27 People Dead, Mostly Children, at Connecticut Elementary

General Intelligent Discussion & One Thread About That Buttknuckle

Moderator: Andrew

Postby FinnFreak » Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:16 am

Memorex wrote:I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle. I don;t see the need for assault rifles, but more and more there is a need for self protection. The right thinks any talk of "control" is unacceptable and the left wants to shame those who believe it is ok to own a firearm.


In Finland there are 32 privately owned firearms per 100 civilians according to the Finnish Ministry of the Interior.

After all the school shootings over here, NOTHING in our gun laws has changed, because there is NO anti-gun lobby. We are still #2 right behind the U.S. in the number of guns per capita. One major difference being: we hunt. In Finland, it is IMPOSSIBLE to get a gun permit just for self defence. Won't happen. Ever. Gotta be a member of either a sports shooting or hunting club. Mandatory theory lessons. Tests. Target shooting days, social gatherings, etc.

PLUS: the local police inspect the home gun storage. Any possible mental problems/reckless behaviour are observed when applying for a certificate the first time: a medical doctor does a series of tests - and the police check the records to be absolutely spotless clean before a certificate is granted.

Reckless behaviour: speeding, drug use, drunk driving, making threats, having a criminal record... even posting disturbing content on the internet may cause the police to invite one to the nearest police station for an interview - and the certificate and firearms will get removed.

Doctors are required to report to the police of patients that seem to have begun to have mental issues that might pose a threat to others.

Gun usage in homicides in Finland is at 14%.


And our system is NOT perfect.


John - :(
Image
User avatar
FinnFreak
45 RPM
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 8:20 pm
Location: Vaasa, Finland

Postby G.I.Jim » Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:30 am

jaxmanjoe wrote:I recall a certain soldier walking onto a base full of highly-trained, armed soldiers and killing 13 and wounding 29. How are guns in the hands of a couple of teachers or principals really going to stop the violence? I also remember the highly-trained cops at the Empire State Building shooting 8-9 innocent civilians because of the confusion of what was going on.

Armed or not; trained or not; more guns don't offer solutions.

Anyone wielding a semi-automatic assault rifle or other high capacity clip arm is in position to create massive casualties in ANY situation. NIH says that about one in four people suffer from mental illness to some degree. That means that one if four gun owners, or people with access to guns suffers from some mental illness. Take millions of gun owners and millions more who have access to those guns and you do the math.

I'm sure everyone who owns a gun on this board is a 'responsible' gun owner. They all say that. The facts speak otherwise... Guns are too readily available to some psycho with an agenda.


Yes he did, and you couldn't be more wrong. The soldiers were NOT armed! You need to do some fact checking Joe. The only time soldiers are armed with AMMO is when they're at a rifle range, or if they're out on a patrol or escort mission. They don't walk around any base in this country with loaded weapons.
The artist formerly known as Jim. :-)
G.I.Jim
MP3
 
Posts: 10100
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:06 pm
Location: Your Momma's house

Postby parfait » Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:31 am

G.I.Jim wrote:
parfait wrote:Handing out guns to teachers? Are all you people completely retarded?

The statistics doesn't lie. More guns = more gun fatalities. All the second amendment yammering doesn't mean much, when people die needlessly. Not to mention the harm caused by the American gun manufacturing and the subsequent export to Mexico.

What would Jesus do?



Tell you to stop using his name in vain.

:wink:


No, seriously. How come Americans are so religious and holier than thou, but wind on about death penalties and gun rights like it's the most natural thing in the world. When two gay guys wants to marry each other though; "Sinners! Against the rules of the church. Yadda yadda yadda".

It's obvious that it's not about facts or logic; then gun control would have been much stricter. I think it's a matter of being uneducated on the matter. The statistics are there for everyone to see: Guns won't make you safer and causes an disgusting amount of harm and injury to people and society as a whole.
User avatar
parfait
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1527
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 11:38 pm
Location: France

Postby G.I.Jim » Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:41 am

parfait wrote:
G.I.Jim wrote:
parfait wrote:Handing out guns to teachers? Are all you people completely retarded?

The statistics doesn't lie. More guns = more gun fatalities. All the second amendment yammering doesn't mean much, when people die needlessly. Not to mention the harm caused by the American gun manufacturing and the subsequent export to Mexico.

What would Jesus do?



Tell you to stop using his name in vain.

:wink:


No, seriously. How come Americans are so religious and holier than thou, but wind on about death penalties and gun rights like it's the most natural thing in the world. When two gay guys wants to marry each other though; "Sinners! Against the rules of the church. Yadda yadda yadda".

It's obvious that it's not about facts or logic; then gun control would have been much stricter. I think it's a matter of being uneducated on the matter. The statistics are there for everyone to see: Guns won't make you safer and causes an disgusting amount of harm and injury to people and society as a whole.


Aren't you french?
The artist formerly known as Jim. :-)
G.I.Jim
MP3
 
Posts: 10100
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:06 pm
Location: Your Momma's house

Postby KenTheDude » Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:49 am

Enigma869 wrote:
RPM wrote:Well if you were to ask a Texan they would say make sure the teacher is armed.....


Right, but Texans probably aren't the best barometer when it comes to logic. Hell, they've been trying to secede from the Union forever. Not to mention, it's probably the only state in the country that allows people to use deadly force to defend property. I'm sure Texas is full of fine people. I just wouldn't want Texas laws governing the part of the country that I call home.


What's wrong with that? If someone breaks into my house to steal something, I have no idea that's he's just there to rob me. If they break into my house, they will leave in a body bag.
User avatar
KenTheDude
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1737
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:55 pm
Location: Texas

Postby The Sushi Hunter » Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:52 am

FinnFreak wrote:
Memorex wrote:I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle. I don;t see the need for assault rifles, but more and more there is a need for self protection. The right thinks any talk of "control" is unacceptable and the left wants to shame those who believe it is ok to own a firearm.


In Finland there are 32 privately owned firearms per 100 civilians according to the Finnish Ministry of the Interior.

After all the school shootings over here, NOTHING in our gun laws has changed, because there is NO anti-gun lobby. We are still #2 right behind the U.S. in the number of guns per capita. One major difference being: we hunt. In Finland, it is IMPOSSIBLE to get a gun permit just for self defence. Won't happen. Ever. Gotta be a member of either a sports shooting or hunting club. Mandatory theory lessons. Tests. Target shooting days, social gatherings, etc.

PLUS: the local police inspect the home gun storage. Any possible mental problems/reckless behaviour are observed when applying for a certificate the first time: a medical doctor does a series of tests - and the police check the records to be absolutely spotless clean before a certificate is granted.

Reckless behaviour: speeding, drug use, drunk driving, making threats, having a criminal record... even posting disturbing content on the internet may cause the police to invite one to the nearest police station for an interview - and the certificate and firearms will get removed.

Doctors are required to report to the police of patients that seem to have begun to have mental issues that might pose a threat to others.

Gun usage in homicides in Finland is at 14%.


And our system is NOT perfect.


John - :(


Just because something works in one country doesn't necessarily mean it will work in others. The determining factor is the overall mentality of the people of a country. Case and point, go to a park in Japan, not on a US Base or near a US Base, but a park that is Japanese public access. You will notice one thing first, there is no trash of any type laying around. Second thing you'll notice is they don't have trash receptacles at most public parks. Why is this? Well, the Japanese don't have trash cans in the parks for some unknown reason to me. I speculate either they are saving funding by not having to buy them, hire someone to come empty and maintain them and perhaps keeps animals from going in and making a mess by taking trash out. But there is also no trash laying around from not having trash receptacles either. If the Japanese have trash, they take it with them when they leave. It's because the vast majority of Japanese have respect for their community and their country. They are motivated with honor and respect. Where I am in America, there is this park with more than a dozen trash receptacles but still people just toss shit on the deck and don't even bother putting their trash in the trash receptacle.

With the problem in America, the root cause is people becoming more and more selfish. In the Bay Area of San Francisco where I live, you can't even merge onto the freeway without some fuckhead already on the freeway punching the gas so you can't get on in front of them. They could be a half mile behind but when they see you up ahead getting ready to merge onto the freeway, they fucking punch it so you don't get in front of them. Society in America has become more and more selfish and that's what the problem is. This kid could have just killed his mother and himself, that's all that he would have had to do. But he was selfish and needed to inflict pain and suffering on many more families. Plain and simple, America has become the land of the selfish derelicts.
User avatar
The Sushi Hunter
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:54 am
Location: Hidden Valley, Japan

Postby The Sushi Hunter » Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:58 am

parfait wrote:No, seriously. How come Americans are so religious and holier than thou, but wind on about death penalties and gun rights like it's the most natural thing in the world. When two gay guys wants to marry each other though; "Sinners! Against the rules of the church. Yadda yadda yadda".


If they want to get married, find someone of the opposite sex and get married. It's called criteria. Plain and simple. If your Buddhist but want to be Catholic, change your faith and practise to Catholic and then you can be a Catholic. You have a class 3 drivers license but want to drive a 18 wheel semi rig, get a fucking truck drivers license. Plain and simple. When your sticking your cock up some guys waste hole, your obviously doing something wrong, hell, even doing that to a female is wrong. I guess packing fudge in France is ok.
User avatar
The Sushi Hunter
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:54 am
Location: Hidden Valley, Japan

Postby slucero » Thu Dec 20, 2012 6:07 am

jaxmanjoe wrote:I recall a certain soldier walking onto a base full of highly-trained, armed soldiers and killing 13 and wounding 29. How are guns in the hands of a couple of teachers or principals really going to stop the violence? I also remember the highly-trained cops at the Empire State Building shooting 8-9 innocent civilians because of the confusion of what was going on.

Armed or not; trained or not; more guns don't offer solutions.

Anyone wielding a semi-automatic assault rifle or other high capacity clip arm is in position to create massive casualties in ANY situation. NIH says that about one in four people suffer from mental illness to some degree. That means that one if four gun owners, or people with access to guns suffers from some mental illness. Take millions of gun owners and millions more who have access to those guns and you do the math.

I'm sure everyone who owns a gun on this board is a 'responsible' gun owner. They all say that. The facts speak otherwise... Guns are too readily available to some psycho with an agenda.



Since you feel you know the "facts"... let's go find some. The following "facts" are found in the FBI "Crime In The U.S." report....

1st lets review the FBI definition of "violent crime":

Definition
In the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Violent crimes are defined in the UCR Program as those offenses which involve force or threat of force.


This shows the actual detail data:

Image

Murder, non-negligent manslaughter, rape, robbery, assault, vehicle theft (carjackings) - ALL DOWN.



Per the data in the FBI report, violent crime has fallen EVERY YEAR since 2006... Don't believe me? Read it for yourself:
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime

Here's the table from that report showing the trend:
Image



So how,
  • when more guns have been sold in this country, EVERY YEAR since 2008 and,
  • violent crime has FALLEN since 2006,


...can anyone come to the conclusion that an increase in guns is the cause for an increase in violent crime? We all know that police are decreasing due to budget cuts. So the drop can't be due to an increased police presence as a deterrent. People are on edge due to the economy, so violent crime should be increasing. Yet violent crime has fallen.

So what is logically the the deterrent?

If the anti-gun crowd uses "more guns" as their reason, the logical response when reviewing the facts is:

"using your logic, the facts say more guns are the cause for the FALL in violent crime"...
Last edited by slucero on Thu Dec 20, 2012 6:38 am, edited 7 times in total.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Postby FinnFreak » Thu Dec 20, 2012 6:16 am

The Sushi Hunter wrote:With the problem in America, the root cause is people becoming more and more selfish. In the Bay Area of San Francisco where I live, you can't even merge onto the freeway without some fuckhead already on the freeway punching the gas so you can't get on in front of them. They could be a half mile behind but when they see you up ahead getting ready to merge onto the freeway, they fucking punch it so you don't get in front of them. Society in America has become more and more selfish and that's what the problem is. This kid could have just killed his mother and himself, that's all that he would have had to do. But he was selfish and needed to inflict pain and suffering on many more families. Plain and simple, America has become the land of the selfish derelicts.


I think you are really making a good point here.

Also, the loss of being a part of community - it's not "one for all & all for one" anymore.

"It's just me against the world" - because nobody gives a f**k anymore.

Nobody cares about anyone else outside the immediate family.

In highly populated areas, this is the blueprint towards destruction.

We must change.


It's not the guns, but our lack of responsibility regarding guns.


John - :(
Image
User avatar
FinnFreak
45 RPM
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 8:20 pm
Location: Vaasa, Finland

Postby Gin and Tonic Sky » Thu Dec 20, 2012 7:29 am

parfait wrote:No, seriously. How come Americans are so religious and holier than thou, but wind on about death penalties and gun rights like it's the most natural thing in the world. When two gay guys wants to marry each other though; "Sinners! Against the rules of the church. Yadda yadda yadda".


Americans don't have a monopoly on inconsistencies in political or philosophical thinking. You can find inconsistencies in thinking it in any country How about that story from France - Robespierre and the Jacobins railing against tyranny and brutal oppression and then justifying lobbing off the head of every dissenter between Cherbourg and Tolouse.

that said , agree a consistent position when you talk about guns and gay marriage is that individuals have the right to defend themselves and their property and individuals have the right to associate and make legal arrangements with who ever they so desire. You can have your guns and stick em in any holster or any waste hole (as Sushi eloquently follows it ) you want .
Last edited by Gin and Tonic Sky on Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Matt
User avatar
Gin and Tonic Sky
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1926
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:46 am
Location: in a purple and gold haze

Postby Enigma869 » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:29 am

KenTheDude wrote:What's wrong with that? If someone breaks into my house to steal something, I have no idea that's he's just there to rob me. If they break into my house, they will leave in a body bag.


I'm not talking about breaking into a house. I'm talking about someone stealing your car...or even your bicycle!
John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby Boomchild » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:36 am

The Sushi Hunter wrote:Things are about to get really good. Biden has been put in charge of the gun issue.

Give him some loaded guns to inspect. Maybe will get lucky and he will shoot himself by mistake.
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Postby KenTheDude » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:38 am

Enigma869 wrote:
KenTheDude wrote:What's wrong with that? If someone breaks into my house to steal something, I have no idea that's he's just there to rob me. If they break into my house, they will leave in a body bag.


I'm not talking about breaking into a house. I'm talking about someone stealing your car...or even your bicycle!


I can see your point but I really don't have sympathy for a thief. They know they're breaking the law and apparently they were willing to accept the circumstances.
User avatar
KenTheDude
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1737
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:55 pm
Location: Texas

Postby Boomchild » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:45 am

jaxmanjoe wrote: Guns are too readily available to some psycho with an agenda.


So are a lot of other things people use to complete their agenda. Maybe we need to provide better medical treatment to help the person that is psycho, mentally disturbed or whatever you want to label people that are mental ill. Otherwise. if they can't be stabilized then they need to be put into metal hospitals or places that care for people that are a danger to society because of their mental illness.
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Postby Boomchild » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:51 am

KenTheDude wrote:
Enigma869 wrote:
KenTheDude wrote:What's wrong with that? If someone breaks into my house to steal something, I have no idea that's he's just there to rob me. If they break into my house, they will leave in a body bag.


I'm not talking about breaking into a house. I'm talking about someone stealing your car...or even your bicycle!


I can see your point but I really don't have sympathy for a thief. They know they're breaking the law and apparently they were willing to accept the circumstances.


Couldn't agree more.
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Postby The Sushi Hunter » Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:05 am

Someone made a great point earlier. The government will make this desperate grab for all guns which will put most American's at higher risk of becoming victims of crimes. I agree with that completely. I'm glad that I'm also very good with my compound bow, among other things as well.
User avatar
The Sushi Hunter
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:54 am
Location: Hidden Valley, Japan

Postby tater1977 » Thu Dec 20, 2012 10:57 am

Boomchild wrote:
The Sushi Hunter wrote:Things are about to get really good. Biden has been put in charge of the gun issue.

Give him some loaded guns to inspect. Maybe will get lucky and he will shoot himself by mistake.


Maybe Cheney will give him a call next time he goes hunting.... :lol:
Perry's good natured bonhomie & the world’s most charmin smile,knocked fans off their feet. Sportin a black tux,gigs came alive as he swished around the stage thrillin audiences w/ charisma that instantly burnt the oxygen right out of the venue.TR.com
tater1977
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5248
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 1:05 am
Location: USA

Postby Enigma869 » Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:02 pm

KenTheDude wrote:
I can see your point but I really don't have sympathy for a thief. They know they're breaking the law and apparently they were willing to accept the circumstances.


For the record, I have a degree in Criminal Justice and have worked as a Police Officer in my life, so I'm the last guy on the planet who will ever feel any sympathy toward a thief. That said, I find it beyond absurd that anyone is allowed to use deadly force to defend property. Obviously, I have no problem with someone using deadly force to defend their life or someone else's. I just draw the line where it's okay to shoot someone in the back because they're running off with little Johnny's tricycle!
John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby Archetype » Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:49 pm

Enigma869 wrote:
KenTheDude wrote:What's wrong with that? If someone breaks into my house to steal something, I have no idea that's he's just there to rob me. If they break into my house, they will leave in a body bag.


I'm not talking about breaking into a house. I'm talking about someone stealing your car...or even your bicycle!


So what? Maybe they shouldn't steal those things.
"It's really important if you're going to remain a valid band that you play your new stuff. Otherwise you become a parody of what you started out doing." - Janick Gers of Iron Maiden
Archetype
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2583
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:06 am
Location: Andromeda

Postby Rick » Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:20 pm

Enigma869 wrote:
KenTheDude wrote:
I can see your point but I really don't have sympathy for a thief. They know they're breaking the law and apparently they were willing to accept the circumstances.


For the record, I have a degree in Criminal Justice and have worked as a Police Officer in my life, so I'm the last guy on the planet who will ever feel any sympathy toward a thief. That said, I find it beyond absurd that anyone is allowed to use deadly force to defend property. Obviously, I have no problem with someone using deadly force to defend their life or someone else's. I just draw the line where it's okay to shoot someone in the back because they're running off with little Johnny's tricycle!


And you would be amazed how few tricycles get stolen here. :lol: :lol: :lol:
I like to sit out on the front porch, where the birds can see me, eating a plate of scrambled eggs, just so they know what I'm capable of.
User avatar
Rick
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16726
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 9:29 am
Location: Texas

Postby Memorex » Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:29 pm

Looking at it from all angles, you still come down to the same issue - all the gun control in the world can't fix what's causing this and until we make life safer for people in the states and get a handle on the mental decline here, people need the ability to protect themselves. It's really that simple.
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Postby Boomchild » Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:18 pm

The Sushi Hunter wrote:Someone made a great point earlier. The government will make this desperate grab for all guns which will put most American's at higher risk of becoming victims of crimes. I agree with that completely. I'm glad that I'm also very good with my compound bow, among other things as well.


Notice how Obama and others are focusing on the issue of the weapons used and said little if anything about the help these people need to address their mental problems?
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Postby KenTheDude » Thu Dec 20, 2012 10:43 pm

Enigma869 wrote:
KenTheDude wrote:
I can see your point but I really don't have sympathy for a thief. They know they're breaking the law and apparently they were willing to accept the circumstances.


For the record, I have a degree in Criminal Justice and have worked as a Police Officer in my life, so I'm the last guy on the planet who will ever feel any sympathy toward a thief. That said, I find it beyond absurd that anyone is allowed to use deadly force to defend property. Obviously, I have no problem with someone using deadly force to defend their life or someone else's. I just draw the line where it's okay to shoot someone in the back because they're running off with little Johnny's tricycle!


You would probably have some problems coming your way if you shot someone in the back when they're running away. You have to be in direct fear of your life. A guy running away with your kid's trike doesn't fit that.
User avatar
KenTheDude
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1737
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:55 pm
Location: Texas

Postby artist4perry » Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:49 pm

G.I.Jim wrote:
parfait wrote:Handing out guns to teachers? Are all you people completely retarded?

The statistics doesn't lie. More guns = more gun fatalities. All the second amendment yammering doesn't mean much, when people die needlessly. Not to mention the harm caused by the American gun manufacturing and the subsequent export to Mexico.

What would Jesus do?



Tell you to stop using his name in vain.

:wink:


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
artist4perry
MP3
 
Posts: 10462
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:42 am
Location: Running around in the vast universe that is my imagination. Send help!

Postby verslibre » Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:24 am

Boomchild wrote:
The Sushi Hunter wrote:Someone made a great point earlier. The government will make this desperate grab for all guns which will put most American's at higher risk of becoming victims of crimes. I agree with that completely. I'm glad that I'm also very good with my compound bow, among other things as well.


Notice how Obama and others are focusing on the issue of the weapons used and said little if anything about the help these people need to address their mental problems?


When are they going to revisit his mom's culpability in cloaking her son's condition and her woefully insufficient methods of storing her hardware?

Guns are guns, but guns need operators. They don't work by themselves.
"Heer's ta swimmen wid bowlegged wimmen!"
verslibre
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 6873
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:55 pm

Postby The Sushi Hunter » Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:11 am

Boomchild wrote:Notice how Obama and others are focusing on the issue of the weapons used and said little if anything about the help these people need to address their mental problems?


Yeap, that's exactly right. This is because Obama and the others are doing what makes their voter base happy. Addressing the real issue of mental illness would only piss off many of his followers.
User avatar
The Sushi Hunter
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:54 am
Location: Hidden Valley, Japan

Postby The Sushi Hunter » Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:22 am

I hope they catch these pricks and burn them at the stake! Talk about what's going wrong in America......

-------------------------

The family of Noah Pozner was mourning the 6-year-old, killed in the Newtown school massacre, when outrage compounded their sorrow.

Someone they didn't know was soliciting donations in Noah's memory, claiming that they'd send any cards, packages and money collected to his parents and siblings. An official-looking website had been set up, with Noah's name as the address, even including petitions on gun control.

Noah's uncle, Alexis Haller, called on law enforcement authorities to seek out "these despicable people."

"These scammers," he said, "are stealing from the families of victims of this horrible tragedy."

It's a problem as familiar as it is disturbing. Tragedy strikes _ be it a natural disaster, a gunman's rampage or a terrorist attack _ and scam artists move in.

It happened after 9/11. It happened after Columbine. It happened after Hurricane Katrina. And after this summer's movie theater shooting in Aurora, Colo.

Sometimes fraud takes the form of bogus charities asking for donations that never get sent to victims. Natural disasters bring another dimension: Scammers try to get government relief money they're not eligible for.

"It's abominable," said Ken Berger, president and CEO of Charity Navigator, which evaluates the performance of charities. "It's just the lowest kind of thievery."

Noah Pozner's relatives found out about one bogus solicitation when a friend received an email asking for money for the family. Poorly punctuated, it gave details about Noah, his funeral and his family. It directed people to send donations to an address in the Bronx, one that the Pozners had never heard of.

It listed a New York City phone number to text with questions about how to donate. When a reporter texted that number Wednesday, a reply came advising the donation go to the United Way.

The Pozner family had the noahpozner.com website transferred to its ownership. Victoria Haller, Noah's aunt, emailed the person who had originally registered the name. The person, who went by the name Jason Martin, wrote back that he'd meant "to somehow honor Noah and help promote a safer gun culture. I had no ill intentions I assure you."

Alexis Haller said the experience "should serve as a warning signal to other victims' families. We urge people to watch out for these frauds on social media sites."

Consumer groups, state attorneys general and law enforcement authorities call for caution about unsolicited requests for donations, by phone or email. They tell people to be wary of callers who don't want to answer questions about their organization, who won't take "no" for an answer, or who convey what seems to be an unreasonable sense of urgency.

"This is a time of mourning for the people of Newtown and for our entire state," Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen said in a statement this week. "Unfortunately, it's also a time when bad actors may seek to exploit those coping with this tragedy."

But scam artists know that calamity is fertile ground for profit, watered by the goodwill of strangers who want to help and may not be familiar with the cause or the people they're sending money to.

After the shootings at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo., scammers asked for credit card donations for victims' families. After the 9/11 attacks, the North American Securities Administrators Association warned investors to be wary of Internet postings encouraging them to invest in supposed anti-terrorist technologies.

In 2006, the FBI warned about an email widely circulated after the Sago, W.Va., mine explosion, which claimed to be from a doctor treating one of the survivors and asking for donations to cover medical bills.

"As was learned after the tragic events of 9/11/01, the tsunami disaster, and more recently with Hurricane Katrina, unscrupulous cyber criminals have shown the desire and means to exploit human emotion by attempting to defraud the public when they are perceived to be most vulnerable," the FBI said at the time.

This fall, the police in Aurora, Colo., accused a local woman of trying to profit off the deadly movie theater rampage by a gunman who killed 12 people. The woman told people that she was the caretaker for a little girl named Kadence, whose mother had died in the shooting. The police said the child was made up. The scam unraveled when a donor got a phone call from what seemed to be a woman imitating a child's voice.

When the government doled out disaster aid after Hurricane Katrina, scammers asked for money to rebuild houses they never lived in or to pay benefits for relatives who never existed.

The government later set up the National Center for Disaster Fraud to try to root out such scams in the federal relief programs administered after Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma. It has since expanded its mandate to other disasters.

The cases brought since then by the Justice Department sketch a colorful picture of fraud:

_ A woman who filed for small-business disaster benefits after the 2010 Gulf Coast oil spill, even though she'd sold the business before the accident.

_ A judge and a commissioner in Texas who, after Hurricane Ike, were accused of awarding debris removal contracts to a company in return for kickbacks. The judge also commandeered a 155-kilowatt generator meant for the county to power his convenience store, according to the government.

_ A pastor who submitted inflated claims to a government-funded program that reimbursed groups sheltering Hurricane Katrina evacuees.

Bob Webster, spokesman for the NASAA, knows the sad pattern.

"We know cons try to cash in on headlines, and any who would even think about stooping to capitalize on the tragedy in Newtown are the lowest of the low," he said.



http://missoulian.com/news/national/ami ... ecbce.html
User avatar
The Sushi Hunter
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:54 am
Location: Hidden Valley, Japan

Postby The Sushi Hunter » Fri Dec 21, 2012 2:53 am

KenTheDude wrote:
Enigma869 wrote:
RPM wrote:Well if you were to ask a Texan they would say make sure the teacher is armed.....


Right, but Texans probably aren't the best barometer when it comes to logic. Hell, they've been trying to secede from the Union forever. Not to mention, it's probably the only state in the country that allows people to use deadly force to defend property. I'm sure Texas is full of fine people. I just wouldn't want Texas laws governing the part of the country that I call home.


What's wrong with that? If someone breaks into my house to steal something, I have no idea that's he's just there to rob me. If they break into my house, they will leave in a body bag.


Exactly. When people are breaking into your house, you never know what they are up to. I'm not waiting around to find out. Breaking into my house, I expect the worst and respond accordingly.

Sort of like this gunman who killed all the kids and teachers at the school. If someone saw him coming into the building with a gun, you think someone should hesitate and say, "oh he's probably just coming to rob the place and leave, lets not try and stop him" bullshit!
User avatar
The Sushi Hunter
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:54 am
Location: Hidden Valley, Japan

Postby Enigma869 » Fri Dec 21, 2012 3:17 am

KenTheDude wrote:
You would probably have some problems coming your way if you shot someone in the back when they're running away. You have to be in direct fear of your life. A guy running away with your kid's trike doesn't fit that.


Don't you live in Texas? See below for how the Texas law is written. Certainly, in the ridiculous example that I gave, you would be correct. No other state would ever allow for this, because it's flat out absurd! That said, it's Texas! Texas would break off and become its own country tomorrow if they had the option.

In Texas (c), the law for using deadly force in defense of property is not new and is very broad. Texas law says a person is justified in using deadly force if they reasonably believe that this is necessary and the only way to prevent a serious crime such as burglary or theft or to prevent someone from fleeing with stolen property from your home or property.

Texas law (http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm) goes even further by adding the justifiable use of deadly force to protect someone else's property if a person "reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property." This means that you can use deadly force in Texas not only to protect your own property, but also the property of someone else. There have been incorrect reports in the media that you may only do this in Texas if you have been formally asked or legally required to protect the property of someone else. However, this is not a provision of the law as it is currently written.
John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby The Sushi Hunter » Fri Dec 21, 2012 3:55 am

Enigma869 wrote:
KenTheDude wrote:
You would probably have some problems coming your way if you shot someone in the back when they're running away. You have to be in direct fear of your life. A guy running away with your kid's trike doesn't fit that.


Don't you live in Texas? See below for how the Texas law is written. Certainly, in the ridiculous example that I gave, you would be correct. No other state would ever allow for this, because it's flat out absurd! That said, it's Texas! Texas would break off and become its own country tomorrow if they had the option.

In Texas (c), the law for using deadly force in defense of property is not new and is very broad. Texas law says a person is justified in using deadly force if they reasonably believe that this is necessary and the only way to prevent a serious crime such as burglary or theft or to prevent someone from fleeing with stolen property from your home or property.

Texas law (http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm) goes even further by adding the justifiable use of deadly force to protect someone else's property if a person "reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property." This means that you can use deadly force in Texas not only to protect your own property, but also the property of someone else. There have been incorrect reports in the media that you may only do this in Texas if you have been formally asked or legally required to protect the property of someone else. However, this is not a provision of the law as it is currently written.


What is the source of this deadly force definition? I've never heard of using deadly force to keep people from stealing civilian property, especially where it says using deadly force authorized to keep someone from fleeing with stolen property. From my experiences, it is my understanding that the only time you can legally shoot someone is when they pose imminent thread of great bodily injury and death to others, such as reaching for something that could be a gun or other type of weapon. Even if a guy is running away from taking money from a bank, you can’t shoot him while he’s running away, unless he’s firing a gun or using some other type of weapon towards people as he’s running away.
User avatar
The Sushi Hunter
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:54 am
Location: Hidden Valley, Japan

PreviousNext

Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests