canndo
Well-Known Member
You aren't really one of those folks that believe that if something doesn't work 100 percent of the time it doesn't work at all are you?
"To conquer a nation, first disarm it." Adolf Hitler
- Thread starter deprave
- Start date
You aren't really one of those folks that believe that if something doesn't work 100 percent of the time it doesn't work at all are you?
racerboy71
bud bootlegger
" to cook an omelette you must first crack the egg" .. julia child..
Johnny Retro
Well-Known Member
This isn't the only time gun control has not worked.
You aren't really one of the crazy folks, are you? Oh, wait...
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I have not seen his presentation. But you said collateral damage. He used those terms?? (Very different from the word collateral, which might mean "hostages" in your second usage. Where is the line between forthright and exaggerated/alarmist?)
Would he need to say anything about malls, churches, theaters? To my knowledge those are not "gun-free". cn
<add> The bit about the game manufacturers seems a bit ripe. I know there's been a lot of talk of video games instilling a culture of violence, but I'm not seeing it. I disapprove of blame games in general.
<add some more> just found this.
To me, this contradicts the idea that "collateral" anything is avoidable. The argument cuts both ways.
canndo
Well-Known Member
No he did not use that term, of course he didn't, he'd have been thrown out of the building.
canndo
Well-Known Member
I think we have established that fully automatic weapons control has worked.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I'm a bit confused because bringing up "collateral damage" (am I paraphrasing you reasonably? i hope so; I have no intent of misrepresenting or pejorating your point) suggests to me a "zero tolerance" policy toward it. Then you come and post a repudiation of zero tolerance as a policy. I'm bound to be missing something here.
cn
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
How? What's the control portion of that experiment? cn
canndo
Well-Known Member
Now I am confused, I state that LaPierre regards gunshot children as collateral to our right to keep and bear - I do as well but my stand is this -
State that these shootings are the cost of doing business in America rather than lamenting the loss of children partly due to one's own lobbying efforts and the illogical presumption that any acceptance of limits, or "gun control" is an unacceptable slippery slope.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
The presumption is illogical, but is it incorrect? Have you ever seen the Ratchet go the other way, anywhere? I have not seen any country restore gun rights. At some point, experience has to feed into the logic. cn
kelly4
Well-Known Member
Battery acid has been thrown on people....let's ban batteries. They are nothing more than tools for disfigurement.
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
I knew a thalidimide kid in school, it was freaky to a little kid (he had a useless arm, coulda been worse). The FDA had to approve this drug used for nausea in pregnancy first while keeping some helpful herbs illegal. I wore asbestos pajamas as most of us did back then (I'm assuming you meant nonflammable clothing). All holloween costumes were mandated to be flame retardant at one time. We all wore asbestos costumes. In fact, asbestos is still in use today, just not in clothing and tile work anymore. We are still letting in toys from China made with lead based paint and materials and giving them to our children.
A kid dies in a house fire and the government's knee jerk reaction is to mandate children's pajamas must be flame retardant. After a few kids develop lung problems they change their minds. The FDA approves thalidimide as a safe drug until a slew of thalidimide deformities make bad press after years of use so they unapprove it. Lead based paint in kids toys are deemed unsafe so we can't make them here. We can still buy all of them we want, we just can't make them.
I think you could have come up with better examples to show how the government has saved us.
We can't have Gasoline without ethanol either. Which drives up the cost of corn, which drives up the cost of 60% of everything in the supermarket, especially beef. The cost of corn makes farmers grow just corn and not other crops people might like to eat, causing a shortage in other commodities which means higher prices. higher prices causes everything that used that commodity to go up in price also.
But hey, at least you have a fuel that is less efficient than just about any other, ruins most gasoline engines over time, is hydroscopic and puts water into your fuel system and makes the storage of fuel for more than 3 months almost impossible, the best part is that most people don't have a choice, they HAVE to use it because there is no other choice at the pump.
But hey, at least you have a fuel that is less efficient than just about any other, ruins most gasoline engines over time, is hydroscopic and puts water into your fuel system and makes the storage of fuel for more than 3 months almost impossible, the best part is that most people don't have a choice, they HAVE to use it because there is no other choice at the pump.
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
The FDA never approved it for use for anything back then. Try to find another govwerment boogieman. That one doesnt hunt
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
WRONG
[h=1]50 Years after Thalidomide: Why Regulation Matters[/h]Posted on February 7, 2012 by FDA_Voice
By: Margaret Hamburg, M.D.
Fifty years ago, the vigilance of FDA medical officer Dr. Frances Kelsey prevented a public health tragedy of enormous proportion by ensuring that the sedative thalidomide was never approved in the United States. As many remember, in the early 1960’s, reports were coming in from around the world of countless women who were giving birth to children with extremely deformed limbs and other severe birth defects. They had taken thalidomide. Although it was being used in many countries, Dr. Kelsey discovered that it hadn’t even been tested on pregnant animals.
Dr. Kelsey’s reaction to thalidomide exemplifies the FDA’s mission: protecting and promoting the health of the American people, using science for regulatory decision-making.
Now I know that in some circles regulation is viewed as a roadblock to innovation and economic growth. But in actuality, when done right, regulation isn’t a roadblock; it’s the actual pathway to achieving real and lasting innovation.Smart, science-based regulation instills consumer confidence in products and treatments. It levels the playing field for businesses. It decreases the threat of litigation. It prevents recalls that threaten industry reputation and consumer trust, not to mention levying huge preventable costs on individual companies and entire industries. And it spurs industry to excellence.
The tragedy of thalidomide led to changes that strengthened both the regulatory and scientific environment for medical product development and review.
In response to the public uproar, in 1962 Congress enacted the Kefauver-Harris amendments to the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Thanks to these new amendments, manufacturers had to prove that a drug was not only safe, but also effective. Approvals had to be based on sound science. Companies had to monitor safety reports that emerged postmarket and adhere to good manufacturing practices that would lead to consistently safe products. And there were new protections for patients.