Slashdot Mirror
UCSD Lecturer Releases Geotagging Application For "Dangerous Guns and Owners"
NF6X writes "UCSD Lecturer Brett Stallbaum has released an Android app called Gun Geo Marker to allow people to 'Geolocate Dangerous Guns and Owners.' The app description states:
'The Gun Geo Marker operates very simply, letting parents and community members mark, or geolocate, sites associated with potentially unsafe guns and gun owners. These locations are typically the homes or businesses of suspected unsafe gun owners, but might also be public lands or other locations where guns are not handled safely, or situations where proper rights to own or use any particular type of firearm may not exist.' I question how the motivation behind developing this app differs from, say, developing an app to allow others to publicly geotag homes of people believed to belong to a particular religion or political party."
"I question how the motivation behind developing this app differs from, say, developing an app to allow others to publicly geotag homes of people believed to belong to a particular religion or political party."
Should be comparing the geopositioning of dangerous guns and owners to sex offenders.
“Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.” Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1744-1812), founder of the House of Rothschild.
If you have a central bank, you don't have democracy. You have elected officials who govern the small folk, and a cabal of central bankers who make the real decisions.
Yes, that goes for America as well.
You were shouting in my face so I pushed you, you pushed me so I hit you, you hit me so I shot you. All self defence?
If you're escalating the situation then you're not practicing self-defense. That said, there is a difference between "he hit me so I shot him" and "he was about to kill or irreparably injure me so I shot him". The situation may be exactly the same, but the former reasoning is escalation, whereas the latter is (preemptive) defense.
To counter an imminent threat of irreversible harm, preemptive defense may be both necessary and justified. However, that path carries significant risks should others happen to disagree with your threat assessment.
"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
Perhaps, but what about the slightly less hypothetical "he realized I was carrying a gun and reached for it but I grabbed it first and shot him"? I suppose we'll be finding out shortly.
Account -> Discussions -> Disable Sigs
And yet, it is sitting at +5 Insightful. I don't know if that means that some people are playing a meta-joke game or if Republicans really do find lies insightful if they match their agenda, so I'll leave that decision to you.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
Clicking a few at random, they all seem relatively justified.
Suspect refuses to drop knife. Suspect gets up and approaches officers - suspect gets shot.
Suspect hiding in a drainage pipe. Suspect is belligerent, and aims gun at officers - suspect gets shot.
Suspect escapes from handcuffs and aims gun at officers - suspect gets shot.
Suspect drives car aggressively towards officers - suspect gets shot.
Notice a theme, here? Most of these involve the suspect threatening imminent harm or death to the officers, so they respond with force.
This proves nothing beyond the fact that the USA is a large and diverse country.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...