ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation • Hacker News Board

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#71

Post by maxerickson » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:32 PM UTC

dm2 wrote: post #48

pionar wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Would people flip out if there was a bill proposed to require all guns in the US to have a GPS tracker? As a gun control advocate who also owns guns, yes, I would flip the f * out. While I have no problem if the government knows I own a gun (they know I own a car), Putting a GPS tracker on it would result in two things: 1. The government would know where I am at all times (I carry my Kahr CM-9 everywhere that allow…

1. The government doesn't care where you are at any time. Individuals might, but that's why there would be a warrant required to access the system that monitors GPS trackers on guns. There is GPS in your phone and in your car, what's the difference? 2. Of course many would. If you make it slightly more difficult to remove then many would not (and would get caught easier) or would opt to not steal the weapon. I've kno…

Bikes are stolen using battery powered angle grinders.

And those locks don't need to be as compact as something securing some fragile electronics to a gun. And guns can actually be worth something.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#72

Post by grey-area » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:32 PM UTC

JHSheridan wrote: post #42

michaelt wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's facing bankruptcy and there's facing bankruptcy. The government devolves responsibility for these things to local groups (to cut management overhead and let them respond to local needs | to transfer blame for under-funding away from elected MPs who set funding levels) and there are usually some local groups who report not having enough money (because the unaccountable bureaucrats are wasteful with other peopl…

I disagree. Facing bankruptcy is facing bankruptcy. Politicians can make it sound as complicated as they like, but at the end of the day, if you owe a man $20, you're going to have to pay him. It doesn't really matter who is at fault. I don't know enough about the NHS to say with any certainty, but I imagine the way the hospitals stay open and patients get their drugs is by the NHS going into more debt (please correc…

The NHS is not set up to make money, it is set up to spend it. You appear to think it is some kind of profit making enterprise - it is a way of spending taxpayers money to safeguard their health, and does so in a demonstrably more efficient manner than private healthcare systems based on insurance, despite any flaws it may have. Compare costs with the US for example.

Clearly it will never turn a profit in pounds and pence, only in lives saved. Talking of bankruptcy in that context is a nonsense introduced by politicians intent on doing away with it for ideological reasons.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#73

Post by wl » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:36 PM UTC

dm2 wrote: post #56

cschneid wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would people flip out if there was a bill proposed to require all guns in the US to have a GPS tracker? Ohh god yes, they would. I live in Colorado, and 2 of our state reps got recalled when the democrats limited clip size to 15, and required more background checks on purchase. That restriction got people so angry that they did mid-term recalls. Not even just waiting till next election.

Why would anyone be against that? Both of those things seem perfectly reasonable. I'm sure there would be a provision for a type of license that would allow a larger magazine if you had a valid reason and very clean record. If you live on a large farm and like to shoot for fun, then maybe a larger magazine would be acceptable. If you live in an apartment in a city, then you don't reasonably need extremely large magaz…

The magazine size restriction only looks reasonable if you're unfamiliar with guns and how they're used in crime. The most common criminal use of a gun consists of a few rounds, rarely exceeding the capacity of these restricted size magazines. If we move to the much more rare mass shooting, we see that magazine size doesn't really reduce the body count. In the Virginia Tech shooting, for example, the shooter killed 32 people and injured 17 more with only 10 and 15 round magazines. In exchange for this limited or non-existent benefit, you seriously inconvenience gun owners who will likely never misuse their guns.

The opposition to background checks isn't necessarily unreasonable, either. Pretty much all of the mass shootings in the US in the past 15 years have been carried out by people who would have been able to pass background checks. In the more common cases of illegal gun use, the user tends to be a felon who already got the gun through black market channels. Perhaps the benefit here is greater than the magazine capacity restrictions, but I don't know. I do know that background checks have been used to create a special tax on firearm transactions that greatly exceeds the cost of doing the checks. I also do know that these background checks have been used to create databases that were later used to confiscate firearms. Pretty much all the practical objections to background checks could be worked around if legislators wanted to. The problem seems to be that legislators who promote such bills don't seem interested in doing so.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#74

Post by DerpDerpDerp » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:37 PM UTC

talmand wrote: post #47

herbig wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You already carry a cellphone, I presume. Also, I am against most forms of gun control, being otherwise very liberal in my worldview. However, I cannot possibly understand why a developer would need to carry a gun at all times. You are inviting trouble with that, and more likely to die to your own gun than you are to protect yourself from some bad guys. If you want to carry a gun with you, I support your right to do…

Your claim about more likely to die to your own gun is often a misleading statement. The leading type of death caused by firearms in the US is suicide, by a large factor. The leading method of suicide in the US is by firearms. Therefore, if you remove suicide from those numbers the chances of you dieing by your own gun is reduced significantly. Sorry, but this is one of my pet peeves whenever I see a statement like t…

Have you considered that gun ownership may contribute to suicide, by lowering the threshold of planning needed, and thus making it possible for gun owners who wouldn't commit suicide by other means?

It's not as simple of a relationship as you make it out to be.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#75

Post by Crito » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:38 PM UTC

beat wrote: post #65

cgore wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with gun registration versus car registration is that there is no real use to having a list of car owners, other than legitimate ones. But, a list of people with weapons would be the first thing any would-be dictator would love to have. I realize I am inviting the wrath of Godwin's Law here, but, as a real-world historical example of the threat of gun registration, the Nazis: "In 1931, Weimar authorities…

Godwin's Law exists for a reason, man. (signed, a pro-gun liberal who loathes your bad line of reasoning)

Not really. Godwin's law itself is just an observation on the nature of online conversations. (And arguably commentary on the popularity of fallacious reductio ad hitlerum style arguments)

Godwin's Law has become some sort of notion of mentioning Hitler being a "forfeit" of sorts. The reason this has become popular is because low barrier-to-entry comment sniping is great fun and this version of Godwin's Law makes it child's play. However it is nothing to be respected.

There is a line of reasoning that states that comparisons to Hitler are damaging to society because they necessarily "cheapen" the memory of what the Nazis were and did. I might concede that this is true in extreme cases ("You won't let me go to the dance with Jimmy? You are literally Hitler!" may qualify. Certainly that is at least obnoxious and fallacious) but I do not accept that line of argument across the board. Nobody is going to walk away from the above comment thinking that the Holocaust was not as bad as they originally thought.

Another, weaker, argument given in support of Godwin's Law is that comparisons to Hitler are inappropriate wherever and whenever the subject is less extreme or serious than the Holocaust. I submit that refusing to compare things to Hitler unless they are demonstrably already as bad as Hitler cripples our ability to learn useful lessons from that dark period in history. If we wait until a situation is as bad as the situation in 1930s Germany, then we have waited to the point that rhetoric alone is no longer of use. Comparisons to that era in German history are therefore only useful in situations that are not as dire.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#76

Post by Crito » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:42 PM UTC

DerpDerpDerp wrote: post #74

talmand wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your claim about more likely to die to your own gun is often a misleading statement. The leading type of death caused by firearms in the US is suicide, by a large factor. The leading method of suicide in the US is by firearms. Therefore, if you remove suicide from those numbers the chances of you dieing by your own gun is reduced significantly. Sorry, but this is one of my pet peeves whenever I see a statement like t…

Have you considered that gun ownership may contribute to suicide, by lowering the threshold of planning needed, and thus making it possible for gun owners who wouldn't commit suicide by other means? It's not as simple of a relationship as you make it out to be.

My below argument still applies.

If we take a "gun ownership"->"suicide" relationship for granted, we cannot assume that this particular gun owner is at risk for suicide. If there is a trend, then we can talk about the trend and populations. However talking about individuals requires more care.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#77

Post by beat » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:42 PM UTC

beat wrote: post #65

cgore wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with gun registration versus car registration is that there is no real use to having a list of car owners, other than legitimate ones. But, a list of people with weapons would be the first thing any would-be dictator would love to have. I realize I am inviting the wrath of Godwin's Law here, but, as a real-world historical example of the threat of gun registration, the Nazis: "In 1931, Weimar authorities…

Godwin's Law exists for a reason, man. (signed, a pro-gun liberal who loathes your bad line of reasoning)

To put it another way... if you can't win your argument without going Godwin, maybe your position isn't very strong. Leading with Godwin is the sign of a very weak argument, or a very weak arguer.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#78

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:44 PM UTC

talmand wrote: post #47

herbig wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You already carry a cellphone, I presume. Also, I am against most forms of gun control, being otherwise very liberal in my worldview. However, I cannot possibly understand why a developer would need to carry a gun at all times. You are inviting trouble with that, and more likely to die to your own gun than you are to protect yourself from some bad guys. If you want to carry a gun with you, I support your right to do…

Your claim about more likely to die to your own gun is often a misleading statement. The leading type of death caused by firearms in the US is suicide, by a large factor. The leading method of suicide in the US is by firearms. Therefore, if you remove suicide from those numbers the chances of you dieing by your own gun is reduced significantly. Sorry, but this is one of my pet peeves whenever I see a statement like t…

[deleted]

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#79

Post by strlen » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:48 PM UTC

CompelTechnic wrote: post #32

herbig wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You already carry a cellphone, I presume. Also, I am against most forms of gun control, being otherwise very liberal in my worldview. However, I cannot possibly understand why a developer would need to carry a gun at all times. You are inviting trouble with that, and more likely to die to your own gun than you are to protect yourself from some bad guys. If you want to carry a gun with you, I support your right to do…

"Objectively wrong play" is a bit too much. Carrying a gun does have benefits, and it does have drawbacks. Lots of room for this to be subjective, and lots of room for someone to subjectively find this to be a good thing to do.

Yep, it's a personal decision to make. It would be simple for me to get a non-resident CCW permit in number of shall-issue states I visit, but I've chosen not to. That's, however, my choice based on my own circumstances. I don't think I can "objectively" decide this for others.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#80

Post by wtbob » Mon, Dec 30, 2013, 8:59 PM UTC

dm2 wrote: post #56

cschneid wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would people flip out if there was a bill proposed to require all guns in the US to have a GPS tracker? Ohh god yes, they would. I live in Colorado, and 2 of our state reps got recalled when the democrats limited clip size to 15, and required more background checks on purchase. That restriction got people so angry that they did mid-term recalls. Not even just waiting till next election.

Why would anyone be against that? Both of those things seem perfectly reasonable. I'm sure there would be a provision for a type of license that would allow a larger magazine if you had a valid reason and very clean record. If you live on a large farm and like to shoot for fun, then maybe a larger magazine would be acceptable. If you live in an apartment in a city, then you don't reasonably need extremely large magaz…

> Why would anyone be against that? Both of those things seem perfectly reasonable.

Because there's nothing wrong with having a magazine which holds more than 15 rounds. That's the standard size for many black rifles.

The universal background check law means that it's illegal for me to give or lend my firearm to my brother, my cousin or my good friend. The existing law was fine: it should be illegal to knowingly transfer a firearm to someone ineligible to own one.