Smart Guns?

[alpenwasser]

Are you seriously going sit there and say that in the case of say a revolution takes place in the USA (for example) that 100% of the military will stand on the governments side? I am not attempting to be aggressive here.

 

I can tell you from experience that most soldiers (and also there were some polls taken but I cannot link them unfortunately) that show that 85-93% of US soldiers would not be willing to open fire or march on US citizens if the US Government decided to take a stance to remove the 2nd amendment from the constitution and a civil war scenario broke out because of it. Pretty hard to fight an army if the army is on your side. As for the statistic from my mentioned poll the lowest number of the questions was 74% and heist was 93% refusal to stand against the people.

 

just sayin.

Nope, that's not what I'm saying. Looking at events in Ukraine, Egypt and Syria, there will most likely be a good portion of the military and police who would refuse to go against their own civilian people and defect.

BUT: If things go similarly as there, there will also be a big portion who will not defect, and will follow orders. And even if some do defect, it would have to be more or less entire troop formations, not just single people. I mean, what good is a B-52 pilot if he defects by himself, or even with his crew and his plane? He'll still need the entire infrastructure around the plane to actually be of use (bombs, fuel, hangars, runways, maintenance people, spare parts, tactical support like other planes etc.). If you want to go up against an organised army, you'll need an organised army yourself, including a solid logistical backbone and good intelligence resources. And that's not going to be as easy as a bunch of soldiers just saying "Fuck this shit, I'm out!" So until I am actually in a position to do something with my guns and ammo I have at home, a whole lot of stuff needs to come together, otherwise I'm little more than target practice for some drone pilot.

As said in my edit, I'm not against the people having the capability to push back against the government. I'm just not optimistic about me and my private arms repository being of all that much use on that front, to be honest.

[SirRoderick]

Are you seriously going sit there and say that in the case of say a revolution takes place in the USA (for example) that 100% of the military will stand on the governments side? I am not attempting to be aggressive here.

 

I can tell you from experience that most soldiers (and also there were some polls taken but I cannot link them unfortunately) that show that 85-93% of US soldiers would not be willing to open fire or march on US citizens if the US Government decided to take a stance to remove the 2nd amendment from the constitution and a civil war scenario broke out because of it. Pretty hard to fight an army if the army is on your side. As for the statistic from my mentioned poll the lowest number of the questions was 74% and highest was 93% refusal to stand against the people/citizens.

 

just sayin.

 

*edit

I cannot link the polls because it is information that was available to me when I was still serving in the Army, I don't have access to that anymore. Sorry.

A fair point to make, but even then I just don't see the increased security from that particular source. I do not believe it would matter overly much.

 

When it comes to target shooting or home/self defence the arguments are at least respectable in my opinion. even though I would never rely on a firearm for self defence I can see why someone would want to. Personally I do always carry a folder knife for EDC uses, which I admit does stay within reach when I go through a shadier part of town. The again, gun crime is very much a rare thing here.

[SansVarnic]

IDK about that.  The effective murder rate of many police divisions in the US is pretty damn high.  Given incentive (money, money, money), I would not be so confident on my fellow americans.

 

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027483722

 

Forgive the source, I just grabbed one quickly.

 

I don't have much in terms of the police force like I do the military unfortunately, but usually you will find more commonly the corruption in major city areas than non-major cities. Iowa is not known for its police corruption but *shrugs* it could happen. In places like Chicago and New York which are well known for police corruption that something that exists and I wont deny.  I do know that 1 in 3 Iowans have served or is serving in the military (highest in the US I think or close to it) so it stands to say something I guess.

 

*edit - forgot to mention

Read the article and I am not surprised, the Miami-Dade county area is strife with police corruption. I think that Florida's State police is constantly having to put out fires because of the southern states counties Sheriffs and City police are causing as much trouble as they are suppose to deter. It is sad. *shakes head*

 

Nope, that's not what I'm saying. Looking at events in Ukraine, Egypt and Syria, there will most likely be a good portion of the military and police who would refuse to go against their own civilian people and defect.

BUT: If things go similarly as there, there will also be a big portion who will not defect, and will follow orders. And even if some do defect, it would have to be more or less entire troop formations, not just single people. I mean, what good is a B-52 pilot if he defects by himself, or even with his crew and his plane? He'll still need the entire infrastructure around the plane to actually be of use (bombs, fuel, hangars, runways, maintenance people, spare parts, tactical support like other planes etc.). If you want to go up against an organised army, you'll need an organised army yourself, including a solid logistical backbone and good intelligence resources. And that's not going to be as easy as a bunch of soldiers just saying "Fuck this shit, I'm out!" So until I am actually in a position to do something with my guns and ammo I have at home, a whole lot of stuff needs to come together, otherwise I'm little more than target practice for some drone pilot.

As said in my edit, I'm not against the people having the capability to push back against the government. I'm just not optimistic about me and my private arms repository being of all that much use on that front, to be honest.

 

I guess my reply was more for @SirRoderick than yourself really, I just added you because of your reply. But I do not disagree so much which what you just said. Having the position that I do I agree that people should be in a position to do what is necessary. I could quote/paraphrase my dad "no need to buy a gun really because once it all goes down hill there will be plenty to find laying around the streets for me to pick up and use for myself than have to go buy something and waste money now." I don't entirely agree with that but I cant disagree with it either. *shrugs*

[SansVarnic]

A fair point to make, but even then I just don't see the increased security from that particular source. I do not believe it would matter overly much.

 

When it comes to target shooting or home/self defence the arguments are at least respectable in my opinion. even though I would never rely on a firearm for self defence I can see why someone would want to. Personally I do always carry a folder knife for EDC uses, which I admit does stay within reach when I go through a shadier part of town. The again, gun crime is very much a rare thing here.

I wholly agree with you. When people ask me about this I always advise that knowing other self defense methods will in most cases benefit you over owning a gun. Having the gun is just an additional option to have available but never something to completely rely on.

 

*edit

I own 2 service firearms and one personal (technically I own them all personally but 2 are used as service) but I think of them as I do anything else, a tool. I have all the means to defend my self with my 2 hands but if the situation presents that I need something more, it is there.

Edited January 21, 2016 by SansVarnic

[stconquest]

I wholly agree with you. When people ask me about this I always advise that knowing other self defense methods will in most cases benefit you over owning a gun. Having the gun is just an additional option to have available but never something to completely rely on.

 

*edit

I own 2 service firearms and one personal (technically I own them all personally but 2 are used as service) but I think of them as I do anything else, a tool. I have all the means to defend my self with my 2 hands but if the situation presents that I need something more, it is there.

 

If more people practiced this, some just say it, it would be nice.  Having a firearm at your hip as the first go-to "problem solver" usually results in some unnecessary shootings.

[SansVarnic]

If more people practiced this, some just say it, it would be nice.  Having a firearm at your hip as the first go-to "problem solver" usually results in some unnecessary shootings.

Yes, yes I agree.

When I train people I attempt to train some sense of awareness before getting into firearm use. The mind is the greatest weapon we have. Knowing your situation and being able to prepare for contingencies is the best way to be able to react to a situation properly. I have never drawn my firearm for any reason because of the training I have received but it never goes from my mind that the possibility exists it could happen. De-escalation training has saved me so many times in my job, understanding the signs, and knowing my surroundings gives me so many options. Once you take a life in self defense it changes you in ways you cannot imagine.

 

*edit

going to bed...

Edited January 21, 2016 by SansVarnic

[HalGameGuru]

-snip-

 

dude... just... no. NICS IS the Brady Law. EVERY state, due to the Brady Law, HAS to use NICS or provide their own form of background checks for all firearms purchases. The states that use NICS are the ones that would most likely have NO background checks if the Brady Law was not in effect. The waiver for background checks is also part of the Brady Law which demarcates what criteria must be met by a license or permit for it to fulfill the function of the mandated NICS check.

 

You claim to be law enforcement, I expect better familiarization with these things.

I respect your opinion in regards to respect for rights and I appreciate you having the humility to withdraw for detente as we are both basically arguing the same side of the argument.

 

It's just, once again, on the factual side of things we have to be as accurate as possible. And more than once you have misreported the facts or relayed your misunderstood opinion of certain things as the facts of the matter. I have no qualm with your opinions where they are stated as such, even where we may disagree. And I very much look forward to reading your opinions on such matters in the future.

[Mihle]

in the ideal world, it would not be any lethal guns in the world, not even in the military

[Belgarathian]

Not to be that guy but i personally hate gun control. I carry a pistol with me everywhere i go, and its for protection. How the world is going with shootings everywhere, you dont think these crazy people could get their hands on a gun? Well let me tell you, if they do have a gun, i do to. And not to toot my own horn but i dont miss.

 

Congratulations on being part of the problem.

[tbroadwater2010]

Congratulations on being part of the problem.

not part of the problem. part of the solution to the problem. I honestly stopped following this post a while ago because it doesnt make sense LOL. but congratulations on having no gun freedoms.

[Belgarathian]

not part of the problem. part of the solution to the problem. I honestly stopped following this post a while ago because it doesnt make sense LOL. but congratulations on having no gun freedoms.

 

You're free to own a gun in NZ as long as you have a valid gun license, pass a police psychometric and background check, and have a safe (permanent, lockable, storage safe) to store your guns in (and yes, they do come to inspect the gun safe and its location). 

 

You can purchase pretty much any gun in NZ so long as it's on the approved list (in the link). More information about NZ gun laws can be found here: http://www.police.govt.nz/advice/firearms/standard-new-zealand-firearms-licence

[vanished]

This couldn't possibly affect reliability could it? /s

I think it's dumb.  They should be simple devices you can depend on.  I recognize their intentions, and the theoretical benefits are great, but I just don't see it working.  Sure, it would prevent unauthorized people from using the weapon (for example if it was stolen or picked up in battle). Yeah, until they figure out how to hack it, either physically or digitally.

[stconquest]

not part of the problem. part of the solution to the problem. I honestly stopped following this post a while ago because it doesnt make sense LOL. but congratulations on having no gun freedoms.

 

...aaaaaand what solution are you part of BECAUSE you carry a gun everywhere. 

[Belgarathian]

-Disclaimer- I've only read the first 5 pages, so I'm sorry if someone has already said this.

 

Pretty sure this tech is designed to protect the user in the scenario that the gun owner is disarmed, the gun can't be used against them. It's not to stop you shooting people, sorry, shooting in 'self defense'. The limitations are that if your batteries run flat after you forgot to replace them when it warned you, or you put the watch on the other wrist (how dumb are you), then yes... You're probably screwed. 

[tbroadwater2010]

...aaaaaand what solution are you part of BECAUSE you carry a gun everywhere. 

i do carry a gun everywhere but i dont see how im part of a problem for doing so. Difference of opinions maybe but if my country has a law that allows me to do so then i will exercise my rights to do so. Those who do not exercise their rights are the problem here.

 

And quite frankly, just because you dont believe in carrying guns doesnt mean its wrong not to.

[stconquest]

i do carry a gun everywhere but i dont see how im part of a problem for doing so. Difference of opinions maybe but if my country has a law that allows me to do so then i will exercise my rights to do so. Those who do not exercise their rights are the problem here.

 

And quite frankly, just because you dont believe in carrying guns doesnt mean its wrong not to.

 

You got hidden guilt or something?  I asked you a simple question.

 

Based on what you are divulging, it seems our friend @Belgarathian might have been on the right track with you.

 

You are also free to jump off a bridge to your death.  Enjoy your freedom. 

[Belgarathian]

Take a look at the Intentional homicides per 100,000  data. 

 

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5

 

The US is no where near the top.

 

 

Umm not sure what stats you are looking at:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate

 

Sorted by Homicide by gun the US is 17th and sorted by total the US comes up 12th.

 

Interestingly Russia is not included in these, I'm not sure why. 

 

Edit: Ninja'd 

 

true, you're not 1st... But you're right behind Albania and pretty much every other 3rd world nation in civil unrest with huge amounts of corruption (I'm making some broad generalisations here).

 

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5?order=wbapi_data_value_2013+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc

 

And just because you're not 1st, doesn't mean that it's okay... Islam has killed more people than Hitler and the Nazi regime, but that doesn't make it okay. What makes America particularly disturbing and disgusting is that you have the ability and power to drive gun reform and protect your people, but you actively campaign to stop it.  

 

In 2016, you've had more mass shooting victims than there are days. And when it comes to discuss how to solve this issue, you make it legal to carry weapons on campus, arm the teachers, and hire a security guard who's expected to be a f*cking superhero for $16/hr and no health insurance.

[tbroadwater2010]

You got hidden guilt or something?  I asked you a simple question.

 

Based on what you are divulging, it seems our friend @Belgarathian might have been on the right track with you.

 

You are also free to jump off a bridge to your death.  Enjoy your freedom. 

Where do you find hidden guilt? See its people like you who assume just because i carry a gun im going to use it for bad purposes. Its people like YOU who are the ones who cry when shit goes down and you aren't ready to protect yourself, but also cry when you see someone carrying a weapon. Like its sad that there are people like you out there. I am proud to be an American and DAMN PROUD to carry my weapon where i choose.

 

I respect everyone and will always be that way. I carry to protect myself, and others from people who may care to hurt people. You apparently do not wish the same for your family? Thats fine but i will carry my gun freely as I am allowed to do, and will feel protected where i go as well. I dont care what people say

 

JUST TO BE CLEAR, i went through the proper channels to get my weapons, and my license to carry that weapon. 

[HalGameGuru]

true, you're not 1st... But you're right behind Albania and pretty much every other 3rd world nation in civil unrest with huge amounts of corruption (I'm making some broad generalisations here).

 

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/VC.IHR.PSRC.P5?order=wbapi_data_value_2013+wbapi_data_value+wbapi_data_value-last&sort=desc

 

And just because you're not 1st, don't mean that it's okay... Islam has killed more people than Hitler and the Nazi regime, but that doesn't make it okay. What makes America particularly disturbing and disgusting is that you have the ability and power to drive gun reform and protect your people, but you actively campaign to stop it.  

 

Now that we know the differences in how different nations tabulate such data I no longer put much credence in those graphs. If America recorded homicides like the UK does our rate would more than halve. America is one of the only nations that includes justified self-defense that leads to death of the assailant as "homicide" and a lot of our crime statistics label it a gun crime if a gun is merely present at the scene, even in the defender's hands, even if it isn't even fired or brandished.

 

America has major issues, innocent citizens exercising their rights is not one of them.

[Belgarathian]

Now that we know the differences in how different nations tabulate such data I no longer put much credence in those graphs. If America recorded homicides like the UK does our rate would more than halve. America is one of the only nations that includes justified self-defense that leads to death of the assailant as "homicide" and a lot of our crime statistics label it a gun crime if a gun is merely present at the scene, even in the defender's hands, even if it isn't even fired or brandished.

 

America has major issues, innocent citizens exercising their rights is not one of them.

 

Sorry, maybe I haven't been clear enough. Innocent citizens exercising their rights isn't the issue, your laws are and so is the 2nd amendment. What I said before about @tbroadwater2010 being part of the problem is that the law allows for him to carry a deadly weapon that's easy to procure and use, and even though he may be mentally okay, the next person might not be. He is one of millions that actively carry a deadly weapon everyday. If you remove these guns from the streets, and make it harder to procure guns by enforcing stricter licenses then you'll reduce gun related deaths. 

 

The only thing stopping you from reducing gun related crime and deaths in America is your people, you guys literally don't care if a School of 8 year olds gets slaughtered by a classmate who purchased an assault rifle from Wallmart for $1000, or off craiglist. 

[stconquest]

Now that we know the differences in how different nations tabulate such data I no longer put much credence in those graphs. If America recorded homicides like the UK does our rate would more than halve. America is one of the only nations that includes justified self-defense that leads to death of the assailant as "homicide" and a lot of our crime statistics label it a gun crime if a gun is merely present at the scene, even in the defender's hands, even if it isn't even fired or brandished.

 

America has major issues, innocent citizens exercising their rights is not one of them.

 

You seem to relish the idea that laws allow you to carry an advanced means to ending someone's life.

 

I see it as a sad, sad fact that some situations do require that level of force/violence.

 

Your mentality will lead to further instability in the social fabric of the USA.

 

A proper mentality understands violence, and finds ways to diminish the causes of violence. 

 

Policing should gradually decline in a proper society.  As intelligence grows among the population, the need to commit crimes declines.  When you stray from progressive ideas only to fall on feral indignation as the method to sustain "freedom", then it is likely that people from other communities chime in and say:

 

You guys are doing it wrong.

[tbroadwater2010]

Sorry, maybe I haven't been clear enough. Innocent citizens exercising their rights isn't the issue, your laws are and so is the 2nd amendment. What I said before about @tbroadwater2010 being part of the problem is that the law allows for him to carry a deadly weapon that's easy to procure and use. He is one of millions that actively carry a deadly weapon everyday. If you remove these guns from the streets, and make it harder to procure guns by enforcing stricter licenses then you'll reduce gun related deaths. 

 

The only thing stopping you from reducing gun related crime and deaths in America is your people, you guys literally don't care if a School of 8 year olds gets slaughtered by a classmate who purchased an assault rifle from Wallmart for $1000, or off craiglist. 

It is very illegal to sell guns on craigslist. So those who do so probably had bad intentions to begin with. And yes they could be a bit more strict on purchasing them (even though you must get a background check for you to own a weapon) and carrying a gun concealed also requires a background check and its fairly strict as well. 

 

And i disagree about not caring about an 8 year old getting slaughtered. Its strictly forbidden in PA to carry a weapon within 500 feet of school grounds, and is punishable as a federal offense.

 

Also you must be over the age of 18 years old to purchase a long barreled gun, and the age of 21 in order to purchase a handgun.

[HalGameGuru]

Sorry, maybe I haven't been clear enough. Innocent citizens exercising their rights isn't the issue, your laws are and so is the 2nd amendment. What I said before about @tbroadwater2010 being part of the problem is that the law allows for him to carry a deadly weapon that's easy to procure and use, and even though he may be mentally okay, the next person might not be. He is one of millions that actively carry a deadly weapon everyday. If you remove these guns from the streets, and make it harder to procure guns by enforcing stricter licenses then you'll reduce gun related deaths. 

 

The only thing stopping you from reducing gun related crime and deaths in America is your people, you guys literally don't care if a School of 8 year olds gets slaughtered by a classmate who purchased an assault rifle from Wallmart for $1000, or off craiglist. 

That's not an argument, lots of things are deadly, lots of things cause more innocent death than guns do year over year. You are wanting to infringe the rights of peaceful individuals via the violence of the state, using the very things you claim to despise. 

 

Nice presumption and projection. So now only gun death is an issue? Death in general is not? What about other victimization? When waiting periods were introduced deaths didn't change but rapes went up. IF the problem is the reservation of the use of deadly force the true bogeyman you need to be concerned with is the state, not your fellow man, and not their possession of guns.

 

Legal gun ownership shows no connection with increased victimization. But the curtailing of said rights does incur victimizations across the board.

[Belgarathian]

It is very illegal to sell guns on craigslist. So those who do so probably had bad intentions to begin with. And yes they could be a bit more strict on purchasing them (even though you must get a background check for you to own a weapon) and carrying a gun concealed also requires a background check and its fairly strict as well. 

 

And i disagree about not caring about an 8 year old getting slaughtered. Its strictly forbidden in PA to carry a weapon within 500 feet of school grounds, and is punishable as a federal offense.

 

Thank you for correcting me, and I would agree that if you illegally purchase a weapon you likely have nefarious plans. 

 

PA might have that solution, but sadly America needs congress to act on gun control and spearhead gun reform across all states as there are huge inconsistencies between them. 

[HalGameGuru]

You seem to relish the idea that laws allow you to carry an advanced means to ending someone's life.

 

I see it as a sad, sad fact that some situations do require that level of force/violence.

 

Your mentality will lead to further instability in the social fabric of the USA.

 

A proper mentality understands violence, and finds ways to diminish the causes of violence. 

 

Policing should gradually decline in a proper society.  As intelligence grows among the population, the need to commit crimes declines.  When you stray from progressive ideas only to fall on feral indignation as the method to sustain "freedom", then it is likely that people from other communities chime in and say:

 

You guys are doing it wrong.

No, my inherent human RIGHTS allow me to own and carry whatever I wish, America's second amendment merely tells the government not to interfere with that specific right. It neither grants nor imbues any rights upon anyone.

 

I can end someone's life with a car, a spoon, an empty hypodermic needle, a can of brake cleaner. Your issue is with the people who would use a tool maliciously, not those who are no danger no matter the tool they possess.

 

Your own commentary belies your argument as it pertains to America. The vast majority of both homicide and victimization revolving around guns would go away with the dissolution of the war on drugs. Even with the way we record our stats the majority of it is gang and drug related, which are due to an OVERREACH of policing, and lack of intelligence on the part of the powers that be. Remove that impetus and see how the stats change.