Live data from Hacker News

Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

reddit.com

881–890 of 957 posts

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#881
post #831
post #768

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5.56x45mm? Aka .223 Remington? 7.62x51mm? Aka .308 Winchester? Only two of the most common NATO standards.

This is incorrect. 5.56 != .223 Remington, same for 7.62 It's actually very dangerous to former in civilian guns, designed for latter.

Citation for 5.56 vs .223?

Fact: The external case and bullet dimensions are functionally identical

Fact: The chamber dimensions in respective rifles are close enough, +/- machining tolerances, that "very dangerous" is inaccurate fearmongering

Fact: 5.56 max pressures exceed .223 pressures (to the tune of ~12.5%), but both are subject to the vagaries of exact loading

So while it's not a good idea to fire 5.56 out of a cheap .223 rifle, it's not a death wish to do so out of a .223 engineered to accept the additional pressure.

Curious where you're getting your information?

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#882
post #881
post #831

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is incorrect. 5.56 != .223 Remington, same for 7.62 It's actually very dangerous to former in civilian guns, designed for latter.

Citation for 5.56 vs .223? Fact: The external case and bullet dimensions are functionally identical Fact: The chamber dimensions in respective rifles are close enough, +/- machining tolerances, that "very dangerous" is inaccurate fearmongering Fact: 5.56 max pressures exceed .223 pressures (to the tune of ~12.5%), but both are subject to the vagaries of exact loading So while it's not a good idea to fire 5.56 out of…

> Citation for 5.56 vs .223?

> Curious where you're getting your information?

The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute

https://saami.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Unsafe-Arms-and...

page 8:

In Firearms Chambered For: 223 Remington

Do Not Use These Cartridges:

5.56mm Military

---

Also literally first entry in FAQ on SAAMI site: https://saami.org/faqs/#ammunition-firearm-chambered

Can I use 5.56x45mm, 5.56 or 5.56 NATO ammunition in a firearm chambered for 223 Remington (223 Rem)?

NO!

It is not safe to shoot “5.56” “5.56 NATO” or “5.56x45mm” (“5.56”) ammunition in a firearm with barrel marked as being chambered in 223 Remington for a number of reasons. The main reason being that a barrel marked as chambered in 223 Remington will have a shorter throat into the rifling than a “5.56” barrel which may cause increased pressure when the “5.56” ammunition is fired in it. This can result in serious injury or death to the user and/or bystanders, as well as damage to the firearm.

However, it is safe to use SAAMI-compliant 223 Remington ammunition in firearms with a barrel marked as chambered in “5.56.”

If you are unclear about which ammunition is appropriate to safely use in your firearm, consult the firearm owner’s manual or contact the firearm manufacturer for further guidance.

> So while it's not a good idea to fire 5.56 out of a cheap .223 rifle, it's not a death wish to do so out of a .223 engineered to accept the additional pressure.

I can't find the manual online, but I'm sure that in my previous, not quite cheap, Tikka T3 Super Varmint manual it was written the same. It's only truly safe only when manufacturer says so (like it was with now discontinued Ruger Precision 223/5.56, if I recall correctly)

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#883

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imagine if the US suddenly had a dictator that just decided they were going to take all property rights and freedoms like that Do you know anything about China and Hong Kong? What exactly do you think China has done in Hong Kong? EDIT: Down-voters, can you answer the question? Or are you just going to try to bury it with down-votes?

I DO know something about China and Hong Kong, having lived/worked/studied in them, and having half of my family there. And of course, as in any of these things, nuance is the first thing that goes out the window. First, although Hongkong has been peaceful in the last decades, it has had some pretty severe rioting before, in the 60s and at various other times. But what we see now is a drawn out result of the 1997 han…

> China has not yet brought down the hammer on Hongkong, and they have not removed property rights and the overall freedom.

Thank you!

> Sadly, these protests are more likely to bring the dictatorship closer.

That's my fear as well. I'm all for peaceful protests, but I'm afraid the violent protesters are signing the death wish of freedom in Hong Kong.

> Then you have the simple fact that China is not a democracy, it's an oppressive surveillance one-party state.

(I'll ignore the "oppressive surveillance" you snuck in there, as that's not an exclusive to China, and many democracies are much further along in that regard.)

And that makes China automatically bad...how? China has on balance done less evil and more good than most of the democracies of the world. Can we be honest with ourselves and keep an open mind?

> All of the democratic world has a certain moral obligation to either attempt to transform or to oppose China.

China certainly should be kept in check by fellow world powers. But let's not get carried away with mindless ideology and dogma.

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#884
post #870

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have read Heller and found Scalia's reasoning to be... perforated at best. Here's a great excerpt (sorry, he just writes and writes and writes): > “Security of a Free State.” The phrase “security of a free state” meant “security of a free polity,” not security of each of the several States as the dissent below argued, see 478 F. 3d, at 405, and n. 10. Joseph Story wrote in his treatise on the Constitution that “the…

It's not an appeal to authority. The Supreme Court is literally the last word on the Constitution in the United States, therefore they are the authority on it. Scalia's opinion is the law of the land, and the reasoning is sound. Unless you're a SCOTUS justice, your opinion on the matter isn't really relevant.

I agree, which is why I actually haven't given my opinion on 2A. I know that because it involves a discussion on whether Americans have a constitutional right to own nuclear weapons. I've only summarized relevant bits of the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, law (The Militia Act of 1792) and Supreme Court precedent.

I concede I'm not likely to convince you. But I implore you not to be taken in by one of the most hollow Justices in the post WWII era. Originalism/Textualism is itself an appeal to authority to the Founders, and its sole purpose is to mask a reactionary conservative agenda by mythologizing a group of people whose overarching concern was how to write a founding document that both enshrined human rights and the will of the people as the source of the American government's legitimacy, while also granting assurances to the South that they would be able to own other humans in perpetuity. It is at best misguided and ignorant to try and present this era as unusually enlightened, but when you consider how women, indigenous people, abducted and enslaved people, and immigrants of most nations were butchered, raped, subjugated, denigrated, bought and sold (yes, by Founders), it's full on repugnant. I urge you to look past Scalia's admittedly charming sophistry, which I promise you conceals a richer, more optimistic and inspired world exorcised of centuries-old ghosts in powdered wigs.

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#885
post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's been other instances today where police was just looking to fight protestors And protestors obviously looking to fight police. They swarmed the other officers partner who was being beaten on the ground and he was next. I find it shocking so many people were expecting him to just take it the beating or 'run away' and leave his partner there. There's a very good argument for having police on the streets when…

> I find it shocking so many people were expecting him to just take it the beating or 'run away' and leave his partner there. When you're a public servant, this should be expected of you. Especially when the crime you're trying to brutalize members of the public for is "exercising freedom of expression"

This is a case of self defense

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#886
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same things rednecks from Vietnam, Afghanistan or Yemen would be doing. The second amendment is not exclusive to America. The flag of Mozambique even has an AK-47 on it, for pretty much the same reason. "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun" said Mao.

Those places are not examples I’d like to follow. I’m struggling to think of a first world country with a law that’s similar, is there one?

Canada. Although it's not in the constitution AFAIK.

In Europe that would be countries like Czech Republic, Austria, Switzerland (interestingly, those countries are well-known producers and exporters of firearms).

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#887
post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Police officers on diplomatic protection, airport security, etc are usually armed, and there may well be armed officers available in riot situations, but they are backup not front line. I said myself it’s not the same elsewhere, many other police services are armed but even so using live ammunition against protesters is unacceptable anywhere. I agree the protesters know what they are doing, but just as I cannot deny…

> Do you think that is acceptable? I think it irrelevant. You don't hit a guy with a gun pointed at you with a pipe and expect not to be shot. The wider situation is not relevant unless the chap wanted to be shot. > but they are backup not front line. Also incorrect. I see armed patrols every day

Having a gun and pointing it at people does not give anyone the right to shoot them.

That last comment was referring specifically to police in riot situation.

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#888
Serious question: Why aren't more from the police protesting as well, and supporting their citizens? I expect it is from fear of the government? What would they do to police unwilling to perform their duty? I wonder, because you have to assume some percentage of the police is in agreement with the protestors. Or maybe it is because right now, no matter what their opinion is, the need for order and police is greater than ever.

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#889
post #715

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any broadening of rights after the signing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration is suspect. These are ploys to alienate the Hong Kong people from China (離間計). If you by that mean that giving a place more civil rights and protections against human rights abuses makes it more unlike China, yes, I agree. And as spacehunt said, British established the independent judiciary which the CCP is trying the dismantle now wit…

> the independent judiciary which the CCP is trying the dismantle now with the extradition bill That narrative is never supported by the facts, and the extradition treaty has been withdrawn. You keep saying it does not make it true. > the British also made large scale election reforms After the signing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration. It's like agreeing to sell your company, then doubling the salary of every em…

> That narrative is never supported by the facts, and the extradition treaty has been withdrawn. You keep saying it does not make it true.

It’s still not withdrawn, Ms. Lam has only promised she will. But the bill is still in second reading.

> After the signing of the Sino-British Joint Declaration. It's like agreeing to sell your company, then doubling the salary of every employee before handing over the company to the new owner. It's reckless, irresponsible, but sadly, very effective.

These are not employees of the CCP who’s freedom is draining China’s budget, these are people who’s freedom and independent judiciary made them an attractive spot for foreign investment in the first place. The only thing the expansion of voting rights cost the CCP was a more expensive process to influence and pressure Hong Kong. With democracy, such a pointless bill as the extradition bill would not have been proposed in the first place, and the threat of losing re-election would have made the LegCo fully withdraw the bill immediately instead of after months of protest. And, a democracy has checks and balances to investigate police departments for excessive violence and corruption, another thing that the people of Hong Kong lost when the CCP rolled back the amendments that restricted police power.

> Just like the exile of Edward Snowden by no means indicate the unraveling of freedom of speech in the US.

I can publish a full page ad in every US newspaper calling for the US to drop all charges against Snowden and have absolutely no repercussions from the US government. I can’t do that in China calling for the release of Gui. That’s the main reason the case of Edward Snowden is not unravelling free speech in the US, or the west.

I work for Bonnier, one of the largest publishers in the Nordics, and the Hong Kong government took out a full page ad in our largest newspaper, Dagens Nyheter, where they argued that Western governments should keep out of Hong Kong’s business. The editor in chief, Peter Wolodarski, explained why we did it like this;

”We gave the Chinese regime the opportunity to present their case in one of the most prestigious newspapers in the country. An opportunity they deny their own citizens. Because that’s how much we value free speech in Sweden, and that’s how little the CCP values free speech.”

Re: Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

#890

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How should we intervene?

Not that I'm necessarily advocating this, but US intelligence has historically proven extremely adept at destabilizing regimes. I'd imagine that mostly look like sowing internal discord within the CCP. The party already has a lot of corruption, so most likely many senior officials could be blackmailed and manipulated. The long-term goal would be to weaken the resolve and coherence of the CCP to the point that a non-v…

This is a quite short-sighted point of view. The real challenge is to establish a stable new regime after toppling the old one. In the case of mainland China that has no prior experience at all as a democratic society, it would have a difficult time adapting (PRC before WWII doesn't count since it was unstable and higly corrupt). Also, a weak goverment is in danger of neglecting to address the internal challenges China faces (tensions with minorities, poverty in rural regions, environmental destruction).
Post reply on HN