[njbchbum]

Originally Posted by buggyone

This law has been on the books since 2003. There have been heavyweight changes in the administration in New Jersey. Why has it not been repealed?

Perhaps because the Gov of NJ has lost approx 100 lbs and is no longer the 'heavyweight' your post seems to mock?

[EnglishJW]

Originally Posted by Steve9930

That's like comparing an orange to a banana.

From Wikipedia
A banana is an edible fruit
The orange (specifically, the sweet orange) is the fruit of the citrus species

It seems to be that this is a valid comparison.

[Steve9930]

Originally Posted by janmcn

Just saying there has been some technology that has worked since the ill-fated Edsel was designed 50 years ago.

That's very true. But how many times have you had a problem with your cell phone, how many dropped calls, how many wrong numbers, no bars showing. There are some very good uses for technology and there is technology that works very well. But there is no technology that works 100% of the time, none.

Critical system analysis or sometimes what we called Management of Change or a Hazard System Analysis are done to try and determine what are the out comes if this piece fails or that piece fails. You then make design changes to the device or add or remove equipment based on the analysis. The more pieces in a critical system the more chance of failure. So there are systems that need to be as simple as possible, the fewer the parts the better chance the device will perform as designed. If that is not possible then you build in redundancy of systems. Two or maybe three different identical systems with automatic fail over. Economics then become more of a part of the equation.

The cell phone is not a critical system. If it fails to do as it was designed the out come is, you or I are not happy with the performance. No one dies in the process. It was never designed in the first place as a critical device. It is a device for convenience.

A firearm is a critical system. If a firearm is needed in a high stress situation and fails to perform then there is a possibility that a person will be harmed or killed. Firearms need to be designed as simply as possible. Firearms are critical systems and should not be politically design driven which in this case of what is called the smart gun is what is happening. Firearms are a very emotional topic. One that politicians have been exploiting for years. One that people need to look at the facts and not the emotional out cry. Firearms were designed to inflict bodily harm, disable or kill your attacker. Protect you or someone else's life. They were never designed to be totally safe. They are designed to be effective. Systems like these require the user to understand that fact and to be cautious when using or owning them. If you research the accidental shootings you will find that they all go back to one thing, negligence. You can never design out negligence. your wasting your efforts.

[Steve9930]

Originally Posted by EnglishJW

From Wikipedia
A banana is an edible fruit
The orange (specifically, the sweet orange) is the fruit of the citrus species

It seems to be that this is a valid comparison.

Only from the fact that they are two pieces of technology, which is a correct comparison. You are very astute for catching that comparison. Glad to see your very sharp today.

[buggyone]

Originally Posted by Steve9930

That's very true. But how many times have you had a problem with your cell phone, how many dropped calls, how many wrong numbers, no bars showing. There are some very good uses for technology and there is technology that works very well. But there is no technology that works 100% of the time, none.

Critical system analysis or sometimes what we called Management of Change or a Hazard System Analysis are done to try and determine what are the out comes if this piece fails or that piece fails. You then make design changes to the device or add or remove equipment based on the analysis. The more pieces in a critical system the more chance of failure. So there are systems that need to be as simple as possible, the fewer the parts the better chance the device will perform as designed. If that is not possible then you build in redundancy of systems. Two or maybe three different identical systems with automatic fail over. Economics then become more of a part of the equation.

The cell phone is not a critical system. If it fails to do as it was designed the out come is, you or I are not happy with the performance. No one dies in the process. It was never designed in the first place as a critical device. It is a device for convenience.

A firearm is a critical system. If a firearm is needed in a high stress situation and fails to perform then there is a possibility that a person will be harmed or killed. Firearms need to be designed as simply as possible. Firearms are critical systems and should not be politically design driven which in this case of what is called the smart gun is what is happening. Firearms are a very emotional topic. One that politicians have been exploiting for years. One that people need to look at the facts and not the emotional out cry. Firearms were designed to inflict bodily harm, disable or kill your attacker. Protect you or someone else's life. They were never designed to be totally safe. They are designed to be effective. Systems like these require the user to understand that fact and to be cautious when using or owning them. If you research the accidental shootings you will find that they all go back to one thing, negligence. You can never design out negligence. your wasting your efforts.

You may very well be right in what you say. However, shouldn't a legal gun store owner be allowed to sell a legal product (smart guns) without being threated with arson and death?

[Cajulian]

Originally Posted by buggyone

You may very well be right in what you say. However, shouldn't a legal gun store owner be allowed to sell a legal product (smart guns) without being threated with arson and death?

Sure, any merchant should be able to sell legal products. And they should be able to do it safely. However, this merchant saw the "error" of his thinking. He thought Smart Guns were a good thing for the public. But once he became an "informed, knowledgeable" merchant, he decided it was in the best interest of the majority of people, to not sell them. I would say he is a very wise man, to look at the situation and have the integrity to correct his thinking once he knew the real story behind the reliability and implications of Smart Guns.

Of course, this is just my opinion, but indeed a wise one.

Ask us another tough question, we like the challenge.

[leftyf]

I'll just add NJ to the list of states that I will not visit again.

[rubicon]

I find it interesting that people feel unsafe about other people owning guns but perfectly content with states selling marijuana. I certainly don't want to be around people smoking marijuana infecting my lungs and brain

Why is it that the gun control isn't settled like Benghazi IRS scandal, etc I am so sick of the hypocrisy

[buggyone]

[QUOTE=rubicon;875281]I find it interesting that people feel unsafe about other people owning guns but perfectly content with states selling marijuana. I certainly don't want to be around people smoking marijuana infecting my lungs and brain."

Just think, though, that Florida may soon legalize "medical usage" marijuana. We can then see people with concealed carry pistols who are walking around The Villages eating their marijuana cupcakes. According to an article in USAToday, eating mj is more potent than smoking it. Stoned plus armed!

I am sure it will not take much "chronic pain" for a lot of local doctors to write scrips for marijuana to their patients.

[Steve9930]

Originally Posted by Cajulian

Sure, any merchant should be able to sell legal products. And they should be able to do it safely. However, this merchant saw the "error" of his thinking. He thought Smart Guns were a good thing for the public. But once he became an "informed, knowledgeable" merchant, he decided it was in the best interest of the majority of people, to not sell them. I would say he is a very wise man, to look at the situation and have the integrity to correct his thinking once he knew the real story behind the reliability and implications of Smart Guns.

Of course, this is just my opinion, but indeed a wise one.

Ask us another tough question, we like the challenge.

[Steve9930]

Originally Posted by buggyone

You may very well be right in what you say. However, shouldn't a legal gun store owner be allowed to sell a legal product (smart guns) without being threated with arson and death?

Yes I agree. My comment in an earlier threat on the subject was that I find the people that go way left or way right on this subject equally disturbing and possibly criminal. Freedom means you have the right to do what is legal and it may just turn my stomach, but I'll defend your right to do so.

[Steve9930]

[quote=buggyone;875292]

Originally Posted by rubicon

I find it interesting that people feel unsafe about other people owning guns but perfectly content with states selling marijuana. I certainly don't want to be around people smoking marijuana infecting my lungs and brain."

Just think, though, that Florida may soon legalize "medical usage" marijuana. We can then see people with concealed carry pistols who are walking around The Villages eating their marijuana cupcakes. According to an article in USAToday, eating mj is more potent than smoking it. Stoned plus armed!

I am sure it will not take much "chronic pain" for a lot of local doctors to write scrips for marijuana to their patients.

Enhances your aim!

[rubicon]

[quote=Steve9930;875313]

Originally Posted by buggyone

Enhances your aim!

Steve9930: If you recall in Bill Cosby's famous monologue he had a response to the guy that said taking drugs "enhanced"his personality.

I don't swear but Bill Cosby's response was "Well would if your a jerk"? the actual word he used was a compound word beginning with "A"

[Steve9930]

[quote=rubicon;875328]

Originally Posted by Steve9930

Steve9930: If you recall in Bill Cosby's famous monologue he had a response to the guy that said taking drugs "enhanced"his personality.

I don't swear but Bill Cosby's response was "Well would if your a jerk"? the actual word he used was a compound word beginning with "A"

I remember that quote: The word started with and a and ended with a hole.....
Did it not seem that life was far simpler then?

[DaleMN]

Somehow I think I'd feel a lot more comfortable with a cloud of marijuana smoke coming my way that a bullet from a handgun.