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
addams
Posts: 10219
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Mon Apr 14, 2014 1:18 am UTC

Qaanol wrote:
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.

I know it is Nitpicky, but...
It, kind'a, does matter what weapon was used.

That is why, The Gun. (right?)
Bludgeoning a person to death is not good for anyone.

Unless the killer is really pissed off,
it is a slowish way to die and (fuck) you know.

If you are bound and determined to Kill, Kill, Kill....
Why is everyone so bound and determined to Kill?

ech. I know I have not heard it all.
I have heard a bunch. Not TV.

On with your conversation.
I can help with the list of Why not to have a Gun.

My choice was, only recently, to prevent me from using it.
I Know! I, just, admitted on the internet, "Guns are Tempting."
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: 3751
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby elasto » Mon Apr 14, 2014 5:18 am UTC

Yeah, this isn't the right thread for it but it absolutely does matter which weapon a person chooses (or is forced to choose).

Sure, a determined person could kill their victim with a pencil, but the more 'distance' a person can gain from their target the easier the act becomes psychologically and the more easily mistakes are made in the heat of the moment and so on.

That's why the US authorities sending in a special forces unit armed only with pencils to butcher an entire Pakistan wedding party is pure fantasy, whereas the same thing happening with a drone strike is so run-of-the-mill it may not even make the news.

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

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Apr 14, 2014 5:48 am UTC

elasto wrote:Yeah, this isn't the right thread for it but it absolutely does matter which weapon a person chooses (or is forced to choose).

Sure, a determined person could kill their victim with a pencil, but the more 'distance' a person can gain from their target the easier the act becomes psychologically and the more easily mistakes are made in the heat of the moment and so on.


The former seems likely, but the latter seems less supported. People in actual combat are panicky. Errors get made. Distance seems likely to decrease errors, at least of certain types. If the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, eh...there's only so much public data to pull from, seems hard to get a firm conclusion, but it seems very likely that there are some nice advantages to adding that distance.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10219
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Mon Apr 14, 2014 5:50 am UTC

The pencil remark was funny.
Your next remark made me curious.

http://www.democracynow.org/2014/2/21/t ... _a_funeral
You are not wrong.
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: 3751
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby elasto » Mon Apr 14, 2014 7:00 am UTC

(spoiler for OT)

Spoiler:
Tyndmyr wrote:The former seems likely, but the latter seems less supported. People in actual combat are panicky. Errors get made. Distance seems likely to decrease errors, at least of certain types. If the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, eh...there's only so much public data to pull from, seems hard to get a firm conclusion, but it seems very likely that there are some nice advantages to adding that distance.

If both parties have a gun, they're both likely to open fire simply out of fear the other one otherwise will - even if neither actually has any interest in doing so. Just look at how trigger happy cops become if they see someone they think to be a criminal who they think to be holding a gun.

Whereas if both parties have a knife, a baton or something else, then unless they are already at close quarters, if neither has any interest in initiating an attack it probably wont happen.

The UK police being unarmed is a big part of why both police killings and police deaths are lower in the UK than in the US.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6568
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Thesh » Mon Apr 14, 2014 8:01 am UTC

http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/14/us/kansas ... -shooting/

Anti-Semite and former KKK leader murders three people, two at a Jewish community center, and one at a Jewish assisted living facility.

So much hatred in this world, so much propaganda, so easy to convince people that [group] is the cause of all our problems. The US that has pounded its citizens with patriotic propaganda, convincing so many people that some idealized concept of America is perfect, then they look for someone to blame for all of our problems. People buy into the propaganda, but when they aren't shouting "Freedom!" they are telling people they need to get out of our country, or telling them how they should live their lives.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

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

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Apr 14, 2014 11:11 am UTC

Thesh wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/14/us/kansas-jewish-center-shooting/

Anti-Semite and former KKK leader murders three people, two at a Jewish community center, and one at a Jewish assisted living facility.

So much hatred in this world, so much propaganda, so easy to convince people that [group] is the cause of all our problems. The US that has pounded its citizens with patriotic propaganda, convincing so many people that some idealized concept of America is perfect, then they look for someone to blame for all of our problems. People buy into the propaganda, but when they aren't shouting "Freedom!" they are telling people they need to get out of our country, or telling them how they should live their lives.


Uh, KKK leaders do not grow on trees. He doesn't look like someone who just swallowed some propaganda, but rather, as the type of person who has been desperately putting such things out for decades to little effect. The dude shouting "Heil Hitler" is not representative of the American people at large.

elasto wrote:(spoiler for OT)

Spoiler:
Tyndmyr wrote:The former seems likely, but the latter seems less supported. People in actual combat are panicky. Errors get made. Distance seems likely to decrease errors, at least of certain types. If the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, eh...there's only so much public data to pull from, seems hard to get a firm conclusion, but it seems very likely that there are some nice advantages to adding that distance.

If both parties have a gun, they're both likely to open fire simply out of fear the other one otherwise will - even if neither actually has any interest in doing so. Just look at how trigger happy cops become if they see someone they think to be a criminal who they think to be holding a gun.

Whereas if both parties have a knife, a baton or something else, then unless they are already at close quarters, if neither has any interest in initiating an attack it probably wont happen.

The UK police being unarmed is a big part of why both police killings and police deaths are lower in the UK than in the US.


Do you have actual data on this topic, specifically? Comparing two specific countries is not especially valid.

In particular, it does not appear that the victims had firearms, nor does the story say that cops believed the victims had firearms. So, I do not think it is reasonable to use fear of guns as an explanation for why two unarmed people got shot.

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 » Mon Apr 14, 2014 4:54 pm UTC

Spoiler:
elasto wrote:Yeah, this isn't the right thread for it but it absolutely does matter which weapon a person chooses (or is forced to choose).

Sure, a determined person could kill their victim with a pencil, but the more 'distance' a person can gain from their target the easier the act becomes psychologically and the more easily mistakes are made in the heat of the moment and so on.

That's why the US authorities sending in a special forces unit armed only with pencils to butcher an entire Pakistan wedding party is pure fantasy, whereas the same thing happening with a drone strike is so run-of-the-mill it may not even make the news.

I think we are talking past each other. I agree that most other weapons are far less effective than guns. It is entirely possible that if there were fewer guns, then more attempted murders would fail, more situations that could have escalated in the heat of the moment would not escalate, and more people would be afraid to commit a violent crime if they had to get up close within arm reach.

Let us suppose all those things to be true. Then a country that goes from having lots of guns to having few guns would see far less crime, less violence, and a lower murder rate. And my point is that all of those things would show up in their entirety in the overall crime and murder statistics. In particular, looking at the overall statistics will show exactly how much less violence there is and how many fewer murders take place. Ceteris paribus, those reductions will be the direct result of the change in gun ownership, so those crime statistics would tell us the precise effect of that change.

Moreover, if we only consider the statistics for gun-related crimes, the numbers would overstate the effect of the change. For example, if gun murders drop by 5,000 but of those would-be killers some 2,000 still murder but with a different weapon, that means overall murders decline by 3,000. The reasons you suggest could well be the explanation for that drop in murder, but to imply that the change saved 5,000 lives when it actually only saved 3,000 would be a misrepresentation of facts.

Does that make sense and sufficiently convey why the important number is the overall rate, not the gun-related rate?

And, since we've just completed a hypothetical situation using your hypotheses, let's consider what might happen if (strawman) gun-rights proponents were correct:

Suppose, as before, that a country goes from high gun ownership to low gun ownership. But in this hypothetical, the result is that people are less afraid to commit crimes because they know there's no chance of the victim or a bystander pulling a gun to stop them. So robberies go up. At the same time, criminals rely more and more on physical strength, so they target weaker victims. Women, the elderly, men who don't work out, and people with disabilities are unable to defend themselves. In the absence of the great equalizer invented by Samuel Colt, assaults and rapes become more common.

Again, we're supposing (strawman) gun-rights advocates are correct here. So robberies that previously would have ended with a homeowner pulling a gun and either scaring off or shooting the invader, now more frequently end with the robber succeeding. If the victim fights back, the attacker may actually be more likely to kill them because they are already at close range and thus better able to identify the attacker if left alive.

So in this scenario, murders, violence, and crime actually all become even more common when there are fewer guns, victimizations are more concentrated among the already-vulnerable, and the total outcome is much worse. Again, this is a hypothetical, but the point is that if we only considered gun-related crime, this result would look on paper like a huge improvement, when it is really the opposite.

I am not claiming that either of those scenarios actually reflects the reality on the ground. Instead I am saying that regardless of what effect gun ownership rates have, in order to measure that effect you have to look at overall crime numbers: just looking at gun-related crime rates is essentially meaningless and says nothing at all about what actually matters.
wee free kings

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

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby PolakoVoador » Mon Apr 14, 2014 6:47 pm UTC

Man enters bus, announces that he is robbing everyone inside, but is confronted... by two other men who were already robbing everyone inside the bus. (link in portuguese only). An argument ensues, and the first two stab the newcomer to death, and then run away.

God fucking dammit Brazil, this is getting ridiculous.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10493
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Apr 14, 2014 6:52 pm UTC

Brazil: Where the crime solves itself?

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Heisenberg » Mon Apr 14, 2014 7:15 pm UTC

Brazil: Site of the next World Cup and Olympics

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10219
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Tue Apr 15, 2014 5:07 am UTC

Thesh wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/14/us/kansas-jewish-center-shooting/

Anti-Semite and former KKK leader murders three people, two at a Jewish community center, and one at a Jewish assisted living facility.

So much hatred in this world, so much propaganda, so easy to convince people that [group] is the cause of all our problems. The US that has pounded its citizens with patriotic propaganda, convincing so many people that some idealized concept of America is perfect, then they look for someone to blame for all of our problems. People buy into the propaganda, but when they aren't shouting "Freedom!" they are telling people they need to get out of our country, or telling them how they should live their lives.

Your rant reflects the reality well.
The people yelling "Freedom!" frighten me.

What they have as freedom is not something I want.
That does not look like freedom to me.

Please do not force me to be as free as you are, Buddy.
I don't want that.

Spoiler:
Pull up your pants, Wipe your nose and wash your USA! flag hat. It's dirty.


What??
Is Brazel getting all snotty?
Because they have self solving crime?

Yes. We still need to call out the Police.
The results are, nearly, the same.

To be fair to us, we get entertainment and propaganda as well as a solved crime.

Two Birds with one bullet.
Two Birds with Five bullets?
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
Jave D
chavey-dee
Posts: 1042
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:41 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Jave D » Tue Apr 15, 2014 5:35 pm UTC

So it turns out that the Brave Defenders of Freedom who went to the Bundy ranch to defend his right to screw the US government out of a million dollars were really hoping that law enforcement would open fire and kill women.

Which is why they put the women in front.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04 ... -standoff/

So Bundy and a lot of his supporters are crowing about the "victory" against the "tyranny" of government, but it seems likely they're disappointed that a televised slaughter leading to a civil war did not occur. Aw, Rambo couldn't use his guns against police to avenge the lives of his human shields.

That's the Tea Party, people. Basically a terrorist organization.

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

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:05 pm UTC

Eh. The whole affair is ludicrous. I mean, it's a little mind boggling that anyone thinks that this is worth violence over(and I'm happy that law enforcement recognized this).

That's a particularly insane strategy, though. I mean, I get that yes, being victimized as PR is a powerful thing(and a common strategy), but....cmon. Maybe the fight just isn't worth it.

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:08 pm UTC

FOX keeps posting and talking about how they "forced" the "feds" to "turn tail and run". Surely THAT'S what happened, right?

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6568
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Thesh » Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:25 pm UTC

Mighty Jalapeno wrote:FOX keeps posting and talking about how they "forced" the "feds" to "turn tail and run". Surely THAT'S what happened, right?

Until they wait for things to cool down and straight up arrest Bundy for tax evasion.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby eSOANEM » Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:27 pm UTC

I missed the background for this, can someone fill me in with the basics?
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

User avatar
JBJ
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:20 pm UTC
Location: a point or extent in space

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby JBJ » Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:50 pm UTC

eSOANEM wrote:I missed the background for this, can someone fill me in with the basics?

Nevada rancher (Bundy) doesn't recognize that the Federal government owns the land he lets his cattle graze on and hasn't payed grazing fees in since 1993. Lost a court battle in 1998, owes something like 1.2 million in back fees.
Feds send people in to remove his cows from public land (note: not his property), uproar ensues.
Pretty good in-depth article here
So, you sacked the cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker?
The second cocky khaki Kicky Sack sock plucker I've sacked since the sixth sitting sheet slitter got sick.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6568
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Thesh » Tue Apr 15, 2014 8:51 pm UTC

So this guy Bundy has been grazing his cattle on federal land without paying the $1.35 per month per head of cattle fee for decades, basically saying that the federal government shouldn't have a right to charge him a fee for land use. The Bureau of Land Management has basically been asking for the money the whole time, and when it became clear he wouldn't pay they decided to round up the cattle. This resulted in protests and the protestors clashed with police. The same people who called the OWS protesters terrorists decided that this was a declaration of war, and decided to grab their guns, getting hard at the thought of killing feds. The BLM decided that it wasn't worth killing over, which the right thinks makes them a bunch of pussies because they WERE willing to kill people over cattle.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby eSOANEM » Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:25 pm UTC

Oh wow. That's ridiculous. Seems like the BLM did the only sensible thing.

Also, "armed militia members"? Is that seriously a thing? The only times I ever hear about militia are in countries either undergoing a revolution/civil war/insurgency. Having militia in the US is crazy. I don't understand how on earth the US got so successful when it's so stupidly distrustful of its government and it has so much general idiocy.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10493
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:27 pm UTC

If they open fire on the Feds, I hope the fed shows them what real war looks like. Beehives (flèchette artillery round), shotgun tanks, white phosphorous, all the AP fun stuff. Nothing Hollywood.

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

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:32 pm UTC

eSOANEM wrote:I missed the background for this, can someone fill me in with the basics?



Decent summary here, if you don't mind horrific ads.

Short version is that a strangely anti-federal government rancher wasn't paying, and the government was willing to spend many millions of dollars over this, and it became a major armed confrontation that was ludicrously out of proportion to the issue at hand(if cows should graze in a specific spot).

eSOANEM wrote:Oh wow. That's ridiculous. Seems like the BLM did the only sensible thing.

Also, "armed militia members"? Is that seriously a thing? The only times I ever hear about militia are in countries either undergoing a revolution/civil war/insurgency. Having militia in the US is crazy. I don't understand how on earth the US got so successful when it's so stupidly distrustful of its government and it has so much general idiocy.


BLM handled this fine by backing down, yeah. Another Waco or whatever over this would have been stupid. Presumably legal, etc action will still happen, it'll just be more court cases and seizing money from bank accounts than armed confrontation. This should suffice, because people need money to run ranches, and it'll be easier on all involved. Well, probably not the rancher, but such is life.

Militia is a vague word. It means anything from a bunch of people who hunt deer and own some camo to full on government hatin' nutters. This lot would tend towards the latter extreme. Keep in mind that the US is very large and populated, so this does not necessarily represent the US(or even the state, etc) at large...it's just that in a large enough group of people, you're gonna get some nuts.

Newt
Posts: 57
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2011 2:33 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Newt » Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:31 am UTC

eSOANEM wrote:Oh wow. That's ridiculous. Seems like the BLM did the only sensible thing.

Also, "armed militia members"? Is that seriously a thing? The only times I ever hear about militia are in countries either undergoing a revolution/civil war/insurgency. Having militia in the US is crazy. I don't understand how on earth the US got so successful when it's so stupidly distrustful of its government and it has so much general idiocy.


As per wikipedia,
By the mid-1990s, groups were active in all 50 states with membership estimated at between 20,000 and 60,000
. Active militia group membership is pretty low (the total U.S. populations in the mid nineties, probably the peak of militia movements, was ~266.28 million), and mostly limited to the sparsely populated rural areas.

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

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:44 am UTC

Yeah, and the vast majority of those are just people who want to feel important, or who want an unusual social club or whatever.

I mean, granted, a coupla hundred people ready for a shootout is probably too much, but I suspect a lot of them didn't *actually* expect a fight, and just wanted the bragging rights and so forth.

I kind of get that there are legitimate beefs underlying some of this too(like people being annoyed at changing rules for public land they've used for decades), but yknow, there are good ways to air grievances and really stupid ways. Things like "I follow pretty much no federal laws" falls into the latter. But, fortunately, it seems to have calmed down some. Cheers all round.

Another issue that is somewhat simmering in that vein is the CT/NY gun registration acts. Bluntly, huge quantities of people just didn't, out of some combination of apathy and unwillingness. And maybe also procrastination. New York's final day for registration is today, expiring in a coupla hours. The law allows for prosecutors to pursue felony charges for those who did not do so. Prior estimates of affected firearms vary between 1 and 2 million, so...this is not a small thing. State officials are refusing to release any data about total numbers of registrations...but in CT, they were abysmal. You've got folks shredding and burning registration forms in public. Hopefully restraint will be used here as well, but there's a fair amount of anger there under the surface.

I don't particularly like this source in general, but it does provide a fairly succinct summary in this case.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10219
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:36 am UTC

The poor things.
Do you know how Hateful some of those Guys are?

Some Posters say, "A social club."
I can not argue with that assessment.

Spoiler:
The people of the US have been abandoned.
The people of the US turn on each other.

The Propaganda tells them it is the Government.
But; Not the Whole Thing.

The Police are Bagger Brothers.
Nearly any uniform on a man that has spent too much time sitting is ok with them.

Have you met any of those Guys?
They are Ready to Shoot.


Hey! Hey!
I found something easy to read and written by an interested party in Nevada.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/04/1 ... rspective#

If someone wanted to make the argument that FOX Plus have clearly and with malice
acted in ways that are detrimental to the well being of the US and her people;
I would agree.

From FOX.
“This is a lot bigger deal than just my cows,” Bundy told FoxNews.com. “It’s a statement for freedom and liberty and the Constitution.”

It would be laughable and silly if it were not taken so darned seriously by The People.

There is a significant number of individuals inside the US spoiling for a War.
There is a larger number that feel helpless in an increasingly uncivil civil life.

And; Of course we always have that Third Set.
People that have no idea this is not the way things have always been.
Those people often think this is the way things should be; Only More!
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
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby eSOANEM » Wed Apr 16, 2014 10:10 am UTC

Those people are also being idiots. The constitution defends the right to keep and bear arms. It says nothing about the state not being allowed to know about it.

These people are just nutjobs disobeying a law which is, undoubtedly a good thing.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

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

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Apr 16, 2014 12:17 pm UTC

eSOANEM wrote:Those people are also being idiots. The constitution defends the right to keep and bear arms. It says nothing about the state not being allowed to know about it.

These people are just nutjobs disobeying a law which is, undoubtedly a good thing.


Constitutionality is different than something being good. I agree that registration does not seem to be explicitly banned by the 2nd amendment, but that does not guarantee that it is a good idea. Opinions on that will likely differ. However, we see pretty clearly that a large quantity of people appear to feel very strongly indeed that this is something terrible. I mean, risking felony charges is no joke. I would assume that many people would comply with even a law they disagreed with to avoid that possibility, so that implies a remarkably strong sentiment.

Factoring out people who procrastinated or simply forgot, I suppose. Some people are not particularly angry sorts, but are just really bad with deadlines. If cooler heads prevail, well meaning but late folks will not be charged, I hope.

Back on the topic of the rancher standoff....I *am* happy that the government imposed "free speech zones" got knocked down. That concept has always been pretty terrible, and precedent against that is welcome.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10219
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Wed Apr 16, 2014 3:29 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
eSOANEM wrote:Those people are also being idiots. The constitution defends the right to keep and bear arms. It says nothing about the state not being allowed to know about it.

These people are just nutjobs disobeying a law which is, undoubtedly a good thing.


Constitutionality is different than something being good. I agree that registration does not seem to be explicitly banned by the 2nd amendment, but that does not guarantee that it is a good idea. Opinions on that will likely differ. However, we see pretty clearly that a large quantity of people appear to feel very strongly indeed that this is something terrible. I mean, risking felony charges is no joke. I would assume that many people would comply with even a law they disagreed with to avoid that possibility, so that implies a remarkably strong sentiment.

Factoring out people who procrastinated or simply forgot, I suppose. Some people are not particularly angry sorts, but are just really bad with deadlines. If cooler heads prevail, well meaning but late folks will not be charged, I hope.

Back on the topic of the rancher standoff....I *am* happy that the government imposed "free speech zones" got knocked down. That concept has always been pretty terrible, and precedent against that is welcome.

You have a lot going on in one post.
The written word is nice that way.

I agree that registration does not seem to be explicitly banned by the 2nd amendment, but that does not guarantee that it is a good idea. Opinions on that will likely differ. However, we see pretty clearly that a large quantity of people appear to feel very strongly indeed that this is something terrible. I mean, risking felony charges is no joke. I would assume that many people would comply with even a law they disagreed with to avoid that possibility, so that implies a remarkably strong sentiment.

However, we see pretty clearly that a large quantity of people appear to feel very strongly indeed that this is something terrible.

I think this is The Shit that gives Democarcy a Bad Name.

Who told you so?
What do you know?
How do you know it?

Don't all Good Americans know everything they need to know about resisting Opression?
"Buy a Gun! Buy Two! Stand Up for Your Own! Don't Let Them get away with it!"

So a large quantity of people appear to feel very strongly that Vigilante Justice is a better kind of Justice.
Those Bad Guys won't Get Away with so much Shit! We, The People, will take care of it. Fun, Fun, Fun.

I disagree with your implied premise.
Just because a great many people believe it, does not make it so.

They can believe it with the fierceness that justifies Murder and walking into Suicide.
That still does not make it Truth. They can Kill and Die and still be Wrong.

ech. I know and you can know, Protests are Fun.
Protests, in the ideal, are not usually Life Threatening get togethers.

I *am* happy that the government imposed "free speech zones" got knocked down. That concept has always been pretty terrible, and precedent against that is welcome.

I do agree with this statement.
I have seen the concept of Free Speech perverted.

You can say anything you want inside This Cage.
We will control who hears you.

And; For fun and Games the audience is given a two hour briefing via TV or Movie before I make a 3 minute statement.
That does not feel like Free Speech to me. To be fair, the people can not speak well and they can not listen well.

Free Speech is meaningless under such conditions.
Free Speech is a concept that assumes people can not parrot an Electronic Voice.

That assumption is False.
The rest of the concept fails without extraordinary effort from both those speaking and those listening.

The people of the Bagger Party don't want to Work at intellectual pursuits.
That would be Boring and Too Damned Hard.

"Get Your Gun, Jethro!
The Revenuers are a Commin'!"


There is a rallying cry everyone can understand.
No deep thinking. No hesitation.

Do what needs to be Done!
What needs to be Done?

Stick up for the Concitiution.
That one part.

The rest of it is Too Wishy Washy.
For those Straight Shooting Baggers.

I think those people need a Drink.
Loads and Loads of Drink.

I might try a different Tack.
In the interest of Peace, The Feds are Handing Out Shots.

No! Not Buck Shots!
Shots. Whiskey is traditional in the West.

Yes. They will act up when Drunk.
They get to. They are adults.

They might get to go to Jail like all other adults do when they shoot people while drunk.
In the infinite Childishness of the Baggers, they would sue.
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
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby eSOANEM » Wed Apr 16, 2014 3:52 pm UTC

I agree that constitutionality doesn't imply that something is a good thing (I think that the second amendment is a paranoid measure that can only make things worse although this is not the thread to delve further into that) but that isn't an argument against gun registration (for which I haven't seen any logically valid argument that doesn't boil down to "because I'm paranoid and don't trust the government").

Also, I was talking about people deliberately choosing not to register, not people who forgot or procrastinated etc. I should have made that clearer.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10219
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby addams » Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:54 pm UTC

The Baggers are an interesting bunch.
Are they not?

Do you think they study Military Psychology?
Do you think the people they listen to study Military Psychology?

How far up the Chain of Command does a person need to look to find someone that Knows something?
So funny. The words, "This Cause is Larger Than Our Stand."

The words needed to keep men and women in the Battle so that the War can rage on.
Those old farts in Nevada have learned to Parrot the Box very well.

They are wearing the imaginary Mantles of Hero.
All other personal qualities are covered with the Mantle of Hero.

It gives Honor and Meaning to a life poorly lived.
Just my opinion.
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.

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

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Apr 16, 2014 6:06 pm UTC

eSOANEM wrote:I agree that constitutionality doesn't imply that something is a good thing (I think that the second amendment is a paranoid measure that can only make things worse although this is not the thread to delve further into that) but that isn't an argument against gun registration (for which I haven't seen any logically valid argument that doesn't boil down to "because I'm paranoid and don't trust the government").

Also, I was talking about people deliberately choosing not to register, not people who forgot or procrastinated etc. I should have made that clearer.


Well, there's no real evidence for the law doing anything to reduce crime or violence overall, so I do not see why you assume it is a good thing.

I see it as a terrible law. I just have a strong preference for disagreement being expressed in words. Preferably polite, logical words. Not a huge fan of things escalating to the point where groups of armed folks are on the brink of violence.

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby eSOANEM » Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:14 pm UTC

It doesn't need to reduce crime in order to be a good thing. It will however, in some cases at least, make it easier to track down criminals because, despite what the NRA would have people believe, not all criminals use or would be using illegally purchased/unregistered guns.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

User avatar
yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby yurell » Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:21 pm UTC

eSOANEM wrote:It doesn't need to reduce crime in order to be a good thing. It will however, in some cases at least, make it easier to track down criminals because, despite what the NRA would have people believe, not all criminals use or would be using illegally purchased/unregistered guns.


That actually does reduce crime — in fact, increasing the certainty and speed by which a criminal is caught is much more efficient at reducing crime than increasing the punishment.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?


Pronouns: Feminine pronouns please!

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6568
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Thesh » Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:38 pm UTC

I'm not so certain registration does make it easier to track people down. Big citation needed on that one.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby eSOANEM » Thu Apr 17, 2014 8:58 am UTC

I didn't say generally. I said in some cases at least.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

User avatar
Red Hal
Magically Delicious
Posts: 1445
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:42 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Red Hal » Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:44 pm UTC

eSOANEM wrote:Also, "armed militia members"? Is that seriously a thing? The only times I ever hear about militia are in countries either undergoing a revolution/civil war/insurgency. Having militia in the US is crazy. I don't understand how on earth the US got so successful when it's so stupidly distrustful of its government and it has so much general idiocy.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Lost Greatest Silent Baby X Y Z. "There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."

speising
Posts: 2350
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby speising » Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:47 pm UTC

Red Hal wrote:
eSOANEM wrote:Also, "armed militia members"? Is that seriously a thing? The only times I ever hear about militia are in countries either undergoing a revolution/civil war/insurgency. Having militia in the US is crazy. I don't understand how on earth the US got so successful when it's so stupidly distrustful of its government and it has so much general idiocy.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."


which begs the question in the first half of the sentence, of course.

User avatar
Red Hal
Magically Delicious
Posts: 1445
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:42 pm UTC

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Red Hal » Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:59 pm UTC

Begs the question or raises the question?

If the former, I'd say it's probably closer to ignoratio elenchi than petitio principi. If the latter, then I assume the question raised is whether or not a well-regulated militia is, indeed, necessary to the security of a free state.
Lost Greatest Silent Baby X Y Z. "There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain..."

speising
Posts: 2350
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby speising » Thu Apr 17, 2014 2:09 pm UTC

the xkcd rule: you can't use the phrase "begs the question" without someone pointing out that it doesn't mean "raises the question".
even if you do not state a question, thereby obviously not using this meaning.

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

Re: The Darker Side of the News

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Apr 17, 2014 2:33 pm UTC

Thesh wrote:I'm not so certain registration does make it easier to track people down. Big citation needed on that one.


Yeah. It's not like a car, where ID info is commonly, publicly visible. Tracking the criminal down based on the gun registration requires first having the gun in possession.

That's situationally useful(assuming that the gun is properly registered to the criminal and the serial number is left intact), but it would seem as if the vast majority of crimes would not fall into this category. A lot of things all have to go exactly right for it to even be a lead.

Who was it, the CDC that did the last study on this, and found no discernable positive effect?


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests