Chum Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 8 minutes ago, Fether said: Yep! What’s that thing… the… the… oh! The constitution. Yes. The constitution says this. The right to bear arms is here to protect us from a tyrannical government. Hey, I'm not judging. I'm just getting it out there that a critical reason for all these guns are in case the gun owners decide there are cops that need killing. -1
Chum Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 4 minutes ago, Chum said: Hey, I'm not judging. I'm just getting it out there that a critical reason for all these guns are in case the gun owners decide there are cops that need killing. Just to out my position on LEO: The healthy, appropriate reason to respect police is that they are human beings. That's enough. 2
Fether Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 4 minutes ago, Chum said: Hey, I'm not judging. I'm just getting it out there that a critical reason for all these guns are in case the gun owners decide there are cops that need killing. Great reduction of the 2nd amendment. Truly top notch. It seems we have reached the point where we are no longer talking about important issues and just trying to drive agendas.
Fether Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 1 minute ago, Chum said: Just to out my position on LEO: The healthy, appropriate reason to respect police is that they are human beings. That's enough. I love police too. I have never had a reason to distrust them
Chum Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Fether said: I love police too. I have never had a reason to distrust them Except the part where you support arming to kill them. Edit: Okay that was mean. Accurate but mean. Edited May 30, 2022 by Chum
Fether Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Chum said: Except the part where you support arming to kill them. Haha ok 👌 I think we are done Ugh. Comm 101 has to be agonizing to follow. My apologies to the other board members. Edited May 30, 2022 by Fether
longview Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 1 hour ago, Chum said: Hey, I'm not judging. I'm just getting it out there that a critical reason for all these guns are in case the gun owners decide there are cops that need killing. BATF did not respect due process and came in very heavy-handed against the poor dolts at Waco. Lon Tomohisa Horiuchi did not respect due process and callously murdered Weaver's wife at Ruby Ridge. The Capitol Police cold-bloodedly shot Ashli Babbitt for no good reason on Jan 6. You have to wonder why so many Fed departments and agencies have their own SWAT teams. Such as IRS and surprisingly the Dept. of Education. The more totalitarian the government becomes the more thugs come out of the woodwork. But in any case, I am a supporter of of 93% of street cops. Contrary to the defund the police subversives. 1
provoman Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 Joseph Story ~ 1840 “One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes with out resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offence to keep arms, and by substituting a regular army in the stead of a resort to the militia.” 1
The Nehor Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 6 hours ago, Fether said: Yep! What’s that thing… the… the… oh! The constitution. Yes. The constitution says this. The right to bear arms is here to protect us from a tyrannical government. Here are some references, but I know you don’t like reading evidences that go contrary to your opinions. https://www.history.com/.amp/topics/united-states-constitution/2nd-amendment#right-to-bear-arms https://www.britannica.com/topic/Second-Amendment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CONAN-1992/pdf/GPO-CONAN-1992-10-3.pdf The only early attempts to tie gun ownership to protection from the government were individual states wanting the tacit threat of their armed population to prevent federal overreach from dominating the states. It wasn’t about fighting the government. 1
The Nehor Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 (edited) Double Post. Edited May 30, 2022 by The Nehor
The Nehor Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 (edited) Triple POST!!!! HAT TRICK!!!!!! Edited May 30, 2022 by The Nehor
The Nehor Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 (edited) Quadruple Post!!!! Do I get an Applebee’s gift card? Edited May 30, 2022 by The Nehor
The Nehor Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 4 hours ago, longview said: The Capitol Police cold-bloodedly shot Ashli Babbitt for no good reason on Jan 6. Wrong. I encourage a complete study of the video from all four angles to avoid reaching erroneous conclusions. 4 hours ago, longview said: You have to wonder why so many Fed departments and agencies have their own SWAT teams. Such as IRS and surprisingly the Dept. of Education. The more totalitarian the government becomes the more thugs come out of the woodwork. But in any case, I am a supporter of of 93% of street cops. Contrary to the defund the police subversives. Ironically it was one of those federal SWAT teams that actually dealt with the situation we are talking about while the LEOs were still doing nothing. I expect this investigation to get ugly. The governor and other politicos have already distanced themselves from the police. There is something that went very badly that they don’t think they will be able to cover up. I don’t get the point of street cops. The recent shootings which are one of the reasons we are told cops need such big budgets have shown them to be pretty useless in general. If 911 calls from literal children begging for help doesn’t get them to act what would? At least the federal agency law enforcement seem willing in general to do their job even if they aren’t necessarily very good at it. I may be soured on police because a lot of my friends are EMTs and firefighters and their consensus is that there is virtually no situation where police showing up to an emergency is helpful. They need to be babysat to avoid doing anything stupid, provoke bystanders, and are generally seen as “toddlers on meth”. It is probably not a coincidence that police hiring standards have been nosediving and that some police departments are literally screening applicants to avoid hiring smart people. Policing in the US is a joke. Defund the police!
The Nehor Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 (edited) 23 hours ago, Chum said: I never realized cop love was such a fickle thing. It's like real romance. Law enforcement is the friend of the people and their outrageous cost and continuous expansion is seen as good. News that we have higher police funding than literal police states and the highest incarceration rate in the world is dismissed as non-worrying trivia. Law enforcement is also simultaneously the enemy that we must shoot the second we think they are getting out of line. Only be being able to shoot cops (a lot of them as we like having lots of cops) can we guarantee our freedom. Now you might think we would worry that they are backed up by the military but I am sure that patriots worried about government overreach wouldn’t support a huge military that can conceivably be used against them. They definitely would balk at artillery that could lay waste to them before their guns would even be useful. I bet they would march on the Capitol if the military started building flying death robots that could kill silently and unnoticed from above. If the military had all that than the big gun collection that Cletus “The Patriot” Beauregard III keeps in his shack would be pretty useless wouldn’t it? Edited May 31, 2022 by The Nehor
Calm Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 2 hours ago, The Nehor said: some police departments are literally screening applicants to avoid hiring smart people Why would they do that?
Chum Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 3 hours ago, Calm said: Why would they do that? One dept went to court for intelligence discrimination. The Wonderlic test they used (still in use by elsewhere) measured intelligence, among other things. Applicants had to score below an intelligence threshold; ostensibly to avoid boredom. Court upheld the dept's policy and AFAIK, it hasn't been challenged since. In my experience, empathy is what divides awful cops from not-awful ones. In complex situations, the ones with empathy had outcomes that ranged between competent and helpful. The ones without seem to be the same ones radiating disdain for difficult people. 2
Chum Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 (edited) 12 hours ago, longview said: BATF did not respect due process and came in very heavy-handed against the poor dolts at Waco. Lon Tomohisa Horiuchi did not respect due process and callously murdered Weaver's wife at Ruby Ridge. The behavior by FBI's HRT at Ruby Ridge was particularly egregious to me. It probably pushed me the rest of the way into conservatism because that's who was calling out - legit - bad federal LEO (IC, etc) behavior. We're so very far from that now. Edited May 30, 2022 by Chum disclaimer: recovering conservative
Amulek Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 On 5/29/2022 at 2:17 AM, Tacenda said: Not even the cops felt they could handle going up against an AR gun...time to ban them already. Banning AR-style weapons won't have any more effect on mass shootings as banning whisky would have on drunken driving. Even if we concluded that drunk drivers were disproportionately drunk on whiskey, banning whiskey would just mean that the drunk drivers will shift to vodka, gin, tequila or other alcoholic beverages that are just as dangerous as whiskey. The same is true for the so-called “assault weapons.” And just because the cops failed to act in this instance doesn't mean that nobody would have reacted if given the opportunity. In fact, the FBI recently released the data for 2021 (download PDF, here). It reports 61 "active shooter" incidents in the last year (of which 12 were treated as "mass killing" incidents), and 4 of those active shooter incidents led to "shooters [being] killed by citizen," all apparently involving gun-wielding citizens (PDF pages 4, 11-12). Two more incidents involved citizens detaining a shooter without using guns themselves. So the aggregate pattern seems to be that civilian self-defense takes place in a meaningful percentage of active shooter incidents. 2
Chum Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 7 hours ago, The Nehor said: At least the federal agency law enforcement seem willing in general to do their job even if they aren’t necessarily very good at it. Yes but their job is to enforce policy and federal policies are commonly born of corruption eg: handcrafting terror plots, enforcement of campaign donor interests, bulk surveillance of Americans not suspected of a crime, fusion centers, continuing lies about encryption, etc
Chum Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 19 minutes ago, Amulek said: Banning AR-style weapons won't have any more effect on mass shootings as banning whisky would have on drunken driving. Would denying a drinker access to their preferred booze effect their drinking habits? In my experience it does. My best friend's dad drank Schlitz and when he couldn't get it, he'd drink Listerine. 1
bluebell Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 On 5/29/2022 at 1:17 AM, Tacenda said: Not even the cops felt they could handle going up against an AR gun...time to ban them already. The cops have the same type of weapons, as ARs are semi-automatic. The one thing that Columbine taught us is that in an active shooter situation, you go in. You do not wait outside. Those cops in TX failed. 4
Amulek Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 4 hours ago, Calm said: 7 hours ago, The Nehor said: some police departments are literally screening applicants to avoid hiring smart people Why would they do that? Overeducated, over qualified employees can easily do more harm than good in an organization - especially in roles where teamwork is important. They can develop negative attitudes because they believe certain assignments are beneath them. And that resentment / boredom can lead to poor performance on the job and, eventually, cause them to look for something more fulfilling / engaging elsewhere...which means you are going to have to start over from scratch and hire someone new to replace them.
Chum Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 25 minutes ago, Amulek said: Banning AR-style weapons won't have any more effect on mass shootings as banning whisky would have on drunken driving. 1) I'm gun agnostic. However, gun worshipers are distressingly annoying but so are politician worshipers. The distressing part is the wholesale loss of perspective that goes with over-adoring things and people. 2) I can't prove or disprove the above quote. The US is so gun heavy that there's no gun law we could pass today that would make tomorrow like every other country. What I do know is reactionary laws are universally bad. Better laws need time and input by diverse interests who put the public first. Passing them will require a sufficient number of elected officials who aren't captured or deluded. 3) I would solidly get behind gun laws if we first tried the one thing we've never done (at least not since Columbine). Stop siren-calling the next shooter by rewarding the last shooter with months of the loudest possible coverage and attention. The endlessly brilliant Zeynep Tufekci was right about minimizing the publication of shooter names but I believe we need to complete that effort by doing the same with the event. If we try that in a meaningful and extended way without result, I'll support carefully written gun restrictions. 1
Amulek Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 (edited) 25 minutes ago, bluebell said: The cops have the same type of weapons, as ARs are semi-automatic. Depends on the department. Technically, they can get pretty much anything they want, but he most common firearms LEO's are going to be using are semi automatic handguns, rifles, and shotguns. SWAT teams will sometimes have access to fully automatic / select fire options, but I don't think I've ever known someone in a department where that was the norm (department wide). 25 minutes ago, bluebell said: The one thing that Columbine taught us is that in an active shooter situation, you go in. You do not wait outside. Those cops in TX failed. Exactly. The sooner assailants are met with force, the sooner the incident will end. Edited May 30, 2022 by Amulek
Chum Posted May 30, 2022 Posted May 30, 2022 22 minutes ago, bluebell said: The one thing that Columbine taught us is that in an active shooter situation, you go in. You do not wait outside. Those cops in TX failed. While I'm inclined to agree I am waiting for facts and analysis to be more complete before I allow an opinion.
Recommended Posts