Rivalarrival

joined 2 years ago
[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 18 points 1 week ago (11 children)

Hide his daughter...

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

Does it have to be a lawsuit? Can it be a big guillotine instead?

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

Napalm sticks to ~~kids~~ Kiddie Diddlers.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 3 points 1 week ago

I read once that you can use a tampon instead of a rag, but I think that would likely blow out when you throw it. But, you could stuff a corner of the rag into the bottle, and then force a tampon in behind it to secure the rag/wick.

The US Army publishes a field manual on improvised munitions. I've been meaning to read it.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

filling it with alcohol/gasoline

You'll want to experiment, but a 50/50 mixture of gasoline and diesel fuel will give improved results. You can also dissolve Styrofoam packing peanuts and/or soap flakes in the gasoline to give it a stickier consistency.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 5 points 1 week ago

That sounds awesome.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I would note that 30dB muffs over 30dB plugs does not provide anything even remotely close to 60dB reduction. It's more like 33dB, because both muffs and plugs block only noise propagated through the auditory canal. They do not block noise conducted to the cochlea by bone.

At noise levels above ~140dB, no amount of PPE is capable of reducing noise to "safe" levels.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Why should a soldier be required to injure themselves with their own weapons? Why should they risk hearing damage while training and fighting?

All small arms should be suppressed.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yes, we can.

The three pieces of "common sense" gun control that we need are:

  1. 50-state reciprocity / National Concealed Carry licensure. It is obscene that a perfectly legal act performed by a person with no criminal record whatsoever, suddenly becomes an aggravated felony, simply by crossing a state line.

  2. Public Access to NICS. A private seller should be able to ask a buyer for proof of a background check, and be able to verify that proof with NICS. Private sales are legal in most states, but private sellers have no access to conduct a background check. This leaves us with the absurd scenario where a private seller can sell to anyone. So long as the buyer doesn't indicate they are a felon, the seller can't be prosecuted, because there is no reasonable way for them to know. Provide that reasonable way, and such sellers can be prosecuted.

  3. Remove silencers from the National Firearms Act. A prohibition on making guns quieter is a mandate for hearing damage.

Three common sense gun control measures we could and should implement immediately. Three common sense gun control measures that are broadly rejected by centrists claiming to be progressive.

The idiotic measures that Hillarycrats keep pushing - like Universal Background Checks, Assault Weapons Bans, Magazine Limits, Waiting Periods - are not "common sense". They are wildly unpopular attacks on mainstream gun owners.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Suppressors reduce the noise of a gunshot by an average of 20 – 35 dB, which is roughly the same as earplugs or earmuffs.

This screen shot is from your own link:

Note that the "average gunshot unsuppressed" is 165 to 170 dB. Note that hearing damage starts at just 85dB.

We are wearing our ear protection, so let's subtract 20-35dB, and we have 130 to 150dB. Definitely above the 85dB lower boundary for hearing damage. OSHA allows less than one second exposure per day at the lowest end of that range.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 0 points 1 week ago

Is this my 1st purchase or 50th?

Oh, if you're trying to return it arbitrarily, it is definitely your first purchase. I've got years of data supporting that. Repeat customers just don't make arbitrary returns. If a repeat customer makes a return, it is because I screwed up, and I don't charge a restock fee on my mistakes. Quite the contrary, I usually offer a replacement without a return, and toss in some goodies as well.

Being anti-consumer

I'm not being anti-consumer. "You" are not a consumer. You're returning the product arbitrarily, not "consuming" it.

What you actually are is a "borrower". Which would be fine if I was a library, but I'm a small business with tight margins.

Catering to borrowers takes time away from serving my customers. I don't feel a pressing need to convert a borrower to a customer.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If they lose customers because of the fee, then aren't they in essence paying the price anyway?

If I buy something from you, and then return it for no reason whatsoever, am I actually a customer? Or am I just some asshole you never want to hear from again?

view more: ‹ prev next ›