Set forth below is the text of a comment that I recently posted to the discussion thread for another blog entry at this site:
Forgive me for doubting you, but your record is not that great in this area. Take this link for example:
With the first link, you appear to make the claim that this is a threat against you. Yet, when we open the link and read the post as well as responding posts, we see that this is an ongoing discussion of board members discussion firearms for home protection. There is even a section at the end of the first post reminding people of gun safety rules.
Certainly, you have something substantive to support your ongoing claim of death threats. If this is all you have, then it is an outright lie.
Are you okay with letting the members of your jury make that call, Anonymous? That’s how it works in our system.
Rob
Unbelievable. This is it? You have been lying about death threats all this time. You should be ashamed of your behavior.
I am not ashamed of my behavior from May 13, 2002, forward, Anonymous. I am proud of it.
It would be fair to say that I am somewhat ashamed of my behavior prior to May 13, 2002.
Not entirely so. Given what we have seen from May 13, 2002, forward, most reasonable people would conclude that my behavior prior to May 13, 2002, was completely understandable. Perhaps. But I am not so sure. I would like to expect better of myself.
I knew in May 1999, when I put my first post to the Motley Fool board, that the retirement study posted at John Greaney’s web site lacked an adjustment for the valuation level that applied on the day the retirement began. I lacked the courage to say so. That’s not good. All of the extenuating circumstances that applied and that influenced me were real. But still….
I would like to see us ALL expect better of ourselves. That’s what this thing is all about. The idea is to bring us all to a higher level and thereby to help us all live better lives in the future.
We’ll see.
Rob
You are proud that you lied about death threats?
Um….
Rob
For anyone that might be reading this board, here is the text that Rob tries to pretend is a death threat (which it is obviously not):
No. of Recommendations: 8
sydsydsyd: They’re taking them down as fast as we put them up. Note that posts 84516, 84518, and 84519 have already disappeared. This included galeno’s helpful prescription, which I consider myself privileged to have read.
My comment on galeno’s post was pulled for ‘incivility’. First, I want to apologize to galeno if he took offense at my ‘rude or discourteous’ post. Saying, “You doctors should stick to your drugs and leave bullets to soldiers like me” was rude and demonstrated a lack of courtesy to galeno on my part.
Anyway, I will try to cover the important points I was trying to make in a non-offensive way here. Most folks think they know a lot about guns from watching movies or TV, but things are a lot different in the real world.
Note: This advice assumes that you want to deliver the round with a handgun. If you prefer a shotgun (which is probably superior for home defense, but not for close quarters combat), then there are many options there, too. A rifle is not well suited for close quarters work.
(1) A .22 caliber bullet fired from a handgun is not likely to cause death even when fired at very close range into the head. The success rate for this round is probably a lot less than 90% even at very close range. (Note that we are not talking about high-powered rifles here!) Folks have reported into the emergency room with a bad headache only to learn that they had a small caliber bullet lodged in their head.
(2) It is not just the size (caliber) of the bullet but the efficacy of the round. A jacketed hollow point (JHP) bullet which expands on contact is much more effective than a lead or full metal jacket (FMJ, aka military ball) bullet which may punch right through the target. In either case, the round must have sufficient velocity to penetrate the target. Obviously, how well the round penetrates has a lot to do with where it hits.
(3) There are several options when considering a handgun round, but most personal defense experts recommend at least a 9mm (aka 9×19 or 9mm Lugar). This is one of the most popular rounds in the world and thus is very inexpensive. It has light recoil, good accuracy and there are a number of effective bullets in this caliber.
(4) I would not recommend anything less than a .40 caliber S&W for personal defense unless you are very sensitive to recoil (then go with the 9mm). My rule of thumb is that you should be comfortable with the capabilities of the round and the performance of the gun.
(5) One of the newer rounds, the .357 SIG (essentially a 9mm bullet with a .40 S&W ‘necked down’ case) has a high velocity and lots of power. It is very popular right now and has a dedicated core of supporters. Select a good JHP and be mindful of potential over penetration.
(6) Another option is the 10mm (essentially a .40 S&W bullet with a bigger case–it predates the .40 S&W and .357 SIG) which is probably more than adequate for human sized animals and sufficient for medium sized game at close ranges. This round will make a big splash so avoid it if you do not want to leave a big mess behind. This is a round for the macho men out there.
(7) The venerable .45 ACP is probably the gold standard. It is big and slow, but penetrates adequately and makes a big hole.
Finally, remember the five basic safety rules (see http://www.civilshield.com/bfsc2.jsp):
1. TREAT ALL GUNS AS IF THEY ARE LOADED
2. KEEP THE GUN POINTED IN THE SAFEST POSSIBLE DIRECTION
3. ALWAYS KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER UNTIL YOU ARE READY TO SHOOT
4. KNOW YOUR TARGET AND ITS SURROUNDINGS
5. STORE YOUR GUN AND AMMUNITION SAFELY AND SECURELY WHEN NOT IN USE
Regards,
Prometheuss
And, as if that weren’t enough, I also say that the retirement study posted at John Greaney’s web site lacks an adjustment for the valuation level that applies on the day the retirement begins!
Hang in there, man.
Sure Shootin’ Rob
Typical Rob tactic of changing the subject so that he draws attention away from those times that he gets caught in a lie.
The error in the Greaney retirement study is always the topic, Anonymous.
A failed retirement is a serious life setback. The reason why we as a people study investing is to get the retirement numbers right, not to get them wrong.
The problem for the Buy-and-Holders with permitting honest posting re the Greaney study is that, if they get the retirement numbers wrong, they get everything wrong. So even discussion of the error made in the study cannot be permitted. Even the possibility that the Buy-and-Holders could have gotten something so important so wrong cannot be entertained.
So we now have a situation on the internet in which the only thing that cannot be discussed is the last 38 years of peer-reviewed research in the investment advice field. I don’t think that that’s a viable long-term reality. The thing that Buy-and-Hold has going for it at the moment is that the numbers on all the stock portfolio statements are inflated. People have enjoyed the good part of a Get Rich Quick approach (easy money) but not the bad part (crushing losses). If Shiller is right (I believe that he is), we will all be experiencing the crushing losses within the next year or two or three. And then we will see enough people work up the courage to stand up to you Goons to open every site on the internet to honest posting on the peer-reviewed research.
Or so Rob Bennett sincerely believes.
I do not believe that John Greaney included a valuation adjustment in the retirement study posted at his web site. I think it is important to get the numbers in retirement studies right. I don’t think that Buy-and-Hold can survive once we begin permitting widespread discussion of the errors in the Buy-and-Hold retirement studies. And I believe that we will work up the courage to do that in the days following the next price crash. Because at that point we will see that we don’t have any other choice.
But we’ll see, you know?
Subject-Changing Rob