Guns

[999]

The Genocide Chart (from Jews For the Preservation of Firearms Ownership)
http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/deathgc.htm

"Hatred + Government + Disarmed Civilians = Genocide"

[Yorkshire pud]

 
So this:

A notable gun control article in Newsweek's online arm, The Daily Beast, by the polymath David Mamet, whose stunning work as playwright/author/screenwriter/director/actor

(I would question if that makes him a true polymath, considering it's all arts based achievements, but no matter...)

Who you feel shows signs of this:

To me he's such an incredible downer of a guy, with a horrible view of humanity and a depressive personality. He seems so hopeless and negative. Still I enjoy a good portion of his creations. I just can't take too many at one time.

Is in a psychologically sound frame of mind to make a measured and reasoned statement such as this?:

Captioning the article title is this line: "The individual is not only best qualified to provide his own personal defense, he is the only one qualified to do so." Perfect.

Interesting; Incidentally, it's not uncommon for proponents of the arts to be troubled, have bouts of depression, paranoia, insecurity, manic depression and even thoughts of suicide. Let us hope he doesn't find himself in a position of significant influence, or indeed holding a firearm when he's having an 'off day'. 

[Yorkshire pud]

Obama is a Commie. I can't put it any better then that.

Elucidate what you think a 'commie' is please.

[Yorkshire pud]

  That's for sure. The second sentence, that is.

?

Beautiful! 

[Eddie Coyle]

Interesting; Incidentally, it's not uncommon for proponents of the arts to be troubled, have bouts of depression, paranoia, insecurity, manic depression and even thoughts of suicide. Let us hope he doesn't find himself in a position of significant influence, or indeed holding a firearm when he's having an 'off day'.

Mamet strikes me as one who will dissertate about guns, but I'm skeptical of his ever handling one. Another dramaturge who has positioned himself into an advocate for public policy. I don't care for people whose livings are based upon "make believe" entering discussions were doses of reality are required.

[3OctaveFart]

I know he's a great talent, but I don't think this is a very good piece.

Mamet's a rich cynic.

So's Donald Trump.

[MV/Liberace!]

I know he's a great talent, but I don't think this is a very good piece.

Mamet's a rich cynic.

So's Donald Trump.

even after all of these months, i still sometimes chuckle when i see your display name.

[3OctaveFart]

Thanks, boss. I would like to start hanging out here more often.

Not saying I endorse this, but Mamet's piece has been fisked at Salon.

www.salon.com/2013/01/29/david_mamet_should_stick_to_writing_plays/

[Sardondi]

Thanks, boss. I would like to start hanging out here more often.

Not saying I endorse this, but Mamet's piece has been fisked at Salon.

www.salon.com/2013/01/29/david_mamet_should_stick_to_writing_plays/

Heh. They loved Mamet when they thought he was just a foul-mouthed materialist. But he has deviated from The Prime Narrative, and must be be seen to pay a price.

[Ruteger]

MOLON LABE. Yeah, you may kill me, but I will not comply. The Founding Fathers stand with me. I will empty my loaded magazines into your sorry asses before I die.

[Yorkshire pud]

MOLON LABE. Yeah, you may kill me, but I will not comply. The Founding Fathers stand with me. I will empty my loaded magazines into your sorry asses before I die.

Poetry....it's (sniff) sheer poetry...(blows nose)....

I do love the bit about not complying if you're killed...is this the secret of immortality? 

[Pragmier]

Here's my proposal. If you have this look in your eyes you shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a gun.

[Eddie Coyle]

Here's my proposal. If you have this look in your eyes you shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a gun.

         One exception, only if the gun near him is being held/used by someone else...on him.

[Pragmier]

ATF grants license to 3D gun printer


A related article on Wired.com calls it a 'terrible technology for making guns'


http://defensedistributed.com/


Interesting stuff - wasn't sure where to post but would like to stick to the tech aspects.

[Juan]

I've been reading about a company that has made clips for rifles using 3d printing.  They have been very successful in tests.

[Yorkshire pud]

ATF grants license to 3D gun printer


A related article on Wired.com calls it a 'terrible technology for making guns'


http://defensedistributed.com/


Interesting stuff - wasn't sure where to post but would like to stick to the tech aspects.

More like a highly innovative technology making something terrible.. The technology isn't the problem; the wish to make something to kill people is.

[stevesh]

More like a highly innovative technology making something terrible.. The technology isn't the problem; the wish to make something to kill people is.

Correct. In other words, guns don't kill people, people kill people.

[Sardondi]

More like a highly innovative technology making something terrible.. The technology isn't the problem; the wish to make something to kill people is.

I agree totally.

[Yorkshire pud]

Correct. In other words, guns don't kill people, people kill people.

But far easier with a gun than a 3d printer...although dropping the latter on someones head from a few floors up would ruin their day. If guns don't kill people, explain how 12000 humans are murdered in the US last year using guns? You think that figure would be the same if pitchforks or batons had been the weapon of choice? It still doesn't explain why anyone would wish to make a gun from a 3d printer. "Because we can"?

[onan]

First, unless there is some process to 3d printing I am unaware of, I am not sure I would want that kind of a fire arm. If the 3d printing is for a frame or stock... I would be fine. but a chamber or barrel... not a chance.


But to the question of why. Many gun enthusiasts want a "special" weapon for hunting. There are many that want to squeeze all the performance they can from a certain powder and a certain bullet.


Check out the science on long distance shooting... you practically have to be a physics major. Does that bother some people's sensibility? I am sure it does. That being said a vast majority of fire arm deaths do not come from rifles. And even fewer from high end rifles and even fewer from custom weapons.

[Pragmier]

Technology again outpacing the legal system maybe. I mean, once production improves, how do you control a felon with this capability? Will citizens in places like the UK have access to guns via these printers?

[Yorkshire pud]

Check out the science on long distance shooting... you practically have to be a physics major. Does that bother some people's sensibility? I am sure it does. That being said a vast majority of fire arm deaths do not come from rifles. And even fewer from high end rifles and even fewer from custom weapons.

I have an acquaintance who was a sniper rifleman. He told me a bit about that (and I've also seen dramatisations that are apparently factually accurate) and the use of programs to compute target distance, trajectory, velocity, wind sheer, air pressure etc..pretty deep stuff.

[Juan]

If guns don't kill people, explain how 12000 humans are murdered in the US last year using guns?

I think the word is homicide, not murder.  Many of the deaths are criminals shooting one another, police shooting criminals, and even a few citizens defending themselves from criminals.  There are more suicides than murders, and those are counted as homicides, too.

It's my understanding that in the UK, you can't defend yourself with a knife or a club, either.  Is that true?  If so, what will you do when the EU comes for your wallet?

[onan]

The image shows the total population of the US. The blue circle is the number of mentally ill. The three smaller circles break down deaths by type. Inside those red circles are the ratio of deaths by guns. I do not believe homicides and suicides are lumped together in this country.

http://www.davidcolarusso.com/deaths/#.UUj3kpnD9fw

[Pragmier]

From Defensedistributed's website:

This project might change the way we think about gun control and consumption. How do governments behave if they must one day operate on the assumption that any and every citizen has near instant access to a firearm through the Internet? Let’s find out.

And how would gun manufacturers behave with a potential encroachment on profits?

[Yorkshire pud]

I think the word is homicide, not murder.  Many of the deaths are criminals shooting one another, police shooting criminals, and even a few citizens defending themselves from criminals.  There are more suicides than murders, and those are counted as homicides, too.

In order: murder is the unlawful pre-meditated decision to kill. (That can be 20 seconds or two years)..Accidental death or causing death (for example) when driving a vehicle can be charged as manslaughter in certain circumstances*; and frequently in a court case both charges (murder and manslaughter-I think in the US it's called 2nd degree murder) will be on the sheet, so the prosecution have the option of falling back on manslaughter if the defendant is acquitted of murder. Suicide here is called suicide and not (thankfully) treated as a crime in itself..Of course it puts a different complexion on things if the suicide is preceded with the killing of others.


  In the UK the police are governed by protocols for the deployment of armed officers. We have dedicated armed response units, and something called SCO 19; which is the specialist firearms command. They deal with things like sieges, terrorist attacks, hostage taking, and support for non armed officers in the cases of drug den raids etc. It's worth mentioning that the police have successively voted over the years to not be universally armed. The armed units are trained to an exceptionally high standard, and have adopted many of the practices, equipment and body armour used by special forces. Not every officer who applies is selected, and they go through psychology testing as well as of course ability to shoot accurately (at the right target!) under extreme duress. Even at the end of all that, every single incident involving firearms that results in the death or injury (and it's seldom injury, they never shoot to wound) results in the Independent police complaints commission investigating it. They have the power to bring prosecutions if they feel the police officer in question shot someone (or even fired the weapon) unlawfully.

It's my understanding that in the UK, you can't defend yourself with a knife or a club, either.  Is that true?

Not so; you can defend yourself using reasonable force up to and including the resulting death of the person you feel might put you or your family in peril. In fact a guy recently did just that over near Manchester and killed a burglar (one of two), and although the police went through the process of arresting him, he was released without charge.


The 'reasonable force' has been open to contention but was recently re clarified by judges and the Director of public prosecutions; It essentially means if you feel at the time you need to break his legs, nose or run and sit on him that results in his ribs bursting through his lungs and killing him, then so be it. If you're a farmer and use a shotgun, again, if you feel that you or your family is in peril, then as long as you can give justified reason to shoot him, you'll be viewed sympathetically. However if the guy is running away and you shoot him in the back, it won't be a good day for you.

If so, what will you do when the EU comes for your wallet?

Why would they do that? We don't use the Euro as our currency in the UK is the pound sterling. Cyprus parliament has just voted against the proposal to steal 10% of their deposits' in the banks..However it now means their prime minister has to go to Putin and plead for a deferral on the billions that Russia has loaned them..time will tell how that plays out. Either way, it's not looking good for the Euro using member states; with the exception perhaps (but not certain) of Germany and France. 


* There is the charge of causing death by dangerous driving. Which can include but not exclusive to alcohol/drugs, including prescription medication being involved. There is also death by misadventure; so for example you may be mountain climbing with your buddy, but because the rope snags it causes a successive but catastrophic series of events and he falls to his death. It's no-ones fault, but it's still a death that wasn't natural.

[Juan]

Onan, that's an interesting chart.  It puts in perspective the low number of deaths compared to the population as a whole.  It reminds me of the Russian who was a prisoner of the Nazis along with my father.  The Russian knew all about how many cars were stolen in the US, but could not believe that it was a very small number compared to the number of cars as a whole.  Compared to the number of cars in Russia, it was a huge number.

Pulling out my old Ballentine's law dictionary, something I should do before shooting off at the fingers, I see that homicide is the killing of a human being under any circumstances by the act, agency, or omission of another. I still believe that large "murder" numbers are actually homicides, based on my many years of dealing with reporters who can't understand the difference.

Yorkie, it sounds like the reasonable force principal is in the same state as in the US - indefinite - though some states have tried to codify it more closely. And as for murder, most murder prosecutions are at the state level, and some states use the old degree system, while others have adopted the more modern definition system.

The wallet comment was a joke.  Your country was thoroughly excoriated by the elitists in this country for your expression of nationalism and jingoism in failing to adopt the Euro.  I always thought you'd be idiots to give up the pound sterling.

[Insanity]

But far easier with a gun than a 3d printer...although dropping the latter on someones head from a few floors up would ruin their day. If guns don't kill people, explain how 12000 humans are murdered in the US last year using guns? You think that figure would be the same if pitchforks or batons had been the weapon of choice? It still doesn't explain why anyone would wish to make a gun from a 3d printer. "Because we can"?

You can be killed by someone who is unarmed, do we start chopping off peoples hand's at birth?

The problem isnt the object used to kill people, it's the fact that someone wants to kill people in the first place.
It seems killing each other is the only thing humans are good at. We might have a future as the universes mercerarys.

[Yorkshire pud]

The wallet comment was a joke.  Your country was thoroughly excoriated by the elitists in this country for your expression of nationalism and jingoism in failing to adopt the Euro.  I always thought you'd be idiots to give up the pound sterling.

If it were that simple! Buckle up:


Unlike your political system that is mainly Republicans and Democrats as your choice, we have two and half main parties and several much smaller ones..The amount of representation in Parliament isn't reflected by the proportion of the electorate who voted the sitting members..Like many such methods it works on first pass the post. England and Wales (Scotland has it's own assembly that has some administrative differences and powers, as does Wales to a lesser degree-but I digress) is divided into constituencies..In larger cities there may be more than one. Okay..so you have an election (national or local if the incumbent has died or retired or jailed!) called by the non partisan official who presides  he/she is called the returning officer.  You could have a dozen separate candidates representing a dozen different political parties who are seconded and stand..They pay a deposit (A few hundred dollars) that pays for their share of the administration. Up til the day of the date of the election (always on a thursday, I have no idea why, but it's tradition) the candidates and their little helpers go around knocking on doors and being royal pains in the ass trying to garner support..


On the day some of the election go to the polling stations where they put a cross next to the name on the list and put the slip in a sealed box. So far so good, and familiar to many.


Problem: In some places, apathy rules okay, and 20% or fewer actually get off their fat butts and bother to vote. But it matters not..the candidate who has the most votes (It can be as little as one more) is declared the winner and therefore the elected member of parliament. An electorate of 60 000 can therefore have a member in parliament speaking on their behalf who had as few as a 2000 actually vote them in.. Proportionally representing the population it does not. There are (and have been for years) arguments for and against proportional representation as practiced in many European countries. Where the parliament is represented by the proportion of the electorate, so if you secured 20% of the total vote, you get 20% of the seats. It does lead to factions and alliances forming with kindred members to get legislation passed of course, but could be argued it's at least more democratic..


We have one or two political parties who want us to get out of the European Union in entirety; trade and commerce agreements would be condemned to the history books. Their support is growing too. There is one called UKIP, whose leader is a member of the European parliament elected specifically to go on his mission to eradicate it!! Yes really! What they really want and are pressing for (other than curbs on immigration) is too let the British people have a vote on our future membership of the EU..They're gaining ground so much that the other main parties are taking heed, and now taking them seriously (if they don't it costs votes, right?)..Blair wouldn't, Brown wouldn't, and Cameron now is resisting the call for the referendum, but it won't last long, because the ground swell of public opinion is driving it and the continued popularity of UKIP.


So it isn't nationalism so much as that Blair wouldn't (because he knew he'd lose-he wanted the Euro as our currency), have a referendum  Cameron won't yet because he's hedging his bets. We essentially haven't had a vote one way or the other. Ireland had two referendums  because the first one voted NO (can you believe that?)..European commissionaires sucked on their teeth and instructed a new referendum until they got the right answer...and they did..Now if that isn't corrupt, I don't what is.  As I've said elsewhere, I'm very anti EU and the motivation, corruption and nastiness behind it.

[Yorkshire pud]

You can be killed by someone who is unarmed, do we start chopping off peoples hand's at birth?

Theoretically yes you can be killed by bare hands.. But as it's such a ludicrous and facile argument to justify several thousand being killed in the US each year with firearms it isn't worth addressing.

The problem isnt the object used to kill people, it's the fact that someone wants to kill people in the first place.
It seems killing each other is the only thing humans are good at. We might have a future as the universes mercerarys.

The object is fundamental..did you know that someone armed is more likely (nearly four and half times more likely) to be shot, than someone who isn't. I know a ball point can can be used to kill if so desired, but the fact remains a round is far more likely to kill either intentionally or due to a negligent discharge than if you were carrying a broom.  Humans I agree are good at self destruction, and very stupid at doing anything to prevent it.