Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Police discrimination, misconduct, Ferguson, MO, the Roman Legion, and now math???

Police discrimination, misconduct, Ferguson, MO, the Roman Legion, and now math??? (Page 73)
Thread Tools
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2016, 01:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
And this perfectly illustrates the problem in that is all too pervasive in US police departments. Shoot first and ask questions later.



West Virginia officer fired for not shooting at armed man | theGrio

This guy was fired for behaving like a peace officer is supposed to.

OAW
No thinking for yourself. This is an embarrassment.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2016, 02:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
That would be great, but we don't have such an entity. It would also be great if we had an almighty all-knowing entity who would reach down from the heavens to shield the righteous and smite the wicked. But we don't have that either. Push-back by the armed populace is not nearly as good, but it at least exists, and has been integral to the nation's structure from the first (of course, we could still choose to remove it from both sides, and have the same non-lethal forms of corruption that other nations currently enjoy).



There is no moral obligation to keep think tanking while people are being killed. Homicide is a different issue than other forms of corruption, regarding the thin blue line as in all other contexts. Other forms or corruption can be remedied afterwards, but there's no bringing the dead back to life. I argue that it's an inaccurate and dangerous logic to mingle the thin blue line of graft with the thin blue line of homicide. The latter should not be allowed to ride the coat tails of the former, not in our minds and not in theirs.





Many a fearful mistake would be reversible if not for all the guns. I agree with you that the prohibition issue is obvious. Why is the gun-culture issue not just as obvious?
I understood the request for proposals to be, well... a request for proposals. Was the request instead for proposals not requiring legislative action or effort? If solutions using that method are off the table, then I agree the only probable remaining solution is vigilante justice.

The connection I make between homocide and non-homocide is based on occuring due to the same mechanism. I'm not attempting to dismiss the far greater importance of the homocide variety by lumping them with the non, I'm claiming the same mechanism is at play. The moral obligation comes from the mechanism in question being the responsibility of the legislatures who created it, and thus ultimately the responsibility of the constituents who elected the legislature. If the public incentivizes corruption, then the public is responsible for the consequences of having done so. At minimum, I feel the public has a moral obligation to propose an alternate system should one exist before declaring the solution must be that of the "last resort".

Perhaps it is unwise of me to cross the streams with the Williams case, but isn't racism a larger factor than the prevalence of guns? White people have guns, they aren't getting murdered by the police.


P.S. Thank you for tolerating me not interleaving my replies. I write on my phone, and iOS makes doing so way more difficult than it should be.
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2016, 09:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Sometimes you don't have the luxury of lots of time.
Yeah, because of all the ... guns. Starting to see a recurring pattern?

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
You left out gang members, that's exactly why they buy (or steal) guns.
Yep, and where do they source all these guns? From the permissive gun culture.
( Last edited by Uncle Skeleton; Sep 15, 2016 at 09:55 AM. )
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2016, 10:49 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I understood the request for proposals to be, well... a request for proposals.
Yeah, I meant to go back and clarify that somehow, but I was too slow...
There's a spectrum of feasibility, don't you agree? It ranges from "govment'll fix it" all the way up through "senate bill 9876 is up for a vote now, and it would actually save money; call your senator".
Is creating a new entity really feasible for this, for a problem that is already solved in all demographics but one? (or is a new entity even what you suggested... I now realize I'm unable to distinguish whether you had an agency in mind or whether you were thinking of a novel one?).

Edit: been thinking it over, and I'm not at all sure I understand what your suggestion was. Did you mean for a new entity to be created for this purpose, or did you mean for the FBI, NSA, Homeland Security, IRS or Kenneth Starr to take it on?

The connection I make between homocide and non-homocide is based on occuring due to the same mechanism.
No I think your connection is more than that, as you reveal in a few more lines:

If the public incentivizes corruption, then the public is responsible for the consequences of having done so.
Yeah, right there. This is a slippery slope kind of argument. If we allow <police> [citizens] to get away with <graft> [jaywalking] then we can't complain when they automatically slip down the slope to <murder> [murder]. It's not logical. Both sides permit each other the minor offenses, and you might even say that it's impossible to thrive without committing those minor offenses from time to time, but neither side is forgiving of more serious offenses within the same rulebook, and every member of both sides is fully cognizant of this fact. No person should have any difficulty recognizing the justice in bolstering a comrade for the little things AND still condemning that comrade for devolving to larger offenses. You wouldn't condone such a line-blurring on the civilian side, and we shouldn't allow police to be stupid enough not to know the difference either.

At minimum, I feel the public has a moral obligation to propose an alternate system should one exist before declaring the solution must be that of the "last resort".
I disagree. I don't think it's fair to demand an "alternate system" just for blacks.

Perhaps it is unwise of me to cross the streams with the Williams case, but isn't racism a larger factor than the prevalence of guns? White people have guns, they aren't getting murdered by the police.
Without guns everywhere, the word "murder" wouldn't even be in your sentence. Yes, I would like to fix racism. Too. Back to your think-tanking comment, if we can at least take murder out of the equation, that gives the nation a lot more latitude for think-tanking.


P.S. Thank you for tolerating me not interleaving my replies. I write on my phone, and iOS makes doing so way more difficult than it should be.
Think nothing of it. I often feel that people hate looking at multi-quotes, and I feel like I should apologize for long posts like this one. Actually, I'm impressed you can type so much on your phone...
( Last edited by Uncle Skeleton; Sep 16, 2016 at 09:31 AM. )
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2016, 01:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
Yep, and where do they source all these guns? From the permissive gun culture.
Having a permissive culture is our right, it isn't influenced by the acts of those who operate outside the law. The gov't isn't our nanny.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2016, 04:57 AM
 
I haven't been following this thread for a while now so excuse me if I'm covering old ground or missing the point you're at, but the prevalence of guns means that any sudden hand movement can give a cop a justified reason to shoot you during an arrest. More importantly perhaps, it gives them a really easy way to get away with shooting you if they do so by mistake or worse, on purpose.

Its not a point I've ever seen raised during standard gun control debate and its surprisingly absent from the discussions I've seen regarding recent police shootings, BLM etc. This makes me wonder how many Americans might have actually considered it or not when formulating their opinions on gun laws.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2016, 09:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Having a permissive culture is our right, it isn't influenced by the acts of those who operate outside the law. The gov't isn't our nanny.
The same non-specific argument can be made (indeed, was made at length) in support of all of the outdated contrivances we used to call our rights, but which have been improved over the course of the last 240 years.

One of government's most valuable roles is in defending against a tragedy of the commons. In such an effort, government is the instrument of the people, not their nanny. The question is whether the people will make a smart decision about what common resources are deemed desirable or not.
     
Snow-i
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Maryland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2016, 06:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
The same non-specific argument can be made (indeed, was made at length) in support of all of the outdated contrivances we used to call our rights, but which have been improved over the course of the last 240 years.

One of government's most valuable roles is in defending against a tragedy of the commons. In such an effort, government is the instrument of the people, not their nanny. The question is whether the people will make a smart decision about what common resources are deemed desirable or not.
But Uncle, the people have already made that decision. It's just not the one you want.

And what good is the government as "an instrument of the people" if it's highest laws are ignored?
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2016, 04:47 AM
 
It's the will of the people to be armed, so we are, and bad actors aren't enough reason to disarm lawful citizens. OED. There's a means by which to change this if you don't like it, or you can move.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2016, 04:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I haven't been following this thread for a while now so excuse me if I'm covering old ground or missing the point you're at, but the prevalence of guns means that any sudden hand movement can give a cop a justified reason to shoot you during an arrest.
Or they could say you were trying to grab their gun (that sudden hand movement you were talking about). There's no need to have a gun just to get shot by police.

Its not a point I've ever seen raised during standard gun control debate and its surprisingly absent from the discussions I've seen regarding recent police shootings, BLM etc. This makes me wonder how many Americans might have actually considered it or not when formulating their opinions on gun laws.
Because there's a plethora of ways to get killed by police, being armed doesn't matter. If a bad cop wants to kill you, they can, and if there's not a preponderance of evidence showing they were in the wrong, they'll walk. It's a good thing >99% of police are honorable.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2016, 09:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Or they could say you were trying to grab their gun (that sudden hand movement you were talking about). There's no need to have a gun just to get shot by police.
That puts a considerable limit on distance though. You can't grab a cops gun from ten feet away.



Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Because there's a plethora of ways to get killed by police, being armed doesn't matter. If a bad cop wants to kill you, they can, and if there's not a preponderance of evidence showing they were in the wrong, they'll walk. It's a good thing >99% of police are honorable.
Of course being armed matters. Even a sociopathic killer cop is going to struggle to explain shooting a naked guy if he is unarmed, in clear light and caught on camera(s). It doesn't matter as much as it should given your cops will tend to shoot a guy for waving a knife at them from twenty yards away, but even if your assertion that 99%+ of cops are honest and decent (and I think thats a pretty generous estimate though hopefully not by too much) is right, even if it were 100% a cop would every right to shoot someone for reaching towards their pocket or waistband etc in a country where guns are so commonplace.
Its a different thing when you have chased down a gang member or a bank robber who you know is armed or strongly suspect is armed, but in America its the case for any traffic stop. A cop could be shot dead for trying to issue a ticket for an illegal u-turn or a bad tail light etc. What I'm saying is even without any arguments about corruption or racism, is that your second amendment gives your police a reason to shoot you that they wouldn't otherwise have and no-one seems to be acknowledging it. I don't expect you to like it, but as usual your efforts to dismiss it are a bit pathetic. Its absolutely true. Neither you nor the American people collectively have to mind that its true, and they probably don't (as evidenced by your own immediate feeble dismissal). But it IS true. I'm just not sure they've had it brought to their attention so they can consciously make that decision not to mind.

Our cops don't have to worry about getting shot for pulling someone over speeding, because the chances of them having a gun are nearly zero. And even if they had one its not worth killing a cop to avoid a £60 fine and a slightly raised insurance premium.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2016, 01:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
That puts a considerable limit on distance though. You can't grab a cops gun from ten feet away.
You can lunge, or they can say you did, claiming you were looking at the gun.

Its a different thing when you have chased down a gang member or a bank robber who you know is armed or strongly suspect is armed, but in America its the case for any traffic stop. A cop could be shot dead for trying to issue a ticket for an illegal u-turn or a bad tail light etc. What I'm saying is even without any arguments about corruption or racism, is that your second amendment gives your police a reason to shoot you that they wouldn't otherwise have and no-one seems to be acknowledging it.
Because we have nearly half a billion guns and criminals don't care about the law. Removing the right to go armed only affects those who care about what's legal in the first place. You likely don't know this, but as a CWP holder there is a drill you follow to keep from misunderstandings to occur, that's why so few permit holders who are carrying a weapon get shot in the first place.

I don't expect you to like it, but as usual your efforts to dismiss it are a bit pathetic.
Says the person who doesn't understand the subject in the first place. Sad. This is why I don't usually talk with non-US residents about guns, they're far too ignorant regarding the realities surrounding them and have only their own very limited experience, living in places where they aren't allowed to even own them, much less carry one in public.

Our cops don't have to worry about getting shot for pulling someone over speeding, because the chances of them having a gun are nearly zero. And even if they had one its not worth killing a cop to avoid a £60 fine and a slightly raised insurance premium.
Because your country (oftentimes forcibly) disarmed you all and you have far less than 1% of the guns we have. It didn't stop one of your own MPs from getting shot recently, however. I'm betting your own police are much more afraid than you know, especially after that, despite your citizenry seemingly being cowed.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2016, 01:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Snow-i View Post
But Uncle, the people have already made that decision. It's just not the one you want.
I know they have. The people can be infantile sometimes. I'm trying to convince the people, not overrule them. Dear the people: please grow up.

Once upon a time, the people held many beliefs we now find archaic and unjust. Many of them involve race and are relevant to this thread.
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2016, 02:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
There's a means by which to change this if you don't like it
That's what I'm doing

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Or they could say you were trying to grab their gun
Not if neither person has a gun. If guns were rare, police wouldn't need to carry them either. Accidents would still happen, but they just wouldn't be deadly ones.

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
we have nearly half a billion guns and criminals don't care about the law.
There are a lot more drugs out there than guns, but we're not afraid to go out and find them. What's more drugs are manufactured on the black market, but guns are manufactured by the above-ground economy, making them easier to control (if we choose). The impediment is will, not logistics.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2016, 03:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
You can lunge, or they can say you did, claiming you were looking at the gun.
Twenty feet then. You can argue the distances within a few feet, but your cops seem to prefer shooting to getting out the way. Thats a really big difference and a really big problem. Maybe its a training issue, or maybe its an attitude problem. "I'm a tough guy with a gun and I will not move for some criminal scumbag!"



Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Because we have nearly half a billion guns and criminals don't care about the law. Removing the right to go armed only affects those who care about what's legal in the first place. You likely don't know this, but as a CWP holder there is a drill you follow to keep from misunderstandings to occur, that's why so few permit holders who are carrying a weapon get shot in the first place.
Aren't we also talking about states that don't require permits?
Don't get bogged down in the entire gun debate. I'm only making the point that having a high rate of police shootings/killings is a side effect of your gun laws and I'm not seeing anyone else really discuss that point which makes me wonder if it many people have considered it and whether it might change any minds. Clearly not yours, but maybe others.



Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Says the person who doesn't understand the subject in the first place. Sad. This is why I don't usually talk with non-US residents about guns, they're far too ignorant regarding the realities surrounding them and have only their own very limited experience, living in places where they aren't allowed to even own them, much less carry one in public.
Guns are nowhere near as complicated as you like to make out. You don't like to talk about them with people from other countries because they tend not to agree with you, they live in much safer, more civilised places and you don't really have a leg to stand on when trying to debate against them. Easier to dismiss them so you don't have to try.
I love that I'm not qualified to talk about guns but you are perfectly qualified to talk about the prejudices against minorities and women being vastly overstated being as you've never been on the receiving end of either.



Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Because your country (oftentimes forcibly) disarmed you all and you have far less than 1% of the guns we have.
Thats my point. The guns aren't there for them to worry about. They don't have to assume that anyone they talk to might try to shoot them at any minute. Yours do. It puts everyone involved on edge and causes more avoidable deaths as a result.

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
It didn't stop one of your own MPs from getting shot recently, however. I'm betting your own police are much more afraid than you know, especially after that, despite your citizenry seemingly being cowed.
The surprising part is that more of your politicians don't get shot. I'm genuinely surprised no-one has had a crack at Obama in 8 years. I would point out though that the last (only) time we lost a PM was over two hundred years ago. Not true of your presidents is it?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2016, 03:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
That's what I'm doing
Good, amendments can take a while, but at least you're using the process. I won't wish you luck, and will work against you, but I'm happy that the system is in place.


Not if neither person has a gun. If guns were rare, police wouldn't need to carry them either. Accidents would still happen, but they just wouldn't be deadly ones.
They'll never be "rare" in the USA, ever. Even if you disarm the citizenry, there are >200M on the black market. In fact, I can buy one illicitly faster than I can legally, and for less $$.

There are a lot more drugs out there than guns, but we're not afraid to go out and find them.
The war on drugs failed, utterly. They only nab 15% of the drugs that circulate in the US. Hell, even the drug lords account for the losses due to law enforcement now, and include it was a simple cost of doing business. The DEA is a complete waste of taxpayer money.

What's more drugs are manufactured on the black market, but guns are manufactured by the above-ground economy, making them easier to control (if we choose). The impediment is will, not logistics.
Completely incorrect. In 2015 1.8M illegally imported guns were brought into the US across the Mexican border. Estimating firearms trafficking across the U.S.-Mexico border - Journalist&#039;s Resource Journalist&#039;s Resource That's not even accounting for the trade across the Pacific and Atlantic via containers, just Mexico, while 81.8% of trafficked weapons go unaccounted for. Add that to the 13M that were legally made and/or imported, and all told, that's probably ~18-20M being introduced in the USA, legally and otherwise... in one year.. Now, you're saying they're going to be able to go out and get them, considering they can only stop 15% of the illegal drug trade, using their best efforts? Really?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2016, 04:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Twenty feet then. You can argue the distances within a few feet, but your cops seem to prefer shooting to getting out the way. Thats a really big difference and a really big problem. Maybe its a training issue, or maybe its an attitude problem. "I'm a tough guy with a gun and I will not move for some criminal scumbag!"
Still doesn't matter. With the exception of a few high-profile cases, people aren't being shot because of being lawfully armed.

Aren't we also talking about states that don't require permits?
Which is why education is so important. People are shot due to gun ignorance, not prevalence.

Don't get bogged down in the entire gun debate. I'm only making the point that having a high rate of police shootings/killings is a side effect of your gun laws and I'm not seeing anyone else really discuss that point which makes me wonder if it many people have considered it and whether it might change any minds. Clearly not yours, but maybe others.
If you discount gang crime, which is a microcosm in itself, our murder rate is no higher than just about anywhere else in the Western world. The time when emotional pleas would have made a difference has passed. The media overplaying their hand caused that.

Guns are nowhere near as complicated as you like to make out. You don't like to talk about them with people from other countries because they tend not to agree with you, they live in much safer, more civilised places and you don't really have a leg to stand on when trying to debate against them. Easier to dismiss them so you don't have to try.
We don't have the same culture, so there's little point in it. With the exception of certain inner cities, which have their own issues, we're no less "safe and cultured" than you snooty people. I've been to Birmingham, Middlesbrough, and Liverpool, that's what you call culture?

I love that I'm not qualified to talk about guns but you are perfectly qualified to talk about the prejudices against minorities and women being vastly overstated being as you've never been on the receiving end of either.
I was beaten up and abused several times for being a `spin and a beaner while growing up, you're talking out of your ass again.

Thats my point. The guns aren't there for them to worry about. They don't have to assume that anyone they talk to might try to shoot them at any minute. Yours do. It puts everyone involved on edge and causes more avoidable deaths as a result.
No, they just have more stabbings than practically anywhere else. You traded freedom for the perception of security, and all the while your own crime rate is flying through the roof and you're still having MPs shot in the street. Sure, you're completely safe. Enjoy your new walls you're building, to keep the dangerous immigrants out.

The surprising part is that more of your politicians don't get shot. I'm genuinely surprised no-one has had a crack at Obama in 8 years. I would point out though that the last (only) time we lost a PM was over two hundred years ago. Not true of your presidents is it?
Yeah, the Left are particularly nasty about going after political figures in the USA. Violent bunch many of them are.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2016, 07:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
They'll never be "rare" in the USA, ever.
Not with that attitude they won't


What's more drugs are manufactured on the black market, but guns are manufactured by the above-ground economy, making them easier to control (if we choose). The impediment is will, not logistics.
Completely incorrect. In 2015 1.8M illegally imported guns were brought into the US across the Mexican border. Estimating firearms trafficking across the U.S.-Mexico border - Journalist&#039;s Resource Journalist&#039;s Resource That's not even accounting for the trade across the Pacific and Atlantic via containers, just Mexico, while 81.8% of trafficked weapons go unaccounted for. Add that to the 13M that were legally made and/or imported, and all told, that's probably ~18-20M being introduced in the USA, legally and otherwise... in one year.. Now, you're saying they're going to be able to go out and get them, considering they can only stop 15% of the illegal drug trade, using their best efforts? Really?
I said manufactured. You don't seem to have answered that.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2016, 08:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Still doesn't matter. With the exception of a few high-profile cases, people aren't being shot because of being lawfully armed.
They're not being shot for being armed at all. They're being shot because they could so easily be armed, lawfully or otherwise.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Which is why education is so important. People are shot due to gun ignorance, not prevalence.
Without the prevalence, the ignorance is almost harmless though. And the ignorance is much harder to get rid of than even the guns would be.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
If you discount gang crime, which is a microcosm in itself, our murder rate is no higher than just about anywhere else in the Western world. The time when emotional pleas would have made a difference has passed. The media overplaying their hand caused that.
You're still ignoring the accidents.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
We don't have the same culture, so there's little point in it. With the exception of certain inner cities, which have their own issues, we're no less "safe and cultured" than you snooty people. I've been to Birmingham, Middlesbrough, and Liverpool, that's what you call culture?
Point is you can wander around any of those cities at 2am and while you might get mugged, it probably won't be at gunpoint. Somehow doubt thats true in most large US cities, because the muggers have to assume their victims could easily be armed too.

Believe it or not, Liverpool was European 'Capital of Culture' in 2008 I think. Great football team though.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
No, they just have more stabbings than practically anywhere else. You traded freedom for the perception of security, and all the while your own crime rate is flying through the roof and you're still having MPs shot in the street. Sure, you're completely safe. Enjoy your new walls you're building, to keep the dangerous immigrants out.
You love to talk about stabbings in the UK but outside of London its not something thats really any worse than it ever was. And if its ok for you to ignore gun crime when it has gang associations, then I'm afraid you're out of luck because almost all the extra stabbings are teenagers involved with gangs. I'll also point out its not the cops getting stabbed.

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Yeah, the Left are particularly nasty about going after political figures in the USA. Violent bunch many of them are.
Is this supposed to be sarcasm?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2016, 12:32 AM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
Not with that attitude they won't
Oh, sorry, I guess I'm just going by the spectacular failure that is the US drug war, or Prohibition, or the war on porn, or really anything else the gov't has tried to keep people from having. Ever.

I said manufactured. You don't seem to have answered that.
Which is irrelevant, given there's already so many here to begin with. However, those illegally sold guns coming from Mexico, much like the drugs coming from there, aren't legally manufactured, either.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2016, 12:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
They're not being shot for being armed at all. They're being shot because they could so easily be armed, lawfully or otherwise.
You mean those people acting like idiots and fools at traffic stops, or even openly provoking officers to take action? That's more like social Darwinism in most cases.

Without the prevalence, the ignorance is almost harmless though. And the ignorance is much harder to get rid of than even the guns would be.
Yes, nanny your people, you know what's best for everyone else, Mr Stalin. I hear the UK is now even starting to take away kitchen cutlery, good luck with your cooking.

You're still ignoring the accidents.
Well, there are so few, you know?

Point is you can wander around any of those cities at 2am and while you might get mugged, it probably won't be at gunpoint. Somehow doubt thats true in most large US cities, because the muggers have to assume their victims could easily be armed too.
but they're such cultured robbers and thieves.

You love to talk about stabbings in the UK but outside of London its not something thats really any worse than it ever was. And if its ok for you to ignore gun crime when it has gang associations, then I'm afraid you're out of luck because almost all the extra stabbings are teenagers involved with gangs. I'll also point out its not the cops getting stabbed.
Nah, they're just stabbing people while invading their homes. It's all good, eh?

Violent crime jumps 27 per cent in new figures - Telegraph

That doesn't say, "just in London, though".

Is this supposed to be sarcasm?
American history isn't your thing, being from the UK. Who shot Kennedy? Oswald, a Leftist extremist. Same goes for Garfield and McKinley, both Republicans assassinated by Leftists. Lincoln was killed by a Democrat with confederate loyalties. Over 3/4ths of attempts on US Presidents were by radicals from the Left.

Attempts:

President: Andrew Jackson (D)
Would-be assassin: Richard Lawrence
Political identity and motive:
Lawrence was mentally ill, suffering from polymorphous delusions.

President: Theodore Roosevelt (R and Bull Moose)
Would-be assassin: John F. Schrank
Political identity and motive:
Schrank was mentally ill; he claimed "that it was the ghost of William McKinley that told him to perform the act."

President: Franklin D. Roosevelt (D)
Would-be assassin: Giuseppe Zangara
Political identity and motive:
"In the Dade County Courthouse jail, Zangara confessed and stated: 'I have the gun in my hand. I kill kings and presidents first and next all capitalists.'" From Zangara's own words, much can be taken. However, he may also have been mentally ill. (Perhaps anyone who wants to kill a president is a touch deranged.)

President: Harry S Truman (D)
Would-be assassin: Oscar Collazo and Griselio Torresola
Political identity and motive:
Oscar Collazo and Griselio Torresola were members of the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party. Puerto Rican Nationalists, represented by Marxist terrorist groups such as FALN, who were responsible for scores of bombings in the U.S.; they were arguably the most active terrorist group in U.S. history. (Interesting side notes: President Carter freed Collazo in 1979, and President Clinton pardoned several FALN terrorists. Il n'y a aucun ennemi du cote gauche?)

President: John F. Kennedy (D)
Would-be assassin: Richard Paul Pavlick
Political identity and motive:
Pavlick was anti-Catholic, and he was also upset by "the close 1960 U.S. Presidential election, in which Kennedy had defeated Republican Richard Nixon by 118,000 votes." However, "Judge Emmet C. Choate ruled that Pavlick was unable to distinguish between right and wrong in his actions." He was kept in a mental hospital for three years. Will this be the closest we get....?

President: Richard M. Nixon (R)
Would-be assassin: Arthur Bremer
Political identity and motive:
Bremer is an interesting case, one that would require more research than we're doing in this admittedly surface analysis. He hated Nixon, but apparently, he also hated segregation and bigotry, and he did shoot Democratic candidate George Wallace. He also clearly had mental instability. Why did he hate Nixon, and also Wallace? He stated "It is my personal plan to assassinate by pistol either Richard Nixon or George Wallace," and that his purpose was "to do SOMETHING BOLD AND DRAMATIC, FORCEFUL & DYNAMIC, A STATEMENT of my manhood for the world to see." These are deep waters, and we'll have to give this one a pass for now.

President: Richard M. Nixon (R)
Would-be assassin: Samuel Byck
Political identity and motive:
Byck "began to harbor the belief that the government was conspiring to oppress the poor." He attempted to join the Black Panthers. However, he was also "diagnosed with manic depression, a mental disorder characterized by both depressive 'lows' and (less frequently) manic or euphoric 'highs.'" He had left-wing motives, but he was also mentally unstable.

President: Gerald R. Ford (R)
Would-be assassin: Lynette Fromme
Political identity and motive:
Insane member of the insane Manson Family.

President: Gerald R. Ford (R)
Would-be assassin: Sara Jane Moore
Political identity and motive:
Revolutionary leftist political activist.

President: James E. Carter (D)
Would-be assassin: Raymond Lee Harvey
Political identity and motive:
Harvey was possibly mentally ill, but also, charges were dismissed for lack of evidence. This one doesn't count.

President: Ronald Reagan (R)
Would-be assassin: John Hinckley, Jr.
Political identity and motive:
Mentally ill, no apparent political motive (despite some absurd references to his connections to the Bush family).

President: George H.W. Bush (R)
Would-be assassin: Operation of sixteen men working for Saddam Hussein's Iraq
Political identity and motive:
Geopolitical attack/act of war.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2016, 11:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Oh, sorry, I guess I'm just going by the spectacular failure that is the US drug war, or Prohibition, or the war on porn, or really anything else the gov't has tried to keep people from having. Ever.
Well I can certainly agree with your implication that America's infatuation with guns IS similar to addictions like all the items on that list. Guns are for the dopamine rush, not for something based on logical reasoning.


Which is irrelevant, given there's already so many here to begin with. However, those illegally sold guns coming from Mexico, much like the drugs coming from there, aren't legally manufactured, either.
Can you corroborate that claim?

I tried to find out for myself, and what I found suggests the exact opposite: one case of illegal cottage industry gun manufacturing in Mexico, yielding in the low 3-digits of guns, and reports went out of their way to mention that this was the only such case ever discovered. How do you know the guns are manufactured illegally?

(PS, I can see that everyone else seems to be crawling up your butt this week, and I'm trying to keep to the facts and learn something if there's something for me to learn. Please don't take my questions as accusations)
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2016, 01:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
Well I can certainly agree with your implication that America's infatuation with guns IS similar to addictions like all the items on that list. Guns are for the dopamine rush, not for something based on logical reasoning.
Nope, learn your Constitution, bud.

Can you corroborate that claim?
Guns w/o serials, that never had them (like the illicit ones from ye old Mehico), aren't being made legally. So, yeah...
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2016, 04:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
You mean those people acting like idiots and fools at traffic stops, or even openly provoking officers to take action? That's more like social Darwinism in most cases.
This is pretty bad, even for you.



Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Yes, nanny your people, you know what's best for everyone else, Mr Stalin. I hear the UK is now even starting to take away kitchen cutlery, good luck with your cooking.
Who told you that? Alex Jones?


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
American history isn't your thing, being from the UK. Who shot Kennedy? Oswald, a Leftist extremist. Same goes for Garfield and McKinley, both Republicans assassinated by Leftists. Lincoln was killed by a Democrat with confederate loyalties. Over 3/4ths of attempts on US Presidents were by radicals from the Left.
American history? Not really. We have so much more of it than you, one doesn't really have the time for that level of fine detail.

What a lovely long list. Sadly in focussing on the partisan argument which I wasn't really, you've done wonders to demonstrate the chasm I mentioned between the number of attempts on your Presidents and those on our Prime Ministers which is a far more important point.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2016, 09:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Nope, learn your Constitution, bud.
Typical junkie response, a cover story that bears only a fanciful semblance for reality.

The constitution includes an experimental measure to hopefully defend against tyranny, but that measure has yet to be put to the test. The only evidence that it works is that we think it sounds like a jolly good idea (in other words, it's a flight of collective fancy). Of course, we were all raised on hero worship tales like cowboys/indians and saving the world from nazis, and our opinions on the matter come far short of objective. We're addicted to the idea that the idea is ordained and good and successful, just as much as we are addicted to the actual dopamine rush one gets when the trigger clicks.

Guns w/o serials, that never had them (like the illicit ones from ye old Mehico), aren't being made legally. So, yeah...
I tried to validate your claim, and again what I found was the opposite:
As a matter of statistics, more than 99-percent of the firearms illegally trafficked have serial numbers.

Edit: weirdly, the link died just now. Here is goo gle cache:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&client=safari
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 19, 2016, 01:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
This is pretty bad, even for you.
River, cry me one.

Who told you that? Alex Jones?
'Zombie knives' ban to come into force - BBC News

When they realize they're just fancy meat cleavers and the like, they'll ban those too. Good luck.

American history? Not really. We have so much more of it than you, one doesn't really have the time for that level of fine detail.
What were you saying about the "bragging" shit, and you have the temerity to try and call me out? You crazy Nationalist, you.

What a lovely long list. Sadly in focussing on the partisan argument which I wasn't really, you've done wonders to demonstrate the chasm I mentioned between the number of attempts on your Presidents and those on our Prime Ministers which is a far more important point.
Yep, gorgeous. Anyway, ideologues are a serious danger, and we've had more than our fair share here, but what you don't realize, or ignored, is how many weren't using guns (for some reason bombs and knives have been quite popular in their attempts). Though, this year a British citizen tried to assassinate Trump by taking an officer's gun. Listen, we don't mind you guys coming over to visit, but keep your violent tendencies at home, okay? Thanks.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 19, 2016, 01:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
Typical junkie response, a cover story that bears only a fanciful semblance for reality.
Resemblance.

The constitution includes an experimental measure to hopefully defend against tyranny, but that measure has yet to be put to the test. The only evidence that it works is that we think it sounds like a jolly good idea (in other words, it's a flight of collective fancy). Of course, we were all raised on hero worship tales like cowboys/indians and saving the world from nazis, and our opinions on the matter come far short of objective. We're addicted to the idea that the idea is ordained and good and successful, just as much as we are addicted to the actual dopamine rush one gets when the trigger clicks.
"Experimental"? You do realize that every empire before has collapsed, right? And when they do it happens violently. I guess you think this country will be eternal, or something irrational like that. When such a thing happens the citizenry can take it back, if they're armed, otherwise they sit like sheep and have to spend generations under tyranny. A gov't has no reason to fear a defanged population, and they should always have some degree of fear that their policies will cause harm.


I tried to validate your claim, and again what I found was the opposite:
As a matter of statistics, more than 99-percent of the firearms illegally trafficked have serial numbers.

Edit: weirdly, the link died just now. Here is goo gle cache:
Feds Exaggerate As They Bust Eight In California Weapons Raid – Bearing Arms
Your own link counters your claim:

BAT statement:
"Undercover agents from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives purchased or seized more than 230 firearms and silencers. Many are known as “ghost guns” because they lack serial numbers and can be sold without background checks or transfer documents."

So... yeah...
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 19, 2016, 04:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
River, cry me one.
Push you into one more like.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
What were you saying about the "bragging" shit, and you have the temerity to try and call me out? You crazy Nationalist, you. :roll eyes:
Mine was relevant though. And "my country is older than yours", really not that much of a brag.



Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
this year a British citizen tried to assassinate Trump by taking an officer's gun. Listen, we don't mind you guys coming over to visit, but keep your violent tendencies at home, okay? Thanks.
You should have let him get on with it.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 19, 2016, 06:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post



'Zombie knives' ban to come into force - BBC News

When they realize they're just fancy meat cleavers and the like, they'll ban those too. Good luck
Machetes. I've been saying they've become the weapon of choice. Baseball bats will be next.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 19, 2016, 08:41 AM
 
Cricket bats. This is England remember.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 19, 2016, 10:17 AM
 
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 19, 2016, 03:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Push you into one more like.
You are overheated, aren't you? Go have a cold drink, maybe take a walk in your "crime free", pastoral neighborhood for a while.

Mine was relevant though. And "my country is older than yours", really not that much of a brag.
Nor was the brag about being "cultured", etc? You forget, I've seen your hooligans and chavs, they're no better than our rednecks and hillbillies.

You should have let him get on with it.
So barbaric...
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 19, 2016, 10:10 PM
 
https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-futur...harges-against
So we get the three troopers at the cruiser talking about what to do. Michael’s permit comes back as valid, they say “oh crap,” and one of the troopers says “we gotta punch a number on this guy,” which means open an investigation in the police database. And he says “we really gotta cover our asses.” And then they have a very long discussion about what to charge Michael with—none of which appear to have any basis in fact.
Meanwhile, Michael filed a complaint with the state police. They claimed they couldn’t do their internal investigation without interviewing Michael. They kept calling Michael directly—and they did that even though there were criminal charges pending and Michael had a criminal defense lawyer. His lawyer kept calling them and saying “don’t you ever call my client again, you have to talk to me.” But they continued to try and get Michael to come in and be interviewed without his lawyer, claiming that they couldn’t do the investigation unless Michael gave a statement. It was unbelievable—this is an interaction that was recorded from start to finish on high-quality digital video. A year later there has been zero movement on the internal affairs investigation as far as anyone knows, which just shows that police and prosecutors in Connecticut should not be in charge of policing themselves.
...and not one of the three cops spoke up against this. Thin Blue Line, baby.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 19, 2016, 11:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
You are overheated, aren't you?
Not at all, I was just kidding.



Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Nor was the brag about being "cultured", etc? You forget, I've seen your hooligans and chavs, they're no better than our rednecks and hillbillies.
Except they are far less likely to be armed.



Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
So barbaric...
The guy shrugging off the multiple murders of unarmed men by gung-ho cops as being their own fault is calling me barbaric for wanting to spare the world from an raving egomaniac. I'll struggle to get over that, I'm sure.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 04:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Not at all, I was just kidding.
You're now Poe = It's so hard to tell these days

Except they are far less likely to be armed.
Except with knives, and frankly being stabbed is as bad, if not worse than, being shot. Of course, getting shot is still a possibility too, despite your govt's best efforts to make you powerless (RIP Jo Cox).

The guy shrugging off the multiple murders of unarmed men by gung-ho cops as being their own fault is calling me barbaric for wanting to spare the world from an raving egomaniac. I'll struggle to get over that, I'm sure.
Except they weren't, and in at least 90% of those situations there were extenuating circumstances, if not outright justification for the shootings. In essence, you're full of shit, but too caught-up in your own nationalistic fairy tale to even accept what other people are saying is even plausible. At least people on the Right will pivot when they're guilty of having their heads up their asses and will eventually get up to speed, on the Left you simply double-down until you hit the wall at full tilt, knocking yourselves unconscious. So keep "struggling", the proximity sensor is blasting like a mother****er, but damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 06:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
You're now Poe = It's so hard to tell these days
I didn't include any indicator emoji, so thats my bad.



Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Except with knives, and frankly being stabbed is as bad, if not worse than, being shot. Of course, getting shot is still a possibility too, despite your govt's best efforts to make you powerless (RIP Jo Cox).
I think you overestimate the number of chavs and hooligans who are armed. And that you keep citing one shooting that happened here repeatedly is hilarious. This thread would probably hit 100 pages or more if I listed the names of US shooting victims since Jo Cox died.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Except they weren't, and in at least 90% of those situations there were extenuating circumstances, if not outright justification for the shootings. In essence, you're full of shit, but too caught-up in your own nationalistic fairy tale to even accept what other people are saying is even plausible.
My nationalism is almost entirely relative.
We disagree on the percentage of extenuating circumstances. I'm not sure I've seen one case discussed on this forum where you haven't take the police side. Some of them have been absolute travesties.

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
At least people on the Right will pivot when they're guilty of having their heads up their asses and will eventually get up to speed, on the Left you simply double-down until you hit the wall at full tilt, knocking yourselves unconscious. So keep "struggling", the proximity sensor is blasting like a mother****er, but damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead.
Thats a good one. The only reason they ever get up to speed is because of the left bludgeoning them over the head with logic, common sense and human decency. And still they get more stubborn and try to drag humanity backwards at every opportunity so the left has to get worse to some extent otherwise the right might start to succeed.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 06:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton View Post
Yep, and where do they source all these guns? From the permissive gun culture.
OR...they are buying stolen guns with serial numbers removed. Nobody got permissive in that transaction.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 08:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
OR...they are buying stolen guns with serial numbers removed. Nobody got permissive in that transaction.
Stolen from whom? The overabundance of guns is clearly the cause here.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 09:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
You should have let him get on with it.
That's a rather casual attitude towards murder.
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 09:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Resemblance.
learn your dictionary, bud.


"Experimental"? You do realize that every empire before has collapsed, right? And when they do it happens violently. I guess you think this country will be eternal, or something irrational like that. When such a thing happens the citizenry can take it back, if they're armed, otherwise they sit like sheep and have to spend generations under tyranny. A gov't has no reason to fear a defanged population, and they should always have some degree of fear that their policies will cause harm.
That's exactly what I said: it has yet to be put to the test. The only evidence that it works is that we think it sounds like a jolly good idea. Your post is a perfect example: you believe it will work, in the FUTURE, but it hasn't actually been tested in the crucible of history.

We won't know whether it works until the government actually tries to tyrannize us AND we fend it off. One could argue that the civil war represents a counter-example. Certain Americans attempted to overpower the federal government and... failed. I'm not suggesting that America will be eternal, quite the opposite in fact. I'm suggesting that the second amendment might be a defective insurance policy that ultimately fails to deliver any protection.



Your own link counters your claim:

BAT statement:
"Undercover agents from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives purchased or seized more than 230 firearms and silencers. Many are known as “ghost guns” because they lack serial numbers and can be sold without background checks or transfer documents."

So... yeah...
That's one of the quotes the title of the article calls "exaggerated," and is not inconsistent with the statistic the author refuted it with (that "99 percent of trafficked firearms have serial numbers."

Also, with "ghost guns" you are losing the distinction between legally manufactured guns (with their serial numbers removed) and illegally made ones (that never had serial numbers). If the bulk of the issue is with legally manufactured weapons with their serial numbers later removed, then it's a whole different ballgame than the war on drugs, in which there is no legal/visible factory as a focal point for enforcement.
     
Uncle Skeleton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 09:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
OR...they are buying stolen guns with serial numbers removed. Nobody got permissive in that transaction.
The permissive gun culture created those guns in the first place (otherwise, why did they even have serial numbers for someone to try to remove?).
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 10:06 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Stolen from whom? The overabundance of guns is clearly the cause here.
So, its THE GUNS FAULT now? NO.. Its an overabundance of assholes who are thugs and gang members trying to prove what big men they are. Hanging around a bunch of gang members must give those 'men' protection in numbers.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 06:17 PM
 
And we have yet another white "officer" shooting and killing an unarmed black male with his hands in the air ...

A 40 year old black male named Terrence Crutcher was leaving a music appreciation class at a local community college when he had car trouble. Apparently he was a regular singer in his church choir and was interested in pursuing a music career according to his family. Now this is the statement that the Tulsa PD made on Saturday about this incident:

Officers stopped to check on an SUV stalled in the middle of 36th Street North when the confrontation happened, according to the TPD.

“As they approached the vehicle a black male started towards them,” said TPD Officer Jeanne Mackenzie. “They asked him to show his hands. He refused to follow commands given by the officers. They continued to talk to him. He continued not to listen, not follow any commands as they got closer to the vehicle he reached inside the vehicle and at that time there was a Taser deployment and then a short time later there was one shot fired."
TPD Identifies Man Shot And Killed By Tulsa Police In Friday Inc - NewsOn6.com - Tulsa, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports - KOTV.com |

So right there the police are claiming that Mr. Crutcher refused to follow commands to show his hands. But the video just release shows that is utter and compete BS. How the hell is he refusing to show his hands when they are clearly in the air?

Dashcam footage



Helicopter footage



The U.S. Department of Justice has opened an investigation into whether a civil rights violation occurred during the fatal police shooting of an unarmed man on Friday night.

During a Monday afternoon news conference about the death of 40-year-old Terence Crutcher, Tulsa Police Chief Chuck Jordan said officers found no gun on Crutcher or in his SUV, which was stopped in the middle of 36th Street North just west of Lewis Avenue.

Officer Betty Shelby fired a single shot at close range that video footage released Monday indicates hit Crutcher in the upper right chest. Another officer, Tyler Turnbough, deployed his Taser at almost the same time Shelby — who did not have a Taser — used her service weapon.

“I want to assure our community, and I want to assure all of you and people across the nation who are going to be looking at this, we will achieve justice, period,” Jordan said.

He called the videos “very disturbing” and “very difficult to watch.”
The footage reveals discrepancies in the department’s initial statements from the scene Friday night.

Police initially said Crutcher approached officers from the side of the road after Turnbough arrived. However, video footage from Turnbough’s patrol car shows Crutcher walking to his vehicle with his hands raised and that Shelby had her gun pointed at his back.

After Crutcher reached the driver’s side of his vehicle and turned toward the window, Shelby, Turnbough and a third officer each had either a gun or a Taser pointed at him.

The officers’ positions on Turnbough’s dash camera video footage obscures much of the shooting, but Crutcher can be seen falling to the ground after one gunshot. Shelby then says, “Shots fired!” over the radio, telling dispatchers, “I’ve shot a subject who won’t show me his hands.”

An attorney for the Crutcher family previously said his hands were up when he was shot.

Tuell told the World that Shelby’s dash cam footage wasn’t provided because she didn’t activate her vehicle’s lights and sirens, which meant the camera was turned off.

Audio from two 911 calls shows two people called the police to report that Crutcher’s vehicle was blocking traffic on 36th Street North, with one caller reporting that the driver apparently left the vehicle running with the doors wide open. That caller also told the dispatcher that a man ran from the vehicle because it was smoking and he believed it might explode.
Video from a Tulsa police helicopter that was overhead briefly before the shooting shows Crutcher walking with his hands up before the shot was fired. It’s unclear from the video whether he was reaching for anything when he was shot.

“Looks like a bad dude, too,” one of the two officers in the helicopter says of Crutcher before he was shot. “Could be on something.”

A records search using Crutcher’s license plate turned up no information regarding any criminal history, according to dispatch audio.


It’s not clear from either video what Crutcher’s last action was before Shelby shot him. Immediately after Crutcher was shot, one officer in the helicopter says, “I think he may have just been Tasered,” before Shelby says over the radio that a shot was fired.

No one can be seen rendering aid to Crutcher until more than 2½ minutes after he was shot, which Tuell said after the news conference is also under investigation. Turnbough’s dash cam video shows an officer apparently searching Crutcher’s pockets and waistband for weapons or other contraband before starting first aid.

Attorney Scott Wood, who is representing Shelby, told the Tulsa World the situation unfolded for nearly 2 minutes before the video footage began. Prior to the deadly encounter, Wood said, no one was around when Shelby pulled up. The SUV was straddling the center line with its engine running and doors open, “so she isn’t really sure what’s going on,” Wood said.

He said Crutcher repeatedly ignored Shelby’s commands and didn’t respond to her questions. Crutcher, he said, reached toward or into his pockets several times despite Shelby’s telling him not to do so.

Wood said Shelby, who has completed drug-recognition expert training, believed that Crutcher was acting like a person who might be under the influence of PCP.

Some key observations ...

1. "Officer" Shelby doesn't bother to turn her berries on so conveniently there is no dash cam footage from her vehicle.

2. Why are 4 police officers, multiple vehicles, and a helicopter dispatched for a broken down vehicle on the road? "Officer" Shelby claimed Mr. Crutcher was "unresponsive" so she called for backup.

3. Why did "Officer" Shelby draw her weapon in the first place? The video shows no signs of aggressive or threatening behavior on the part of Mr. Crutcher. Furthermore, not even the police have alleged that anything of the sort took place before the videos started capturing the events. Was it because Mr. Crutcher was allegedly "unresponsive"? Funny how he was "responsive" enough to put his hands all the way in the air when she pulled a gun on him?

4. On Friday at the scene the police initially claimed that Mr. Crutcher approached officers (plural) from the side of the road after Ofc. Turnbough (the one who fired the stun gun) arrived. But the video clearly shows "Officer" Shelby had her weapon drawn on Mr. Crutcher before Turnbough had even pulled up. So that's another area where the cops are lying right out of the gate.

5. The helicopter pilot ... believed to be the husband of "Officer" Shelby ... unwittingly contradicted her claims of Mr. Crutcher not complying with police commands when he said in real-time "This guy is still walking and following commands."

6. The passenger in the helicopter says “That looks like a bad dude too. Might be on something." So just what do YOU see in the video that would lead this "officer" to that conclusion? From several hundred feet in the air?

7. Oh but wait it gets worse! More from the article from "Officer" Shelby's attorney ...

Shelby was concerned that Crutcher kept reaching toward his pockets, Wood said, because someone carrying a weapon will often touch it to make sure it’s still there. She drew her handgun after Crutcher walked toward the passenger side of the police car and started to put his hand in his left pocket, Wood said. She then radioed dispatch to report that she was with a person who wasn’t complying with her demands, he said.

“He never makes any response to her,” Wood said.

Wood said Shelby cleared — or checked — the SUV from the driver’s side and was about to clear the passenger side when Crutcher approached from the east. The backup officer arrived and drew his Taser, Wood said. The Taser deployment and gunshot were simultaneous because both officers perceived the same threat, he said.

“He has his hands up and is facing the car and looks at Shelby, and his left hand goes through the car window, and that’s when she fired her shot,” Wood said
.
So just how exactly does he put his left hand through a closed window?



And if by some miracle that window actually is open according to "Officer" Shelby she had already cleared the vehicle on the driver's side! Either way somebody ... that is "Officer" Shelby and/or her attorney ... is lying!

8. There are four officers on the scene. The others have their tasers out. Why is "Officer" Shelby the only one with a firearm drawn. The Tulsa PD has confirmed that she had one on her person and obviously the other officers didn't think the situation warranted all that.

9. Mr. Crutcher's right hand briefly drops immediately before he is shot and killed. On the one hand the police claim he was reaching inside the window with his left hand. But on the other hand they claim he was reaching in his pocket with his other hand. That's one helluva trick. Could a more plausible explanation be that he was tasered BEFORE he was shot and that's what caused his hand to drop? It seems pretty clear he wasn't reaching inside his pocket.

10. And the cover-up begins by using one of the oldest stereotypes in the book. Because after finding no weapons these cops had no incentive whatsoever to plant drugs in the car. And even IF dude what high as a kite there was absolutely no threatening behavior to justify "Officer" Shelby killing him.

Police say PCP found in vehicle occupied by Terence Crutcher on Friday - Tulsa World

OAW
( Last edited by OAW; Sep 21, 2016 at 10:26 AM. )
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 07:24 PM
 
I notice that not only is no-one trying to help him after he gets shot. but no-one goes near him at all. Since you can see him moving his arms, surely if they thought he was armed they'd be restraining him and searching him for weapons so he didn't still pull something out and shoot them?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 08:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I notice that not only is no-one trying to help him after he gets shot. but no-one goes near him at all. Since you can see him moving his arms, surely if they thought he was armed they'd be restraining him and searching him for weapons so he didn't still pull something out and shoot them?
That is a very disturbing and consistent thing you see in situations like that. More often than not the "officers" make no attempt to render first aid even though they are legally obligated too. In this case they let him bleed out for nearly 3 minutes before one of them even tried to put pressure on the wound. But #AllLivesMatter though.

OAW
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 11:02 PM
 
Mass. High Court Says Black Men May Have Legitimate Reason To Flee Police | WBUR News
In its ruling, the court made two major findings: They said police didn’t have the right to stop Warren in the first place, and the fact that he ran away shouldn’t be used against him.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 20, 2016, 11:49 PM
 
Of course they do. With the case I mentioned above Mr. Crutcher could very well have been complying with the "officer's" command to go to his car. I can't count the number of black men I've seen on the side of the road with their hands on the roof of a vehicle "assuming the position" so they can be searched. OTOH he could have been trying to just get back into his vehicle because "Officer" Shelby decided to pull her weapon on him.

OAW
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 21, 2016, 12:13 AM
 
Apparently "Reading While Black" is a thing now. Because right on the heels of the egregious killing of an unarmed black man in Tulsa ... we now have disabled black man killed in Charlotte while READING A BOOK in his car waiting on his son to be dropped off after school. Naturally the police claim he "posed an imminent deadly threat to the officers".

UPDATE: Keith Lamont Scott Identified as Disabled Black Man Shot Dead by N.C. Police While Reading in Car

#ButAllLivesMatterThough

OAW
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 21, 2016, 04:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
That is a very disturbing and consistent thing you see in situations like that. More often than not the "officers" make no attempt to render first aid even though they are legally obligated too. In this case they let him bleed out for nearly 3 minutes before one of them even tried to put pressure on the wound. But #AllLivesMatter though.

OAW
Yeah but even beyond the first aid, if you shot the guy because you thought he was reaching for a weapon, you'd go check that he didn't have one. If you don't, thats basically an admission that you felt no imminent danger and you just shot a guy you knew was unarmed. Not one of them checks as far as I can tell. Its an execution, plain and simple.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 21, 2016, 02:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I think you overestimate the number of chavs and hooligans who are armed. And that you keep citing one shooting that happened here repeatedly is hilarious. This thread would probably hit 100 pages or more if I listed the names of US shooting victims since Jo Cox died.
The difference being that your country prides itself on being disarmed

My nationalism is almost entirely relative.
The "relative" part is that you're the one doing it?

We disagree on the percentage of extenuating circumstances. I'm not sure I've seen one case discussed on this forum where you haven't take the police side. Some of them have been absolute travesties.
I can't help your memory, that's on you, but there have been several instances already. IMO, it's always a travesty when anyone is killed (unlike your feelings about Trump), even when it can be justified.

Thats a good one. The only reason they ever get up to speed is because of the left bludgeoning them over the head with logic, common sense and human decency. And still they get more stubborn and try to drag humanity backwards at every opportunity so the left has to get worse to some extent otherwise the right might start to succeed.
That's how society works, it's about checks and balances between the various ideologies, your views on the actual dynamics at work here are absurd, to say the least. Most of the time you come in here armed with movie and TV show plots and believe they represent the real world.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:35 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,