Wednesday PO and Pontificating

[Z is for Zangie]

Happy Hump Day! Have a great day!

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

I wanted to point out for everyone who assumes I'm a 2nd amendment absolutist, I think everything Matthew McConaughey said is 100% right. I'm not sure what he says goes far enough. For instance the intellectual difference between an 18 year old and a 21 year old are minor. It's 25 when our brains are fully developed. I wish our laws would catch up with the science.

In other news, a buddy and I were talking about criminal justice reform. And he made a point that I've heard before, but it never really stuck with me. He said, "The biggest problem with our system is that it starts out adversarial from the beginning. It should be about finding the truth" I'm not sure how we work that out though. I don't have the answer, but I do think he's right. I just don't know how you can accuse someone of something, guilty or innocent, and not have it be adversarial, at least from the accused point of view.

Finally, we were talking about drug laws. Which is where I become the most hard line libertarian. It seem absurd to me that we feel like we have the right to tell others what they do with their bodies (see abortion). I'm all for offering help to those who are addicted, but there are so many issues with prohibition. I got to thinking about an important argument that I often forget. Everyone knows the experiment with rats where they offered them heroine and water. The rats neglected the water and drank the heroine until they died. What most people don't know is that sums up half the experiment. This was true when the rats were kept alone in cages. But for the 2nd part the put rats in a large pin communally, with lots of rat activities. In that situation almost all the rats ignored the heroine. This suggests that drug addiction really is a product of desperation. Criminalizing drugs is in essence criminalizing desperation. This seems unnecessarily cruel to me.

[Tarmaque]

I wanted to point out for everyone who assumes I'm a 2nd amendment absolutist, I think everything Matthew McConaughey said is 100% right. I'm not sure what he says goes far enough. For instance the intellectual difference between an 18 year old and a 21 year old are minor. It's 25 when our brains are fully developed. I wish our laws would catch up with the science.

I agree with Mathew too, to an extent. I'd go a little bit further though, and my plan would cause the 2nd Amendment nuts' heads to explode. I think we should license firearms ownership. Make people jump through the minimal hoops they have to jump through to get a driving license. Don't make it difficult to get, but make sure there are requirements and absolute background checks. That's the minimum. I'd actually like to go further, and require membership in a "well regulated militia" in order to get a firearms ownership license. One of the regulations would be the officers of the militia would have to approve the license for the member. then, if that member uses any firearm they purchase for a crime, then the officers of said militia would be responsible. Make the people who are approving the purchase of firearms responsible for their use.

But it'll never happen. People don't want to be responsible, they just want rights without responsibility.

In other news, a buddy and I were talking about criminal justice reform. And he made a point that I've heard before, but it never really stuck with me. He said, "The biggest problem with our system is that it starts out adversarial from the beginning. It should be about finding the truth" I'm not sure how we work that out though. I don't have the answer, but I do think he's right. I just don't know how you can accuse someone of something, guilty or innocent, and not have it be adversarial, at least from the accused point of view.

Indeed, we should be looking for "facts" not "truth." "Truth" is a wriggly term and can mean all sorts of things to all sorts of people. But that's not the core of the problem. The core is we have a criminal justice culture in our nation based on conviction and power. Our prosecutors are rewarded for convictions, not finding out the facts, and our police officers are trained to fear everyone and impose their power over them. Without exception, Law Enforcement training is based on the idea that the world is out to get them and will kill them if given any chance, and they should proactively protect themselves. This kind of culture draws bigots, bullies, and power freaks like flies to a turd, and those who weren't that way going in are quickly converted. This culture must change if we want our criminal justice system to change. And we need to reward our prosecutors for finding the facts instead of convicting someone.

But it'll never happen. People don't want "facts," they want to be in control without responsibility.

Finally, we were talking about drug laws. Which is where I become the most hard line libertarian. It seem absurd to me that we feel like we have the right to tell others what they do with their bodies (see abortion). I'm all for offering help to those who are addicted, but there are so many issues with prohibition. I got to thinking about an important argument that I often forget. Everyone knows the experiment with rats where they offered them heroine and water. The rats neglected the water and drank the heroine until they died. What most people don't know is that sums up half the experiment. This was true when the rats were kept alone in cages. But for the 2nd part the put rats in a large pin communally, with lots of rat activities. In that situation almost all the rats ignored the heroine. This suggests that drug addiction really is a product of desperation. Criminalizing drugs is in essence criminalizing desperation. This seems unnecessarily cruel to me.

I tend to very much agree on this, however there is also the famous "Mouse Utopia" experiments."

This is a summary, but there are more deep dives available.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

I agree with Mathew too, to an extent. I'd go a little bit further though, and my plan would cause the 2nd Amendment nuts' heads to explode. I think we should license firearms ownership. Make people jump through the minimal hoops they have to jump through to get a driving license. Don't make it difficult to get, but make sure there are requirements and absolute background checks. That's the minimum.

I don't have an issue with that. It feels like a non-starter though.

I'd actually like to go further, and require membership in a "well regulated militia" in order to get a firearms ownership license. One of the regulations would be the officers of the militia would have to approve the license for the member. then, if that member uses any firearm they purchase for a crime, then the officers of said militia would be responsible.

That feels a little rough. I'm all for holding irresponsible people accountable for anything that happens from neglect. I don't like the idea of holding a third party accountable for another adult's actions.

Indeed, we should be looking for "facts" not "truth." "Truth" is a wriggly term and can mean all sorts of things to all sorts of people.

Hey I'm the Pedantic one around here. Get your own thing!

I tend to very much agree on this, however there is also the famous "Mouse Utopia" experiments."

I will have to look at that one. Sounds like a follow up.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

Another thing, I'm on a role today...

Why am I seeing all this coverage of golfers playing for a Saudi backed league when our government sells billions of dollars in weapons to them every year, and every president in my memory has made a point to kiss the Saudi ring? Priorities America...

[Tarmaque]

Hey I'm the Pedantic one around here. Get your own thing!

You like to step on ants? (Ped-ant-ic) That sounds a little pathosocial to me.

[Tarmaque]

I will have to look at that one. Sounds like a follow up.

This guy (John Calhoun) was the actual inspiration for the book Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH, and the animated movie The Secret of NIMH that was based on the novel.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

This guy (John Calhoun) was the actual inspiration for the book Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH, and the animated movie The Secret of NIMH that was based on the novel.

That is reason enough.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

You like to step on ants? (Ped-ant-ic) That sounds a little pathosocial to me.

That is the least of my patholagies.

[Mike]

I would like to see the NFA rules apply to semiautos.

The reality is that you almost never see a licensed full auto weapon used in a crime. The owners are very much fans of being able to continue to have the pleasure of shooting them, and therefore pay the extra $$$. With each change of hands, the gun becomes more valuable.

Anyone who practices can get off something like four rounds a second with an AR15.

I know there are folks who will complain that such a licensing structure takes the guns out of the hands of law-abiding poor, and that combined with police prejudice essentially rules the lower income black person out of owning it legally. That’s a fair point, but there’s gotta be a way to get movement on this.

I am personally a former owner of such weapons. I had a Mini-14 and a Galil, both with hi-capacity magazines. Got them back when the 1994 bill was in process, to make my political statement about preserving 2nd Amendment rights. I no longer own guns, and am ever more in favor of finding ways to get them off the street. Any time an altercation occurs, if there’s a gun present rhat altercation immediately escalates from ‘ouch, I got punched” to ‘I gotta get my hands on that weapon before the owner shoots me” - and from the other side, “I gotta soot this guy before he gets his hands on my gun and shoots me”. The fact that the guy who killed Trayvon over merely being punched is testament to this reality.

Nope, I’m not ever going to be the one who introduces lethality into a mere scuffle.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

Anyone who practices can get off something like four rounds a second with an AR15.

I have a question that I never seem to get a straight anwser to. And since you obviously know guns I think you might be able to help me understand. What is it about an AR-15 that makes it any more dangerous then other weapons? I know it's commonly used in these events, but it's a very popular rifle. I ask becasue "let's ban an AR-15" doesn't seem productive. What does seem productive is "lets' ban X functionality in weapons"

[Mike]

Anyone who practices can get off something like four rounds a second with an AR15.

I have a question that I never seem to get a straight anwser to. And since you obviously know guns I think you might be able to help me understand. What is it about an AR-15 that makes it any more dangerous then other weapons? I know it's commonly used in these events, but it's a very popular rifle. I ask becasue "let's ban an AR-15" doesn't seem productive. What does seem productive is "lets' ban X functionality in weapons"

They tried the across the board ban in 1994. The GOP rolled that back in 2004. What concerned folks are now doing is going after “the one”, the one that is most utilized.

The AR15 and its derivatives are of course no more or less technically dangerous against a classroom full of children than any other detachable magazine semiauto rifle. What makes it “more dangerous” now is that it’s cheap, plentiful and often untraceable (see the ghost guns issue). Back in 1994, the gun of the moment was the AK47 and its derivatives. Because at that time, you could get one for less than $200. And you could get hi-capacity magazines for ten bucks, and huge cans of Norinco surplus ammo for bargain prices. So those guns were utilized for some terrible events… thus making them “more dangerous” than, say, an SKS. Which, while it could be had for $49, often had a fixed five round magazine.

The magic combo is a) semiauto, b) detachable magazine, c) high capacity magazines. THAT is what makes these weapons so deadly. And that is, in fact, the combo for the battlefield. Full auto is a blast, but in a carbine it’s only valuable for protective cover fire. When it comes time to maximize your damage, you’re gonna fire one bullet at a time.

As for ammo, the .223 (and 5.56 military equivalent) is incredibly effective. Fired into a crowd, it will go through the first person, start tumbling midway through, and then hit a second person with nearly as much force as it hit the first. While every projectile is a compromise of some sort, it’s as good as you can do really for short and medium range operations. The Russian federation is moving toward a similar round, after decades of the 7.62x39 (which is also effective, but compromises in different ways). One huge advantage of the smaller .223 round? It’s lighter in weight, enabling a shooter to carry more (= more dangerous).

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

The magic combo is a) semiauto, b) detachable magazine, c) high capacity magazines.

Thank you for clarifying the issue.

So would you propose we outlaw this particular combination or all three of it's individual components? or may one or two of them?

It seems to me high compacity magazine should be outlawed (and they are in Ca.) I could probably be convinced simi-auto riffles are to much of an issue. Detachable magazines took a little more though outlawing them would take care of the hard capacity mags pretty quickly. It would also make it much harder for the "bad guys" to use high compacity mags. Makes sense to me.

[Z is for Zangie]

The magic combo is a) semiauto, b) detachable magazine, c) high capacity magazines.

Thank you for clarifying the issue.

So would you propose we outlaw this particular combination or all three of it's individual components? or may one or two of them?

It seems to me high compacity magazine should be outlawed (and they are in Ca.) I could probably be convinced simi-auto riffles are to much of an issue. Detachable magazines took a little more though outlawing them would take care of the hard capacity mags pretty quickly. It would also make it much harder for the "bad guys" to use high compacity mags. Makes sense to me.

Are you out of town already?

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

Are you out of town already?

Yeah, I'm in a hotel room in Wilsonville Oregon. We will be in Washington tomorrow.

[Mike]

The magic combo is a) semiauto, b) detachable magazine, c) high capacity magazines.

Thank you for clarifying the issue.

So would you propose we outlaw this particular combination or all three of it's individual components? or may one or two of them?

It seems to me high compacity magazine should be outlawed (and they are in Ca.) I could probably be convinced simi-auto riffles are to much of an issue. Detachable magazines took a little more though outlawing them would take care of the hard capacity mags pretty quickly. It would also make it much harder for the "bad guys" to use high compacity mags. Makes sense to me.

Again… I would not outlaw them. I would make them subject to NFA regulation, similar to that used for full auto. Right now, any 18 yo kid (in many states) can go to a gun show or store, plunk down $400 or less for the gun and another $250 for a quartet of 30-round magazines and enough ammo to fill ‘em, and go out hunting humans. So make a new NFA classification of these weapons and magazines, with a license required to own and a transfer tax when buying/selling. Combine that with raising the purchase age, along with actual background checks (involving a waiting period) to ensure you’re not a convicted criminal and have no history of violence or mental illness. Outlaw the sales of “80% complete” frames (ghost guns).

Oh, and make owners responsible for what happens with their guns. Including gun store owners and wholesalers. A gun should always be secure and its whereabouts known. “My gun got stolen” is so often actually “I sold it on the black market”…. when I sold mine off years ago, I sold to a FFL (federally licensed dealer).

All of this is just common sense. Nothing radical here, and it in no way infringes on anyone’s 2nd Amendment rights. It just make it more difficult for an immature or deranged person to mow down a roomful of people.

But in a few months, the national population will again vote into office representatives and senators who will derail any/all attempts to do any of these things.

As Pogo famously said: we have met the enemy, and he is us.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

Again… I would not outlaw them. I would make them subject to NFA regulation, similar to that used for full auto.

I guess in my mind I don't see that much of a difference. NFA regulation server to outlaw guns for all but the wealthiest. But I understand your point.

Oh, and make owners responsible for what happens with their guns. Including gun store owners and wholesalers. A gun should always be secure and its whereabouts known.

I've made this very point myself. It blows my mind that you can be arrested and charged with reckless endangerment for driving too fast on the freeway, but if you leave a load gun in the open around in the open, that's cool, because 2nd amendment or something. Freedom does not elevate responsibility. I would argue the exact opposite, freedom creates new responsibilities. Being safe with a weapon is a responsibility. I would also point out to those who want to have guns that allowing people to be irresponsible with them puts responsible gun ownership at risk.

It's funny though, I've never known an irresponsible gun owner. At least not well enough to know they were irresponsible with their weapons. I said this to my wife and she was quick to point that that is because I don't willing spend my time with stupid people.

“My gun got stolen” is so often actually “I sold it on the black market”…. when I sold mine off years ago, I sold to a FFL (federally licensed dealer).

I have no idea how often that is the case, but I'm sure it does happen. There does have to be some reasonability to the law. Guns do get stolen, even out of safes. I wouldn't want to hold someone accountable for a criminal's behavior when they have done what they can to be safe. I am also pretty sure that someone in this situation would immediately report their gun stolen. If you haven't reported your weapon stolen and it is used in a crime, "Oh, it must have been stolen." Doesn't cut it with me.

But in a few months, the national population will again vote into office representatives and senators who will derail any/all attempts to do any of these things.

That is in part because not being an idiot about guns will cost your your job in some districts.

ROFLMAO. I started to say that I have a hard time believing anyone gets to these positions and is so dumb they can't see the things we are saying. Then I remembered we just had 4 years of Trump. SMH.