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

ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

jsonline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 192 posts

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#51

Post by Crito »

wylee wrote: post #41
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…

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?

Nearly all political terminology is heavily overloaded. The best you can do is take the words as they are used; trying to infer meaning from them etymologically won't work.

For example, if we were to take the term "conservative" literally we would expect Republicans to be rabid environmentalists.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#52

Post by logfromblammo »

rayiner wrote: post #38
logfromblammo wrote: post #12

Cue the libertarian versus non-libertarian mudwrestling. It has become increasingly clear to me that the ills of the U.S. pogroms against some recreational drugs are due in no small part to the conversion of the criminal justice system to a for-profit industry. As long as the jobs and budgets are tied to the number of criminals processed rather than the peace and order produced, cop cadres will titrate the frequency…

It's quite a bit more complicated than that. The two most important graphs for understanding U.S. law enforcement: Total state and federal prisoners: http://www.sentencingproject.org/images/photo/State%20and%20... . Total violent crime: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zJiRb6FKYgM/Tqil-T4fLpI/AAAAAAAAAF... . Violent crime increases almost 5x from the mid 1960's to the early 1990's. The number of state and federal prisoners…

The strongest-correlated single factor to violent crime is, in fact, lead pollution. When lead antiknock compounds were abolished in gasoline, and lead pigments abolished in paint, lead pollution peaked and began a long, steady decline. Violent crime followed. The prisoner incarceration rate has stayed high, despite the decline in violence, because of the money interests.

For-profit prisons are the ratchets that prevent the wheels of justice from turning backward. Sweden consolidates prisons and mothballs the emptied ones. America tricks the ignorant into fencing stolen bicycles and selling weed to informants.

Remove the profit, and you also remove the paradoxical idiotic behavior that generates it.

My outsider's perspective would first segregate all revenues from fines and forfeitures from justice budgets, perhaps exclusively dedicating them to public education and pollution abatement and cleanup. Then I'd abolish incarceration in any facility that was not entirely publicly owned and state-operated. I'd also abolish plea bargaining, as it seems a perversion of due process. After that, I'm not sure what else might help; keep following the money and pushing the Nash equilibrium toward "everyone respect the law and each other".

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#53

Post by daeken »

derekp7 wrote: post #28
logfromblammo wrote: post #12

Cue the libertarian versus non-libertarian mudwrestling. It has become increasingly clear to me that the ills of the U.S. pogroms against some recreational drugs are due in no small part to the conversion of the criminal justice system to a for-profit industry. As long as the jobs and budgets are tied to the number of criminals processed rather than the peace and order produced, cop cadres will titrate the frequency…

I've thought about a way to have a for-profit prison system that would work better. First, give the convict the right to choose which prison to go to (possibly with a particular security category). Then they (the prisons) would have to compete based on how the prisoners are treated. Now, after the prisoner is released, if he reoffends, then the prison that he "attended" would have to foot the bill for the additional…

Interesting idea. Many crimes are committed due to a lack of options caused by poverty (theft most directly, but many other crimes are correlated strongly with poverty levels), so if a prison has to pay if a released prisoner re-offends, perhaps it's in the best interest of the prison to pay directly to the ex-prisoner, to get them on their feet. Give them a place to live, food budget, whatever. Probably still cheaper than incarceration.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#54

Post by wl »

cschneid wrote: post #34
dm2 wrote: post #18

Moral of the story? Police and federal agents must be more transparent and accountable for their actions and expenditures. The whole concept of "spend money so that our budget doesn't shrink next year" has go to be fixed also. I don't know a solution other than having more auditors and efficiency experts (GAO, gao.gov). Would people flip out if there was a bill proposed to require all guns in the US to have a GPS tra…

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.

FYI, using the term "clip" in this way is common but incorrect. Colorado limited the size of magazines to 15 rounds.

Magazines hold ammunition in a way that a gun can pull a round from it when the action cycles. Clips are a specific kind of device for loading some types of magazines.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#55

Post by logfromblammo »

jpttsn wrote: post #23
logfromblammo wrote: post #12

Cue the libertarian versus non-libertarian mudwrestling. It has become increasingly clear to me that the ills of the U.S. pogroms against some recreational drugs are due in no small part to the conversion of the criminal justice system to a for-profit industry. As long as the jobs and budgets are tied to the number of criminals processed rather than the peace and order produced, cop cadres will titrate the frequency…

That's interesting. Is your issue with the for-profit criminal justice system that it's for-profit, or is it with the laws it upholds to bring the profits? In other words, would this still be a problem if all laws upheld were, to your mind, reasonable?

I don't think the laws can be meaningfully separated from the system. Reasonable laws would simply be enforced unreasonably. It certainly doesn't help that unreasonable laws exist, but fixing that would not entirely solve the problem.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#56

Post by dm2 »

cschneid wrote: post #34
dm2 wrote: post #18

Moral of the story? Police and federal agents must be more transparent and accountable for their actions and expenditures. The whole concept of "spend money so that our budget doesn't shrink next year" has go to be fixed also. I don't know a solution other than having more auditors and efficiency experts (GAO, gao.gov). Would people flip out if there was a bill proposed to require all guns in the US to have a GPS tra…

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 magazines for your weapons. The law would probably only prohibit the sale of large magazines but grandfather in existing owners, so who really has an issue with this?

And more background checks shouldn't be an issue, as long as there was some sort of process or committee for appeals and exceptions. Someone with a history of mental illness or a felony should probably not be allowed to own a gun. Someone who was wrongfully convicted or had a minor offense that was charged as a felony decades ago might be a candidate for an exception.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#57

Post by talmand »

simbolit wrote: post #22

This seems to be a paradigm case of entrapment. This should thus be easily sorted out in the courts. Am I wrong? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entrapment

Many people don't have the funds to defend themselves against the very group that entrapped them. They have nearly unlimited funds to prove they didn't entrap you, while likely you will not. That's why there are supposed to be laws and procedures to prevent this from ever starting, but there are budgets and arrest records to pad.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#58

Post by nazgulnarsil »

herbig wrote: post #29
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…

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…

private gun ownership deters an order of magnitude more crime than is committed with guns. This is not hyperbole, it is the DoJ statistics.

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#59

Post by cgore »

pionar wrote: post #24
dm2 wrote: post #18

Moral of the story? Police and federal agents must be more transparent and accountable for their actions and expenditures. The whole concept of "spend money so that our budget doesn't shrink next year" has go to be fixed also. I don't know a solution other than having more auditors and efficiency experts (GAO, gao.gov). Would people flip out if there was a bill proposed to require all guns in the US to have a GPS tra…

> 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 discovered plans for a Nazi takeover in which Jews would be denied food and persons refusing to surrender their guns within 24 hours would be executed. They were written by Werner Best, a future Gestapo official. In reaction to such threats, the government authorized the registration of all firearms and the confiscation thereof, if required for “public safety.” The interior minister warned that the records must not fall into the hands of any extremist group."

"In 1933, the ultimate extremist group, led by Adolf Hitler, seized power and used the records to identify, disarm, and attack political opponents and Jews. Constitutional rights were suspended, and mass searches for and seizures of guns and dissident publications ensued. Police revoked gun licenses of Social Democrats and others who were not “politically reliable.”"

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/365103/how-nazis-used-...

Re: ATF uses rogue tactics in storefront stings across nation

#60

Post by talmand »

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…

Because, in most cases, its a stupid argument and a requirement that only restricts law abiding citizens. Criminals don't care about laws in the first place. It's a way for certain politicians to appeal to a certain base that, in the end, helps no one in any way that was proposed.

Get into a boxing match and stipulate that both boxers must have their right hand secured behind their back. You step into the ring to find your opponent has chosen to ignore that rule. The ref tells you that while you must keep your hand tied or be disqualified, he cannot deal with your opponent's lack of respect of the rules until after the match is finished. How exactly did that rule help you?

Some people disagree with the law, some people think it's the beginning of slippery slope that leads to confiscation, some people don't like their rights being used as a cheap election gimmick. Take your pick.

Post reply on HN