Return-Path: X-Scanned-By: RAE MPP/Clamd http://raeinternet.com/mpp X-Scanned-By: This message was scanned by MPP Lite Edition (www.messagepartners.com)! X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net Received: by prxy.net (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.2.10) with PIPE id 36720238; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 19:01:40 -0700 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.5 (2006-08-29) on localhost X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,EMPTY_MESSAGE, NO_RECEIVED,NO_RELAYS autolearn=no version=3.1.5 X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.2.10 List-Unsubscribe: List-ID: Message-ID: From: "Stagecraft" Sender: "Stagecraft" To: "Stagecraft" Precedence: list Subject: Stagecraft Digest #988 Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:59:55 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline X-TFF-CGPSA-Version: 1.4 X-prxy-Spam-Filter: Scanned For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Stagecraft Digest, Issue #988 1. Re: a political stance by "Bill Nelson" 2. Re: a political stance by "Bill Nelson" 3. Re: Re[2]: a political stance by "Bill Nelson" 4. Re: Black-and-white or sepia photo effect by "Delbert Hall" 5. Re: TV effect by Dorian Kelly 6. Re: Black-and-white or sepia photo effect by "Bill Nelson" 7. Re: Black-and-white or sepia photo effect by Bruce Purdy 8. Re: a political stance by Dorian Kelly 9. political stance by b Ricie 10. Re: Black-and-white or sepia photo effect by "Bill Nelson" 11. Re: political stance by "Bill Nelson" 12. Re: a political stance - theatre by Scott Spidell 13. Re: a political stance - theatre by "Bill Nelson" 14. Re: a political stance - theatre by "Chris Warner" 15. Re: a political stance - theatre by "Bill Nelson" 16. Re: a political stance - theatre by Philip Johnson 17. Canes and other weapons by "Frank E. Merrill" 18. Re: a political stance by "Paul Schreiner" 19. Re: political stance by "Paul Schreiner" 20. Re: a political stance - theatre by "Paul Schreiner" 21. Re: a political stance - kids and weapons by MissWisc [at] aol.com 22. Re: a political stance - theatre by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 23. Re: a political stance - kids and weapons by "Nigel Worsley" 24. Re: a political stance by "Kirk Wahamaki" 25. Re: a political stance - theatre by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 26. Re: a political stance by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 27. Re: a political stance by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 28. Re: a political stance by Jerry Durand 29. Re: a political stance by Jerry Durand 30. Re: a political stance - theatre by Chip Wood 31. Re: a political stance by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 32. Re: a political stance by CB 33. Re: a political stance by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 34. Re: a political stance by CB 35. Re: a political stance by Jerry Durand 36. Re: a political stance - theatre by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 37. Re: a political stance by Jerry Durand 38. Re: a political stance by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 39. Re: a political stance - kids and weapons by "Storms, Randy" 40. Re: a political stance by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 41. Re: a political stance by CB 42. Was: a political stance, Now: Safety Handbooks by Bill Potter 43. Re: a political stance by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 44. Re[2]: a political stance by "Frank E. Merrill" 45. Re: a political stance by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 46. Re: Was: a political stance, Now: Safety Handbooks by "Frank E. Merrill" 47. Re: Canes and other weapons by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 48. Re: Was: a political stance, Now: Safety Handbooks by Bill Potter 49. Re: Was: a political stance, Now: Safety Handbooks by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 50. Re: a political stance - theatre by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 51. Re: Was: a political stance, Now: Safety Handbooks by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 52. Re[2]: Was: a political stance, Now: Safety Handbooks by "Frank E. Merrill" 53. Re: a political stance - theatre by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 54. Re: a political stance by "ladesigners [at] juno.com" 55. Re: a political stance by CB 56. Push sticks by Myself 57. Re: Push sticks by "Frank E. Merrill" 58. Re: a political stance by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 59. Re: a political stance - theatre by 60. Re: a political stance by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 61. Re: Re[2]: a political stance by "RD" 62. Re: a political stance by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 63. a political stance. by "David Fox" 64. Re: a political stance by Jerry Durand 65. Re: a political stance - kids and weapons by 66. Re: a political stance by 67. Re: a political stance - theatre by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 68. Re: a political stance by 69. Looking for VL3500 in Texas by "Laura McMeley" 70. Re: a political stance by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 71. Re: a political stance by FrankWood95 [at] aol.com 72. Re: a political stance by 73. Re: a political stance. by 74. Re: a political stance - theatre by 75. Re: a political stance - kids and weapons by "Paul Schreiner" *** Please update the subject line of your reply to use the subject *** line of the message you are replying to! Please only reply to *** one message subject in each reply. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <1310.64.28.53.215.1161245253.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References:

Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 01:07:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: a political stance From: "Bill Nelson" > Out of curiouity, is there some reference, some stats that prove this? > That most criminals don't carry firearms? Probably, somewhere. From the news articles, it is the bank/store robbers that carry firearms. The burglars, muggers, rapists don't seem to do so. > I would have to find the reports yet again, but unless something has > changed in the past two years, violent crime and crimes involving firearms > have gone UP over there. (As well as in Australia, where they also have > banned firearms). I don't know where "over there" is. There is an interesting statistic from Florida, when they passed the concealed carry law. The crime rates for muggings, assaults and (if I recall correctly) even burglary went down. Seems like the criminals did not like taking the chance of being shot by the little old grandma packing a 45 and knowing how to use it. They just took their activities to nearby states. >> How many crimes HAVE been prevented by such a citizen being armed? And >> of >> those, how many have resulted in the death or serious injury of the >> aggressor? And how many attempted crimes where the victim has drawn a >> weapon >> have actually resulted in that victim being shot as a result? > > Again, I'd have to dig up my paperwork, but a couple of points here: In > virtually all cases where someone who is attacked draws a firearm, the > sight > alone is enough to scare the would-be perp away - without firing a shot. > Very rarely does a victim having a firearm mean that the victim ends up > shot. And if I'm being attacked in some form, where I fear for my life, > why are we concerned with the one doing the harm? There was a study done about that, I forget when or where. The conclusion was that many times more reported attempted rapes/assaults/robberies/burglaries were prevented by the intended victim having a handgun than there were crimes committed using a firearm. I would be highly surprised if it were otherwise. Bill ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1318.64.28.53.215.1161246057.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References:

Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 01:20:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: a political stance From: "Bill Nelson" > How many burglars over there break in with a loaded gun? Serious question. Almost none. For one thing, the penalties for armed robbery/burglary are much more severe than for unarmed robbery/burglary. Since the criminal can simply run away if caught in the act, most don't want to take the risk. Another is that if the criminal is strong, he just might beat the person senseless - either with his fists or some handy object in the house. >> On the hunting part, do you need a magazine with more >> than six bullets? wouldn't the >> deer/quail/duck/bear/cute woodland creature have run >> away by the time you missed with the first five? > > Have GOT to smile at this one! > If you need more than a couple of shots to put down your prey then you > ain't > gonna be much of a hunter!! I suspect it would be considered pretty poor > sport if the only way you can down a deer is by firing off a volley from > an automatic rifle!! It would also be illegal. Semi-automatic rifles may be legal for hunting in some states, but fully automatic are not. I hunt with a longbow. Unless I get within 20 yards of the game, there is no way that I will take a shot and risk missing. >> As far as the fun part goes, couldn't the gun club buy >> all the assault rifles and machine guns, and then you >> pay to use them for the evening? You pay membership >> dues or a shooting fee to shoot the guns at the range >> anyway, and then they have to worry about maintaining >> and securing the firearms. > > Again, another sensible suggestion. Assault rifle is a misused term. It really means a selective fire rifle, not one that is semi-automatic only - or even worse, one that just "looks like a military rifle". > How many crimes HAVE been prevented by such a citizen being armed? And of > those, how many have resulted in the death or serious injury of the > aggressor? And how many attempted crimes where the victim has drawn a > weapon have actually resulted in that victim being shot as a result? Tens/hundreds of thousands. No idea, most run away when confronted. Some few do get shot as a result - but proper training would minimize that risk. Bill ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1331.64.28.53.215.1161246567.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References:

Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 01:29:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Re[2]: a political stance From: "Bill Nelson" > If we all posted about about our "basic freedoms," would there be any time > left for anything actually stagecraft related? Sure. Just delete the messages unread and go on to the more on-topic posts. Bill ------------------------------ Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 06:31:45 -0400 From: "Delbert Hall" Subject: Re: Black-and-white or sepia photo effect In-Reply-To: References:

I create a sepia-like effect for a "flashback" in a show that I am lighting (that opens tonight). I double-gelled the instruments for this effects with Chocolate (#99) and Bastard Amber (#02). I worked pretty well. For the TV effect we discussed a few weeks back I used two 26 degree S4s, one with no color and one with Light Sky Blue (#67). The board op runs the effect manually. It is only OK. I think the effect needs a third instrument (something warm), but I ran out of dimmers (the theatre only has 48). Delbert -- Delbert L. Hall ETCP Certified Rigger - Theatre 423-773-4255 ------------------------------ Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References:

Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:54:44 +0100 From: Dorian Kelly Subject: re: TV effect > >For the TV effect we discussed a few weeks back I used two 26 degree >S4s, one with no color and one with Light Sky Blue (#67). The board >op runs the effect manually. It is only OK. I think the effect needs >a third instrument (something warm), but I ran out of dimmers (the >theatre only has 48). > >Delbert I have used three RO60 domestic reflector spotlamps, heavily colour lacquered, mounted inside a TV, each wired via a universal fluorescent starter, and let them free run It gives a great effect. I have run them either straight from a non-dim and also via an ancient wirewound dimmer. I havn't risked a proper dimmer on them. Starters dont last all that long. Dorian ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1564.64.28.53.215.1161255371.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References:

Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 03:56:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Black-and-white or sepia photo effect From: "Bill Nelson" > op runs the effect manually. It is only OK. I think the effect needs > a third instrument (something warm), but I ran out of dimmers (the > theatre only has 48). ONLY 48? You are "swimming in the lap of luxury". One theatre where I do a lot of lighting only has 24. That is, unless I take in some of my own quad packs. Bill ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References:

Message-Id: <20B51A2C-6C50-4E17-83EB-E782A797904D [at] rochester.rr.com> From: Bruce Purdy Subject: Re: Black-and-white or sepia photo effect Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 07:43:22 -0400 > It would be "pretty effective" at keeping me from attending any > performances. I am NOT color blind. I cannot think of a single play > that > would be enhanced by such lighting - although some of the modern > experimental stuff might be an exception. I have a framed print of Ansel Adams' "Moonlight Hernandezn New Mexico". I'll never forget the customer when I had my studio, admiring the photograph and saying "I'd love to see that in colour"! Bruce ____________________ Bruce Purdy Technical Director Smith Opera House ------------------------------ Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:43:46 +0100 From: Dorian Kelly Subject: Re: a political stance > Me, I have a loaded cane reasonably to hand, which I inherited. >Two feet of marocco wood, the end of which has been bored out and filled with >lead. Carefully applied, this should discourage an intruder. > >Frank Wood Frank, you do realise, dont you that here in the UK this constitutes a weapon in the eyes of the law and if you hit anyone with it it will be you that goes to jail, and what is more the burglar can sue you for damages. Hitting an intruder with something that comes to hand like a table lamp of a chair is different. Dorian ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20061019131048.47415.qmail [at] web50607.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 06:10:48 -0700 (PDT) From: b Ricie Subject: political stance In-Reply-To: OOPS...Was not gonna do it, but here I am. Guns Don't kill people...Bullets do, guns just make them go faster... So, if I read things correctly, the Dems want to melt down all the firearms and turn them into playground equipment....or was that a "Simpson's" episode? OK, REAL POINT...If the people VOTE, then it is the VOTERS that change the laws, NOT the Demonocrats or Repugnicans. Please, no matter what side of the pond your on, refrain from buying a sac of propaganda. Brian Rice 508-685-0716 b_ricie [at] yahoo.com "Blessed are the cracked: For it is they who let in the light." __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1890.64.28.53.215.1161267146.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References:

Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 07:12:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Black-and-white or sepia photo effect From: "Bill Nelson" > I have a framed print of Ansel Adams' "Moonlight Hernandezn New > Mexico". I'll never forget the customer when I had my studio, > admiring the photograph and saying "I'd love to see that in colour"! I happen to love B&W photography. I also enjoy B&W movies. But both are completely different than watching a live play in forced B&W - which does not have the controlled contrast or shades of gray that you will find in the other two media. Bill ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1896.64.28.53.215.1161267565.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References:

Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 07:19:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: political stance From: "Bill Nelson" > OK, REAL POINT...If the people VOTE, then it is the > VOTERS that change the laws, NOT the Demonocrats or > Repugnicans. The people get to vote on very few laws. Most matters are decided by the legislators that they elected. The legislators are mostly swayed by the lobbyists and the people who provide most of their campaign funding. Bill ------------------------------ Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.0.20061019094911.01a04f50 [at] uwaterloo.ca> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 10:41:21 -0400 From: Scott Spidell Subject: Re: a political stance - theatre In-Reply-To: References: At 12:55 PM 10/18/2006, Merel Ray-Pfeifer wrote: > >Not really off topic at all. How many of you out there have a prop gun >stored in your office? Or other safe lock up site. When was the last time >you had to purchase one, or blank amo for a show. >Sometimes you just have to have a gun onstage. As another Canadian, but a gun owner, our "strict" gun regulation does not make it difficult to put a gun onstage. You just have to follow, even what I am sure any gun club in the US would agree are, sensible safety precautions. So what if it's registered? So what if I had to prove to the RCMP and the testing authority that I didn't have a criminal record and could handle a gun safely? regulation and legislation does not need to remove your "right" to have access to firearms if you can prove your need. It would be great if you Yanks would just grow up and realize less guns means less deaths by guns. and At 04:21 AM 10/19/2006, Bill Nelson wrote in response to Jason Salvatori: > >> I hate to be the typical Canadian on the list, but I don't > >> see any reason ever to own a handgun or Automatic of any kind. > >A few million of your own countrymen do not agree with you. They have >acquired the necessary licenses to own handguns - even though the >government makes it difficult to do so. Bad numbers Bill - try a couple hundred thousand complain. Don't include the U.S. hunting lobby that likes our moose. As far as handgun owners in Canada, there might be a couple of thousand hand gun licences issued in Canada that don't belong to military, police or security. Vote early, vote often. Scott Scott Spidell Drama Department University of Waterloo ML 104 x84767 or 519-888-4767 (F) 519-725-0651 drama.uwaterloo.ca ccat.uwaterloo.ca ------------------------------ Message-ID: <2168.64.28.53.215.1161269972.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References:

Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 07:59:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: a political stance - theatre From: "Bill Nelson" > Bad numbers Bill - try a couple hundred thousand complain. Don't > include the U.S. hunting lobby that likes our moose. As far as > handgun owners in Canada, there might be a couple of thousand hand > gun licences issued in Canada that don't belong to military, police > or security. If that is the case, then there are a lot of unlicensed handgun owners in Canada. At least, I have met a lot of them in BC - during my annual sailing trips there over the last 20 years. None of these people belonged to the groups you mentioned. Bill ------------------------------ From: "Chris Warner" Subject: RE: a political stance - theatre Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 08:00:03 -0700 Message-ID: <001501c6f38f$439f63f0$6801a8c0 [at] CHRISLAPTOP> In-Reply-To: Well, as many of my friends and I have once realized, as snooty as some Americans believe the British to be, the US was founded by people who believed the Church of Britain was too LIBERAL! So the US will have problems with this for the rest of it's life... The right to bear arms was not meant to be every gun manufactured it was meant to be a musket that you could use when required by the government = to protect the country. Oh how would the writers of the constitution = cringe at the weapons we have devised in the 200 or so years since it was enacted. Chris > -----Original Message----- > From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Scott Spidell > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 7:41 AM > To: Stagecraft > Subject: Re: a political stance - theatre >=20 > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see = > --------------------------------------------------- >=20 > At 12:55 PM 10/18/2006, Merel Ray-Pfeifer wrote: > > > >Not really off topic at all. How many of you out there have a prop = gun > >stored in your office? Or other safe lock up site. When was the = last time > >you had to purchase one, or blank amo for a show. > >Sometimes you just have to have a gun onstage. >=20 > As another Canadian, but a gun owner, our "strict" gun regulation > does not make it difficult to put a gun onstage. You just have to > follow, even what I am sure any gun club in the US would agree are, > sensible safety precautions. So what if it's registered? So what if I > had to prove to the RCMP and the testing authority that I didn't have > a criminal record and could handle a gun safely? regulation and > legislation does not need to remove your "right" to have access to > firearms if you can prove your need. It would be great if you Yanks > would just grow up and realize less guns means less deaths by guns. >=20 > and >=20 > At 04:21 AM 10/19/2006, Bill Nelson wrote in response to Jason = Salvatori: >=20 > > >> I hate to be the typical Canadian on the list, but I don't > > >> see any reason ever to own a handgun or Automatic of any kind. > > > >A few million of your own countrymen do not agree with you. They have > >acquired the necessary licenses to own handguns - even though the > >government makes it difficult to do so. >=20 > Bad numbers Bill - try a couple hundred thousand complain. Don't > include the U.S. hunting lobby that likes our moose. As far as > handgun owners in Canada, there might be a couple of thousand hand > gun licences issued in Canada that don't belong to military, police > or security. >=20 > Vote early, vote often. > Scott >=20 > Scott Spidell Drama Department University of Waterloo > ML 104 x84767 or 519-888-4767 (F) 519-725-0651 > drama.uwaterloo.ca ccat.uwaterloo.ca ------------------------------ Message-ID: <2171.64.28.53.215.1161270221.squirrel [at] webmail.peak.org> In-Reply-To: References:

Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 08:03:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: a political stance - theatre From: "Bill Nelson" >> >> I hate to be the typical Canadian on the list, but I don't >> >> see any reason ever to own a handgun or Automatic of any kind. >> >>A few million of your own countrymen do not agree with you. They have >>acquired the necessary licenses to own handguns - even though the >>government makes it difficult to do so. I didn't say that there were that many legal handgun owners. But I have met a lot that want to own one - but won't do so for various reasons. One of those reasons is not wanting to be on a governmental list. They have read history and realize how easy it would be for the government to take the firearms away at whim. The same concern exists here in the US. With the way our government is headed right now, that concern may well be valid - even without any list. Bill ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 10:06:59 -0500 Subject: Re: a political stance - theatre From: Philip Johnson Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On 10/19/06 9:41 AM, "Scott Spidell" wrote: > It would be great if you Yanks > would just grow up and realize less guns means less deaths by guns. I look at this statement in a condescending manner, I dislike generalizations of entire societies, races or persuasions of any kind. And while it would be easy to reference the McKenzie brothers for most of our knowledge of our friends in the north, it would be as inappropriate as this statement is. While we choose to have or not to have guns, I do take exception to generalizations where I should grow up an realize something that you have no idea of. There are specific instances where a hand gun is needed here where I live. If I were take my 4 wheel to certain places on the gulf barrier islands or to the outback of south Texas I and my friends would feel much safer having it with us. We are not vigilantes or minutemen, we just need the gun. There has been more than one instance in deer hunting when a hand gun was needed because the rifle shot didn't do its job and we are now too close to get it up and fire off a round to finish the job. ( please don't start a hunting thread) My point is that any generalizations of entire countries such as the statement implies is uncalled for and unappreciated. You may live in a civilized world as I do, most of the time. There are however, like it or not, instances where we still live on a frontier and need protection. Sure we go through training and licensing, and learn to respect what we have. You have no idea of the world some of us go into on a regular basis. Sorry for the rant but not the opinion Phil Johnaon ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:07:08 -0400 From: "Frank E. Merrill" Reply-To: "Frank E. Merrill" Message-ID: <1398691014.20061019110708 [at] tcon.net> Subject: Canes and other weapons Howdy ! Mr. wood (the other Frank) wrote: > I have a loaded cane reasonably to hand, which I inherited. Two > feet of marocco wood, the end of which has been bored out and filled > with lead. Carefully applied, this should discourage an intruder. My Dad, almost 86 years of adventure and the founder of the below named business, has a beautiful walking stick whose origin I suddenly realize I don't know. It has an ornately carved top knob inlaid with brass and mother-of-pearl, below which is a finely knurled brass ring. If one rotates the brass ring about 1/8 turn, the bottom third of the stick releases to expose a dandy steel blade! Dad left it at home last time he took a commercial flight.... Best regards, Frank E. Merrill MERRILL STAGE EQUIPMENT Indianapolis Established 1946 www.merrillstage.com This email is a natural hand made product. The slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty, and in no way are to be considered flaws or defects. Running THE BAT! Natural e-mail system v.3.85.03 mailto:Lamplighter [at] tcon.net ------------------------------ Subject: RE: a political stance Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:07:32 -0400 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A067BF097 [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> In-Reply-To: From: "Paul Schreiner" > We don't need to eliminate firearms, we need to get violent=20 > people off the street and keep them locked up where they=20 > cannot maim/kill others. I'd rather see a concerted effort on the part of society to reduce the social problems that drive people to think that violence is the only answer... ------------------------------ Subject: RE: political stance Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:08:29 -0400 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A067BF098 [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> In-Reply-To: From: "Paul Schreiner" > > OK, REAL POINT...If the people VOTE, then it is the VOTERS=20 > that change=20 > > the laws, NOT the Demonocrats or Repugnicans. >=20 > The people get to vote on very few laws. Most matters are=20 > decided by the legislators that they elected. The legislators=20 > are mostly swayed by the lobbyists and the people who provide=20 > most of their campaign funding. Just for the sake of argument, google "Read The Bills Act". ------------------------------ Subject: RE: a political stance - theatre Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:11:16 -0400 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A067BF09F [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> In-Reply-To: From: "Paul Schreiner" > Well, as many of my friends and I have once realized, as=20 > snooty as some Americans believe the British to be, the US=20 > was founded by people who believed the Church of Britain was=20 > too LIBERAL! So the US will have problems with this for the=20 > rest of it's life... Some of the earlier colonies were founded by such people; the US itself was founded by people who were po'd by having the British monarchy exert too much financial control over their pockets without having any substantial recourse. > The right to bear arms was not meant to be every gun=20 > manufactured it was meant to be a musket that you could use=20 > when required by the government to protect the country. =20 I disagree. My understanding is that the right to bear arms was a reaction to the tendency of strong centralized governments to acting with impunity as far as its own citizens were concerned. ------------------------------ From: MissWisc [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:21:07 EDT Subject: Re: a political stance - kids and weapons A colleague of mine was attacked by one of her students: a kindergarten child (age 5) wielding a pencil. Child was able to stab another kid in the eye socket (fortunately missing the eyeball itself, but cutting one of the muscles which resulted in surgery to repair the tear) and stab the teacher in the back of the hand before being tackled to the floor in the "district approved 4-point secure hold". Shall we ban #2 pencils too? Kristi ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:37:16 GMT Subject: Re: a political stance - theatre Message-Id: <20061019.083745.15735.614058 [at] webmail30.lax.untd.com> If I may briefly take a 'Devil's Advocate' position, I'll mention: = What many fail to consider is that those with the guns that have been = paid to protect us could switch sides in a heartbeat. Whether the = change is orchestrated and performed by police, military or whomever = currently has the color of authority, it might happen. Our trust = could be misplaced if we rely upon those in uniform to provide all = our needs for protection. "Trust, but verify" would be insufficient = if the revolution comes. People should become more self-reliant in = providing for their own protection needs. If you need to protect your = own home and your family within it, you should have the proper tools = available for the job, on the job, just as you are expected to be = able to safely use the tools in our shops and on our stages, and own = those tools that are needed to SAFELY accomplish the task at hand. /s/ Richard = ________________________ The same concern exists here in the US. With the way our government is headed right now, that concern may well be valid - even without any = list. Bill ------------------------------ Message-ID: <01df01c6f396$86b79520$0e00a8c0 [at] Nogle> From: "Nigel Worsley" References: Subject: Re: a political stance - kids and weapons Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 16:52:00 +0100 > Shall we ban #2 pencils too? No, just ban kids! Nigel Worsley ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "Kirk Wahamaki" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: a political stance Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:02:33 -0400 Organization: Muskegon Civic Theatre Message-ID: <002101c6f397$fce587b0$f6b09710$ [at] org> Guns are dangerous, Pencils can be dangerous cars and boats are dangerous when in the wrong hands. We license operators of cars, cars, trucks, boats.. We license electricians, contractors, architects, doctors, lawyers, We regulate and require training of many things, pyrotechnics, fire safety, etc. Why not guns and gun owners? Kirk M. Wahamaki kwahamaki [at] muskegoncivictheatre.org ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 16:10:08 GMT Subject: Re: a political stance - theatre Message-Id: <20061019.091011.15735.614330 [at] webmail30.lax.untd.com> I disagree -- The Constitution was designed to be a flexible = document, as were its amendments. The 'Right to Bear Arms' clause has = been interpreted differently over the years, but still is valid law. = The writers would NOT cringe; they would be glad that their ideas = survived these many years, and were still given respect and effect. /s/ Richard ____________________________ Oh how would the writers of the constitution cringe at the = weapons we have devised in the 200 or so years since it was enacted. Chris ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:21:05 GMT Subject: Re: a political stance Message-Id: <20061019.102139.15735.614834 [at] webmail30.lax.untd.com> Some Consumer Goods, particularly, but not exclusively, wireless = devices such as radios, radio-controlled garage-door openers, walkie- talkies, wireless internet transponders, and the like, are 'Type = Accepted' and do not require a specific license or registration for = each one sold. Many other goods have to be listed with Underwriters = Laboratories before they are allowed to be sold in the US. Perhaps = the US Consumer Product Safety Commission should separately certify = guns for household use, for range use, for liquor-store-clerk use, = etc. The State of California already requires the potential = purchasers of hand guns to take a test to receive a card permitting = them to purchase a gun at a retail establishment. The State of = California also requires a waiting period in the purchase of handguns = from retailers, and this waiting period is LONGER than is required = under Federal Law. Most Californians do not have a problem with this, = but perhaps some Texans might find that our laws too restrictive. = Maybe licensing the Dealers, Buyers, and Products are enough, because = the legitimate confiscation concerns are based upon fears that a = particular gun could be taken away from a particular person. Lets use = a car analogy: The motorist has a valid drivers license to drive a = certain class of vehicle, and the Car complies with all laws in = effect as of the date of its manufacture. We need not explore which = licensed person is driving which street-legal car unless a violation = of law has occurred. In other words, you don't need a license to OWN = a car. To get personal, If Jerry Durand wants to buy Pyrotechnics = from a licensed distributor of the kind of Pyrotechnics that he is = licensed to handle, he should be able to do so without a lot of = linkage, and if I want to covertly represent a particular client in a = California or local Federal Court, it is nobody's business but mine. = /s/ Richard ________________________ Guns are dangerous, Pencils can be dangerous cars and boats are = dangerous when in the wrong hands. We license operators of cars, cars, trucks, boats.. We license electricians, contractors, architects, doctors, lawyers, We regulate and require training of many things, pyrotechnics, fire = safety, etc. = Why not guns and gun owners? Kirk M. Wahamaki kwahamaki [at] muskegoncivictheatre.org ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 13:39:21 EDT Subject: Re: a political stance In a message dated 19/10/06 02:56:21 GMT Daylight Time, brianedwardjames [at] gmail.com writes: > I always find it amusing that people site gun fatalities as a reason to > ban guns. Car accidents are pretty deadly. Lets ban cars! Alcohol is > dangerous and potentially deadly, lets ban it! > > Again, why are "we" more afraid of a gun than anything else? I'll tell you quite simply. Guns are made for killing people. Thats all. Cars and alcohol both have other legitimate purposes. To be fair, so do some guns. Hunting rifles and shotguns have. Handguns, no. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 10:43:07 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: a political stance In-reply-to: Message-id: <7.0.1.0.0.20061019103710.01f84d30 [at] interstellar.com> References: At 10:21 AM 10/19/2006, ladesigners [at] juno.com wrote: >To get personal, If Jerry Durand wants to buy Pyrotechnics >from a licensed distributor of the kind of Pyrotechnics that he is >licensed to handle, he should be able to do so without a lot of >linkage, and if I want to covertly represent a particular client in a >California or local Federal Court, it is nobody's business but mine. Of course, I actually DO have to fill out paperwork, who I bought it from, who I sold it to, when I put it in storage, a regular check that it's still in storage, when I take it out, what I did with it when I took it out. Technically, any automobile with an air bag has to follow the same paperwork/license/permit trail. Really. It's in the ATF Orange Book. I've heard from other sources that ammo has started becoming scarce. The only guns I use now fire flaming balls, so I couldn't say. I guess one way to regulate guns would be to have all the ammo disappear from the shelves. In the pyro biz, the major chemical suppliers are being pressured to not sell to the smaller chemical distributors who deal with us pyro people. Of course, the ammo problem could be because we're shooting it all at other countries. Never thought of war as a way of getting rid of nuclear waste, but we sure have dumped a LOT (tons) in the Middle East. I wonder if the guy who thought that up got a bonus? -- Jerry Durand, Durand Interstellar, Inc. www.interstellar.com 219 Oak Wood Way, Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 Skype: jerrydurand ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 10:46:45 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: a political stance In-reply-to: Message-id: <7.0.1.0.0.20061019104346.01fbc920 [at] interstellar.com> References: An interesting addition to the pyro licensing thing. The old ATF explosives permits had a LOT of classes for what type of explosive and what you were doing with it. The new ones are simplified to "Manufacturer", "Importer", "Distributor" and "User" and cover all explosive classes. So, when I renew my permit I go from fireworks only to any explosive. Seems like an odd move in the current fear-think. -- Jerry Durand, Durand Interstellar, Inc. www.interstellar.com 219 Oak Wood Way, Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 Skype: jerrydurand ------------------------------ Message-ID: <4537BC2C.9040805 [at] gmail.com> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 10:55:56 -0700 From: Chip Wood Subject: Re: a political stance - theatre References: In-Reply-To: ladesigners [at] juno.com wrote: > I disagree -- The Constitution was designed to be a flexible > document, as were its amendments. > I can think of at least 4 members of the Supreme Court that would disagree with that comment. Chip ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 13:56:34 EDT Subject: Re: a political stance In a message dated 19/10/06 06:06:33 GMT Daylight Time, billn [at] peak.org writes: > I think it was Jefferson who said there are two reasons for owning > firearms. 1) To protect against invaders and 2) To overthrow a tyranical > government. > > These days it would be difficult to do either, given the weaponry now > available to any military. When Jefferson wrote, the most advanced weapons > were the muzzle loading rifle and the muzzle loading cannon. Either could > be made by any competent blacksmith and neither is really a long range > weapon. I think you're wrong here. Making even a musket which can shoot with any sort of accuracy is well beyond a blacksmith. Making a rifle needs specialist machine tools to cut the lands. I seem to remember that Jefferson himself.to try to buy arms from a European manufacturer, who had better tools. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20061019102848.00c518a8 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 10:28:48 From: CB Subject: RE: a political stance >Forgive this non-gun-toting Brit for being dumb, but what are you asking >here? >Are you pro-gun or anti? Anti-democratic. This is a thinly veiled scare tactic used to get gun-toting Dems to change their vote. The last act of the humiliated. The Republicans have gotten caught with their hand in the cookie jar and not doing their homework far too often, and fear that this will lead to a change in the power structure in the American Congress. With this in mind, this cat is trying to frighten gun-toting Dems to vote for "those hep cats that will insure your right to carry and own." What they forget is us Dems that cary guns do so with the constitutional guarantee in mind. One which was enacted to insure that when arguments with the government got heated, they'd stay civilized because both sides would have enough armament to keep it so. You should remember from your days in knee-britches, Tony, the story of the baker who led the revolution against the King in, what ws it, 1350? Lil town called Essex where the artisans were peeved abouyt the extra tax to pay for a war against ter, er, France? The only reason that they were put down is that they carried sticks and rakes and pitchforks, and what swords they had were old and rusty, and their arrows poor. Four hundred years later, the cats who wrote the second amendment to the Constitution and their friends did it. Their weapons were in great shape. In history, many people have suggested that the populace be disarmed. Most of them have been evil dictators or similar folk. Hitler ("The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.") Stalin and Musollini, Hideyoshi, Richard III, the list goes on. I'm not sure what any of this has to do with Stagecraft, but I thought that those of you unfamiliar with this countries politics or history in general should have a bit of perspective from both sides. Maybe someone would like to do a play on the subject? Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:57:13 GMT Subject: Re: a political stance Message-Id: <20061019.105755.15735.615091 [at] webmail30.lax.untd.com> I am well aware of this, and that is why I 'dropped' your name. I got = the response from you that I was seeking. I have to assume that the = preparation cost of the aforementioned documentation has to be passed = on to your customers, and ultimately to those who enjoy your shows... /s/ Richard __________________________ >To get personal, If Jerry Durand wants to buy Pyrotechnics >from a licensed distributor of the kind of Pyrotechnics that he is >licensed to handle, he should be able to do so without a lot of >linkage, and if I want to covertly represent a particular client in a >California or local Federal Court, it is nobody's business but mine. ________________________ Of course, I actually DO have to fill out paperwork, who I bought it = from, who I sold it to, when I put it in storage, a regular check = that it's still in storage, when I take it out, what I did with it = when I took it out. Jerry Durand ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20061019103250.00c518a8 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 10:32:50 From: CB Subject: Re: a political stance >This is exactly the reason of using it for self-defense is idiotic! If >you sleep with it loaded and safety off under your pillow, you probably >are going to kill your kid coming home late. The number of shootings in self-defense outnumber the number of accidental shootings over a hundred to one. One percent of any group of people are going to be complete idiots. One percent is a pretty good percentage. >After it is pried from your cold, dead hand by the crook. Now that's just sensationalism. If you insist on continuing this conversation, let's all be civil, calm, and speak from an educated and factual basis. I have places you can go look this up. A purely emotional response to this issue isn't contibuting in any helpful manner. Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:09:30 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: a political stance In-reply-to: Message-id: <7.0.1.0.0.20061019110813.01fbd948 [at] interstellar.com> References: At 10:56 AM 10/19/2006, FrankWood95 [at] aol.com wrote: >I think you're wrong here. Making even a musket which can shoot with any sort >of accuracy is well beyond a blacksmith. Making a rifle needs specialist >machine tools to cut the lands. I seem to remember that Jefferson >himself.to try >to buy arms from a European manufacturer, who had better tools. Specialist tools? My wife and fellow shop workers built a rifle when she was doing smithing work (wrought iron), they used what they had available and built the rest. -- Jerry Durand, Durand Interstellar, Inc. www.interstellar.com 219 Oak Wood Way, Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 Skype: jerrydurand ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:10:46 GMT Subject: Re: a political stance - theatre Message-Id: <20061019.111115.15735.615168 [at] webmail30.lax.untd.com> There have been a few Strict Constructionists on the US Supreme Court = over the years, but the Constitution is pliable enough to survive = them relatively intact. /s/ Richard ____________________________ > I disagree -- The Constitution was designed to be a flexible = > document, as were its amendments. = > = I can think of at least 4 members of the Supreme Court that would = disagree with that comment. Chip ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:11:08 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: a political stance In-reply-to: Message-id: <7.0.1.0.0.20061019111003.01fb98a8 [at] interstellar.com> References: At 10:57 AM 10/19/2006, ladesigners [at] juno.com wrote: >I am well aware of this, and that is why I 'dropped' your name. I got >the response from you that I was seeking. I have to assume that the >preparation cost of the aforementioned documentation has to be passed >on to your customers, and ultimately to those who enjoy your shows... Show cost has to remain about the same to keep the customers, we just shoot more "junk". -- Jerry Durand, Durand Interstellar, Inc. www.interstellar.com 219 Oak Wood Way, Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 Skype: jerrydurand ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <52d.b782aae.32691b03 [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:16:35 EDT Subject: Re: a political stance In a message dated 19/10/06 07:52:07 GMT Daylight Time, billn [at] peak.org writes: > The whole point is - firearms are not the cause of crime, although they > may be used to carry out various crimes. What we need to do is address the > reasons for violence and find ways to reduce/eliminate those reasons. Wishful thinking. Handguns are used for two purposes by violent criminals. First, as a threat to the victim. Second, to eliminate any witness of it. This includes the police, if they get there in time. Most people have a potential for violence in them. I know that I have. When I was 18, I tried to drive a fellow-pupil into the floor with a volume of "Encyclopaedia Britannica". He was out for fifteen minutes, and I thought I'd killed him. Since then, I have kept it under control. But if I woke in the night, to find an intruder in my bedroom, his life would not be safe. Doubly so if I had a firearm to hand. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Subject: RE: a political stance - kids and weapons Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:17:04 -0700 Message-ID: <555928311F8B2943B65FC7197942C3B70538C382 [at] es1.bsdnet.wednet.edu> From: "Storms, Randy" (Reluctantly joining the fray)Is anyone following the "fear itself" = storyline in "Doonesbury" lately? -- r. Randy Storms rstorms [at] bham.wednet.edu -----Original Message----- >Shall we ban #2 pencils too? ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <589.3ae1608.32691bf0 [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:20:32 EDT Subject: Re: a political stance In a message dated 19/10/06 08:05:19 GMT Daylight Time, billn [at] peak.org writes: > > Constitutional right - Because someone wrote it down 200 years ago, it > > must still be appropriate for today??? Right??? > > Maybe even more so than anytime in the history of the US. Now, why? Are you secretly planning a second revolution? Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20061019105023.00c518a8 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 10:50:23 From: CB Subject: RE: a political stance >How many crimes HAVE been prevented by such a citizen being armed? And of >those, how many have resulted in the death or serious injury of the >aggressor? And how many attempted crimes where the victim has drawn a weapon >have actually resulted in that victim being shot as a result? Answers to these questions would amaze you. the figures are astounding, and support an armed populace. In any case, it's a long discussion, and better answers can be found elsewhere. If you're interested, Google it. I really don't have a problem having this discussion on Stagecraft, but I think that hte ground rules should be: 1) Try to relate it to Stagecraft or the list 2) Emotional, disparaging, or solely plitically motivated discourse be left alone 3) The discussion be based in factual reality. Your opinions are great, keep 'em. Or, we drop it altogether. This could just as easily be about religion, as far as differences of opinion, and throwing around of statements that can not be proven, go. If the discussion is not going to be civil, educational, and relate in some way to our raison d'etre, it really doens't need to happen here. I'd be happy to provide info for anyone, off list, if you like. Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:26:11 -0400 Subject: Was: a political stance, Now: Safety Handbooks From: Bill Potter Message-ID: In-Reply-To: OHMYGOD!!!!!! PLEASE, take this gun stuff off list. I know it's important. I know it's a passionate issue for many. I also know it is not stagecraft related. Don't we have any actual stagecraft related topics to discuss? I'll propose one. Our school Safety Committee is asking each department to come up with safety guidelines for use of our spaces and equipment, (particularly as it relates to student use.) Does anyone have any sources for educational theater safety handbooks? I've looked at various school web sites and found a few, but was wondering if anyone has any specific recommendations. TIA Bill Potter Technical Director St. Paul's School Concord NH ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:25:06 GMT Subject: Re: a political stance Message-Id: <20061019.112549.15735.615274 [at] webmail30.lax.untd.com> It's been done: If it works, don't fix it. It's worked for ~400 years. "Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious summer by this = son of York" --Richard III, as you mentioned. /s/ Richard _______________________ Maybe someone would like to do a play on the subject? Chris "Chris" Babbie ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:28:05 -0400 From: "Frank E. Merrill" Reply-To: "Frank E. Merrill" Message-ID: <1937966199.20061019142805 [at] tcon.net> Subject: Re[2]: a political stance In-Reply-To: References: Howdy ! Thursday, October 19, 2006, Chris Babbie wrote: > Maybe someone would like to do a play on the subject? Now that is a fabulous idea! And doing so might bring the topic into line with Stagecraft, and thus cool off some of the heat I've earned by bringing up the topic in the first place! Best regards, Frank E. Merrill MERRILL STAGE EQUIPMENT Indianapolis Established 1946 www.merrillstage.com Running THE BAT! Natural e-mail system v.3.85.03 mailto:Lamplighter [at] tcon.net ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:32:08 GMT Subject: Re: a political stance Message-Id: <20061019.113300.15735.615315 [at] webmail30.lax.untd.com> Thomas Jefferson recommended a revolution every 20 years, and no = credible statesman of the time said he was conceptually wrong. /s/ Richard ________________________ > > Constitutional right - Because someone wrote it down 200 years = ago, it must still be appropriate for today??? Right??? __________ > Maybe even more so than anytime in the history of the US. __________ Now, why? Are you secretly planning a second revolution? Frank Wood ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:34:29 -0400 From: "Frank E. Merrill" Reply-To: "Frank E. Merrill" Message-ID: <778570529.20061019143429 [at] tcon.net> Subject: Re: Was: a political stance, Now: Safety Handbooks In-Reply-To: References:

Howdy ! Thursday, October 19, 2006, you wrote: > Does anyone have any sources for educational theater safety handbooks? I KNOW! I KNOW! "Practical Health and Safety Guidelines for Schoo; Theatre Operations" by our own Dr. Randall W. A. Davidson here on the list! ISBN 0-9774525-0-6 Why yes. I DO have it in stock! Best regards, Frank E. Merrill MERRILL STAGE EQUIPMENT Indianapolis Established 1946 www.merrillstage.com Running THE BAT! Natural e-mail system v.3.85.03 mailto:Lamplighter [at] tcon.net ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:38:54 EDT Subject: Re: Canes and other weapons In a message dated 19/10/06 16:08:20 GMT Daylight Time, Lamplighter [at] tcon.net writes: > My Dad, almost 86 years of adventure and the founder of the below > named business, has a beautiful walking stick whose origin I suddenly > realize I don't know. It has an ornately carved top knob inlaid with > brass and mother-of-pearl, below which is a finely knurled brass ring. > If one rotates the brass ring about 1/8 turn, the bottom third of the > stick releases to expose a dandy steel blade! > > Dad left it at home last time he took a commercial flight.... I don't blame him Most airports would confiscate it. I once had my pocket corkscrew confiscated. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:42:33 -0400 Subject: Re: Was: a political stance, Now: Safety Handbooks From: Bill Potter Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Thanks Frank, I've recently found out about this book. It seems like a bit much to take to a safety committee meeting and say. "Here's our safety policy." Does it contain a section on, or guidelines for writing site specific policies? Bill Potter Technical Director St. Paul's School Concord NH On 10/19/06 2:34 PM, "Frank E. Merrill" wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Howdy ! > > Thursday, October 19, 2006, you wrote: > >> Does anyone have any sources for educational theater safety handbooks? > > I KNOW! I KNOW! > > "Practical Health and Safety Guidelines for Schoo; Theatre Operations" > by our own Dr. Randall W. A. Davidson here on the list! > > ISBN 0-9774525-0-6 > > Why yes. I DO have it in stock! > > Best regards, > Frank E. Merrill > MERRILL STAGE EQUIPMENT > Indianapolis > Established 1946 > www.merrillstage.com > > Running THE BAT! Natural e-mail system v.3.85.03 > mailto:Lamplighter [at] tcon.net > > > > ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:42:53 GMT Subject: Re: Was: a political stance, Now: Safety Handbooks Message-Id: <20061019.114323.15735.615388 [at] webmail30.lax.untd.com> Dear Bill, Start with buying and plagiarizing Doom's book, and go from there. 'Practical Health and Safety Guidelines for School Theater Operations' Library of Congress Catalog Number 2005938919; ISBN 0-9774525-0-6 /s/ Richard ____________________________ Our school Safety Committee is asking each department to come up with = safety guidelines for use of our spaces and equipment, (particularly = as it relates to student use.) Does anyone have any sources for educational theater safety = handbooks? I've looked at various school web sites and found a few, = but was wondering if anyone has any specific recommendations. TIA Bill Potter Technical Director St. Paul's School Concord NH ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:44:21 EDT Subject: Re: a political stance - theatre In a message dated 19/10/06 16:39:42 GMT Daylight Time, ladesigners [at] juno.com writes: > If you need to protect your > own home and your family within it, you should have the proper tools > available for the job, on the job, just as you are expected to be > able to safely use the tools in our shops and on our stages, and own > those tools that are needed to SAFELY accomplish the task at hand. Please tell me how to use a handgun safely. Hell's teeth! If this attitude is common, not only the US but also the world is doomed. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:55:15 GMT Subject: Re: Was: a political stance, Now: Safety Handbooks Message-Id: <20061019.115544.15735.615467 [at] webmail30.lax.untd.com> I know. I just wish that each school having a theatre would buy it = for their library so it would be on site for school AHJ reference! /s/ Richard ____________________ "Practical Health and Safety Guidelines for School Theatre Operations" by our own Dr. Randall W. A. Davidson here on the list! ISBN 0-9774525-0-6 Why yes. I DO have it in stock! Best regards, Frank E. Merrill MERRILL STAGE EQUIPMENT Indianapolis Established 1946 www.merrillstage.com = Running THE BAT! Natural e-mail system v.3.85.03 = mailto:Lamplighter [at] tcon.net = ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:58:10 -0400 From: "Frank E. Merrill" Reply-To: "Frank E. Merrill" Message-ID: <186738179.20061019145810 [at] tcon.net> Subject: Re[2]: Was: a political stance, Now: Safety Handbooks In-Reply-To: References:

Howdy ! Thursday, October 19, 2006, Bill Potter wrote about Doom's book: > Does it contain a section on, or guidelines for writing site > specific policies? I had to get a copy of fthe shelf, but I see "General Health and Safety Regulations for School Theatres" beginnig on page 405 and running through page 413. There's enough boiler plate information there to construct any configuration I can think of. The next few pages, 414 through 422, is a list of hazards one is likely to encounter in a theatre...gives me poosegrimples just to read the list! I'm thinking I'd be better off testing test my luck with a burglar without being armed than walk through a theatre.... Finally, Doom has suggested permission forms for use in "licensing" students to use various tools and equipment in pages 423 through 432. Now what I need to do is read the previous 400-odd pages to see if any of MY installations are listed as poor examples of workmanship! Best regards, Frank E. Merrill MERRILL STAGE EQUIPMENT Indianapolis Established 1946 www.merrillstage.com Running THE BAT! Natural e-mail system v.3.85.03 mailto:Lamplighter [at] tcon.net ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 19:11:04 GMT Subject: Re: a political stance - theatre Message-Id: <20061019.121111.15735.615562 [at] webmail30.lax.untd.com> Like any other tool- use related question, start with: (1)Get the Right Tool for the job. (2)Get the Right Training and practice. (3)Use the tool as the manufacturer intended. (4)Clean your tools appropriately. (5)Do the proper maintenance. (6)Lock up your tools when not in use. (7)Do not operate your tools while under the influence of alcohol or drugs. /s/ Richard _______________________________________ Please tell me how to use a handgun safely. ______________ Hell's teeth! If this attitude is common, not only the US but also = the world is doomed. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: "ladesigners [at] juno.com" Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 19:21:34 GMT Subject: Re: a political stance Message-Id: <20061019.122141.15735.615662 [at] webmail30.lax.untd.com> By that logic, we should take them away from police officers. Also, a = police officer displaying a gun can cause a bad situation to escalate. /s/ Richard ___________________________ I'll tell you quite simply. Guns are made for killing people. Thats = all. Cars and alcohol both have other legitimate purposes. To be = fair, so do some guns. Hunting rifles and shotguns have. Handguns, = no. = Frank Wood ------------------------------ Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20061019120220.00c518a8 [at] pop.west.cox.net> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 12:02:20 From: CB Subject: Re: a political stance >Not so easily done when the US abducts people from the streets of other >countries and incarcerates them without due process. > >Or simply imposes American laws on the rest of the world. I agree. And I'm a US gun-owner, too! I hope the new guy simply says sopmething to the effect of, "Oops! Our bad, sorry." I think that an apology may be the most effective weapon in "The War on Terror" that we own. Isn't there a play based on that very thing? We need more plays where a well placed apology solves everything. Anyone? Chris "Chris" Babbie Location Sound MON AZ Delete key training and post trimming done by appointment. Rates negotiable, will trade for typing lessons/ADD treatment... ------------------------------ Message-ID: <7b8450b90610191324n55d15c09ocd540cc8eda4f75 [at] mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 13:24:27 -0700 From: Myself Subject: Push sticks I am looking to make some push sticks on my trusty CNC, and I would like anyone with their favorite ones to email me direct a dxf cadd file of it so I may try it out. Mark-O ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 16:47:36 -0400 From: "Frank E. Merrill" Reply-To: "Frank E. Merrill" Message-ID: <1108456057.20061019164736 [at] tcon.net> Subject: Re: Push sticks In-Reply-To: References: Howdy ! Thursday, October 19, 2006, Mark-O wrote: > I am looking to make some push sticks on my trusty CNC Dang. And here I thought MY shop was full of toys! Best regards, Frank E. Merrill MERRILL STAGE EQUIPMENT Indianapolis Established 1946 www.merrillstage.com Running THE BAT! Natural e-mail system v.3.85.03 mailto:Lamplighter [at] tcon.net ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:54:00 EDT Subject: Re: a political stance In a message dated 19/10/06 18:44:59 GMT Daylight Time, jdurand [at] interstellar.com writes: > Of course, the ammo problem could be because we're shooting it all at > other countries. Never thought of war as a way of getting rid of > nuclear waste, but we sure have dumped a LOT (tons) in the Middle > East. I wonder if the guy who thought that up got a bonus? True. Depleted Uranium, being one of the densest materials around, is very good for making anti-tank shells. It is supposed to be safe, apart from what it does to tanks, but there are doubts around. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: Re: a political stance - theatre Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 21:54:26 +0000 Message-Id: <20061019215426.DAZG4750.outaamta02.mail.tds.net [at] smtp.tds.net> > > From: Scott Spidell > Date: 2006/10/19 Thu PM 02:41:21 GMT > > So what if I > had to prove to the RCMP and the testing authority that I didn't have > a criminal record and could handle a gun safely? regulation and > legislation does not need to remove your "right" to have access to > firearms if you can prove your need. It would be great if you Yanks > would just grow up and realize less guns means less deaths by guns. I'd hate to burst everyone's "wild west" bubble, but contrary to what many people seem to believe, one does have to undergo a fair amount of safety training in order to carry concealed in most states in the US. Can't speak for any other jurisdiction, but where I live you do have to bring your newly-purchased handgun to the local law enforcement folks within 10 days of purchase for a "safety inspection" (iow: registration). No big deal, really... Open-carry may technically be legal in a given jurisdiction, but you better believe that if you attempt to exercise that right you'll be talking to the gendarmes rather quickly. Just a couple of data points, fwiw. -- Dave Vick rigger [at] tds.net 20/20 Design ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <3b5.a0bc02d.3269515f [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:08:31 EDT Subject: Re: a political stance In a message dated 19/10/06 19:00:39 GMT Daylight Time, psyd [at] cox.net writes: > Four hundred years later, the cats who wrote the second amendment to the > Constitution and their friends did it. Their weapons were in great shape. They were. The modern machine tool owes much to the American need for reliable, accurate, and easily repairable firearms. > In history, many people have suggested that the populace be disarmed. Most > of them have been evil dictators or similar folk. Hitler ("The most > foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered > Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have > allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall > by doing so.") Stalin and Musollini, Hideyoshi, Richard III, the list goes > on. This is going too far. To start with, it suggests that the populace was armed, and could be organised to revolt. It also implies that the government was sufficiently unpopular to provoke such a revolt, and insufficiently organised to nip it in the bud. Dealing with the ringleaders is usually sufficient. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: "RD" Cc: Lamplighter [at] tcon.net ('Frank E. Merrill') Subject: RE: Re[2]: a political stance Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 16:19:20 -0600 Message-ID: <025d01c6f3cc$a04237d0$6501a8c0 [at] doom1> In-Reply-To: 1776 a musical. ??? doom -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Frank E. Merrill Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 12:28 PM To: Stagecraft Subject: Re[2]: a political stance For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Howdy ! Thursday, October 19, 2006, Chris Babbie wrote: > Maybe someone would like to do a play on the subject? Now that is a fabulous idea! And doing so might bring the topic into line with Stagecraft, and thus cool off some of the heat I've earned by bringing up the topic in the first place! Best regards, Frank E. Merrill MERRILL STAGE EQUIPMENT Indianapolis Established 1946 www.merrillstage.com Running THE BAT! Natural e-mail system v.3.85.03 mailto:Lamplighter [at] tcon.net ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:20:18 EDT Subject: Re: a political stance In a message dated 19/10/06 19:12:09 GMT Daylight Time, jdurand [at] interstellar.com writes: > >I think you're wrong here. Making even a musket which can shoot with any > sort > >of accuracy is well beyond a blacksmith. Making a rifle needs specialist > >machine tools to cut the lands. I seem to remember that Jefferson > >himself.to try > >to buy arms from a European manufacturer, who had better tools. > > Specialist tools? My wife and fellow shop workers built a rifle when > she was doing smithing work (wrought iron), they used what they had > available and built the rest. Well, OK. Just tell me how they forged the barrel, out of high tensile steel, cut the lands, which make the bullet spin, and the rest. Even with access to modern machine tools, I shouldn't like to try. Frank Wood ------------------------------ Subject: a political stance. Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:20:41 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: From: "David Fox" [fingers itching]....... [overwhelming desire to enter the Frey]........... [saner side of brain reminding me this is a STAGECRAFT LIST AND THERE ARE LIKE 60 MILLION OTHER PLACES ON THE INTERNET TO TALK ABOUT GUN RIGHTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!] [irrational side of brain overriding saner side and just going for it] What seems to be missing from this conversation and every conversation about gun ownership is responsibility. Want to own a gun? Own 50? Fine with me. More power to you. But in owning a firearm you are responsible for it.=20 Misuse one, or you let one get stolen because you don't keep it secure; then you don't get to own them anymore because you are not responsible enough to own a gun. End of story. Nothing burns my bacon faster then listening to people take the gun control issue and try to wrap in into a political agenda of democrat taking this or republican defending that without talking about the idiots who refuse to take responsibility for their firearms. Like it or not a gun is a deadly weapon, and while the second amendment defends the rights of the populous, it is not protection for every irresponsible person out there who wants a gun. Further; watching the NRA and its members stand on the rooftops politicking for gun rights and shouting down anyone who tries to speak, then hiding in the corner with their fingers in their ears whenever some kid borrows their family arsenal and shoots up their school; does nothing but prove my point further. Want a gun? Fine, but with it comes responsibility and training and licensing, and in some cases regulation and discipline. Them's the breaks with freedom people. You want the rights? Take the responsibility. [calm ensuing]...... [saner side of brain (now bandaged) getting irrational should have known better side under control] [sincere desires that we can all say our piece ONCE and then move on] _________________________________ =20 It is important to note that the opinions of the individual and those of their employer are not always aligned.=20 What you have read should be construed as my opinion and not the opinion of my employer. If you don't like or agree with my thoughts and musings; I am the one you should take to task and not the nice people who pay me. =20 Be Seeing You David _________________________________ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:28:05 -0700 From: Jerry Durand Subject: Re: a political stance In-reply-to: Message-id: <7.0.1.0.0.20061019152154.01f41258 [at] interstellar.com> References: At 03:20 PM 10/19/2006, FrankWood95 [at] aol.com wrote: >Well, OK. Just tell me how they forged the barrel, out of high tensile steel, >cut the lands, which make the bullet spin, and the rest. Even with access to >modern machine tools, I shouldn't like to try. Black powder guns don't need high-tensile steel. Back in the days of the musket, they didn't HAVE high-tensile steel. To rifle the barrel you have a cutter on the end of a long threaded rod that runs through a nut. You run this back and forth through the barrel until your grove is deep enough. This is the same way it was done "back then". Frank, do you think the Chinese had modern tools to make rockets? Even today, my only "technology" I use for rockets is machine rolled paper tubes (but I know how to make them by hand), stainless steel sieves (but could get by without them), hot melt glue (could use horse hoof), and a hydraulic press (but I've done it with a mallet). I buy the chemicals pre-ground, but I also know how to make a ball mill. -- Jerry Durand, Durand Interstellar, Inc. www.interstellar.com 219 Oak Wood Way, Los Gatos, California 95032-2523 USA tel: +1 408 356-3886, USA toll free: 1 866 356-3886 Skype: jerrydurand ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: Re: a political stance - kids and weapons Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 22:29:15 +0000 Message-Id: <20061019222915.DKMI4750.outaamta02.mail.tds.net [at] smtp.tds.net> > > From: "Nigel Worsley" > Date: 2006/10/19 Thu PM 03:52:00 GMT > >> Shall we ban #2 pencils too? > > No, just ban kids! Say, now *there's* an idea... "When children are outlawed, only outlaws will have children." Yep; I like it. -- Dave Vick rigger [at] tds.net 20/20 Design ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: Re: a political stance Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 22:30:44 +0000 Message-Id: <20061019223044.DKWM4750.outaamta02.mail.tds.net [at] smtp.tds.net> > > From: "Kirk Wahamaki" > Date: 2006/10/19 Thu PM 04:02:33 GMT > > We license operators of cars, cars, trucks, boats.. > We license electricians, contractors, architects, doctors, lawyers, > We regulate and require training of many things, pyrotechnics, fire safety, > etc. > > Why not guns and gun owners? [*shrug*] I'm licensed... -- Dave Vick rigger [at] tds.net 20/20 Design ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: <411.3241484.32695758 [at] aol.com> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:34:00 EDT Subject: Re: a political stance - theatre In a message dated 19/10/06 20:13:17 GMT Daylight Time, ladesigners [at] juno.com writes: > Like any other tool- use related question, start with: > (3)Use the tool as the manufacturer intended. The manufacturer intended it to be used to KILL people. A handgun has no other purpose. Target practice allows you to do it better. All thwe rest of your advice is good. > > /s/ Richard > _______________________________________ > > Please tell me how to use a handgun safely. > ______________ > Hell's teeth! If this attitude is common, not only the US but also > the world is doomed. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: Re: a political stance Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 22:34:57 +0000 Message-Id: <20061019223457.DLVX4750.outaamta02.mail.tds.net [at] smtp.tds.net> > From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com > Date: 2006/10/19 Thu PM 05:39:21 GMT > > I'll tell you quite simply. Guns are made for killing people. Thats all. Cars > and alcohol both have other legitimate purposes. To be fair, so do some guns. > Hunting rifles and shotguns have. Handguns, no. That'll come as a rude shock to my target pistols; they think their purpose is to punch little holes in paper. Hey Stuart Wheaton; how do you plan on breaking this news to your target pistols? -- Dave Vick rigger [at] tds.net 20/20 Design ------------------------------ Message-ID: From: "Laura McMeley" Subject: Looking for VL3500 in Texas Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:42:47 -0500 Message-ID: <00f501c6f3cf$e6bacee0$6600a8c0 [at] tdolighting01> I'm looking for anyone near Dallas TX with a VL3500 available from Oct. 26 to Nov.19. I have the 13 I need for the show but that leaves me with no spare. Does anyone out there know where I could find one. I've already tried Gemini, Communilux, Christie Lights, Dallas Stage Lighting, and Stagelight. Laura McMeley Resident Lighting Coordinator The Dallas Opera 972-333-5016 ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:47:27 EDT Subject: Re: a political stance In a message dated 19/10/06 23:29:07 GMT Daylight Time, jdurand [at] interstellar.com writes: > To rifle the barrel you have a cutter on the end of a long threaded > rod that runs through a nut. You run this back and forth through the > barrel until your grove is deep enough. > > This is the same way it was done "back then". > > Frank, do you think the Chinese had modern tools to make > rockets? Even today, my only "technology" I use for rockets is > machine rolled paper tubes (but I know how to make them by hand), > stainless steel sieves (but could get by without them), hot melt glue > (could use horse hoof), and a hydraulic press (but I've done it with > a mallet). I buy the chemicals pre-ground, but I also know how to > make a ball mill. Rockets are easy. Rifles are harder. I still want to know how your blacksmiths made a rifle barrel. Truly bored and rifled. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:59:24 EDT Subject: Re: a political stance In a message dated 19/10/06 23:35:21 GMT Daylight Time, rigger [at] tds.net writes: > > That'll come as a rude shock to my target pistols; they think their purpose > is to punch little holes in paper. > > Hey Stuart Wheaton; how do you plan on breaking this news to your target > pistols? If you think about it logically, target shooting is really to improve your skills. Nothing more. I have done some of this myself, with military arms and live ammunition. I rated as a marksman. Had it been a live person in my sights, I don't know what I should have done. Frank Wood ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: Re: a political stance Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 23:00:18 +0000 Message-Id: <20061019230018.DRXH4750.outaamta02.mail.tds.net [at] smtp.tds.net> > From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com > Date: 2006/10/19 Thu PM 10:20:18 GMT > > > Specialist tools? My wife and fellow shop workers built a rifle when > > she was doing smithing work (wrought iron), they used what they had > > available and built the rest. > > Well, OK. Just tell me how they forged the barrel, out of high tensile steel, > cut the lands, which make the bullet spin, and the rest. Even with access to > modern machine tools, I shouldn't like to try. Hammer-forging rifled barrels is oooolllld technology that it still in use today. The steel is forged around a heated mandrel with raised spiral ridges, forming the recessed rifling inside the barrel. Once the barrel seam was welded shut, the mandrel was cooled, which shrunk it enough to allow it to be withdrawn from the rifled barrel. There's nothing wrong with a hammer-forged barrel; many "modern"firearms makers still use the technique. It's not as accurate, perhaps, as cut-rifling or button-rifling, but it's plenty accurate for all but the most precision shooting. About the only caveat I'd suggest is that one would not want to fire modern smokeless powder charges through a very old hammer-forged barrel, due to the increased pressure over old black powder. Other than that, they can be very fine firearms. Really, Frank; they've been buildig rifles for a long, long time. Well before "modern machine tools" were created. -- Dave Vick rigger [at] tds.net 20/20 Design ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: a political stance. Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 23:02:20 +0000 Message-Id: <20061019230220.DSJJ4750.outaamta02.mail.tds.net [at] smtp.tds.net> > > From: "David Fox" > Date: 2006/10/19 Thu PM 10:20:41 GMT > > What seems to be missing from this conversation and every conversation > about gun ownership is responsibility. Want to own a gun? Own 50? Fine > with me. More power to you. But in owning a firearm you are responsible > for it. > > Misuse one, or you let one get stolen because you don't keep it secure; > then you don't get to own them anymore because you are not responsible > enough to own a gun. End of story. And that, sir, is exactly how the laws work where I live. -- Dave Vick rigger [at] tds.net 20/20 Design ------------------------------ From: Subject: Re: Re: a political stance - theatre Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 23:11:59 +0000 Message-Id: <20061019231159.DURP4750.outaamta02.mail.tds.net [at] smtp.tds.net> > From: FrankWood95 [at] aol.com > Date: 2006/10/19 Thu PM 10:34:00 GMT > >> (3)Use the tool as the manufacturer intended. > > The manufacturer intended it to be used to KILL people. A handgun has no > other purpose. Target practice allows you to do it better. Excuse me? As a target shooter of some years, as well as a trained range safety officer, I believe I'll take that as a personal insult. Once again, you demonstrate that you know as little about this subject as you know about professional theatre, and are prone to shooting your mouth off (pardon the pun) without first engaging your brain, or what passes for one in your case. And you were doing so well for a while, there... -- Dave Vick rigger [at] tds.net 20/20 Design ------------------------------ Subject: RE: a political stance - kids and weapons Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 19:15:20 -0400 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A0687604C [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> In-Reply-To: From: "Paul Schreiner" > (Reluctantly joining the fray)Is anyone following the "fear=20 > itself" storyline in "Doonesbury" lately? I am. Read that online right after I get my daily dose of Tom Toles. ------------------------------ End of Stagecraft Digest #988 *****************************