Guns

[Black Angel]

Popular devices known as "switches" are turning ordinary pistols into fully automatic weapons.
August 14, 2023

These makeshift machine guns — able to inflict indiscriminate carnage in seconds — are helping fuel the national epidemic of gun violence, making shootings increasingly lethal, creating added risks for bystanders and leaving survivors more grievously wounded, according to law enforcement authorities and medical workers.
**LINK**

This sounds very similar to bump stop mods.. weren't these banned?

 

[passenger]

This sounds very similar to bump stop mods.. weren't these banned?

I did not read the whole article, and do not understand the 'mechanics' of this device; but, I do believe the article went on to say that this is an illegal but becoming more 'popular' tool.

 

[MrDawn]

it's the idiot nutjobs that are the problem.

Like these people.....

 

[Reddington]

Like these people.....

Yeah, this is about what I expected. 😂😂

 

[MrDawn]

Yeah, this is about what I expected. 😂😂

lol there are whole videos on YouTube like that one that go under the label "idiots with guns"

 

[Black Angel]

I've been thinking..

Let's say that we did steer into the skid on this, and the gun nuts were ToTaLlY rIgHt that the gov't did want to take their guns, and were coming to collect them..

Do they really think that their collection of guns and ammo will stop them?

I mean we spend more money on defense even though it has been said that we haven't been in a defensive war since WW2.. so we've basically been invading other countries for resources that we don't want to pay for..

I say this because we have the ability to merc someone with the click of a button.. and without soldiers being involved. And technology only gets better with time.

So what exactly do these guys think they will be able to do with their gun collection? Even if they have the guns and training, they wouldn't be able to hold out as long as the military would.. and they wouldn't have access to the resources that the military would either, even if they managed to get some militarized cops and sherriffs on their side. Most cops, would probably side with the government on this, and that is not even taking our allies or anything else into consideration.

Have they really thought this through?

 

[~ True Legend ~]

1. I agree that there are issues with the #believewomen movement. I was immediately suspicious the moment that the movement's orginal focus had changed. Especially since any movement started by marginalized groups to call attention to the issues that they faced that are usually ignored, has always been co-opted by non-marginalized groups and then recentered on them and the next thing you know, the newly revamped organization, no longer includes the very group that the original movement was originally intended for. This is why I support Black Lives Matter the movement, but not the organization.. because there is a difference.

Gloria Steinem was a Trojan horse and FBI informant in the 60s and was integral in uniting the White feminists with the Civil Rights Movement and today's equivalent would be Alyssa Milano with Tarana Burke's Me Too movement. Soon after Milano got involved, after originally and erroneously being credited with starting the movement (before someone else mentioned Burke..) Tarana Burke sold out similar to the founders of Black Lives Matter, and in return, she got her millions, and a mansion, Harvey Weinstein's Hollywood victims and Larry Nasser's Olympic victims got their justice, and the BIPOC women who originally supported both Tarana Burke and her Me Too movement got shafted.. and yet another one of our movements has been undermined.. again.

BLM did get some awesome street dancers for the protests and marches for the events protesting and meant for increasing awareness against police brutality and excessive and lethal force used against Black people. But even this hurts the movement because the racist idiots out there will say "see, Black people aren't oppressed, they are twerking at a another protest for some "thug" killed by police."

Which is why we are still fighting for the same rights today that my ancestors did in the 60s.. in the same way that BIPOC women (LGBT+ and not) are still more likely to go missing and are never found.

Then again, history does repeat itself.

2. I am not sure what you are trying to say regarding your ex, but it seems personal. At any rate, if you always respected the wishes of others and got clarification regarding consent then you've nothing to worry about. I am not saying his about you personally, but in general. Your argument for statute of limitations on accusations is interesting because it is incredibly similar to those that are often credibly accused but want to escape consequences of their actions.. such as entitled men that refuse to take no for an answer but still doesn't care and constantly pressures the woman about it until she relents and gives in.

That doesn't mean she wanted it anymore than if the man had a gun to her head when he asked her. In that case, then the accusation is valid because it still involves that person not taking no for an answer. These are also the same guys that come equipped with roofies just in case.

I completely understand your point about false accusations and agree to a degree, they have and can be deadly and this is why I don't believe in that particular hashtag, I say this as a Black woman, that is from a group who has been historically affected by false accusations. I say this because of the violent history behind them and of course by the time the evidence has exonerated the accused, it is too late, and there is no justice, this is something that affects all of us, regardless of whether or not we are related to the falsely accused.. then again, trauma does do that to you.

However, it is still within the best of everyone's interest including the falsely accused to not have a time limit on a claims, because if it means that even if your ex did come forward 23 years later, and you can prove your innocence, then you deserve to go after her too for falsely accusing you. In fact, I'd personally hope you'd bring the full force of the law with you and win, should you decide to countersue your ex for defamation after you have successfully been exonerated of the original accusation. I say this because rape, is the kind of accusation where, even if you have been proven innocent in the court of law, the damage has already been done in the court of public opinion.

People will still treat you with suspicion and your innocence wouldn't matter, even though it should.. especially if they were previously your friend or worse, related to you. I mean some people still believe that Dick Rowland raped Sarah Page even though not only had he said it wasn't true, but so did Sarah Page and the OKC sherriff's dept.

So even then, the truth didnt matter, but guess what, unlike the victims of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre and their descendants, and the others that occured like it, you will at least be able to get justice against your false accuser, unlike the descendants of these massacres because of those who levied the false accusations that started them. I say this because even false accusations, hurt real victims (be they those who were actually raped, or those falsely accused) too in the same way that bad cops and the unions and precincts that support them, hurt the good cops out there and the entire profession itself.

3. Regarding ACAB, et. al,

You seem to be making a lot of assumptions here. No where in any of my posts, past and present, have I stated ACAB and as far as I can tell, neither has True Legend's or anyone else's. I couldn't say that if I wanted to because I know for a fact that that isn't true. This is because, I have not encountered all cops on the planet to make that distinction, and most are cops out there, including the good ones mentioned in this thread, are those who don't meet the criteria, that that moniker is typically used for.

Can you point out where specifically I said that? Otherwise, you will have just inserted words into my posts and falsely accused me of something I never said nor implied in any of my posts to begin with.

As far as I can tell, up until this post, I have never specifically mentioned it nor implied it. I only posted supporting arguements about what True Legend said, and gave her some insight into why she wasn't wrong when she said what she did about police culture and some facts about why it is. A lot of their silence is because of fear of retaliation and not that they supported it. I then posted examples of the real cops who got fired for doing the right thing in these situations.

The thread isn't derailed at all. I only responded to True Legend specifically, just as I am now to you, and as she did to me specifically in the same thread we both responded in. And I did so, because I wanted to and didn't want to leave her hanging. I don't recall either of us specifically addressing you.

Lastly, you might want to check out the name of the forum. It is implied an eventuality.. lol if you don't believe me, check out the thrift store thread. We ran the gamut of topics there.. and in other topics and guess what, Nebulous, the owner, participated too and continued it.. and get this, he even asked follow up questions of his own.. and so did members of his staff and no one died and the thread is still in tact.

Isn't that great?

Thusly implying that they are cool with it too and I am sure that had it been a problem, then he or his staff, would have said so, in lieu of continuing the discussion. And besides, this just means that the people here are actually very comfortable with talking to each other which is something that any admin would want.

But hey, I am not one to make assumptions, I am once again just stating the facts and my personal experiences.

Just had a chance to read all the articles you shared in this thread this weekend.

Since you raise the possibility of false accusations, look no further

Sheffield sex assault trial collapses due to 'astonishing' jury problems

One juror fell asleep while another could not hear crucial evidence at Sheffield Crown Court.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sure, a false accusation has not occurred - yet . But that’s not to say it can’t happen when a jury, who has a history of falling asleep on duty, is allowed to serve as jury. And a well done job also relies on juries being upfront and candid when they have a disorder like tinnitus which may prevent them from gathering all the necessary information.

 

[Black Angel]

Pause.

They tossed the case because of a narcoleptic juror? Why didn't that come through during voir dire?

Honestly, I feel like the jury process is often an after-thought.. and also compensation can be shitty which is probably why a lot of people try to get out of it.

Honestly, I think it is a part of the legal process that needs a severe overhaul in addition to some definitions of rape and sexual assault to be up to date with the new types that fall in this category that were previously unknown in the past..

But regarding the jury I think they can start by finding out why people want to skip out and make it voluntary instead of mandatory, but also make it so that it is rewarding and worthwhile to serve. They need to increase the compensation for those who are willing to serve and do so according to the cost of living. $40 per day doesn't mean shit to someone who makes that much and more per hour, and they actually LOSE money by serving as a juror and never see compensation that would adequately cover the time they missed from work..

For people that repeatedly volunteer they should see an increase in their compensation everytime they serve. And there should be limits on how often a person can serve in a calendar year every X number of years. This would probably dissuade those looking to make a career out of it.. and eliminate possible bias.

And they can start by sparing us the b.s. reasoning that "it is an honor to serve your country by being a juror.." to say that it hurts more thwn it helps is a massive understatement, but i will say that as someone from a marginalized group that has historically and presently being screwed by the justice system, that argument is more gaslighting in nature than encouragement.

 

[~ True Legend ~]

Pause.

They tossed the case because of a narcoleptic juror? Why didn't that come through during voir dire?

Honestly, I feel like the jury process is often an after-thought.. and also compensation can be shitty which is probably why a lot of people try to get out of it.

Honestly, I think it is a part of the legal process that needs a severe overhaul in addition to some definitions of rape and sexual assault to be up to date with the new types that fall in this category that were previously unknown in the past..

But regarding the jury I think they can start by finding out why people want to skip out and make it voluntary instead of mandatory, but also make it so that it is rewarding and worthwhile to serve. They need to increase the compensation for those who are willing to serve and do so according to the cost of living. $40 per day doesn't mean shit to someone who makes that much and more per hour, and they actually LOSE money by serving as a juror and never see compensation that would adequately cover the time they missed from work..

For people that repeatedly volunteer they should see an increase in their compensation everytime they serve. And there should be limits on how often a person can serve in a calendar year every X number of years. This would probably dissuade those looking to make a career out of it.. and eliminate possible bias.

And they can start by sparing us the b.s. reasoning that "it is an honor to serve your country by being a juror.." to say that it hurts more thwn it helps is a massive understatement, but i will say that as someone from a marginalized group that has historically and presently being screwed by the justice system, that argument is more gaslighting in nature than encouragement.

I’m sorry, I don’t understand. You just said to make it voluntary and then you say to increase compensation of juries. Have I understood correctly? 😕
[automerge]1692739432[/automerge]
@Black Angel yet another example of police officers defending one another.

'I was raped by a Metropolitan Police officer but saw him jailed - twice'

Lauren Taylor was 16 when she was raped by Metropolitan Police officer Adam Provan in 2010.

www.bbc.co.uk

[automerge]1692739844[/automerge]

Nicky Campbell claims 'Savile scale' teacher abuse

The BBC Radio 5Live presenter describes a former Edinburgh Academy teacher as a "prolific paedophile".

www.bbc.co.uk

A similar Jimmy Savile case at a school too once again 😡

Also physical violence. Speaking of which, I’m so glad that beatings are prohibited at schools nowadays. We want to teach kids respect and our core values. And we don’t get that with violence. We only get fear out of them and send them the message that violence is acceptable or that they and their needs are inferior to adults. Logical and natural consequences are the way to teach a child, not excessive punishment.

 

[Black Angel]

I’m sorry, I don’t understand. You just said to make it voluntary and then you say to increase compensation of juries. Have I understood correctly? 😕
[automerge]1692739432[/automerge]
@Black Angel yet another example of police officers defending one another.

'I was raped by a Metropolitan Police officer but saw him jailed - twice'

Lauren Taylor was 16 when she was raped by Metropolitan Police officer Adam Provan in 2010.

www.bbc.co.uk

Yes. You have that correct. I do think that jury duty should be voluntary and one of the things they can do to get more people to do so would be to increase the compensation that the jurors would get for doing so, because often times the reasons for people trying to get out of it is because the compensation for doing so is abysmal. They may cite other reasons for wanting to get out of it, but the primary reason comes down to money.

I don't know what it is like outside of the U.S. or even in other states, but for NY the compensation wasn't more than $40 a day if you are called to serve and chosen. I have heard that there is more for a Grand Juror.. but I have never been called for that. Missing work due to appear for the notice isn't paid back either. So a person who makes $40 an hour, has just lost at least $320 just for showing up.

And if, for example, they were called to serve, for like a week then they will only see $200 in compensation for doing so.. and there is no adjustment for cost of living either, which is what their salary at work would have take into account already, so the fact that it is ignored with respect to juror compensation isn't right either. So, this same person would end up losing $1,400 for serving 5 days as a juror. And if you add in the day they had to appear for the initial notice to be called and the total comes to $1,720.

And yeah, the second part of your post regarding the police doesn't surprise me. It is called the blue wall for a reason.. and it is why people say that the police function like the mafia, because they often do the same things. It's also why they say that the largest gang in this country, is the NYPD, and the same issues that exist where street gangs are concerned in terms of factions within, also exist withing the police as well.

Recently, one faction within a Mississippi police dept. was involved in the beating and sexual assaults of 2 innocent Black men in which one of the survivors was shot in the mouth. The other survivor said that the cops had accused them of dating White women and it was alleged that one of the survivors had recently started dating the ex of one of the officers. The 6 officers were fired and investigated.

Six White Former Police Officers Plead Guilty To State Charges For Torturing Two Black Men In Mississippi

The officers, accused of assaulting and torturing the men in an illegal raid, pleaded guilty to state charges after recently pleading guilty to 16 federal felonies involving the assault of two Black men who were caring for a sick friend.

www.forbes.com

How 6 Mississippi officers tried to cover up their torture of 2 Black men

Six white former law enforcement officers in Mississippi have pleaded guilty to a racist assault on Michael Corey Jenkins and his friend Eddie Terrell Parker

abcnews.go.com

But yeah, although I mentioned Mississippi, this problem occurs nationwide.. and with the coverage this, and the scandal involving the West Virginia police who the cameras placed in the women's areas at the academy, I wouldn't be surprised if we end up hearing more and more police stories like this..

But it will be a good thing as light has always been the best disinfectant.. as they say..

 

[~ True Legend ~]

Well @Black Angel here’s another case where a shooting began with a domestic violence case between him and his partner.

California shooting: Four killed, six hurt in Cook's Corner bar

Six others have been wounded in the incident at Cook's Corner, a popular community hangout.

www.bbc.co.uk

7 deaths and 6 injuries from a shooting at a biker bar in California.

 

[Black Angel]

I am honestly quite surprised that the cop got as far as he did.

I always assumed that the people in those places were armed to the teeth and as such would be the least likely place to be hit during a mass shooting.

 

[~ True Legend ~]

I am honestly quite surprised that the cop got as far as he did.

I always assumed that the people in those places were armed to the teeth and as such would be the least likely place to be hit during a mass shooting.

Tbh I’ve always questioned whether areas marked as safe are actually safe or are just considered safe due to ignorance as a consequence under-reporting, as a result of a lack of police presence. And the irony is it could be said that these areas are the least safe !

 

[Black Angel]

I agree.. and honestly nowadays I'd feel safer in a biker bar than I would a police station.

Bikers are generally pretty chill people.. I dont know any personally, but I have seen and briefly interacted with them in my travels on the road and they are usually friendly and polite.. I remember how they always seemed to smile and wave and pop wheelies when my brother and I were kids on a road trip with our parents..

My husband and I had one that blocked some asshole that wouldn't let us change lanes, so that we could get to our exit lane. This guy just kept speeding up when we did and pacing us when we slowed down so the biker that was behind us, passed us in the passing lane and then cut in front of him and slowed down to let us pass. He had been doing this for at least the last 10 miles..

Come to think of it, I have never really been nervous around them.. but I have been with respect to cops, even though we have a NYPD and DEA decal on our window, and their demeanor always changes as soon as they see it.. and that is what makes me nervous.. because I often dont want to imagine how it would go down if we didn't have those decals..

But yeah, you can probably add racial bias to that too. I have noticed that when I lived in Brooklyn that many White people that aren't familiar with the boroughs will just call it ghetto if they see more than 3 BIPOC within a 2 block radius.

I tend to think that of churches. The more churches you see within a 2 block radius, the more dangerous that particular location is. I say this because the churches there suck the resources out of the community and they don't really do anything for it aside from having services ones a week and a few programs to keep their tax exemption.

 

[Ravenfreak]

I think people have the right to own guns to protect themselves. However there needs to be better background checks so guns do not fall in the wrong hands. I think people with certain conditions should not be able to own a gun, because they can be a danger to themselves or others.

 

[~ True Legend ~]

I think people have the right to own guns to protect themselves. However there needs to be better background checks so guns do not fall in the wrong hands. I think people with certain conditions should not be able to own a gun, because they can be a danger to themselves or others.

I recall such a debate in another thread. While I respect your opinion, my view that discrimination needs to be balanced against safety still stands, with a proposed solution being psychological evaluations and risk assessments.

For example what’s your view in relation to someone having a condition like ASD or ADHD ? Such conditions manifest so differently in individuals.
[automerge]1693186168[/automerge]

I agree.. and honestly nowadays I'd feel safer in a biker bar than I would a police station.

Bikers are generally pretty chill people.. I dont know any personally, but I have seen and briefly interacted with them in my travels on the road and they are usually friendly and polite.. I remember how they always seemed to smile and wave and pop wheelies when my brother and I were kids on a road trip with our parents..

My husband and I had one that blocked some asshole that wouldn't let us change lanes, so that we could get to our exit lane. This guy just kept speeding up when we did and pacing us when we slowed down so the biker that was behind us, passed us in the passing lane and then cut in front of him and slowed down to let us pass. He had been doing this for at least the last 10 miles..

Come to think of it, I have never really been nervous around them.. but I have been with respect to cops, even though we have a NYPD and DEA decal on our window, and their demeanor always changes as soon as they see it.. and that is what makes me nervous.. because I often dont want to imagine how it would go down if we didn't have those decals..

But yeah, you can probably add racial bias to that too. I have noticed that when I lived in Brooklyn that many White people that aren't familiar with the boroughs will just call it ghetto if they see more than 3 BIPOC within a 2 block radius.

I tend to think that of churches. The more churches you see within a 2 block radius, the more dangerous that particular location is. I say this because the churches there suck the resources out of the community and they don't really do anything for it aside from having services ones a week and a few programs to keep their tax exemption.

Think about it, you may feel safe somewhere just because it’s not an area known for high levels of crime. That could just be because crime is udner-reported as opposed to it not actually occurring. This ornically makes the “safest” areas the least safe areas due to a lack of police presence.

Since you mention racial influences, here’s to another example of a racially motivated attack against Black men:

Jacksonville shooter, 21, who killed three 'wrote racist manifestos'

The man who shot dead three Black people had a "disgusting ideology of hate", Jacksonville's sheriff says.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Uncrowned]

I have always been pro-gun and believe everyone deserves the right to fully defend themselves with any means they can. I do believe in regulations around guns, however, but I always viewed the answer as fairly simple. All gun laws in the States should apply to all non-military organizations. There is no reason that law enforcement needs guns and devices to protect the public that the public is not allowed to protect themselves with. If as a culture we believe that fully automatic weapons are not needed, then why do the people signing those laws require their private guards to carry full auto weapons when in US cities? A large part of gun control is the mistrust of the citizens of the government and that isn't really misplaced given history and current events, so a simple regulation like this would not only help with that problem, but it could also place gun regulations on a more practical level.

As someone who worked in public safety for most of my life, it is easy to say that the evil deeds people do to each other are not due to guns. Guns might be a tool that makes it worse, but there is no tool that will drive a person to do horrific and simply inhumane actions against people who were unable to successfully defend themselves at times. Sadly a lot of the problems we face today with regulations is our inability to admit that a fraction of the population is simply evil and when you talk to these people you can easily tell that the tool they use does not matter in what their goals are.

 

[~ True Legend ~]

I have always been pro-gun and believe everyone deserves the right to fully defend themselves with any means they can. I do believe in regulations around guns, however, but I always viewed the answer as fairly simple. All gun laws in the States should apply to all non-military organizations. There is no reason that law enforcement needs guns and devices to protect the public that the public is not allowed to protect themselves with. If as a culture we believe that fully automatic weapons are not needed, then why do the people signing those laws require their private guards to carry full auto weapons when in US cities? A large part of gun control is the mistrust of the citizens of the government and that isn't really misplaced given history and current events, so a simple regulation like this would not only help with that problem, but it could also place gun regulations on a more practical level.

As someone who worked in public safety for most of my life, it is easy to say that the evil deeds people do to each other are not due to guns. Guns might be a tool that makes it worse, but there is no tool that will drive a person to do horrific and simply inhumane actions against people who were unable to successfully defend themselves at times. Sadly a lot of the problems we face today with regulations is our inability to admit that a fraction of the population is simply evil and when you talk to these people you can easily tell that the tool they use does not matter in what their goals are.

It’s true, I recommend watching Unknown Killer Robots. The same AI technology that’s used to find molecules for use in drugs to treat diseases can be used just as easily to find molecules for the most toxic chemicals… and these can be used for chemical weapons.

Guns are dangerous, AI is also dangerous when not regulated or constrained for ethical use.

 

[passenger]

I have always been pro-gun and believe everyone deserves the right to fully defend themselves with any means they can. I do believe in regulations around guns, however, but I always viewed the answer as fairly simple. All gun laws in the States should apply to all non-military organizations. There is no reason that law enforcement needs guns and devices to protect the public that the public is not allowed to protect themselves with. If as a culture we believe that fully automatic weapons are not needed, then why do the people signing those laws require their private guards to carry full auto weapons when in US cities? A large part of gun control is the mistrust of the citizens of the government and that isn't really misplaced given history and current events, so a simple regulation like this would not only help with that problem, but it could also place gun regulations on a more practical level.

As someone who worked in public safety for most of my life, it is easy to say that the evil deeds people do to each other are not due to guns. Guns might be a tool that makes it worse, but there is no tool that will drive a person to do horrific and simply inhumane actions against people who were unable to successfully defend themselves at times. Sadly a lot of the problems we face today with regulations is our inability to admit that a fraction of the population is simply evil and when you talk to these people you can easily tell that the tool they use does not matter in what their goals are.

Nailed it!

 

[~ True Legend ~]

@Black Angel following on from your discussion on domestic violence earlier on, were you aware that, at least in the UK, the abuser in the case can take the other parent to court and use "parental alienation" (a concept where one parent has turned the child against the other parent) to force the child to live with the abuser and prevent the target of the domestic violence from seeing their child?

Family courts: Children forced into contact with fathers accused of abuse

In some cases, family courts ordered a child to live with a paedophile, a BBC investigation finds.

www.bbc.co.uk

Absolute nuts !