JTarrou
1mo ago
Anything that harms "higher" education, the NGO complex and the politically captured "scientists" is good by me. This guy checks all three.
JTarrou
1mo ago
Your source is Shaun King? Talcum X hisself?
The rest is pretty bog-standard conspiratorial huffing. You could pull some police-blotter item on literally any group in the world and construct some bullshit secret conspiracy. Of course, with Da Jooos, there's always some genius like Shaun King to get things started.
JTarrou
1mo ago
could
could be
could drive
When reading a news article, let the word "could" serve as a little bell. In journo-speak, it means "isn't technically impossible". When someone knows they'll be sued and they'll lose if they say something "will" happen, they say it "could" instead. Any time you see the word "could", it negates everything that follows.
JTarrou
1mo ago
I saw no mention of any cutting of the slide in the FBI report, any the modifications were done to spare parts and the process confirmed by putting those parts in a new gun as well.
JTarrou
1mo ago
Yes, SIG would like very much if people all said the 320 was fine. That's what your link says. It's just rewritten SIG ad copy, as is obvious from the very first sentence:
New Hampshire gun-maker Sig Sauer is asking two federal agencies — the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security — to vouch for its embattled P320 pistol.
The entreaty comes as part of a lengthy statement Sig Sauer released July 29 as it continues to push back against allegations — some in the form of lawsuits — that the P320 is unsafe.
JTarrou
1mo ago
For the purposes of certain tests, the subject gun sent to the FBI sometimes had certain parts replaced with modified spare parts, in order to do things like be able to film the inside of the gun while it was being fired, or stress-test a particular part.
Specifically for the test involving the secondary safety, a modified sear was used to remove the primary safety. None of these modifications were done to original parts of the specific gun, and all were replicated on a brand-new SIG 320 from the FBI armory.
JTarrou
1mo ago
I linked you the FBI tests last week, which you dismissed as having "modified" the gun. I'm sure SIG USA is worthy of your dedication and continued support.
JTarrou
2mo ago
They do not currently have the cultural capital to ruin lives en masse.
The loss of privilege feels a lot like oppression.
JTarrou
2mo ago
It's not, read the FBI lab report and stop weakmanning with the youtubers.
It's not, but there's a sucker born in the MIC every minute.
And your article says the Army announced a plan to think about maybe at some point asking a guy about ordering a hundred thousand M7s. That's not "fielded" in any way shape or form. My guess is even that won't happen, but if it does there's a kickback.
JTarrou
2mo ago
When you're down to mind reading a whole country, you might as well hang up the argument.
There's significant context behind some of these theories, the main one is that SIG USA is widely believed to be gaming/bribing/conning the US military procurement tests.
Some readers here may remember the release of SIG USA's replacement for the M-16, which was "adopted by the US Army" before being quietly skuttled at the cost of several hundred million dollars. Keen readers may recall that I called all that long before it happened based on nothing but the claimed weight and chamber pressures. It was such an obvious lie that any expert in the field should have been able to spot it immediately. Is that because I'm smarter than the entire Ordnance Corps, or because I'm not being paid to lie?
Some things to keep in mind. SIG USA is not Sig Sauer, it's a spun-off triple-shell corporation built out of the old Sigarms importer. But now they manufacture, and they don't manufacture anything by Sig Sauer. They just license the logo so people will think this start-up gun company that somehow got a military contract in its first ten years is actually a bespoke european manufacturer.
Now, everything OP says about people being unable to reliably recreate the discharge is true. But equally true is some of the more damning stories, some with video evidence, that show 320s going off with apparently no input. The one that killed an airman recently wasn't even being worn at the time, it was in the holster, sitting on a table some feet from any people. There was also recently a case in the state police of my state had one go off, they sent it to the FBI labs, which were able to recreate the discharge, but not reliably.
In several trials mimicking movements similar to those made by officers in the field,like pressing the gun into a wall, jumping, or running, researchers were able to make the P320 fire without the trigger being pulled. In nine out of 50 attempts using a primed case, the pistol fired after only holster manipulation and sear release, indicating failure of the striker safety lock.
Maybe a 20% chance doesn't sound conclusive, and to be fair it isn't. But you can buy other guns that are just as good as the P320 that don't have a one in five chance of putting a round in your leg if the gun jostles just right in the holster.
In the case of the M-16, Forgotten Weapons has a great show on that, basically the corrupt Ordnance Corps tried to sabotage the first major run of M-16s, and they did. But they still couldn't get the shitpile M-14 back, so they reverted the design to the one Stoner told them to use, chrome-lined the barrels and the gun was fine ever after.
The thread I think you should consider is not the conspiracy theory, which was temporarily correct, but the deep corruption of military procurement, and the sort of dirty tricks that go on there.
JTarrou
2mo ago
Notice the discontinuity with your comparison.
Hamas invaded Israel, committed a bunch of war crimes, and now has no method nor seemingly intention of feeding their own people. Which apparently is Israel's fault?
You're comparing Hamas' crimes to their incompetence, and in so doing illustrating my point.
Yeah, that's the bet all western jews are making. They think Israel is going to fall someday, and their political opinions are often a sublimation of that basic choice. Some take it one way, some take it the other, but it's just pre-survivor's guilt.
This is how the jewish people have survived thousands of years without a country.
JTarrou
2mo ago
1: 65 miles
2: 85 miles
3: 30 yards, wheat this summer
4: 40 miles
5: 3 Miles
6: 5 miles (it technically has a regular flight to Canada), or 45 miles to an actual regional airport.
JTarrou
2mo ago
As with most new technologies, it destabilizes the economy, leading to outsize gains for those who were already in a good position. The dating market bifurcates, with more and more women using the tech to access a shrinking minority of men. Those guys are doing great. They did great in the sexual revolution, and they'll do great any time women are freed to pursue them en masse.
It's also a heyday for women to monetize their sexuality for the majority of men who are priced out of the dating market. Lots of lonely, horny young men to be milked for cash until they figure out AI chatbots are cheaper.
To be clear, most people are still going to pair up, this is all on the margins. But the margins are where movement happens, and the group of marginal sexual partners is growing.
JTarrou
2mo ago
A lot of pushback on the least important part of a month-old post for a pack of people who like to consider themselves smarter than the average bear.....
Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.
JTarrou
2mo ago
People who work at a university aren't nearly smart enough to be on the far side of that slope.
JTarrou
2mo ago
There's disagreement on that, but I'm going with my personal opinion and experience. There's a lot of studies, and if you want to pick your definitions and operationalizations, you can find damn near anything you want. Current meta-studies are saying there's no relationship at all between attractiveness and IQ, or maybe only on the lower end. I don't believe them, in part because I've met Scott (and a couple other geniuses).
I think humans whose genetic expression maximizes any one trait are going to have trade-offs in other areas. Height is correlated with athleticism, to a point. At some height, you can't move properly, so the tallest man in the world never plays basketball. Same thing with geniuses. At the real high reaches of IQ, these people are statistical freaks, and they generally look like it.
To date, I've personally met maybe five or six people smarter than me, and they are all much, much uglier. To the point a few look retarded/disabled. Even beyond the physical stuff you can see in a picture, their mannerisms, twitches and behaviors would be hugely off-putting to most people.
My theory is that attractiveness is generally correlated with IQ, but this horseshoes at the ends of the distribution.
The tree needs to go, dig up the dirt, salt the hole and burn anything still crawling.
There are no good branches. APAB.
More options
Context Copy link