, I can dig up those measurements. I used it to measure excess 1/f noise in resistors hooked up in a biased

Yes, especially the setup of the 89410.

Wheatstone bridge, like this:
https://dcc.ligo.org/public/0002/T0900200/001/current_noise.pdf

Another nice trick with the 2-channel FFT is cross-spectrum measurement.. With two good preamps and some patience it buys you another 10-20 dB downwards:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/3622215_Measurement_of_voltage_noise_in_chemical_batteries


Thanks to plowing with the power of a thousand chicken my setup is only
abt. 10 dB worse than that of Fred Walls, but without cross
correlation. I still can add that.
1000 chicken means averaging over 20 ADA4898 op amps :).

If you want numbers on batteries that you actually can buy and not some
anonymous thingies that they happened to have in the lab, there is


http://www.hoffmann-hochfrequenz.de/downloads/NoiseMeasurementsOnChemicalBatteries.pdf


It is still limited by the 1/f of the 89410A and the undersized input
capacitor of the preamp (160 uF foil). I have replaced the foil caps
with wet slug tantal, 4700 u IIRC, but that is only a good decade
better, just a drop in the bucket.

An array of organic polymer electrolytics was too leaky. An array of
wet slug tantals costs too much if I have to pay for it from my own
money. :-(

BTW, two 3.7V Panasonic lithiums are quite OK, noisewise. They seem
hard to top.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/137684711@N07/39056813010/in/album-72157662535945536/

0 dB is 1nV / rt Hz, DC voltage is 7.3V. The 60 Ohm 1nV/rt Hz reference
resistor and the short switch are on the amplifier side of the coupling
capacitor, so everything looks much better.

The picture of the batteries is to the right.

cheers, Gerhard

Thanks, Gerhard. You've done quite a lot of good work in this field.

I've always tried to avoid AC-coupling and its associated problems. With near-zero voltages (e.g. balanced bridge), you can survive with some amount of offset, or fix it in between the gain stages. For batteries I've tried (with variable success) to measure two of them back-to-back, in counter-series.

The point of my 4xADA4522 preamp was not to get super low white noise (5 nV/sqrtHz is nothing to brag about), but to have no 1/f. It was all DC-coupled, including the 89410A in its most sensitive range (10 mV I think). With an upper frequency of 1 Hz and 3201 frequency bins (the maximum), it takes one FFT in more than an hour. With overnight averaging it gets smooth enough to make sense.

I'll find those details in the next days, some of them are in my work labbooks.

Cheers,
Nikolai
 
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 3:12:07 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
On 02/16/2018 01:28 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
"The calls we are hearing today for gun control have nothing to do
with protecting Americans from violence. What you're witnessing is a
kind of class war. The left hates rural America, red America,
gun-owning America, the America that elected Donald Trump. They hate
them. Progressives are still in charge of most of the major
institutions in this country and they despise the autonomy of an armed
population. They want collective punishment for the sins of a few.
They seek to obliterate our core constitutional right rather than
trying to mitigate its downsides. They call it gun control, but it's
not. It's people control. For the left, voters who can't be
controlled, can't be trusted."

https://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2018/02/youre-witnessing-kind-class-war/

...Jim Thompson


Gun control is a red herring, a peaceful, civilized society will be
peaceful with or without them. A perpetually angry, paranoid, and
intrinsically violent society will surely find a way to make do with
knives and rocks.

America falls squarely in the latter category. Guns don't make civility
the civility comes first.

So who in this group comes across as angry, paranoid and violent? I'm thinking, but no one comes to mind...
 
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 5:35:39 PM UTC-5, Long Hair wrote:
bitrex wrote:

There appears to be three ways forward:
 1) heavily control guns, as in civilised countries
 2) heavily arm schoolkids, the logical conclusion of
    gun nut's position
 3) ban schools

Which is preferable?

Build Trump walls around the schools and screen folks entering at all
times.

Two results.

We get to test proposed TrumpTard walls for efficacy.

We get to keep jackasses with guns out of our schools

A possible third... the folks we charge with teaching our kids might
get some behavioral education and be better equipped to detect jackasses
like that guy before they reach adult age numbers and start to get
rights meant for mature adults.

I can pretty much also bet that that ugly fucking kid got railed in
school for his facial features.

Are you speaking from personal experience?
 
On Sunday, March 18, 2018 at 11:21:40 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 3:12:07 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:
On 02/16/2018 01:28 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
"The calls we are hearing today for gun control have nothing to do
with protecting Americans from violence. What you're witnessing is a
kind of class war. The left hates rural America, red America,
gun-owning America, the America that elected Donald Trump. They hate
them. Progressives are still in charge of most of the major
institutions in this country and they despise the autonomy of an armed
population. They want collective punishment for the sins of a few.
They seek to obliterate our core constitutional right rather than
trying to mitigate its downsides. They call it gun control, but it's
not. It's people control. For the left, voters who can't be
controlled, can't be trusted."

https://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2018/02/youre-witnessing-kind-class-war/

...Jim Thompson


Gun control is a red herring, a peaceful, civilized society will be
peaceful with or without them. A perpetually angry, paranoid, and
intrinsically violent society will surely find a way to make do with
knives and rocks.

America falls squarely in the latter category. Guns don't make civility
the civility comes first.

So who in this group comes across as angry, paranoid and violent? I'm thinking, but no one comes to mind...

Jim Thompson comes pretty close. He has disclosed a plan to shoot his more left-wing neighbours after the US fall apart. If he actually had a gun at home, this might be worrying ...

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 17:21:35 -0700, gnuarm.deletethisbit wrote:

So who in this group comes across as angry, paranoid and violent? I'm
thinking, but no one comes to mind...

Bill Sloman, perhaps? No, he's more resentful, hateful and disingenuous
come to think of it.
;->



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
 
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 17:23:55 -0700, gnuarm.deletethisbit wrote:

On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 5:35:39 PM UTC-5, Long Hair wrote:
bitrex wrote:

There appears to be three ways forward:
 1) heavily control guns, as in civilised countries 2) heavily arm
 schoolkids, the logical conclusion of
    gun nut's position
 3) ban schools

Which is preferable?

No. 2. But you don't have to "heavily arm" them. .25ACPs would be ideal,
certainly for children in the 5-10 year age range at any rate.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.
 
On Sunday, March 18, 2018 at 10:23:36 PM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 17:21:35 -0700, gnuarm.deletethisbit wrote:

So who in this group comes across as angry, paranoid and violent? I'm
thinking, but no one comes to mind...

Bill Sloman, perhaps? No, he's more resentful, hateful and disingenuous
come to think of it.
;-

Cursitor Doom is merely despicably gullible. If he showed any signs of understanding the twaddle he posts links to, he'd be in a more dangerous category, but as it is he's more like krw - visibly brain-damaged, and in need of toleration, though not actually deserving it.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Sunday, March 18, 2018 at 10:26:49 PM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 17:23:55 -0700, gnuarm.deletethisbit wrote:

On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 5:35:39 PM UTC-5, Long Hair wrote:
bitrex wrote:

There appears to be three ways forward:
 1) heavily control guns, as in civilised countries
2) heavily arm schoolkids, the logical conclusion of gun nut's
position
 3) ban schools

Which is preferable?

No. 2. But you don't have to "heavily arm" them. .25ACPs would be ideal,
certainly for children in the 5-10 year age range at any rate.

Cursitor Doom doesn't recognise sarcasm, and hasn't quite followed the logic of extending the gun nuts desire to arm every adult in sight by adding open carry school children. Quite a few adults shouldn't be trusted with guns, and a rather higher proportion of school-children.

Jonathan Swift's

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal

is on the same wavelength - one that Cursitor Doom isn't wired up to receive.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydeny
 
On 18/03/18 12:58, bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote:
On Sunday, March 18, 2018 at 10:26:49 PM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 17:23:55 -0700, gnuarm.deletethisbit wrote:

On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 5:35:39 PM UTC-5, Long Hair wrote:
bitrex wrote:

There appears to be three ways forward:
1) heavily control guns, as in civilised countries
2) heavily arm schoolkids, the logical conclusion of gun nut's
position
3) ban schools

Which is preferable?

No. 2. But you don't have to "heavily arm" them. .25ACPs would be ideal,
certainly for children in the 5-10 year age range at any rate.

Cursitor Doom doesn't recognise sarcasm, and hasn't quite followed the logic of extending the gun nuts desire to arm every adult in sight by adding open carry school children. Quite a few adults shouldn't be trusted with guns, and a rather higher proportion of school-children.

Jonathan Swift's

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal

is on the same wavelength - one that Cursitor Doom isn't wired up to receive.

Oh, I wouldn't be so sure of non-reception[1]!

He'll receive and amplify things if
- he thinks it will help him get the good books of some posters here
- it is a good troll
- he sees in on Russia Today

[1] reception != understanding != wisdom
 
On Monday, March 19, 2018 at 12:57:02 AM UTC+11, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 18/03/18 12:58, bill.sloman@ieee.org wrote:
On Sunday, March 18, 2018 at 10:26:49 PM UTC+11, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 17:23:55 -0700, gnuarm.deletethisbit wrote:

On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 5:35:39 PM UTC-5, Long Hair wrote:
bitrex wrote:

There appears to be three ways forward:
1) heavily control guns, as in civilised countries
2) heavily arm schoolkids, the logical conclusion of gun nut's
position
3) ban schools

Which is preferable?

No. 2. But you don't have to "heavily arm" them. .25ACPs would be ideal,
certainly for children in the 5-10 year age range at any rate.

Cursitor Doom doesn't recognise sarcasm, and hasn't quite followed the logic of extending the gun nuts desire to arm every adult in sight by adding open carry school children. Quite a few adults shouldn't be trusted with guns, and a rather higher proportion of school-children.

Jonathan Swift's

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal

is on the same wavelength - one that Cursitor Doom isn't wired up to receive.

Oh, I wouldn't be so sure of non-reception[1]!

He'll receive and amplify things if
- he thinks it will help him get the good books of some posters here
- it is a good troll
- he sees in on Russia Today

[1] reception != understanding != wisdom

He got a message, just not the one that the poster intended to send. The moral indignation whooshed straight past Cursitor Doom, leaving him free to meditate on the kind of gun that a 5-10 year old child might carry all day.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
So, here's the device with popcorn noise in one of the channels:

http://nbeev.web.cern.ch/device1_psd.png
http://nbeev.web.cern.ch/device1_td.png

The second device is my own 89440 - the only one I have access to right now.. Channel A is clearly better in terms of LF noise. The magenta curve is cross-spectrum.

http://nbeev.web.cern.ch/device2_psd_hf.png
http://nbeev.web.cern.ch/device2_psd_lf.png

All these measurements are on the finest range, 1MOhm inputs with external short, DC-coupled.

I coulnd't find the ADA4522-1 preamp measurement files, but I found notes on the setup. The preamp was followed by an SRS amplifier, and the total gain was 10000. That was enough to ensure flat floor down to a few mHz, but around there it did intersect with the 89440A 1/f noise. For my purposes back then it was fine.

All of the batteries I tested showed steeper than 1/f behaviour at low frequencies, so they were not good enough as a DC source for my tests. And I did it carefully - temperature-stabilized oven, no stress, mechanical relief, plenty of time to settle, etc...

Cheers,
Nikolai
 
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 8:55:04 PM UTC-5, rober...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 7:41:06 PM UTC-6, dca...@krl.org wrote:
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 7:56:37 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:



It bears repeating - anyone who is stockpiling weapons when their
neighbors aren't is planning an attack.

Of course wingnut gun-nuts can't be trusted. Duh!

I understand why you feel as you do, but I grew up in the South where many people have multiple guns. If you do not have some sort of adjustable choke, you need a gun for ducks. A different one for pheasants, and another for quail,doves and snipe. Add another gun for a deer rifle and maybe also a slug gun for places where rifles carry too far. You probably want a bigger calliper for Elk and Moose. And maybe a varmint rifle for varmints. And a .22 for target practise. And I have not even gotten into hand guns..

What we really ought to be doing is having car control. Cars kill a lot more people than guns.

Dan

That's just a stupid diversion from the issue. The purpose of a gun is to kill.

Sure. In self-defense. That's the most fundamental right of all.
What's wrong with that? Do people not have a right to defend their
own lives?

And in America, the Founders provided for the private right to firearms to
keep the nation safe, stable, and free. What's wrong with that?

> The purpose of a car is for transportation.

The purpose of a firearm varies, from hunting to self-defense.

> How many people use a car to intentionally kill? I'd say that's a very rare occurrence.

How many firearm owners use their firearms to murder? I'd say that's a
very rare occurrence.

Virtually all killers get to their crime sites in cars. BAN CARS!

> Why is it so damn hard to come to a rational consensus to prevent these mass shootings? What are other developed nations doing? Why is this so prevalent in the USA compared to similar countries? Sheesh it's not rocket science. Any idiot can tell you the solution to preventing mass shootings is to not add more guns to the matter.

Cheers,
James Arthur
 
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 2:29:34 PM UTC-5, John Robertson wrote:
On 2018/02/16 10:28 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:
"The calls we are hearing today for gun control have nothing to do
with protecting Americans from violence. What you're witnessing is a
kind of class war. The left hates rural America, red America,
gun-owning America, the America that elected Donald Trump. They hate
them. Progressives are still in charge of most of the major
institutions in this country and they despise the autonomy of an armed
population. They want collective punishment for the sins of a few.
They seek to obliterate our core constitutional right rather than
trying to mitigate its downsides. They call it gun control, but it's
not. It's people control. For the left, voters who can't be
controlled, can't be trusted."

https://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2018/02/youre-witnessing-kind-class-war/

...Jim Thompson


Do you believe every flake that is against gun control? I mean really,
the above diatribe is ridiculous - as usual you can substitute "right"
for "left" and "rural" for "city" and get much the same emotional results.

Gun control does not entail taking guns from law abiding citizens,

Then you'll be able to explain this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj4AcjyuV38

"If I could've gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for
an outright ban [on firearms], picking up every one of them --
Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in -- I would have done it."
--Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)

Like statements can be found from most of the other Party leaders.

the
whole purpose is to reduce the number of incidents that your school
children and other innocents are up against.

Less than twenty a year, average. Skateboards kill more. The biggest
threat is giving teens drivers' licenses--that kills 200x as many teens.
Yet there's no talk of banning that, not even a whisper.

More guns won't help - the
same logic would have every country in the world with as many nuclear
bombs as they could pack on their soil.

You just don't get it.

And I'll let you in on a secret - Democrats aren't lefties. For the rest
of the world they are considered soft rightists.

They're for an all-powerful central government that takes from workers
and gives to their voters who do not work. (Also known as making poverty
pay?)

That creates a large pool of dependent people who could, but do not work.

Sounds left, AIUI.

> John :-#(#

Cheers,
James Arthur
 
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 8:41:06 PM UTC-5, dca...@krl.org wrote:

What we really ought to be doing is having car control. Cars kill a lot more people than guns.

Dan

Yep. And politicians, historically, kill far more than either.

So what we really need is politician control. Which is why we have guns.

Not for shooting politicians, mind you, but just to remind them that if
they tried to go too far without consent, American citizens still have
a say too--there would be massive resistance.

And it has worked wonderfully well, saving us from the tribulations that
befall most other countries once or twice a century.

Cheers,
James Arthur
 
On 19/03/18 16:25, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 8:55:04 PM UTC-5, rober...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 7:41:06 PM UTC-6, dca...@krl.org wrote:
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 7:56:37 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:



It bears repeating - anyone who is stockpiling weapons when their
neighbors aren't is planning an attack.

Of course wingnut gun-nuts can't be trusted. Duh!

I understand why you feel as you do, but I grew up in the South where many people have multiple guns. If you do not have some sort of adjustable choke, you need a gun for ducks. A different one for pheasants, and another for quail,doves and snipe. Add another gun for a deer rifle and maybe also a slug gun for places where rifles carry too far. You probably want a bigger calliper for Elk and Moose. And maybe a varmint rifle for varmints. And a .22 for target practise. And I have not even gotten into hand guns.

What we really ought to be doing is having car control. Cars kill a lot more people than guns.

Dan

That's just a stupid diversion from the issue. The purpose of a gun is to kill.

Sure. In self-defense. That's the most fundamental right of all.
What's wrong with that? Do people not have a right to defend their
own lives?

Yes, they do have that right, amongst other rights, e.g. the
"*life*, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Now, how was the bastard that killed innocent schoolkids acting
in self defence?


And in America, the Founders provided for the private right to firearms to
keep the nation safe, stable, and free. What's wrong with that?

In the extreme forms advocated by the gun fetishists, and taken
advantage by criminals and some mentally disturbed people,
it has failed. That's what is wrong.
 
On 2018/03/19 9:46 AM, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 8:41:06 PM UTC-5, dca...@krl.org wrote:

What we really ought to be doing is having car control. Cars kill a lot more people than guns.

Dan

Yep. And politicians, historically, kill far more than either.

So what we really need is politician control. Which is why we have guns.

Not for shooting politicians, mind you, but just to remind them that if
they tried to go too far without consent, American citizens still have
a say too--there would be massive resistance.

And it has worked wonderfully well, saving us from the tribulations that
befall most other countries once or twice a century.

Cheers,
James Arthur

Like Canada? Australia? The UK? France? Iceland? Norway? Japan? Other
1st world countries?

I'm sure these governments have had periodic popular uprisings that were
put down by an armed government - but somehow it never reached the press!

A conspiracy of silence!

John
 
.... Any idiot can tell you the solution to preventing mass shootings is to not add more guns to the matter.
>

And if we just outlaw spoons, we could solve America's obesity problem!
 
On Tuesday, March 20, 2018 at 3:13:56 AM UTC+11, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 2:29:34 PM UTC-5, John Robertson wrote:
On 2018/02/16 10:28 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:
"The calls we are hearing today for gun control have nothing to do
with protecting Americans from violence. What you're witnessing is a
kind of class war. The left hates rural America, red America,
gun-owning America, the America that elected Donald Trump. They hate
them. Progressives are still in charge of most of the major
institutions in this country and they despise the autonomy of an armed
population. They want collective punishment for the sins of a few.
They seek to obliterate our core constitutional right rather than
trying to mitigate its downsides. They call it gun control, but it's
not. It's people control. For the left, voters who can't be
controlled, can't be trusted."

https://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2018/02/youre-witnessing-kind-class-war/

...Jim Thompson


Do you believe every flake that is against gun control? I mean really,
the above diatribe is ridiculous - as usual you can substitute "right"
for "left" and "rural" for "city" and get much the same emotional results.

Gun control does not entail taking guns from law abiding citizens,

Then you'll be able to explain this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj4AcjyuV38

"If I could've gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for
an outright ban [on firearms], picking up every one of them --
Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in -- I would have done it."
--Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)

Like statements can be found from most of the other Party leaders.

When read, usually out of context, by James Arthur.

In the rest of the advanced industrial countries, gun control involves licensing gun ownership - not banning it - and making sure that any guns kept are kept locked up when not in use.

This isn't any kind of outright ban, but it does seem to be enough to reduce the gun murder rate and the gun suicide rate by a couple of orders of magnitude.

the
whole purpose is to reduce the number of incidents that your school
children and other innocents are up against.

Less than twenty a year, average. Skateboards kill more. The biggest
threat is giving teens drivers' licenses--that kills 200x as many teens.
Yet there's no talk of banning that, not even a whisper.

Because cars are useful, and guns - outside of a very narrow context - aren't. Proper gun control doesn't stop people who need guns from getting and using them, but it does greatly reduce their use by mentally deranged.

More guns won't help - the
same logic would have every country in the world with as many nuclear
bombs as they could pack on their soil.

You just don't get it.

Of course he doesn't. He's sane and you have been brainwashed by a culture that equates an armed rabble of citizens with political stability. The second amendment didn't prevent the US Civil war, and it didn't stop the former Yugoslavia from falling apart (and made the reversion to separate nation states a series of bloody civil wars).

And I'll let you in on a secret - Democrats aren't lefties. For the rest
of the world they are considered soft rightists.

They're for an all-powerful central government that takes from workers
and gives to their voters who do not work. (Also known as making poverty
pay?)

That creates a large pool of dependent people who could, but do not work.

Only in James Arthur's fertile imagination. Scandinavia and Germany don't have any such large pool of "dependent people" who could work, but don't.

Germany famously spends quite a bit of the extra taxes it collects (45% of GDP versus 30% in the US) on educating it's work force, which has a higher proportion of tertiary educated participants than any other.

And the central government in democratic socialist countries (which none of the Communist block ever were) is perfectly happy to leave the free market to regulate where capital is invested - though they do regulate the free markets (to the same extent that the US does) to prevent the development of monopolies and cartels, and some of the other tragedies of the commons that free markets are susceptible to.

> Sounds left, AIUI.

Pretty much everything that isn't to the right of Genghis Khan sounds left to James Arthur. His understanding is flawed.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On Tuesday, March 20, 2018 at 10:58:34 AM UTC+11, k...@notreal.com wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2018 17:46:42 +0000, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 19/03/18 16:25, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 8:55:04 PM UTC-5, rober...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 7:41:06 PM UTC-6, dca...@krl.org wrote:
On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 7:56:37 PM UTC-5, bitrex wrote:



It bears repeating - anyone who is stockpiling weapons when their
neighbors aren't is planning an attack.

Of course wingnut gun-nuts can't be trusted. Duh!

I understand why you feel as you do, but I grew up in the South where many people have multiple guns. If you do not have some sort of adjustable choke, you need a gun for ducks. A different one for pheasants, and another for quail,doves and snipe. Add another gun for a deer rifle and maybe also a slug gun for places where rifles carry too far. You probably want a bigger calliper for Elk and Moose. And maybe a varmint rifle for varmints. And a .22 for target practise. And I have not even gotten into hand guns.

What we really ought to be doing is having car control. Cars kill a lot more people than guns.

Dan

That's just a stupid diversion from the issue. The purpose of a gun is to kill.

Sure. In self-defense. That's the most fundamental right of all.
What's wrong with that? Do people not have a right to defend their
own lives?

Yes, they do have that right, amongst other rights, e.g. the
"*life*, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Now, how was the bastard that killed innocent schoolkids acting
in self defence?

What does that have to do with someone else's right to self defense?

Their right to self-defense has to be balanced against a gun control system that keeps guns out of the hands of lunatics.

Every other advanced industrial country limits the number of guns held in households to a lower level than the US does, and is pickier about their owners keeping them locked away. Their murder rates are about five times lower (mostly because they have many fewer gun murders) so it seems that they have got the balance closer to the optimum than the US.

And in America, the Founders provided for the private right to firearms to
keep the nation safe, stable, and free. What's wrong with that?

It doesn't work - as indicated by the war between the States.

In the extreme forms advocated by the gun fetishists, and taken
advantage by criminals and some mentally disturbed people,
it has failed. That's what is wrong.

Except, as James indicated before, this is exceedingly rare. Self
defense isn't.

Krw seems to take the NRA figures for "self-defense" as reliable. They seem to think that every time a gun nut brandishes a gun, that gun has been used for "self defense". More reliable observers seem to put "self-defense" use in the same ball-park as gun murders and gun suicides, and it isn't clear that brandishing a gun is all that much more effective than brandishing a base-ball bat (which is lot less likely to get people killed - not that many people get killed under the justification of self-defense, which is several orders of magnitude less frequent than gun murder).

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top