[Info-vax] Nice printers for OpenVMS?

[David Froble]

Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> On 8/5/2012 2:26 PM, David Froble wrote:
>> Paul Sture wrote:
>>> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 16:04:29 +0100, Single Stage to Orbit wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 2012-08-05 at 16:38 +0200, Paul Sture wrote:
>>>>> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/08/the-portable-3d-
>>>>> printer-that-fits-in-a-briefcase/
>>>>>> (I want that for Christmas !)
>>>>> Ah, a portable 3D printer.  Nice.
>>>> What's giving lawmakers all over the world fits is that these things 
>>>> can
>>>> potentially be used to print guns and make drugs given the right
>>>> ingredients!
>>>
>>> "Hobbyist builds working assault rifle using 3D printer"
>>>
>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/30/3d_printed_assault_rifle/
>>>
>>
>> Not sure what a 3-D printer is.
>>
>> But I do know guns, and the liberals once again are more interested in
>> appearance than fact.  Fact is, if you want to do some damage, most
>> assault weapons would rate rather low on the list of capabilities.
>>
>> For real effect, start with a semi-automatic shotgun (or pump), remove
>> the stock, shorten the barrel, and load with double ought buckshot.  If
>> you want to top that, probably the next step up would be a grenade
>> launcher.
>>
>> The problem with the lawmakers is that they are more interested in votes
>> than results, and their actions show that.  SO, I guess they'll be
>> thinking about restricting 3-D printers.
>>
>> What most refuse to acknowledge that none of the weapons do any harm
>> without help from people.  The information available on the web today
>> can allow most anyone with nefarious intent to do harm.  Pandora's box
>> is truly open.
>>
>> I know they're trying to claim that the guy that shot up the theatre in
>> Colorado was "disturbed", but, I have to wonder if he would have acted
>> the same is everyone in the theatre was also armed, and trained.  What
>> the hell, MAD (a truly obscene concept) worked for the 1960s to the 
>> 1990s.
> 
> 
> I don't think I want to be in that theater with a mad man and a few 
> hundred armed men!  I would expect something like seventy percent 
> casualties!

This totally misses the point I was trying to make.  Maybe improve your reading 
skills a bit.  What I wrote was, would the disturbed person's thinking maybe be 
influenced if he knew without a doubt that as soon as he did something there 
would be many weapons pointing at him.  It's his decision making I'm 
questioning, not what might happen with everyone armed.

> ONE man with a gun who is also an expert pistol shot is a situation I 
> would feel a lot better about!  I'd feel even better if I were wearing
> a bullet proof vest.


Vest doesn't cover your head ....

Perhaps public places such as theaters should have detectors, thus causing 
people to know that they won't get past the door with a metal weapon.  Ounce of 
prevention is worth a pound of cure ....

Perhaps if there is going to be some local entertainment, as some people thought 
was happening, it must be announced beforehand, and people trained to drop to 
the floor if something happens, to allow any security people to act.