While it doesn’t work as well with or as your joke, the ATF is actually now the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. So we need to add the E as well and we can spell FACET, which is less fun. Or use M for Marijuana and spell FMEAT.
So building on this I did some light perusing on the internet and got a little hyperfixated, but found some tiny things.
This was the closest Solingen I could find, but the caps on the end don’t match and I doubt the little rivets would be completely hidden by the patina, so that’s probably not it.
Then on Etsy I found this posting That has one that looks identical but with no further information on it and listed as “Richards” (Richards, Sheffeild). And This one that just doesn’t have the smaller blade but is listed as Solingen.
I went to try and double check that patent number and I’m not finding what they did, but I also don’t know what I’m doing. The German patent office has 2 companies with that patent number, one for Naproxen and one for the moving blades on hair trimmers.
But then I found This guy with the exact same patent number on it but marked as Hammer brand. It’s very similar but has 3 blades instead of 2.
This leads me to believe that the patent is not for the whole knife but the blade specifically that was made by Solingen and sold to other knife manufacturers who affixed them to their own pocket-knife-pieces. With all this in mind, I’m starting to think it’s likely from Richards, so I refined my search again and found this guy as the best bet: knife. But instead of the patent number on the tang they have their own stamp. So my best guess, after a tiny bit of research, is that Richards probably made it, but it’s not their top of the line stuff with their branding but something akin to a “store brand” where they used their typical parts but used the blades from Solingen. I’m still assuming it’s Richards because they were the only brand I could find that made knives with all the parts (Same end caps, 2 blades, pearl handle with no rivets showing, shape) together. Other brands seemed to have some, but not all parts combined. But with the tang stamp being off, I can only assume it wasn’t an “official” Richards brand but put together by them and sold by another party as a cheaper alternative.
If you’re still curious, that All About Pocket Knives site seems to have active forums with knowledgeable people who could probably (almost definitely) find or know more than me. I don’t know anything about any of this and was just a bit bored this morning while drinking my coffee, so I definitely suggest asking them for legit advice.
It was a thing, in a localized area of an infinitely small point, that also was everywhere that existed… I think. I’m not a big bang-ologist, I’m more of a small bang-ologist so my understanding may be flawed.
don’t even know enough to care in the first place.
but ultimately it’s the user who decides to use the service, and how to use it.
So you admit they don’t have access to the knowledge needed to make better choices for their digital security. Then immediately blame them. I think your bias from the point of view of a one that is already more informed on this sort of thing. If they don’t know they need to know more, how can they be expected to do any research? There’s only so much time in a day so you can’t expect people to learn “enough” about literally everything.
Also sure, Mamoa is a big guy and fit, but he’s an actor, right? Not a fighter?
It’s kind of like how Nick Offerman said in an interview once. Everyone sees him as this manly man because of the roles he plays and because he wood-works. But he’s from a real “country” family. A rural farming community where everyone was self-sufficient and real “manly” men type. He’s the one who wanted to be an actor who never has to work with his hands again.
What I’m saying is those men have jobs where they protect people from physical violence with physical violence. Jason Mamoa pretends to hit people on camera.
I did not! I definitely intended to respond to you implying there’s nothing wrong with parents using their influence to help their child.
Fuck that nonsense. This is the same mindset as every poor person who thinks of themselves as a “temporarily embarrassed millionaire.” You say it with the assumption that you’re somewhere in that equation and don’t give a shit about any kind of equality. That’s selfish as shit. You phrase it like they should be stopped from helping to make sure their kids are still fed while off at college or some shit, but we’re talking about millionaires helping their millionaire children also maintain their millionaire lifestyle by leveraging their brand to possibly get a role someone without famous parents could use to fucking survive. I don’t care how able he is to do a good job, it’s bullshit to pretend he actually deserves it because his parents really feel like he should.
Yeah.
I’m not vying for a pure meritocracy, but the system we currently have to work and live in, as established, expects merit to be the thing that enables success and advancement in living conditions. As long as that’s the system were in, those that already exist with a certain level of privilege of already achieving acceptable, if not ample living conditions, shouldn’t be given an additional lead on those that don’t. This guy was never going to be poor or struggling to eat because he couldn’t find a job.
When speaking about privilege, I like to use the race analogy. Some people are given bikes while some are given cars, and others even just have to walk. This guy was born with a sports car already, then his parents started him a mile ahead from the starting line.
There is nothing wrong with parents using their influence to help their child.
I’m gonna disagree with you on that one, Hoss. It’s definitely a problem.
in Kate Manne’s “Down Girl,” about misogyny she wrote: “They put women in their place when they seem to have ‘ideas beyond their station.’”
“Misogynist hostility encompasses myriad ‘down girl’ moves . . . to generalize: adults are insultingly likened to children, people to animals or even to objects. As well as infantilizing and belittling, there’s ridiculing, humiliating, mocking, slurring, vilifying, demonizing sexualizing or, alternatively desexualizing… and other forms that are dismissive and disparaging in specific social contexts.”
Emphasis mine to point out the most relevant portions in this case. It’s a solid read on misogyny that I definitely recommend to anyone.
“anti” also doesn’t mean opposite, it means against. The roots of the word, tracing back to the Greek, means against. As it does in French and it’s Sanskrit version. All forms of it mean opposed to. This is why language is important and some checks should be there to counter the “language is malleable” argument that people use as an excuse to not learn how to use words correctly. The idea that anti means opposite has been around as long as I can remember, and definitely longer than that, but it drastically changes the meaning of words.
But it’s great to put on a list of reasons for gun control! Most seem to agree that him responding to a perceived threat violently was acceptable, but he shouldn’t have used a gun. But if he’s legally carrying, then it sounds like the biggest threat here was the access to firearms. Maybe access to a pocket sized kill button is harmful to society?
This guy felt threatened. If it’s any of the gun-owners in this thread and they have no context and feel threatened, I’m sure they’d hate having people call for their imprisonment because they thought they were doing the right thing to protect themselves and it turns out they made the wrong call.
I agree with you. This is responsible use of firearms. This is just what responsible gun ownership looks like. It’s a machine who’s only purpose is to kill. The best outcome is trying but failing to kill someone. The most likely outcome is someone is dead. That’s how guns work.
Not a hockey fan, is that because it’s too cheap or too expensive?