All the three -1s are used to silence opponents, and some use sockpuppet accounts.
It would be nice if the new and improved slashdot could do some log file analysis, and at least strike down on patterns of posters that quickly get +1 while the parent gets -1. Once in a while can happen, but there are some posters where this happens far too often for it to be chance. Statistical anomalies should be easily discoverable.
If you look at what the Hammonds have done over the last twenty years or so, what the "militia" up there has done, etc; These clowns got off easy.
Because they quote "scripture" and wear cowboy boots, they have gotten the soft approach from law enforcement, and everyone knows it.
Just imagine if something similar had taken place, except the "militia" was composed of African Americans, say, in Oakland or Memphis? It would have been a blood bath from the get go.
Also, why do these militia/patriot types think its their prerogative to use lethal force or violence to get what they want? WTF?!? That is what criminals do. Isn't this obvious enough?
Setting a fire to your own land to control weeds, ettc. is not a crime. That fire getting out of control and burning into neighboring jurisdictions is not all that uncommon.
make sure your next door neighbor knows that's how you feel.
Well, the point is that gun ownership and homicide rate are LOOSELY correlated. I made a point in another post, but I will summarize it.
Let's compare gun laws. Chicago. A few zip codes had ZERO shootings last year. Some zip codes approached a hundred shootings last year. The gun laws are the SAME. The difference? Poverty.
Take guns away from areas with high poverty, and you will see an increase in stabbing and beating deaths.
Give plenty of guns away in the areas with money, and they will suddenly not decide to start committing murder.
But, how much easier it is to simply add more ineffective gun laws, rather than focus on the ROOT cause of violence -- poverty?
it could be argued that the real root cause of our civil dysfunction is the segregation of neighborhoods by class/wealth/race, makes it possible for whole neighborhoods to just be abandoned to their own devices.
The first, fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments can be rolled back just as easily, especially once precedents are set.
They already have. The second is protected because people want their toys, not because they worry about the constitution.
in the history of the US, the only tyranny that gun owners appear to have opposed is any sort of gun regulations. if anything, it appears they are in favor of things like incarcerating japanese americans, shooting unarmed protesters, police killing unarmed blacks in custody, etc, in that the same "conservatives" arguing against gun laws are the guys espousing every sort of oppressive racist idea.
Here is a challenge for you. Go to this page that has a convenient table with gun ownership and homicide rates. Copy and paste this table into your favorite spreadsheet. Make an X-Y scatter graph with "Gun ownership %" as the X axis and "Homicides per 100,000" as the Y axis. Add a linear trend line.
Hey, look at that! The trend is that more gun ownership is correlated with LESS homicide. It is a weak correlation, but it is there. OK, Washington DC has few guns, but by far the most homicides. Delete that row. Hey, look! The trend still holds!
Some people ding Wikipedia, but at least I trust in, in this instance, to be relatively unbiased, and they have links to the source data (FBI and Census Bureau).
Now, the nice this about THIS instead of some random article from some biased journalist is that the source data comes from someplace that you can trust, and you can do the math yourself, and draw your own conclusions.
have you done that? because for the states with below 30% gun ownership, it's almost linear that gun murders depends on gun owner percentage, then it flattens out, and gets noisy. the missing factor, of course, is population density. gun murders go up with population density at the low end of densities with a lot of noise, but then level off. if you look at similar population densities you see a definite correlation between gun ownership percentage and gun murders. sort by density and see there is still some variation, though; the problem, even if you want to do a multifactor analysis, is that state is too large a unit, you need data by city/town. looking at the table, it seems that states with no big cities has fewer gun murders than one with similar overall population density and gun owner percentage, but which has a big city in it. that explains DC too, of course, where population density and gun murder rate are both outliers. so if you sort by population density and use only states with no large cities you see a real correlation between more gun owners=more gun murders. except for Utah. mormons apparently don't shoot people.
Have you ever considered that you might be a bigot?
No, the religious right is not trying to force their religion on anyone. The Left has been trying to take away religious freedom, but that is a different thing.
yes, the laws regarding sexual behavior, marriage, etc are all just tradition-based, not religious in nature. and what about that war on christmas, huh?
You've made your bed, time to enjoy your nap while the adults clean up the mess liberal Democrats made yet again.
I stand amazed at the projection coming from the Right. The Bush Administration spent 8 years nearly ruining this country; starting unnecessary wars, curtailing civil liberties, and implementing irresponsible tax cuts. By the end of his presidency even hardcore Republicans were running away from him and the whole country couldn't wait to elect a different president. Yet you still write sentences like that above and expect to be taken seriously.
and these are the people who are certain they're responsible enough to be trusted with a firearm.
In 2012 over 3,300 people died in accidents but that doesn't fit the left's narrative so it's ignored. If someone's killed with a knife the left will proclaim that's bad, a killing with a car will be met with the proclamation of "how horrible", but a killing where a gun is involved will end with the call to ban all guns. Doesn't make sense and it's due to a lack of understanding and fear of the unknown.
http://www.cdc.gov/Motorvehicl...
hey, you'd be glad to know, there's been quite an effort to make cars safer recently, like for the past 50 years, with some success. thank a big government liberal,
The truth is an unloaded gun is good for nothing more than a paperweight or a very inefficient club
You have obviously never used a Mosin-Nagant. If you have the bayonet they make an excellent pike/spear and with the metal butt stock they can make a very good club.
I actually own a Mosin Nagant (receiver is stamped 1942). Unfortunately the guy I bought it from had lost the bayonet.:( In any case, I would hope that no one would really be trying to carry on a Mosin Nagant, and it's certainly pretty hard to "forget" you have one on you, as they are not light weapons. I think it's generally assumed that when people talk about firearms confiscated at TSA security, the majority of them are going to be handguns.
excuse me sir, is that a howitzer in your pocket or are you just frightened to see me?
"I forgot" as an excuse for bringing a firearm on a plane should mean you are instantly put on a no-buy and no-fly list, and that any other guns you own must be turned over to authorities...
OK, calm the hell down already.
In the larger scheme of things, the car you and the other 200 million Americans drive every day kills 35,000 people every year, and when you "forget" to use your turn signal and cause an accident, no one is demanding you ride a fucking bicycle for the rest of your life.
We're human. Humans make mistakes. And statistically speaking, the mistakes being made are by a very small percentage of the gun-toting population, regardless of how sensationalized we want to portray this.
like shooting somebody by accident. hey, i'm only human, and humans make mistakes.
"I forgot" as an excuse for bringing a firearm on a plane should mean you are instantly put on a no-buy and no-fly list, and that any other guns you own must be turned over to authorities...
OK, calm the hell down already.
In the larger scheme of things, the car you and the other 200 million Americans drive every day kills 35,000 people every year, and when you "forget" to use your turn signal and cause an accident, no one is demanding you ride a fucking bicycle for the rest of your life.
We're human. Humans make mistakes. And statistically speaking, the mistakes being made are by a very small percentage of the gun-toting population, regardless of how sensationalized we want to portray this.
on the other hand, if you forget you are bringing a car with you, most people would agree it's time to hang it up, carwise.
So, are these people prosecuted, or just given a waggled finger and a box to store their firearm safely to take home?
I ask because:
"9 U.S. Code 46505 - Carrying a weapon or explosive on an aircraft
(b)General Criminal Penalty.—An individual shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both, if the individual—
(1) when on, or attempting to get on, an aircraft in, or intended for operation in, air transportation or intrastate air transportation, has on or about the individual or the property of the individual a concealed dangerous weapon that is or would be accessible to the individual in flight;"
Since only embarking passengers are allowed through security now, going through the TSA station might constitute an "attempt to get on..." This is, afaict, a felony. With the exception of the (somewhat controversial, and funded/unfunded times for reviews) BATFE Relief program, those convicted of a federal felony are barred from purchase or possession of firearms.
Was this pursued on any of the 2000 cases?
on a related note; they never test the liquids confiscated. for all we know there are dozens of attempts per day to smuggle some sort of Bad Liquid on board.
Talking with someone back then who said when he checks in baggage, he wants to carry on his pistol as valuable possession not to get lost in baggage. This was before 9-11 and I don't think they objected. I may have not remembered some details, I think airline would at least request it be placed with pilot.
Also before 9-11 another who loves to cook and he always brings his knives as carry on as these are expensive and doesn't want to get lost in baggage. Those were the days!
if you tell the baggage people there's a gun in your checked baggage, does that increase or decrease the chances it gets lost, i wonder
Slashdot Mirror
So... ask slashdot in the sense that slashdot is asking us. OK, first suggestion, make headlines that have sensible relationship to article.
Having a "+1 disagree" would work, though...
All the three -1s are used to silence opponents, and some use sockpuppet accounts. It would be nice if the new and improved slashdot could do some log file analysis, and at least strike down on patterns of posters that quickly get +1 while the parent gets -1. Once in a while can happen, but there are some posters where this happens far too often for it to be chance. Statistical anomalies should be easily discoverable.
best idea in a long time.
here's no doubt that the Slashdot community is one of the most thoughtful, intelligent, and prolific communities on the web.
You must be new here.
no, it's true. sad, but true. see if you can read the youtube comments for more than 10 seconds.
I, for one, welcome our new BIZX, LLC overlords.
If you look at what the Hammonds have done over the last twenty years or so, what the "militia" up there has done, etc; These clowns got off easy. Because they quote "scripture" and wear cowboy boots, they have gotten the soft approach from law enforcement, and everyone knows it. Just imagine if something similar had taken place, except the "militia" was composed of African Americans, say, in Oakland or Memphis? It would have been a blood bath from the get go. Also, why do these militia/patriot types think its their prerogative to use lethal force or violence to get what they want? WTF?!? That is what criminals do. Isn't this obvious enough?
http://wp.production.patheos.c...
And so is pointing guns at law enforcement. But hey, they're white!
And in several cases, in custody today or even dead. What's your point?
the guys at the original Bundystock got a free pass for promising to shoot people http://static2.businessinsider... http://www.reviewjournal.com/s... http://graphics8.nytimes.com/i... http://www.trbimg.com/img-536a... http://www.motherjones.com/fil... the new bunch overgeneralized from that.
Setting a fire to your own land to control weeds, ettc. is not a crime. That fire getting out of control and burning into neighboring jurisdictions is not all that uncommon.
make sure your next door neighbor knows that's how you feel.
Instead of cake, you could get him a 1 radian slice of pie.
pi radians
Right, I bought my kid a signed firest edition of Newton's Principia in the original Klingon
as an american, obviously it's time for the dad to buy the kid a gun
Well, the point is that gun ownership and homicide rate are LOOSELY correlated. I made a point in another post, but I will summarize it.
Let's compare gun laws. Chicago. A few zip codes had ZERO shootings last year. Some zip codes approached a hundred shootings last year. The gun laws are the SAME. The difference? Poverty.
Take guns away from areas with high poverty, and you will see an increase in stabbing and beating deaths.
Give plenty of guns away in the areas with money, and they will suddenly not decide to start committing murder.
But, how much easier it is to simply add more ineffective gun laws, rather than focus on the ROOT cause of violence -- poverty?
it could be argued that the real root cause of our civil dysfunction is the segregation of neighborhoods by class/wealth/race, makes it possible for whole neighborhoods to just be abandoned to their own devices.
The first, fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments can be rolled back just as easily, especially once precedents are set.
They already have. The second is protected because people want their toys, not because they worry about the constitution.
in the history of the US, the only tyranny that gun owners appear to have opposed is any sort of gun regulations. if anything, it appears they are in favor of things like incarcerating japanese americans, shooting unarmed protesters, police killing unarmed blacks in custody, etc, in that the same "conservatives" arguing against gun laws are the guys espousing every sort of oppressive racist idea.
Here is a challenge for you. Go to this page that has a convenient table with gun ownership and homicide rates. Copy and paste this table into your favorite spreadsheet. Make an X-Y scatter graph with "Gun ownership %" as the X axis and "Homicides per 100,000" as the Y axis. Add a linear trend line.
Hey, look at that! The trend is that more gun ownership is correlated with LESS homicide. It is a weak correlation, but it is there. OK, Washington DC has few guns, but by far the most homicides. Delete that row. Hey, look! The trend still holds!
Some people ding Wikipedia, but at least I trust in, in this instance, to be relatively unbiased, and they have links to the source data (FBI and Census Bureau).
Now, the nice this about THIS instead of some random article from some biased journalist is that the source data comes from someplace that you can trust, and you can do the math yourself, and draw your own conclusions.
have you done that? because for the states with below 30% gun ownership, it's almost linear that gun murders depends on gun owner percentage, then it flattens out, and gets noisy. the missing factor, of course, is population density. gun murders go up with population density at the low end of densities with a lot of noise, but then level off. if you look at similar population densities you see a definite correlation between gun ownership percentage and gun murders. sort by density and see
there is still some variation, though; the problem, even if you want to do a multifactor analysis, is that state is too large a unit, you need data by city/town. looking at the table, it seems that states with no big cities has fewer gun murders than one with similar overall population density and gun owner percentage, but which has a big city in it. that explains DC too, of course, where population density and gun murder rate are both outliers. so if you sort by population density and use only states with no large cities you see a real correlation between more gun owners=more gun murders. except for Utah. mormons apparently don't shoot people.
Have you ever considered that you might be a bigot?
No, the religious right is not trying to force their religion on anyone. The Left has been trying to take away religious freedom, but that is a different thing.
yes, the laws regarding sexual behavior, marriage, etc are all just tradition-based, not religious in nature. and what about that war on christmas, huh?
You've made your bed, time to enjoy your nap while the adults clean up the mess liberal Democrats made yet again.
I stand amazed at the projection coming from the Right. The Bush Administration spent 8 years nearly ruining this country; starting unnecessary wars, curtailing civil liberties, and implementing irresponsible tax cuts. By the end of his presidency even hardcore Republicans were running away from him and the whole country couldn't wait to elect a different president. Yet you still write sentences like that above and expect to be taken seriously.
and these are the people who are certain they're responsible enough to be trusted with a firearm.
It's not irresponsible to have a gun on your person you don't know about? Or to take said gun to an airport? Really?
Oh wait, there's another one in your sock. and look, there's another in your jacket.
boy, i am just scattered today!
In 2012 over 3,300 people died in accidents but that doesn't fit the left's narrative so it's ignored. If someone's killed with a knife the left will proclaim that's bad, a killing with a car will be met with the proclamation of "how horrible", but a killing where a gun is involved will end with the call to ban all guns. Doesn't make sense and it's due to a lack of understanding and fear of the unknown. http://www.cdc.gov/Motorvehicl...
hey, you'd be glad to know, there's been quite an effort to make cars safer recently, like for the past 50 years, with some success. thank a big government liberal,
The truth is an unloaded gun is good for nothing more than a paperweight or a very inefficient club
You have obviously never used a Mosin-Nagant. If you have the bayonet they make an excellent pike/spear and with the metal butt stock they can make a very good club.
I actually own a Mosin Nagant (receiver is stamped 1942). Unfortunately the guy I bought it from had lost the bayonet. :( In any case, I would hope that no one would really be trying to carry on a Mosin Nagant, and it's certainly pretty hard to "forget" you have one on you, as they are not light weapons. I think it's generally assumed that when people talk about firearms confiscated at TSA security, the majority of them are going to be handguns.
excuse me sir, is that a howitzer in your pocket or are you just frightened to see me?
Without guns, we'd become Europeans. You may get a chubby watching your wives and daughters get raped, but for the most part, we don't.
don't be silly, european women don't get raped because they do 't have mexicans. ask Trump.
Americans don't care what Europeans think. Thinking in general is considered highly suspect in America these days, even more so if done by Europeans.
if'n ya got a gun, ya don' hafta think.
"I forgot" as an excuse for bringing a firearm on a plane should mean you are instantly put on a no-buy and no-fly list, and that any other guns you own must be turned over to authorities...
OK, calm the hell down already.
In the larger scheme of things, the car you and the other 200 million Americans drive every day kills 35,000 people every year, and when you "forget" to use your turn signal and cause an accident, no one is demanding you ride a fucking bicycle for the rest of your life.
We're human. Humans make mistakes. And statistically speaking, the mistakes being made are by a very small percentage of the gun-toting population, regardless of how sensationalized we want to portray this.
like shooting somebody by accident. hey, i'm only human, and humans make mistakes.
"I forgot" as an excuse for bringing a firearm on a plane should mean you are instantly put on a no-buy and no-fly list, and that any other guns you own must be turned over to authorities...
OK, calm the hell down already.
In the larger scheme of things, the car you and the other 200 million Americans drive every day kills 35,000 people every year, and when you "forget" to use your turn signal and cause an accident, no one is demanding you ride a fucking bicycle for the rest of your life.
We're human. Humans make mistakes. And statistically speaking, the mistakes being made are by a very small percentage of the gun-toting population, regardless of how sensationalized we want to portray this.
on the other hand, if you forget you are bringing a car with you, most people would agree it's time to hang it up, carwise.
Substitute a bottle of water, see how many people accidentally bring those, and you might change your mind on the severity of this infraction.
worst possible offense; boarding a plane carrying a water pistol larger than 3 oz.
That's the extent of your argument? Really? That's the best you could do?
OK, OK... "I forgot. EXCUUUUUUSE ME!!!"
So, are these people prosecuted, or just given a waggled finger and a box to store their firearm safely to take home?
I ask because:
"9 U.S. Code 46505 - Carrying a weapon or explosive on an aircraft (b)General Criminal Penalty.—An individual shall be fined under title 18, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both, if the individual— (1) when on, or attempting to get on, an aircraft in, or intended for operation in, air transportation or intrastate air transportation, has on or about the individual or the property of the individual a concealed dangerous weapon that is or would be accessible to the individual in flight;"
Since only embarking passengers are allowed through security now, going through the TSA station might constitute an "attempt to get on..." This is, afaict, a felony. With the exception of the (somewhat controversial, and funded/unfunded times for reviews) BATFE Relief program, those convicted of a federal felony are barred from purchase or possession of firearms.
Was this pursued on any of the 2000 cases?
on a related note; they never test the liquids confiscated. for all we know there are dozens of attempts per day to smuggle some sort of Bad Liquid on board.
Talking with someone back then who said when he checks in baggage, he wants to carry on his pistol as valuable possession not to get lost in baggage. This was before 9-11 and I don't think they objected. I may have not remembered some details, I think airline would at least request it be placed with pilot.
Also before 9-11 another who loves to cook and he always brings his knives as carry on as these are expensive and doesn't want to get lost in baggage. Those were the days!
if you tell the baggage people there's a gun in your checked baggage, does that increase or decrease the chances it gets lost, i wonder