Intelligent Conversation

[bigscoop]

Here is another "HUGE" part of the problem......."Law Enforcement". Example; Not too many years ago the IRS flagged my return over what amounted to a few remaining shares of some old stock that I got stuck with after several company misfortunes, it amounted to less then $20.00 but I had failed to report it. Needless to say it was quite the fiasco getting it all straightened out and in the end I think they ended up owing me a couple of dollars, a couple of dollars I would have gladly forfeited to save all the frustration and needless motions. But, as I was in fact in the wrong, and so they pursued it. Keep this in mind.

At this same time 48HRS was running a show about illegal gangland activities, the images flashing across the screne displaying gang members with loads of unreported drug cash spread across a couple of beds, everyone in the room brandishing weapons and talking trash. Now the IRS can see their faces, they can see the illegal money and they even have all the illegal activity and confessions on tape, so why didn't they go make some immediate arrest?

Point is, law enforcement isn't consistent in applying the law regardless of the situation and circumstances. Obviously it would have taken a small army to address this gangland activity, activity that is still very active and well known today. So, why is it allowed to continue when the law, something that is to be applied equally to all, clearly against it? To me, this is a huge part of the problem that has been allowed to balloon out of control, to the point that in many areas these armed threats are now substantial. In my opinion, this is where the Government/Law Enforcement has failed, and is failing its citizens. Some will say this is a different issue but it isn't because firepower is at the very heart of these gangland issues. These threats should never have been allowed to establish themselves. If, in my petty situation, had I refused to correct the situation and then locked myself behind closed doors with just the uncertainty of possessing a gun the SWAT TEAM would be quickly parked out front.

So, to summarize, there is a huge an obvious problem in all of this that has allowed and endless supply of guns to circulate into the hands of the wrong element, to the point that even law enforcement now fears these threats. How did it come to this? Who is to really blame? The recent wake up call needs to run much deeper then just a gun control issue. Laws mean very little if you do not possess the means and fortitude to uphold them evenly across the board.

PS: MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[worldtalker]

Here is another "HUGE" part of the problem......."Law Enforcement". Example; Not too many years ago the IRS flagged my return over what amounted to a few remaining shares of some old stock that I got stuck with after several company misfortunes, it amounted to less then $20.00 but I had failed to report it. Needless to say it was quite the fiasco getting it all straightened out and in the end I think they ended up owing me a couple of dollars, a couple of dollars I would have gladly forfeited to save all the frustration and needless motions. But, as I was in fact in the wrong, and so they pursued it. Keep this in mind.

At this same time 48HRS was running a show about illegal gangland activities, the images flashing across the screne displaying gang members with loads of unreported drug cash spread across a couple of beds, everyone in the room brandishing weapons and talking trash. Now the IRS can see their faces, they can see the illegal money and they even have all the illegal activity and confessions on tape, so why didn't they go make some immediate arrest?

Point is, law enforcement isn't consistent in applying the law regardless of the situation and circumstances. Obviously it would have taken a small army to address this gangland activity, activity that is still very active and well known today. So, why is it allowed to continue when the law, something that is to be applied equally to all, clearly against it? To me, this is a huge part of the problem that has been allowed to balloon out of control, to the point that in many areas these armed threats are now substantial. In my opinion, this is where the Government/Law Enforcement has failed, and is failing its citizens. Some will say this is a different issue but it isn't because firepower is at the very heart of these gangland issues. These threats should never have been allowed to establish themselves. If, in my petty situation, had I refused to correct the situation and then locked myself behind closed doors with just the uncertainty of possessing a gun the SWAT TEAM would be quickly parked out front.

So, to summarize, there is a huge an obvious problem in all of this that has allowed and endless supply of guns to circulate into the hands of the wrong element, to the point that even law enforcement now fears these threats. How did it come to this? Who is to really blame? The recent wake up call needs to run much deeper then just a gun control issue. Laws mean very little if you do not possess the means and fortitude to uphold them evenly across the board.

Don't forget Fast&Furious!There is more going on than is being told! Misinformation And Disinformation abound!

 

[Crispin]

Treasure Hunter:
1. Your comments are well thought out and I took pause to rethink after reading them. In 1971 a group of researchers conducted the Stanford Prison Experiment. Stanford prison experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . Researchers went into a town, took healthy volunteers, and randomized them to become either a prisoner or a guard. In a very short period of time both populations started conform to preconcieved ideas of behavior. Physical and psychological torture stopped the experiment only six days into it. It stood the world of psychology on its head and helped guide us to further understand human behavior. We learned that humans will take on behaviors of what is expected of them. If we put armed guards in every school it may have the opposite effect. It could easily encourage troubled children to take more guns to school. One problem with adolescents is that they rebel against authority. Putting an armed security guard there could provide them with a target and increase these tragedies.
2. I agree with you that we need to do a better job of teaching children the world is a dangerous place and how to protect themselves. However, a child's mind is very fragile and delicate. Children go through phases of life where they are more scared then others. Exposing them to these principles too early would be very traumatic.
3. I respect your opinions, please reconsider. Children need to be sheltered and slowly introduced into the harsh realities of the world. This job should fall on their family and parents. Schools are there to educate and keep children safe. I do not want teachers educating my children on issues like abortion, gun control, death penalty, and several high other emotional issues. I want my child to be well rounded, educated, and not sheltered; but I do not think this belongs in the hands of schools.

 

[Crispin]

BigScoop: I liked your example. You point out the Catch-22 at the very heart of all governments. Most people do not want to be controlled by the government; however, we cannot live in a society that has no laws.
1. Increasing a police presence empowers the government at the sacrifice of individual liberties. "Power corrupts, and aboslute power corrupts absolutely."
2. Lack of law enforcement allows evil and dangerous individuals to run ripshod through our communities.
3. There must be a balance. I believe the government has allowed to gangs to exist in their current forms because of two reasons: they are easy to identify and monitor; and, most of their crimes are commited against either themselves or poor communties. Kind of the "shoot em all and let God sort it out" mentality. If gangs started doing crimes in wealthy communties a crack down would rapidly ensue.
Thanks for adding your thoughts to the conversation, Happy Holidays and Merry X-mas,
Crispin

 

[G.I.B.]

Children need to be sheltered and slowly introduced into the harsh realities of the world. This job should fall on their family and parents. Schools are there to educate and keep children safe. I do not want teachers educating my children on issues like abortion, gun control, death penalty, and several high other emotional issues. I want my child to be well rounded, educated, and not sheltered; but I do not think this belongs in the hands of schools.

Crispin,
You have some idyllic goals in your perception of a well mannered society. The big question is, how do you propose to accomplish these things?

I'd have to say that a good (my estimate only) 80% of parents dump the kid off at the school. It's the schools problem, now educate them. Unless something happens they don't like, then they start complaining, but not actually doing anything about it. How will you make the parents be good parents?

Your statement about the police 'allowing' gangs to exist is just simply out of touch with reality. If allowing gangs to exist because it makes them easy to monitor makes sense, then getting rid of them and not having to monitor them at all makes more sense.

If they had enough enforcement power to stop them, they would. Where would you draw the line at too much law enforcement? What civil rights would you give up? How would your perception of 'just enough' be measured? Is your 'just the right amount' good enough for everyone else?

Does anyone really think that any bans on any weapons or high capacity magazines will remove them from the criminally inclined when the myriad of laws already on the books are not doing that now? Why do so many of the convicted felons have weapons? Laws state that they are not allowed to have them at all...

 

[bigscoop]

Just my final thoughts on this subject;

Reflection has lead me to believe that we need to go back to the say, the 50's, and we need to evaluate why there has been a growing notion that people need to arm themselves in this country? I do not want to make this sound political, and yet it simply can't be avoided when we evaluate the failure to squelch many of these threats and concerns while they were in their infancy. I am not anti-government in any way but at the same time I think the present policy makers need to look back into the very roots of the issue at hand. Those roots are not just the recent events, but rather they go quite a ways back to eras when many of these rising issues and concerns were just starting to manifest themselves within our rapidly growing society and changing culture. In the fifties most civilian weapons were purchased for sport, today a great portion of them are being purchased with the notion of personal protection. Why? Why has this change in our society occurred? I was brought up with sporting arms, yet today I fear going into the sporting field due to all of the military style weapons that are being allowed in the sporting field. Why is this being allowed? What is the mentality of the person carrying that military style weapon in the sporting field? Clearly, our past and present leaders are, and have been, failing our society. Why? What has been the cause of this/these changes? In order to correct the present we must first recognize these past failures. We can debate the gun control issue forever, but what really needs to be investigated are the reasons why we have the current gun control issue in the first place. Just my personal opinion after many hours of reflection.

G.I.B.,....I have to agree. I was raised in a two parent home, father worked, mother raised the children through the day. When I played sports I was allowed to go on family vacations without penalty, even or coaches and school administrators understood the importance in this.

 

[releventchair]

Being brought up with arms in my case involved hunting with an adult my first year of legal age with an unloaded weapon. This after hours of instruction and some practice. To point a gun at some one was thought of as the lowest of low things you could do. No such thing as an empty weapon or an "accident".
Out side of at time rare cases of self defence if you had a confrontation or thought you had to assault some one a
firearm was not a consideration as it would be unfair. even if you got your but whipped. That's not why we had them. Perhaps some are viewing them today as a perverted equalizer for conditions they should not even be being considered for.

 

[Terry Soloman]

Most Americans TODAY, have never owned - or fired, a pistol or rifle. That was not the case when I grew up. I started target shooting at about six-years-old, with an Ithaca single shot .22 rifle. Cub Scouts, Boy Scouts, even my Elementary and High Schools had shooting teams and competitions. Back then having a gun wasn’t “gangster,” or “cool,” it was just normal.

We all knew every gun we touched was loaded and would kill us or our friends if not treated with utmost respect and safety. We knew the “bad guys” used guns to kill and rob, rape and murder, and that the “good guys” used their guns to feed the hungry and protect the innocent. Murderers were executed, put to a gruesome death in the electric chair as an example to others that might contemplate killing another human being, not warehoused at $600.00 a day for 20-years then returned to society. Prisons were not glorified as places of “higher learning” for criminals and gang members on television, nor were young men encouraged or allowed by society to mimic prison dress on public streets.

Everything started to change in 1965. I remember seeing the nightly news, the wounded and dying soldiers, napalm bombs spreading over the jungle, the stacks of captured weapons and dead bodies – Every night. The protests against the war, burning Draft cards, the shootings at Kent State University.

My generation is just now coming into power, but we have been shaping public opinion and changing societal rules for the last 25-years. My generation is the first to have a telephone, radio and television, in every home. We developed “MTV” and “Cable News.” I volunteered to join the Army in 1973, because the “Draft” was no more. Our children are now in their 20s- and 30s, and they have never held a gun except at the fair, or in a video game. They are emotionally soft, entitled from years of “winning” trophies even though their team lost, and completely desensitized to murder and violent crime by a society that glorifies it. Where I ran and hid under my bed from “The Wicked Witch of the West” and her flying monkeys, my Grandkids just laugh and ask, “When is it going to be scary Grandpa?”

We did this to ourselves. Everything is cyclic in history. We make the same mistakes century-after-century because the more successful we become as a Country or society, the easier it gets for us to eat, sleep and recreate, the faster we forget the struggle, pain and blood it took to get there, and the reasons for the “archaic and outdated” laws set down by the very people that made our dreams possible in the first place.

I have faith in America. It is not the same country I grew up in, but I have changed and evolved over the years as well. I am old enough to know I could change my opinion on almost anything tomorrow if presented with the right set of circumstances. Today however, I’ll cling to my guns and religion.

 

[bill from lachine]

Terry,

Well thought out response.....unfortunately we live in a more complex environment than when our generation were kids
I grew up in the 1950' and 1960's and thought nothing of roaming all over town on my own from about 8 years old or so...didn't have to worry about a bad guy on every corner.....like you the more I get on in years the more open minded I
try to be.....

I kind of gravitate somewhere between a flower power type and a conservative realist and attempt to choose the best of those 2 sprectrums as my moral compass and keep my mind open to other rational options put forward by others.

Regards + HH

Bill

 

[releventchair]

Well put Terry. T.v. brought some reality of war to most homes. Nam war for my generation left a void in older teens being around. Us younger kids had more expected of us and while allowed more range at all hours there was a short leash of what behavior was allowed. No one told us life was fair or that we were owed anything more than to be citizens respecting each other because of our behavior.

 

[bill from lachine]

Bigscoop,

Good post....I remember being taught to respect my elders, be honest, don't lie, steal, etc....I guess what you'd call the golden rule.

3 older brothers were avid hunters most of their adult lives....when not in use the firearms and ammo were under lock and key in different locations...certainly not to be considered as protection.

If young people you taught the golden rule like our generation were probably there'd be a lot less issues with all the lawlessness going on...as others have pointed out it's a complex issue with a lot of factors intertwined and it's hard to touch on just one of the factors at a time as the solution.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you and yours.

Regards + HH

Bill

Just my final thoughts on this subject;

Reflection has lead me to believe that we need to go back to the say, the 50's, and we need to evaluate why there has been a growing notion that people need to arm themselves in this country? I do not want to make this sound political, and yet it simply can't be avoided when we evaluate the failure to squelch many of these threats and concerns while they were in their infancy. I am not anti-government in any way but at the same time I think the present policy makers need to look back into the very roots of the issue at hand. Those roots are not just the recent events, but rather they go quite a ways back to eras when many of these rising issues and concerns were just starting to manifest themselves within our rapidly growing society and changing culture. In the fifties most civilian weapons were purchased for sport, today a great portion of them are being purchased with the notion of personal protection. Why? Why has this change in our society occurred? I was brought up with sporting arms, yet today I fear going into the sporting field due to all of the military style weapons that are being allowed in the sporting field. Why is this being allowed? What is the mentality of the person carrying that military style weapon in the sporting field? Clearly, our past and present leaders are, and have been, failing our society. Why? What has been the cause of this/these changes? In order to correct the present we must first recognize these past failures. We can debate the gun control issue forever, but what really needs to be investigated are the reasons why we have the current gun control issue in the first place. Just my personal opinion after many hours of reflection.

G.I.B.,....I have to agree. I was raised in a two parent home, father worked, mother raised the children through the day. When I played sports I was allowed to go on family vacations without penalty, even or coaches and school administrators understood the importance in this.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

I believe in Teddy Roosevelt's line, "speak softly and carry a big stick"....

I haven't looked for trouble for over 30 years, after taking up taekwando at age of 30 I learned to control my temper or I grew up. I'm not sure which it really was, just know after receiving my black belt I changed.

The training taught you to think before acting and the fact you could really hurt someone made me conscious about using it except in defense. Fighting full contact a couple times a week was all the adrenaline rush I needed.

Just knowing if needed it was an option was an act of self-defense, just like a gun. I hope I never need to use it, but if needed to protect myself or love ones it is a self defense option I have and would use if needed...

 

[bill from lachine]

TH,

Yup....martial arts gives you a discipline because it's kind of scary what a well trained person can do with their bare hands.
I did some kung fu and my sifu or master Mr. Lee was about 5'2" and maybe weighed 130 lbs....

He did a demo and had about 6 of his black belt students attack him.....he tossed them around like rag dolls...and they couldn't even lay a hand on him.....these were burly guys mid 25's or so....and he was probably about 55 at the time.

Regards + HH

Bill

 

[Ammonhotep]

I, like all of you, have considered this topic for many years and from multiple perspectives. As a sociologist my perspective tends to focus on the sociological causes of deviant behavior. As some have said: if someone is intent on committing a crime, they will find a way. I believe this to be true. Many consider legislation the solution to deviant behavior. Of course legislation is an important part of maintaining social order.

Let us first consider why legislation is necessary. Dunbar's number--a theoretical "maximum" number of strong social connections the average person can maintain--is only 150. Beyond that number groups tend to split into differing factions with variance in social norms. This is common with many types of groups. When groups are too large, people simply do not know their group members with enough intimacy to maintain a natural (non-legalistic) order. The groups either split, or they create various forms of governance (often authoritarian) to establish expectations and consequences for deviant behavior. Exclusive, commune-type groups are illustrative examples of this principle.

Modern societies, clearly, go way beyond groups of 150 people. Formalized legal systems are therefore requisite. Yet, we may also be able to adjust our social norms in ways that mitigate the need for regulatory solutions to social problems. I feel that it is government's primary responsibility to optimize opportunities for its constituency by investing public funds in public assets (schools, preventative health care, public works, etc.). When people are productive, progressing (intellectually, emotionally, financially, etc) citizens, they are happy. Happy people are far less prone to mental illness or anti-social behavior.

One of the aspects of our society that I feel disconnects us from our social roots is consumerism. When our social worth is connected more to what we have/use than what we make/provide, then we exacerbate the negative externalities of competition (not negative in-and-of itself) while simultaneously mitigating the positives of collaboration. We need to do the opposite.

Attacking the problem of guns head on--by regulating guns, or ammo--merely hides a symptom and does not treat the disease. The disease is social, not mechanical.

In short, we have a tendency to compare and compete with each other. We alienate others. Yet, if we focus more on our social roots, on producing good in society--emotional good, financial good, social good--then our own social connectedness will mitigate travesties such as the case most prominent in our minds.

There are my two cents for your consideration.

--Ammo

 

[onfire]

Assault weapon? If I literally punch, kick the living crap out of someone and get arrested for assault are my fists, feet considered a assault weapon? How about a 3in knife blade, a expandable nite stick a base ball bat. I know this is silly, but if we give in to the idea of almost any gun is considered a assault weapon, were will the powers to be stop? Anyone with a slight knowledge of guns can differentiate between them. The problem today is the definition is made by people who have no idea.

 

[dieselram94]

Crispin, I don't think it matters to the police where gang crimes occur as far as rich or poor neighborhood. I believe the police do the best they can to deal with gangs. We already live in a society with laws, seems to be the more laws passed the more crimes are committed. The news has just released a story today saying the years the assault weapons ban was in effect gun crimes actually went up slightly. The rules and laws of this country are thousands of pages long, yet we still have crime. Just something to keep in mind. I think you and I can agree based on one of your previous posts: the schools should not be teaching high emotion issues.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

TH,

Yup....martial arts gives you a discipline because it's kind of scary what a well trained person can do with their bare hands.
I did some kung fu and my sifu or master Mr. Lee was about 5'2" and maybe weighed 130 lbs....

He did a demo and had about 6 of his black belt students attack him.....he tossed them around like rag dolls...and they couldn't even lay a hand on him.....these were burly guys mid 25's or so....and he was probably about 55 at the time.

Regards + HH

Bill

Your right about that Bill, our school founder Master Lee Haeng Ung Lee ( American Taekwando Association ATA ) was a 9th degree blackbelt from Okinawa when I started, small man maybe 5'5 140 lbs, very soft spoken, very humble and friendly man, but he could be lethal.

I had 3 different instructors in 7 years I took it, they would train 3rd degree Red and all Black belts by putting us in a corner and have 3 at a time come at you...... I took it for 7 years, then while working out of town for 6 weeks my ex canceled my membership when it came due for renewal and the school would not renew it at the original cost of $15 a month, by then rates were $75 a month...I was one of 1st 20 to sign up in the town when it open and they offered a super deal, $15 a motnh for life good anywhere in country as long as membership was kept current...

Master Lee Haeng Ung Lee (now Eternal Grand Master) passed away in 2000...

 

[bill from lachine]

Ammo,

Well thought out post....a bit over my head.....but what I did pick up on is accentuate the positives that society shares in common.....and putting a bit less emphasis on commercialism....

The more toys any of us have does not make us a better person....mind you I've never played the keeping up with the Jones' game any way.....I try to judge people by their deeds/actions not by their bank account.

Regards + HH

Bill

 

[Crispin]

DieselRam: "I think you and I can agree based on one of your previous posts: the schools should not be teaching high emotion issues." Absolutely!

GIB: Glad to see you survived the Apocolypse!

Big Scoop and Terry: I don't disagree with you; however, I was not alive in the 50's and 60's. Society is constantly evolving. In order for governments to avoid collapse they must evolve with it.

TH: Great points about martial arts! Meditation is another eastern principle I have incorporated into my life.

Ammon: Great post, I definitely need to read it a couple of more times. I am sure you are aware of the Milgram experiments and other similiar work. The problem with antisocial PD is that they exhibit no remorse, are unable to postpone gratification, and cannot anticipate outcomes. As you know, our criminal justice system is based on fear as a deterrent. However, this has no effect of psychopaths. When facing these individuals attempting moral and good acts has no effect. The very concept of Altruism is a foreign language to them. The only way to combat such people is to understand them and act as best we can to prevent them. It is sad that this small percentage of people in society have such a huge effect on our legislation. Your thoughts?

 

[Red James Cash]

What it all comes to is,good people and good citizens do not need laws,criminals do.