|
Post by sigurdur on Jul 14, 2016 17:35:59 GMT
A couple of points I find 'interesting': 1. There are more whites killed by the police than blacks around 5 times the number apparently - yet it is only the blacks being killed that are published by the media, in fact there is more fuss in the media about a family's dog being shot by police than there is about a white person being shot. Why is this? 2. Many years ago in a different existence any more than two shots to take down an attacker would have been frowned on. Two police emptying a magazine each into a person they are holding on the ground, or 4 shots to a driver at point blank range through the open window would in my view result in loss of right to carry a gun. There was a case recently of a car being shot at over a hundred times with a police'man' at the end standing on the hood emptying a magazine through the windshield. I would have removed the badges from all of those 'police'. If you cannot hit what you are shooting at within 2 rounds then you should not be allowed near guns. As in your story Sig, there appear to be many police who are not mentally suited to be in the job. It only takes the actions of a few of these to ruin all the attempts at 'community policing' and give ammunition to the anti-police groups. The police know who these weak characters are but tend to pull together and not say anything. This is stupid as they are being their own worst enemies and it leads to the kind of retaliation seen in Dallas. This makes every traffic stop or minor interaction with the public a potential attack which in turn makes the weak police more trigger happy and so the cycle spirals down. There is a simple answer to Americas gun problem, disarm the police but also get rid of all the guns in the country. The larger question is, does the USA really have a gun problem? Where I live, nope. Ownership of firearms is very high, with most owning multiple systems. Only in small pockets in the USA is there what could be perceived as a gun problem. A major problem today, and it has been a problem for some time, is that Police Officers have distanced themselves from community. And with this distance, comes fear. I know my Sheriff on a first name basis. I don't know how many folks can say that, but I would say 80%+ of folks in my county do. In cities, is the Police Chief appointed or is he elected? I think he should be elected. It forces him to get out and know his community. The US has been attacked by terrorists. Case in point where a gun owner made a difference is the bunch that planned to shoot up a bunch of folks in Texas. Didn't turn out too well for the terrorists. It is a people problem in areas of our Great land.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Jul 14, 2016 19:35:35 GMT
There are a lot of guns in the US. There are a significant number in NZ also, violent crime in NZ is very significantly lower. I don't think its just the guns.
How many crimes would not have happened if guns were less fashionable to have on your person, a reverse argument also is heard.
My observation of the deltas relating to guns that may contribute is that assault weapons should be restricted, they make poor hunting guns. They attract the wrong people. Loaded hand guns are just dangerous in peoples daily use.
I think the number of people saved by an armed bystander is very small, but anecdotally it can be presented as a positive. We in NZ have a maximum magazine size of 10 and semi auto. I believe Australia restrict to bolt action I think NZ rules are fine, and yes we do have gun accidents and gun crimes.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jul 15, 2016 14:08:33 GMT
The Stats are that gun crime/violence in the US has been dropping for decades even as gun ownership has increased. However, in Democrat controlled urban areas gun crime particularly so called black on black gun violence has increased considerably, despite (or because) these areas having the most restrictive gun laws and regulations in the US.
More people are killed in the US each yer by blunt force trauma (hammers, half bricks, fists etc) than are killed by guns.
It is difficult to get sensible statistics on this as the proponents of gun control massage the stats more than climate scientists.
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Jul 15, 2016 14:27:21 GMT
The America that I live in is perfectly safe, I give nearly zero thought to crime or security, other than locking our house and car. Gun violence is almost completely limited to black ghettos. I'm not willing to let it be presented any differently. We have many thousands of responsible gun owners in the US who are not a threat to anyone, but they are a threat to potential leftist dictators.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jul 15, 2016 20:49:08 GMT
The America that I live in is perfectly safe, I give nearly zero thought to crime or security, other than locking our house and car. Gun violence is almost completely limited to black ghettos. I'm not willing to let it be presented any differently. We have many thousands of responsible gun owners in the US who are not a threat to anyone, but they are a threat to potential leftist dictators. And to violent raiding excursions from the urban core to the 'burbs' and countryside ... coming to a neighborhood near us? ??
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jul 15, 2016 23:13:57 GMT
The America that I live in is perfectly safe, I give nearly zero thought to crime or security, other than locking our house and car. Gun violence is almost completely limited to black ghettos. I'm not willing to let it be presented any differently. We have many thousands of responsible gun owners in the US who are not a threat to anyone, but they are a threat to potential leftist dictators. And to violent raiding excursions from the urban core to the 'burbs' and countryside ... coming to a neighborhood near us? ?? Can you expand on that MB?
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jul 16, 2016 5:04:58 GMT
And to violent raiding excursions from the urban core to the 'burbs' and countryside ... coming to a neighborhood near us? ?? Can you expand on that MB? Why certainly. I did a personal study once to see the results of a couple of close presidential elections if electoral votes were allocated by congressional district instead of by state. You will remember that in the American system, presidents are chosen by the Electoral College, whose delegates (in most states) are selected from political party lists and are bound to vote for the candidate that wins the popular state-wide vote. Now, congressional district boundaries must, by law, be drawn to incorporate equal numbers of people in each district ... so, theoretically the elector allocation should not vary statistically based on allocation method. BUT IT DOES. And this is because the urban (particularly inner city districts) typically vote overwhelmingly Democrat. While rural and suburban districts tended to be much closer contests. A couple of close presidential elections might well have turned out differently under the congressional elector allocation method. It will be interesting to see if the non or marginally urban areas become much more polarized in this election. So what does this have to do with my comment? Most of us here in the States understand that most large urban centers are highly segregated spatially by economic status. This example is merely another measure of how concentrated and intensely partisan the Democratic vote has become in this country. The spatial map (don't immediately have one) leaves the just impression of a sea of red (conservative / republican) covering large spatial areas of lower population, with intermitent, densely populated islands of blue (liberal, progressive, democrat). These densely packed urban areas hold lots of angry people with guns who don't seem to think much of their local sheriffs. You're right Sig ... they should. And to be fair, those red areas are starting to boil too. In times of extreme stress and scarcity (whatever sets it off), already poor people who seem convinced that the rest of us are out to get them ... or others that are really unhappy that their lifestyle has seriously downgraded over the last decade ... are unlikely to stay at home and 'suffer' like good little citizens. This is a favorite subject of many Sci-Fi stories ... which I hope remains fiction. But the new geomagnetic forces are screwing with the brains of humanity (Or Not).
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jul 16, 2016 5:17:36 GMT
Newt always catches a lot of heat. And while I don't always agree with him, his ability to weave logic in a historical narrative is really quite good. Here is the latest ... very relevant to this thread. Live video discussing the Nice attack and the steps we must take to defeat Radical Islamists. www.facebook.com/newtgingrich/videos/10154305282629197/
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jul 16, 2016 5:48:44 GMT
[ Snip ] This is a favorite subject of many Sci-Fi stories ... which I hope remains fiction. But the new geomagnetic forces are screwing with the brains of humanity (Or Not). Thanks for an informative explanation, MB.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jul 16, 2016 8:14:02 GMT
[ Snip ] This is a favorite subject of many Sci-Fi stories ... which I hope remains fiction. But the new geomagnetic forces are screwing with the brains of humanity (Or Not). Thanks for an informative explanation, MB. You may be interested in and comment on this aspect which is hidden in Agenda 21, and appears to be proceeding. It does fit with Miss boy's urban island comments. www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2014/08/26/the-agenda-21-depopulation-of-rural-areas-will-give-obama-stalin-like-control-over-food/There have been studies recently on what will happen to a major metroplex when a grid fails and power goes out, say to New York Metroplex or London or Paris for a week or ten days. Most assessments are that after 2 or 3 days there will be law and order break down not unlike that seen in New Orleans after Katrina, but this time with around 9 million people in the area affected. Yes this type of scenario has been foreseen by Science Fiction writers. That doesn't increase the appeal. There is something to be said for a population that can 'survive in place' without external support. That cannot happen in a 'mega-city'. Indeed, the people in the megacity will not even have the knowledge of how to 'survive' without food being made available in processed packs and cans and with water coming out of the taps. In system terms we are building societies that are not resilient to failures, even relatively common failures. Then under the guise of 'sustainable' these failure modes are made more likely. See wattsupwiththat.com/2016/07/14/14000-per-mwh-the-price-south-australia-pays-for-renewables-madness/ Imagine a failure of the Inteconnectors to South Australia that could take a month to repair and the grid fails in South Australia due to no base load power supply even something minor like 2 major transformers failing. So you now have a month without power. In UK they have the STOR system ( www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0f664c78-821b-11e5-8095-ed1a37d1e096.html and ircp.com/sector-focus/case-study/green-frog-power.html ) Now for UK imagine a bad winter storm of the type foreseen by Theo, deep snow blocking major routes and the wind being high the windmills are parked and demand exceeds supply, STOR generators start and run -- but they only are expected to run intermittently - this time after the storm comes the anticyclonic hard frosts and still winds. Power is still required snow covers solar panels windmills have no wind and the diesel tankers cannot get to the STOR sites which are out of fuel. Science fiction becomes reality.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jul 16, 2016 11:08:51 GMT
Naut, Quite apart from the potential disaster scenarios you mention, I've been urging any politician who would listen to get people out of the big cities. Our roads are clogged, crime against persons is on the rise, visual pollution everywhere, there is highrise proliferation to get even more people into each square kilometer, etc, etc. Quality of life in Australia's large cities is on the decline and most don't realise it. On the power front, we've just had another prime example - in addition to South Australia - of what can go wrong: Tasmanian Government response to Second Basslink outage in nine days 'really is scandalous'Tasmania is another example of poor planning, driven by years of green-dominated governments, relying on hydro but the rain didn't fall. Governments drink the Kool-Aid too.
|
|
|
Post by fredzl4dh on Jul 16, 2016 12:48:30 GMT
Yep, that's simple alright ....... Or instigate feelings of love and peace to one another.... Flower power boring lol;.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jul 16, 2016 17:01:39 GMT
The Islamist demandoth! Will the Obama obey?
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jul 16, 2016 18:27:04 GMT
Hillary is determined to be as green as green can be.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jul 16, 2016 18:35:15 GMT
There is one area that should be recognized. The Saudi Government isn't a Saudi version of Democrat vs Republican, it is a large family (and they can get large if a king has many wives and the sons and grandsons have many wives). They get into posts in the Saudi government on a modified inheritance system and they can have significantly different opinions between them, rather tan all practicing small government and low taxation or whatever benchmark you would use. Also, from what I have read, the hijackers in the flying schools took advantage of Saudi funding schemes and methods for students while in the US but this is rather different to being funded for terrorism. However, Bin Laden was Saudi so he may have found it easier to recruit Saudis.
|
|