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."

19 of 976 comments (clear)

  1. 1 2 3 4 I declare flame war by Nimey · · Score: 5, Funny

    This article will have mature and reasonable discussion, let me tell you.

    --
    Hail Eris, full of mischief...

    E pluribus sanguinem
    1. Re:1 2 3 4 I declare flame war by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why isn't the argument basis for geotagging potentially violent people of any stripe, no matter what their weapon of choice? Ah, it's the ideology. Bound to stir up some flamage.

      You know? Yesterday, there was a bit of a protest as the local longshoremen decided to clog up our building and get noisy for a bit (the business they were protesting occupies a floor in the building). After seeing one of the protesters walking in with a sign nailed to a baseball bat (and a rather agitated look on his face), not to mention the rather battle-ready attitude of most the strikers (and then seeing this article today)? I kind of wonder why everyone fixates on weapons, when the problem is people... I mean, if the argument was about dangerous weapons, then maybe someone ought to geotag all the farmers who live next to truck stops, since a mixture of diesel fuel and fertilizer is way the hell more dangerous than a gun could ever be.

      Given all of that, the argument is, IMHO, nothing more than a way to agitate for an ideology centered around what the guy considers to be a scary weapon... and nothing more. It's a means to put a stigma on gun owners that someone, somewhere thinks to be 'dangerous' (whatever that may mean) - much like one would geotag sex offenders or other 'undesireables' (in that person's mind).

      Well, fair enough I guess, if that's what floats his ideological boat. Then again, I hope he can afford the potential lawsuit that would come from someone being incorrectly 'tagged'...

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    2. Re:1 2 3 4 I declare flame war by fche · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "it easy and efficient to cause death, while having no other redeeming legitimate purpose"

      Causing death is not ipso facto bad, if the person on the receiving end was performing or threatening violent assault, and thus triggered lawful self-defense. Context matters.

    3. Re:1 2 3 4 I declare flame war by youngatheart · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Stigma? My first thought was "I better tag my house" because even though I don't actually have a gun, I would like any potential thieves to think I do. Plus, where I come from (yes, Texas) gun ownership is seen as a good thing. People use their concealed carry permits as their preferred bragging type of state issued ID around here.

    4. Re:1 2 3 4 I declare flame war by sycodon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would prefer to put my children in a school where all parents educate their children on firearms and are active in firearm sports. That way, kids a less likely to go rooting through bedroom drawers.

      Ignorance of danger doesn't make the danger go away.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    5. Re:1 2 3 4 I declare flame war by fche · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Who the hell are you to decide when an action is grounds for the death penalty?"

      Just to be crystal clear, are you saying that self-defense with a weapon is never appropriate? If so, you may wish to hold forth as to why the police should be armed, or exactly what posture someone being beaten to death should take to be most noble in your eyes. Is that the fetal position, or some sort of supplication toward the east?

    6. Re:1 2 3 4 I declare flame war by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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
    7. Re:1 2 3 4 I declare flame war by Muad'Dave · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If only I had mod points - you hit the nail on the head. Lack of firearm safety EDUCATION is the biggest cause of accidental firearm deaths. Most gun illiterate people don't know they're gun illiterate - they think they know all they need to from watching TV (where some of the most egregious firearm-handling mistakes are taught to our youth).

      It's disgraceful that the general public is so eager to watch (and let their kids watch) gun violence on TV, but is so unwilling to actually teach gun safety to it's youth.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    8. Re:1 2 3 4 I declare flame war by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Informative

      But if you carry one in a holster, you can literally pull out the gun and kill someone in seconds.

      And yet, as the number of Concealed Carry license holders increased in recent decades, the murder rate has declined.

      Yes, correlation does not equal causation, but it's hard to see how "higher carry rates" + "lower murder rates" matches up with what I quoted above....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    9. Re:1 2 3 4 I declare flame war by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The biggest problem I see is a lack of Gun Education, and proper handling of a firearm.

      This a thousand times. I really wish more non firearm owners were like you who don't have the crazy fear or hatred of firearms. There does seem to be a lack of training and respect for firearms among the general population and thus firearms really are very dangerous when not handled properly because they don't have a clue what they are doing. I own firearms and keep them properly stored (large fireproof safe bolted to the concrete floor in my basement), always handle them correctly (follow all the rules from all of the various safety courses I have ever had), and show them proper respect (it isn't something to show how tough I am and isn't an extension of my cock). I also don't believe in accidental shooting as every one I have ever read about that is called accidental is really negligent or outright reckless. Now granted I could probably contrive a case that I would consider an accidental shooting but there is probably a better chance of getting struck by lightning.

      --
      Time to offend someone
  2. your nearest gun is here by jamesh · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

    It differs because a list of people belonging to a religion or political party doesn't help you if you need to find a gun in a hurry.

  3. I've seen this before. by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A long time ago, some people at UT Austin put signs in front of dorms listing "potential rapists" that had the names of all male residents. Indiscriminate and unsubstantiated accusations do not serve a useful purpose.

  4. Good intensions, bad idea. by Deemus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Criminals rejoice! No longer do you have to randomly break in to houses to see what there is to steal. There's now an app to tell you exactly which houses to rob.

  5. Re:All guns are dangerous... by jittles · · Score: 5, Insightful

    aren't they?

    Not as dangerous as lecturers at public universities. I think I will write an app that allows you to geotag your local professors, track their license plates, and give you hints and tips on how to heckle them and ruin their lives for doing things that you may or may not agree with.

    Because its not like you couldn't call the police if people are doing unsafe things with guns. In a lot of places there are laws about the safe handling of weapons.

  6. Re:Geotag those military bases! by kilfarsnar · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  7. Re:The Last Lonely Man ? by Culture20 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First Amendment > Second Amendment.

    Constitutional amendments are not arranged in a hierarchy.

  8. Re:Move to Europe. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 5, Informative

    So - you DO have school shootings. All the propaganda that tells us that Europe is gun-free and safe is bullshit at the end of the day then. Rationalize it how you will, spin like crazy, you do hae school shootings.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Europe

    I will note that the death tolls are lower than the US - is that due to ineptitude on the part of the shooters, or better police response, or some other element at play?

    http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Lott-guns-Connecticut-shooting/2012/12/15/id/467903

            Newsmax: The media typically spins these mass shootings as an American phenomenon. They suggest we ought to be more like Europe, with strong gun control, because then we would not have these problems. Is that true?

            Dr. Lott: No. Europe has a lot of multiple victim shootings. If you look at a per capita rate, the rate of multiple-victim public shootings in Europe and the United States over the last 10 years have been fairly similar to each other. A couple of years ago you had a couple of big shootings in Finland. About two-and-a-half years ago you had a big shooting in the U.K., 12 people were killed.

            You had Norway last year [where 77 died]. Two years ago, you had the shooting in Austria at a Sikh Temple. There have been several multiple-victim public shootings in France over the last couple of years. Over the last decade, you’ve had a couple of big school shootings in Germany. Germany in terms of modern incidents has two of the four worst public-school shootings, and they have very strict gun-control laws. The one common feature of all of those shootings in Europe is that they all take place in gun-free zones, in places where guns are supposed to be banned.

            Newsmax: So can you give us a correlation between crime rates in jurisdictions that try to ban concealed guns and the crime rate in those that do not?

            If you look over past data, before everyone that was adopting [concealed carry laws], you find that for each additional state that adopted a right-to-carry law . . . you’d see about a 1.5 percent drop in murder rates, and about 2 percent drop in rape and robbery . . . Just because states are right-to-carry doesn’t mean they’ve issued the same number of fees. You have big differences in states’ training requirements.

            Newsmax: Would it be a good idea to have teachers who have concealed carry permits in the schools, to better protect kids?

            I’m all for that. I’ve been a teacher most of my life. I’ve been an academic. I have kids in college still, and kids below that. It’s not something that I take lightly. But it’s hard to see what the argument would be against it.

            People may not realize this, but we allowed permit-concealed handguns in schools prior to the ironically named Safe School Zone Act. And no one that I know has been able to point to a single bad thing that occurred, not one.

            We changed the law, and we started having these public-school shootings. So I don’t think they got the intended result that they were hoping for with that type of ban. Right now, [some jurisdictions] allow you to carry concealed-permit guns in the schools. There are not a lot of them. But there are no problems that have occurred with any of those states, either.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  9. Re:All guns are dangerous... by Runaway1956 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When seconds count, the police are only minutes away. In my area, we have waited for thirty minutes and more for emergency personnel to arrive where they are needed. I sat with three badly burned boys for half an hour, before a first responder arrived, followed soon after by a policeman.

    Had someone not already called for police and ambulance services, I would have loaded those boys into my car, and driven to the hospital. Ignoring posted speed limit signs, I could have had those boys at the regional medical center in about 25 minutes, where they would have received trauma unit care immediately upon arrival.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  10. Obvious, no? by J'raxis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    There's one obvious difference: This kind of paranoia and bigotry is popular among left-leaning types, so it's all good.