Another targeted shooting in the UK.
Gun free zones haven't kept guns out of schools, declaring a gun-free country hasn't been sufficiënt in rendering the islands that are the united kingdom gun-free, as guns -much like drugs- are smuggled in, or manufactured illegally inside the country.
Just though I'd remind you all.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Friday, March 7, 2008
Pipe bombs found on Campus
Via Sear and hammer:
Two partially assembled pipe bombs were found in a dorm of a Californian university.
The student who had gathered the components claimed he liked to experiment.
I understand that he liked to experiment, but this seems rather reckless doesn't it?
On another note, is this the explosive terror loophole the Brady campaign is talking about? A kid with no training whatshowever being capable of building a bomb?
Two partially assembled pipe bombs were found in a dorm of a Californian university.
The student who had gathered the components claimed he liked to experiment.
I understand that he liked to experiment, but this seems rather reckless doesn't it?
On another note, is this the explosive terror loophole the Brady campaign is talking about? A kid with no training whatshowever being capable of building a bomb?
On people who don't obey the law.
It's long been said that few laws affect criminals, because they -per definition- break the law, they do just what they want.
Well, not just criminals, it would appear.
My country of residence, Belgium, has long been pleagued by various tyes of criminals. Being a very high-traffic country, there has always been a lot of smuggling (illicit drugs, fake cigarettes to Brittain), there's eastern European gangs focused on credit card fraud, burglary and other offences. Essentially, the courts are flooded with important criminal cases.
At some point, we the people decided that the criminals mentioned should be put higher on the courts priority list than -say- people smoking pot. Having their hands full with dangerous criminals, people arrested with cannabis simply had their trials moved back, and back, untill it expired, reasonable term for a court case was exceeded.
Logical consequence: If the police catch you with some pot -which is illegal in Belgium- and there are no minors involved, nor are you making a public disturbance, they won't file charges against you. Policemen too have bigger fish to fry than people who are already fried.
Not so in Denver! Even though the people have clearly shown that they want marihuana offences kicked down to the lowest spot on the priority list. Since then, arrests for possessing the drug have gone UP! To the great discontent of the people, the voting publics bidding is being disregarded by local law enforcement authorities, who claim obedience to federal regulations.
Is democracy being trampeled, or should the penal system come up for review?
Well, not just criminals, it would appear.
My country of residence, Belgium, has long been pleagued by various tyes of criminals. Being a very high-traffic country, there has always been a lot of smuggling (illicit drugs, fake cigarettes to Brittain), there's eastern European gangs focused on credit card fraud, burglary and other offences. Essentially, the courts are flooded with important criminal cases.
At some point, we the people decided that the criminals mentioned should be put higher on the courts priority list than -say- people smoking pot. Having their hands full with dangerous criminals, people arrested with cannabis simply had their trials moved back, and back, untill it expired, reasonable term for a court case was exceeded.
Logical consequence: If the police catch you with some pot -which is illegal in Belgium- and there are no minors involved, nor are you making a public disturbance, they won't file charges against you. Policemen too have bigger fish to fry than people who are already fried.
Not so in Denver! Even though the people have clearly shown that they want marihuana offences kicked down to the lowest spot on the priority list. Since then, arrests for possessing the drug have gone UP! To the great discontent of the people, the voting publics bidding is being disregarded by local law enforcement authorities, who claim obedience to federal regulations.
Is democracy being trampeled, or should the penal system come up for review?
Thursday, March 6, 2008
They will never stop, a different war
I posted how gun control activists will never back down, never cease to push for even more restrictions, the same can be said about those who promote the so called war on drugs.
Banning heroin didn't work out, so acetic anhydride got scheduled too. Banning amphetamines has yet to get rid of them, so pseudo ephedrine, formic acid and methamine have been added to the -you can't have them- list.
Politicians have apparently found a new target for their anti-drug warriors: plastic baggies.
I kid you not, I came upon the story through sayuncle and TaxingTennesee, some one is actually calling out for a ban on small plastic baggies.
Refusing to admit that your venue of passing laws to curb undesired behavior is a well observed pattern of behavior in certain people. Instead of looking for alternative ways of dealing with the "problem", they insist on strengthening their original idea, which didn't work.
Did you know that a lot of coffee makers are illegal under Texan law? The pot is made out of pyrex (borosilicate glass), ownership requires licencing, and the heating element is a hotplate, which requires a licence as well.
How exactly have these laws stopped the availability of illicit drugs? They haven't.
Would you feel better, knowing that criminals can't legally get plastic baggies anymore? I don't.
Banning heroin didn't work out, so acetic anhydride got scheduled too. Banning amphetamines has yet to get rid of them, so pseudo ephedrine, formic acid and methamine have been added to the -you can't have them- list.
Politicians have apparently found a new target for their anti-drug warriors: plastic baggies.
I kid you not, I came upon the story through sayuncle and TaxingTennesee, some one is actually calling out for a ban on small plastic baggies.
Refusing to admit that your venue of passing laws to curb undesired behavior is a well observed pattern of behavior in certain people. Instead of looking for alternative ways of dealing with the "problem", they insist on strengthening their original idea, which didn't work.
Did you know that a lot of coffee makers are illegal under Texan law? The pot is made out of pyrex (borosilicate glass), ownership requires licencing, and the heating element is a hotplate, which requires a licence as well.
How exactly have these laws stopped the availability of illicit drugs? They haven't.
Would you feel better, knowing that criminals can't legally get plastic baggies anymore? I don't.
Times square bombing
New York was shook by a bombing on Times square, probably targetted at a recuitment office for one of the branches of the military.
I've said this before and I'll say this again: the internet is riddeled with infomation on producing explosives, some of which is accurate.
It is impossible to eliminate every single way for people to harm one another, it is vital that we try to instill some kindness into humanity. It is not so much "how" someone wreaks havoc, much more "why". School shooters don't commit their atrocities "because they can", they are ill, filled with hate or just trying to go down in a blaze of glory.
It's those first two that are the greatest threat, because they will go to any ends to do their damage.
Or for Awalk: I've long realized that removing guns from society (or just NYC) will make society safe.
I've said this before and I'll say this again: the internet is riddeled with infomation on producing explosives, some of which is accurate.
It is impossible to eliminate every single way for people to harm one another, it is vital that we try to instill some kindness into humanity. It is not so much "how" someone wreaks havoc, much more "why". School shooters don't commit their atrocities "because they can", they are ill, filled with hate or just trying to go down in a blaze of glory.
It's those first two that are the greatest threat, because they will go to any ends to do their damage.
Or for Awalk: I've long realized that removing guns from society (or just NYC) will make society safe.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Baltimore bus beating, legal proceedings
In case you're asking: "which one?" Don't feel too bad, I've list track myself of all the beatings in the beautiful and peaceful Baltimore with its progressive laws concering firearms and self defence. Here's for a reminder.
One of the victims, Sarah Kreager, is still dealing with the aftermath from the beating she received at the hand of a gang of "kids".
One of them has insunuated that the injuries she sustained, numerous broken bones, serious cuts to the head and neck and injuries to her face, were the results of injecting drugs in the past, a habit she has kicked and for which she was receiving treathment at the time of the attack.
Hence: "kids"
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world ...
One of the victims, Sarah Kreager, is still dealing with the aftermath from the beating she received at the hand of a gang of "kids".
One of them has insunuated that the injuries she sustained, numerous broken bones, serious cuts to the head and neck and injuries to her face, were the results of injecting drugs in the past, a habit she has kicked and for which she was receiving treathment at the time of the attack.
Hence: "kids"
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world ...
The effects of gun laws
45superman over at "armed and safe" found a great article concerning exactly what effect gun laws have had in Virginia.
A small excerpt from the blogpost/
Headlam (the "gun-runner") then sheds some light on the "gun show loophole" myth.
A small excerpt from the blogpost/
Headlam (the "gun-runner") then sheds some light on the "gun show loophole" myth.
They all knew that in Virginia, they could avoid the background checks if they purchased secondhand guns from private sellers - either at gun shows or through the classifieds.The "gun shows are arms bazaars for gang-bangers" myth is starting to get more than a little frayed around the edges, it would seem, with gun traffickers more daunted by the idea of a friendly conversation with a private vendor than by criminal background checks--still proud, Paul?
But, Headlam said: "We never bought from any of them. That one-on-one stuff gets too complicated. People want to have a conversation. They get all skeptical. For real, it was less hassle at a gun shop.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Got my computer back!
Those technicians finally came 'round to replace my fried out graphics card, after a measely six months waiting, I can finally get back to gaming! Hellgate London has been ideling in my drawer for far too long now.
I hope it won't cut into my blogging too badly, you'll probably be seeing some azerty/querty spelling errors on top of my usual crappy English though. Typing semi-blind can be a curse in Europe I tell you ...
So, three months to swap out a part that's available at any computer store ... reminds me of big bears trip to the DMV. Except this is a private company that's not doing what it's supposed to do!
I hope it won't cut into my blogging too badly, you'll probably be seeing some azerty/querty spelling errors on top of my usual crappy English though. Typing semi-blind can be a curse in Europe I tell you ...
So, three months to swap out a part that's available at any computer store ... reminds me of big bears trip to the DMV. Except this is a private company that's not doing what it's supposed to do!
Monday, March 3, 2008
Why I oppose gun control
The Brady camapign like to inform people of exactly how many people that have been prevented from legally buying a gun because of the Brady bills backgrounds check system.
The NRA even put it's alledged 33 million pair of shoulders under legislation that would strenthen and fine-tune the system.
But still, felons are finding guns with which to shoot policemen.
A Miami Dade-police officer was shot by a felon, a person who cannot legally buy or own a gun, but managed to get one anyway. The current laws are not preventing criminals from getting guns illegally. There are several ways to respond to this:
Some people want to strengthen gun legislation, or introduce new laws aimed at traficking. Since the current gun laws don't work perfectly, stronger laws might work better. They value safety over gun rights, and believe that more restrictive legislation might deliver that safety.
Then there are people who look at it differently; the current laws don't work because they are fundamentally ineffective. Criminals do not obey the current laws, and find ways of getting around them. A lot of people think that criminals will break the stronger laws, just like they brake the current laws. Murder can already land you in jail untill the end of your days, how could you make that worse? The death penalty has been observed to be no real deterrent.
These people point to cities like Los Angeles, Baltimore and Washington DC to prove their point that stric gun control will not provide safety.
Personally, I would support anti-trafficing measure, if it weren't for the "slippery slope arguement". What if it doesn't work, and people will keep calling for even more stringent legislation? What if it never ends up providing us with security and safety, will those failed laws be repealed? A lot of "waiting period" laws have proven ineffective, but are yet to be repealed. This makes me, as well as a lot of other people- weary of giving new laws a chance.
There will always be the "what part of shall not be infringed don't you understand" crowd. I am not one of them. I oppose gun control because I don't believe it works. I support the right to keep and bear arms because I think it is an important right. That is -after all- the reason why it is on the bill of rights. And I support the rights on the bill of rights, not because they are on the bill of rights, but because they are very important, vital even to living free and secure.
I oppose laws that I believe could really help, because I'm afraid that it will never stop, like it didn't in the UK.
The NRA even put it's alledged 33 million pair of shoulders under legislation that would strenthen and fine-tune the system.
But still, felons are finding guns with which to shoot policemen.
A Miami Dade-police officer was shot by a felon, a person who cannot legally buy or own a gun, but managed to get one anyway. The current laws are not preventing criminals from getting guns illegally. There are several ways to respond to this:
Some people want to strengthen gun legislation, or introduce new laws aimed at traficking. Since the current gun laws don't work perfectly, stronger laws might work better. They value safety over gun rights, and believe that more restrictive legislation might deliver that safety.
Then there are people who look at it differently; the current laws don't work because they are fundamentally ineffective. Criminals do not obey the current laws, and find ways of getting around them. A lot of people think that criminals will break the stronger laws, just like they brake the current laws. Murder can already land you in jail untill the end of your days, how could you make that worse? The death penalty has been observed to be no real deterrent.
These people point to cities like Los Angeles, Baltimore and Washington DC to prove their point that stric gun control will not provide safety.
Personally, I would support anti-trafficing measure, if it weren't for the "slippery slope arguement". What if it doesn't work, and people will keep calling for even more stringent legislation? What if it never ends up providing us with security and safety, will those failed laws be repealed? A lot of "waiting period" laws have proven ineffective, but are yet to be repealed. This makes me, as well as a lot of other people- weary of giving new laws a chance.
There will always be the "what part of shall not be infringed don't you understand" crowd. I am not one of them. I oppose gun control because I don't believe it works. I support the right to keep and bear arms because I think it is an important right. That is -after all- the reason why it is on the bill of rights. And I support the rights on the bill of rights, not because they are on the bill of rights, but because they are very important, vital even to living free and secure.
I oppose laws that I believe could really help, because I'm afraid that it will never stop, like it didn't in the UK.
Nonviolent chemical warfare ...!?
here's a new one .. as well as some pretty bunk reporting if you ask me.
This article speaks of whalers being bombarded with either rotting butter, or bottles of butyric acid. Now, if they had really been attacked with butyric acid, they would have been forced to abandon ship, so the entire "rotting butter that contains some butyric acid" seems a lot more plausible.
Goes to show exactly what things some people will call "non-violent". Yeah, hurling chemicals that cause slippery floors on a ship on the high seas is perfectly safe ... or not.
The entire "rotting butter" thing also goes to show the half-assed-ness of these protestors. Doesn't every child know that cut up potatoes in a jar of water covered in a layer of oil works way better to make butyric acid? Amateurs ... puh.
And by that, I mean in no way to say that I synthesise dangerous chemicals for a living ... though I did make some stinky ester in the lab a couple of days back ... I just think these "nonviolent chemical attack" people are idiots.
This article speaks of whalers being bombarded with either rotting butter, or bottles of butyric acid. Now, if they had really been attacked with butyric acid, they would have been forced to abandon ship, so the entire "rotting butter that contains some butyric acid" seems a lot more plausible.
Goes to show exactly what things some people will call "non-violent". Yeah, hurling chemicals that cause slippery floors on a ship on the high seas is perfectly safe ... or not.
The entire "rotting butter" thing also goes to show the half-assed-ness of these protestors. Doesn't every child know that cut up potatoes in a jar of water covered in a layer of oil works way better to make butyric acid? Amateurs ... puh.
And by that, I mean in no way to say that I synthesise dangerous chemicals for a living ... though I did make some stinky ester in the lab a couple of days back ... I just think these "nonviolent chemical attack" people are idiots.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Love's forbidden, so is passion. This whole place is sterilized.
So I watched "the island" yesterday, pretty good cyberpunk if you ask me, but passing that:
They didn't want their sheep (agnates, agnus: lat: lamb) hugging or getting physically close to eachother to make it easier to control them. Keeping them apathic untill the day they are led to the slaughter so to speak.
Today's society is evolving towards that premise in some places today even, Alice Cooper made a song about it back in 2000, "cold machines" from the "brutal planet" album. I like to believe that he's talking about the emotional element of people when he sais "no-one here gets out alive", as the place he's at turns lovers into cold machines, numbing their senses and killing them on the inside.
Eight year old shock rock has now become policy in an american institution, as a school in Mesa Arizona bans hugs that last more than two seconds.
This is the place you send your children to to become healthy adult beings, but it would appear that said school considers showing affection to be ... unhealthy? In bad taste? Unproductive?
Instead of showing affection, are children to become mechanical instruments that carry out assignments with question?
Having children raised by the TV is razing their future, as is wanting them to become apathic machines. It is vital to instill kindness into our children if we want them to turn out right. If anything, the present day should serve us as a warning of what can go wrong when children aren't brought up properly.
If you can stomach the heavier trash metal, Annihilators "plasma zombies" has a great message on the subject of letting electronical entertainment take over the role of parenting. (lyrics)
Scrat, now I need a hug ...
They didn't want their sheep (agnates, agnus: lat: lamb) hugging or getting physically close to eachother to make it easier to control them. Keeping them apathic untill the day they are led to the slaughter so to speak.
Today's society is evolving towards that premise in some places today even, Alice Cooper made a song about it back in 2000, "cold machines" from the "brutal planet" album. I like to believe that he's talking about the emotional element of people when he sais "no-one here gets out alive", as the place he's at turns lovers into cold machines, numbing their senses and killing them on the inside.
Eight year old shock rock has now become policy in an american institution, as a school in Mesa Arizona bans hugs that last more than two seconds.
This is the place you send your children to to become healthy adult beings, but it would appear that said school considers showing affection to be ... unhealthy? In bad taste? Unproductive?
Instead of showing affection, are children to become mechanical instruments that carry out assignments with question?
Having children raised by the TV is razing their future, as is wanting them to become apathic machines. It is vital to instill kindness into our children if we want them to turn out right. If anything, the present day should serve us as a warning of what can go wrong when children aren't brought up properly.
If you can stomach the heavier trash metal, Annihilators "plasma zombies" has a great message on the subject of letting electronical entertainment take over the role of parenting. (lyrics)
Scrat, now I need a hug ...
They will never stop!
Once gun control starts, those puching for it will not stop, will not back down until every gun is gone.
The united kingdom is the most industrialised country with highly restrictive gun legislation. These laws were supposedly implemented to curb the actions of criminals, and to safe lifes. Supposedly? Well you see, they failed to reduce firearm violence, it went up!
Now, Scottish politicians are calling for even more gun laws, seeing as firearm fatalities are up 25%! They want stronger and simpler legislation (simpler, allowing a court of law more leeway), they want more restrictions on air guns, replica's are to follow soon.
It won't ever end!
In the meanwhile:
A group of thugs was convicted for kicking a man to death, there was this fatal stabbing of a 30y/o. A kid survived getting shot and in a running child abuse case, a witness to was intimidated. And that's just one newspaper, one day ...
Yeah sure, more laws to keep the general public safe.
The united kingdom is the most industrialised country with highly restrictive gun legislation. These laws were supposedly implemented to curb the actions of criminals, and to safe lifes. Supposedly? Well you see, they failed to reduce firearm violence, it went up!
Now, Scottish politicians are calling for even more gun laws, seeing as firearm fatalities are up 25%! They want stronger and simpler legislation (simpler, allowing a court of law more leeway), they want more restrictions on air guns, replica's are to follow soon.
It won't ever end!
In the meanwhile:
A group of thugs was convicted for kicking a man to death, there was this fatal stabbing of a 30y/o. A kid survived getting shot and in a running child abuse case, a witness to was intimidated. And that's just one newspaper, one day ...
Yeah sure, more laws to keep the general public safe.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Gun control debate forum
This looks like it will be a forum where both sides of the discussion are represented.
Please, check it out and put up you thoughts and opinions.
Please, check it out and put up you thoughts and opinions.
Cop shoots suspect in the back.
A suspect was fleeing away from a police officer by speeding away in a car. The deputy figured that the proper course of action was not to put out an APB on the car, or to persue him, he decided to open fire on the suspect ...
The now-deceased suspect turned out to be a convicted criminal who -according to the involved deputy- tried to run somebody over. Does this qualify as a justified shooting? Even if he did try to kill somebody, he wasn't an immediate treath to anybody when he was shot. Even if he was -say- speeding towards a group of pedestrians, shooting him will not defuse that situation.
Would a civillian get away with this? He tried to run me over officer, so I pulled out my sidearm and shot him through his rear window, it was self-defence. Give me a break! Seriously, shooting somebody, who poses no immediate danger to anybody but himself, in the back!? Here in Belgium, cops get suspended for even just unholstering their weapon on a fleeing suspect!
No disrespect towards law enforcement as a whole, just this one ... this one is a dangerous idiot!
The now-deceased suspect turned out to be a convicted criminal who -according to the involved deputy- tried to run somebody over. Does this qualify as a justified shooting? Even if he did try to kill somebody, he wasn't an immediate treath to anybody when he was shot. Even if he was -say- speeding towards a group of pedestrians, shooting him will not defuse that situation.
Would a civillian get away with this? He tried to run me over officer, so I pulled out my sidearm and shot him through his rear window, it was self-defence. Give me a break! Seriously, shooting somebody, who poses no immediate danger to anybody but himself, in the back!? Here in Belgium, cops get suspended for even just unholstering their weapon on a fleeing suspect!
No disrespect towards law enforcement as a whole, just this one ... this one is a dangerous idiot!
Keep your kids off the streets, send them to school?
It would appear that a ring of burglars was in fact using school as an alibi when they went of robbing. They would "clock in" so to say in the morning during first period, then go out invading people homes, and then come back for last period to submit their names on the attendancy list.
This effectively allowed them to burglarise houses, yet prove that they were at school when those burglaries took place.
If we ever wish to tackle juvinile crime and gang activity, it is vital that we give our children an education and a future. Events like this are despicable in several ways. first of all, this school is clearly failing to keep around, let alone give them an education, if they can't even account for missing students.
This effectively allowed them to burglarise houses, yet prove that they were at school when those burglaries took place.
If we ever wish to tackle juvinile crime and gang activity, it is vital that we give our children an education and a future. Events like this are despicable in several ways. first of all, this school is clearly failing to keep around, let alone give them an education, if they can't even account for missing students.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)