Gun control, which side wins?

[Ten oz]

Quote

 

Roughly half of all the guns in this country are possessed by just 3 percent of American adults. That's one of the top findings in a new survey on gun ownership in America from researchers at Harvard and Northeastern universities.

The study also reveals that even as the country has gotten less violent, most gun owners say they bought weapons for self-protection, rather than for hunting or target shooting. 

https://www.npr.org/2016/09/20/494765559/nearly-half-of-guns-in-u-s-owned-by-3-percent-of-population-study-findshttps://www.npr.org/2016/09/20/494765559/nearly-half-of-guns-in-u-s-owned-by-3-percent-of-population-study-finds

 

A very small but fervent group of people Shepard gun policy in the U.S.. They use a mixture of national/founderism and Whataboutism to promote distrust toward democracy which prevents action on the issue. 

 

*Founderism is my made up word for the notion that the U.S. was designed, by the founders, as a White Evengelical Christian nation. 

[dimreepr]

A new low in a long list  of facile arguments:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/04/trump-nra-london-hospital-knives

Quote

“I recently read a story that in London, which has unbelievably tough gun laws, a once very prestigious hospital, right in the middle, is like a war zone for horrible stabbing wounds,” he said. “Yes, that’s right, they don’t have guns, they have knives and instead there’s blood all over the floors of this hospital. They say it’s as bad as a military war zone hospital.”

 

[Endy0816]

We're a visual species, so strongly react to blood, but bullets are more dangerous.

Bullets are cutting, bouncing and shattering. Large amount of damage via the formation and collapse of the temporary cavity too.

Edited May 5, 2018 by Endy0816

[StringJunky]

6 hours ago, dimreepr said:

A new low in a long list  of facile arguments:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/04/trump-nra-london-hospital-knives

 

If Trump turned  sideways he'd disappear. He's like a spaghetti western film set: all front. A quote from Aesop seems pertinent:

Quote

43. THE BIRDS, THE BEASTS, AND THE BAT

The Birds and the Beasts declared war against each other. No compromise was possible, and so they went at it tooth and claw. It is said the quarrel grew out of the persecution the race of Geese suffered at the teeth of the Fox family. The Beasts, too, had cause for fight. The Eagle was constantly pouncing on the Hare, and the Owl dined daily on Mice.

It was a terrible battle. Many a Hare and many a Mouse died. Chickens and Geese fell by the score—and the victor always stopped for a feast.

Now the Bat family had not openly joined either side. They were a very politic race. So when they saw the Birds getting the better of it, they were Birds for all there was in it. But when the tide of battle turned, they immediately sided with the Beasts.

When the battle was over, the conduct of the Bats was discussed at the peace conference. Such deceit was unpardonable, and Birds and Beasts made common cause to drive out the Bats. And since then the Bat family hides in dark towers and deserted ruins, flying out only in the night.

The deceitful have no friends.

 

Edited May 5, 2018 by StringJunky

[John Cuthber]

10 hours ago, dimreepr said:

A new low in a long list  of facile arguments:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/04/trump-nra-london-hospital-knives

 

He lied about London before

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/donald-trump-uk-should-thank-him-london-radicalised-police-scared-no-go-a6767606.html

 

[Strange]

Great historical and linguistics analysis of the 2nd Amendment here: https://www.english.illinois.edu/-people-/faculty/debaron/essays/guns.pdf

[CharonY]

So here is an interesting spin on the persecution of gun owners. Apparently law enforcement (including the FBI) have a racially divided approach. Historically, this is a known phenomenon. Folks were suddenly for gun control when Black Panther activists decided to make use of their 2nd Amendment rights. More recently law enforcement still seems to hold that view:

Quote

“The FBI assesses it is very likely Black Identity Extremist (BIE) perceptions of police brutality against African Americans spurred an increase in premeditated, retaliatory lethal violence against law enforcement and will very likely serve as justification for such violence,” reads the report, marked for official use only and obtained by Foreign Policy.

[...]

The report, dated Aug. 3 — just nine days before the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville turned deadly — appears to be the first known reference to “black identity extremists” as a movement. But former government officials and legal experts said no such movement exists, and some expressed concern that the term is part of a politically motivated effort to find an equivalent threat to white supremacists.

Now, this is not just a note without consequences:

Quote

Balogun, who lost his home and more while incarcerated, is believed to be the first person targeted and prosecuted under a secretive US surveillance effort to track so-called “black identity extremists”. In a leaked August 2017 report from the FBI’s Domestic Terrorism Analysis Unit, officials claimed that there had been a “resurgence in ideologically motivated, violent criminal activity” stemming from African Americans’ “perceptions of police brutality”.

Balogun, who was working full-time for an IT company when he was arrested, has long been an activist, co-founding Guerrilla Mainframe and the Huey P Newton Gun Club, two groups fighting police brutality and advocating for the rights of black gun owners. Some of the work included coordinating meals for the homeless, youth picnics and self-defense classes – but that’s not what interested the FBI.

 

Investigators began monitoring Balogun, whose legal name is Christopher Daniels, after he participated in an Austin, Texas, rally in March 2015 protesting against law enforcement, special agent Aaron Keighley testified in court.

The FBI, Keighley said, learned of the protest from a video on Infowars, a far-right site run by the commentator Alex Jones, known for spreading false news and conspiracy theories.

The reference to Infowars stunned Balogun: “They’re using a conspiracy theorist video as a reason to justify their tyranny? That is a big insult.”

Keighley made no mention of Balogun’s specific actions at the rally, but noted the marchers’ anti-police statements, such as “oink oink bang bang” and “the only good pig is a pig that’s dead”. The agent also mentioned Balogun’s Facebook posts calling a murder suspect in a police officer’s death a “hero” and expressing “solidarity” with the man who killed officers in Texas when he posted: “They deserve what they got.”

Keighley, however, later admitted the FBI had no evidence of Balogun making any specific threats about harming police.

Quote

He’d been waiting in jail as federal attorneys tried, and failed, to prosecute him for terrorism and, when that case fell apart, illegal possession of firearms. Even that charge got dismissed by the judge.

His prosecution and time behind bars represented “tyranny at its finest,” Balogun told the Guardian.

Articles 1, 2 and 3. Strangely, the voices shouting for freedom of expression and the 2nd Amendment keep quiet for certain folks.

[Ten oz]

Even when listing every excuse he can think of the Texas Lt. Gov. refuses that guns themselves might part part of the problem. 

Quote

 

Patrick listed off a long list of reasons that led to Friday's shooting, including violent video games, the elimination of religion from public schools, abortion, the breakdown of families, unarmed teachers and the design of schools that includes too many entrances. But he stressed that guns were not to blame, explaining that they are "part of who we are as a nation."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/05/21/santa-fe-texas-high-school-shooting-guns/627865002/

 

 

[StringJunky]

47 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Even when listing every excuse he can think of the Texas Lt. Gov. refuses that guns themselves might part part of the problem. 

 

This comes to mind;

[Ten oz]

44 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

This comes to mind;

 

What comes to my mind is numerous expletives.  

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

This comes to mind;

Concern for profit knots up many issues in the US that should be public responsibility. Everything productive has to wait until someone/some corporation with a lot of money figures out how to insinuate themselves into the issue at the taxpayer expense, then lobby politicians while misleading the public to support their new investment opportunity. Human loss isn't considered over loss of profit.

Most Americans understand rationally that "Pour enough gasoline on the fire and you'll smother it" is a poor strategy. Guns and gun violence help fuel many extremist conservative/capitalist agendas wrt our justice system (largest in the world, folks, #1 with a bullet!). Our system withholds social aid to create criminals so we can justify spending that money instead to protect ourselves from them. The working class has a designer golf shoe on its throat, and the extremist wearing it is telling them to buy more guns, which historically results in growing our criminal culture.

[StringJunky]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

Concern for profit knots up many issues in the US that should be public responsibility. Everything productive has to wait until someone/some corporation with a lot of money figures out how to insinuate themselves into the issue at the taxpayer expense, then lobby politicians while misleading the public to support their new investment opportunity. Human loss isn't considered over loss of profit.

Most Americans understand rationally that "Pour enough gasoline on the fire and you'll smother it" is a poor strategy. Guns and gun violence help fuel many extremist conservative/capitalist agendas wrt our justice system (largest in the world, folks, #1 with a bullet!). Our system withholds social aid to create criminals so we can justify spending that money instead to protect ourselves from them. The working class has a designer golf shoe on its throat, and the extremist wearing it is telling them to buy more guns, which historically results in growing our criminal culture.

Nearly everything is affected by the potential job losses/profit losses of a restrictive directive.  The trouble with overt capitalism is that it encourages people to think they are little islands of autonomy with no collective sense of responsibility.

[Phi for All]

51 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Nearly everything is affected by the potential job losses/profit losses of a restrictive directive.  The trouble with overt capitalism is that it encourages people to think they are little islands of autonomy with no collective sense of responsibility.

So they end up more concerned someone may take their guns than take their lives with a gun. To me, this speaks of emotional manipulation.

Capitalism is awesome for growth. Whenever it's misapplied to something that should be carefully kept in check, it fails.

We could use a private solution for those who like to shoot guns. The market would love to set up hunting excursions where weapons are provided (and nobody owns a gun), and ranges where you can lease any gun you want. As long as those weapons are tightly controlled, the market for them can grow all it wants.

The hard sell is to those who want a gun for protection. I think the best way to convince them is figure out better insurance against armed break-ins, namely fewer guns on the streets overall (not more police and prisons). There are some great statistics that show how much more dangerous you make your house when you buy one for home protection (you reduce only the chances of armed assault in exchange for increasing the chances of several other lethal situations). Again, tough sell since men like macho more than smarts, on average.

I honestly don't know what to do about the gun owners that believe they stand ready to repel a betrayal from their own government. These are probably some of Trump's biggest supporters, yet they have no problem with any of the Russia allegations, despite being some of the most paranoid folks on the planet. These are also the 3% of Americans who own half the guns. Maybe we do nothing with them, but keep hinting that we MIGHT come for their guns someday. Get them to hunker down in their compounds and wait. As long as they're hoarding those weapons and firing at cutouts of FBI agents, they can pretend they're safe from the might of the US military.

[Ten oz]

Video was released of a many attempting to shoot a teenager who made the life threatening mistake of knocking on a door to ask for directions, Here. Fortunately the shooter was charged we'll have to wait and see if a jury will find him guilty. 

[DirtyChai]

19 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Video was released of a many attempting to shoot a teenager who made the life threatening mistake of knocking on a door to ask for directions, Here.

It's not looking good for this guy:

"taking the stand Tuesday was Detective Shawn Pace, who said during his investigation, his assessment of what had allegedly happened at the Zeigler house — a home invasion attempt — changed as he watched the surveillance video.

“When I saw that video, my thought process switched...I knew which direction I had to go. I was shocked,” Pace testified. After viewing it a second time, he said he was “charged up, because I was offended by what I had seen.”

 

After watching the video, I have to say that I share the detective's sentiment.  Makes you wonder what would've happened if the police didn't have the video. . .

 

Also, Zeigler (the defendant) apparently gave conflicting statements.  He denied ever taking aim, and that the gun fired after he slipped.  But Detective Pace told him that he did take aim.  Ac coring to Detective Pace, Zeigler then “took a big drink of water, looked at me and said, ‘I’m tired of being a victim.’  (Apparently there is a documented history of attempted burglaries and teenagers stealing his beer)

https://www.theoaklandpress.com/news/copscourts/jurors-view-video-of-rochester-hills-shooting-as-trial-continues/article_3f07f548-cca1-11e8-8e16-1b5ad08f57c5.html

 

Even more, this guy was already convicted of a gun crime back in 2004 during an apparent road rage shooting:

"Zeigler was initially charged with assault with a deadly weapon, a felony punishable by up to four years in prison and one count of discharge of a firearm from a motor vehicle, which can carry up to 10 years in prison."

Due to an apparent lack of physical evidence, "Judge John Chmura dismissed the assault with a deadly weapon charge but found Zeigler guilty of firing and aiming a weapon without malice or injury, a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail and fines."

"He was not jailed but sentenced to one year reporting probation and $609 in fines and costs."

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/oakland-county/2018/04/19/homeowner-charged-shooting-teen-prior-gun-conviction/34005391/

 

19 hours ago, Ten oz said:

we'll have to wait and see if a jury will find him guilty. 

Tho I know the selection of the jury pool is random, I'm not sure if it concentrates on a specific area or not, such as the county in which the alleged crime took place.

If in this case it's just Oakland County, then I know the most  populated area is the lower southeast quadrant of the county in the map below that also includes Rochester where the incident happened. 

This area  is the most affluent in Michigan, consisting of highly educated doctors, lawyers, professional athletes, Bob Seger, Eminem, etc.  This specific area tends to lean left and is most likely the reason that Oakland County is only but several counties in Michigan that didn't vote for Trump.  There are also majority concentrations of blacks in Southfield and Pontiac where the trial is being held.  Not sure if that had any affect the jury pool or not.  The rest of the county is more conservative/republican.

 

 

Personally, I know there have been many concerns about the rise of petty thefts in these areas, like breaking into cars and things of that nature, but you really don't expect something like this to happen there.

IMO the video looks really bad.  I didn't see it in your link,  but you can watch it below starting around the 35 second mark:
https://www.wxyz.com/news/region/oakland-county/surveillance-video-shown-in-court-of-man-accused-of-attacking-teenager

 

Edited October 12, 2018 by DirtyChai

[StringJunky]

15 minutes ago, DirtyChai said:

IMO the video looks really bad.  I didn't see it in your link,  but you can watch it below starting around the 35 second mark:
https://www.wxyz.com/news/region/oakland-county/surveillance-video-shown-in-court-of-man-accused-of-attacking-teenager

 

It looks like to me that he takes aim, then thinks differently, evidenced by lifting up the gun up before firing as a warning shot instead

Edited October 12, 2018 by StringJunky

[DirtyChai]

16 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

30 minutes ago, DirtyChai said:

IMO the video looks really bad.  I didn't see it in your link,  but you can watch it below starting around the 35 second mark:
https://www.wxyz.com/news/region/oakland-county/surveillance-video-shown-in-court-of-man-accused-of-attacking-teenager

 

It looks like to me that he takes aim, then thinks differently, evidenced by lifting up the gun up before firing as a warning shot instead

Ya, I can possibly see that.  The video looks like it was sped up for some reason which makes it look worse.  I guess the Jury will get to watch it in slow motion if they haven't already.

But let me ask you this.  Does it look like he may have possibly tried to hurry up and quickly get a shot off, but the safety was locked.  In his haste he fiddles briefly with the safety when the gun suddenly goes off?

 

Edited October 12, 2018 by DirtyChai

[StringJunky]

19 minutes ago, DirtyChai said:

Ya, I can possibly see that.  The video looks like it was sped up for some reason which makes it look worse.  I guess the Jury will get to watch it in slow motion if they haven't already.

But let me ask you this.  Does it look like he may have possibly tried to hurry up and quickly get a shot off, but the safety was locked.  In his haste he fiddles briefly with the safety when the gun suddenly goes off?

 

It doesn't look like that to me because he doesn't seem to take his eye off that lad at any point up to firing. If you pretend to hold a gun as though aiming it, the trigger mechanism/safety is obscured and I would expect to move the gun away to look,  thinking there was something wrong. My guess is no better than yours though.

Edited October 12, 2018 by StringJunky

[DirtyChai]

18 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

It doesn't look like that to me because he doesn't seem to take his eye off that lad at any point up to firing.

Actually, that crossed my mind as well.

However, a deputy sheriff did testify that Zeigler "played around with the safety."

Up to the jury to decide.

Edit:

If there are any jurors with gun experience, they know it's not necessary to take your eye off the target to disengage the safety.  It's very close to the trigger and almost second nature to click it off when you're engaged in an abrupt situation.

Edited October 12, 2018 by DirtyChai

[StringJunky]

10 minutes ago, DirtyChai said:

 

If there are any jurors with gun experience, they know it's not necessary to take your eye off the target to disengage the safety.  It's very close to the trigger and almost second nature to click it off when you're engaged in an abrupt situation.

This is true, but if you are angry and flustered, things can cause you to do things in the wrong order.

[MigL]

If I was a mailman in that area I'd be asking for danger pay.

Shouldn't matter where the jury comes from, or where the trial is held.
This kind of behaviour should offend/disgust anyone.

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

It looks like to me that he takes aim, then thinks differently, evidenced by lifting up the gun up before firing as a warning shot instead

Why shoot at all? The kid clearly saw the rifle, was running away, and had not appeared to be doing anything suspicious prior to that point. 

[CharonY]

3 hours ago, StringJunky said:

firing as a warning shot instead

Well, his claim was that was a misfire. But even then (and I understand that parts of the USA have really silly laws in that respect), a warning shot after someone (a kid no less) who is running away? What would the warning be that is not already conveyed by a guy running after you with a shotgun?

2 hours ago, MigL said:

Shouldn't matter where the jury comes from, or where the trial is held.
This kind of behaviour should offend/disgust anyone.

agreed.

[StringJunky]

2 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Well, his claim was that was a misfire. But even then (and I understand that parts of the USA have really silly laws in that respect), a warning shot after someone (a kid no less) who is running away? What would the warning be that is not already conveyed by a guy running after you with a shotgun?

agreed.

I was just saying what it looks like to me.

[CharonY]

11 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

I was just saying what it looks like to me.

Sure, I just wanted to note that it should not have any bearing on the trial itself, based on the defendant's claim.