View Full Version : 355
Ultralight
12-3-15, 8:23am
Yesterday's daily shooting was especially bad. What can reasonably be done?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/02/the-san-bernardino-mass-shooting-is-the-second-today-and-the-355th-this-year/
Williamsmith
12-3-15, 9:12am
Build a giant wall. Shut down all immigration period. Shoot anyone trying to get in. Gather up all Muslims and put them in detention camps. Take all semi automatic firearms from everyone. Make the sale and possession of semiautomatic firearms a capital offense. Invade Syria with a massive ground force. Make the country part of the United States. Use the oil there to build a huge military capable of invading all the other surrounding countries. Oh yeah, and to make this all sound reasonable.....elect Donald Trump President but maybe give him a new name, something he can paint on the side of Air Force One ....like "Pooh-Bah".
catherine
12-3-15, 10:00am
Just in case you are not being sarcastic, Williamsmith ;)
94% of the terrorism on US soil is committed by non-Muslims (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/05/muslims-only-carried-out-2-5-percent-of-terrorist-attacks-on-u-s-soil-between-1970-and-2012.html)
Of the 72 mass public shootings since 1982, 44 have been carried out by white males (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map) Three-quarters of the shootings were carried out with legal firearms.
Not all Muslims believe in, or are committed to carrying out, ISIS medieval ideology. (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/)
As we've recently covered in other threads, its not a Muslim thing, its a radical/terrorist/extremist/angry nut job thing. And in a few cases its a disturbed/imbalanced/sick thing. But that doesn't make for as many soundbites.
I have to admit sadness and total frustration with the violence around us. I still don't think banning guns is the answer just because anyone who would commit 14 murders isn't likely to be concerned with an additional slap from a firearms charge and the old outlaws & guns adage holds just enough water to be true. Plus that 2nd amendment thing was put in for a reason. It would be helpful to know the motive of the most recent shooters. If these people were truly angry about a situation that could be changed wouldn't they have left some clue what that was? Maybe they did and it hasn't come out yet, but they would be in the minority if they did. If we're left guessing I'll stick with addressing things like grotesque inequality, a lack of opportunity and the corresponding lack of hope, the vitriol spouted by public officials and those who wannabe, our lack of compassion and care in all afflictions of the mind, etc. Not a small task to fix those kinds of issues with ineffectual leaders at almost every level.
catherine
12-3-15, 10:58am
As we've recently covered in other threads, its not a Muslim thing, its a radical/terrorist/extremist/angry nut job thing. And in a few cases its a disturbed/imbalanced/sick thing. But that doesn't make for as many soundbites.
I have to admit sadness and total frustration with the violence around us. I still don't think banning guns is the answer just because anyone who would commit 14 murders isn't likely to be concerned with an additional slap from a firearms charge and the old outlaws & guns adage holds just enough water to be true. Plus that 2nd amendment thing was put in for a reason. It would be helpful to know the motive of the most recent shooters. If these people were truly angry about a situation that could be changed wouldn't they have left some clue what that was? Maybe they did and it hasn't come out yet, but they would be in the minority if they did. If we're left guessing I'll stick with addressing things like grotesque inequality, a lack of opportunity and the corresponding lack of hope, the vitriol spouted by public officials and those who wannabe, our lack of compassion and care in all afflictions of the mind, etc. Not a small task to fix those kinds of issues with ineffectual leaders at almost every level.
Here's another great article, this one about the Charleston shootings and the kid responsible:
http://time.com/time-magazine-charleston-shooting-cover-story/
You could probably simplify the motivation for shootings with a simple equation: hate + fear x ignorance
Ultralight
12-3-15, 11:06am
I think we live in a toxic, sickening culture.
The thing that makes me so sad about all this is wondering what could make a human so full of hate that they would even want to do this? I have to admit that yesterday upon hearing this news, I felt like crying. Not because it was tragic and absurd, but because this ongoing group of perpetrators - fellow human beings - have lost all sense of humanity. I know there are probably far more acts of generosity, caring and kindness but these actions are like stabs in the heart of our culture.
Ultralight
12-3-15, 11:08am
The thing that makes me so sad about all this is wondering what could make a human so full of hate that they would even want to do this?
Who knows? It is just so unfathomable.
You could probably simplify the motivation for shootings with a simple equation: hate + fear x ignorance
I would have to add "hopelessness" in at least some cases. What really makes me crazy is that the US is the only first world country where this happens on such a regular basis. If everyone else found a way to fix it, or avoid it in the first place, why can't we? As good as I believe Americans are as people, I'm forced to agree with ULA that parts of our culture are toxic.
Ultralight
12-3-15, 11:51am
I would have to add "hopelessness" in at least some cases. What really makes me crazy is that the US is the only first world country where this happens on such a regular basis. If everyone else found a way to fix it, or avoid it in the first place, why can't we? As good as I believe Americans are as people, I'm forced to agree with ULA that parts of our culture are toxic.
I agree that there are lots of good folks in the US.
Ultralight
12-3-15, 11:57am
Be good neighbors.
This should be a universal truism that we all live by!
well I did cry, and dealt with anxiety a lot of the day. The domestic terrorism has no clear face, no clear agenda, there is nothing for us to pull together and fight against.
Last night the school that my staff member's children attend was on a lock-down. We are on some type of lock-down almost once a month. It was a little freakier knowing there was one (and later I found out) 2 mass shootings yesterday.
Ultralight
12-3-15, 1:57pm
I think we are all becoming numb to these horrific events. Some of us are quicker to become numb than others though.
I never fully get numb, it really is hard
ToomuchStuff
12-3-15, 2:46pm
Yesterday's daily shooting was especially bad. What can reasonably be done?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/02/the-san-bernardino-mass-shooting-is-the-second-today-and-the-355th-this-year/
What was especially bad about it? What made it worse then any other mass murder?
Also, what does one define as reasonable, and realize that will change. Right now, we have privacy in our own brains, but what would happen if we could map them, translate a persons thoughts, then transmit them via some implant, so when someone has the THOUGHT of hurting someone else, it goes to the authorities. What would one consider reasonable then? Would it be different for the leader of a country, thinking of sending others children to war, then someone looking at hitting someone?
The thing that makes me so sad about all this is wondering what could make a human so full of hate that they would even want to do this?
Other humans of course. Mental illness or some sort of physical illness (like the much reported, and also reported as incorrect, brain tumor in the clock tower shooter, Charles Joseph Wittman)
The domestic terrorism has no clear face, no clear agenda, there is nothing for us to pull together and fight against.
Your the first I have heard it call domestic terror, rather then mass murder. Is there some sort of report about the killings being organized? Others doing more? (I certainly haven't heard all the details, so I may be not up to date)
[QUOTE=ToomuchStuff;223692
Your the first I have heard it call domestic terror, rather then mass murder. Is there some sort of report about the killings being organized? Others doing more? (I certainly haven't heard all the details, so I may be not up to date)[/QUOTE]
I just am basing that on my feelings, not on any strict definition. Don't expect that anyone needs to agree with me. It feels so much like the ways that war works, the frequency is overwhelming, I just am responding to how I feel when I read all the claims of terrorism from outside that are not true while we have murder on a scale that is unreal.
The story teller in me wants to make sense of it, wants to find a common thread, and I am quite disorganized about it today
We're so afraid to step on anyone's rights that lots of things fall through the cracks.
Also.....as one "expert" said on the news today......if it was terrorist related..........they try very hard to look like they fit into the life around them, and don't have the usual qualities........like being loners. I mean this shooter was born here and lived here and had been working at this place for several years. This was a holiday party, and he was attending and supposedly he had words with someone and left abruptly. Maybe it was the tipping point for him. I don't know.
This country is just so concerned with not violating rights, that these things are going to happen, over and over and over. We have to get more forceful with enforcing rules and punishing people. It will probably take some actions that won't make some people happy. But how long can we tolerate this kind of thing?
Ultralight
12-3-15, 3:42pm
These horrible events make me do things to increase my situational awareness. I doubt the government or many private companies and such will do anything substantial to prevent these incidents.
So for me, I think about how I as an individual can avoid potentially bad situations and how I could escape if they were to happen in a place I am at.
What else can reasonably be done?
These horrible events make me do things to increase my situational awareness. I doubt the government or many private companies and such will do anything substantial to prevent these incidents.
I don't think most of us would be happy living under the sort of governmental/private industry protection that would be necessary to be "protected" from random crazies or dedicated groups of attackers. I don't even know that the nation could afford it, even if we wanted it.
What else can reasonably be done?
My personal actions:
- Situational awareness. I try to always have a plan for getting out of wherever I am. Handy for fires, earthquakes, and whatnot as well.
- Communications. I keep a cell phone/sat phone and a police/fire/rescue transceiver on my person or in arm's reach at almost all times.
- Advanced medical training to be able to help out, along with carrying a small supply of necessary medical items (gloves, tourniquets, gauze, NPA tube, needle decompression kit, ... - not much, small enough to fit in a small pouch or pocket. One of my partners was running in the Boston Marathon when the bombs went off, he's sure glad he had training and experience so he could assist.
- Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) training, other Technical Rescue discipline training - for helping out post-incident, getting people found/evacuated/transported. This includes "recovery", which is not a fun job but needful.
- Weapons: I carry an assortment of weapons on my person almost always. I generally also have better weapons close at hand, along with armor. And I train rather a lot.
- Location: I try to avoid high-probability target areas, mostly because I prefer the wilderness/rural environment.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-zh02FXrAQNs/UpRSwyDKhfI/AAAAAAAAI0g/JVgoPO6uL9A/s800-Ic42/Awesomized.jpg
Ultralight
12-3-15, 4:00pm
My personal actions:
- Situational awareness. I try to always have a plan for getting out of wherever I am. Handy for fires, earthquakes, and whatnot as well.
- Communications. I keep a cell phone/sat phone and a police/fire/rescue transceiver on my person or in arm's reach at almost all times.
- Advanced medical training to be able to help out, along with carrying a small supply of necessary medical items (gloves, tourniquets, gauze, NPA tube, needle decompression kit, ... - not much, small enough to fit in a small pouch or pocket. One of my partners was running in the Boston Marathon when the bombs went off, he's sure glad he had training and experience so he could assist.
- Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) training, other Technical Rescue discipline training - for helping out post-incident, getting people found/evacuated/transported. This includes "recovery", which is not a fun job but needful.
- Weapons: I carry an assortment of weapons on my person almost always. I generally also have better weapons close at hand, along with armor. And I train rather a lot.
- Location: I try to avoid high-probability target areas, mostly because I prefer the wilderness/rural environment.
A lot of these seem really smart. Some seem like you'd need a lot of free time to develop these skills. :)
I definitely have plans of how to escape places or shelter-in-place.
A lot of these seem really smart. Some seem like you'd need a lot of free time to develop these skills. :)
It's all about being a good neighbor. And many of these things pay off in normal boring regular accidents and misadventures.
I just got a neighbor out of his house to the doctor last night by feeding him through a second story window (which was more like a second-story door by the time I finished altering it...) and lowering him to the ground with a crane system we built out of a ladder and some hardware.
Ultralight
12-3-15, 4:10pm
It's all about being a good neighbor. And many of these things pay off in normal boring regular accidents and misadventures.
I can dig it. It makes a lot of sense.
situational awareness.
It has been four or five years ago but we had mandatory training in what to do in active shooter situations here at the university. I think about it some but sorry it has to even occupy space in my thoughts.
Ultralight
12-3-15, 4:28pm
It has been four or five years ago but we had mandatory training in what to do in active shooter situations here at the university. I think about it some but sorry it has to even occupy space in my thoughts.
I wonder if it would be a bad idea to ask management here to do a training like that for us?
And it's not like there's any place that's completely safe - remember the Amish school incident about 10 years ago?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Nickel_Mines_School_shooting
However, human risk perception is a bit odd. You're still more at risk driving to work than you are from J. Random Bad Guy deciding to shoot up your workplace. And yet I encounter people all the time who don't wear their seat belts even.
Ultralight
12-3-15, 4:33pm
And it's not like there's any place that's completely safe - remember the Amish school incident about 10 years ago?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Nickel_Mines_School_shooting
However, human risk perception is a bit odd. You're still more at risk driving to work than you are from J. Random Bad Guy deciding to shoot up your workplace. And yet I encounter people all the time who don't wear their seat belts even.
About 40k people per year die in auto related accidents.
ApatheticNoMore
12-3-15, 5:07pm
Driving to work may still be more dangerous, nevertheless there have been several armed attacks with guns and knives (at least one in broad daylight) plus at least 2 bomb threats right on my way to work where I am everyday, so I'm not convinced it's actually a safe area either.
Speaking of situational awareness versus profiling...........
I was in line at the customer service desk at a store recently, when a Middle-Eastern-looking man came in the store's door, talking VERY loudly and energetically in Arabic. He was right behind me and had a package. I came really close to stepping out of line.
What I couldn't see was that he had phone earplug in his ear and he was talking to someone......albeit a little too loudly. It did rattle me a bit..........imagining the headlines of the paper the next day......"Terrorist blows up the customer service area in small town store." So.........should I have moved away from that line? No, I wasn't blown to bits. Yes, I was "profiling". But who knows........maybe the next time I won't make the right decision.
Yes, it's good to always be aware and to have an escape plan............but that's easy to say when we're not stunned by loud noises and brains and guts blowing up around us.
When these things happen.....they happen fast. I would say the best thing to do is drop and pretend you're dead.............if you can.
I'm not sure what the answer is, but I feel that we're putting on bandaid after bandaid after bandaid.......and not making any progress.
I would give up some of my freedoms to fix this. I think a lot of people would. But we're a spoiled bunch.
Williamsmith
12-3-15, 6:39pm
I would not give up any of my freedoms to fix this. Too many good people have died already protecting these freedoms. I don't care if it's domestic or foreign terrorism.....this is MY country....MY Liberty....and I'm passing this on to my kids with all the freedoms in tact.
I would give up some of my freedoms to fix this. I think a lot of people would. But we're a spoiled bunch.
I'm not sure what freedoms you could give up that would "fix this". You would just end up giving up freedoms.
I've been to countries that have very few freedoms, and this sort of thing still happens. It may even happen more often, as the lack of freedom seems to irk people more.
Ultralight
12-3-15, 7:12pm
Speaking of situational awareness versus profiling...........
I was in line at the customer service desk at a store recently, when a Middle-Eastern-looking man came in the store's door, talking VERY loudly and energetically in Arabic. He was right behind me and had a package. I came really close to stepping out of line.
What I couldn't see was that he had phone earplug in his ear and he was talking to someone......albeit a little too loudly. It did rattle me a bit..........imagining the headlines of the paper the next day......"Terrorist blows up the customer service area in small town store." So.........should I have moved away from that line? No, I wasn't blown to bits. Yes, I was "profiling". But who knows........maybe the next time I won't make the right decision.
Yes, it's good to always be aware and to have an escape plan............but that's easy to say when we're not stunned by loud noises and brains and guts blowing up around us.
When these things happen.....they happen fast. I would say the best thing to do is drop and pretend you're dead.............if you can.
I'm not sure what the answer is, but I feel that we're putting on bandaid after bandaid after bandaid.......and not making any progress.
I would give up some of my freedoms to fix this. I think a lot of people would. But we're a spoiled bunch.
I am very intrigued by your views on race and profiling.
A neighbor of the terrorist couple said yesterday that they had seen multiple large packages being delivered to the garage at night, plus a lot of Middle Eastern men coming and going. But the neighbor didn't want to racially profile the men, and so didn't want to report it to authorities. The PC mindset gone haywire.
Teacher Terry
12-3-15, 8:04pm
Sorry but we are not spoiled but enjoy the freedoms of this country. Enough of them have already gone by the wayside. YOu can't prevent every bad thing from happening. At one point I worked for the state of Kansas & another co-worker that was much older then me at the time was very angry about things at work & at co-workers. I was a new employee & really grew to like this guy a lot but I was also worried he might do something stupid like work place violence so basically I talked him into retiring. Turns out it was the best thing for him & he & his wife were much happier. Later whenever I would see him he was great. It never hurts to reach out to others.
A neighbor of the terrorist couple said yesterday that they had seen multiple large packages being delivered to the garage at night, plus a lot of Middle Eastern men coming and going. But the neighbor didn't want to racially profile the men, and so didn't want to report it to authorities. The PC mindset gone haywire.
I am a white male of a certain age. My garage is full of scary looking tools. My lab space even more so. I receive frequent deliveries of packages, often with scary labels on them. There are a lot of men and women coming and going through my garage and work space. Strange noises late into the night. Sometimes the sound of gunfire or explosions.
Williamsmith
12-3-15, 10:07pm
I am a white male of a certain age. My garage is full of scary looking tools. My lab space even more so. I receive frequent deliveries of packages, often with scary labels on them. There are a lot of men and women coming and going through my garage and work space. Strange noises late into the night. Sometimes the sound of gunfire or explosions.
Pretty sure the NSA knows exactly what is going in and out of your garage bae. Just like they already knew about the two Islamic terrorists that went wacko yesterday. Just too many of them to keep track of on a daily basis. Keep your Glock handy.
I had to laugh when I read about the size of the terrorists' arsenal. Some twit of a reporter even asked if it was legal to have that much ammo. Folks who regularly shoot have thousands of rounds stocked up, quite often.
I had to laugh when I read about the size of the terrorists' arsenal. Some twit of a reporter even asked if it was legal to have that much ammo. Folks who regularly shoot have thousands of rounds stocked up, quite often.
Ha, true enough. No point really in buying less than a case at a time if you are trying to be frugal.
I'm not sure what freedoms you could give up that would "fix this". .
Maybe the freedom to buy a gun without any sort of background check? Probably wouldn't stop all, or even most, of these shooting situations, but if it stopped just nine in two decades it would be more effective than more people with guns. At least if the statistics about "good guys with guns" are accurate.
Williamsmith
12-4-15, 3:26am
I'm thinking more in terms of the other direction. How about a law requiring every citizen who can pass a background check and is of voting age own a semiautomatic weapon and a thousand rounds of ammo, that they take required training on the proper storage, care and use of the firearm and that when an incident like this occurs instead of cowering in the fetal position in a bathtub ....they are prepared to use their defensive rifle if called upon or necessary to protect themselves, their family and their property from these evil terrorists.
I'm thinking more in terms of the other direction. How about a law requiring every citizen who can pass a background check and is of voting age own a semiautomatic weapon and a thousand rounds of ammo, that they take required training on the proper storage, care and use of the firearm and that when an incident like this occurs instead of cowering in the fetal position in a bathtub ....they are prepared to use their defensive rifle if called upon or necessary to protect themselves, their family and their property from these evil terrorists.
Pretty much our duty as citizens, IMO.
Ultralight
12-4-15, 8:00am
A neighbor of the terrorist couple said yesterday that they had seen multiple large packages being delivered to the garage at night, plus a lot of Middle Eastern men coming and going. But the neighbor didn't want to racially profile the men, and so didn't want to report it to authorities. The PC mindset gone haywire.
Can you send me a link to that article about the neighbor?
iris lilies
12-4-15, 8:43am
Can you send me a link to that article about the neighbor?
this looks like the source, the second-to-last paragraph in this story by the Los Angeles CBS affiliate.
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/12/02/authorities-search-redlands-home-tied-to-suspect-syed-farook/
Ultralight
12-4-15, 8:51am
this looks like the source, the second-to-last paragraph in this story by the Los Angeles CBS affiliate.
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2015/12/02/authorities-search-redlands-home-tied-to-suspect-syed-farook/
Interesting.
Pretty much our duty as citizens, IMO.
There is a small town in Colorado that requires gun ownership.
"Guns have put Nucla in the national Second Amendment spotlight since the Nucla Town Board on May 8 passed the first — and only — municipal ordinance in Colorado requiring heads of households to have guns, and ammunition, "in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the town and its inhabitants."
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_23320447/nucla-becomes-colorados-first-and-only-town-mandating
Firearm ownership may be a personal decision for home and personal protection, but I think it's time for people to realize gun laws are unlikely to stop these types of shootings any more than gun ownership and it's time to move on to real solutions, whatever they maybe.
Ultralight
12-4-15, 9:17am
Wasn't the San Bernadino tragedy at a work party?
Nucla
Wow...my mom was born there and I've never heard of it again until this.
Some of these ideas of what would work I find really frightening.
Ultralite........as far as "profiling"..........It goes to my feelings that we still have our primitive wiring. In a "civilized" society, we struggle to distance ourselves from animal behavior. Sometimes it leads to good things, sometimes bad. As far as profiling.......I really believe that it is a mechanism we have to keep us safe........to optimize our self-preservation. So saying that profiling is wrong, seems to be confusing to me.......since it's how we create short-cuts to keep ourselves safe. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I wonder how many in that massacred group in San Bernardino felt good about not letting themselves make any deductions about the middle eastern male among them?
If there is a certain type of person who does horrible things in an area.........it's to our benefit (for survival) to quickly make assessments of anyone who looks like that. But in today's U.S. world, that is considered wrong. Its just another "animal" trait (and we ARE animals) that we try to deny in order to be "civilized".....and give everyone the same rights.
What's confusing to me is that here in the U.S., we are trying to protect everyone's rights.......be true to the constitution......being politically correct........but it's becoming self-destructive to us now.
So, I feel profiling is okay. I have said before here, that in my town if a bunch of white-haired, older ladies with arthritic fingers was going around killing people..........I would totally understand if I got stopped a fair amount of time to be checked out. Wouldn't it be stupid to not be stopped and checked out?
I'm not sure what freedoms you could give up that would "fix this". You would just end up giving up freedoms.
I've been to countries that have very few freedoms, and this sort of thing still happens. It may even happen more often, as the lack of freedom seems to irk people more.
There are small things that could be done without people screaming that it violates their rights..........like the NSA wanting to be able to read emails, or keep track of who calls who. I wouldn't mind this at all. I have nothing to hide.
Of course, if it were a perfect world, I might find this offensive, but I really feel it's a "simple" thing that could intercept some of these massacres ahead of time in the world that it has become.
And stronger screening at airports, etc., makes a lot of sense to me.........but nobody wants to have to wait very long, and is offended by being frisked or "profiled".
It would be like asking our immune systems to back off and quit being so defensive. We know what happens with that. I mean........bacteria/viruses/antigens have feelings too and we wouldn't want to deny them their rights!
Ultralight
12-4-15, 10:18am
Some of these ideas of what would work I find really frightening.
Ultralite........as far as "profiling"..........It goes to my feelings that we still have our primitive wiring. In a "civilized" society, we struggle to distance ourselves from animal behavior. Sometimes it leads to good things, sometimes bad. As far as profiling.......I really believe that it is a mechanism we have to keep us safe........to optimize our self-preservation. So saying that profiling is wrong, seems to be confusing to me.......since it's how we create short-cuts to keep ourselves safe. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I wonder how many in that massacred group in San Bernardino felt good about not letting themselves make any deductions about the middle eastern male among them?
If there is a certain type of person who does horrible things in an area.........it's to our benefit (for survival) to quickly make assessments of anyone who looks like that. But in today's U.S. world, that is considered wrong. Its just another "animal" trait (and we ARE animals) that we try to deny in order to be "civilized".....and give everyone the same rights.
What's confusing to me is that here in the U.S., we are trying to protect everyone's rights.......be true to the constitution......being politically correct........but it's becoming self-destructive to us now.
So, I feel profiling is okay. I have said before here, that in my town if a bunch of white-haired, older ladies with arthritic fingers was going around killing people..........I would totally understand if I got stopped a fair amount of time to be checked out. Wouldn't it be stupid to not be stopped and checked out?
Do you worry that profiling by law enforcement would just become so massive though? Like, going by "the stats" there'd be profiling of black men, white right-wing men, and Middle Eastern men. That is a lot of people to profile.
Something I am curious about, who all do you personally profile? Like which demographics and such?
Do you worry that profiling by law enforcement would just become so massive though? Like, going by "the stats" there'd be profiling of black men, white right-wing men, and Middle Eastern men. That is a lot of people to profile.
Something I am curious about, who all do you personally profile? Like which demographics and such?
"Profiling" is what I do all day long..........if there is a coyote in my yard........I see it as a possible threat, and I don't try to make friends with it.
If I'm out in the yard and see a buck in rut........I know to get the hell out of there.
If a strange dog comes up to me.......I know not to kneel down and start to pet it.
If a person I don't know knocks on my door, I don't open it, but talk through the glass, and have my cell phone handy.
I consider all of these examples as "profiling". It's just being cautious, based on my experience.
If someone of a certain ethnicity shows up in a store in my small town that I have never seen before.......and their "people" have been accused of hiding among us and looking normal, yet blow up innocents.........then my antennae go up and I'm more cautious than usual. Do I scream and run? No. Do I call 911? No. Do I hate them? No. I just am more alert. but then.........I'm alert all the time with everyone and everything.
It would be pretty ignorant/blind/naive/lacking a self preservation instinct to not do that.
I see "profiling" by our government is a reaction to the problems we are having......and they are trying to keep people safe.
Does it go wrong sometimes? Yes. Do certain law enforcement people carry out their own justice? Yes. But I still think the majority of them (and the government) is trying to keep us safe.
I'm not paranoid about the government about this aspect of things, at this point.
Ultralight
12-4-15, 10:37am
"Profiling" is what I do all day long..........if there is a coyote in my yard........I see it as a possible threat, and I don't try to make friends with it.
If I'm out in the yard and see a buck in rut........I know to get the hell out of there.
If a strange dog comes up to me.......I know not to kneel down and start to pet it.
If a person I don't know knocks on my door, I don't open it, but talk through the glass, and have my cell phone handy.
I consider all of these examples as "profiling". It's just being cautious, based on my experience.
If someone of a certain ethnicity shows up in a store in my small town that I have never seen before.......and their "people" have been accused of hiding among us and looking normal, yet blow up innocents.........then my antennae go up and I'm more cautious than usual. Do I scream and run? No. Do I call 911? No. Do I hate them? No. I just am more alert. but then.........I'm alert all the time with everyone and everything.
It would be pretty ignorant/blind/naive/lacking a self preservation instinct to not do that.
Okay, could you be more specific about the humans you profile and which demographics they are part of? And why?
No. I have other things to do.
Ultralight
12-4-15, 11:22am
No. I have other things to do.
Relax. This is not a trap. haha
Have you heard of something called the "shy-bold continuum?"
In animals (we are animals, after all), when something novel is introduced to their environment there is a continuum of shyness and boldness that the animals occupy. For instance, a school of sunfish encounters a new worm wriggling in the water near them.
The boldest fish will move in and scope it out. Then the second boldest... and on down the line until the shyest of the fish finally checks it out.
But the bold fish are the ones who either get a tasty meal or get a hook in their mouth.
I suspect that people who profile tend to be on the shy end of the human shy-bold continuum.
For instance, an ex-GF of mine is Ugandan. She was born there, grew up there until her early teens and then she moved to the Ivory Coast. When she was about 18 she moved to the US.
Now, some folks I knew -- like my dad -- were a bit concerned about me dating a foreigner from the continent of Africa. The popular imagery is that everyone in Africa has AIDS.
But I tend to be a bit more on the bold end of the shy-bold continuum. So I figured why not get to know her?
Turns out she did not have AIDS, which was contrary to the stereotypes. In fact she was an accomplished scientist with a BS, an MPH, and a Ph.D. in epidemiology from excellent US universities.
We cared deeply and quite a bit for each other and only split up because she was adamant about having two babies with me.
But my point is that by occupying the shyest end of the shy-bold continuum you might really miss out on some good stuff.
And it doesn't have to be romance. Many people in this part of Ohio profile and dislike Somali immigrants. But I went to a little hole-in-the-wall Somali restaurant in a rough part of the city. And delish!
Sure, you don't get a hook in the mouth but you also might miss out on what it really means to be a fish -- if you can dig that metaphor.
catherine
12-4-15, 11:26am
Sure, you don't get a hook in the mouth but you also might miss out on what it really means to be a fish -- if you can dig that metaphor.
I can dig it.
rodeosweetheart
12-4-15, 11:34am
And I dig Cathy's expressions of her thoughts. As Pete Seeger used to sing,
"Die gedanken sind frei"
and I appreciate your communications, which are clear and non-condescending.
Thanks.
I'm thinking more in terms of the other direction. How about a law requiring every citizen who can pass a background check and is of voting age own a semiautomatic weapon and a thousand rounds of ammo, that they take required training on the proper storage, care and use of the firearm and that when an incident like this occurs instead of cowering in the fetal position in a bathtub ....they are prepared to use their defensive rifle if called upon or necessary to protect themselves, their family and their property from these evil terrorists.
Perhaps instead of a law forcing me against my will to have to buy a machine for killing, all in the name of freedom, we instead pass a personal responsibility law making the owner of a gun liable in the event that someone else uses it to commit a crime. Combine that with mandatory background checks and we might be getting somewhere.
Ultralight
12-4-15, 11:55am
I really don't think the government is going to do anything but pray and/or talk.
So for me, I just think we ought to do things we can do (we as in individual regular Schmoes) in our daily lives.
I'm back. You know, all of us have had different experiences in life, are different ages, and have different genetic make-ups (i.e. brains). This country's plan was to have everyone live in harmony. It was a great idea........but there are soooo many different brains and cultures and experiences in the millions of people who live here. Someone (or lots of someones) at any given time aren't going to get what they want. But we have a one-size-fits-all policy. In trying to accept "differentness" we ignore some basic instincts. I'm rambling.......
Ultralite.......I understand what you are saying about the shy people. I'm not shy........just like living apart from the masses. And I'm hyper-vigilant. That's just how my neuro system is set up. I couldn't be happy being the type of person you are, or catherine, or others. Just like you guys wouldn't like living like me. I might appreciate you for who you are, but I don't want to be like that. So we have to be careful to assume that one is preferred over the other, for everyone.
As far as the San Bernardino massacre........I think it causes more people like myself to do even more profiling. This couple lived among others for a couple years........no one was suspicious, no one thought they were weird. When there are people like this (especially of a certain ethnicity), it makes it even harder to NOT be concerned with others around us. You're no doubt saying "Well, okay.........you can live your life in fear and angst, but you're missing out on a lot of things." But I'm not. I'm living the life I've chosen. If you knew me personally, you would see that I'm a fair, reasonable person. I give people different from me the same reactions I give people like me. My behavior doesn't lead to awful things.
When you try to change me..........it's no different than someone of a certain religion trying to convert me. I am content with my beliefs......even if they come across as racist. I'm fair to everyone I meet. I'm not going to change, and I don't want to change. I think I'm pretty much of a realist.
But I do have a question for you.........Did you break up with your black girlfriend, or do you have another one of the same ethnicity? Just trying to see who you are.
And I know that question will drive some people crazy. Oh well.
I would not give up any of my freedoms to fix this. Too many good people have died already protecting these freedoms. I don't care if it's domestic or foreign terrorism.....this is MY country....MY Liberty....and I'm passing this on to my kids with all the freedoms in tact.
Well........this country is changing big time. It may not even be remotely the same place for your kids, unless we accept some mild-moderate changes in certain things.
Ultralight
12-4-15, 1:00pm
Did you break up with your black girlfriend, or do you have another one of the same ethnicity? Just trying to see who you are.
And I know that question will drive some people crazy. Oh well.
I have not broken up with my current girlfriend who happens to be black. She is not African though, she is American -- from NY.
The girlfriend I referred to above did break up with me when I said I did not want to have kids with her. She wants two, I want zero. I probably could have negotiated her down to one, but still... not what I want for my life. So we split.
Ultralight
12-4-15, 1:44pm
CathyA:
What do you think of this? Is it profiling? How does this factor into your "reptilian brain" theory?
I am most attracted to black women. I have dated women from all races and ethnic backgrounds. But when it comes to catching my eye -- it is black women.
Williamsmith
12-4-15, 4:06pm
Perhaps instead of a law forcing me against my will to have to buy a machine for killing, all in the name of freedom, we instead pass a personal responsibility law making the owner of a gun liable in the event that someone else uses it to commit a crime. Combine that with mandatory background checks and we might be getting somewhere.
I would call the firearm a tool for self defense and you would not have to buy it.....it would be provided to you free of charge.
And if you insist, I would accept your personal responsibility law making the owner of a gun liable including yourself in the event you were unable to physically hold onto it 24 hrs a day 7 days a week and some thug got it off your hands and went out and committed a crime with it. But why stop there? Let's make everyone who is present at the scene of a mass shooting liable if they did not have a firearm with which to defend themselves and others. Makes as much sense as your proposition.
I would call the firearm a tool for self defense and you would not have to buy it.....it would be provided to you free of charge.
And if you insist, I would accept your personal responsibility law making the owner of a gun liable including yourself in the event you were unable to physically hold onto it 24 hrs a day 7 days a week and some thug got it off your hands and went out and committed a crime with it. But why stop there? Let's make everyone who is present at the scene of a mass shooting liable if they did not have a firearm with which to defend themselves and others. Makes as much sense as your proposition.
I can't see myself living in a place where the government gives out guns to all of its citizens ((shudder))
Ultralight
12-4-15, 4:16pm
You know, after the Paris attacks I was just so angry.
But after the San Bernadino attack I am just incredibly sad.
I'm thinking more in terms of the other direction. How about a law requiring every citizen who can pass a background check and is of voting age own a semiautomatic weapon and a thousand rounds of ammo, that they take required training on the proper storage, care and use of the firearm and that when an incident like this occurs instead of cowering in the fetal position in a bathtub ....they are prepared to use their defensive rifle if called upon or necessary to protect themselves, their family and their property from these evil terrorists.
Yes, because more guns to cure all the gun violence is very helpful much in the same way more alcohol is the cure for drunk driving.>8)
I would call the firearm a tool for self defense and you would not have to buy it.....it would be provided to you free of charge.
And if you insist, I would accept your personal responsibility law making the owner of a gun liable including yourself in the event you were unable to physically hold onto it 24 hrs a day 7 days a week and some thug got it off your hands and went out and committed a crime with it. But why stop there? Let's make everyone who is present at the scene of a mass shooting liable if they did not have a firearm with which to defend themselves and others. Makes as much sense as your proposition.
Wow, did jp1 touch a nerve there? Actually the idea is a very good one and one that makes perfect sense.
Although these mass shootings seem to garner all the attention, more people in this country are killed by guns in one on one drug/robbery/passion killings. So where are they all getting these guns? Without background checks? Gun shows, craigs list, over the fence....
Requiring every gun purchase to be registered puts a real name to each gun. If you sell your gun at a show or through a want ad, then this sale would be registered much in the same way car sales are registered. If your gun is lost or stolen (how careless of you to 'lose' your gun!) then you report this to the police, just as you would if your car were stolen (or lost!) This way, if a gun is used in a crime, either you have the paper trail showing it was sold or stolen from you, or you are charged with something. A hefty charge depending on the crime committed with your gun. this is a way to prevent these guns from being scooped up by the handfuls at shows (without background checks and by the same ones over and over again) and resold to the criminals. Or it prevents an enterprising fellow with a clean background check from repeatedly buying at a store and reselling through want ads. With this registry, guns used in crimes can be traced back to the last legitimate owner. If it's found that this owner has a habit of 'losing' his guns, then law enforcement can be involved.
When we go driving on the highways, hurling ourselves at 70 mph or faster, we count on the fact that the other cars have been inspected and registered and the drivers are hopefully somewhat competent. Shouldn't we expect at least as much when we go out about our business daily knowing there are more guns than citizens out there.
I also think there should be a 'no-fly' list of sorts for gun ownership. If your kid (or a neighbors kid) got a hold of your gun and shot someone, whether they died or not, you don't get to own a gun.
Ultralight
12-4-15, 5:09pm
The government is not going to pass any gun control laws, liberals. Get over it. Move on. Think of other ways to deal with these situations.
iris lilies
12-4-15, 5:16pm
Peggy, you have such faith in "registration" and "a hefty charge" and etc. As if the lads in my urban 'nabe would give one Fock about these controls, but carry on.
st. Louis has been the scene of 4 or 5 of the mass shootings this year counted by the Feds, and all were gangland shootings. I'm sure tha guns In these events were passed around to a point that no one knew who the owner was.
DH served 3 months on the grand jury here hearing around 700 cases, and 3/4 of them were gun charges, drug charges, and guns 'n drug charges. For all of the laws that control guns now, there doesn't seem to be much control out there.
Ultralight
12-4-15, 5:18pm
Wow, did jp1 touch a nerve there? Actually the idea is a very good one and one that makes perfect sense.
Although these mass shootings seem to garner all the attention, more people in this country are killed by guns in one on one drug/robbery/passion killings. So where are they all getting these guns? Without background checks? Gun shows, craigs list, over the fence....
Requiring every gun purchase to be registered puts a real name to each gun. If you sell your gun at a show or through a want ad, then this sale would be registered much in the same way car sales are registered. If your gun is lost or stolen (how careless of you to 'lose' your gun!) then you report this to the police, just as you would if your car were stolen (or lost!) This way, if a gun is used in a crime, either you have the paper trail showing it was sold or stolen from you, or you are charged with something. A hefty charge depending on the crime committed with your gun. this is a way to prevent these guns from being scooped up by the handfuls at shows (without background checks and by the same ones over and over again) and resold to the criminals. Or it prevents an enterprising fellow with a clean background check from repeatedly buying at a store and reselling through want ads. With this registry, guns used in crimes can be traced back to the last legitimate owner. If it's found that this owner has a habit of 'losing' his guns, then law enforcement can be involved.
When we go driving on the highways, hurling ourselves at 70 mph or faster, we count on the fact that the other cars have been inspected and registered and the drivers are hopefully somewhat competent. Shouldn't we expect at least as much when we go out about our business daily knowing there are more guns than citizens out there.
I also think there should be a 'no-fly' list of sorts for gun ownership. If your kid (or a neighbors kid) got a hold of your gun and shot someone, whether they died or not, you don't get to own a gun.
About 40k people die annually from automobile accidents.
I would have to add "hopelessness" in at least some cases. What really makes me crazy is that the US is the only first world country where this happens on such a regular basis. If everyone else found a way to fix it, or avoid it in the first place, why can't we? As good as I believe Americans are as people, I'm forced to agree with ULA that parts of our culture are toxic.
You are joking right? This is a joke, right? Sarcasm? Surely you jest....
Ok, I'll play.
Let's see...only in America is this regular....religious fanatics, angry workers, pissed off boyfriends, general nut jobs...now what oh what is common to EVERYONE of these massacres...what could possibly be the unifying thing that each has in common...what is it about America that isn't present in England or Finland or Germany and yes even France (their one massacre can't hold a candle to our 355)...
Let's see, it wasn't a hammer, although that has been trotted out time and again as a dangerous tool that could be used to mass murder. Wasn't a machete, though this is also often referenced as a possible mass murdering tool.
Here's a hint...those on the no fly list can buy one cause Merika!
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/12/03/ryan-urges-caution-on-gun-legislation/76714608/
Let's see...only in America is this regular....religious fanatics, angry workers, pissed off boyfriends, general nut jobs...now what oh what is common to EVERYONE of these massacres...what could possibly be the unifying thing that each has in common...what is it about America that isn't present in England or Finland or Germany and yes even France (their one massacre can't hold a candle to our 355)...
The devaluation of human life and willingness to use extreme violence as a means to an end?
I can't see myself living in a place where the government gives out guns to all of its citizens ((shudder))
Switzerland has an interesting gun policy. Most of the males are obligated to military service and training and at the end of their service they can convert their military weapon to personal ownership. I am thinking this is without having to purchase the gun, but am delving back in my memory. Per wiki, they are fourth in gun ownership per capital behind the U.S., Yemen, and Serbia. Semi-automatic rifles, which I am assuming includes assault type rifles, are legal and fully automatic military weapons must be converted to semi-automatic before they can be privately owned. They tried to tighten gun laws after their only mass shooting in 2001, but were mostly unsuccessful. Their violent crime rate where guns were involved is minuscule compared to the U.S.
Not to advocate that would work here. I think it might be frightening to give all our males (or females) weapons, too. But it gets back to the cultural mentality of gun ownership.
iris lilies
12-4-15, 6:19pm
Switzerland has an interesting gun policy. Most of the males are obligated to military service and training and at the end of their service they can convert their military weapon to personal ownership. I am thinking this is without having to purchase the gun, but am delving back in my memory. Per wiki, they are fourth in gun ownership per capital behind the U.S., Yemen, and Serbia. Semi-automatic rifles, which I am assuming includes assault type rifles, are legal and fully automatic military weapons must be converted to semi-automatic before they can be privately owned. They tried to tighten gun laws after their only mass shooting in 2001, but were mostly unsuccessful. Their violent crime rate where guns were involved is minuscule compared to the U.S.
Not to advocate that would work here. I think it might be frightening to give all our males (or females) weapons, too. But it gets back to the cultural mentality of gun ownership.
We travel regularly to Switzerlwnd and stay in homes of relatives. With their guns. It really is not a big deal, this gun ownership among law abiding citizens. I see it here, I see it there. Not a big deal.
Williamsmith
12-4-15, 6:38pm
Wow, did jp1 touch a nerve there? Actually the idea is a very good one and one that makes perfect sense.
Although these mass shootings seem to garner all the attention, more people in this country are killed by guns in one on one drug/robbery/passion killings. So where are they all getting these guns? Without background checks? Gun shows, craigs list, over the fence....
Requiring every gun purchase to be registered puts a real name to each gun. If you sell your gun at a show or through a want ad, then this sale would be registered much in the same way car sales are registered. If your gun is lost or stolen (how careless of you to 'lose' your gun!) then you report this to the police, just as you would if your car were stolen (or lost!) This way, if a gun is used in a crime, either you have the paper trail showing it was sold or stolen from you, or you are charged with something. A hefty charge depending on the crime committed with your gun. this is a way to prevent these guns from being scooped up by the handfuls at shows (without background checks and by the same ones over and over again) and resold to the criminals. Or it prevents an enterprising fellow with a clean background check from repeatedly buying at a store and reselling through want ads. With this registry, guns used in crimes can be traced back to the last legitimate owner. If it's found that this owner has a habit of 'losing' his guns, then law enforcement can be involved.
When we go driving on the highways, hurling ourselves at 70 mph or faster, we count on the fact that the other cars have been inspected and registered and the drivers are hopefully somewhat competent. Shouldn't we expect at least as much when we go out about our business daily knowing there are more guns than citizens out there.
I also think there should be a 'no-fly' list of sorts for gun ownership. If your kid (or a neighbors kid) got a hold of your gun and shot someone, whether they died or not, you don't get to own a gun.
Peggy I love your enthusiasm. You realize all this gun registry relies on the ability of a government to actually register all the firearms? And you realize serial numbers do disappear from firearms on a daily basis? And do you realize plenty of motor vehicles are being driven around unregistered, uninsured, uninspected and by unlicensed people every day. That is why you are required to have insurance to cover the uninsured. And can you believe, there are plenty of tool and die makers in my community alone who can whip out an automatic rifle based on an AR platform just using the machinery they have in their basement?
Admit one thing......all registration schemes have one thing in common......taxation. They just happen to achieve a certain percent of registration because like you and me, we are honest law abiding citizens who fork over the money to register their vehicle and have no intention of committing crimes. The people who do.....they get their guns elsewhere.
Admit one thing......all registration schemes have one thing in common......taxation. They just happen to achieve a certain percent of registration because like you and me, we are honest law abiding citizens who fork over the money to register their vehicle and have no intention of committing crimes. The people who do.....they get their guns elsewhere.
You remind me of my DH who adamantly refused to get a license for our dog from our town clerk on principle: because in his mind it's just a tax-generating ploy. We finally had to pony up the $7 when we were interested in becoming members of a dog park that required licensing.
Do you feel the same way about car registration?
I have long been in favor of reasonable controls on gun ownership, like background checks and registration because I truly believe it's no big deal for non-criminals to get licenses--just like it's no big deal to register your car, and it just might make it slightly more difficult for the wrong people to get access to them. I'm not totally convinced that tight gun control will unequivocally result in fewer mass shootings, and I'm with UA in that I'm ready to give up that fight and instead try to address the root cause of all the violence in this country, because it's really out of hand.
Anyone have a stat on how many gun murders committed in the US are committed by the person who owns the registered weapon, vs stolen guns, "borrowed" guns, unregistered guns and other rouge firearms? I realize that registering might deter a small fraction of people from purchasing guns in the first place, but beyond that, my opinion on the effectiveness of controlling ownership would be directly tied to the percentage of violence committed by the registered owner versus someone else.
Peggy, you have such faith in "registration" and "a hefty charge" and etc. As if the lads in my urban 'nabe would give one Fock about these controls, but carry on.
Throw enough people in jail for crimes committed with their 'lost' guns and eventually people will learn not to 'lose' their guns.
Yossarian
12-4-15, 11:20pm
because it's really out of hand.
https://adask.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/homicide-rates2.jpg
I need to check when the next gun show will be around. I suddenly have a desire to purchase something. I'm sure all these talks has helped sell many more firearms.
Ultralight
12-5-15, 9:36am
My sis had a double-barrel .410 with 20 inch barrels. I took it sporting clays shooting. Very challenging but quite rewarding when you hit the targets.
If I saw one of those in good shape at a gun show I'd consider picking one up.
https://adask.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/homicide-rates2.jpg
That’s what puzzles me. I had been hearing that gun violence has been declining for some time. How credible is the 355 figure? I understand it comes from a crowd-sourced web site ( shootingtracker.com ) that defines “mass shootings” as shooting, not necessarily fatally four or more people including the shooter in one event or series of related events. The FBI and Congressional Research Service, using different definitions, publish much less alarming numbers (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/427985/media-mass-shootings-count-misleading ).
Now I see the New York Times has published it’s first front-page editorial in 95 years, saying “It is a moral outrage and national disgrace that civilians can legally purchase weapons designed to kill people with brutal speed and efficiency.” That may be true, but with all the convulsions and towering evils of the last century, how does this one issue merit such exceptional treatment?
I don’t mean to minimize the suffering of the victims, but I’m curious about why this particular problem seems to have captured the media’s and perhaps the popular imagination.
I actually share LDAHLs questions…I have read statistics on both sides of the fence--I read the literature Tradd posted a little while ago, and other things I found on the internet, and I'm *almost* ready to concede that there may be no strong causation between guns ownership per capita and homicide rate.
The main question is, why DO we have so much more gun violence than other 1st world countries? From what I can see, several Central American and South American countries have higher rates of homocides by firearm, but that's it.
I also find the love affair between gun-owners and their guns to be interesting, and the degree to which they insist on ownership with absolutely no strings attached. I'm guessing it's a freedom thing, a self-security thing, an American "rugged individual" thing. But maybe you gun-owners can enlighten me on that. Again, I own a "weapon"--a car--and I don't go nuts at the suggestion that I register it.
Ultralight
12-5-15, 9:57am
I actually share LDAHLs questions…I have read statistics on both sides of the fence--I read the literature Tradd posted a little while ago, and other things I found on the internet, and I'm *almost* ready to concede that there may be no strong causation between guns ownership per capita and homicide rate.
The main question is, why DO we have so much more gun violence than other 1st world countries? From what I can see, several Central American and South American countries have higher rates of homocides by firearm, but that's it.
I also find the love affair between gun-owners and their guns to be interesting, and the degree to which they insist on ownership with absolutely no strings attached. I'm guessing it's a freedom thing, a self-security thing, an American "rugged individual" thing. But maybe you gun-owners can enlighten me on that. Again, I own a "weapon"--a car--and I don't go nuts at the suggestion that I register it.
A lot of gun nuts will say things like: "A gun is just a tool."
But they don't have near the devotion to their flathead screwdriver set as they do to their AR-15.
Yossarian
12-5-15, 10:11am
why DO we have so much more gun violence than other 1st world countries?
See the chart halfway down this page: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/black-americans-are-killed-at-12-times-the-rate-of-people-in-other-developed-countries/
I don't know how that affects the answer, but it may help shape your questions.
Yossarian
12-5-15, 10:31am
there may be no strong causation between guns ownership per capita and homicide rate.
And I think you will also find that over the last 20 years the number of guns has doubled while the gun homicide rate has been cut in half. That's not to say the rate is now acceptable, but the headlines don't always give the full story.
catherine
12-5-15, 10:43am
See the chart halfway down this page: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/black-americans-are-killed-at-12-times-the-rate-of-people-in-other-developed-countries/
I don't know how that affects the answer, but it may help shape your questions.
Interesting chart, and it does raise more questions--however it doesn't explain, excuse, or justify the high homocide rate in the US.
And, to the point of the OP, what about the mass shootings? I'd like to see an analysis of the motivations for all the mass shootings we've had this year.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/10/02/gun_control_by_state_tougher_laws_mean_fewer_death s.html
And some more statistics to consider.
Williamsmith
12-5-15, 11:04am
There are a lot of issues involved. Registering vehicles has nothing to do with reducing deaths caused by vehicles. It is strictly a way to manage taxation of owners who use the public highways. It is also governed by state agencies and has nothing to do with the federal government. Firearm registration is always discussed in the form of a federal registration. Which would make gun confiscation a simple next step. And there is historic precedence for governments confiscating citizen firearms. So obviously gun owners are against a federal registry because, one...it will not do anything to reduce gun violence, two.....it is a necessary step for any government to confiscate all firearms. Comparing the two is actually not helpful at all.
As a gun owner, not all of my guns are registered because some of them have been passed to me by family members and are older guns. There is no reason why I should be required to notify any government agency the details of my gun ownership just because a tiny percent of the population of the US uses a firearm to commit heinous crimes. The question is, what is the governments interest in knowing? And the only answer is that they want to be able to take it away in the future. Because knowing will do nothing to stop crimes being committed. Is it a useful tool for law enforcement investigation. Yes, I Benefited by my state firearms registry many times and solved more than one homicide with the help of the registry. But I was never able to stop a crime from happening because of the registry.
catherine
12-5-15, 11:21am
Yes, I Benefited by my state firearms registry many times and solved more than one homicide with the help of the registry.
So isn't a good enough reason to require registration? Isn't it like saying I'm against fingerprint databases because someday the government might want to fingerprint me? Registering vehicles doesn't reduce deaths but if there's a hit and run, that information might help.
iris lilies
12-5-15, 11:35am
So isn't a good enough reason to require registration? Isn't it like saying I'm against fingerprint databases because someday the government might want to fingerprint me? Registering vehicles doesn't reduce deaths but if there's a hit and run, that information might help.
Gee, auto registration helps a lot with crime, at least the ones on TV. The TV coppers are always running plates and discovering things about perps. but I agree with WSmith that the Feds have no business in registering guns. Let Congress have their panels and hearings and moments of silence, keeps them busy with that stuff that is useful for, well, keeping them busy. But they need to stay away from a national gun registry.
Actually, the concept of a national fingerprint database gives me pause as well, but it is now so ingrained into our culture that it's cranky to question it.
Williamsmith
12-5-15, 11:41am
It's the slippery slope argument.....we could benefit greatly by having a chip placed in every citizen that would document where they were at every point of their lives. It would undoubtedly be useful in solving crimes. Where to stop....that is the question.
It's the slippery slope argument.....we could benefit greatly by having a chip placed in every citizen that would document where they were at every point of their lives. It would undoubtedly be useful in solving crimes. Where to stop....that is the question.
We're already well down that path. They're called cell phones.
We're already well down that path. They're called cell phones.
I don't think the price point has gotten low enough yet - but when RFID's are cheap enough to just place into products at time of manufacture, people will be able to be tracked by what they carry around with them.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/10/02/gun_control_by_state_tougher_laws_mean_fewer_death s.html
And some more statistics to consider.
I considered them but don't understand them. How do they put CA at about 7th or 8th lowest deaths and WY at 50th when CA has 3.4/100k and WY has 0.9/100k???
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state
And where is DC on that chart?
Here's an interesting exercise- sort the wikipedia data by the last column, which basically gives you lowest to highest gun murder rates. Some of the highest gun ownership states are the lowest gun murder rates. And the all time winner is DC with the absolute by far lowest ownership percentage and by far highest gun murder rate.
ETA- Now I see maybe your stats are picking up suicides too, which is an issue but I don't think ought to be mixed in the same discussion. Suicide and homicide are not equivalent.
I believe the difference is that the slate article's study is about all gun deaths, not just murders. When I looked up those numbers I came up with a list that is more closely aligned with the slate article's table:
http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/firearms-death-rate-per-100000/
It's not surprising that the results would be wildly different when all gun deaths are measured instead of murders since 3/5 of gun deaths are suicide and other studies have shown that people with guns in the home significantly increase the likelihood of suicide, especially for men.
I don't think the price point has gotten low enough yet - but when RFID's are cheap enough to just place into products at time of manufacture, people will be able to be tracked by what they carry around with them.
You don't think the metadata that the NSA is collecting on our phone usage includes location? 90% of Americans have a cell phone and I would imagine that the vast majority of those people carry it with them most, if not all, the time.
iris lilies
12-5-15, 4:09pm
I believe the difference is that the slate article's study is about all gun deaths, not just murders. When I looked up those numbers I came up with a list that is more closely aligned with the slate article's table:
http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/firearms-death-rate-per-100000/
It's not surprising that the results would be wildly different when all gun deaths are measured instead of murders since 3/5 of gun deaths are suicide and other studies have shown that people with guns in the home significantly increase the likelihood of suicide, especially for men.
And yet, in Switzerland where every man is required to be in the Army and keep a gun in their home, the suicide rate is lower than the U.S.
And yet, in Switzerland where every man is required to be in the Army and keep a gun in their home, the suicide rate is lower than the U.S.
Weird, it's like different countries have different cultures and demographics, making naïve cross-cultural comparisons not particularly helpful.
Go figure :-)
iris lilies
12-5-15, 4:38pm
Weird, it's like different countries have different cultures and demographics, making naïve cross-cultural comparisons not particularly helpful.
Go figure :-)
different culture? Nawwwwww, I'm pretty sure that the guns sold here in the U.S. are infused with especially malevolent spirits, making them prone to incite their owner to shoot. It's important to keep the focus on the guns.
And yet, in Switzerland where every man is required to be in the Army and keep a gun in their home, the suicide rate is lower than the U.S.
Looking at the risk factors for suicide https://www.afsp.org/understanding-suicide/suicide-risk-factors there are any number of reasons why Swiss guys are less likely to blow their brains out. Japan is ranked #17 in number of male suicides https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate yet guns are almost non-existent among the population, so obviously if one wants to kill oneself one doesn't need a gun. Presumably guys in the US are using guns because they are often readily available. I do find it interesting though that states with higher gun ownership rates have higher suicide rates: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/means-matter/risk/ I would be curious to see if states with lower gun ownership rates have more unsuccessful suicide attempts, but according to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention such statistics aren't kept.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate
iris lilies
12-5-15, 4:51pm
Last night I attended a talk by former state Senator Jeff Smith, out of prison after serving time for lying to the FBI, and he earnestly told the audience that selling drugs is dangerous work and that's why the dealers all need guns with them. Hmmm, that was interesting, I had not considered the equipment needs of that profession.
This was in the context of Jeff talking about prison sentences being too long, and how gun possession charges added on time.
So, as Peggy and others advocate all sorts of controls and punishments for weapons possession, I would like you to remember that guns are an essential piece of equipment in some professions that have nothing to do with law enforcement.
iris lilies
12-5-15, 5:31pm
...so obviously if one wants to kill oneself one doesn't need a gun.
Obviously! Then the problem is more the people than the malevolent guns.
but
...Presumably guys in the US are using guns because they are often readily available.
Presumably! Then the problem really IS with the extensive number of guns in households.
but wait, there is a gun in every household in Switzerland and the rate of suicide by gun is lower.
I am dizzy going around in this logic circle. Let's step out of it.
Could it be possible that Americans are acculturated to killing humans with guns, while the Swiss are acculturated to this kind of gun play: drinking schnapps and shooting targets. Our Swiss uncles tell us this is what happens during their annual army unit meetup.
So, we need more schnapps here in the USA? Sounds like a plan!
Obviously! Then the problem is more the people than the malevolent guns.
but
Presumably! Then the problem really IS with the extensive number of guns in households.
but wait, there is a gun in every household in Switzerland and the rate of suicide by gun is lower.
Hence the reason I pointed out the different suicide rates in states depending on the prevalence of guns. Continuing to discuss Switzerland is simply an attempt to deflect from a valid point.
You don't think the metadata that the NSA is collecting on our phone usage includes location? 90% of Americans have a cell phone and I would imagine that the vast majority of those people carry it with them most, if not all, the time.
Agreed - I'm just saying that is not the only method out there. The EZPass in my car, my Charlie card for the subway, ATM and credit card transactions, all the places where they are just scanning all the license plate numbers going by. And probably a dozen more I haven't thought of.
http://wagunrights.org/after-one-year-no-arrests-no-prosecutions-no-convictions-from-i-594/
It has been a year since my state banned private transfers of firearms, including a clause which makes me a criminal if I take my daughter trap-shooting when she comes home for Christmas break this year and hand her one of my shotguns to use. It adds considerable cost and bother to private transfers, and imposes registration.
Results after one year in action: nothing but wasted money. No arrests, no prosecutions, no crimes solved because of it.
Other results: considerable cost and inconvenience to law abiding citizens, and creating criminals out of people who don't read the fine print.
Yay!
iris lilies
12-5-15, 6:48pm
Hence the reason I pointed out the different suicide rates in states depending on the prevalence of guns. Continuing to discuss Switzerland is simply an attempt to deflect from a valid point.
I don't mean this in a snarky way, but I think diverting the discussion to suicide is deflecting the main topic of this thread which I believe to be gun violence. Japan? I don't grok its relevance. But maybe I am really missing something here, so I will assume your intent is honorable.
Perhaps the underlying question is whether we kill each other because we are somehow more accepting of the idea of murder as a form of "conflict resolution", or whether we kill each other because it's made easy.
^&*() sorry I have guests and will apparently be unable to complete a thought of my own for the next four days.
^&*() sorry I have guests and will apparently be unable to complete a thought of my own for the next four days.
You have my deepest sympathies :-)
I don't mean this in a snarky way, but I think diverting the discussion to suicide is deflecting the main topic of this thread which I believe to be gun violence. Japan? I don't grok its relevance. But maybe I am really missing something here, so I will assume your intent is honorable.
I guess for me it's all related, perhaps because I had a friend years ago take his own life by using his father's legally owned gun. Whether the violence is towards others or towards oneself doesn't matter to me. It's all violence made easy by the abundance of guns in this country. Others may have a different view.
Williamsmith
12-5-15, 8:24pm
I guess for me it's all related, perhaps because I had a friend years ago take his own life by using his father's legally owned gun. Whether the violence is towards others or towards oneself doesn't matter to me. It's all violence made easy by the abundance of guns in this country. Others may have a different view.
Had your friend done so by hanging himself with a dog leash, do you think you may feel the same about the abundance of dog leashes in this country?
Had your friend done so by hanging himself with a dog leash, do you think you may feel the same about the abundance of dog leashes in this country?
Perhaps if the people in San Bernadino, Sandy Hook, etc, had also been killed by dog leashes.
Yossarian
12-5-15, 10:47pm
3/5 of gun deaths are suicide
What role do you think magazine capacity plays in those deaths?
Williamsmith
12-5-15, 10:57pm
A terrorist will be just as effective with three ten round mags as he/she would with a 30 round mag. It doesn't take long to drop a mag and slam another in. Limiting magazine size is arbitrary and symbolic. So you limit the magazine size and arbitrarily create millions of felons out of law abiding citizens who happen to already own perfectly legal firearms that are designed to hold more than the arbitrary number you legislated. Or you grandfather them in as an exception and make the whole law double ridiculous. It's a waste of time.
Williamsmith
12-5-15, 11:00pm
What role do you think magazine capacity plays in those deaths?
I once had a suicide where a man was found with a gunshot wound to the head. The revolver at the scene had two spent rounds in the cylinder. And once had a suicide where the man shot himself twice in the chest before he expired.
Limiting magazine size is arbitrary and symbolic. So you limit the magazine size and arbitrarily create millions of felons out of law abiding citizens who happen to already own perfectly legal firearms that are designed to hold more than the arbitrary number you legislated.
I have a wee collection of John M. Browning-designed firearms, including his belt-fed ones. In the state of California, I am a felon if I simply possess a piece of cloth with too many stitches in it. Amazing.
http://cdn1.ima-usa.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/88decfed4fba5801a7dc8e03047eb978/m/u/mu1960__1.jpg
What role do you think magazine capacity plays in those deaths?
So the theoretical magazine capacity laws put you guys in conniptions? It only takes one bullet to kill someone, with the exception of williamsmith's dreadful two shot suicide, and I haven't expressed an opinion one way or the other about magazine capacity this whole thread, so I can only assume that this is a touchy issue... Not sure why it's so sensitive, but I'd love to hear what the right amount of magazine capacity is and what horrors will happen if we go below that level.
Williamsmith
12-6-15, 3:50am
Personally, I would love it if every terrorist would do what my brother and I did as a child. When playing war games or cops and robbers we would point plastic replicas of real firearms at each other and yell, "PYOW!! PYOW!! Your Dead!" After having done that sufficient amount of times, retire to the living room and watch The Three Stooges on our black and white vhf/uhf tv. That's if mom wasn't home because it was unacceptable to watch Moe, Larry and Curly bop each other on the head and poke each other in the eyes.
Now if you can get the terrorists to do that.....then I will give up,on my insistence of having as many damn bullets in my magazine as I feel I need for my defense.
Imagine how pissed off I would have been if I would have been playing the game with plastic pistols and a neighbor kid came over and shot me with a real BB gun. Might have started an arms race!
So the theoretical magazine capacity laws put you guys in conniptions?
I see no conniptions here, only a desire for clarity. You wouldn't argue for mandatory childhood vaccines based on mortality data that included pool drownings, would you?
I was curious about the incidence of mass shootings as I don't recall the phenomenon happening until a certain point in our history. Apparently there was one back in the 40s and then the one in 1966 by Charles Whitman. They really took off in the late 80s and 90s. Did something about gun laws change then or perhaps a turning point in our cultural viewpoints?
rodeosweetheart
12-6-15, 1:14pm
Or maybe it's television, video, the change in how we perceive the world/reality/our fellow man?
I went to a gun show today. The browning hi power was designed way back in the 30's or so and had a 13 round clip and I suppose you could also have one in the chamber. Evidently there was not a rash of mass shootings from the extra capacity, unless you count war use.
the newer guns held a few more, but with extra mags it wouldn't take but a second to reload.
I Have not had a desire to buy a handgun until recently, I may have to buy an assault rifle also. I would think they might even be a good investment. The more talk of banning them just makes the demand go up.
I even signed up for a concealed carry class. Evidently all I would have to do to concealed carry is go to this class for a couple of hours and then go to the local gov office to get fingerprinted. Send Florida some money and I'm good to go.
I went to a gun show today. The browning hi power was designed way back in the 30's or so and had a 13 round clip and I suppose you could also have one in the chamber. Evidently there was not a rash of mass shootings from the extra capacity, unless you count war use.
The Browning Hi Power was actually designed in 1923, it just wasn't manufactured until a bit later.
My Browning M1919 holds 250 rounds (or more, if you use links instead of cloth belts), and it was first placed in service in 1919. Doesn't get used in a lot of non-state crimes.
The Luger semi-auto pistol was designed and manufactured in 1898, and there was a 32-round snail-drum magazine available for it, and issued for the '08 version during The Great War. You can still buy those magazines, along with adapters for them for several other common firearms of the era.
I Have not had a desire to buy a handgun until recently, I may have to buy an assault rifle also. I would think they might even be a good investment. The more talk of banning them just makes the demand go up.[/QUOTE]
The guns used in the California shooting were evidently obtained illegally. If the neighbor purchased the guns I'm pretty sure he couldn't then turn around and sell or give them to the shooters. Wouldn't that be considered a straw purchase?
The guns used in the California shooting were evidently obtained illegally. If the neighbor purchased the guns I'm pretty sure he couldn't then turn around and sell or give them to the shooters. Wouldn't that be considered a straw purchase?
A "straw purchase" occurs when one person buys a firearm and fills out the federal form 4473 naming himself as the purchaser, when he fully intends at that moment to transfer it to another person who is directing or funding the purchase. A purchase made with the intent to gift the firearm, or sell it to another person not involved in the immediate transaction is generally not a straw-man purchase. A straw purchase is against federal law.
California does not allow any private sales between individuals, all transactions must go through a licensed dealer and are subject to fees, background checks, a waiting period, mandatory firearms safety education, and a mandatory dancing-bear safety demonstration to be performed when accepting delivery.
I'm not sure if the San Bernadino guns were legally purchased and transferred or not, given the general reliability of Internet news sources these days. The guns appear upon description to violate California law as to magazine size and removeability - California has some of the most bizarre and restrictive regulations in the country.
I suspect all those pipe bombs were probably against some fine print in some California law as well....
I even signed up for a concealed carry class. Evidently all I would have to do to concealed carry is go to this class for a couple of hours and then go to the local gov office to get fingerprinted. Send Florida some money and I'm good to go.
Good for you! I have a FL non-resident CCW permit. FL doesn't recognize IL. The NRA Basic Pistol class I took a couple of years ago was sufficient for the FL permit (8 hour class). So I can carry in FL when I visit friends. I've got a number of non-resident permits. I've known some heads to explode when I've mentioned to some people such things exist.
Gun shows are known for crappy selection and prices, from everything I hear. Never been to one.
I've got a number of non-resident permits. I've known some heads to explode when I've mentioned to some people such things exist.
I keep a small assortment of non-resident permits on hand, it allows me to cover most states.
It'd sure be handy if carry permits were treated like driver's licenses, marriage licenses, and other sorts of things, and honored by other states when you travel. I suppose if I were a criminal, I wouldn't bother with all this paperwork. Probably a big timesaver, crime.
I keep a small assortment of non-resident permits on hand, it allows me to cover most states.
It'd sure be handy if carry permits were treated like driver's licenses, marriage licenses, and other sorts of things, and honored by other states when you travel. I suppose if I were a criminal, I wouldn't bother with all this paperwork. Probably a big timesaver, crime.
Yes, it would, wouldn't it? I've got UT, AZ, FL, PA.
34 states recognize fl CCW. For us that want to be legal.
Good for you! I have a FL non-resident CCW permit. FL doesn't recognize IL. The NRA Basic Pistol class I took a couple of years ago was sufficient for the FL permit (8 hour class). So I can carry in FL when I visit friends. I've got a number of non-resident permits. I've known some heads to explode when I've mentioned to some people such things exist.
Gun shows are known for crappy selection and prices, from everything I hear. Never been to one.
i just wanted to go look and compare. The prices didn't seem so bad. And according to Peggy its the best place to pick up something.
Gun shows are known for crappy selection and prices, from everything I hear. Never been to one.
I've been to a few around here (Nebraska) and that's generally what I've run across. They have typically been stocked by licensed dealers hoping to unload some of the slow moving stock from their brick and mortar stores or by individuals who tended to be collectors of antique firearms and accessories. The individual collectors are the ones who can sell without federal paperwork, btw. At any rate, I've never run across anything I couldn't live without.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.