Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

morganhilltimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

911–920 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#911

Post by casefields »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #528
LyndsySimon wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not anymore. The firearms community is more inclusive than it has ever been. We - and I obviously count myself among them - see the racial disparity in access to arms as a key component of our legal strategy to get those laws overturned. Pretty much all gun control in the US is racist in its origins and usually in its modern implementation. "May issue" is a shining example of this.

When you say "Not anymore", that must have changed dramatically in the past 2 1/2 years. The NRA's silence in the Philando Castile case in 2017 was deafening.

Claudette Colvin.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#912

Post by anoonmoose »

da_big_ghey wrote: post #849
anoonmoose wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the end of the day, Texas, however you may feel living there/being from there, has a higher per capita firearm death rate than several large states with stricter gun laws and many countries with stricter gun laws, and I personally believe those things to be related.

Gun murder rate per 100k, state by state: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta... The data are from 2015, but DC is highest by far, even with its very strict gun laws. Note that California is higher than Texas despite horribly restrictive gun laws. My point was more that people are less likely to abuse them as some exceptional item, at least as far as I've seen. Criminals will always use them;…

I know there are areas with higher gun murder rates than TX. DC is a slightly unfair comparison, as you're comparing a city to a state. CA is not significantly higher than TX.

Your general point- which really seemed to be "knowing that everyone is armed in TX results in less gun violence", is easily disproven by other states with totally different laws having similar or lower gun violence rates.

To your last line- I agree with you, I don't believe crime rate should have any effect on our right to keep and bear arms. I want a complete repeal of the Second Amendment, though.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#913

Post by anoonmoose »

agensaequivocum wrote: post #851
danaris wrote: post #844

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, um...what are the statistics for Texas , which is the state being talked about? It's all very well to mention that other states have some firearm homicides each year, but if you don't provide Texas' stats to compare to, it's not especially germane to the topic at hand...

TX 3.67 The reason I pointed out the other states was to show that the looser gun laws of Texas is not necessarily the cause of higher firearm homicide rate. The other states have looser firearm laws than Texas (not in all respects). Edit: Some other states CT 1.823 DC 19.27 IL 5.11 MA 1.25 MD 7.61 NY 1.53 RI 0.94

I do not think it is the cause. My point is that the laws on the books and the firearm homicide rate seem fairly loosely coupled, if at all. If TX has loose laws, and CA has strict laws, and they're about the same with regards to firearm homicide rate, I think it is fair to suggest that the original poster's suggestion that "knowing every person could be armed actually reduces issues" may be faulty.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#914

Post by uncoder0 »

frob wrote: post #819
rietta wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an argument to be made that licensing in general is a poll tax. There is an equal protection argument against not recognizing permits issued to out of State residents who meet the same standards except for residency. Sadly, I am not holding my breath to see either come to the test.

Can you please make the argument that licensing in general is a poll tax? This statement seems very outlandish to me and I cannot find any papers or articles to support it. The equal protection argument also seems incorrect to me. If this were the case, states would be under scrutiny for basically any discrepancy between their laws. Why should voters in Texas be required to show IDs when those in California aren't? W…

Here is a simple argument to support that stance. Under the 2nd amendment I have the constitutional right to bear arms. If I want to purchase a suppressor to limit hearing damage while firing my weapons I have to pay a $200 tax, send my fingerprints to the FBI and wait 6 months to a year and sometimes longer before I can take possession of my suppressor. There are no similar restrictions on the right to vote or speak freely. The same rules apply if I wanted to add a stock to my AR 'pistol' which currently has a pistol brace or if I wanted to add a small piece of metal to make it fully automatic.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#915

Post by thaumasiotes »

lsllc wrote: post #709
magila wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sort of thing is the result of a permitting policy called may-issue. Basically it means the party that issues permits, usually the local sheriff or police department, can deny a concealed carry application for any reason. States adopt this policy as a way of punting CC policy making down to the local level. In practice the may-issue policy has repeatedly proven to be an irresistible opportunity for graft. Despit…

This is exactly right! When there's no clear set of criteria for a permit and people get denied for this or that or maybe no reason at all. Just try getting a (unrestricted) LTC in Boston, near impossible -- unless you "have friends". This is how LTCs (License To Carry) work in Massachusetts, it's city by city dependent on the Chief of Police. The criteria should be clear and contestable in court. Like it or not, it'…

> Like it or not, it's a constitutional right and the law should be "shall issue" (unless good reason not to -- and I'm all for reasonable "good reasons not to").

I believe the state of the law is that either concealed carry or open carry must be available. They can't both be may-issue, but one can be if the other isn't.

And I tend to agree that that's enough to satisfy the argument "it's a constitutional right".

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#916

Post by fastball »

electriclove wrote: post #860
fastball wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't even need tax dollars to build more housing, all you need is not NIMBYism. Unfortunately the Bay Area has that in spades.

It exists everywhere

It is demonstrably worse in BA than in most other places in the US.

Places like Japan don't seem to have much of a problem with it at all.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#917

Post by uncoder0 »

SwimSwimHungry wrote: post #706
xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #646

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are... you seriously suggesting that if it was easier to get guns there might be less violent crime?

Yes. That is what is likely being suggested. A well armed society is a polite society. But hey, if you live in an ivory tower, why let the common folk have a right to bear arms? Doesn't that sound elitist to you? A certain someone by the name of Ronald Reagan (yeah... that guy... the one worshiped by conservatives) signed the Mulford Act into law to keep Black Panthers from open carrying guns. California's history on…

To expand on this... there are virtually zero intentional homicides at gun ranges and gun shows where hundreds of weapons are present.

Also all gun laws are discriminatory toward the poor and minorities disproportionately.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#918

Post by SwimSwimHungry »

uncoder0 wrote: post #917
SwimSwimHungry wrote: post #706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. That is what is likely being suggested. A well armed society is a polite society. But hey, if you live in an ivory tower, why let the common folk have a right to bear arms? Doesn't that sound elitist to you? A certain someone by the name of Ronald Reagan (yeah... that guy... the one worshiped by conservatives) signed the Mulford Act into law to keep Black Panthers from open carrying guns. California's history on…

To expand on this... there are virtually zero intentional homicides at gun ranges and gun shows where hundreds of weapons are present. Also all gun laws are discriminatory toward the poor and minorities disproportionately.

I can't agree more. Simply put, even if you do manage to get a thumb up from the Sheriff in California for a permit, the fees really are a tax on the poor as well.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#919

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

ashtonkem wrote: post #898
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #868

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show me a gun control law that doesn’t explicitly exempt police.

My favorite is how cops in CA are allowed to buy off-roster guns[0]. Apparently a Glock 19 Gen 5 is just too dangerous for citizens (but a Gen 3 is fine), however cops are allowed to own them personally because ... reasons. 0 - CA has a roster of handguns legal for private purchase and ownership. The list includes every gun that was for sale when the roster was created, plus any gun that meets CA's microstamping law.…

Ha, yea. CA gun roster is a classic example. Don’t think the over-time defacto ban isn’t entirely intentional. Peak California.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#920

Post by zests »

iaw wrote: post #510
zests wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lowest? I checked wikipedia and was able to find that Arizona had a 30% lower rate in 2016 and is a "shall issue" state.

2013 rates age adjusted[0], Arizona had a higher per capita death rate at 14.1 vs 7.7 with California. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_death_rates_in_the_Uni...

I found those age adjusted rates some time after I posted. It strikes me as odd. I'm sure if we adjust by enough rates we can come to whatever conclusion we want. What if we adjusted for gang prevalence and suicide rate as well?
Post reply on HN