justin_o_guy2 wrote on 03/28/13 at 11:15:40:Sri, did your bike need to be broken in? ALL new equipment has to be broken in,, your ignorance about guns really doesnt bolster your opinions.
Brilliant JOG ... however, my car did not need to be broken in.
Whatever that may need, has to come out of the factory, in fact you remember all the issues you had with the first few 1000 miles on your bike. The bloody cyl head plug cap leaking for example. They should have eliminated that 100% if they were forced to run these buggers for say 20- 30 hours on the bench before slapping a sticker on it and tossing it out. You had a bike that used so much oil you thought you'd go broke form pouring in oil in the sucker ... only to have the factory warranty jerk tell you unless it uses more than 1 qt in 500 miles its not warranteeable - Intruder 1400/1500 and vulcan 1500/1600's were famous for that - guess what, we could have eliminated that by setting a limit on what it can use, and they bench run it and see if it does. I've owned 42 bikes in my life, and would have loved that on atleast a few models.
The whole 500-1000 bullet break in period if there is a $100 bullet tax would make owning a gun cost you $100,000 in the first week. Making it untenable for the manufacturer, and promptly you'd be able to buy a perfectly machined and broken in gun right off the shelf.
We can argue all these hypotheticals, I will be happy to explain any of these - but I cant solve every problem including the biggest one - "Well, we dont want to do this".
You remember those days when a policeman saw you weaving crazy all over the road would stop you, ask you if you were drunk, and if so, they'd give you a ride home. Has happened to a few old timers I know of. What changed to now ? Some people plowed into pedestrians, other cars and other objects. They ruined it for all of us so to speak. Misuse of something brings more responsibility on everyone.
You may say Your gun is defective cos its not killed any one, but I'd say so is your alcohol, and your car. BTW the biggest reason why there is still Drunk driving at present rates is cos drunk drivers are almost 99 - 1 likely to be caught and pay hefty fines to the local govt than they are to harm any one other than themselves. Cops want you to drive drunk, they just want you to do it where they can easily catch and hit you with a hefty fine. We dont make $$ off mass murders for local govt.
A $100 bullet tax will not only make random killings nearly non existent, it will also cut way down on gang killings, drive by's, as well as someone getting shot mugging you for $20. They will need to make sure you have more than a few 100 before loading up a gun. It may make a difference in self defense ... how much is the question. That stat would affect the price - maybe $100 should be $50. I dunno. Someone who spends 1000's on a gun I doubt would be worried about a few 100 more in bullets, cos its a matter of life and death. Still, I'd like to look at it after we have such a law and we can adjust it.
Cool.
Srinath.
Pages: 
