Live data from Hacker News

ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

jsonline.com

161–170 of 192 posts

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're using a gun in self defense and you need more than 10 or 15 rounds, again, you're woefully under-equipped to be using a gun. Unlike game and paper targets, people you are defending yourself from, can shoot back at you.

In what reality would a long drawn-out firefight between me and a bad guy happen often enough for me to be "seriously inconvenienced" by the fact that I only have a 10 round clip? Does that ever actually happen? The only way I can see that happening is if I'm wildly firing rounds towards a target hoping something hits. Not very realistic.

If you were talking about just yourself - I cannot really comment since I don't know you and have no idea what happens to you.

For all I know there are millions of people who don't own a gun at all and don't feel inconvenienced by that at all. If you don't need more than 10 round magazines - just don't buy them. If you decided that 6 rounds or 3 is all you need - just go with that. You know yourself better than anybody on the internet could hope to.

But, please, don't use general "you" when referring to yourself, it's really confusing.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#162
post #59
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…

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…

The government doesn't care about your rifles. Not even your semi-automatic ones with sights and stocks and lasers and so on. They barely even care about a well-trained militia full of people who are angry with them: The US Armed Forces destroyed something a lot scarier than anything the NRA could muster when it steamrollered Iraq in 2003.

So get off your horse about needing guns to protect yourself from the government. The government could destroy you and your guns in a second if it wanted to.

If you want to be persuasive, stick to defending yourself against home invasion. That's a band-aid on a serious problem, but at least it's a historically and logically honest argument.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#163
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't have a Constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right to own cell-phones, for one.

I don't know. > A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Legislating away cell phones seems like it infringes my right to regulate my militia.

I'll take "'What is a non-sequitur?' for $200, Alex".

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#164
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.

I suspect banning guns wouldn't really help. Japan doesn't have many, but they have lots of suicides.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#165
post #41
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…

A question (maybe a nitpick) about the word "liberal"--wouldn't it be more "liberal" to be against gun control since less control means more liberty?

"A question (maybe a nitpick) about the word "liberal"--wouldn't it be more "liberal" to be against gun control since less control means more liberty?"

Yes.

Conversely, the political party aligned with corporate and business interests (whichever that may be at the time) is NOT the political party that will champion broad access to means of force.

Whatever (temporary) accident of history it is that the party of corporate power is also the party of "gun rights" is an anomaly and will self-correct quickly.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, the old personal ownership of nuclear weapons argument, as if that were the same thing and relevant to this discussion. Note, in my comment above when I state "an inanimate object", I am referring to a gun. For you to take that statement and expand it to an extreme such as nuclear weapons is rather childish on your part. Since we've started into childish manner of discussion, are you suggesting then that some…

You are dealing in really generic platitudes that do not have any basis in fact. > In 2005, 75% of the 10,100 homicides committed using firearms in the United States were committed using handguns, compared to 4% with rifles, 5% with shotguns, and the rest with unspecified firearms.[48] The likelihood that a death will result is significantly increased when either the victim or the attacker has a firearm.[49] For exam…

Switching from suicides to homicides doesn't really help the case for gun control.

That page's neutrality on the subject is also under dispute. You should read the comments about that, they are interesting.

If we're talking homicides, does that include legal homicides as well as the illegal kind? If it does then the number is misleading. Since homicide is defined as a person killing another person then many shootings are listed as homicides but are not considered crimes. A police officer shooting someone attempting to kill a person is considered a homicide. A woman shooting her rapist to defend herself is considered a homicide. It depends on how the data was collected and labeled.

If you dig a bit deeper into the statistics you will find many places with tough gun control laws that have high rates of gun murders. You can also find examples of low gun ownership with low gun murders. The thing is you cannot look at the US as a whole with stats like that, the stats can vary wildly from state to state if you break it down that way. It is not as simple as saying guns bad, gun control good.

If one is willing to do so, break down homicides by race in each state and you often see interesting numbers. But I'm sure that's racist to suggest such things...

If you dig deeper into state statistics you may find that the majority of some of the states with the highest gun murders also happen to have high levels of gang activity. Look at Chicago in recent years. I wouldn't consider the entire state of Illinois as a crime-ridden state with murders in the street every day just because of Chicago's problems. You can find such findings on the Wikipedia page you linked. If one were to remove gun crimes committed in low-income urban areas, the number gets cut roughly in half. Heck, it wasn't that long ago that Washington D.C., where Congress can run things almost as strict as they want, was the murder capitol of the country.

How come that most gun control advocates use AR style rifles as their go-to evil gun example when the stats show almost no gun murders happen with that type of weapon? Because of mass shootings that get immediate national news coverage, it has become a tool to prey upon the emotions of people to further their agenda. If they were serious about helping people through gun control they would try to do something in Chicago where tough gun control has failed people for years. But they don't because mass shootings is where the news is and that's where the people who need to grandstand go to push their agenda. They often push an agenda that wouldn't have prevented the tragedy that they are taking advantage of in the first place.

You also can't compare homicide statistics internationally because often times it's an apples-to-oranges comparison. It's my understanding that in some countries a homicide may not listed as a murder, or whatever crime, until someone has been convicted. If that's the case then numbers can't be compared with the US where normally a non-accidental death caused by another human being is considered a homicide, regardless of court findings. Even then, it could vary from state to state.

Plus, this type of attitude is just attempting to treat a symptom instead of facing the social issues that cause such symptoms. If only the guns would go away then everything would somehow be okay.

That's an interesting stat on the shot/stabbing to the heart, but also rather expected. But it's just a rather specific statistic that almost sort of supports one-side of an argument. For instance, right before that statement it is speaking in terms of victim and assailant, such as your attacker deciding to shoot you specifically in the heart while being mugged. It's an attempt at an emotional response without discussing the problem as a whole.

Finally, the last I heard is that our crime statistics show a downward trend in violent crimes despite any real national level gun control legislation. By the way people talk you would think every American is constantly on edge waiting for someone to shoot them, which for the vast majority of America is simply not true. As discussed elsewhere in this thread, you are more likely to shoot yourself than be shot by someone else.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I suspect banning guns wouldn't really help. Japan doesn't have many, but they have lots of suicides.

Excellent point, a quick look says that it is the leading cause of death of men aged 20-44 and of women 15-34. Without a gun culture to speak of.

I wish you posted this earlier in the day. I could have used this information. Sad thing is, I knew this to some level but did not think of it.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#168
post #64
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…

Oh, people down voting because of Godwin's law? Fine... Armenians in Ottoman Turkey, Anti-Communists/Stalinists in Soviet Union, Anti-Communists in China, Mayan Indians in Guatemala, Christians in Uganda, General Population in Cambodia There are lots of examples of gun confiscations preceding mass murders. Not that every gun confiscations lead to mass murder since there are examples of that not happening. But to igno…

The problem is that there are lots of examples of gun confiscations that did not lead to mass murder as well. If we look at Britain, or Australia, or Japan, all those regions once allowed gun ownership on much more liberal terms than they allow today. In the transition from having a liberal gun ownership policy to having a strict gun ownership policy, guns were confiscated. But I don't see anyone saying that Britain has turned into a totalitarian dictatorship.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#169
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Well, I feel that it is that simple. Owning a gun does not contribute to suicide. I suppose there might be cases of someone killing themselves with their gun because they feel bad about owning a gun. What you are suggesting makes it easier, but does not contribute. Owning a gun may make it simpler for some people to commit the act, but the sad fact of the matter is it not that difficult to do. There are numerous ways…

The problem with saying that "owning a gun doesn't contribute to suicide" is that there is a clear and strong statistical correlation between gun availability and suicide. If gun ownership doesn't contribute to suicide, by lowering the planning threshold (or some other mechanism), then you have to find some other hidden factor that would both cause an increase in gun ownership and an increase in suicide.

Now, that doesn't mean that I necessarily favor gun confiscation. But there's a huge difference between saying, "Yes, there is a correlation between gun ownership and suicide, but that's outweighed by the fact that gun ownership is guaranteed by the Constitution," and saying, "No, there is no correlation between gun ownership and suicide." The first is an arguable and defensible point. The second is objectively false.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Talking of bankruptcy in that context is a nonsense introduced by politicians intent on doing away with it for ideological reasons. And that comment is a perfect example why we still have people on HN saying things like "free" healthcare. But at the end of the day it all costs money. It's just this make-believe world that some people want to live in...amazing.

Are you saying any part of my comment was make-believe? If so please let me know which part, instead of struggling with a straw man of your own invention.

Of course it costs money, and that money comes from taxes and borrowing as does the money for the MOD, MOE, and all other state funded services.

Post reply on HN