0
jfields

Ballistic "Fingerprinting"

Recommended Posts

You are missing one thing in all your points. It is already against the law for felons to aquire guns of any kind. So, if that law doesn't stop them from getting guns, why would another law do it?

This is where the question of outlawing every gun comes in. If there are already laws against it, and they don't work, why would these? But, if your goal is total banning, and there is a register holding the names of all the gun owners [as would be accomplished by this plan] then confiscating the guns is that much easier. Every gun-control group has at one time or another said their final goal s the confiscation of all guns. Period.

And as a by-the-by, the FOP is AGAINST ballistic fingerprinting.
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Take away a gun, and you take away the best way to keep yourself
>safe.

As Bill said in different words, the best way to keep yourself safe is to use your head, not a gun.

I'd go so far as to say that a gun instills a false sense of confidence and a measure of bravado that is as likely to get a person killed as save them in a confrontation scenario. That isn't statistically based, just my opinion.

Quote

Exactly. And guns in the hands of thugs scare the bejeezus out of law abiding citizens.



The line between law abiding citizens and "thugs" is also nowhere near as clear as these types of statements imply. A scared, enraged or careless law abiding citizens is a trigger pull away from being a criminal and therefore a "thug". Some people have iron-clad control of their emotions and would never use a firearm without sound reason. While being "good people", others are not so self controlled. Where they might scream, fume and maybe throw a punch, posession of a handgun in the same circumstance could leave them in the position of having committed a crime.

The idea that the good and bad are clearly divided by some uncrossible moral line is false. Providing easy access to firearm for law-abiding citizens does not insure that they are not used by that individual in a crime. At that point, it is a little late for the victim, and the advocates of firearm ownership dissavow that circumstance, because the person that did the shooting was "a criminal".

The biggest frustration I have with the entire gun control debate is the subterfuge and evasion. Rather than hiding behind the second amendment, comparisons to China and debateable or irrelevant statstics, try calmly and rationally discussing the issues. I've seen a remarkable avoidance of sensible dialogue. As I said way earlier in the thread, I think it has a lot to do with the "slippery slope scenario". The thought of any restriction, no matter how logical, brings up the hackles of gun owners and puts them into a defensive posture that allows no compromise. This very stubborness fuels the paranoid folks on the other side of the issue. I'm somewhere in the middle, but I have to give the hard-headeness award to the pro-gun lobby. By continuing to back themselves into an "all-or-nothing" corner, diehard gun advocates are in denial about the societal changes that are leaving them farther and farther in the minority. I'm not in that camp, but as a pretty moderate gun control supporter, I see compromise as their best plan.

(Bill, not directed at you. Just replying to your post.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Trouble is that every single felon started out as a law abiding citizen. It only takes a fraction of a second to transform.



NO! It takes criminal intent. And when you start trying to legislate that, you lose. Taking away the means to commit a crime means putting every one in a cage. Speeding and traffic accidents a problem? Ban cars! Drownings and falls a problem? Ban bathtubs!

If it's already illegal, and criminals still do it, another law won't stop them from doing it.

yeah, breakin da law, breakin da law! oh shit, they made it MORE illegal? damn, I better just stop now!

Why do I doubt that will happen?
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>>does the murder rate in Houston or Dallas compare with that in London, Ottawa or Sydney? They are all large cities with an English speaking population that share a similar culture in most respects?
Actually, they don't. The US has a much less homogeneous population than those other countries,



Wrong! Canada is just as diverse than the USA, and London is more diverse than the US average, yet both have a lower homicide rate than the US average.




Quote


and as much as we (and some other countries) celebrate our diversity, I remember from poli sci class in college (impossible to quote source, and I recognize that makes it impossible to evaluate and/or refute, but it does kind of make sense) that both property crimes and violent crimes tend to be positively correlated to diverstiy of population across countries (i.e., the US is not an anomaly) despite the fact that both property crimes and violent crimes are likely to have perpetrators of the same ethnicity. There was a name for this effect, but the test was over 10 years ago, and I have forgotten it.



Convenient lapse of memory!

I wonder why it is that England and the USA have almost identical rates of violent crime in all categories but one - homicide (Source, US DOJ). Only in homicide is the USA 400% ahead. How does that fit with your diversity theory?

Once again, how does the homicide rate in Houston and Dallas compare with London's or Ottawa's? According to the CCW theory, London should be far more dangerous. I wonder why no-one will answer such a simple question
:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right, using your head is the answer. And your head doesn't solve much without the use of one tool or another. But, like the man said, "God created man, Mr. Colt made us equal."

JF, do you really have so little faith in humanity as a whole?
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Trouble is that every single felon started out as a law abiding citizen. It
only takes a fraction of a second to transform.



NO! It takes criminal intent. And when you start trying to legislate that, you
lose. Taking away the means to commit a crime means putting every one in
a cage. Speeding and traffic accidents a problem? Ban cars! Drownings and
falls a problem? Ban bathtubs!



It may take criminal intent, but it may just take carelessness or fear or poor judgement. In January 1998 I was assaulted (technically it was battery) by a guy (non felon until that instant) who totally lost his cool. I'm convinced that had he had a gun, he would have shot me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

JF, do you really have so little faith in humanity as a whole?



I have little faith in the saying, "Might makes right". Because someone is bigger or better armed than I am does not make them right. Empowering this mentality is a step backwards in our development as a race. And by that I don't mean color, nationality or religion. I mean the human race.

As for faith in people, I have a lot, but I also understand human nature. Good people make mistakes. I have not lived a perfect life, nor has anyone in this forum. Given that some number of people will make their mistakes with firearms at the expense of other people's lives, I do not see the point in encouraging this behavior by promoting gun ownership.

As for faith in human humanity, I'm not the one walking around prepared to take another human life. I am not walking around with the belief that my judgement is so flawless that I may be cavalier in determining whether another person may live or die. I believe I have evolved from the apes to use the power of my brain, not the speed of my index finger on a trigger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Or if you'd had a gun maybe he wouldn't have assaulted you. You're missing a point, though. You called his mom a whore, ran over his dog, looked at him cross-eyed, whatever. Whatever caused him to do it, he had criminal intent. And the second he had that, no law in the world would have stopped him. [I think if he would have shot you then he would killed you some other way. A gun is just the tool]

The point stands that the more you take responsibility away from people, the more irresponsible they act.
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I have little faith in the saying, "Might makes right". Because someone is bigger or better armed than I am does not make them right.



But that's just it. Unless someone stops them, the stronger person DOES win. Homicidals don't care about your moral high ground. The point to gun ownership is that you hold in you the ability to stop them.

Quote

Given that some number of people will make their mistakes with firearms at the expense of other people's lives, I do not see the point in encouraging this behavior by promoting gun ownership.



"Given that some number of people will make their mistakes with cars at the expense of other people's lives, I do not see the point in encouraging this behavior by promoting car ownership."
or how about
"Given that some number of people will make their mistakes with skydiving at the expense of other people's lives, I do not see the point in encouraging this behavior by promoting skydiving."

Now you see my problem with your logic on that one?

Quote

As for faith in human humanity, I'm not the one walking around prepared to take another human life. I am not walking around with the belief that my judgement is so flawless that I may be cavalier in determining whether another person may live or die. I believe I have evolved from the apes to use the power of my brain, not the speed of my index finger on a trigger.



First, let me say I am a bit insulted if this is your opinion of me. I am not prepared to take a life, unless that life threatens mine or my family.
If you think I could kill someone in a cavalier way, you have not been listening to me. You hold your beliefs, and I hold mine. I don't force mine on you, why would you force yours on me?

You sir, are no gentleman.
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Now you see my problem with your logic on that one?



No. Neither cars nor skydiving equipment are made with the primary function of ending human life. I don't see that the analogy holds up.

Quote

First, let me say I am a bit insulted if this is your opinion of me. I am not prepared to take a life



If you aren't prepared to take a life, there is no reason to own a firearm for self defense, which you must know, as you continue to say,

Quote

unless that life threatens mine or my family.



That clause depends on your judgement, which might disagree with my judgement. But if you use a gun as an extension of your judgement, which is not infallible, you risk killing an innocent person. To carry a weapon and be prepared to use it under ANY circumstance acknowledges this risk. It is a risk I am not willing to take with another person's life.

Quote

If you think I could kill someone in a cavalier way, you have not been listening to me.



You may not. Others may. As Kallend said, people can cross the line for the briefest second, just once, and an innocent person is dead, and a law-abiding citizen is now a criminal.

Quote

You hold your beliefs, and I hold mine. I don't force mine on you, why would you force yours on me?



I don't see that I am forcing my opinions any more than you are in the other direction. I think I'm actually being pretty moderate. I'm not for a uniform ban on all firearms. I've not said some people ought not be allowed to carry them. I just don't see the correlations that Firearms=Freedom or Firearms=Safety.

Quote

You sir, are no gentleman.



Needless to say, I disagree. Hopefully, you don't feel strongly enough about it to shoot me. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>You are missing one thing in all your points. It is already against the
> law for felons to aquire guns of any kind. So, if that law doesn't stop
> them from getting guns, why would another law do it?

It would not stop them at all. It would just make it more difficult. If color TV's were outlawed, fewer burglars would be able to find color TV's in homes, trucks or stores to steal. This does not, of course, mean we should outlaw color TV's, it's just a fact of life that they're easier to steal when they're all over the place. Similarly, it is simply a fact of life that if fewer guns are available, fewer will be available to be stolen/illegally purchased.

>This is where the question of outlawing every gun comes in.

No one has raised that question.

> But, if your goal is total banning, and there is a register holding the
> names of all the gun owners [as would be accomplished by this
> plan] then confiscating the guns is that much easier.

Of course. And if getting rid of all SUV's is the goal, then registering your car would make it easier for the government to take your SUV. This is not really a valid argument to make in opposition to mandatory registration of vehicles in the US.

>Every gun-control group has at one time or another said their final
>goal s the confiscation of all guns. Period.

I am pro-gun control when it comes to ballistic fingerprinting, and my goal is to allow safer usage of guns, not outlawing. I do not believe that all groups interested in gun safety are anti-gun, nor do I believe that the people who matter (i.e. the people running our government) are anti-gun. The governors of both Maryland and Virginia have come out both for better gun controls and for continued private ownership of guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Whatever caused him to do it, he had criminal intent.

You are mixing up definitions. If you kill someone with a gun and do so as a result of a scuffle rising from being insulted, such death is often classified as manslaugter. Manslaughter is killing without malice or premeditation; in other words, without criminal intent. He swung at you; you feared injury or his getting control of your gun and killing you; you shot him in an instantaneous decision to prevent that injury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>The line between law abiding citizens and "thugs" is also nowhere
> near as clear as these types of statements imply. A scared, enraged
> or careless law abiding citizens is a trigger pull away from being a
> criminal and therefore a "thug".

While I agree with the first statement, you just contradicted yourself. In the case above, the line is very clear, and is crossed when you pull that trigger.

>Some people have iron-clad control of their emotions and would
> never use a firearm without sound reason. While being "good
> people", others are not so self controlled.

True. However, I know some very good people who simply cannot avoid driving drunk. One is now in jail; others have lost their licenses. It would be a mistake, I think, to engage in a wider ban on driving to try to keep these people off the roads.

Who is best suited to decide who can drive and who can't, who can use a gun and who can't? The user. If they err in their decision, and they drive drunk or get drunk and try to shoot their neighbor in a scuffle, then that right to choose gets taken away from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Better than one saying "I'm not armed, so please don't beat/mug/rape/murder me. Thank you."

Concealed means hidden from sight, not visible to the naked eye. So it'd kind of pointless, don't you think?

Besides, Most places passed CCW laws to prevent public concern/panic, so don't assume most people carry concealed because they prefer it.

Oh, and just to say thanks, I've finally picked up a signature due to this thread.
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Or if you'd had a gun maybe he wouldn't have assaulted you.
--

So do you wear a sign on your head saying "Caution, concealed weapon on board"?




In every state that has CCW, branishing a weapon is ILLEGAL. That means you can't flash your weapon, you can't even say "Hey, asshole, back off or you'll be shot" if you do that, you're going to jail for a deal of time and getting your CCW taken away from you.
--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>>I wonder why it is that England and the USA have almost identical rates of violent crime in all categories but one - homicide (Source, US DOJ). Only in homicide is the USA 400% ahead. How does that fit with your diversity theory?

Once again, how does the homicide rate in Houston and Dallas compare with London's or Ottawa's? According to the CCW theory, London should be far more dangerous. I wonder why no-one will answer such a simple question
<<
My point is that there is and has been an unfortunate difference between Americans and folks of other backgrounds for a long time now - we kill each other more than they do. And we have for a long time. We just have a more violent culture.

The reason that the US has a higher homicide rate than other countries is that we kill each other more often than they do.

If you tell me that London and Ottawa have lower homicide rates than certain cities in the US, then I'll believe you. I just don't think that making it more difficult for me to defend myself will make you or I any safer.

BMcD...

----------------------------------
www.jumpelvis.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"As Bill said in different words, the best way to keep yourself safe is to use your head, not a gun."
.......................................................
I don't think this is what Bill was refering to. In fact I'll bet that if you checked Bill's house there would be more than one gun that could be used for home defense purposes. Why? Because it is the smart thing to do.

Try telling a policeman who walks a dangerous beat that he doesn't need a gun. Maybe you trust the government to protect you. I don't. During the L.A. riots my brother found out quickly that there was noone available to help him. The first thing he did was buy a gun.

Here in Eastern Montana it would take around an hour for the police to show up to many remote ranch houses. Think what could happen in that hour. Recently a farmer returned home to find a burglar ransacking his house. By the time our local cop showed up, the farmer had him hog tied in the front room. How was he able to do this? It was because he had a gun and some rope and knew how to use both. Every day people defend their lives and property with a gun. Seldom does it make the news though. Usually all you hear about is about drive by shootings or domestic disputes where someone kills another with an evil gun. A lot of criminals are kept from breaking and entering because they know someone in that home has a gun and knows how to use it. Maybe you live in a nice safe place where the police can save you in time. Not everyone is that fortunate. I'm not going to put my family in harms way and hope they will remain safe. As Bill said I'm going to use my head. Steve1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Or if you'd had a gun maybe he wouldn't have assaulted you.
--

So do you wear a sign on your head saying "Caution, concealed weapon on board"?




In every state that has CCW, branishing a weapon is ILLEGAL. That means you can't flash your weapon, you can't even say "Hey, asshole, back off or you'll be shot" if you do that, you're going to jail for a deal of time and getting your CCW taken away from you.




In which case, please explain the logic that carrying a concealed gun might have saved me from the assault. I must be missing something here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



"As Bill said in different words, the best way to keep yourself safe is to use your head, not a gun."
.......................................................
I don't think this is what Bill was refering to. In fact I'll bet that if you checked Bill's house there would be more than one gun that could be used for home defense purposes. Why? Because it is the smart thing to do.

Try telling a policeman who walks a dangerous beat that he doesn't need a gun. Maybe you trust the government to protect you. I don't. During the L.A. riots my brother found out quickly that there was noone available to help him. The first thing he did was buy a gun.

Here in Eastern Montana it would take around an hour for the police to show up to many remote ranch houses. Think what could happen in that hour. Recently a farmer returned home to find a burglar ransacking his house. By the time our local cop showed up, the farmer had him hog tied in the front room. How was he able to do this? It was because he had a gun and some rope and knew how to use both. Every day people defend their lives and property with a gun. Seldom does it make the news though. Usually all you hear about is about drive by shootings or domestic disputes where someone kills another with an evil gun. A lot of criminals are kept from breaking and entering because they know someone in that home has a gun and knows how to use it. Maybe you live in a nice safe place where the police can save you in time. Not everyone is that fortunate. I'm not going to put my family in harms way and hope they will remain safe. As Bill said I'm going to use my head. Steve1



From 1978 to 1981 I lived on the south side of Chicago (31st and State for those familiar with the area). I still work there. By any measure this is considered one of the worst neighborhoods in the USA - absolutely no comparison to any part of Montana. I manage to go about my daily life unarmed and without fear, and by "using our heads" neither I nor my family have ever felt threatened in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

In every state that has CCW, branishing a weapon is ILLEGAL. That means you can't flash your weapon, you can't even say "Hey, asshole, back off or you'll be shot" if you do that, you're going to jail for a deal of time and getting your CCW taken away from you.


In which case, please explain the logic that carrying a concealed gun might have saved me from the assault. I must be missing something here.



You are missing two somethings. First, the possibility that citizens are armed deters criminals [shown by countless studies; criminals go from AZ to CA, not vice versa].

Second, if you had been carrying in your particular case, and you feared for you life [as you stated you did] then you could have drawn. You may even have gotten away with only pointing it at him. That'll stop lots. If that didn't stop him, you'd have been in a position to defend yourself.
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

From 1978 to 1981 I lived on the south side of Chicago (31st and State for those familiar with the area). I still work there. By any measure this is considered one of the worst neighborhoods in the USA - absolutely no comparison to any part of Montana. I manage to go about my daily life unarmed and without fear, and by "using our heads" neither I nor my family have ever felt threatened in any way.



It's one of the worst neighborhood sin Chicago and you've never felt threatened? You walk around without fear? Boy, you're brave. Or stupid.

"Well, gee, I live in a dangerous neighborhood, but I've never been attacked, just lots of others. But I'm not those others, so I have nothing to worry about." Is THAT your mentality?

How bad can a neighborhood be that you go about your business not worrying about where you are? I can walk around a friends acres-wide property where nothing has ever happened but still be constantly aware that it could.
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

As I've said before, if protecting your family is a priority, it is a lot smarter to not put them in harm's way than put them in harm's way and then buy a gun.



But that's where the firearms=freedom issue jfields brought up comes in. People may choose to defend their family however they decide is best.

I choose [will choose] to have a firearm, or firearms that I might avail myself to should SOMEONE ELSE 'put my family in harm's way.'

This is where others infringe on my freedom. I am free to defend "life liberty and [my] pusuit of happiness." You can decide whether guns are right for you. You may NOT decide whether or not they are right for me. That's MY choice.
witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Quote


From 1978 to 1981 I lived on the south side of Chicago ... I manage to go about my daily life unarmed and without fear, and by "using our heads" neither I nor my family have ever felt threatened in any way.


It's one of the worst neighborhood sin Chicago and you've never felt threatened? You walk around without fear? Boy, you're brave. Or stupid.
I think just different. I lived in Rio de Janeiro in high school, and have lived and worked in several less-desirable parts of Houston since then. I've never been particularly scared, and never really let it affect what I wanted to do. I don't really speak for Kallend, but I know what worked for me. I just don't think that being armed to the teeth is the only way to deal with the uncertainties of urban life. I'm not stupid, and probably not particularly brave in the sense you're thinking of either. Wendy W.
There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0