• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

866 F'n Saint

1 Follower

About mikewof

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

19,853 profile views
  1. mikewof

    What's in your arsenal??

    I dunno, I guess a live in a different world than a lot of gun owners. I've cruised through L.A. County, Corona, Gravesend, South Bronx, Washington Heights, though not much in Chicago ... so far nothing more than some chump who punched like a five year old girl and tried to mug me on the G-Train in Brooklyn. Even a skateboard would have been way more weapon needed for that one. If I moved through the world with people blocking off my truck and trying to shoot me like in a Mad Max movie, I guess I might get a little Bernie Goetz. For now though, the guns in my life are more the "leave 'em in storage" type.
  2. mikewof

    What's in your arsenal??

    This is getting into PA territory. But we had the DGU (defensive use of gun) argument back in PA about two years ago. It turns out that it's a statistic that is based in little more than wishes and fairy godmother juice. When you actually parse the Department of Justice data, the actual number of times that people have used guns against assailants or intruders who they didn't actually know, and in regular neighborhoods that aren't poverty stricken, was somewhere around a hundred. So yeah, if you do lots of business in rough neighborhoods, or if you have family or acquaintances that might be the kind of people to jack you, then yeah, arm up. But this idea that guns are keeping the hordes at bay isn't really going to work if data and precision still mean something in the face of fear-mongering and alarmism. If you like your guns, keep your gun. But this idea that we're somehow more moral because we have a gun in our lady-purse that we didn't use to kill someone today, just starts to take on the odor of bullshit. There is nothing about that gun that connects you to the mainline of humanity, and it's most likely that anyone who uses their gun for professional crime-making, and has been doing so while you were watching reruns of All In The Family, will outshoot you. And the concealed carry people know that they are little more than amateur gunmen. So they keep their guns hidden.
  3. The complexity of the devices has changed for one ... one of the infamous Jeep transmissions has a belt in there, for some hell-forsaken reason. Boothie used to make whiskey-drinking money just building override switches for the wonky-ass Borg-Warner electric transfer. Engineers -- if left unattended -- will find a way to fuck up a wet-dream. They just add complexity where it isn't needed. My old Isuzu General Motors has a 5-speed manual, and a manual transfer, and she will find a way to slog through a muddy morning in Bayonne. It's not the efficiency, it's just that they've found ways to make engines run a solid 200k without a rebuild, what's the point of switching out the old 300k manual transmissions for 150k automatics? Great, the little race car has an automatic and the Proctologist with the mid-life crisis is able to take half-a-second off his quarter mile. Fine. But with trucks? Fucking why? It's like putting an automatic blower on the bilge. If we're too absent minded to vent our fumes, maybe we deserve the spark.
  4. I've had clutches fail, I've overloaded engines, and I've overloaded transmissions. But I've never overloaded a manual gearbox and I've never had a manual gearbox fail on me. Manual gearboxes are simpler, and thus they are fundamentally more advanced technologies than automatics.
  5. mikewof

    What's in your arsenal??

    OC is better in all situations. You're advertising your commitment to your Constitutional rights, you warn the soft flowers from a distance that you're armed, you don't need to dig through a "tactical purse" to find your gun, and you presumably don't need to ask anyone's permission to carry your gun. Now, if you switch from openly carrying a handgun to openly carrying a lightweight long gun, you'll then usually have a more effective tool for most intended purposes.
  6. mikewof

    What's in your arsenal??

    Yeah, shit's all fucked up ... but apparently a sufficiently large proportion of Floridians prefer to exercise their constitutional right in secrecy with permission rather than openly and notoriously without permission. Cue Normy's "may and shall" moldy peaches.
  7. mikewof

    What's in your arsenal??

    Your argument fails with U.S. Department of Justice data. The "just-in-case" gun that you carry is less likely to be used for your intended purpose than for an unintended purpose. What you call a "ridiculous extreme" is in fact the more common likelihood. Fire extinguishers, car insurance, spare tires and road flares rarely kill children by accident, they rarely are used in the heat of passion or despair for an unintended purpose. Perhaps you needed to take a statistics class along with that debate class. If you enjoy your guns, then enjoy them, you don't need an excuse, it's your Constitutional right to keep them. So why make up nonsense? I own two guns and neither of my guns have triggered a need to reimagine reality.
  8. mikewof

    What's in your arsenal??

    Pussy. If you were a real man, you would carry your gun on your hip, and not take your business to any place that doesn't welcome your open and notorious extraction of The Constitution of the United States of America. I don't carry a gun concealed since I don't carry a gun. If I did carry a gun, it would be on my hip. But I don't need to carry a gun, because I get along with people and I have no need to shoot them. Obviously not everyone is in the same boat as I am ... some people hate their fellow humans and need to carry a concealed weapon in case they have some murderin' to do ...
  9. mikewof

    Getting Tough With The Maskless

    In that case, you should shut your taco-receptacle, you shitheel.
  10. The CDC might be getting data that is hard to interpret, but you make them sound like a gaggle of idiots. They folded the flu and pneumonia statistics into the COVID statistics because someone TOLD them to do it. I don't really care who told them to do it, it's still shit science. And you can't possibly justify it. You might know how to frame a deck better than me, but I'm a scientist, this is my fucking job, when you have a pot of data, you don't fucking combine it with other mildly related data, because then you lose the integrity of your data, and your resolution plummets when you have to expand the boundary conditions of your curves. It's dumb, shitty science, and it's not the kind of thing that scientists at the CDC would do unless they were specifically instructed to do that dumb-ass thing for political reasons. From whom? I have no fucking clue, and as I wrote, I don't care. But it happened on Trump's watch. So the buck has to stop with him. Personally, I don't really have all that much against Trump. He used remote control flying robots to kill brown people just like Obama did, and just like Bush Jr. did. He had his chance to be a human, and he failed. I just sent in my ballot, it was a toss-up between Princess Khadijah Maryam Jacob-Fambro / Khadijah Maryam Jacob Sr., and Biden / Harris. But I would prefer not to say who received my vote. Trump fucked up this COVID thing, you heard it here first, Mike agrees that Trump has earned himself the title of ex-president and all the golf he can manage. We don't need to hate the guy, he had a few amusing parts of his Presidency, and he had a few successes too, he found a way to take credit for Israel and UAE finally making their lunch counter business official. He had some other stuff too. But that's not really the point. Rather, COVID wasn't political back then, and it isn't political now. We had a chance to make some good decisions that didn't put Americans out of work, and derail an entire generation of young people. But we didn't do it. We were too busy crying in our soup that some Baby Boomers were going to die. And then they didn't, for the most part. Now, as to what you wrote, you're wrong. I don't need to "provide a reasonable explanation" for the shitshow that was NYC when this thing started. Because I've already plainly admitted to the show-worthiness of the shit. We won't really know what happened in NYC until we have data, and we won't have data until late next year. So fuck off with you demanding what I need to do. I don't need to do it. I have my guesses Frenchie. But the one that keeps bugging me is that I wonder if once the COVID things started, if anyone bothered to test for Yersinia Pestis from the people who lived in close proximity to sewer steam. And even if they did, we know that a number of those deaths were bacterial strep because a number of those deaths are always bacterial strep, some 40,000 per year. So what can explain a city's death rate that jumps from 150 or so per day up to 600 per day? Fuck if I know, but it's not unprecedented in the world, just in NYC. Aging infrastructure which led to the perfect epidemiological storm this season in cities around the world? Maybe. Aging infrastructure has been shown to trigger these with strep and yersinia pestis. As for that doctor, I'm not going to get into a fight of trivialities. It's sufficient for me to not that dietary cholesterol is not strongly linked to arterial cholesterol. They're two different things. If someone's blood is jammed with cholesterol deposits, then they likely have a health problem far more general than what they're shoving into their pie hole. They're likely overweight, they likely get little exercise, they likely have early stages of organ failure. We do have something called "science" now and aside from the ethical concerns of eating chicken and sucking on the titties of cows, most of us can conclude that it's relatively safe to eat eggs fried in butter. If you have a hard-on for that doctor, then get your own MD degree and call him a charlatan. I don't give a shit. I forgot about the fucker completely until you just brought it up again.
  11. The excess deaths are all estimates. We won't have actual data on actual excess deaths until late 2021 or even a little later with the COVID delays. Until then, we knows that SARS-CoV-2 is highly virulent, it spreads like a fat titty on a sausage plate. And we know that SARS-CoV-2 is not terribly lethal because most of the people who get it do not die. It seems to have an IDR a bit higher than the common rhinoviruses and coronaviruses. Of course, we're not currently in flu season, and that helps a lot. 2021 flu season might be a bitch and a half, lots of deaths, most of them attributed to COVID-19, but in reality we're going to have some bounce back from this year's lockdown. That's a lot more poverty in the 2021 flu season than in the 2020 flu season. So there are going to be a lot of asthmatics who live in houses with broken vacuum cleaners, and people who can't afford medicine, and people without healthcare that die from community acquired pneumonia because they didn't have the money to get some antibiotics for the lung infection, and they assumed it was COVID-19 anyway, and who the hell dies of COVID-19 in 2021? But that guy will die of COVID-19 in 2021 because he died of a pneumonia from bacterial strep, but he also will test positive for SARS-CoV-2, and even 2021 we're still going to be stuck on this nonsensical bullshit that viruses are worse than bacteria, even though bacteria kill more people than viruses and all cancers combined. So the doctor will put down COVID-19 on the death certificate, along with "lungs the consistency of tapioca pudding and the color of an ashtray in a Downtown Reno lounge in 1976." The point here is that the IDR for COVID-19 keeps falling because it's ultimately just a coronavirus, and its novelty is starting to wear off. As its novelty wears off, doctors learn how to treat it better, people stop overreacting and kill their patients like that army truck ran over the hero The Crying Game movie. The issue here is that you really should put be on ignore. You're an utter dipshit, and in fact you might even be more emotionally malignant than diseases womb from which you launched.
  12. The concrete isn't just cracked, it's all fucked up. It's a patchwork of the original strip driveway poured in 1923, and the filler driveway poured in 1978, and the edge-to driveway poured in 1992. It's just a ripe, shit mess. But I think the reason you see the cracks on the surface with asphalt is because it has very little shear strength, so when the ground moves a bit in a spot, it shows up in the asphalt like tracing paper. The cracks in this case aren't due to shifting soils, they're due to about a hundred years of wear-and-tear on the driveway. So compression-wise, I think I'm good ... as long as the driveway doesn't mind being 6-inches deep in some spots, and 1.75-inches deep in other spots. The moss idea though, that's really good. The end of the driveway is kind a tenant's smoking spot, I don't want to asphalt that because it will be too hot for them in the summer. But if I just build a little transition from the end of the asphalt to the original concrete driveway at the end (which I'll need anyway, in case I ever decide to the use the front entrance to the garage instead of the rear, then I can just plant moss everywhere past the end of the asphalt. I've never planet moss ... doesn't it take years to get established and grow?
  13. It's looking like this is going to be my best option. I'm going to chip and shovel all the loose stuff into a big pile, smash it to shit with my 8 pound sledge, then shovel the stuff into the holes. Then I'll buy about four cubic yards of asphalt, spread it around, use the jumping jack I have, then run a rented steamroller over it. But realistically, I can't add more than two inches onto the height of that driveway without interfering with other stuff. So how thin can I really go on the asphalt, given that I have a relatively solid paved driveway underneath it? I gave a close look at the next door guys driveway, he did asphalt over concrete, it seems to hold together really well. But he's the owner, I'm not sure if tenants can take care of asphalt driveway.
  14. No. Perhaps you should use some of that expensive college training to actually read the thread? I'm complaining about throwing the vast numbers of asymptomatic and mild infections in with hospital-stay and physician directed cases. And I'm complaining that we have so little data about competing illnesses, that we can't effectively see what is happening. What I'm discussing IS actual news about the subversion of the CDC, but apparently since it requires thought, you prefer to just jump to your own conclusions.
  15. AFAIK, those are estimates based on previous years. Frenchie and I went over this a couple months ago. We won't know actual excess deaths until the data is released late in 2021. As for what you claim about strep, the data suggests that your experience doesn't coincide with experience. In 2016 for instance, there were about 2.5 million pneumonia deaths (link) with about 60% of those due to strep infections. Strep is the most common cause of Community Acquired Pneumonias. So, using that as an average year, and assuming all 1 million or so people who died from COVID would not have died from co-occurring illnesses, we're looking at about 1.5 million from strep, versus about 1 million from SARS-CoV-2, so far, with about 3 months left in the data year. Perhaps your experience is because strep is an incredibly common bacterial infection and it is usually asymptomatic in most people because when it doesn't get into the respiratory system, it can't cause much damage. It's too bad about your COVID, glad you're better, but everyone I know who had it, including family members, described it as a cold at worse, and barely noticed it at best. But that's their experience. The data shows that the most SARS-CoV-2 infections do not require extensive treatment, or are outright asymptomatic. We should therefore remember, that our personal experiences with strep or with SARS are not the same thing as science, they are our experiences.