NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 00:54:06 -0600
From: Barry Lennox
Subject: Re: MICROWAVE DETECTOR FOR CONCEALED FIREARMS.
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 19:56:26 +1300
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
X-Original-Trace: 12 Jan 2003 19:54:03 +1300, 203-167-132-218.dialup.clear.net.nz
Organization: CLEAR Net New Zealand http://www.clear.net.nz - Complaints firstname.lastname@example.org
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: Complaints to email@example.com
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 03:39:32 -0000, "Designori"
>A revolver would be just another welded-up chunk of metal.
Maybe, if you got the right ammo to the right gun at the right time.
>They wouldn't have to co-operate. We'd do it from here. How much? Of the
>rounds that didn't contain GPS positioning telltales, 100%.
Reading too much science fiction again. Can you cite me a ref that
shows how we can fit GPS telltales into a .22 round?
>Are you fantasizing about ancient grannies with sub-machine guns again?
WTF are you keeping on about??
You keep avoiding the point here. Your ground-based radar deployment
will become known to the low-life in a matter of days or hours, so
they then mask the weapons presence with cooking foil, or a metal tin
or similar. Then, to be effective, yes you must:--- " spot metal
target on ground radar and sufficient to warrant a person-check and
search."------- (Your quote) Hence creating a nightmare where anybody
with a metal reflection bigger than a small handgun can be stopped and
searched. That will certainly include grannies with their shopping
bags. The false alarm rate could easily be 99%, I recall reading in a
security journal that any system with a false positive alarm rate
higher than around 5% rapidly falls into disrepute. So, can you not
see the problem here?
You also stoutly asserted that " The only possessors of firearms in
the UK are criminals." Surely this is BS, surely the police and
military still have them, don't they? Also, AFAIK, ordinary citizens
can own a single shot rifle or shotgun, is that true or not. Can you
answer the questions?
>You have adopted the position of a gun enthusiast.
Bollocks, you have learnt a lesson. Don't assume. I am not a gun
enthusiast, don't own one, and don't care for the NRA type nutters.
OTOH, there's little evidence that gun control works. Look at
Washington DC. Legallly owing a handgun there has been impossible for
ordinary citizens since about 1970, I think. Yet the murder rate is
pretty amazing. When I was living there in 1991, there was about 1.4
murders a day. All to do with poverty, drugs and guns getting mixed
up. And the fatcat politicians didn't really give a toss, just
muttered more about control, but it was only words.
>You are spoonfed opinions and aren't strong enough to find your way without.
>No, I know where you live. It explains a lot.
OK, here's the gauntlet. My opinion is that your ground based gun
detection radar is doomed to fail for the reasons above. Prove me
wrong. But there is a market for it, why don't you put it to some good
use, like finding mines that the UK defence industry whores sold
around the world.
>I'm very obviously in the UK. Very obviously. It's also obvious that you
>can't argue your position.
Why is that so obvious? My position is that your ground based gun
detection radar is doomed to fail for the reasons above. Never mind
the spectral pollution and HERP concerns.