Author and Ditko scholar Blake Bell writes that it was Ditko who noted the similarities to the Fly. Ditko recalled that, "Stan called Jack about the Fly", adding that "[d]ays later, Stan told me I would be penciling the story panel breakdowns from Stan's synopsis". It was at this point that the nature of the strip changed. "Out went the magic ring, adult Spider-Man and whatever legend ideas that Spider-Man story would have contained". Lee gave Ditko the premise of a teenager bitten by a spider and developing powers, a premise Ditko would expand upon to the point he became what Bell describes as "the first work for hire artist of his generation to create and control the narrative arc of his series". On the issue of the initial creation, Ditko states, "I still don't know whose idea was Spider-Man".  Kirby noted in a 1971 interview that it was Ditko who "got Spider-Man to roll, and the thing caught on because of what he did".  Lee, while claiming credit for the initial idea, has acknowledged Ditko's role, stating, "If Steve wants to be called co-creator, I think he deserves [it]".  He has further commented that Ditko's costume design was key to the character's success; since the costume completely covers Spider-Man's body, people of all races could visualize themselves inside the costume and thus more easily identify with the character.  Writer Al Nickerson believes "that Stan Lee and Steve Ditko created the Spider-Man that we are familiar with today [but that] ultimately, Spider-Man came into existence, and prospered, through the efforts of not just one or two, but many, comic book creators". 
There are some anti-gun zealots who believe that EVERY gun (and most likely sword or bayonet as well) should be taken away from law abiding citizens and destroyed. They claim it is "for the children" or will "prevent violence" or other noble sounding reasons. These misguided souls are unable to show where a gun ban, or other increased gun control laws have ever been successful, even total bans on private arms ownership. England, Australia, Washington DC and Chicago are decimated by gun violence, because criminals simply do not obey the law, leaving only disarmed victims. They want to take YOUR guns away,not matter how old, how valuable, or how historic. They have a long list of various excuses about why some specific type of gun is too big, or too small, or too cheap, or too ugly, or something else, and IT should be banned. Regrettably, in 1986, gun owners fell for that scheme and most ignored the attacks on continued manufacture of machine guns, effectively shutting off that area of arms collecting. In 1994 "assault weapons" (whatever that means) were banned, because the shotgun and pistol owners didn't pay much attention. Henceforth, it is imperative that EVERY gun owner resist EVERY attempt to pass ANY sort of restriction on private gun ownership. Your derringer collection or your properly licensed self defense pistol will be attacked as a "pocket rocket" or cheap "Saturday night special". Your engraved trap gun will become a potential "sawed- off shotgun gangster weapon." Your deer rifle or prized target rifles will be described as "evil sniper rifles that can kill from a great distance."
We need to encourage youngsters who have some interest in firearms. Years ago nearly every boy (and may girls) were given a rifle of their own when their parents thought it was appropriate for them to learn about gun safety and marksmanship. This was usually about ages 10 to 12, and many high schools had rifle teams as well as most colleges with their ROTC programs. Sadly, the antigun folks have successfully sold the myth that access to, or even knowledge about, firearms has suddenly caused an increase in violent crime especially gun violence. Research should show that decades of permissive parents, glorified violence from the "entertainment" industry, and an education industry bent on indoctrination and power are the real culprits. The end of traditional universal military service where every young man learned gun safety and marksmanship as part of their obligation to serve our country has also eroded familiarity with those topics.
All companies buy parts from the commercial world "that do not relate in any way to a particular contract, customer or customer requirements," the proposal says. Applying defense-unique rules to nearly all aspects of companies' supply chains creates a "problematic situation," as it potentially cuts into "efficiency of operations and production."
Another proposal specifically asks Congress to widen the definition of a commercial item. If something is deemed commercial — rather than a uniquely military item — industry can withhold most price data on it in for the sake of staying a step ahead of its competition on the open market. The congressional source said Pentagon efforts to limit the definition of what is considered commercial allows the government wider access to cost information.