The Darker Side of the News

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: de Darker Side ah de News

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Apr 01, 2014 3:30 am UTC

And that is why Jury Nullification should be made more known. Because when the justice system fucks up to the point that vigilantism is our only alternative, a message needs to be sent.

Unfortunately, the message received would be "trial by cop".

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: de Darker Side ah de News

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:45 am UTC

Thesh wrote:Vigilantism be a nice sounding word sometimes.


I'd say that this sounds like a job for Batman, but I'm not sure that would actually suffice here. At most, it'd add a bit of punching to the capture, which then still relies on the justice system for actually sending folks to jail.

And yeah, I'm pretty sure the guy would have a rough time in jail. But shit, nobody said that going to jail was supposed to be fun.

User avatar
PolakoVoador
Posts: 1028
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:11 pm UTC
Location: Brazil

Re: de Darker Side ah de News

Postby PolakoVoador » Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:41 pm UTC

Defence lawyer Joseph Hurley wrote:Sex offenders are the lowest of the low in prison. He's a rich, white boy who is a wuss and a child perv. The prison can't protect them, and Jan Jurden knows that reality. She is right on.


Ohh I see, if it were a poor black man, there wouldn't be a problem.

User avatar
PeteP
What the peck?
Posts: 1451
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:51 pm UTC

Re: de Darker Side ah de News

Postby PeteP » Tue Apr 01, 2014 2:43 pm UTC

Yes your prison system sucks, but that is nothing new and selectively not using it on some people who happen to be rich is quite problematic.

Darryl
Posts: 327
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 2:32 pm UTC

Re: de Darker Side ah de News

Postby Darryl » Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:20 am UTC

PeteP wrote:Yes your prison system sucks, but that is nothing new and selectively not using it on some people who happen to be rich is quite problematic.

Good Charlotte got it pretty dead on.

"Well, did you know when you were famous you could kill your wife
And there's no such thing as 25 to life"

Written 13 years ago, and still accurate.
yurell wrote:We need fewer homoeopaths, that way they'll be more potent!

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Djehutynakht » Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:35 am UTC

Student suspended for twirling pencil.

Second story:
Apparently, it was because it was a "gun-like motion".

Story Two wrote:A 13-year-old New Jersey boy was suspended from school Thursday for twirling his pencil around in math class and making another student uncomfortable.

Ethan Chaplin, a 7th-grader at Glen Meadow Middle School in Vernon Township, was twirling around a pencil with a pen cap on it when a student behind him yelled, “He’s making gun motions, send him to juvie!” a local news station reported.

The school suspended Ethan and ordered him to undergo a physical and psychological evaluation, his father, Michael Chaplin, told the station.


Story 1 wrote:Michael Chaplin told InfoWars about what his son had to undergo during the psychological evaluation.

"The child was stripped, had to give blood samples (which caused him to pass out) and urine samples for of all things drug testing,” Michael Chaplin said. “Then four hours later a social worker spoke to him for five minutes and cleared him. Then an actual doctor came in and said the state was 100 percent incorrect in their procedure and this would not get him back in school.”



What the hell.

Like, literally, what the hell.

What is this.

User avatar
pkcommando
Posts: 567
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:22 pm UTC
Location: Allston, MA

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby pkcommando » Tue Apr 08, 2014 12:10 pm UTC

From the Huffington Post link:

When a student misbehaves or displays actions that are non-conforming or don't meet our expectations, it causes us some concerns.


*raises hand*
I have some concerns as well.

User avatar
PeteP
What the peck?
Posts: 1451
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:51 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby PeteP » Tue Apr 08, 2014 12:11 pm UTC

Non-conforming? …

If the line “He’s making gun motions, send him to juvie!” is correct I kinda doubt the other kid was actually feeling threatened.
Also wtf.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Apr 08, 2014 12:15 pm UTC

Just going to leave this out here.


We don't need no, educaaation. We don't need no, thought controoool.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Diadem » Tue Apr 08, 2014 12:29 pm UTC

This here is the problem (from the Huffington Post link):
Maranzano also said, in the wake of several deadly shootings, schools are being especially careful.

"I don't want to be the one who failed to act when there were warning signs being demonstrated or displayed," Maranzano said.


Fear is a bad counselor. Mass Hysteria is an even worse one.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

Chen
Posts: 5565
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Chen » Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:07 pm UTC

PeteP wrote:If the line “He’s making gun motions, send him to juvie!” is correct I kinda doubt the other kid was actually feeling threatened.
Also wtf.


Yeah it seems like one student being an ass to another. The proper reply (by the student accused) would have been "so is he" and then they'd BOTH have been suspended. Something is clearly wrong with these absurd zero tolerance policies.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Apr 08, 2014 3:32 pm UTC

Gun fear has gotten utterly ridiculous. I mean, the various episodes of "he chewed his pop tart to look like a gun" and so forth were bad enough...but this seems like something out of a terrible dystopian parody. I mean, if I wrote fiction with such an ludicrously overreacting villain, it'd get panned for being unbelievable.

It's twirling a GD pencil. This should have gone no further than the teacher or administrator telling them to stop whining and go back to class.

LLCoolDave
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 10:17 am UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby LLCoolDave » Tue Apr 08, 2014 3:50 pm UTC

As an European outsider, I find the hypocrisy of demanding free and easy to access to guns as a right and then being overtly fearful of people actually having guns to be humorously ironic, if rather concerning on both ends. It also seems to me that the American school system seems to become more and more modeled by the already rather defunct prison system the US employs. It seems that the best solution for dealing with something outside the norm is to just ignore the problem and separate the problem dweller from the rest of society instead of trying to understand the issue and solving the core problem. The amount of news of rather stupefying detentions has certainly increased in the past years, but it's hard for me to tell if there's an actual change in policy or it's just the perception of it being reported more frequently. In any case, things seem to grow more surrealistically dystopian with all the fear-mongering in the past decade. Maybe things have always been this way and I've just grown up to actually notice it now.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:35 pm UTC

Considering that every Swiss male has a gun and knows how to use it, it shouldn't be a foreign concept. The problem is that we kind of forgot about the whole "militia" thing. The second amendment doesn't mean that only members of a well regulated militia should own guns, but that only people who could become part of a militia should own guns. That means that the government had every right to require mandatory gun safety training, background screening, licensing, psych evaluations, and everything else that could get you disqualified for a draft.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Apr 08, 2014 6:36 pm UTC

LLCoolDave wrote:As an European outsider, I find the hypocrisy of demanding free and easy to access to guns as a right and then being overtly fearful of people actually having guns to be humorously ironic, if rather concerning on both ends.


It's not generally the same people. It's opposite ends of the spectrum. Gun rights people routinely pass around such incidents mocking their opposition, and so on. Now, obviously, fear of pencil twirling is...an extreme example, but it's deeply troubling that this was not just one nutty person briefly overreacting, but a several hour ordeal it which it appears many people were involved. It seems as if SOMEONE should have been able to say "hold on, this is stupid" before it got that far.

It also seems to me that the American school system seems to become more and more modeled by the already rather defunct prison system the US employs.


Yeah. There's some truth there. The reaction to differences as if they are inherently threats is particularly telling. Someone being different is not necessarily a danger. Or an illness. In fact, a certain degree of diversity in all respects is quite healthy, and better than no diversity at all. I fear schools are more interested in managing children than in teaching them.

Uh, CorruptUser, I'm not sure that the latter follows. Certainly, such standards were not really a thing in the revolutionary era, and that would not really describe the popular conception of a militia at the time. I mean, you might want those things, but I'm not sure how you derive that from a single word that was not used to mean that.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Wed Apr 09, 2014 5:41 am UTC

LLCoolDave wrote:As an European outsider, I find the hypocrisy of demanding free and easy to access to guns as a right and then being overtly fearful of people actually having guns to be humorously ironic, if rather concerning on both ends. It also seems to me that the American school system seems to become more and more modeled by the already rather defunct prison system the US employs. It seems that the best solution for dealing with something outside the norm is to just ignore the problem and separate the problem dweller from the rest of society instead of trying to understand the issue and solving the core problem. The amount of news of rather stupefying detentions has certainly increased in the past years, but it's hard for me to tell if there's an actual change in policy or it's just the perception of it being reported more frequently. In any case, things seem to grow more surrealistically dystopian with all the fear-mongering in the past decade. Maybe things have always been this way and I've just grown up to actually notice it now.

From the outside you may not see a change in Policy.
There have Absolutly been changes in Policy.

The News that gets out is a version of the News that was written for June Cleaver.
Surrealistically dystopian are very good words to describe the Reality in the US.

I Know! I am Here!
In a twenty-five mile long drive, I see five new Police Cars.
Every time I go, I see Three to Five Police Cars.

In the same stretch of road, I have seen men that were in desperate need of assistance.
I have helped, a little. The Police do not help The Poor. Why? Do you know, Why?

Surreal is the Police Cars.
There are a lot of them and some are quite fashionable.

Dystopian is the Poor suffering and dying while the Cop Cars blow by to meet the needs of Who?

Dark side of The News?
I've got your dark side, right here.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Darryl
Posts: 327
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 2:32 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Darryl » Thu Apr 10, 2014 12:40 am UTC

LLCoolDave wrote:The amount of news of rather stupefying detentions has certainly increased in the past years, but it's hard for me to tell if there's an actual change in policy or it's just the perception of it being reported more frequently. In any case, things seem to grow more surrealistically dystopian with all the fear-mongering in the past decade. Maybe things have always been this way and I've just grown up to actually notice it now.

I think it's being reported more frequently, because people are finally willing to accept that zero-tolerance rules in school are for the most part bad, so they won't get a ratings backlash for reporting on them.

For background: My friend's brother, in 2000, was suspended from my school district for "Fighting" because he raised his arms to protect his face. My little brother, in 2004, was suspended for "fighting" for grabbing another student's punch before it hit his friend. The absolute stupidity of zero-tolerance rules has been around for quite a while, they're just finally getting some backlash.
yurell wrote:We need fewer homoeopaths, that way they'll be more potent!

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:40 am UTC

Darryl wrote:
LLCoolDave wrote:The amount of news of rather stupefying detentions has certainly increased in the past years, but it's hard for me to tell if there's an actual change in policy or it's just the perception of it being reported more frequently. In any case, things seem to grow more surrealistically dystopian with all the fear-mongering in the past decade. Maybe things have always been this way and I've just grown up to actually notice it now.

I think it's being reported more frequently, because people are finally willing to accept that zero-tolerance rules in school are for the most part bad, so they won't get a ratings backlash for reporting on them.

For background: My friend's brother, in 2000, was suspended from my school district for "Fighting" because he raised his arms to protect his face. My little brother, in 2004, was suspended for "fighting" for grabbing another student's punch before it hit his friend. The absolute stupidity of zero-tolerance rules has been around for quite a while, they're just finally getting some backlash.

I think you are wrong.
Zero tolerance is not The Problem.

BackLash against Zero Tolerance must make sense to you.
Take a deep breath and think about what you are writing.

The poor innocent children being sent home from work with pay for Fighting?
The Horror!

The people both young and old lack social skills,
The people both young and old are course and violent.

The culture of violence is Your culture.
It is Your culture of birth, like your family.

That does Not make any part of it Correct in any way.
You are not taught how to be civil people at home.
You are not taught to be civil people at school.
You are not expected to be civil people in public.

Zero Tolerance is not The Problem.
The Idiot Students are The Problem.

What?? Are your nation's schools practice for prison?
Use violence to get in. Use violence to survive it.

Then What?
One in Four Adults have been imprisoned in the US.
That is an old number. I expect increase over three years, not decrease.

You think a policy that states You Will Not Be Violent At School is unreasonable?
Because?

Do you and your generation of people expect to grow up and be fully functioning adults?
The young learn how to be Adults. What kind of adults are you people practicing to be?

This shit is Serous! Zero Tolerance is getting BackLash? From the Bullies?
If you had a lick of sense you would be supporting your facility.

You can and should ask for complete explanations from every Moron that fights.
Send it to student mediation. Do something positive! Don't be a Bagger, so early.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Djehutynakht » Sat Apr 12, 2014 12:25 am UTC

So... you guys remember that kid... er.. Ethan Couch. The Affluenza Case.

He decides to go drive drunk and as a result ends up killing four people. His lawyers argue "affluenza", that he was too rich to realize the consequences, and subsequently ordered to attend rehab.

Well, as it turns out His family will not be picking up most of the tab.


According to the report, his family will only have to pay $1200 a month for his treatment, which costs about $715 a day.

That means they'll be paying $14,400 out of an estimated $260,975 yearly bill, about 18% of the cost.

Considering, at the very least, the basis of his defense, this seems absolutely ludicrous.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Apr 12, 2014 12:44 am UTC

I think you mean 9% of the cost.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Djehutynakht » Sat Apr 12, 2014 2:17 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:I think you mean 9% of the cost.


Hm. Must have made a calculation error. Sounds about right.

Even worse.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Sat Apr 12, 2014 4:38 am UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:I think you mean 9% of the cost.


Hm. Must have made a calculation error. Sounds about right.

Even worse.

You and I will bitch about the same thing for different reasons.
I see the state picking up the cost of Rehab as unfair.

You want the Rich Family to pay.
I think they pay too much.

I want the Poor people to go to Rehab and for them to pay the same amount.
Nothing. Not when sick, traumatized, and helpless. Later. or; Before.

The people that suck off the Government pay.
They pay with their lives.

Some make a bunch of money.
Some make a bunch of trouble.

Each and every one should be trotting off to a delightful Rehab experience the moment they feel the need.
Or; When the court orders it. All on the Public dime. Free. Free. Free.

Of course, in return for all this Free, Free, Free stuff
The Government will make a bunch of demands.

That is what happens in civilized nations.
The people pay with their lives.

That is a very good thing, most of the time.
In the US people with needs are without resources.
In the US people with wealth are allowed indiscretions.

I think we are much too indecret.
All of us.

The rich get away with it.
The poor don't. You see the injustice in that.

You little Human you.
You répond the way humans do.

You want to take the advantage away from The Rich.
I want to give the same advantages to The Poor.

The Rich would benefit.
It would still bother them.

They may not want their son hanging around with low class drug and alcohol users.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Djehutynakht » Sat Apr 12, 2014 1:13 pm UTC

addams wrote:You and I will bitch about the same thing for different reasons.
I see the state picking up the cost of Rehab as unfair.


I do believe that rehab should, as a general rule, be free to all who require it.

However, my complaints stem ultimately from this source; that he bears no responsibility for his crimes, save the necessity to rehabilitate himself, is ridiculous. I disagree with the ruling on his case on a general matter.

However, since what has been done has been done, and our healthcare system already requiring that he pay something, I believe it should be more, not less.

The decision in his case ran this bit; his wealth is the source of his troubles. It is because of his wealth that he is indiscriminate. It is because of his wealth that he is careless, and believes he may do whatever he wants.

When you say a man's crime was caused by drugs, what do you do? You take away his drugs. Rehabilitate. What do you do when his crime was caused by his alcohol? You take away his alcohol? Rehabilitate. He killed many with his car? Suspend his license until he may operate with sober judgment.

Obviously, money itself is a bit different from drugs, alcohol and cars. But if we ruled him being too rich was his flaw, should not payment be the right punishment? Should he not learn that as his wealth has made him fatal to society, some wealth must therefore be surrendered?

If he argues that wealth is at fault, is it not our duty to inflict due damage on that very cause?


I believe in general that money should be absolutely no issue in the delivery of treatment. Your health comes first. What you pay for the service, if anything, is a secondary matter.

But besides that, I believe that there are still measures to take in his case.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Apr 12, 2014 2:25 pm UTC

The judge should be removed from his post. Convicted for 4 cases of manslaughter (after a night of debauchery and drinking) and the sentence is probation and rehab? Look, I'm all for rehab in lieu of jail time, but not when there's corpses involved, and especially not when the rehab is only available for the richest of the rich.


I just hope the civil court solves the "affluenza" at the source...

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Sat Apr 12, 2014 3:12 pm UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:
addams wrote:You and I will bitch about the same thing for different reasons.
I see the state picking up the cost of Rehab as unfair.


I do believe that rehab should, as a general rule, be free to all who require it.

However, my complaints stem ultimately from this source; that he bears no responsibility for his crimes, save the necessity to rehabilitate himself, is ridiculous. I disagree with the ruling on his case on a general matter.

However, since what has been done has been done, and our healthcare system already requiring that he pay something, I believe it should be more, not less.

The decision in his case ran this bit; his wealth is the source of his troubles. It is because of his wealth that he is indiscriminate. It is because of his wealth that he is careless, and believes he may do whatever he wants.

When you say a man's crime was caused by drugs, what do you do? You take away his drugs. Rehabilitate. What do you do when his crime was caused by his alcohol? You take away his alcohol? Rehabilitate. He killed many with his car? Suspend his license until he may operate with sober judgment.

Obviously, money itself is a bit different from drugs, alcohol and cars. But if we ruled him being too rich was his flaw, should not payment be the right punishment? Should he not learn that as his wealth has made him fatal to society, some wealth must therefore be surrendered?

If he argues that wealth is at fault, is it not our duty to inflict due damage on that very cause?


I believe in general that money should be absolutely no issue in the delivery of treatment. Your health comes first. What you pay for the service, if anything, is a secondary matter.

But besides that, I believe that there are still measures to take in his case.

My goodness.
You write like an old fashioned American.
I mean that as a complement.

The balance in your language reads like letters those Old Dead Guys wrote to each other.
They wrote letters.
(oh. sigh...) They got together once in a while, too.

And; Read their stupid letters to each other.
Then argued into the Night.

They seemed to be trying to talk each other to death.
They would look like a bunch of drunks passed out,
Because that is what they were, sometimes.

Do you know how often those guys wrote,
"After sober contemplation,..."

Why would a person make a distinction between sober contemplation and What? Pipe Dreams?
Sorry.

I am responding to the Poster not the Posted.
sorry.

I was touched and interested not so much in What you wrote; But the Way you wrote it.

What is your common day to day language and thinking like?
Classical? Do you have a Classical Education?

Is that too personal for an internet forum?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Ormurinn
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:42 pm UTC
Location: Suth Eoferwicscire

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Ormurinn » Sat Apr 12, 2014 3:38 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Considering that every Swiss male has a gun and knows how to use it, it shouldn't be a foreign concept. The problem is that we kind of forgot about the whole "militia" thing. The second amendment doesn't mean that only members of a well regulated militia should own guns, but that only people who could become part of a militia should own guns. That means that the government had every right to require mandatory gun safety training, background screening, licensing, psych evaluations, and everything else that could get you disqualified for a draft.


Norway and Finland also have scadloads of guns, and low gun crime. You can own a SMG for self defense in Northern Ireland - again, low gun crime.

With regards to the militia;

United States Code, Title 10, Section 311, paragraph a wrote:"The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard."


So strictly speaking, if we were to go by the "conjoined clause" interpretation of the second amendment, all male U.S citizens without disabilities would automatically have the right to own weapons, whilst women would only have the right to own them if they were members of the National Guard. They'd also lose their right to own weapons after the age of 45.

Personally I think the "separate clauses" interpretation holds more water - that the intent was to give an unconditional right to firearms, and the first clause about a militia was a preamble outlining one of the positive anticipated effects of the amendment.

However, I'm not an American.
"Progress" - Technological advances masking societal decay.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Sat Apr 12, 2014 4:06 pm UTC

Ormurinn wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Considering that every Swiss male has a gun and knows how to use it, it shouldn't be a foreign concept. The problem is that we kind of forgot about the whole "militia" thing. The second amendment doesn't mean that only members of a well regulated militia should own guns, but that only people who could become part of a militia should own guns. That means that the government had every right to require mandatory gun safety training, background screening, licensing, psych evaluations, and everything else that could get you disqualified for a draft.


Norway and Finland also have scadloads of guns, and low gun crime. You can own a SMG for self defense in Northern Ireland - again, low gun crime.

With regards to the militia;

United States Code, Title 10, Section 311, paragraph a wrote:"The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard."


So strictly speaking, if we were to go by the "conjoined clause" interpretation of the second amendment, all male U.S citizens without disabilities would automatically have the right to own weapons, whilst women would only have the right to own them if they were members of the National Guard. They'd also lose their right to own weapons after the age of 45.

Personally I think the "separate clauses" interpretation holds more water - that the intent was to give an unconditional right to firearms, and the first clause about a militia was a preamble outlining one of the positive anticipated effects of the amendment.

However, I'm not an American.

This is mildly interesting to me.
You are not an American.
Are you inside the US?

What do you see and hear?
What I have seen and heard has calmed down a bit in the last 8 months or so.

Well...Maybe. Was it the company I was keeping?
The shots fired in the Park had nothing to do with who I am, did it?

There were shots in the Park, this year.
Why? I have no idea.

Am I sure they were shots? No.
Unless I see it; Either the shooter or the projectile, it could be something else.

Sure sounds like shots.
When I hear shots in the park.
I stay out of the park for a while. You?

What is The Point?
Do you have Weapons?

To what end are the Americans arming themselves?
I am here. Inside the US. Loads of people don't like me.

Some people will talk to me.
The Gun Counter is a Strange Place.

I have met aging people at the Gun Counter.
Two in particular stand out for me.

Imagine, An Older Couple.
In their Seventies. A matched set.
They move alike. Like Twins; created, not made.
(or maybe the other way around. Years and Years of being near and dear have made them Close as Twins.)


He reaches for something, she puts it in his hand.
She needs an exact date, she looks at him.

Can you imagine such people?
Simple and intelligent and very very used to each other.

They had decided to Look at Guns.
Why? The TV told them so.
The other oldies told them so.

It's in The Air.
People must be able to protect themselves.
Ask them. "Who is going to, Protect You?"

I listened to them discuss this one and that one.
They decided they did not understand how to buy a Gun.

They were going to Study Up.
I talked to them a little.

We laughed at the Futility of a people defending each and every FarmStead against Mad Max of Thunder Dome. (whoever That is.)
As we laughed and talked, we talked about modern communication.

They have High Speed Internet at Home.
They need to UpGrade their Phones.

The new ones are Internet and Phone and little old men and women can photograph The World.
They can even record sound. If they practice, it is as easy and natural as another modern device.

They can shoot a lot of People in Anger.
They can shoot a lot of People in Fear.

They will have Bragging Rights.
All the fun of a Gun and a lot less mess.

They went away excited about the new Phones they were going to shop for.
The Phones will cost less than a Gun and be a lot more fun.

A man like that buys a gun praying he will never use it.
A man like that buys a Phone praying for the courage to use it.

We are not all AssHoles.
It, just, looks that way.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Mambrino
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:45 pm UTC
Location: No we don't have polar bears. Except in zoos.

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Mambrino » Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:44 am UTC

Ormurinn wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Considering that every Swiss male has a gun and knows how to use it, it shouldn't be a foreign concept. The problem is that we kind of forgot about the whole "militia" thing. The second amendment doesn't mean that only members of a well regulated militia should own guns, but that only people who could become part of a militia should own guns. That means that the government had every right to require mandatory gun safety training, background screening, licensing, psych evaluations, and everything else that could get you disqualified for a draft.


Norway and Finland also have scadloads of guns, and low gun crime. You can own a SMG for self defense in Northern Ireland - again, low gun crime.


Scadloads of guns? (Spoilered for slightly OT, title being 'The Darker Side of the News', the discussion being about guns.)
Spoiler:
in 2007: Norway, 31.3 guns per 100 people. Finland, 45.3. United States of America: 88.8.(Small Arms Survey 2007, civilian firearms arsenal. Note that the survey assumed there were 800 000 illegal, unregistered handguns in Finland - the ministry of interior maintain their estimate to be around 50 000.)

I've seen plenty of legal hunting rifles in rural Finland. I believe they account for a significant proportion of total number of guns here. Background screenings, and such evaluations are done - and they were tightened after two school shootings committed by students with their legal small-calibre pistols. I don't know if they're any useful, but neither I don't know if the US gun ownership situation (both the numbers and the 'guns for self defence' attitude) can be compared to Finland.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Sun Apr 13, 2014 4:06 am UTC

This is dark.
No medical personal?
A medical procedure and no medical personal?

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2014/04 ... armacists/
Since pharmacists are the sole hold-out in this area, the health workers who typically ensure that injections are administered properly are barred from overseeing executions. With no experts in the room, the process can go awry.
Medical professionals don’t mince words about what that means in practice. At the end of last year, an anesthesiologist published an op-ed calling for the abolishment of lethal injection as a method of killing inmates, claiming that “what appears as humane is theater alone.”

Ten years ago, I would not have believed it.
Today, I don't doubt it.

The Theater?
We are an amusing bunch.
To be amused at Death is weird to me.

It is Normal for a number of people.
I can explain.

We don't need an explanation.
We need grown ups.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

elasto
Posts: 3750
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby elasto » Sun Apr 13, 2014 4:25 am UTC

Years ago I watched a documentary on the most humane way to carry out the death penalty.

The conclusion was to simply have the condemned breathe pure Nitrogen. Turns out it's the build up of Carbon Dioxide that causes the pain during suffocation. A lack of Oxygen in and of itself causes no pain at all; Think of how people simply fall asleep and pass away during a Carbon Monoxide leak for example.

In fact, the experience of a lack of Oxygen is actually frequently euphoric; Think about auto-erotic asphyxiation for example.

When it was put to the various authorities and vested interest bodies in the US that death by Nitrogen inhalation would avoid any risk of 'cruel and unusual punishment' the response was rather telling: A death with no pain, or, horror of horrors, actually euphoric was repugnant to them. These monsters don't deserve that they'd say. The fact it might be a horrific death was part of the appeal - despite the fact studies have proved it has no deterrent effect on crime - and therefor the only the only real effect is to degrade the humanity of the participants.

All part of the American justice system's fetish for revenge over rehabilitation though - despite the clear lack of results.

Apologies for the source being linked to, but in this case it's actually a really good article on the matter: Review of documentary

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Tyndmyr » Sun Apr 13, 2014 5:41 am UTC

Mambrino wrote:Norway and Finland also have scadloads of guns, and low gun crime. You can own a SMG for self defense in Northern Ireland - again, low gun crime.


Scadloads of guns? (Spoilered for slightly OT, title being 'The Darker Side of the News', the discussion being about guns.)
Spoiler:
in 2007: Norway, 31.3 guns per 100 people. Finland, 45.3. United States of America: 88.8.(Small Arms Survey 2007, civilian firearms arsenal. Note that the survey assumed there were 800 000 illegal, unregistered handguns in Finland - the ministry of interior maintain their estimate to be around 50 000.)

I've seen plenty of legal hunting rifles in rural Finland. I believe they account for a significant proportion of total number of guns here. Background screenings, and such evaluations are done - and they were tightened after two school shootings committed by students with their legal small-calibre pistols. I don't know if they're any useful, but neither I don't know if the US gun ownership situation (both the numbers and the 'guns for self defence' attitude) can be compared to Finland.
[/quote]

Compared to other western european countries, yeah, "scadloads" is pretty descriptive. The US has a higher ownership rate yet, but yes, there is a lack of correlation between gun ownership rates and crime....but a pretty high variance in crime. This indicates that one or more other factors are behind the variation.

The ridiculous fear-monger w/regards to the pencil does seem to be mostly a US thing, but there have been similar fear-mongering incidents in UK/Australia as well. Granted, we have decently strong cultural ties to both of these, so it could well all be related.

User avatar
Djehutynakht
Posts: 1546
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:37 am UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Djehutynakht » Sun Apr 13, 2014 9:32 am UTC

Ormurinn wrote:So strictly speaking, if we were to go by the "conjoined clause" interpretation of the second amendment, all male U.S citizens without disabilities would automatically have the right to own weapons, whilst women would only have the right to own them if they were members of the National Guard. They'd also lose their right to own weapons after the age of 45.


The US military is in the process of revising its protocol to allow women to serve as, in essence, equals to men. I haven't been following this change very closely so I can't give much more specific information.

addams wrote:My goodness.
You write like an old fashioned American.
I mean that as a complement.

[...]

I was touched and interested not so much in What you wrote; But the Way you wrote it.

What is your common day to day language and thinking like?
Classical? Do you have a Classical Education?

Is that too personal for an internet forum?


Not at all. And thank you for your compliment. It's not every day that one is told that they write like the Founding Fathers.

Spoilered for off-topicness and a fair amount of self-discussion:

Spoiler:
My own manner of language can vary with situation, content and simply the natural randomness which I seem so often to embrace. My education, both as self taught and as taught by the institutions which I have attended, may be described by some as having a classical air to them. My high school implicitly emphasized that the tradition of classical education was one which they hoped to continue to instill amongst their students into the modern day. It is a very old school; in fact it is one which quite a few of these "old fashioned Americans", those whom some of my writing implicitly emulates, have attended and learned from themselves. Of course, the curriculum was different in their own day. Though they try to uphold the classical tradition the need to emphasize the integration of the modern arts and sciences, such as the STEM focus, also takes upon itself greater prominence. Which is a good thing, and not entirely eschewing of tradition. Did not Ben Franklin, who himself was known for his prose and wit, not also compliment himself with great advancements of the sciences?

But in general I do try to blend the modern with the classic. Sometimes those old authors can be hard to read; they like to go page after page adding in a multitude of words to bespeak ideas summed up by their students in a few sentences with chapters of detail. Of course, for me to say that is a little bit hypocritical.

I have to admit to trying a bit to be distinct in the paragraph above. I'm not sure if it hit quite the same spot as the post we're commenting on, but ah well.

In general, I guess I sometimes just take up the influences of those who I have read or seen and either unconsciously or occasionally with a bit of effort try to integrate or mimic their style in my own. I did notice that my last comments had a very distinct early-Republic feel to them. It might have helped that I was reading selections of The Federalist Papers not too long ago. But I do enjoy the style of the early Americans. It has a good quality to it.


And you too, Addams, must be aware that a lot of us on this forum regard your own style of posting as itself something interesting with its own style to it.

User avatar
Ormurinn
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 3:42 pm UTC
Location: Suth Eoferwicscire

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Ormurinn » Sun Apr 13, 2014 11:24 am UTC

Mambrino wrote:Scadloads of guns? (Spoilered for slightly OT, title being 'The Darker Side of the News', the discussion being about guns.)
Spoiler:
in 2007: Norway, 31.3 guns per 100 people. Finland, 45.3. United States of America: 88.8.(Small Arms Survey 2007, civilian firearms arsenal. Note that the survey assumed there were 800 000 illegal, unregistered handguns in Finland - the ministry of interior maintain their estimate to be around 50 000.)

I've seen plenty of legal hunting rifles in rural Finland. I believe they account for a significant proportion of total number of guns here. Background screenings, and such evaluations are done - and they were tightened after two school shootings committed by students with their legal small-calibre pistols. I don't know if they're any useful, but neither I don't know if the US gun ownership situation (both the numbers and the 'guns for self defence' attitude) can be compared to Finland.


Spoiler:
From your own source Finland is 4th in the world for civilian firearms ownership, and Norway is 11th.

Scadloads is relative to me (England - 88th in the world, since the government's post-Dunblane mass confiscation program) and to the rest of the world.

As I understand it, most weapons in the U.S are also for hunting (The scary black AR-15 "Assault weapon" fires a .223 verminating cartridge) - and though it varies by state I believe all sales require a background check.

There's no real correlation between gun ownership and gun crime - hell in the U.K the correlation is negative - post Dunlane our gun crime has rocketed even as we've become one of the most disarmed polities on the planet.
"Progress" - Technological advances masking societal decay.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Sun Apr 13, 2014 11:42 am UTC

Ormurinn wrote:
Mambrino wrote:Scadloads of guns? (Spoilered for slightly OT, title being 'The Darker Side of the News', the discussion being about guns.)
Spoiler:
in 2007: Norway, 31.3 guns per 100 people. Finland, 45.3. United States of America: 88.8.(Small Arms Survey 2007, civilian firearms arsenal. Note that the survey assumed there were 800 000 illegal, unregistered handguns in Finland - the ministry of interior maintain their estimate to be around 50 000.)

I've seen plenty of legal hunting rifles in rural Finland. I believe they account for a significant proportion of total number of guns here. Background screenings, and such evaluations are done - and they were tightened after two school shootings committed by students with their legal small-calibre pistols. I don't know if they're any useful, but neither I don't know if the US gun ownership situation (both the numbers and the 'guns for self defence' attitude) can be compared to Finland.


Spoiler:
From your own source Finland is 4th in the world for civilian firearms ownership, and Norway is 11th.

Scadloads is relative to me (England - 88th in the world, since the government's post-Dunblane mass confiscation program) and to the rest of the world.

As I understand it, most weapons in the U.S are also for hunting (The scary black AR-15 "Assault weapon" fires a .223 verminating cartridge) - and though it varies by state I believe all sales require a background check.

There's no real correlation between gun ownership and gun crime - hell in the U.K the correlation is negative - post Dunlane our gun crime has rocketed even as we've become one of the most disarmed polities on the planet.

Spoiler:
I have one little nitpick.
Most Guns in the US today are bought and maintained for personal protection.

Not everyone has a gun.
Nearly everyone has considered it.

We are not out to 'Get' Bambi.
We are scared shitless if each other.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Apr 13, 2014 12:24 pm UTC

Spoiler:
Just have a gun deposit/recycling fee on all guns, like we do with aluminum cans in the better states. Make it like $50. Not enough that serious owners would be driven away from gun ownership, but enough that the street price rises too much for the crack addicts. Plus, criminals might return their guns for recycling money when they have to get rid of the evidence, making it easier to catch them. (E.g., police on lookout for 9mm handgun, 9mm handguns turned in on march 3rd, 5th, and 6th by people X Y and Z...)

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: de Darker Side ah de News

Postby addams » Sun Apr 13, 2014 1:17 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:And that is why Jury Nullification should be made more known. Because when the justice system fucks up to the point that vigilantism is our only alternative, a message needs to be sent.

Unfortunately, the message received would be "trial by cop".


CorruptUser wrote:
Spoiler:
Just have a gun deposit/recycling fee on all guns, like we do with aluminum cans in the better states. Make it like $50. Not enough that serious owners would be driven away from gun ownership, but enough that the street price rises too much for the crack addicts. Plus, criminals might return their guns for recycling money when they have to get rid of the evidence, making it easier to catch them. (E.g., police on lookout for 9mm handgun, 9mm handguns turned in on march 3rd, 5th, and 6th by people X Y and Z...)


but enough that the street price rises too much for the crack addicts

In the Darker Side of The News.

What kind of a World View is reflected in the above posts?

ok. It may be a bot.
That is Truth.

I may be reading the words of a bot.
I may be attempting to fill in a real person where there is no real person.

Like a fictional characters.
The written words are part of the personality.
I fill in where needed, like all readers do.

On the off chance those words were written by a real human.
On the off chance those words were written from that person's heart.
On the off chance those words reflect a common American World View.

Helllll-o;
Who are you?

Where did you get those ideas?
Crack Addicts? Really?

You are going to make Guns okay-dokey by out pricing Crack Addicts?
Please explain your experience with both Vigalatism and Crack Addicts?

Are Crack Addicts after Guns?
RARELY!! Only when told to. (sort of)

And; Maybe what you think are Crack Addicts are simply poor and starving human beings;
Separated from you by the Glass of Class.

Vigilanteism?
The Page Topper for The Dark Side is a post about Vigilanteism.
That is some Dark News.

Your post speaks in the 'We' form.
"We have no choice."
"It's Vigilanteism. But; We have no other Choice."


how many languages has That been said in.
how many hearts have regretted it.

Vigilantism is a Dark and Serious subject.
When this sort of thing was discussed among responsible, professional adults,
the words, "We are all adults here." were spoken.

Those words mean, "This is Fucking Serious."
Those words mean, "This is not Entertainment for Children."

We are all adults?
We are Not all adults.

This is the internet.
There are fifteen year old children reading what we write.

What kind of an example are we?
We? We must do vigalianism?

Our only other choice is Trial By Cop?
We, Americans, are at this very moment deeply involved with both of those Activitiies.

And; It all is so very ho-hum, to you?
You get these ideas from the TV. (don't you?)

I don't want to do personal attacks.
I do want to ask,
What do you know?
How do you know it?


How fucking frightened should each and every one of us be?

You? nah. None.
You are a bot.

Bots know No Fear.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10485
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Apr 13, 2014 1:27 pm UTC

Did I fail a Turing test or something?

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10186
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Sun Apr 13, 2014 1:55 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Did I fail a Turing test or something?

oh, Darn.
You might be Real.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

elasto
Posts: 3750
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby elasto » Sun Apr 13, 2014 2:32 pm UTC

Ormurinn wrote:
Spoiler:
There's no real correlation between gun ownership and gun crime - hell in the U.K the correlation is negative - post Dunlane our gun crime has rocketed even as we've become one of the most disarmed polities on the planet.


Spoiler:
That is disputable:

Wikipedia wrote:A Home Office study published in 2007 reported that gun crime in England and Wales remained a relatively rare event. Firearms (including air guns) were used in 21,521 recorded crimes. It said that injury caused during a firearm offence was rare, with fewer than 3% of offences resulting in a serious or fatal injury.

For 2011/12, police in England and Wales recorded 541 offences as homicide, of which 42 (8%) involved the use of firearms — a rate of 0.1 illegal gun deaths per 100,000 of population. The number of homicides per year committed with firearms in England and Wales remained between 39 and 81 in the ten years to 2011/12, with an average of 56 per year. During the same time period, there were three fatal shootings of police officers in England and Wales, and 154 non-fatal shootings, an average of 15.4 per year.

Since 1998, the number of people injured by firearms in England and Wales increased by 110% from 2,378 in 1998/99 to 5,001 in 2005/06. Most of the rise in injuries were in the category slight injuries from the non-air weapons. "Slight" in this context means an injury that was not classified as "serious" (i.e., did not require detention in hospital, did not involve fractures, concussion, severe general shock, penetration by a bullet or multiple shot wounds).

In 2005/06, 87% of such injuries were defined as "slight," which includes the use of firearms as a threat only.

By 2011/12 the total number of injuries had fallen to 1,668 of which 1,434 (86%) were "slight."


So crime rates involving guns did briefly rise but then fell back again - and importantly the brief rise in crimes did not go hand in hand with a corresponding rise in serious injuries - and homicides were about 3x higher and gun deaths about 40x higher per head of population in the US vs the UK

User avatar
Qaanol
The Cheshirest Catamount
Posts: 3069
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 11:55 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Qaanol » Sun Apr 13, 2014 7:20 pm UTC

elasto wrote:
Ormurinn wrote:
Spoiler:
There's no real correlation between gun ownership and gun crime - hell in the U.K the correlation is negative - post Dunlane our gun crime has rocketed even as we've become one of the most disarmed polities on the planet.


Spoiler:
That is disputable:

Wikipedia wrote:A Home Office study published in 2007 reported that gun crime in England and Wales remained a relatively rare event. Firearms (including air guns) were used in 21,521 recorded crimes. It said that injury caused during a firearm offence was rare, with fewer than 3% of offences resulting in a serious or fatal injury.

For 2011/12, police in England and Wales recorded 541 offences as homicide, of which 42 (8%) involved the use of firearms — a rate of 0.1 illegal gun deaths per 100,000 of population. The number of homicides per year committed with firearms in England and Wales remained between 39 and 81 in the ten years to 2011/12, with an average of 56 per year. During the same time period, there were three fatal shootings of police officers in England and Wales, and 154 non-fatal shootings, an average of 15.4 per year.

Since 1998, the number of people injured by firearms in England and Wales increased by 110% from 2,378 in 1998/99 to 5,001 in 2005/06. Most of the rise in injuries were in the category slight injuries from the non-air weapons. "Slight" in this context means an injury that was not classified as "serious" (i.e., did not require detention in hospital, did not involve fractures, concussion, severe general shock, penetration by a bullet or multiple shot wounds).

In 2005/06, 87% of such injuries were defined as "slight," which includes the use of firearms as a threat only.

By 2011/12 the total number of injuries had fallen to 1,668 of which 1,434 (86%) were "slight."


So crime rates involving guns did briefly rise but then fell back again - and importantly the brief rise in crimes did not go hand in hand with a corresponding rise in serious injuries - and homicides were about 3x higher and gun deaths about 40x higher per head of population in the US vs the UK

I have not looked into the sources and methods here, but my understanding is that the UK is notorious for not classifying a death as murder until there has been a conviction. I don’t know if that also applies to homicides and/or gun deaths, but the result is that UK murder rates always look like they have been declining for the last few years, because recent killings have not yet been adjudicated.

In any case, Ormurinn is using the wrong metric to begin with. The important question is whether there is a relationship between gun ownership and crime—not gun crime, but overall crime. I won’t go into detail here because there’s another thread for that discussion, but the fact remains: it doesn’t matter to a dead person what weapon (if any) was used to kill them, nor to a shopkeeper who was robbed whether the thief had a firearm.
wee free kings


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests