Slashdot Mirror
Uber Investor Suggests Addressing Police Killings With an App (usatoday.com)
An anonymous reader write: To address the problem of motorists killed by police officers, Shervin Pishevar, the Iranian-born VC who backed Uber, is suggesting an app that allows police officers to communicate with motorists during traffic stops without either party leaving their vehicles. USA Today reports that Pishevar "says he has slept very little in the past 48 hours as he seeks input from law enforcement, software engineers and designers, lawmakers and from community members," and he's now working with former New York City police commissioner. Engadget has criticized Pishevar's proposal, writing "Dear Silicon Valley, not everything can be solved with apps."
At midnight on Friday, Uber also shut down their service for one minute "to create a moment of reflection for the Uber Community,", and also added a peace sign to their app, encouraging its users to "take a moment to think about what we can do to help," and changed the countdown for the arrival of a car into the amount of time left "to reflect on gun violence".
At midnight on Friday, Uber also shut down their service for one minute "to create a moment of reflection for the Uber Community,", and also added a peace sign to their app, encouraging its users to "take a moment to think about what we can do to help," and changed the countdown for the arrival of a car into the amount of time left "to reflect on gun violence".
apple will want 30% of ticket / court fees.
...the solution to America's social problems can be fixed by less face-to-face human interaction. In fact, I suspect that a large part of the problem is that too many people live in their own bubble, rarely looking up from the screen in their hands.
Maybe we could try... I don't know... just engaging with each other in a calm, direct, civil manner that communicates mutual respect? Pssht. I know. Crazy talk.
Non-kinetic solutions will not solve kinetic problems. How's about we all just take a step back and count to five before we make any sudden motions, literal or metaphorical.
you could just keep your hands on the wheel and not unexpectedly reach for something in the car.
If Mr. Pishevar really wants to help, perhaps he should seek some advice from people and organisations who have a good grasp of the issues before offering solutions.
Maybe because the people in the trenches are least like to think over the horizon. Status quo incumbents tend to resist change, rather than initiate it. Most police departments haven't even adopted bodycams, and many don't even have dashcams, despite big documented advantages at reducing violence.
This capability already exists, but it's not an app. It's a loudspeaker behind the police car's grille. I have no idea how someone could come up with such a ridiculous idea, to use an app to communicate to a car.
-SR
How is that not a technical solution for a social problem? The social problems are numerous, including police violent trigger-happy officers, a society that seeks to right wrongs with violence and trump. Sure, some behaviour can be influenced with gadgets (violent behaviour vs bodycams), but this is like trying to cure psychiatric illness with reading a self-help booklet.
A good social solution imho would be to disarm 90% of police officers, only those exposed to real dangerous situations should be allowed body-armour and weapons. Put those officers that wish to leave the force after such a change on ship B, as the world would be much better off without them.
This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
How about a real time audio communications system is added to the cellphones? SOmething that can use the cellphone's microphone, convert it to digital data, and then send it across the network in real time to another cellphone in the police officer's car? Perhaps we could use some kind of numbering system to uniqlely identify each cellphone, with perhaps a three digit or short number for emergency services coordination.
Now for a name... hmm... well, obviously, it's phonic because that means sound, and it is at a distance, which as we know from ancient greek, is "tele". So... something like telephnr. Becauese adding an "r" makes it an awesome app...
Oh wait.
I think this is a reflection of everyone being frustrated, and being unable to do anything about it. You try and find answers in what you know. If apps are your world, then you hope to develop and code your way into a solution. I think the intent is laudable, even if in the end the app is a non-starter.
I will shred my adversaries. Pull their eyes out just enough to turn them towards their mewing, mutilated faces. Illyria
coz non gun violence is fine. :|
Violence is stupid. Period. And should be the last resort LAST. "I got scared" ain't a good excuse to use it.
Traffic offences are easily caught on camera. There should be little need to stop a motorist unless they're clearly putting other people at risk. In a country that insists on having firearms all over the fucking place, being policed by machines is probably safer...
A bigger problem is Uber's clumsy one-dimensional approach. Michael Brown, Walter Scott, Eric Garner, Freddie Gray, etc. were unarmed and the police knew they were unarmed at the time that they killed them. So suggesting that the solution is to "reflect on gun violence", as if armed citizens are the root of the problem, is silly. If Uber is not willing to be balanced and constructive, then they should just stay out of this.
For millions of years mankind lived just like the animals. Then something happened which unleashed the power of our imagination. We learned to talk.
-- Keep Talking - Pink Floyd
Perhaps we need to put down our keyboards and screens and lean how to talk to each other again, in person. If we don't, we risk going back to being animals.
Most of the criminals doing the shootings and outright murders are the younger ones in the 20s-40s.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
The implementation of this would be troublesome to say the least, but I don't think the idea and the reasoning behind it is inherently unsound. I've seen police videos where an officer is approaching the driver side door of a vehicle they have pulled over and the driver opens the door and starts shooting.
Even a brief initial verbal exchange before they meet face to face has the potential to add value and either tip an officer off to something bad, or reassure both parties that there can be a safe interaction between them (while never fully letting your guard down, obviously.)
Michael Brown was attacking the officer trying to take his firearm away, i would have shot him too in that situation
you are right about the Walter Scott shooting, the officer was wrong to shoot him while he was running away, they already knew who he was so they could have caught him later
i have to agree too that Eric Garner should not have been shot, he was only selling individual cigarettes on the street, if i was a cop i would have ignored Eric Garner and let him sell his cigarettes, i doubt he made more money than enough to buy himself a hamburger, Fries and a sodapop
Freddie Gray is a bit of a toss up, he could have had already been injured before he was put in the back of that paddy wagon, but i also agree the officer should have sat him down and put a seatbelt on him, i would rule that an accidental death
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Because the disconnected communication on the internet has resulted in so much more meaningful conversation and much better sharing of information ? One sided expressions of opinions based on nothing but opinions are what the internet excels at. Net rage, manifestos, isolation and depression are the chief exports of the so called social networking scene. People in the days before texting, Facebook, Twitter and such were forced to interact with other people on some level and others saw you and could sense your deepening depression and gradual withdrawal from the human race, today not so much. On a side note isn't it grand that Uber shut its' service down for a whole 'minute' to observe its' commitment to humanity, then back to business as usual.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
Michael Brown was attacking the officer trying to take his firearm away, i would have shot him too in that situation
Sure. Michael Brown was a violent thug, and the preponderance of the evidence is that the shooting was justified. But he was unarmed when he was killed, and his death had little to do with "gun violence".
i have to agree too that Eric Garner should not have been shot
He wasn't shot. He was wrestled to the ground and died of a heart attack. He was unarmed, and the police never drew their weapons. "Reflecting on gun violence" would have done nothing to prevent his death.
if i was a cop i would have ignored Eric Garner and let him sell his cigarettes
If the police ignore people selling untaxed cigarettes, then all cigarettes will be sold untaxed.
People already get shot for holding a cellphone so what makes you think a smartphone app will improve the situation? Also, if you don't have a smartphone then will they just assume you are hostile and/or antisocial?
The problem is how the police are chosen and trained.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
If you, as a police officer, tell someone to stay in the car and they get out, or you tell them to get out and they stay in, don't you think that's a pretty damn clear answer? You can't fix stupid, not even with an app.
I think the idea is crazy, but I'm not against taking his money to prove him crazy.
I think it's funny when it's assumed that an app works across all cell phones and all cell networks, as well as the assumption that everyone carries a smartphone.
but those cigarettes were taxed, Eric Garner paid taxes when he bought a pack of cigarettes
Eric Garner had multiple arrests for selling untaxed cigarettes, and the cigarettes he was selling the day he was killed did not have a tax stamp, as required by NY law. It is highly unlikely he paid tax on them, and selling "loosies" is illegal in itself. NYC has very high tobacco taxes, and smuggling cigarettes from low tax states (mostly in the South) is big business for organized crime.
i think the IRS should be abolished and a flat tax implemented that is fair and not too burdensome on the working class
Please define "fair". If a rich person and a poor person buy a gallon of milk, they pay exactly the same. Most people consider that "fair". But very few people would consider a flat head tax of ~$10k on every citizen to be "fair". Most people would not even consider a flat percentage of income to be "fair" (even if they could agree on a definition of "income"). Some people think government services should be paid for by the people that use them. Since poor people use police and prisons much more than rich people, should they be taxed proportionally more? Other people think it is "fair" to tax activities that incur expensive externalities, which is why we have ... cigarette taxes.
Highly unlikely. Several states have similar or more restrictive controls on so called 'assault weapons'... and as we saw in San Bernardino, it didn't stop a thing.. and they even modified the rifles in a way which was illegal under California law. More so, during the 'ban', much the same rifles were still available, only with minor cosmetic changes to make them legal (ie thumb in hole stock instead of a pistol grip).
And yet the gun deaths are not evenly distributed across the country, instead they are primarily centralized in in a handful of locations... which if you discount their influence, the actual national rate drops like a rock.
Maybe it's not the firearms which are the problem?
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
If Clinton's assault weapon ban been in force, 50 Pulse patrons and many police would be alive right now.
Maybe. Maybe not. Norway has some of the strictest gun laws in the world, yet Anders Breivik was able to kill 77 people. Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people with a pair of handguns. Timothy McVeigh killed 168 with a truck full of fertilizer. Assault weapons are responsible for less than 1% of gun deaths in America.
The US needs to join Australia and Venezuela in stricter gun laws if the country is to actually have an actual future.
Perhaps, but that has very little to do with police-on-civilian killings. Trying to change the subject from excessive force by police, to disarming civilians, is misleading and unproductive.
As it stands now, the US is in the world's top five countries when it comes to people being killed by guns.
Wrong. The US is #11.
Nice circular logic you've got there.
How pray-tell do you expect to put the gun genie back in the bottle... even if you successfully repealed the second amendment and then legislatively banned all private ownership? There are over 300 million privately owned arms in the US, they can be built in a garage with simple tools from the hardware store, or you can get more advanced with a CNC or 3d printer if suddenly you can't buy any new ones. How many people would die as the police go door to door to collect non-turned in arms?
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
I would do that... only given you failed to mention St Louis, Baltimore, New Orleans, Newark, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Memphis, Atlanta, Cincinnati or Oakland... I'm pretty sure I understand the numbers... because if they were equally distributed, why does a place like Plano, TX have such a rather low homicide rate? (Nyeh! it's a small town!) San Diego has a population of ~1.3 million but has a rate a third that of San Antonio (~1.4 million), why?
Why does Philadelphia have a rate twice that of Las Vegas? And that when Vegas has a rate 2.5x that of San Diego?
Again, not uniformly distributed. Lots of random noise here & there, but also fairly obvious areas of concentration.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
The often used excuse is that many of those above us aren't industrialized first world countries... which somehow makes gun death ok?
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
I thought it was called a cell phone. gives the police an excuse for portal stingray devices.
Be seeing you...
At midnight on Friday, Uber also shut down their service for one minute "to create a moment of reflection for the Uber Community,"
60 seconds. Not more, otherwise it could hurt revenues.
[...] and smuggling cigarettes from low tax states (mostly in the South) is big business for organized crime.
My father and uncles smuggled cigarettes from Oregon (no cigarette tax) to California (cigarette tax) to sell to construction workers out of the trunk of their cars in the 1950's. Some of my uncles went to smuggle moonshine and heroin in Idaho. A distant cousin made a living hauling coke between Cuba and Florida until he got caught by the Coast Guard. I always chuckled when my aunts in Idaho blame about drug dealers from California for drive-by shooting and rising real estate prices. Smuggling is an American tradition.
"At midnight on Friday, Uber also shut down their service for one minute "to create a moment of reflection for the Uber Community,"
Wow, a whole minute. They must really have been broken up about all that murder and killing and stuff.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I'm sick of the whole "you have to be armed to be killed". That's not how the law works, and for good reason. If you are attacked you have every right to defend your life. Micheal Brown and Trayvon Martin are both thugs who deserve what they got; good riddance.
Australia managed. And considering that pretty much everything on the continent that walks, slithers, crawls, swims, flys, or hops has at least the desire, and usually the ability, to kill you... often horrifically painfully; they had far more legitimate use for firearms than we do here.
Imagine all the people...
No, your family is just trash.
We're rednecks. Trailer trash is a different breed altogether.
Small problem... the United States is not Australia... and you ignored a whole lot of history.
Australia did have a gun buy back, but no where near all newly illegal firearms were turned in, and the mass shootings that the ban was imposed in response to were abnormal blips, not part of a trend.
One fact that most pointing to Australia forget is that guns aren't actually illegal there, just a few types are, and as a result they are still very popular: http://www.abc.net.au/news/201...
Again, assuming you successfully repeal the second amendment, how exactly are you going to round up guns from all of those unwilling to turn them over? How many police and civilians will die as a result of the door to door searches?
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
The root of all these problems is the fact that hardly anyone in the US trusts the government, or believes in how the government operates. I see it here on slashdot all the time. Inevitably all discussions of what is wrong in the US comes down to it.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
This ignores the unspoken policy that traffic stops are not always about enforcing traffic law and collecting small fines, but rather the police want that interaction with the driver so they can fish for bigger violations. Traffic stops are "pretext stops", a loophole to get around the 4th amendment.
Running your plate and taking your ID isn't about making sure they assign points to the right person, but also about looking for wants and warrants. Getting you to roll down the window and talk to the officer isn't really about checking whether you smell like booze or pot, or seem nervous. There is no right to remain silent when an automobile is involved., and traffic stops are one of the most productive ways to find and arrest people with outstanding warrants.
I do not deploy Linux. Ever.
Your reasoning for not collecting all of the guns in the US is because people might get hurt while collecting them? That makes no sense, whatsoever.
I don't respond to AC's.
The problem is how the police are chosen and trained.
No. There is more than one problem. That is sometimes one of the problems, because it is not like that is uniform either.
If people broke laws less, we would also have less need for police. So having too many laws is also a problem.
So is breaking the laws, and anything that incentivizes people to break the laws.
So is mistreating criminal suspects in ways which may be as you are trained to do, but which will cause their entire community to distrust police officers forever.
So is abuse of alcohol and inhibited judgment.
So is any society where the punishment for a simple misdemeanor includes not being able to rent an apartment.
So is a police culture where reporting a concern about a fellow officer's behavior makes you a pariah.
So is a society where police lives are at risk at every traffic stop.
It's not just one problem.
Real lawyers write in C++
If the police ignore people selling untaxed cigarettes, then all cigarettes will be sold untaxed
You're right. That shouldn't happen. The police should continue to murder people who don't give the government their rightful cut.
I don't respond to AC's.
This app will reduce the potential violence associated with searching your car for cash to steal. Instead, it will just funnel your checking account balance to the police. A trained Animal Control officer will be dispatched to your home address to shoot the dog.
They shut down for a whole MINUTE
DAMN
Which is as it should be. You should never speak to the police. Let them run your plates, run your license and check your registration and insurance while you remain completely silent.
Talking to police who have stopped you has never been anything but a waste of time. Just do as they say and be on your way. If they wrong you, you take them to court AFTER you have complied with what they tell you to do.
True, however up until he died, legally speaking he was stilt a good guy (just like most of the rest of the American population... having not been convicted of any crimes or subject to any other legal process which would prevent him from buying a firearm (just like most of the rest of the American population who do not use firearms for evil. Had the military properly discharged him in a non honorable way (as it sounds like was their intention) then he wouldn't have been able to purchase something... so again, maybe it wasn't the gun which was to blame?
I live in Washington state... it's actually easier for me to buy marijuana than firearms (pot shops being closer to my house than stores which sell firearms or ammo... granted I can at least have ammo shipped to my house).
Not quite, it just means those who own firearms aren't going to be shooting them as often, but will still likely have quite an inventory of ammo on hand.
More so, do you know what gunpowder is made of? Just some common ingredients one can purchase at your local home improvement store and/or grocery store... are you saying finding sulfur, charcoal, and potassium nitrate is going to be that hard?
Who says you need to grow it? As discussed, you can make your own gunpowder as the component materials are not at all hard to come across, hell, there was a Star Trek episode which pointed out just how easy it was: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There also is an entire class of firearm owners who reload their own ammo. Most simply combine over the counter brass, powder & bullets to make their own... I do know a few though who actually fabricate their own bullets & powder. In order to stop these people you'd actually have to crack down on primers... the chemistry & mechanics of which is a hair bit more difficult than powder, but not insurmountable.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
There is also the constitutional issue, a new amendment being needed to be ratified in order to make such an operation legal.
Again, there are about as many firearms in this country as people... the only way to collect them is to go door to door, at the point of a gun to collect them... would the deaths resulting from that be more or less than those lost to unlawful use of firearms today? How then do you factor in the increase in deaths due to the inability to lawfully use arms for self-defense?
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Clearly there is a cultural problem with some who think it legitimate to go shoot up cops protecting a protest, a school or movie theater.
If it was simply access to firearms that caused such things, you'd think they'd be more prevalent in places where firearms aren't overly difficult to acquire... yet they aren't at the same rate.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Strange, I just got a call from Senator Dianne Feinstein, asking me to ask you not to misrepresent her view.
And who exactly is going to be the arbiter of what is 'legitimate' or not? Also, I've got some Christians calling saying they would like to sign up to regulate the proper forms of relationships & sexual contact.
True 'assuult rifles', like automatic weapons have been heavily regulated since 1934... or did you mean 'assault weapons', in which case I'm pretty sure you don't know what you are talking about: http://www.assaultweapon.info/
On the contrary, I hope to die as an old and happy man never having to have drawn a weapon in anger or fear... ditto for calling the fire department saying my house is burning down and my kids are inside... but none the less I keep a few fire extinguishers, smoke detectors and firearms at hand... just in case the worst happens.
Except I haven't made that argument.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Why do you think the police carry guns? When an officer asks you to do something, you comply period. It wouldn't have been that hard for Brown to get out of the street. But no, he called the officer's bluff and you just don't do that. I'm not saying he deserved a death sentence but I'm really not sure what else he thought would happen.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Most police departments haven't even adopted bodycams, and many don't even have dashcams, despite big documented advantages at reducing violence.
That's because for most police departments(since you're talking US), can't afford to. Most cops make diddly in money(Between $28k-55k), many have to buy everything from shoes/boots/puncture resistant gloves to their own guns and bullet proof vests as well. In some of the poorer police departments they even have to pay for the fuel for their patrol cars.
Jump north into Canada here, there are plenty of police services that are the same way. Especially for the people who are working in the asshole of nowhere, like postings in the far north of Canada -- FYI: The far north of Canada is pretty much anywhere outside of 250km of the US border or a major city like Saskatoon, Edmonton, etc. Your home is also your jail in those cases. If you're married your family lives in the jail with you. If you get lucky, small towns may have a jail. But this is all getting a bit off. Even here though, many people have to buy all of their own gear. Everything except guns or non-lethal weapons. Many police services can't afford dash-cams or body cams, though there is a push much like in the US for both. Some services like the OPP or SQ(both equivalent to state police), have been to points as well where constables have to pay to fuel their own vehicles, or they'd simply have them parked on major highways to create the illusion that they're out there.
So unless the areas are very rich like peel region(here in Ontario), or Vancouver(BC), it's still a waiting game. And of course when the police say "we need money for xyz thing" the first thing people do is start screaming that the police don't need that money. One also can't forget that in many parts of Canada due to changes in police services acts, all police services must have ERT(like SWAT), homicide divisions, underwater rescue, drug dogs, K-9 units and so on. Stuff that they can't afford, but if they don't have it they lose their status as an actual police service which leads to either rental or sharing between services. It's also one of the reasons here in Ontario, local police(and people who know the area) are so rare now. Because the OPP replaced them all because those small local police couldn't compete with the "hey here's our contract rate." Now you deal with people who've never lived in the area and have no idea of what's going on.
Om, nomnomnom...
Or deaf.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
This is a brilliant idea! Take out a large life insurance policy on your wife/husband/partner. When they're out running errands, call the car in stolen. Then the cop shoots them, because apparently we don't need trials or due process (AND grand theft auto carries the death penalty). Time to cash in!
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Just walk up to the fucking car and hold a courteous conversation.
You'd be amazed how effective this can be.
If you are attacked you have a right to reasonable defence. If you have a non-lethal option you are obliged to take it. If you can run away or otherwise avoid a deadly fight, you are obliged to. At least that's how it is in most developed countries.
Cops get some special powers because they have to arrest people. But those powers usually don't include executing people because they felt a little bit unsafe. For always has to be justified in terms of either preventing harm or making a lawful arrest.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
As it stands now, the US is in the world's top five countries when it comes to people being killed by guns.
Wrong. The US is #11.
To be fair, it's top of the list of developed, "first world" nations, at 10.54 per 100k people. Next is Finland at 3.25, mostly due to suicides (the gun related murder rate is 1/10th that of the US). In fact all other developed nations have just a fraction of the gun crime per head of population.
What the US needs is a proper mental healthcare system, that helps people before they become violent or suicidal.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Brown didn't just steal a back of smokes. He strong-arm robbed a store, physically assaulting the clerk. Then was shot for punching (at least once) a cop in the face (breaking his orbital plate), then trying take his gun. I would have shot the SOB too, as would any sane person. Martin pinned a gut down a guy, pounding the crap out of his face. Again, good riddance. Doubtful you have ever read the constitution.
Being stubborn in defense of individual liberty, how horrible and inexcusable!
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
I can't agree with you enough. 10-15 years ago, if someone was mentally ill, there were hospitals and beds for them. Now, they get tossed into a (private) prison, which at best has an intern who asks 1-2 questions, makes a snap diagnosis, and gets the on duty psych to prescribe meds... and there is a good chance the meds will only make things worse. Since private prison companies don't make money from mental patient needs, ultimately, the mental patients are tossed into the hole, which doesn't exactly help things.
Yes, the US can ban guns, use social media to find people talking about them as probable cause, and then show that drone strikes are more powerful than some redneck's bolt-action rifle... but realistically, we saw what Prohibition and the War on Drugs did, with the cat and mouse games following. With people fearing for their lives and distrust of the government, there will be trillions spent on cat and mouse games, which do nothing for improving the quality of life. Far more lives could be saved by having a safety net for people who are depressed or mentally ill than to do a "war on guns".
Guns are definitely a symptom of how people fear/distrust the government. Right now, we have a Commander in Chief who doesn't give speeches that unify or pep the US population. His speeches blame and divide, which further aggravates the issue. Furthermore, neither of the two candidates appear to be able to unify the population either, as both will blame their demon of choice (NRA) for the entire nation's troubles while not bothering to address the real causes.
Buckle up, we are in for a ride here, and we have no politicians in office who are interested in staunching the bleeding of the country's psyche. Instead, we have people who want to add anticoagulant and cut the wounds wider and deeper.
I'm sick of people like you and your disingenuous bulshit. First of all, the US has the most gun crime because it has the most guns. The US does not have the most gun crime per capita and if you remove large, usually democrat-run cities, the US drops right into line. If there were no guns here, the people killing each other in Chicago would be killing each other with sticks and stones. Then we'd need stick and stone control, right? All of these Utopias with gun control have high rates of violent crime and petty theft because only the criminals have weapons. It's not a gun problem, it's a societal and cultural problem. Until you progressive bleeding hearts come up with a real solution to the societal issues that doesn't include taking everything I own and giving it to people who still show next to zero improvement in their future outlook, I'll keep my concealed carry permit. Now please, piss off.
For example you could install cop watch video recorder on your iPhone, it's just what came up first when I searched. There are similar apps for Android.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
The number of deaths resulting from accidents *far* outweighs the number of "self-defense" uses.
I don't respond to AC's.
If Clinton's assault weapon ban been in force, ... many police would be alive right now.
Reports are that Micah Johnson was armed with an SKS. The SKS wasn't affected by the "Clinton assault weapon ban" as it didn't (by and large) fit the criteria set out. As a matter of fact it's still legal in California...
But it doesn't really matter. A shotgun and and a can of gasoline would let you do the same thing. Or just the can of gasoline.
So, if you think you'll change anything material by outlawing semi automatic long guns with large capacity magazines, my money is on you waking up very disappointed one day. Remember, after all, and the statistics are very clear on this: "Guns don't kill people, Americans kill people..." Though not as much as you used to. Your rates are declining and that's despite owning more guns than ever.
Stefan Axelsson
It's not the people in the prison's or being arrested who are "using" the police and prisons, they are a product, not a consumer. The wealthy benefit way more from our legal framework, and use it more.
Cheap storage VM.
..and japan is probably #1 by jumping from buildings. Who cares. If I'm going to kill myself, I'd rather have a gun to do it.
If you have a non-lethal option you are obliged to take it. If you can run away or otherwise avoid a deadly fight, you are obliged to. At least that's how it is in most developed countries.
Actually, that depends on the jurisdiction in the US, and the specific circumstances of the situation. Although it would generally be preferable (from a humanistic standpoint) to use an available non-lethal option, the sticking point is who has the burden of proof that an option was available. This comes into effect in the so-called Castle Doctrine (in common law) as well as Stand Your Ground laws, which extend this to anywhere you have a lawful right to be in.
Lethality is distinct from self-defense, but in most jurisdictions if you have a reasonable fear of serious bodily injury then defense including deadly force is permitted. The "reasonable" clause there (as inevitably interpreted by a jury) pertains as to whether the escalation was justifiable or not. If a 10 year old kid is coming at you with a yellow wiffle ball bat and the jury feels that your fear of serious bodily injury was unreasonable, then the use of deadly force would become a manslaughter charge instead of justified homicide (at least in my state).
Also... IANAL. So yeah.
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
San Diego has a population of ~1.3 million but has a rate a third that of San Antonio (~1.4 million), why?
Why does Philadelphia have a rate twice that of Las Vegas? And that when Vegas has a rate 2.5x that of San Diego?
I think the answer to that is obvious... ;)
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
If the police ignore people selling untaxed cigarettes, then all cigarettes will be sold untaxed.
They were taxed when Garner bought them from the store. In the US, we don't have VAT, we have sales tax, which is charged only once, when the retailer makes the sale; if Garner bought them at retail (which he did) it was paid.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
If Clinton's assault weapon ban been in force, 50 Pulse patrons and many police would be alive right now.
The shooter spent 3 hours walking around shooting at an average rate of about 2 minutes per shot fired. Magazines don't take that long to change, he could have still fired off all 115 or so shots in that time even with 5 round mags, let alone given the 10 round limit under Clinton's ban, and he could have easily sustained that rate of fire with a handgun or a basic hunting rifle, neither of which were affected by the ban. Hell, he could have gone around with a kitchen knife for 3 hours to kill 50 people and wound 60 or so.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Not really, Afghanistan is no less civilized than the US. It's different from the western world, but it's not uncivilized.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Especially when knife, club, and fist deaths outnumber gun deaths in the US.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Indeed, a bullet to the head is much more humane than the terror of falling 50 stories. Both are just as final.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Why do you think the police carry guns? When an officer asks you to do something, you comply period.
The reason police carry guns is not for compliance. The reason they carry guns is to protect themselves from danger or to protect the community from imminent danger. No other reason.
Enigma
Guns don't kill people, bullets (sometimes) do, but it's usually uncontrolled bleeding and organ damage caused by the bullet. In any case, the bullet wasn't acting on its own, it was acting under the direction of a person so, ultimately, even if you want to say someone dying of uncontrolled bleeding and organ damage caused by a bullet was killed by the bullet, you have to trace the chain of events that lead to the bullet killing them in the first place. And I know you can do that; it's how you got to the gun being the killer in the first place. Go one step further, though. Who fired the gun?
Any way you cut it, guns don't kill people. Whether you want to blame the injury, blame the object that caused the injury, or blame whatever set the events in motion that lead to the death, the gun is the wrong target. The injury did ultimately kill. The bullet (object) did ultimately cause the injury, that that could have been any other weapon, or object repurposed as a weapon, just as well, rendering the gun it was fired from irrelevant. The person who made the conscious decision (or accidental action) to use that object to cause the injury that lead to that death, now that's your killer. And they'd be a killer even without that gun.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Like... I'm sorry but your whiteness is showing. I'm white too and even I can see, because I bother to watch the ugly truth. Even I can see that someone reaching for their registration when asked to reach for their registration is following orders. Could have done nothing. Shot in front of their fucking kids.
How... fucking... dare... you.
Data?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
No it is also a representation of capability to respond with deadly force. I get it, it's the kind of authority that many Americans resent, but it is what it is.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Shervin Pishevar, the Iranian-born VC
Iranian-born... as in born in Iran? That's important information. I know it is important, because when I searched for more information on this person, it was repeated over and over again in multiple news reports.
It is good to know that he was born in Iran. Otherwise, how else could I judge the validity of his ideas?
Born in Iran? I hope this is attached to his title for life so that I and others can know exactly where his ideas are really coming from.
Especially since: 1. The drive rmust have a smart phone. 2. There must be cell coverage. 3. The police department must have access to this one single app. It would be easier to have a device that could detect the telephones in a car and ring them. But - gasp! - not everyone has a mobile phone.
Many citizens (NOT civilians because despite what cops think THEY ARE CIVILIANS) don't necessarily understand that for their safety they should stay in the car. Additionally, in other countries this might not be the case; when I was in the academy I was told of a situation that could have gone bad but didn't where two Russian men, both body builders, exited their vehicle and went up to the police cruiser, where the officer was, shall we say, passing a brick, because IN RUSSIA THIS IS WHAT YOU DO. They didn't speak good English, and the Universal Translator wasn't working that day.
Indeed. The Colonists didn't stop drinking tea after tax was added to it - they drank SMUGGLED TEA.
No, not quite. There is a force continuum. A uniformed officer represents the lowest level on this continuum, as he or she represents the law. Next is wrist locks, pressure points, spraying with oleoresin capsicasum (I'm sure that is spelled wrong because I usually abbreviate OC and it is often called 'Mace'), a baton, THEN the firearm. You usually go up the force continuum one at time BUT there may be cases where you h ave to jump immediately to using a firearm such as when someone is pointing one at you.
This. The 'drops like a rock' moves AMerican violent crime down pretty much to western European levels. I don't know about now, but throughout the 1990s you were far more likely to be a victim of violent crime in England and Wales than in the US -a ccording to the Clinton Justice Department.
You make all of those things sound so easy to use in every situation.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
I wasn't meaning to do this. I was simply saying that responding with deadly force is NOT what good police training his. There is a continuum of force, and it's very hard, especially when adrenaline is flowing, to do what you're supposed to do. What I found tiresome as a cop was the guy who said "Oh yeha, I was in 4 fights last month and 3 this month and it's only the 12th of the month!" and in too many instances, he was merely being an *sshole to people who he had a contact with. I'm not Monday Morning Quarterbacking either - I'm merely stating what *I* learned. I know how difficult it is to do. I'm glad I never shot anyone, nor got shot myself. Some of that is circumstance, I'm sure - and it is impossible to quantify how much of it may have been because of how I did my job.
I'm not really sure it matters much, truth be told. Legally owned guns aren't used in crimes much, so deaths (not including suicides) are basically anomalies.
Just for comparison I ran the numbers of deaths versus number of gang members comparing the US and Sweden, and, between thumb and forefinger, they correlate very well. The reason we're having so much better murder rater figures than you then being that we have so much fewer gangs and gang members. The ones we do have though seem to shoot each other at about the same frequency.
Of course our gun legislation is much, much stricter than yours. As it happens though, the guns used in "the settling of scores between known criminals" aren't legally owned, have never been legally owned, and are of types that couldn't be legally owned (for the most part). So restricting legal guns would have little to no impact on that.
So, in summary, there's much to suggest you have many severe problems, but that legal gun ownership doesn't much factor into the equation. It doesn't much in any other country in the west so it's not a big stretch.
So if you want to turn it around, focusing on guns is the lazy analysis and solution. In all probability, even an Australian/UK "ban" wouldn't change much at all.
Stefan Axelsson
In my state it is required to tell the officer if you are concealed carrying when stopped. The officer just asks where it is in my experience. And if you are carrying you hand the officer both licenses. When your DL is run it will show you have a carry license though. I have heard it makes them a little nervous if you don't tell them you had one. So I always hand over both even when I am not carrying.
refactor the law, its bloated, confusing and unmaintainable.
I see this as entrapment. In CA, and many other states, it is illegal to use your phone in your car, even when you are stopped. So when the cop pulls you over, and starts chatting with you on the app, they can ticket you for using your cell phone.
WTB [sig], PST!!!