Smith & Wesson Forum

Advertise With Us Search
Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > General Topics > The Lounge

Notices

The Lounge A Catch-All Area for NON-GUN topics.
PUT GUN TOPICS in the GUN FORUMS.
Keep it Family Friendly. See The Rules for Banned Topics!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-18-2010, 06:03 PM
ingmansinc's Avatar
ingmansinc ingmansinc is offline
US Veteran
Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 1,498
Likes: 0
Liked 47 Times in 14 Posts
Default Just a thought

I have never been invited to any inner circles in DC, thankful for that, but if you spill a few million gallons of oil in the ocean it seems like they want you be their guest. Now I got to thinking perhaps the oil executives should have to work for the next six months or so, yes I mean work, cleaning up the spill. Their sleeves rolled up, arms in the sludge, and 110 degree sun beating on their lily white backs. Now that may be one way to help them figure out how to fix a problem before it starts.

It would seem to me that all equipment would be tested on a regular time schedule to be sure it was in working order. ie: the shut off valve on the bottom of the pipe.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-18-2010, 06:43 PM
diamonback68's Avatar
diamonback68 diamonback68 is offline
US Veteran
Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Due south of Orlando
Posts: 7,202
Likes: 597
Liked 3,451 Times in 1,412 Posts
Default

John, now there you go again with your rational thinking. C'mon you know it's not allowed in DC.
__________________
Dick
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-18-2010, 06:55 PM
OKFC05 OKFC05 is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 8,161
Likes: 3,622
Liked 5,210 Times in 2,174 Posts
Default

The oil spill is only going to cost US: you and me ordinary guys.

Either you pay more tax, or pay more at the pump, or both.

The oil execs will get their contract $6M if they have to retire early, and there will be a new "oil Czar" appointed to live high and "punish" the oil companies.

During the 5 years I spent at the Pentagon dealing with Congress and the Executive branch, it always was "punish the innocent, let off the guilty, and reward the non-participants."
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-19-2010, 06:16 AM
badam0112's Avatar
badam0112 badam0112 is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 417
Likes: 68
Liked 16 Times in 9 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OKFC05 View Post
The oil spill is only going to cost US: you and me ordinary guys."
This is really going to end up being a tragedy for all the states that border the Gulf of Mexico. 1000's of jobs affected, tourism money lost, beaches ruined, coastal water habitat ruined for years. Etc, Etc.
__________________
I drank what? - Socrates
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-19-2010, 06:36 AM
oldman45 oldman45 is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 3,973
Likes: 95
Liked 336 Times in 138 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ingmansinc View Post
I have never been invited to any inner circles in DC, thankful for that, but if you spill a few million gallons of oil in the ocean it seems like they want you be their guest. Now I got to thinking perhaps the oil executives should have to work for the next six months or so, yes I mean work, cleaning up the spill. Their sleeves rolled up, arms in the sludge, and 110 degree sun beating on their lily white backs. Now that may be one way to help them figure out how to fix a problem before it starts.

It would seem to me that all equipment would be tested on a regular time schedule to be sure it was in working order. ie: the shut off valve on the bottom of the pipe.
Not a good idea at all. In fact it is rather dumb. BP is paying for the cleanup. They have lost over a million barrels of oil. They are paying for the repairs to the well. People were killed. BP is paying money to those that have had their jobs affected. All this is costing them hundreds of billions of dollars. Does people think they wanted or anticipated this happening?

People need to get off the political and media bandwagon to see this as it was and is. This was nothing more than an accident. We have car accidents all the time due to many things yet nobody is wanting the President of Toyota, GM or such to be out on the streets working deadly accidents? We had coal mine accidents often in the past. We have thousands of wells offshore. Tell me when this happened in the past? You cannot because it is an isolated incident. It was a series of things that came together at the right time and turned tragic.

Now people and groups are wanting off shore drilling banned. One third of all the producing wells are off shore. Multiply the cost of gas times three and see if you want off shore oil production stopped.

The trouble is too many want to point fingers when they should be saying how bad the loss of life was, how sad this is taking so long to correct and how stupid people are in trying to worsen the incident by giving out incorrect estimates in order to gain support for their dumb green ideas.

And NO, I am not related to any oil or oil related business. I am not getting paid a dime from any of this incident. I know the oil business from living in Louisiana and having to do some safety evaluations many years ago. I also know the corrupt political system in DC and know what they are trying to accomplish.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-19-2010, 07:30 AM
gunlovingirl's Avatar
gunlovingirl gunlovingirl is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: MI
Posts: 6,305
Likes: 922
Liked 870 Times in 256 Posts
Default

I like that idea. Probably why I'm not in politics. I think a great job for them would be to rescue and degrease all the wildlife that will be coated with the stuff. The ones that can be rescued.
__________________
Misty
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-19-2010, 08:33 AM
4406v 4406v is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

This tragedy will be used to ensure gas and oil prices will remain high and will climb even higher.Does anyone else think the timing of this "accident" is more than a little suspicious?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-19-2010, 09:10 AM
dave b dave b is offline
Member
Just a thought  
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 602
Likes: 765
Liked 403 Times in 119 Posts
Default

If everybody would just park their cars and start riding a bicycle, we wouldn't have this problem, would we?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-19-2010, 09:23 AM
oldman45 oldman45 is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 3,973
Likes: 95
Liked 336 Times in 138 Posts
Default

There must be a lot of liberal media watchers on this site.

Since it has been proven what caused this accident, how could it be timed?

Since it hurt the entire oil business, why would any company want this to happen?

Since it cost way more money to clear this incident up, why would it be intentional?

Why are people not upset with the hundreds of coal mine disasters? They happen all the time and cost a lot of money to correct.

It is nothing more than one of the perils of oil production. Storage tanks get hit by lightning and blow up. Crude oil leaves a gas vapor and that is ignited by sparks. Derricks collapse often due to things past the control of the producer.

If anyone here can give a solution so this never happens again, they can become a multibillionnaire immediately. Just ONE such accident and everyone gets in an uproar over it.

With Exxon Valdez, it was a drunken ship captain and that was something that can be prevented. This was an unpreventable accident caused by a gas blowback and a failed preventer valve. Had the mechanical valve not failed, it would not have happened. Had the blowback not happened, the failed valve would not have been a problem. It was two things that took place at a time that was unforeseen.

Yes, there is a massive amount of eco problems from this but there are worse eco problems from other things. Yesterday my city spent a full day dumping raw, untreated sewage into a river that provides drinking water for other towns. It was an intentional act but one the city declared necessary. The EPA aapproved it. Yet the sewage was a small amount compared to the daily contaminates going into the river naturally.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-19-2010, 10:45 AM
feralmerril feralmerril is offline
Absent Comrade
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: utah
Posts: 13,059
Likes: 2,547
Liked 7,201 Times in 3,064 Posts
Default

**** happens.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 05-19-2010, 05:18 PM
oldman45 oldman45 is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 3,973
Likes: 95
Liked 336 Times in 138 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by feralmerril View Post
**** happens.
Yes it does and it is often messy.

A new media wrinkle backfired today. For several days the media has been showing photos of tar balls they claimed were washing up on the beaches from the oil spill.

Now they are admitting that testing on the tar balls proved they did not come from the type crude oil being released from the blown well. Now there are hundreds of thousands of people thinking the beaches are messy due to the spill when they are not.

Amazing how the media tries to portray something in one light and then after all the accusations, it is proven to be nothing at all.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-25-2010, 02:32 PM
ingmansinc's Avatar
ingmansinc ingmansinc is offline
US Veteran
Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 1,498
Likes: 0
Liked 47 Times in 14 Posts
Default

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37338000...il_and_energy/

EPA weighs sanctions against BP


Frustrated agency cites oil giant’s ‘corporate attitude’



BP CEO Tony Hayward answers questions from the media on an oil-stained beach on Monday at Port Fourchon, Louisiana.

Over the past 10 years, BP has paid tens of millions of dollars in fines and been implicated in four separate instances of criminal misconduct that could have prompted this far more serious action. Until now, the company's executives and their lawyers have fended off such a penalty by promising that BP would change its ways.

Seems like my original post is coming to pass. The picture of the CEO standing on the beach in the middle of the oil mess had his sleeves rolled up and was in the hot sun.

Last edited by ingmansinc; 05-25-2010 at 02:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-25-2010, 03:10 PM
walter o walter o is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hammond in U.S.A.
Posts: 2,072
Likes: 1,324
Liked 3,939 Times in 942 Posts
Default oil spill

I love the way that Washington is staying away from the solution . It is all B.P.s fault and they can figure out a way to clean it up,We in Washington are not the experts on this type of thing Quoting DICK DURBAN but they are experts in solving the Health care problem. Its a mess that no one has an answer for the oil will be a problem for our children and the people of the gulf coast for years.Washington knows that their is not a solution to sealing the well yet so they are not about to really get into the problem . It looks like a good way to push more s**t onto big business. Maybe the Gov. will have to take over the oil companies to see they are run correctly.All i can say is that it is a shame &disaster for the Gulf, They just cant get a break
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-25-2010, 03:44 PM
JcMack's Avatar
JcMack JcMack is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Deepest, darkest, Indiana
Posts: 6,199
Likes: 3,380
Liked 6,194 Times in 1,899 Posts
Default

I agree that it was just an "accident". However, if you've got the intelligence and technology, to go a mile beneath the ocean drill a hole, and suck up the earths blood, one would think you'd have an iron clad back up plan should the patient "accidentally" hemorrhage. My thoughts about the fine folks in Washington is: most could not find their butt with both hands if there was a candy cane sticking out of it. That fool Obama has basically said: "I'm gonna stamp foot till somebody does something. So there." Personally I'd rather he'd hold his breath.
__________________
SOS USA

Last edited by JcMack; 05-25-2010 at 05:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-25-2010, 04:09 PM
Stonecove's Avatar
Stonecove Stonecove is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lenawee County, Michigan
Posts: 447
Likes: 962
Liked 156 Times in 59 Posts
Default

Oldman, I agree with you 100%. I will say this is a tragedy, just like many other accidents. I won't defend BP here other than to say where were the government fire starters (to burn off the oil before it spreads) It appears to me that the media & enviro wackos are playing this just like the Three Mile Island radiation leak that claimed the whole nuclear industry in the 70's. Just because of that one problem and a stupid movie China Syndrome with our friend Jane Fonda (certainly she had no agenda)
Three Mile Island accident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
we have had no new nuclear plants in the US since. One industry down.
Now if they can kill off the off-shore drilling through hystaria and propiganda, they will have accomplished phase 2. They are already after phase 3 which is coal fired generation.
So let's see, no coal, no off-shore oil and no nukes-- Johnny has to stay at home and eat dirt and heat his house with cow manure-- oops they are after that too!
Stonecove
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-25-2010, 04:38 PM
Grog Grog is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: East of Dallas... TX
Posts: 955
Likes: 33
Liked 161 Times in 91 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonecove View Post

Three Mile Island accident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
we have had no new nuclear plants in the US since.

O' Rly?

SCANA Corporation - SCE&G?s New Nuclear Plans Approved by Public Service Commission of South Carolina
__________________
I miss my 4546 the most.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-25-2010, 06:16 PM
Iggy's Avatar
Iggy Iggy is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 10,419
Likes: 10,428
Liked 28,233 Times in 5,273 Posts
Default

You realize of course that BP is probably going to go bankrupt. However comma, being too big to fail and not be around clean up it's mess, we, the taxpayers, will no doubt be called upon to provide them with the needed funds to help them muddle through until they can return to profitability.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-25-2010, 08:23 PM
Stonecove's Avatar
Stonecove Stonecove is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lenawee County, Michigan
Posts: 447
Likes: 962
Liked 156 Times in 59 Posts
Default

Hey Grog,
What’s your point? Is the US awash in nuclear power from nuclear plants built since 1979? It's indisputable the Three Mile Island accident put a stake in the heart of new nuclear power plant construction. Oh yea, the South Carolina site you reference was approved in Feb 2009, but construction has not been started.
My point is BP oil spill will be the Three Mile Island event to stop off shore drilling. I hope I am wrong.
Stonecove
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-25-2010, 10:48 PM
Grog Grog is offline
Member
Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought Just a thought  
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: East of Dallas... TX
Posts: 955
Likes: 33
Liked 161 Times in 91 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonecove View Post
Hey Grog,
What’s your point?
I was providing facts.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Stonecove View Post
Oh yea, the South Carolina site you reference was approved in Feb 2009, but construction has not been started.

O' Rly?

There has been work done already, plus it's being done at an already operating site.


Building a nuke plant is not an overnight thing, it's a good them they have people working for them who built the first plant so it'll be a bit easier this time around.
__________________
I miss my 4546 the most.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I never would've thought... coltle6920 The Lounge 7 03-05-2015 11:18 PM
I thought I had seen it all. feralmerril The Lounge 4 01-17-2013 12:25 AM
So I thought I was done for a bit Quarterhorse Smith & Wesson M&P 15-22 10 08-23-2012 02:05 PM
Thought for the day CAJUNLAWYER The Lounge 21 05-12-2010 11:16 AM
I thought it would be more fun Strato The Lounge 9 05-07-2010 03:16 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:39 PM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)