Really sad story out of Texas

[TroutBum]

In comparison, we've gone from a couple per day in the entire country to a several per day per state, and you don't think that increase is large?

No, I don't. Here a few things to consider:

1) The population in the US in 1970 was just over 203,000,000 and now sits at 314,000,000. Anytime you add over 100,000,000 people, everything is going to increase. This one is self explanatory, so I won't go further.

2) In the 1970's you can read about all of the domestic terrorist activity, killings, bombings, etc. and the entire decade doesn't equal as many deaths as just the Oklahoma City bombing. 9/11, Waco, The Unabomber, Anthrax, sniper attacks, Fort Hood, just to name a few, are part of the reason we are seeing beefier police presence and action.

3) Ruthless drug cartels are pushing new types of drugs and weapons.

4) In the 70's you couldn't go online and purchase armor piercing bullets, high powered assault rifles, or create complex and devastating car bombs and IED's like you can now.

Do you agree that technology has given criminals far more options, including cyber crimes, than what they had available to them in the 70's? Is it not rational to expect our police force to also use that technology to stop them and protect citizens?

I feel like I'm the only person here who is thinking outside of the last Fox News broadcast.

 

[Gameface]

LOL, E.J., armor piercing bullets? Link please?

FYI, armor piercing ammo was banned in the GCA of 1986. The way the term is used today is fairly silly as it seems to generally apply to any full metal jacket round. Entertainingly enough, when ammo is not "armor piercing" it is typically referred to as "super deadly rapidly expanding hollow points" by the unknowledgeable anti-gun crowd. Either way it seems the sole purpose of both types of ammo is to kill cops.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2...-of-russian-made-5-45x39-armor-piercing-ammo/

You couldn't purchase high powered assault rifles in the 1970s? You sure about that, or is it just that you can buy them over the internet now (which is not entirely true, see spoiler)?

Spoiler

You can shop for guns online, but cannot have them sent to your home unless you are a Federal Firearm Licensed dealer, which would mean that the address being shipped to would be open for inspection without notice at any time by federal agents. Otherwise the firearm must be shipped to a local FFL holder (gun store) and you pay that store a fee and they are responsible to run the background check before releasing the firearm to you

Ruthless war on drugs is hurting more people than the drug cartels. But I guess as long as you feel like the people being hurt are undesirable it doesn't matter how ruthless America's war against itself is. It doesn't matter how far law enforcement officers are being forced to go or how they are being ordered to violate people's rights as standard operating procedure. I don't blame the cops, I blame the objectives they are being tasked to achieve. But as they move further and further away from being seen as a force for good the public's interactions with them are bound to become more and more adversarial. And we see the results of this negative feedback loop as the police become more defensive and meet hostility with hostility.

 

[TroutBum]

LOL, E.J., armor piercing bullets? Link please?

Link to what? Seriously, I have no idea what you want me to link here.

FYI, armor piercing ammo was banned in the GCA of 1986. The way the term is used today is fairly silly as it seems to generally apply to any full metal jacket round.

You've got more experience with firearms in your little finger than I do as a whole, so I'll trust you. However, can you explain this then?

https://news.softpedia.com/news/How-Do-Armor-Piercing-Bullets-Work-56249.shtml

The most widely used armor piercing bullets in the world are made of a hardened steel, tungsten-carbide, or depleted uranium penetrator enclosed within a softer material, such as copper or aluminum. The depleted uranium rounds, for instance, take advantage of their high-density material, designed to retain its shape and carry the maximum possible amount of energy as deep as possible into the target.

Sounds like the ban didn't work too well, unless I'm missing something. The point being, if you google "buy armor piercing bullets", you get a grundle of places to buy them, quickly and easily.

Entertainingly enough, when ammo is not "armor piercing" it is typically referred to as "super deadly rapidly expanding hollow points" by the unknowledgeable anti-gun crowd. Either way it seems the sole purpose of both types of ammo is to kill cops.

I've never heard ammo referred to as that, but again, you know more than me.

You couldn't purchase high powered assault rifles in the 1970s? You sure about that, or is it just that you can buy them over the internet now (which is not entirely true, see spoiler)?

If you read what I wrote, you will answer your own question. While I'm here though, let me throw in an insulting spoiler too.

Spoiler

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2014/sep/19/study-criminals-easily-skirt-law-buying-guns/

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/want-buy-gun-without-background-check-armlist-can-help

Ruthless war on drugs is hurting more people than the drug cartels.

I totally agree. Thanks for the opinion that has nothing to do with what is being discussed.

But I guess as long as you feel like the people being hurt are undesirable it doesn't matter how ruthless America's war against itself is.

Uh, WTF? Undesirables? You mean, like guys with criminal records, who do a lot of stupid ****, make bad decisions, etc? In short, me? I think you've got me confused with Pearl Watson and/or KKKarolinaJazz.

It doesn't matter how far law enforcement officers are being forced to go or how they are being ordered to violate people's rights as standard operating procedure. I don't blame the cops, I blame the objectives they are being tasked to achieve.

Again, I completely agree. The only real position I have taken in the last several threads like this is in defense of cops as a whole, because as a group, they are generally good, honest, and upstanding people. There are *** wipes in every group, but can we not intelligently see the difference between the two?

But as they move further and further away from being seen as a force for good the public's interactions with them are bound to become more and more adversarial. And we see the results of this negative feedback loop as the police become more defensive and meet hostility with hostility.

Chicken/Egg. If the sensationalized media didn't report and overblow random police shootings and correlate them with hot button topics to further incite people, then people would likely have more respect for police officers -- you know, the guys that are generally good people, trying to make their community a better place.




*edited to add: (It changes everything)

 

[One Brow]

There are a lot of things that haven't happened yet. That doesn't make it okay to write about those things as if they have already happened. People who call racist on every single instance where skin tone might have played a role don't seem to realize that they are setting themselves up for Chicken Little treatment.

Right, it's so damn unlikely for a Texas jury to convict a black man of killing a police officer when there is a claim of self-defense. I'm sure you can name five such cases from the top of your head. How about 1?

Besides, as I already pointed out, being charged is already a huge difference between Guy's and Magee's treatments.

Since you are pointing out an exaggeration/anticipation as if it nullifies a claim of discrimination, and ignoring the very real discrimination that has already happened, I'm not too worried about what you consider worthy of Chicken Little treatment.

 

[One Brow]

Do you agree that technology has given criminals far more options, including cyber crimes, than what they had available to them in the 70's? Is it not rational to expect our police force to also use that technology to stop them and protect citizens?

I agree criminals have more options, and it is rational to expect police to use better technology.

No-knock warrants are not new technology. They've been around since we were a country, and they cast a pall on civil liberties.

 

[Stoked]

Right, it's so damn unlikely for a Texas jury to convict a black man of killing a police officer when there is a claim of self-defense. I'm sure you can name five such cases from the top of your head. How about 1?

Besides, as I already pointed out, being charged is already a huge difference between Guy's and Magee's treatments.

Since you are pointing out an exaggeration/anticipation as if it nullifies a claim of discrimination, and ignoring the very real discrimination that has already happened, I'm not too worried about what you consider worthy of Chicken Little treatment.

That still does not justify it being the first thing yelled about on every single case becasue it might be what happened. It is disgusting to me to use that as an attack when you know nothing of the person or the case. Disgusting, cowardly and dishonest. If it is the case then it needs to be proven and then punished.

It absolutely "chicken little's" their argument. One only has to listen to the response from large sections of the white population to find proof of this.

 

[TroutBum]

I agree criminals have more options, and it is rational to expect police to use better technology.

No-knock warrants are not new technology. They've been around since we were a country, and they cast a pall on civil liberties.

I agree with you.

 

[One Brow]

That still does not justify it being the first thing yelled about on every single case becasue it might be what happened.

I was under the impression we were discussing HighlandHomie's initial post, where we know what did happen.

 

[One Brow]

The only real position I have taken in the last several threads like this is in defense of cops as a whole, because as a group, they are generally good, honest, and upstanding people.

My issue is much more with the training and tactics than with the individual police officers. The change needs to be in police culture.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Right, it's so damn unlikely for a Texas jury to convict a black man of killing a police officer when there is a claim of self-defense. I'm sure you can name five such cases from the top of your head. How about 1?

Besides, as I already pointed out, being charged is already a huge difference between Guy's and Magee's treatments.

Since you are pointing out an exaggeration/anticipation as if it nullifies a claim of discrimination, and ignoring the very real discrimination that has already happened, I'm not too worried about what you consider worthy of Chicken Little treatment.

You should be worried about the Chicken Little stuff because even though you apparently can't understand it, problems in credibility arise when you play loose with your facts. People start seeing you as a nut job who will twist the facts to fit their agenda, no matter what.

If the OP claims that someone has received the death penalty, and then a quick read of the article he links to proves that is not the case, it seems very strange of you to jump in and protect him by claiming that the only problem with what he is saying is that it hasn't happened yet. It is generally a very big assumption to suggest that just because something has not yet occurred that it is certain to happen.

And BTW, I'm not going to play your game of naming instances of Texas court cases off the top of my head because, surprisingly enough, I am not an expert in the history of the Texas courts. If you have evidence that shows that a black man being charged with this crime in Texas is the same as being sentenced to death then go ahead and show it to us.

 

[TroutBum]

My issue is much more with the training and tactics than with the individual police officers. The change needs to be in police culture.

Agreed.

Which way do you think would be the best option?

A) Riot, loot, and burn your city when you perceive an injustice.
B) Make music, videos, blogs, and essentially live a life that is all about "**** The Police".
C) Get involved in your city. Attend city council meetings. Go on ride alongside so you can see firsthand what officers to through on a daily basis. Be proactive instead of reactive.
D) Blame cops for everything.

 

[One Brow]

You should be worried about the Chicken Little stuff because even though you apparently can't understand it, problems in credibility arise when you play loose with your facts. People start seeing you as a nut job who will twist the facts to fit their agenda, no matter what.

Many people will say that regardless, as long as what you are saying does not comport to what they like to hear, no matter how carefully you try to hew to the facts. The real question is whether reasonable people will use an exaggeration to dismiss an entire argument.

If/when Guy is found guilty a year from now, will you come and tell HighlandHomie he was right and prophetic, or will you still be playing this perfect-accuracy card?

If the OP claims that someone has received the death penalty, and then a quick read of the article he links to proves that is not the case, it seems very strange of you to jump in and protect him by claiming that the only problem with what he is saying is that it hasn't happened yet. It is generally a very big assumption to suggest that just because something has not yet occurred that it is certain to happen.

I suggest that when I trun my key in my car's ignition after school tonight, it will start. I don't find that a particularly big assumption.

And BTW, I'm not going to play your game of naming instances of Texas court cases off the top of my head because, surprisingly enough, I am not an expert in the history of the Texas courts. If you have evidence that shows that a black man being charged with this crime in Texas is the same as being sentenced to death then go ahead and show it to us.

You mean, evidence of black men in Texas who where charged with killing police, convicted, and sentenced to death? I can find that easily enough. Did you have something more specific in mind?

 

[One Brow]

Agreed.

Which way do you think would be the best option?

A) Riot, loot, and burn your city when you perceive an injustice.
B) Make music, videos, blogs, and essentially live a life that is all about "**** The Police".
C) Get involved in your city. Attend city council meetings. Go on ride alongside so you can see firsthand what officers to through on a daily basis. Be proactive instead of reactive.
D) Blame cops for everything.

With the exception of "everything", why not all 4?

Just out of curiosity, is there anything in your list that you think is not being done?

 

[TroutBum]

With the exception of "everything", why not all 4?

Just out of curiosity, is there anything in your list that you think is not being done?

Because A,B, and D are ****ing stupid, that's why.

 

[One Brow]

Because A,B, and D are ****ing stupid, that's why.

I truly understand why this is true for you, but your experience does not translate universally.

 

[Gameface]

Link to what? Seriously, I have no idea what you want me to link here.



You've got more experience with firearms in your little finger than I do as a whole, so I'll trust you. However, can you explain this then?

https://news.softpedia.com/news/How-Do-Armor-Piercing-Bullets-Work-56249.shtml


Sounds like the ban didn't work too well, unless I'm missing something. The point being, if you google "buy armor piercing bullets", you get a grundle of places to buy them, quickly and easily.



I've never heard ammo referred to as that, but again, you know more than me.



If you read what I wrote, you will answer your own question. While I'm here though, let me throw in an insulting spoiler too.

Spoiler

https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2014/sep/19/study-criminals-easily-skirt-law-buying-guns/

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/want-buy-gun-without-background-check-armlist-can-help

I totally agree. Thanks for the opinion that has nothing to do with what is being discussed.



Uh, WTF? Undesirables? You mean, like guys with criminal records, who do a lot of stupid ****, make bad decisions, etc? In short, me? I think you've got me confused with Pearl Watson and/or KKKarolinaJazz.



Again, I completely agree. The only real position I have taken in the last several threads like this is in defense of cops as a whole, because as a group, they are generally good, honest, and upstanding people. There are *** wipes in every group, but can we not intelligently see the difference between the two?



Chicken/Egg. If the sensationalized media didn't report and overblow random police shootings and correlate them with hot button topics to further incite people, then people would likely have more respect for police officers -- you know, the guys that are generally good people, trying to make their community a better place.




*edited to add: (It changes everything)

First, my spoiler was not intended to be insulting. It was you can take my word for it or read further. 90% of my posts are tl;dr so I decided I would start using spoiler boxes when I launch into an extended explanation of something.

Here's the last paragraph of the link you provided on armor piercing ammo.

[FONT=museo_sans]Since 1986, according to Title 18, U.S. Code Section 922, no one may manufacture or import armor-piercing ammunition for civilian use, nor may manufacturers or importers sell or deliver such ammunition to civilians without the permission of the attorney general.[/FONT]

I don't know if the emphasis was your own, but seriously, depleted uranium rounds...Those are not available to the public.

I searched armor piercing. The stuff I saw was expensive and was intended for rifles. It wasn't intended to penetrate body armor. Pretty much any rifle round you'd use to hunt with will penetrate body armor, while very little handgun ammo will. Anyway, the stuff I found by searching for armor piercing ammo was all surplus military ammo manufactured before 1986.

I guess my point was that the term armor piercing is misused a lot. FMJ rounds are not "armor piercing" and hollow point ammo is not "cop killer" ammo. Maybe you haven't heard those terms but they are thrown around a lot by the anti-gun crowd.


You did bring up the drug war. You mentioned the drug cartels. IMO, drug cartels exist because of the drug war. Narcotics were not made illegal because of drug cartels. Before prohibition cartels didn't control the drug trade. You say you support the ending of the drug war yet seem to enthusiastically support the means used to fight it. I don't get it, but I'm willing to take you at your word. I associate indifference to the pain and suffering caused by the way drug laws are enforced as being based on the notion that "bad guys" are the only ones who suffer. That couldn't be further from the truth. We all suffer, but of course, in the neighborhoods where drug laws are aggressively enforced they suffer far far worse.



Just having a healthy debate. You know I love you.

 

[TroutBum]

Just because they're not available to the public doesn't mean that they don't exist or aren't easily obtained in today's cyber black market.

Anyway, my point was that what we're seeing with police beefing up their swat teams, gear, and ammo is a result of the times and technology we live in and with. This is not some government conspiracy to take your freedoms away.

As for the war on drugs, it is what it is. I hate it, think it's a waste of time, money, and lives. However, it isn't going away anytime soon, so in the interim, I support the people who took an oath to serve and protect, even if I don't agree with some of their policies.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Many people will say that regardless, as long as what you are saying does not comport to what they like to hear, no matter how carefully you try to hew to the facts. The real question is whether reasonable people will use an exaggeration to dismiss an entire argument.

If/when Guy is found guilty a year from now, will you come and tell HighlandHomie he was right and prophetic, or will you still be playing this perfect-accuracy card?



I suggest that when I trun my key in my car's ignition after school tonight, it will start. I don't find that a particularly big assumption.



You mean, evidence of black men in Texas who where charged with killing police, convicted, and sentenced to death? I can find that easily enough. Did you have something more specific in mind?

You're making a simple issue so damn complicated. HH did not say "I predict that this guy will get the death penalty." He said that the guy was getting the death penalty, and no such situation currently exists. If I was to play so loosly with the facts on the other side of this argument you'd be the first one to be all over me. Sheesh. And unless you can prove otherwise, starting a car does not sound like a very accurate parallel for being sentenced to death. How come you see it as such a burden to be asked for a little bit of intellectual honesty?

 

[♪alt13]

LOL, E.J., armor piercing bullets? Link please?

FYI, armor piercing ammo was banned in the GCA of 1986. The way the term is used today is fairly silly as it seems to generally apply to any full metal jacket round. Entertainingly enough, when ammo is not "armor piercing" it is typically referred to as "super deadly rapidly expanding hollow points" by the unknowledgeable anti-gun crowd. Either way it seems the sole purpose of both types of ammo is to kill cops.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2...-of-russian-made-5-45x39-armor-piercing-ammo/

You couldn't purchase high powered assault rifles in the 1970s? You sure about that, or is it just that you can buy them over the internet now (which is not entirely true, see spoiler)?

Spoiler

You can shop for guns online, but cannot have them sent to your home unless you are a Federal Firearm Licensed dealer, which would mean that the address being shipped to would be open for inspection without notice at any time by federal agents. Otherwise the firearm must be shipped to a local FFL holder (gun store) and you pay that store a fee and they are responsible to run the background check before releasing the firearm to you

Ruthless war on drugs is hurting more people than the drug cartels. But I guess as long as you feel like the people being hurt are undesirable it doesn't matter how ruthless America's war against itself is. It doesn't matter how far law enforcement officers are being forced to go or how they are being ordered to violate people's rights as standard operating procedure. I don't blame the cops, I blame the objectives they are being tasked to achieve. But as they move further and further away from being seen as a force for good the public's interactions with them are bound to become more and more adversarial. And we see the results of this negative feedback loop as the police become more defensive and meet hostility with hostility.

How can you be pro-gun and against the drug war? Don't you know that you are supposed to pick a team(D or R) to root for and then regurgitate whatever crap they sell you?

 

[♪alt13]

You're making a simple issue so damn complicated. HH did not say "I predict that this guy will get the death penalty." He said that the guy was getting the death penalty, and no such situation currently exists. If I was to play so loosly with the facts on the other side of this argument you'd be the first one to be all over me. Sheesh. And unless you can prove otherwise, starting a car does not sound like a very accurate parallel for being sentenced to death. How come you see it as such a burden to be asked for a little bit of intellectual honesty?

One man was indicted for murder by a grand jury the other was not. There are striking similarities between the two cases. One man was white the other was black. I think in this instance asking the question whether or not the different results is due to the race of each man is relevant.

more broadly speaking

Blacks are more likely to be convicted of the charges brought against them than whites.
Blacks receive harsher sentences for the same convictions.
Blacks are more likely to be wrongfully convicted than whites.

You can look it all up. Justice in America is Not color blind.