eddhead

OK, so i am not that smart, nor that young (Eco major 1980 Stony Brook) but I will gladly look it over if you are interested in the views of a dumb old guy.

Exactly my point. I currently live in Hell's Kitchen.. you could not walk down the street I live in 20 years ago without a serious weapon. Today it is safe, diverse, hip and really an exciting place to live. Pretty analogous to the tranisition that took place along the lower east side.

according to FBI statistics, 7.5 violent crimes in NYC per 100,000 residents. This translates to 1 crime for every 1333 people. Of course this is violent crime not all crime... I read the book.. not sure i buy the theory, but it sure is thought provoking

1. What is the source of your data? I cannot find anything on the web to validate thos nos, except antecdotal writings from the NRA which are published without back-up or statitical evidence. 2. Even if it is true, comparing large cities to rural areas is kind of like comparing apples to oranges. There are no inner cities, fewer impvoerished areas, less steet gangs, etc...

In a previous thread, a post indicated that crime rates in NYC were above the national average. In fact, NYC has the lowest violent crime rate among the 10 most populated cities in the US, and is ranked 18th best out of the top 240. Sorry to be so anal about this but it is a very sore point of contention with me. p.s. "don't look now" indeed. This from the New Yorker: "On a list of two hundred and forty cities in the United States with a population of a hundred thousand or more, New York City now ranks two hundred-and-twenty-second in crime, down near the bottom with Fontana, California, and Port St. Lucie, Florida" And these from usa today, and msnbc.com http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-0...rimerates_x.htm http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14910822/

cannot really tell about the lume from the photos i have a gen vintage no date and it is sort of antique.. I have seen others with a more yellowish hue however. Mine also does not click.

yep... sorry.

this IS fun.. now let's talk about Iraq!!! (NOT!!!!!)

I beg your pardon but NYC does not have one of the higest murder rates in the US. In fact, it has one of the lowest homicide rates of major cities in the US and has been within the top 10 for several years now. Nothwithstanding the crap you read from NRA news letters (yeah, i read the article too .. shows you what how you can distort a truth ), you need to adjust your statistics to account for the population at large.. that is why they call it a 'rate' . The problem with washington dc is its proximity to maryland and virgina where guns are easily obtained. I'll give you chicago and detroit though.. the problem there is with out of state manufacturers who illegally market and distribute gun products to chicago gangs and felons. lack of a federal registration requirement and database. these cities have the right laws, but they lack the tools to support them. And that is the point State wide gun control will never be effective as long as people have the option of going across state lines and purchasing guns from less restrictive states or area gun dealers can flaunt the law. That is why we need National not state laws. It will never happen though, not in this political climate. the NRA just has too much money to throw around.

I guess we are not going to agree on this. As a criminal there is a lesser chance you would have a gun at all if gun control laws were national and uniformally applied. There have been a number of statistical studies that substante the direct correlation between number of handguns and number of homicides. My previous thread refers provides an index to a number of such articles. As to driveby killings, my point is that most of the people being trageted are armed as well. Doesn't prevent them from being shot at though. The real problem is that a significantly high percentage of deaths are to people who just happened to have the bad luck of being in the way. Are you saying that if they had guns, they would not get shot? Does that mean that everyone should be REQUIRED to be armed just in case some lunatic degenerate happens to shoot them by mistake?

The statement about an armed populace being the only real crime deterrent is inconsistent with statistical findings: 1. The US has one of the highest homicide rates of any of developed country. We also have one of the least restrictive set of firearms control laws. More than 1/2 or all homicides are firearm related. 2. Within the US ares with the highest percentage of gun ownership also have the highest homicide and suicide rates. There are numerous surveys that substatiate these claims, some of them can be found here: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/Firearms.htm

I agree with your comments on the distiction between knives and guns... not withstanding my sincere condolences to you avitt..

I wasn't going to respond to this post because I did not want to go off topic, and the fact is, as long as forum rules do not prohibit, I think any dealer has the right to sell any artical he or she sees fit. If there is a market for it it will sell. As far as I know, there is no law against selling knives. But the comments suggesting US gun controls laws are ineffective strike me as being overly simplistic. The issue in the US with gun control is that laws are governed by states and not federal govt, and are thus not uniformly applied. That is why there is such a big black market for handguns in NYC. People travel to states with less restrictive laws, buy lots of handguns, and re-sell them to felons, drug dealers, street gangs and other less than upstanding citizens. I am not sure how many innocent bystatnders are killed each year by drive by shooters with bad aim, but I know it is a significant number. More uniform national laws would prevent that. The lack of national gun laws is a leading reason why homicide rates in the US are extremely high by developed nations standards. I agree, guns don't kill people, people kill people. I just don't want to give those who would kill a head start. Sorry about crapping on the thread. You can delete if you need to

wow.. i had to keep reading that to make sure i got it right.

now THAT's funny!!!

This has actually been discussed before. Rolex artificially manages to keep the price of their watches high, but manipulating the supply side of the supply and demand dynamic. I guess they would rather sell fewer watches at higher prices than more at lower, even though they can probably bring in more revenue with the alternate approach (but probably at leaner margins). Clearly their concern is protecting the luxury brand... you have to give them credit for not allowing short term revenue opportunities to distract them from their longer term interests. It is true they produce 1MM watches a year. It is also true, the sell virtually every watch they produce.

in the immortal words of jackie gleason.. .... and awwwwaayyy we goooooo!

I would like that as well.. it would certainly clear the air a bit... thanks.

true, but cost and price are not necessarily related in a free market. supply and demand dynamics, not costs,.drive market pricing for commodity products that have little differentiation. if market based prices do not cover fully loaded costs, as a producer, you have a problem. you either need to drive down unit costs, are consider another livlihood. but this is not a commodity market, it is a luxury market and there is distiction between brands even it is only in the perception of potential buyers. no doubt, the rolex brand carries an intrinsic value appeal that translates to a premium price, or their products would not command that price.

well, toyoto has manufacturing plants in fremont california, but we still identify the product as a japanese car right? the brand and its promise are built on the reputation of japanese engineering which connotes attention to detail during the manufactring process and high quality control standards. is there any difference between how we view toyota and japanese vs how we view of rolex and swiss? EDIT: I hear ya... Einstein was perhaps the greatest philosopher of our time.. ok so now I am off subject again.. i think i am a bad influence

pretty deep posts... philosphy major

The hairdryer method works where glue is used to adhere the insert to the bezel however in some case double sided tape is used. Where tape is used, some people have had success lifting the insert with a toothpick but if you do this, you run the risk of scratching the insert. You can also pry the bezel off with the flat side of a swiss army knife.. (be very carefull) and once off, push the insert out and realign it. The tricky part here is relacing the bezel spring, but it is doable. I did that with my SMP and it worked fine.

well.. my mistake... .it is a gorgeous watch though

I believe both Shephed and Burke are 'attendings...'

So was Sheppard's Daytona... I do not have a pic, but i remember seeing it.