Harris County, Texas

Friday: [URL="http://abc13.com/news/boy-3-who-accidentally-shot-himself-dies/537322/"]A three-year-old boy who accidentally shot himself inside a home in northwest Harris County Friday has died[/URL]

Sunday: [URL="http://www.khou.com/story/news/local/2015/03/01/4-year-old-accidentally-shoots-himself/24219865/"]Deputies: 4-year-old dead after finding gun in babysitter's home[/URL]

[URL]http://time.com/3930178/pope-francis-weapons-manufacturers-christian/[/URL]

[QUOTE]"Duplicity is the currency of today…they say one thing and do another"[/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/woman-struck-by-bullet-while-at-pennsylvania-amusement-park/article_d5e27978-93a1-5914-9fa0-c799b502bf42.html[/url]

[QUOTE]Police believe the gunshot came from outside the park, possibly from someone firing a gun to celebrate the holiday.[/QUOTE]

[url]http://news.yahoo.com/guns-dont-deter-crime-study-finds-180710261.html[/url]

[QUOTE]"We found no support for the hypothesis that owning more guns leads to a drop or a reduction in violent crime," said study researcher Michael Monuteaux, an epidemiologist and professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. "Instead, we found the opposite."[/QUOTE]

From that same article, near the end :[quote]After federally funded research in the 1980s and 1990s began to reach a consensus that firearms in the home were linked to higher chances of violent death in the home, the National Rifle Association (NRA) lobbied successfully for an end to federal funding of firearms research.[/quote]no comment needed.

Jacob

[URL="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/07/21/los-angeles-police-find-stash-1200-guns-in-dead-man-home/"]Los Angeles police find stash of 1,200 guns in dead man's home[/URL]
[QUOTE]Los Angeles police investigating a man's death discovered an arsenal of more than 1,200 firearms and approximately two tons of ammunition in his home and garage Monday.[/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/rick-perry-calls-for-more-guns-in-cinemas-following-shooting-1.2298482[/url]

[QUOTE]US presidential hopeful Rick Perry has said filmgoers should be able to take their guns into cinemas in order to help stop fatal shootings.[/QUOTE]

Not sure whether [URL="http://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-can-disable-sniper-rifleor-change-target/"]this [/URL] should be in the bare right arms, science news, or Hmmmm threads.

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34062118[/url]

[QUOTE=xilman;408859][URL]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34062118[/URL][/QUOTE]

More bitter fruit to lay at the door of gun fanatics. I'm sure one or more of them have trotted out the canard that had others been armed, the shooter could have been stopped. I cringe at the thought of bullets flying wildly in all directions in a mall. :shock:

Speaking of bears, see the last panel.

[QUOTE=kladner;408862]More bitter fruit to lay at the door of gun fanatics.[/QUOTE]Not addressing the gun aspect of this, I want to make a few other points.

This was effectively a 'work place' incident.
I have had an occasion to talk to a work place violence expert (more details below). He has personally (and his partner) responded to numerous previous shootings and other events of severe trauma on the job. His firm is hired by companies to educate employees how to spot indicators that someone might 'go off'. While these incidents may seem sudden, other employees will indicate that the person had been known to have major problems (and often the other employees were worried about them). During the training he plays news clips where fellow employees of the shooter tell how they knew the person was peeved. Company management rarely contacts the police for assistance ahead of time, or his firm (or similar consultants.)

My employer has suffered more than one fatal incident of work place violence. This is why they had the consultants train employees to recognize threats. When the police are contacted and the right resources brought in (the shrinks), there can be a defusing of the tension. Those that do perpetrate the violence have psychologically painted themselves into a corner. They see only 2 likely outcomes: their death or life in prison. From what little I have heard, the man in question should have been identified, had the staff taken the problem seriously.

(The one-on-one time that I spent with the expert {he has been called a "recognized leader in the field of workplace violence prevention."}, was during a time of general low morale at work. I had a particular 'beef' with the bosses and they thought I might be a threat. His assessment was that chatting with me was a waste of his time. The bosses had only looked at a single aspect of the situation. His 360 interview with me proved that I had a fine life outside work and would get over the slight {I was more upset about the problem being bad for the work group and not so much a personal slight. Management could not understand that.})

While a gun was the weapon of choice this time, workplace violence also comes in the form of poisonings, stabbings, beatings, and things like pushing someone off a ledge. The way to prevent workplace shootings is also the way to prevent the others. Recognise potential threats, assess the threat, defuse the problem. Often it is just a case of the employee sitting down with someone significant in management along with a mediator or specialist and maybe the employee's union/guild rep or lawyer. Once they feel they have been fairly heard and given the reasons why the decisions where made the way they were, they are satisfied and can move on. Often they have problems in their personal life. If the employer can get them help dealing with that, it can make a profound difference.

:two cents:

I agree with your analysis. I understand your experience. Still, the untrammeled availability of firearms makes such outcomes easier. The same is true of guns in the home. Availability leads to more gun violence against residents in a domicile, more suicides, and more little kids shooting each other out of ignorance of what they found in Dad's bedside table drawer.

[QUOTE=kladner;408862]More bitter fruit to lay at the door of gun fanatics. I'm sure one or more of them have trotted out the canard that had others been armed, the shooter could have been stopped. I cringe at the thought of bullets flying wildly in all directions in a mall. :shock:[/QUOTE]

The guys who tackled the shooter on the French train last week were also unarmed - I shudder to think at how many more passengers might have been killed/injured with a bunch of Rick-Perry-fantasy vigilantes blasting away in a crowded train compartment. The darkened-theater example Perry himself trotted out is an even more nightmarish scenario. We can at least be thankful that the only one 'hopeful' of a Perry presidency is Perry himself.

But all this talk of right-wing sexual fantasies of gunfire in a crowded space gives me an idea of how to, um, 'liven up' one of the upcoming Republican presidential-hopeful debates, and winnow the number of such at the same time: 'Whichever of you emerges first from the darkened Old West Saloon theatrical set with your NRA-approved 30-round extended clip empty, gets the nomination'.

[QUOTE] 'Whichever of you emerges first from the darkened Old West Saloon theatrical set with your NRA-approved 30-round extended clip empty, gets the nomination'. [/QUOTE]
:tu:

[QUOTE=ewmayer;408896]'Whichever of you emerges first from the darkened Old West Saloon theatrical set with your NRA-approved 30-round extended clip empty, gets the nomination'.[/QUOTE]
Priceless! And deep! Makes me think what should I do in that situation, what should be the best way to win? Empty your clip in the air and run out? Neeee... Some guys may stay in a corner shooting at guys who want to get out. But that may not be the best strategy either... Hm.. Deeeeeppp....

[QUOTE=kladner;408890]I agree with your analysis. I understand your experience. Still,.....[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Uncwilly;408888]Not addressing the gun aspect of this, I want to make a few other points.[/QUOTE]
I [B][U]am not[/U][/B] entering the gun debate. What I am saying is that there is a problem that is all around that doesn't need laws passed or changed to deal with. People over look it. This evening I heard a story that focus on the social and the video posted. That is not the problem. The problem is what happened at work.

In further versions of the story about today's events I heard that he said that he had been bullied at work. This was before the issue where he thought that he had been discriminated against and that management did not take his case seriously. Bullying is caustic. It is often one part of the issue that leads to any form of work place violence. I have seen the effects it had on a family member at school.

One of my co-workers that I had worked with during the dark times, had moved to a different section, because of problems caused by the boss that continued to cause problems for years. (We had ~50% of the staff leave in one way or another under their reign.) At the new section, my pal was harassed, bullied, and received disparate treatment. This led to events which ultimately resulted in his death. I lay the blame at the feet of both the boss that I worked for and the management of the new section. And lest anyone forget him, I have his obituary hanging above my desk. His death was not by a gun. It was not on the job site, but the root cause was events at work.

Focus on the causes and the prevention. Prevention starts months and years ahead of time. See something, say something. Deal with people's grievances with sincere concern. (As an aside, I have had to personally report s..ual harassment by the same individual 3 times before it finally stopped. The first time the boss did nothing.) Hostile work environments breeds violence of all sorts. Deal with the root issues and the evil flower won't bloom.

@uncwilly: Well said, Sir.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;408933]I [B][U]am not[/U][/B] entering the gun debate. What I am saying is that there is a problem that is all around that doesn't need laws passed or changed to deal with. People over look it. This evening I heard a story that focus on the social and the video posted. That is not the problem. The problem is what happened at work.

In further versions of the story about today's events I heard that he said that he had been bullied at work. This was before the issue where he thought that he had been discriminated against and that management did not take his case seriously. Bullying is caustic. It is often one part of the issue that leads to any form of work place violence. I have seen the effects it had on a family member at school.

One of my co-workers that I had worked with during the dark times, had moved to a different section, because of problems caused by the boss that continued to cause problems for years. (We had ~50% of the staff leave in one way or another under their reign.) At the new section, my pal was harassed, bullied, and received disparate treatment. This led to events which ultimately resulted in his death. I lay the blame at the feet of both the boss that I worked for and the management of the new section. And lest anyone forget him, I have his obituary hanging above my desk. His death was not by a gun. It was not on the job site, but the root cause was events at work.

Focus on the causes and the prevention. Prevention starts months and years ahead of time. See something, say something. Deal with people's grievances with sincere concern. (As an aside, I have had to personally report s..ual harassment by the same individual 3 times before it finally stopped. The first time the boss did nothing.) Hostile work environments breeds violence of all sorts. Deal with the root issues and the evil flower won't bloom.[/QUOTE]

All good points in general, Uncwilly, but it's probably worth noting that in this particular case, the shooter had not worked at the job in question for two and a half years, so the opportunity to concentrate on the causes and the prevention was not really there.

[QUOTE=LaurV;408920]Priceless! And deep! Makes me think what should I do in that situation, what should be the best way to win? Empty your clip in the air and run out? Neeee... Some guys may stay in a corner shooting at guys who want to get out. But that may not be the best strategy either... Hm.. Deeeeeppp....[/QUOTE]

Yes, the interesting game-theoretic aspects occurred to me as well as soon as I started posting the scenario - but before anyone really spends time analyzing possible strategies (both 1-player and competitive/cooperative) I should probably clarify the debate rules a bit to eliminate loopholes. BTW, a perpetual-stalemate scenario in which no one gets out and all the remaining live players slowly starve to death, leaving no one with nomination, that works for me, too. :)

The Joys of "Campus Carry"
 

[url]http://jensorensen.com/2015/10/05/the-joys-of-campus-carry/[/url]

[URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/14/us/woman-in-michigan-charged-after-shooting-at-fleeing-shoplifters.html?_r=0"]Woman in Michigan Charged After Shooting at Fleeing Shoplifters[/URL]
[QUOTE]“We are grateful that nothing more serious happened as a result of the decision to fire a weapon in a busy parking lot,” the Auburn Hills police chief, Doreen Olko, said in the statement announcing the charge. “We do not encourage bystanders to insert themselves into incidents because of the potential for deadly consequences.”

Michigan’s state Constitution says a person has the right to keep and bear arms “for the defense of himself and the state.”

To use a concealed weapon in the state, a licensed holder needs to think that there is an imminent danger of death, great bodily harm or sexual assault, said Rick Ector, who runs Rick’s Firearm Academy of Detroit.[/QUOTE]

[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/10/14/people-are-getting-shot-by-toddlers-on-a-weekly-basis-this-year/"]People are getting shot by toddlers on a weekly basis this year[/URL]
[QUOTE]After spending a few hours sifting through news reports, I've found at least 43 instances this year of somebody being shot by a toddler 3 or younger. In 31 of those 43 cases, a toddler found a gun and shot himself or herself.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=only_human;413041][URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/10/14/people-are-getting-shot-by-toddlers-on-a-weekly-basis-this-year/"]People are getting shot by toddlers on a weekly basis this year[/URL][/QUOTE]
I wonder about the break down of the owners of these guns. How many are NRA members? How many are in law enforcement? How many are well trained gun users? How many have a concealed carry permit? Etc.

[QUOTE=only_human;413041][URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/10/14/people-are-getting-shot-by-toddlers-on-a-weekly-basis-this-year/"]People are getting shot by toddlers on a weekly basis this year[/URL][/QUOTE]
It's this sort of statistic that makes me believe that a fundamental shift of attitude is probably on the cards in the coming few years in the USA, as I predicted in this thread two and a half years ago. The USA public will wake up to the reality of the situation before this decade (the "2010s") is out. I think the constitutional change required to outlaw firearms by anyone except those with a licence to hold them will be achieved before 2020.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;413047]How many are NRA members? How many are in law enforcement? How many are well trained gun users? How many have a concealed carry permit? Etc.[/QUOTE]Probably all of them. :razz:

Here are statistics from another recent year:
[URL="http://everytownresearch.org/reports/innocents_lost/"]Innocents Lost - A Year of Unintentional Child Gun Deaths[/URL]
[QUOTE]About two-thirds of these unintended deaths — 65 percent — took place in a home or vehicle that belonged to the victim’s family, most often with guns that were legally owned but not secured. Another 19 percent took place in the home of a relative or friend of the victim.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]About a third of American children live in homes with firearms, and of these households, 43 percent contain at least one unlocked firearm. Thirteen percent of households with guns contain at least one firearm that is unlocked and loaded or stored with ammunition.6 In all, more than two million American children live in homes with unsecured guns — and 1.7 million live in homes with guns that are both loaded and unlocked.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Parents underestimate the extent to which their children know where their household guns are stored and the frequency with which children handle household guns unsupervised. A Harvard survey of children in gun-owning households found that more than 70 percent of children under age 10 knew where their parents stored their guns — even when they were hidden — and 36 percent of the children reported handling the weapons. Thirty-nine percent of parents who thought their child was unaware of the location of the household’s gun were contradicted by their children, and one of every five parents who believed their child had not handled the gun was mistaken.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]A majority of incidents took place in towns with populations less than 50,000 people, whereas only 10 percent of incidents occurred in cities with more than 500,000 people.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]APPENDICES

[URL="http://everytownresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Appendix20-39.pdf"]Click here[/URL] to see an appendix of narrative descriptions of each shooting used to complete this dataset.[/QUOTE]

[URL="http://thehill.com/regulation/258012-la-ban-on-high-capacity-magazines-draws-legal-challenge"]Law enforcement sues LA over ban on high-capacity magazines[/URL]
[QUOTE]California has cracked down on the magazines since 2000, making it illegal to manufacture or sell them, but Los Angeles' ordinance would go further, making it illegal to possess them.

Other cities like Sunnyvale and San Francisco also ban possession of the magazines.

Violation of the new ordinance would carry misdemeanor charges.

Los Angeles City Councilman Paul Krekorian called the lawsuit a “predictable and desperate attempt by NRA lawyers to strike down a common-sense policy that will keep our city and its people safe.”[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=only_human;413680][URL="http://thehill.com/regulation/258012-la-ban-on-high-capacity-magazines-draws-legal-challenge"]Law enforcement sues LA over ban on high-capacity magazines[/URL][/QUOTE]
We expect this from gun ownership organisations, but am I alone in finding the position of "Law enforcement" as a joint plaintiff in this action bizarre? What is "law enforcement"'s motivation for opposing a law which would ban possession of high volume ammunition capable of killing many people in a single incident?

In the article we read:
[QUOTE]Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko, one of 30 sheriffs who filed the lawsuit, said parts of the state allow high-capacity magazines.
“The ordinance creates a patchwork of laws that law-abiding citizens and law enforcement have to navigate through,” Bosenko said, according to Los Angeles Daily News.
[/QUOTE]But I don't buy that. A slight increase in the complexity of where exactly you can possess what is hardly a good reason to sue. Can't law enforcers just update the lists of "what is legal where" which they presumably use? Aren't the people behind the proposed new law in Los Angeles working to the same end as the sheriffs supposedly are (to make the general public safer)? I smell an ulterior motive here which has nothing to do with law enforcement and keeping the public safe.

Chicago Bears team facility's caution over a disgruntled defensive lineman extended to his potential to be armed.
[URL="http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/7/71/1058753/jeremiah-ratliff-said-felt-like-killing-everybody-building"]Police Report: Jeremiah Ratliff said he felt like 'killing everybody in the building'[/URL]
[QUOTE]Bears director of security John Tarpey made a call to Lake Forest police. Officers responded to the call and remained on the scene until all staff members left. The police report also states Ratliff is believed to own multiple firearms. Lake Forest police were on hand again the next morning.[/QUOTE]

[URL="http://denver.cbslocal.com/2015/10/06/man-survives-grizzly-attack-by-shoving-arm-down-bears-throat/"]Man Survives Grizzly Attack By Shoving Arm Down Bear’s Throat[/URL]
[QUOTE]The bear was spooked, and charged Dellwo, knocking him off his feet. It bit down on his head, roared “the loudest roar I have ever heard,” Dellwo said, and paused. Dellwo managed to sit up before the bear came back and bit his right leg.

When the bear came back again, Dellwo said he recalled a tip from his grandmother.

“I remembered an article that my grandmother gave me a long time ago that said large animals have bad gag reflexes. So I shoved my right arm down his throat,” Dellwo said.

It worked. He walked out, bloodied and disoriented, to find his brother and head to the hospital.[/QUOTE]

.

[url]http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/11/28/waffle-house-worker-killed-after-arguing-customer/76491292/[/url]

[QUOTE]"Upon investigation we learned he had gotten into an argument with an employee over smoking and he pulled out a handgun and shot the employee in the head."[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;417502][url]http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/11/28/waffle-house-worker-killed-after-arguing-customer/76491292/[/url][/QUOTE]
He must have feared for his life when she asked him to put out his cigarette.

[URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/jay-dickey-gun-violence-research-amendment_561333d7e4b022a4ce5f45bf"]The Congressman Who Restricted Gun Violence Research Has Regrets[/URL]
Rep. Jay Dickey (R-Ark.) authored the controversial 1996 amendment that remains in place. He wishes Congress would change it.
[QUOTE]After the Dickey amendment passed in '96, the Knight Ridder media chain did an analysis of the vote. It discovered that three-quarters of those who backed the measure had received a collective $1.6 million from the NRA that calendar year. Only six of the 158 members who opposed the measure had received support from the gun lobby.[/QUOTE]

[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/11/30/georgia-6-year-old-dead-finds-gun-in-couch-cushion-fatally-shoots-herself/[/url]

[QUOTE]Ja’Mecca is the third Georgia child to be killed in an accidental shooting in the past month. [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;417762][url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/11/30/georgia-6-year-old-dead-finds-gun-in-couch-cushion-fatally-shoots-herself/[/url][/QUOTE]Auto-darwination by proxy?

(Parents restricting their own contribution to the gene pool by making it easier for their offspring not to reproduce.)

[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/12/02/hours-before-san-bernardino-mass-shooting-doctors-were-on-capitol-hill-petitioning-congress-to-lift-ban-on-gun-violence-research/[/url]

[QUOTE]Joined by a handful of Democratic lawmakers, the doctors spoke about the need to view gun violence as a public health epidemic and research ways to solve it – as the country would with any disease causing the deaths of thousands of Americans each year.[/QUOTE]

[URL]http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/san-bernardino-shooting/staggering-stats-there-have-been-more-mass-shootings-days-year-n473436[/URL]

[QUOTE]This year, there have been more mass shootings — defined as incidents in which four or more victims are shot — than days in the calendar year.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]Fifty times more Americans have been killed by guns than terrorist attacks since 9/11, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Global Terrorism Database says.[/QUOTE]

just thought I'd throw this in
 

[URL="https://www.yahoo.com/news/man-hoard-nearly-5-000-guns-shows-ease-200547133.html"]Man’s hoard of nearly 5,000 guns shows ease of amassing arms in U.S[/URL]

[QUOTE]Inside, the guns were everywhere: rifles and shotguns piled in the living room, halls and bedrooms; handguns littering tables and countertops. Outside, when they rolled up the door on the pre-fab metal garage, more arms spilled out at their feet.

[/QUOTE]

[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gun-rights-try-gun-pride-gop-candidates-display-firearms-machismo/2015/12/04/1f24fa12-9ab5-11e5-94f0-9eeaff906ef3_story.html[/url]

[QUOTE]“You don’t stop bad guys by taking away our guns. You stop bad guys by using our guns,” Cruz thundered to a roomful of Second Amendment activists.[/QUOTE]

Hat tip to the Texas Observer.

It's all about the money
 

[url]http://www.news.com.au/finance/business/why-the-gun-industry-has-us-over-a-barrel/news-story/e4b72289e90b5ceda7778208410d1d99[/url][quote]Money makes them powerful. The NRA has an annual budget of about \$US250 million. It spends \$15 for every \$1 spent by the gun control lobby and has them on the run. The NRA rates US politicians for how strongly they are committed to the right to own guns, and politicians fear a bad rating.[/quote]

It is discouraging. All that money gives them great public manipulative power, too, and not just in threatening [STRIKE]prostititions.[/STRIKE] politicians. :bangheadonwall:

[URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-shane-coleman/served-my-country-but-only-shot-at-by-americans_b_8757940.html"]I Served My Country for 11 Years and I've Only Ever Been Shot at by American Citizens[/URL]
[QUOTE]But here's the thing: In the entire time I served in the military, I was never shot at. In fact, that didn't happen until after I got out of the service and it was done by one of the very citizens whose rights I sacrificed 11 years of my life to defend. That was the first time I faced the nightmare of surviving the military only to be nearly killed by those I swore to protect.

Since I left the military in 2006, I have been shot at, or been in the presence of a gunman, three times. I know that might not seem like much to some of you, especially to my fellow veterans. But think about it. Eleven years in the military and I was never shot at. Nine years as a civilian and I have had three different people point a gun at me. That's why Ke'arre Stewart's death hit me like a ton of bricks. He survived nearly a decade in the Army only to be gunned down in his hometown by an unstable American citizen with access to guns.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=only_human;418799][URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-shane-coleman/served-my-country-but-only-shot-at-by-americans_b_8757940.html"]I Served My Country for 11 Years and I've Only Ever Been Shot at by American Citizens[/URL][/QUOTE]

Wow. Just Wow.

Tom Tomorrow strikes again!

This a follow-up to a previous post. She received probation and lost her gun license.
[URL="http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2015/12/10/1458941/-Vigilante-woman-who-fired-at-shoplifters-has-been-sentenced-vows-to-never-help-anyone-again"]Vigilante woman who fired at shoplifters has been sentenced, vows to 'never help anyone again'[/URL]
[QUOTE] A Michigan woman pulled her gun and fired at shoplifters in a Home Depot parking lot has been sentenced after pleading no contest to reckless discharge of a gun:

A woman described as a “sharpshooter” was sentenced to 18 months of probation Wednesday for firing a gun at the getaway car as suspected shoplifters fled a Home Depot.

Tatiana Duva-Rodriguez, who was licensed to carry a concealed weapon, said she heard a scream and feared the incident was worse than a theft. She acknowledged the shooting in the parking lot was a mistake.
Emphasis added because she’s no longer allowed to carry a concealed gun. As part of her sentence, Rochester Hills District Court Judge Julie Nicholson ruled Duva-Rodriguez cannot apply for another conceal carry permit until 2023, which is what prosecutors wanted:

[QUOTE]“If guns are taken away from her and she learns her lesson, that’s fine,” Oakland County Prosecutor Jessica Cooper told The Detroit News Wednesday afternoon. “That’s the key. That she doesn’t have access to guns and she doesn’t have access to ammunition. Hopefully someone has sat down with her and talked with her about what responsible gun ownership is all about.”[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

[URL]http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sandy-hook-american-kid-has-died-gun-every-other-day-n478746[/URL]

[quote]There are at least 554 reasons to ask whether American children are safer from gun violence today than they were three years ago, when the unthinkable happened at Sandy Hook Elementary School.[/quote]Our thoughts: In the same time period, how many American children were killed by terrorists?

[SIZE=1][COLOR=White]ISIS or NRA - Which is more dangerous?[/COLOR][/SIZE]

[URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/28/guns-killed-more-people-on-christmas-in-the-u-s-than-in-an-entire-year-in-these-countries/[/URL]

[QUOTE]The 27 people killed by guns in America on Christmas this year is equal to the total number of people killed in gun homicides in an entire year in Austria, New Zealand, Norway, Slovenia, Estonia, Bermuda, Hong Kong and Iceland, combined.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Xyzzy;420371][URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/28/guns-killed-more-people-on-christmas-in-the-u-s-than-in-an-entire-year-in-these-countries/[/URL][/QUOTE]

That ignores these deaths: [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks#Ut.C3.B8ya"]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks#Ut.C3.B8ya[/URL]

Weighting the numbers on the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate"]table here[/URL], one could expect an average of 14.4 deaths per day for the average of those countries.

If one were to take the Norway numbers from 2011 instead of 2012, that would mess with the total.

[URL="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/12/31/florida-mother-shoots-and-killed-daughter-mistook-for-intruder.html"]Florida mother shoots and killed daughter she mistook for intruder[/URL][QUOTE]St. Cloud police Sgt. Denise Roberts said Wednesday that the 45-year-old mother was asleep when she heard someone enter her home shortly before midnight Tuesday. The mother told police she heard footsteps approaching quickly so she fired a single shot.

Roberts said the daughter had been visiting from North Carolina and didn't live in the home.

St. Cloud police officials said the mother is a 911 dispatcher for Osceola County and her husband is a St. Cloud police corporal.[/QUOTE]

Edit:
That is how fox news reported it.
The Orlando Sentinel says:
[QUOTE]But not once during the five-minute 911 call does Campbell, a veteran member of the St. Cloud Police Department, mention why Doby was struggling to breathe: a gunshot wound to the chest.

Campbell omitted that fact because he was asleep when his wife shot Doby, mistaking her for an intruder, police said on Wednesday. He didn't realize what happened until his wife — a 911 dispatcher with the Osceola County Sheriff's Office – explained it to him, according to authorities.[/QUOTE]
ahem, a veteran officer is unaware of a gunshot in his own home. Cough cough gunsmoke. I'm just saying.

[url]http://abcnews.go.com/US/ammon-bundy-speaks-occupied-oregon-refuge-important-people/story?id=36078727[/url]

[QUOTE]Ammon Bundy, one of the armed militia members occupying a building on federal land at an Oregon national wildlife refuge, told ABC News this morning that, while their protest is peaceful, the group is armed "because we understand that in order to truly express our 1st Amendment rights, we have to have our 2nd Amendment rights."[/QUOTE]

[url]http://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/eastern-oregon-ranchers-convicted-arson-resentenced-five-years-prison[/url]

[QUOTE]The jury convicted both of the Hammonds of using fire to destroy federal property for a 2001 arson known as the Hardie-Hammond Fire, located in the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area. Witnesses at trial, including a relative of the Hammonds, testified the arson occurred shortly after Steven Hammond and his hunting party illegally slaughtered several deer on BLM property. Jurors were told that Steven Hammond handed out “Strike Anywhere” matches with instructions that they be lit and dropped on the ground because they were going to “light up the whole country on fire.” One witness testified that he barely escaped the eight to ten foot high flames caused by the arson. The fire consumed 139 acres of public land and destroyed all evidence of the game violations. After committing the arson, Steven Hammond called the BLM office in Burns, Oregon and claimed the fire was started on Hammond property to burn off invasive species and had inadvertently burned onto public lands. Dwight and Steven Hammond told one of their relatives to keep his mouth shut and that nobody needed to know about the fire.[/QUOTE]

the right to be alarmed... yep totally suited for this situation...
Those people occupying the federal building should be treated the same way terrorist are. Their gun will be retrieved from their still warm dead hands.

As with most situations the reality is complicated. In this case by a certain antagonism that certain Mormon factions feel toward the Government.

[url]http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympleii/heres-what-you-need-to-understand-about-mormon-history-if-yo#.bkElEpWMv[/url]

However, let's not call them militias. These guys are, at best, whiny children with guns, and at worst domestic terrorists (it's hard for me to justify calling a group whose main threat so far is taking over a building that nobody cares about actual terrorists. Maybe potential terrorists. Terrorist lite[SUP]tm[/SUP] or VanillaISIS.

escuse my lack of knowledge of oregon's law, but isn't taking over a federal building with weapon a federal offence/crime?

[QUOTE=firejuggler;421231]escuse my lack of knowledge of oregon's law, but isn't taking over a federal building with weapon a federal offence/crime?[/QUOTE]

Possibly.

But maybe this is just known as a Barbecue in around those parts....

[QUOTE=chalsall;421236]But maybe this is just known as a Barbecue in around those parts....[/QUOTE]

Hmmm... [URL="http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/04/us/oregon-wildlife-refuge-protest/"]This might explain what they are complaining about[/URL].

I'm going to stamp my little feet until people pay attention to me!!!!!!!!!!

[QUOTE=firejuggler;421231]escuse my lack of knowledge of oregon's law, but isn't taking over a federal building with weapon a federal offence/crime?[/QUOTE]

Oregon law doesn't apply. The question is, What is the appropriate response?

I haven't seen anyone yet claim that they shouldn't be held accountable for their actions (including themselves--though they seem to think that their armed insurrection is more important than it actually is).

[QUOTE=chappy;421240]The question is, What is the appropriate response?[/QUOTE]

I'm going to argue only enough to stop to a dangerous situation.

No more, and no less.

I would agree. List the crimes they are currently committing. Put up a fence around them and charge them by day for all of the response. Both as a criminal offense and as the cost of putting up with their nonsense. Tell them that monetary cost up front.

How long will it be before they give themselves up? Throwing off the manacles of tyranny would have worked better in the Spring.

[QUOTE=chappy;421210]As with most situations the reality is complicated. In this case by a certain antagonism that certain Mormon factions feel toward the Government.

[URL]http://www.buzzfeed.com/jimdalrympleii/heres-what-you-need-to-understand-about-mormon-history-if-yo#.bkElEpWMv[/URL]

However, let's not call them militias. These guys are, at best, whiny children with guns, and at worst domestic terrorists (it's hard for me to justify calling a group whose main threat so far is taking over a building that nobody cares about actual terrorists. Maybe potential terrorists. Terrorist lite[SUP]tm[/SUP] or VanillaISIS.[/QUOTE]

I am one who does care about wildlife refuges. The occupiers' attitude is that they should be able to graze, log, ATV, hunt....whatever they want, on this land, which happens to be a major migratory stopover.

That is a subject separate from their current actions.

Bundy has spouted off to that effect. Given his love of arsonists, one might be concerned about his actions.

But it is not against the law, neither Federal nor State to [B][SIZE="3"]want to[/SIZE][/B] "be able to graze, log, ATV, hunt....whatever they want, on this land."

It may be against the law to do any or all of those things in certain situations, that is not the issue at hand. The current situation may have come about because a small group of terribly oppressed middle-class white males aren't getting everything they want, but it is their current actions that require response.

[QUOTE=chappy;421210]... or VanillaISIS.[/QUOTE]
Lovely invention

[QUOTE=Batalov;421253]Lovely invention[/QUOTE]

Another good one from an anonymous (at least to me) Twitteratus was "YallQaeda".

[url=boingboing.net/2016/01/03/armed-domestic-terrorists-take.html]Armed domestic terrorists take over federal building, but it’s OK, they’re white[/url] | Boing Boing

Best comment I saw today was a snarky reference to US machinations in Syria by an [url=http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/01/links-1416.html#comment-2530546]NC reader[/url]: "Aren’t there moderate militias in Oregon we could be supporting?"

[url]http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2016/01/drama_in_burns_ends_with_quiet.html[/url]

A good overview from boots on the ground.

Even those who might sympathize are not taking the bait. I am getting really sick of the name Bundy. The old man is still a scofflaw, owing tons of money to the government. He is in contempt of court orders. Surely, after the stand-off, the perpetrators could be picked up individually. More significantly, Cliven's bank accounts could be frozen. The government, incarnate in the IRS, is not backward about such tactics, though in this case it would probably come as another court order.
[QUOTE]Ammon Bundy met with Dwight Hammond and his wife in November, seeking a way to keep the elderly rancher from having to surrender for prison. The Hammonds professed through their attorneys that they had no interest in ignoring the order to report for prison.

Ammon Bundy said the goal is to turn over federal land to local ranchers, loggers and miners. He said he met with 10 or so residents in Burns on Friday to try to recruit them, but they declined.[/QUOTE]

I have to add that Dan holds to the idea that the DOJ, under a Democratic administration, does not want to do anything that might give the Republican candidates any ammunition (black pun intended).

[url]http://www.theonion.com/graphic/what-you-need-know-about-oregon-militia-standoff-52111[/url]

The Onion breaks from its long standing tradition of satire to publish a serious news item.

Not entirely serious ;)

[QUOTE][B]Who is Ammon Bundy?[/B]

An American patriot who is currently living inside a government wildlife building in the middle of Oregon to defend ranchers who burned down 130 acres of federal land.

[B]Are the protesters violent?[/B]

They have vowed to only seek a peaceful overthrow of the entire U.S. federal government.

[B]How long are they planning to stay?[/B]

As long as their supply of whiskey and bison chili lasts.

[B]What is the militia ultimately hoping to achieve?[/B]

Garner enough attention over next few weeks to be brought onstage during rally for a low-polling GOP candidate.

[B]Is the protest going to work?[/B]

Nope.[/QUOTE]

Once again, the Onion provides wonderfully biting insight. :smile:

[QUOTE=chappy;421281][URL]http://www.theonion.com/graphic/what-you-need-know-about-oregon-militia-standoff-52111[/URL]

The Onion breaks from its long standing tradition of satire to publish a serious news item.[/QUOTE]
Excellent summation!

.

Ethics Watchdog: NRA Is Lying About Its Political Spending
 

[URL="http://prospect.org/blog/checks/ethics-watchdog-nra-lying-about-its-political-spending-0"]Checks: Political Money & Democracy[/URL]
[QUOTE]The National Rifle Association might be misrepresenting the extent of its political activity, according to Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). The ethics watchdog filed a new complaint today with the IRS calling on the agency to investigate alleged discrepancies in political spending disclosures.

According to the complaint, the reported \$12.6 million in political expenditures during the 2014 election cycle. However, it only reported \$5.79 million in political spending to the IRS. And its annual audited statement showed that the group had covered \$18.5 million of its PAC’s expenses—bringing the grand total of political expenditures up to \$31.1 million.
[/QUOTE]

I just wanted to drop in and point out that one of the geniuses who have the best grasp on Federalism and the Constitution[URL="http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/01/protester_arrested_in_burns_dr.html"] drove a stolen government truck[/URL] to the Safeway to get some snacks.

Did authorities cut all electric power and water supply from the building yet? That would be a peacefull way to end this situation more quickly. Catching anyone who get out or try to get out. make a no fly zone around the building too (droping supply, anyone?).

[QUOTE=chappy;422655]I just wanted to drop in and point out that one of the geniuses who have the best grasp on Federalism and the Constitution[URL="http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/01/protester_arrested_in_burns_dr.html"] drove a stolen government truck[/URL] to the Safeway to get some snacks.[/QUOTE]
Thanks for this story. :smile:

[url=www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/01/whats-your-threat-score.html]What's Your Threat Score?[/url] | naked capitalism
[quote]Beware is the new stats-bank that helps officers analyze “billions of data points, including arrest reports, property records, commercial databases, deep Web searches and…social-media postings” to ultimately come up with a score that indicates a person’s potential for violence, according to a Washington Post story. No word yet on whether this meta data includes photos and facial recognition software. For example would an ordinary person, yet to commit a crime, be flagged when seen wearing a hoodie in a gated Florida community.

The company tries to paint itself as a savior to first responders, claiming they want to help them “understand the nature of the environment they may encounter during the window of a 911 event.” Think of it like someone pulling your credit score when you apply for a job. Except, in this instance you never applied for the job and they’re pulling your credit score anyway because they knew you might apply. It’s that level of creepiness.[/quote]
And if you think avoiding the life-sucking social media (as I do, except for this particular big-data-only-in-the-numbers-we-crunch venue here) will help keep you out of the AI's crosshairs, think again:
[i]
"Suppose a person doesn’t use social media or own a house but was once arrested when he was 17 for possession of marijuana. The absence of data might lend itself to a high threat level."
[/i]
And unlike your credit score(s), you've no way of viewing your profile and challenging inaccuracies. "Safety through opacity, comrades!"

"Sleepwalking our way into totalitarianism," is spot-on.

WTF?
 

I can't wait to have more of these kind of [URL="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/24/sheriff-gun-shop-shootout-over-25-kills-2-wounds-2.html"]folks[/URL] walking around....

It looks like a prosecutor would have to [URL="http://www.newsms.fm/mississippis-version-of-stand-your-ground/"]prove[/URL] that the shooter was in the gun shop illegally before he shot, or prove that he provoked the owner, to be able to prosecute. It will be interesting to see how the NRA spins this one.

Oregon protest leader Ammon Bundy seized in deadly clash
[url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35416516[/url]

Ethical question
 

Most people here are probably aware of the precarious survival odds for rhinos. Poachers continue to pick them off from protected areas. Today, I saw this story about a program in two preserves in Kenya, which involves [URL="http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-35503077"]snipers shooting presumed poachers on sight[/URL]. When I mentioned this story to my partner he became incensed that I might come anywhere close to accepting such a policy.

I am not sure what drives the level of presumption. Given the numbers of dead rhinos and dead poachers mentioned, one might guess that the sniper teams do not wait for a rhino to be killed. This suggests preemptive killing, based, perhaps, on such things as being in a wildlife refuge with weapons. It is definitely "shoot first, ask questions later."

So what do people think?

[QUOTE]I'm lying in wet grass with three heavily armed Kenyans. One hundred metres ahead stand three white rhinos. They're oblivious to our presence, and from here, with three shots, my companions could earn themselves a year's salary each.


But they won't. They're part of an SAS-trained private army raised to protect the species from poachers. I ask the sergeant what he would do if he spotted one of his friends or neighbours up to no good.


His reply is unequivocal. "If he comes to kill rhinos he is robbing the entire community. And I will shoot him dead."
[/QUOTE]

If I understand the article correctly:
[LIST=1][*]Rhino horn fetches exorbitant prices because it is scarce and falsely believed to cure many illnesses.[*]To counter poaching in Kenya, convicted poachers can expect 25 years in prison.[*]As a result of (2), poachers are willing to use extreme violence to avoid being caught.[*]As a result of (3), the park officials justify pre-emptive killing of (suspected) poachers as the only safe way to deal with them.[/LIST]Is it really impossible to reduce the demand? (Prove that horn is no cure, or flood the market with synthetically produced horn that works just as well, or as a last resort remove the horns yourself without harming the rhino.)
Is it really impossible to reduce the prison term (so poachers are less violent) but increase the likelihood of catching them (alive)?

I think that a guy who can kill that beautiful animal without being in extreme situation (like self defense, life threatening, whatever) without any remorse, to take its horn, would kill a human being with even less remorse (i.e. less than "no remorse!"), with or without prison term. OTOH, it is no need to kill them. Shot their wheels, their hat, like in western movies, whatever. They will get the message. If not, then shot their legs. Are we talking about real snipers, or a bunch of LaurVs with glasses on the nose, and compressed air guns? If they are real snipers, shot the poacher's dicks. No joke. :smile:

Spread the news that ground poacher's penis causes longer sustained erections than rhino horn ever did.

[QUOTE=kladner;425558]So what do people think?[/QUOTE]

Humans are plentiful. Endangered animals are (by definition) limited.

Shoot to kill any human who are anywhere near an endangered animal without authorization who might do them harm.

Let us not forget Cecil the Lion, killed by Walter Palmer, a dentist who enjoyed "recreational big-game hunting".

[URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/argentina-soccer-player-kills-referee_us_56c31bb8e4b08ffac1266711"]Referee Dies After Soccer Player Shoots Him During Game[/URL]
[QUOTE]A soccer player is on the lam in Argentina after he allegedly shot and killed a referee who sent him off.

The man was reportedly shown a red card for hitting another player during an amateur league match in Cordoba on Sunday.

Police say he walked off the pitch and grabbed a gun from his backpack.

He then ran back onto the field of play as the game continued, and allegedly shot 48-year-old official Cesar Flores in the head, chest and neck.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=chalsall;425662]Humans are plentiful. Endangered animals are (by definition) limited.
Shoot to kill any human who are anywhere near an endangered animal without authorization who might do them harm.
Let us not forget Cecil the Lion, killed by Walter Palmer, a dentist who enjoyed "recreational big-game hunting".[/QUOTE]

I didn't see an emoji. You are kidding, right?

[url]http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/04/us/gun-violence-graphics/[/url] [quote]Gun violence kills far more Americans than terrorism

During his presidency, Barack Obama has had to deliver statements on gun violence regularly. After a shooting at Oregon's Umpqua Community College in October, he asked news organizations to tally up the number of Americans killed by terrorist attacks in the last decade and compare it with the number of Americans who have died in gun violence.[/quote]The huge focus on (the fallacy of) stopping terrorism by slurping up ever more personal data is grossly misplaced effort if the real goal is to [strike]save[/strike] extend lives.

[QUOTE=retina;426781][URL]http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/04/us/gun-violence-graphics/[/URL] The huge focus on (the fallacy of) stopping terrorism by slurping up ever more personal data is grossly misplaced effort if the real goal is to [strike]save[/strike] extend lives.[/QUOTE]

Terrorists are just the latest in a long line of boogeymen used to scare people into accepting the loss of privacy. Not, it seems, that we have any say in the matter. The camel's nose is too far under the tent already. I again applaud Apple for loudly opposing the court order to create a way to hack an encrypted phone.
I am seeing a lot of this kind of stuff:
[CENTER][INDENT][SIZE=4][I][B][FONT=Comic Sans MS][COLOR=Red] "Head Spook says Paris attacks would have been stopped, if not for encryption."[/COLOR][/FONT][/B][/I][/SIZE][SIZE=4][COLOR=Red]
[/COLOR][/SIZE][/INDENT][LEFT][SIZE=4]Be afraid.[/SIZE] [COLOR=Gray]Be very afraid.[/COLOR][COLOR=Silver] [SIZE=1]Give us your passwords and we'll [I]try [/I]to get some lenience for you.[/SIZE][/COLOR]
[/LEFT]
[/CENTER]

The basic issue is how do we stamp out violent terrorism.

[QUOTE=davar55;426805]The basic issue is how do we stamp out violent terrorism.[/QUOTE]Easy. Don't give people a reason to terrorise you.

OK, Retina, I'll try. Of course, I wasn't referring to
forumites as terrorists nor me as victim, but there
may have appeared to be an analogous situation
here a few times. I may have been considered on
the other side at times. But we're all ultimately
reasonable, aren't we? Discussion is a good thing...

[QUOTE=davar55;426834]... Of course, I wasn't referring to forumites as terrorists nor me as victim ...[/QUOTE]Neither was I actually. My usage of "you" was meant in the plural form as in: "all of you that are affected by it".

Perhaps I should spell it out more clearly: Stop interfering in other people's business and perhaps, just perhaps, the others will stop terrorising you (the collective you).

[QUOTE=retina;426838]Neither was I actually. My usage of "you" was meant in the plural form as in: "all of you that are affected by it".

Perhaps I should spell it out more clearly: [U]Stop interfering in other people's business and perhaps, just perhaps, the others will stop terrorising you (the collective you)[/U].[/QUOTE]
:goodposting:

[QUOTE=retina;426838]Neither was I actually. My usage of "you" was meant in the plural form as in: "all of you that are affected by it".

Perhaps I should spell it out more clearly: Stop interfering in other people's business and perhaps, just perhaps, the others will stop terrorising you (the collective you).[/QUOTE]

Of course I had thought you were referring to the world-wide threat
posed by radical violently extremist terrorists, who have an agenda
that in fact involves destroying all those who oppose their climb
toward world domination and intolerance of all others.

[URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/02/24/we-do-not-need-a-militia-of-toddlers-if-iowa-law-passes-children-can-carry-handguns/"]‘We do not need a militia of toddlers': If Iowa law passes, children can carry handguns[/URL]
[QUOTE]The current state law has no restrictions on children using long guns or shotguns under a parent’s supervision but prohibits them from using handguns.

State Rep. Jake Highfill (R) said the new bill, which passed 62-36, “brings the code in line with long guns and shotguns” by allowing them to possess a firearm under direct supervision from a parent or legal guardian.

It defines “direct supervision” as “supervision provided by another person who maintains visual and verbal contact at all times with the supervised person.”[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=only_human;427315][URL="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/02/24/we-do-not-need-a-militia-of-toddlers-if-iowa-law-passes-children-can-carry-handguns/"]‘We do not need a militia of toddlers': If Iowa law passes, children can carry handguns[/URL][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]It defines “direct supervision” as “supervision provided by another person who maintains visual and verbal contact at all times with the supervised person.” [/QUOTE]
Remember the 9-year-old girl who was handed an Uzi, which the instructor put on Full Auto. The girl fired a burst and lost control of the weapon. It proceeded to kick up and shoot the instructor in the head.

Supervision may not all it is cracked up to be.

Why doesn't Iowa dispense with the legal age of being allowed to drive a car on a public road provided that a child driver is under supervision of an adult in the car maintaining "visual and verbal contact"? I would find that prospect no more alarming.