Wrench Safety Pages: Fill & Download for Free

This one.Okay so what does it look like?A couple enjoying themselves on the beach near the sea. Completely normal and romantic. Right?No, wrong! This picture might look all normal and romantic but it's damn heartbreaking.It was taken on the morning of April 2, 1954, by a Los Angeles Times photographer John Gaunt. He was in the front yard of his beachfront home in Hermosa Beach when he heard a neighbor shout, “Something’s happening on the beach!”When he arrived, he saw a young couple standing near the water clutching each other. He figured something is wrong and captured a quick picture of the couple.Later, it was revealed that the couple's nineteen-month-old son, Michael, was playing in the safety of the shallows. The surf, suddenly aggressive, reached out and sucked Michael away. None of the adults could do anything except wait and watch. Later in the day, the child’s lifeless body was found on the beach a mile away.If you'll look carefully you will be able to see how the lady's face is distraught, distressed, flustered, and frantic. She is tightly clutching her husband's shirt while he scans the water for his son.This heart wrenching picture appeared on the front page of The Los Angeles Times the next morning and won him a Pulitzer and an AP Award. It was titled “Tragedy by the Sea.”Heart wrenching, isn't it?Source: Tragedy by the SeaThanks for stopping by.This is Aditi Mishra, signing off!

Gun manufacturers are not exempt from manufacturing safety standards, as Remington recently demonstrates:Remington Trigger Class Action SettlementThe trigger was deemed faulty by a court, and Remington is required to fix it and pay out a settlement to those affected.(Due to some conversation on another answer I am clarifying the above statement. Remington did not actually lose the lawsuit, they agreed to settle. The trigger recall was part of the settlement, and Remington still stands by the safety of the device. Nevertheless the point still stands that manufacturers are responsible for the safety of their products, which is the only point relevant to this answer.)What would make you think that is not the case?The Trace: Cars, Toys and Aspirin Must Meet Mandatory Safety Standards. Guns Do Not.Oh, there is your problem, you are getting your news from lying partisan hacks.I am not going to quote the entire article, but lets take some of the claims piece by piece:No federal agency oversees how firearms are designed or built.False; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosive regulates firearms manufacture and sale in compliance with all applicable laws, most notable the NFA (and subsequent Hughes Amendment) as well as sales and export laws. For reference, hear is a 240+ page summary of only federal gun laws: www.atf.gov-Gun Laws Summary (hat tip Paul Harding). Please note that does not include any state specific laws.Gun manufacturers have operated without federal oversight for decades. When the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) was created by Congress in 1972 to set safety standards for most consumer products, firearms were specifically excluded from CPSC’s jurisdiction.This is deliberately misleading. The article is written in such a way to lead you to believe all consumer products fall under the purview of the CPSC, when they do not. Take this quote from the beginning of the article: “Obama noted that automobile regulations such as seat belts and airbags have reduced traffic fatalities, …”. But cars are not regulated by the CPSC, they are regulated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a separate governmental agency mentioned nowhere in this article. Firearms were likewise exempted from the CPSC because (as mentioned above) there was another agency already tasked with their oversight.With the federal government boxed out, gun safety standards are set by a trade organization called the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute.Ah, now we are getting somewhere. Yes, it is true that the BATFE does not oversee technical specifications for firearms beyond what is specified in law. Many aspects of firearms technical designs are left up to industry self regulation. This is actually not much different than many technical aspects of other manufactured goods. For example, electric motor manufacture (yes, even for those found in goods covered by the CPSC) are regulated by the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, a trade group for such companies. Similarly the American Society of Mechanical Engineers covers many aspects of mechanical and industrial devices, like pressure vessels and elevators. Given these precedents, and given that firearms are almost purely mechanical devices, such industry self regulation is not unusual. Most such industries avoid government intrusion into their regulatory space so long as there are no egregious safety violations by member companies. So far the firearms industry has a pretty good track record in this regard.Parents might air their ideas about how to make monkey bars safer to an ANSI group that monitors playground equipment, for instance. But SAAMI doesn’t ask gun owners how to improve safety features on firearms.This is because SAAMI uses a different methodology than other organizations. Customers go to manufacturers, and manufacturers take those desired standards to SAAMI. This is not wrong, it is just different. Reading between the lines, what this author might be complaining about is that non-customers cannot spam SAAMI with useless and trivial complaints designed to throw a wrench into gun manufacturing standards in order to adversely affect the marketplace, but that is admittedly pure speculation on my part. But either way, do you want to impact gun manufacturing standards? Let manufactures know what you want to see and vote with your wallet. If it is actually a good and useful improvement it will get adopted into a standard.(SAAMI did not reply to multiple requests for comment.)Of course not. Why would they reply to an organization know to twist words, falsify information and omit inconvenient facts? This was just plain smart on the part of SAAMI.With firearms uniquely exempt from federal safety regulations, the American gun market has been flooded with thousands of defective weapons.This is false.Saturday Night Specials of the 1970s and the so-called “junk guns” of the 1980s and early ’90s were notorious for malfunctioning.No, they were “notorious” for being cheap enough for poor people to own. These guns mostly followed and met the safety standards of the day and were comparable in function (if not quality) to police guns of the era. Yes, there were some manufactures who produced genuinely unsafe guns even by the standards of the day, but these manufactures quickly went out of business due to poor reputation, without the need for regulatory intervention.The article goes on to mention a few more modern cases of lawsuits against manufactures, none of which are out of the ordinary even for highly regulated industries, and also mentions some states that have their own testing standards for guns sold within their borders. What the article does not do is mention accident statistics for firearms, which would seem to be highly relevant to the topic at hand. Take the very last line in the article:“Of course you should hope gun owners act prudently and kindly,” he says. “But if you can save lives by changing gun designs, then you should do that, too.”How many lives could be save by “changing gun designs”? I assume he is talking about accidental deaths here, specifically accidental deaths due to poor design, and not due to user negligence. Well, in the U.S. accidental firearms deaths hover between 400 and 500 a year. That is a total for the entire nation which owns 350,000,000 guns (give or take a few tens of millions). Even assuming every single one of those deaths was from faulty design and none were due to careless use, that is still a failure rate, per owned gun, of 0.00001%. Lets throw in accidental injury into the mix, of which there are, at best guess, 3000 a year (we are left to guessing, because the accidental injury rate for firearms is so low that is does not meet the CDC threshold for tracking), That only gets us to a failure rate of 0.0001% (for both injury and death).Given those numbers suddenly this whole article seems like much ado about nothing. The shooting sports are among the safest sports anyone could participate in, with a lower accident rate than baseball. When you factor out deliberate acts like suicide and homicide firearms give the 5 gallon bucked a run for its money with regard to safety. Does that sound like an industry in desperate need of regulation? Or is this article aimed at people who want to destroy the gun owning culture, and is willing to grasp at any and all threads that could be used to further that goal, regardless of the facts?But credit where credit is due, the article does not mention the PLCAA, so I at least did not have to dedicate whole paragraphs to that red herring. I would count that as a victory, but I am sure you can find a bunch of false information about that elsewhere on that site.

I say you should go for it. Doing your first oil change is a big confidence booster. Just be careful; it's a gateway drug. Before long, you'll start getting the urge to change your own spark plugs, then brake pads, and then it's all downhill. You'll buy a spark plug socket, and a torque wrench, and before long, you'll have a garage full of tools. You'll have both the Haynes and Chilton repair manuals for your car, with dog-eared pages and greasy fingerprints throughout. You'll start searching the used car section of Craigslist on your lunch break for "mechanic's special" because you want a new challenge. Your friends will start asking you to listen to a funny noise in their cars or teach them how to change their oil. Are you prepared to go down that road?I change my oil because, although the $20 for oil and a filter is no cheaper than the $20 at a quick-lube place, I trust myself to do the job right. A trustworthy independent shop costs more, and that requires dropping off your car or sitting in a waiting room while they work. I know I won't overtighten the drain plug or filter, damaging the threads. I'll replace the drain plug gasket, but I don't expect the quick-lube guy to do it. I'm only working on one car at a time, so I'm less likely to forget to put the new oil in or check the dipstick after. And while I'm under the truck and under the hood, I take a minute to check for leaks or anything out of place.The obstacles that other folks have mentioned may not apply in your case. Depending on your vehicle, you may not need to jack the car up. A truck or SUV may be high enough to let you slide underneath, and some cars (like the Prius) have the drain plug and oil filter close to the front bumper and easy to reach. If you can reach them without jack stands or a ramp, then the only tools you need to buy are a drain pan, a socket wrench for the drain plug, and a funnel. If the previous mechanic tightened the filter too much, you might need a filter wrench to loosen it the first time. If you only tighten it by hand after that, you probably won't need it again. You probably already have an old t-shirt for a cleaning rag, and a flattened cardboard box makes a great spill mat.Observe safety precautions. Never work under a car supported only by the jack (use jack stands). If you're not ready to invest in a jack and jack stands, go to your buddy's garage (everybody has a buddy who works on cars). Watch a few YouTube videos about your make and model, and make sure you can find the correct drain plug. Check the dipstick before and after to make sure you put the right amount of oil in the right place. As for disposing of used oil, just pour it back into the empty bottles and take it back to the parts store for recycling.