Export thread

Mass shooting at Sikh temple in Wisconsin

#1

Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

www.cnn.com/2012/08/05/us/wisconsin-temple-shooting/index.html?c=weekend-homepage-t&page=0

Story is still developing.


#2

LordRendar

LordRendar

That is horrible.
And why do I keep scrolling down to the comment section -.-


#3

Tress

Tress

My first thought is that some islamaphobe asshole mistook the Sikhs at the temple for Muslims, and that was his motivation for the killing. It seems quite a few people can't tell the difference, or don't even know there's a difference.


#4

Bubble181

Bubble181

Tress said:
My first thought is that some islamaphobe asshole mistook the Sikhs at the temple for Muslims, and that was his motivation for the killing. It seems quite a few people can't tell the difference, or don't even know there's a difference.
Click to expand...
In other news, quite a few people are complete idiots.

Also, I'm still surprised I haven't heard "the muslims are bringing their wars over from India to our country OMG Waaaah :tina::aaah:" yet. Not that I think that's the case, mind.


#5

Hailey Knight

Hailey Knight

Bubble181 said:
In other news, quite a few people are complete idiots.

Also, I'm still surprised I haven't heard "the muslims are bringing their wars over from India to our country OMG Waaaah :tina::aaah:" yet. Not that I think that's the case, mind.
Click to expand...
I don't think the idiots even know about wars in India even if they've been going on for 30+ years. Most people in the U.S. don't want to know much beyond their backyards.


#6

CrimsonSoul

CrimsonSoul

Fucking people. If they want to die why don't they just take themselves out instead of trying to take as many people a they can with them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


#7

Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

I'm not even angry anymore. I'm just sad.


#8

Bubble181

Bubble181

CrimsonSoul said:
Fucking people. If they want to die why don't they just take themselves out instead of trying to take as many people a they can with them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
No, no. If these people wanted to kill a lot of people, they'd have used bombs. Guns aren't dangerous and don't facilitate killing!

sorry, couldn't resist. I'll go hang my head in shame for a bit now.


#9

bhamv3

bhamv3

Man, what the hell. All the Sikhs I've ever met have been great people. Sure they carry knives as part of their faith, and sure they probably know the deadliest martial art ever known to man, but still, they're wonderful guys. I can't imagine anyone wanting to hurt them.


#10

Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

From the CNN story:

Kaleka was not at the temple at the time of the shooting, but helped police interview witnesses in the aftermath. He said members described the attacker as a bald, white man, dressed in a white T-shirt and black pants and with a 9/11 tattoo on one arm -- which "implies to me that there's some level of hate crime there."
Click to expand...
That's not good.

also Fox News dot com curiously left that part out!


#11

Jay

Jay

'MERICA!


#12

DarkAudit

DarkAudit

Jay said:
'MERICA!
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/École_Polytechnique_massacre

CANADA!

So can we please cut that shit out now?


#13

blotsfan

blotsfan

I just get the impression that Charlie and Jay fistpumped when they saw this.


#14

Jay

Jay

Did you just bring up an event that happened more than 23 years ago that had NOTHING to do with the hate crime the OP posted where yet another American had far too many guns in his control?[DOUBLEPOST=1344217618][/DOUBLEPOST]
blotsfan said:
I just get the impression that Charlie and Jay fistpumped when they saw this.
Click to expand...
I get the impression you have nothing relevant to say and just posted this to congregate two very different opinions into one generalization.

You made me feel like a Sikh.[DOUBLEPOST=1344217707][/DOUBLEPOST]
Charlie Don't Surf said:
also Fox News dot com curiously left that part out!
Click to expand...
No conspiracy there, Fox News simply sucks.


#15

blotsfan

blotsfan

Jay said:
I get the impression you have nothing relevant to say and just posted this to congregate two very different opinions into one generalization.
Click to expand...
Jay said:
'MERICA!
Click to expand...
My apologies very relevant and not at all meant to incite.

Edit: actually, I take it back about charlie. That wasn't fair of me to say, and he didn't jump into his usual rhetoric. You on the other hand, just posted your little comment about the US.


#16

DarkAudit

DarkAudit

I wasn't the one blaming the other 300+ million of us whenever one idiot does something stupid like this. It's gotten old.


#17

Chippy

Chippy

Think he's blaming the violence culture and shitton amount of guns, brogan.


#18

Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

Fox News has IDed the shooter as Wade Michael Page, a 40-year old ex-Army soldier.


#19

Frank

Frank

Tress said:
My first thought is that some islamaphobe asshole mistook the Sikhs at the temple for Muslims, and that was his motivation for the killing. It seems quite a few people can't tell the difference, or don't even know there's a difference.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I thought.

And it sounds like that's what happened.

Fuck.

Seriously.


#20

Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

blotsfan said:
I just get the impression that Charlie and Jay fistpumped when they saw this.
Click to expand...
I wish I was wrong about the US' violent gun culture and the utter hell the US Military in its current form wrecks on the minds of thousands of young Americans.


#21

sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

One of the local newscasters has been calling the victims "Sicks" all morning.


#22

GasBandit

GasBandit

Aaaand from tragedy to axegrinding in one page, multiple times in under 20 posts.


#23

Dave

Dave

sixpackshaker said:
One of the local newscasters has been calling the victims "Sicks" all morning.
Click to expand...
I don't know how to pronounce it either. But if I were on the news I'd learn how.

And just a quick note. I think I'm going to be adding a section in the censorship area that will take the names of these spree killers and either X them out or make fun of them. Not so much in cases where the guy was killed but in cases of the Colorado shooter where he could get his jollies by being acknowledged.


#24

North_Ranger

North_Ranger

Dave said:
I don't know how to pronounce it either. But if I were on the news I'd learn how.
Click to expand...
SEE-kh-s, I believe. With the 'kh' pronounced like in the word 'charisma'.[DOUBLEPOST=1344281409][/DOUBLEPOST]No, wait... just checked. It's pronounced either /si:k/ (the same as 'seak') or /s|k/ (as in 'sick'). At least in English.


#25

Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

Dave said:
I don't know how to pronounce it either. But if I were on the news I'd learn how.

And just a quick note. I think I'm going to be adding a section in the censorship area that will take the names of these spree killers and either X them out or make fun of them. Not so much in cases where the guy was killed but in cases of the Colorado shooter where he could get his jollies by being acknowledged.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't like that idea at all, but then I hate all censorship filters


#26

Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

Dave said:
And just a quick note. I think I'm going to be adding a section in the censorship area that will take the names of these spree killers and either X them out or make fun of them. Not so much in cases where the guy was killed but in cases of the Colorado shooter where he could get his jollies by being acknowledged.
Click to expand...
That just seems kind of silly.


#27

GasBandit

GasBandit

While I agree the mass media needs to stop rebroadcasting their faces and names every 30 seconds for months following their criminal acts, I don't think the same goals are served here on a tiny forum that isn't even in the top 350,000 websites out there.


#28

Dave

Dave

I don't know whether to feel bad that we don't matter or bad that the idea is silly.


#29

North_Ranger

North_Ranger

Dave said:
I don't know whether to feel bad that we don't matter or bad that the idea is silly.
Click to expand...
At least we will always have the male genitalia of a mythical bovine/humanoid hybrid.


#30

WasabiPoptart

WasabiPoptart

Instead of x's why not replace it with He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named.


#31

GasBandit

GasBandit

WasabiPoptart said:
Instead of x's why not replace it with He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's appropriate either... the whole point of that plot device in the book was to be cowed out of even saying a tyrant's name out of fear of his power. That's so very completely not the intent.


#32

Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

you can't white wash murderers' names and you can't white wash academic discussion of ethnic or homosexual slurs


#33

Dave

Dave

Charlie Don't Surf said:
you can't white wash murderers' names and you can't white wash academic discussion of ethnic or homosexual slurs
Click to expand...
Apparently we can.

:p


#34

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

Dave said:
Apparently we can.

:p
Click to expand...
Fark does it with certain words and it's pretty hilarious.


#35

Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

Charlie Don't Surf said:
you can't white wash murderers' names and you can't white wash academic discussion of ethnic or homosexual slurs
Click to expand...
For once, I agree with Charlie 100%*

*actually not the first time we've agreed, but it's more dramatic this way.


#36

GasBandit

GasBandit

AshburnerX said:
Fark does it with certain words and it's pretty hilarious.
Click to expand...
Heh, I would support the automatic replacing of the phrase "first post" with "boobies!" like they do on fark, except that we don't really have "first post" problems around here.


#37

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

I was talking more along the lines of how they replace a certain word with "Attractive and successful African American."


#38

blotsfan

blotsfan

GasBandit said:
Heh, I would support the automatic replacing of the phrase "first post" with "boobies!" like they do on fark, except that we don't really have "first post" problems around here.
Click to expand...
Just do it for "I'm leaving."


#39

GasBandit

GasBandit

AshburnerX said:
I was talking more along the lines of how they replace a certain word with "Attractive and successful African American."
Click to expand...
It has it's downsides too though, for example they completely obliterate any instance of the phrase "In soviet russia."


#40

sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

I remember 4 years ago that some conservative news site changed gay to homosexual. I wonder if today's news has Tyson Homosexual came in 4th.


#41

GasBandit

GasBandit

sixpackshaker said:
I remember 4 years ago that some conservative news site changed gay to homosexual. I wonder if today's news has Tyson Homosexual came in 4th.
Click to expand...
Ha! I remember that!

The Daily Mirror (which is a UK scandal rag, granted) says they did it again today, but I can't find a link to the actual thing.


#42

WasabiPoptart

WasabiPoptart

GasBandit said:
I don't think that's appropriate either... the whole point of that plot device in the book was to be cowed out of even saying a tyrant's name out of fear of his power. That's so very completely not the intent.
Click to expand...
For the record, I was being sarcastic and did not intend for my suggestion to be taken seriously. I don't think censoring a murder's name, whether by x-ing it out or using a word/phrase, is going to change anything. I understand Dave's intent. While noble, it doesn't change the facts about who committed the crime. If you're talking about "He-Who Should-Not-Be-Named" or XXXXXXXXXX that is on trial for murdering people in a movie theater in Colorado it's not hard to put together who is being discussed. Name or no name you are still basically giving that person attention.
And then where does it stop? I once belonged to a board with some ridiculous censoring. For example, you couldn't use the word cocktail because it contained cock, so the entire word would be x-ed out. I got banned for standing up for another friend who had challenged the rules and got kicked off the board. The whole situation left a bad taste in my mouth and I'd hate to see this become the beginning of something similar happening on this board.


#43

Tress

Tress

So, hey, remember how that whole shooting thing that started this thread? Now we're all going to be having a debate as to whether or not it should be categorized as a "hate crime" or "act of domestic terrorism."

... because of all things we should worry about in this country, we've apparently decided to focus on the exact label of a horrible crime.

[source]


#44

ZenMonkey

ZenMonkey

Tress, I didn't get that from the story. I got that the FBI is likely to label it terrorism depending on what they learn, and then a lot more information about the shooters, domestic terrorism in general, etc. It IS important what to call it because it sets a precedent and/or can draw on precedent. But I'd agree that it's only legally, not really socially important, not right now anyway.


#45

Tress

Tress

ZenMonkey said:
Tress, I didn't get that from the story. I got that the FBI is likely to label it terrorism depending on what they learn, and then a lot more information about the shooters, domestic terrorism in general, etc. It IS important what to call it because it sets a precedent and/or can draw on precedent. But I'd agree that it's only legally, not really socially important, not right now anyway.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. The article has changed since I first read it. The original headline was "Sikh temple shooting: Domestic terrorism or hate crime?" It appears a section of commentary was removed, wherein the author talked about whether or not this is "just" a hate crime or if it counts as terrorism. So yeah. Nice stealth editing... stay classy, Yahoo!.


#46

WasabiPoptart

WasabiPoptart

Yahoo is a terrible source for news, IMO, unless you want to know what Justin Bieber is wearing today.


#47

DarkAudit

DarkAudit

Dude was a racist shit stain that won't be missed or mourned by the population at large. Not "'Merica!" by any stretch of the imagination. Period. The end.


#48

Vrii

Vrii

You're projecting a lot into Jay's not-even-a-full-word comment.


#49

DarkAudit

DarkAudit

Vrii said:
You're projecting a lot into Jay's not-even-a-full-word comment.
Click to expand...
Shit gets old after the third or fourth time. I've had enough of it, pure and simple.


#50

Vrii

Vrii

And you seem to be taking it pretty personally, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me.


#51

DarkAudit

DarkAudit

Don't worry about it. It's not about me, or Jay. It's about the victims, and to a lesser extent the useless slime that did this.

And that's all I've got to say about that.


#52

strawman

strawman

Tress said:
Now we're all going to be having a debate as to whether or not it should be categorized as a "hate crime" or "act of domestic terrorism."
Click to expand...
Jurisdiction and what laws apply are very dependent on what they determine it to be.


#53

Jay

Jay

I was too busy yesterday to spoon feed answers as to why I wrote what I wrote.

Anyways, will I say it again? Absolutely, why? Because America isn't learning. Having these events show up on the main page on news sites and going "Oh wow, that's horrible." isn't enough. I find American values... comical.... to say the least when it comes to this and I know I'm not the only one and this goes far beyond "Kanada".

A great example would be the whole Chick-Fil-A fiasco. OH NO! YOU DON'T SUPPORT GAY RIGHTS?! Manifestations! Boycotts! Get politicians involved! Pro Chick-Fil-A! Anti Chick-Fil-A! Twatter! Facebook! RAGGGGEEEEE.

As a Canadian....

Wat?

Meanwhile America goes from shooting spree to shooting spree with no consequence to people actions. Shoot a guy randomly that is selling door to door? It's not even spoke of the next day. OP's tragedy won't be talked about in a few days. No one will follow through and go... why does this guy have a dozen guns? How? It's clear as day to any non-American that Americans have a severe gun control problem yet little to nothing gets done. Instead of having one general consensus in this matter.... you have 50+ of them (WTF)...

Look, I won't go into the details about Americana failure at gun control... it's their gun culture... Americans have more gun deaths than the entire world combined many times over every single year.... recently an idiot shows up at a movie theater and kills a dozen people and what are people spoon feeding me?

"He was just a sick fuck, guns aren't the problem, anyone should have a right to defend themselves, it's in my rights. Don't piss me off in telling me that I shouldn't have the right to have a single or dozen guns. RAAAAAGGEEEEEEEE"

How can someone enlightened by this subject even talk sense with people as stupid as this? I will admit, some days I'd rather talk religion with those Baptist people... I feel I could manage some level of progress with them. Especially when they throw Canadian tragedies around as examples of my countries worst moments without even bothering to read what it was all about and what happened because of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/École_Polytechnique_massacre

It's a shame they couldn't bother themselves to read about it in full detail and actually find they were contradicting themselves in trying to make a mockery of one of Canada's worst moments.

If you're interested read paragraph 4.2

Change is good, embrace it as you were able to embrace many other things.

While you're changing things, fix the whole lobbying thing, it doesn't do democracy a whole of good anyways.

pcwk9.jpg


#54

sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

There is some serious troll shit happening there.


#55

Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

Jay said:
I was too busy yesterday to spoon feed answers as to why I wrote what I wrote.

Anyways, will I say it again? Absolutely, why? Because America isn't learning. Having these events show up on the main page on news sites and going "Oh wow, that's horrible." isn't enough. I find American values... comical.... to say the least when it comes to this and I know I'm not the only one and this goes far beyond "Kanada".

A great example would be the whole Chick-Fil-A fiasco. OH NO! YOU DON'T SUPPORT GAY RIGHTS?! Manifestations! Boycotts! Get politicians involved! Pro Chick-Fil-A! Anti Chick-Fil-A! Twatter! Facebook! RAGGGGEEEEE.

As a Canadian....

Wat?

Meanwhile America goes from shooting spree to shooting spree with no consequence to people actions. Shoot a guy randomly that is selling door to door? It's not even spoke of the next day. OP's tragedy won't be talked about in a few days. No one will follow through and go... why does this guy have a dozen guns? How? It's clear as day to any non-American that Americans have a severe gun control problem yet little to nothing gets done. Instead of having one general consensus in this matter.... you have 50+ of them (WTF)...

Look, I won't go into the details about Americana failure at gun control... it's their gun culture... Americans have more gun deaths than the entire world combined many times over every single year.... recently an idiot shows up at a movie theater and kills a dozen people and what are people spoon feeding me?

"He was just a sick fuck, guns aren't the problem, anyone should have a right to defend themselves, it's in my rights. Don't piss me off in telling me that I shouldn't have the right to have a single or dozen guns. RAAAAAGGEEEEEEEE"

How can someone enlightened by this subject even talk sense with people as stupid as this? I will admit, some days I'd rather talk religion with those Baptist people... I feel I could manage some level of progress with them. Especially when they throw Canadian tragedies around as examples of my countries worst moments without even bothering to read what it was all about and what happened because of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/École_Polytechnique_massacre

It's a shame they couldn't bother themselves to read about it in full detail and actually find they were contradicting themselves in trying to make a mockery of one of Canada's worst moments.

If you're interested read paragraph 4.2

Change is good, embrace it as you were able to embrace many other things.

While you're changing things, fix the whole lobbying thing, it doesn't do democracy a whole of good anyways.

View attachment 7536
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, I can't hear you over all the violent gun crime that happens around me non stop. I'm too busy getting shot and/or shooting people.


#56

BananaHands

BananaHands

Instead of banning guns, let's just ban every Canadian so we can shoot each other in peace.


#57



Magister Moonie

ban guns and chic-fil-a

all bases covered.


#58

Bubble181

Bubble181

Jay : I agree.

That said, I think that it is an acceptable personal opinion to be more or less gun oriented. Patrick, for example, owns a gun, and isn't a nutter. GasBandit, for another example, is in favour of more guns and less control (I'm exagerating for effect, GB), but he's at least open-minded and clear-headed about it: guns as a form of defense against a tyrannical regime, and these losses are acceptable collateral damage to keep his right to defend himself. I don't agree, but hey. Both of them are, up to a point, agreed that people who own guns should be more responsible/educated about them.
What gets me are the nuts who don't think for themselves but just see "all guns are good" as a basic American Truth. They make little to no sense.


#59

sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

There are just so many cultural issues that need to be tackled before we ever start rounding up all the gun owners.

Stop the glorification of gun violence, crime, gang lifestyles, criminals, and terrorists.
Create a mental health system that does not look like life behind bars to a troubled individual.
Do a better job about teaching fallacies of bigotry.

Remember that there was no law and order in this nation from the start of the Civil War till about 1910. That is one of the big cultural differences that I taught my classes between the lawless USA and peaceful Canada. Canada started its Westward Push after the US. While in a US boom town in the 1840-1930's there were no law enforcement, the Texas Ranger only showed up after the riots started. While in Canada, a prospector shows up in a boom town, he is met by an imposing Mountie in a Red Shirt carrying a Winchester and a club...


#60

Bubble181

Bubble181

sixpackshaker said:
There are just so many cultural issues that need to be tackled before we ever start rounding up all the gun owners.

Stop the glorification of gun violence, crime, gang lifestyles, criminals, and terrorists.
Create a mental health system that does not look like life behind bars to a troubled individual.
Do a better job about teaching fallacies of bigotry.

Remember that there was no law and order in this nation from the start of the Civil War till about 1910. That is one of the big cultural differences that I taught my classes between the lawless USA and peaceful Canada. Canada started its Westward Push after the US. While in a US boom town in the 1840-1930's there were no law enforcement, the Texas Ranger only showed up after the riots started. While in Canada, a prospector shows up in a boom town, he is met by an imposing Mountie in a Red Shirt carrying a Winchester and a club...
Click to expand...
So Canadians did things the right and logical way, and Americans did it the silly first-come-first-push-and-shove-first-serve way of hyperindividualistic children? Got ya. :devil:


#61

sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

And we did it first.[DOUBLEPOST=1344353169][/DOUBLEPOST]Just how did you do it in the Kongo?


#62

strawman

strawman

Jay please set the example and reduce Canada's gun murder rate to zero without increasing the other methods of murder.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/legal01-eng.htm

Also, why are you bothering to rage about this only when someone kills more than a few people? Most murders in the us, gun or otherwise, only involve one victim. Mass murders account for such a small fraction of gun deaths that even if we eliminated them in some magical way, it wouldn't really affect the overall statistics.


#63

Jay

Jay

Not known homicides... 20....

wat.....


#64

strawman

strawman

Jay said:
Not known homicides... 20....

wat.....
Click to expand...
Those are maple syrup deaths. They don't want people to know how dangerous maple syrup is, so they hide them under "unknown".

I think the explanation for 'other' is even more interesting, in that it includes heart attacks. I can imagine the courtroom scene:

"the prosecution will show that the defendant murderd his father via heart attack by declaring his love of the Red Wings hockey team."


#65

sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

Or there were not enough parts left over to make a determination.


#66

strawman

strawman

sixpackshaker said:
Or there were not enough parts left over to make a determination.
Click to expand...
I like my explanation better.


#67

Hailey Knight

Hailey Knight

U.S. is not the homicide capital of the world despite the guns.


#68

ZenMonkey

ZenMonkey

Did I mention I've taken up target shooting? I have a Ruger 10-22 rifle and a SR-22 pistol now. It's taught me a whole lot about just how severely screwed up the gun laws are, especially in California (one of the most restrictive gun-control states). I can't even imagine how to fix that godawful mess, although banning 100-round mags (no civilian needs that) and possibly even Internet sales of weapons/ammo, and closing the last few gun-show loopholes seem two obvious places to start.

I have a non-trolling question to put to you guys. In a purely hypothetical world (forget the 2nd Amendment, the NRA lobby, etc.), do you think assigning ATF or some other Fed agency control over gun laws, as opposed to individual states, would be a helpful or harmful move? I can see the upsides but I'm sure there are downsides I'm not considering.


#69

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

Yes, I'd imagine a federal agency watching over a single set of gun laws would be an improvement, if only because it would make enforcement of said rules much simpler. The problem is mostly enforcement.


#70

GasBandit

GasBandit

ZenMonkey said:
Did I mention I've taken up target shooting? I have a Ruger 10-22 rifle and a SR-22 pistol now.
Click to expand...
Nice! Much of my early plinking was done on my father's Ruger Mk 2 .22 cal pistol.

It's taught me a whole lot about just how severely screwed up the gun laws are, especially in California (one of the most restrictive gun-control states). I can't even imagine how to fix that godawful mess, although banning 100-round mags (no civilian needs that) and possibly even Internet sales of weapons/ammo, and closing the last few gun-show loopholes seem two obvious places to start.

I have a non-trolling question to put to you guys. In a purely hypothetical world (forget the 2nd Amendment, the NRA lobby, etc.), do you think assigning ATF or some other Fed agency control over gun laws, as opposed to individual states, would be a helpful or harmful move? I can see the upsides but I'm sure there are downsides I'm not considering.
Click to expand...
In my opinion, just about everything taken from the states to give to the federal government is harmful. The higher up in government something is, the less accountable it is. And frankly, to speak my mind about the ATF would probably godwin the thread.


#71



Soliloquy

GasBandit said:
And frankly, to speak my mind about the ATF would probably godwin the thread.
Click to expand...
Do you know who else didn't speak his mind about the ATF? Hitler.


#72

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

I suppose I should amend my earlier statement: I would be fine with a federally run agency that enforced the laws that a federal government set up... as long as it's not the ATF. Their incompetence, greed, and just general blood thirst has caused more than one massacre.


#73

GasBandit

GasBandit

AshburnerX said:
I suppose I should amend my earlier statement: I would be fine with a federally run agency that enforced the laws that a federal government set up... as long as it's not the ATF. Their incompetence, greed, and just general blood thirst has caused more than one massacre.
Click to expand...
My problem there is, you know where they'd get the folks to plan, organize and implement this new agency?


#74

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

GasBandit said:
My problem there is, you know where they'd get the folks to plan, organize and implement this new agency?
Click to expand...
Knowing how our government has worked over the past 10 years, they'd hire Xi/Blackwater to set it up. Baring that, yeah, they'd fuck it up and use the ATF to set it up. Possibly the HSA or NSA, which aren't exactly better.


#75

ZenMonkey

ZenMonkey

AshburnerX said:
Yes, I'd imagine a federal agency watching over a single set of gun laws would be an improvement, if only because it would make enforcement of said rules much simpler. The problem is mostly enforcement.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I just have this idea that the current system is like herding cats, whereas there could be a centralized system that...uh...corrals the cats. (?)

GasBandit said:
My problem there is, you know where they'd get the folks to plan, organize and implement this new agency?
Click to expand...
That is a very good point. And believe me, "fuck the ATF" (along with "punch Eric Holder in his tiny nutsack") is not an unknown sentiment chez ZenMonkey.


#76

GasBandit

GasBandit

So, in vaguely related news, the Arizona shooter pled guilty today.


#77

Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

it's kind of sad that it's hard for me to keep track of all the mass shooters off the top of my head


#78



Soliloquy

Charlie Don't Surf said:
it's kind of sad that it's hard for me to keep track of all the mass shooters off the top of my head
Click to expand...
Goddamnit Charlie you just made me depressed.


#79

strawman

strawman

ZenMonkey said:
do you think assigning ATF or some other Fed agency control over gun laws, as opposed to individual states, would be a helpful or harmful move? I can see the upsides but I'm sure there are downsides I'm not considering.
Click to expand...
I think there would be several intractable problems, the biggest of which is the idea that one size fits all. Even if the states were culturally homogeneous, they are wildly different in aspects important to self protection. You couldn't successfully apply rhode islands gun laws and needs to Alaska and Texas. Even if you remove human targets from the equation, all three places have very different animal control issues, and in the case of the latter two some of the animals or herds are able to kill humans.

Of course you could come up with a single set of rules with loopholes to ensure everyone's needs are met, but do we really need another IRS tax code to deal with gun laws, with loopholes big enough to drive a tractor trailor full of semiautomatic weapons through?

Further, who would perform enforcement? Right now it's local authorities enforcing local laws for the people who actually got those laws put in place. If we move it to a federal level, then you either face no enforcement because the federal govt isn't going to adequately reimburse local enforcement of federal statutes, or you face another huge policing organization, or simply task the FBI with Yet Another Federal Law To Enforce that can't possibly be enforced except in the largest cases. They aren't going to have the manpower to track down a single gun violation.

Consider drug enforcement as an example of the problem. There is a mixture of federal law and federal funding and federal enforcement, but all the small stuff is ignored federally, and so states have had to come up with more restrictive laws anyway and enforce them locally because the FBI and ATF aren't going to deal with minor infractions.

Is it possible to enforce gun laws better than they've been enforcing drug laws at the federal level?

I do think that the federal government could help out with getting states together, though. Concealed carry laws are different, and there a several different reciprocal agreements between states, and different laws governing them. But you can't currently expect that your ccw license will work across state boundaries unless you've researched it. Further there are advantages to getting your license in one state over the others where you might be eligible to get it.

It would be nice if the federal government helped normalize some of the laws between the states, but i don't think that moving the whole kit and caboodle up to the federal government is a good idea on any other level.


#80

jwhouk

jwhouk

All right. A little information for those of you who are just thinking "WTF" and everything:
  • The Sikh Temple where this shooting happened is located on Howell Avenue in Oak Creek. That might not sound important, but it is if you know Oak Creek. It is about a mile or two due south of Mitchell Field (aka General Mitchell International Airport).
  • The idiot who did the shooting is not only ex-army, but he apparently purchased the guns (legally) at an arms dealer that was likely just down the road. I know this because there's a lot of different strip malls and such along Howell, mostly because of what I pointed out in the previous point.
  • This isn't the only Sikh Temple in the southeastern Wisconsin area. There is one in my old stomping grounds in Pewaukee, practically across the street from the Wal-Mart and the new Costco. I believe there is also one on the north side of Milwaukee (where there's pretty much one center for each major religion, though I'm not sure about a Shinto temple or any Buddhist temples).
  • Oak Creek is most notable for being a 'burb of Milwaukee, with the annoying distraction of jet noise from MKE.
  • There are likely many former Army/Air Force vets who live in the area, because of the former site of the 440th Tactical Squadron and 128th AF Air Refueling Bases that shared Mitchell Field.
  • In general, when I lived in Racine, Oak Creek was about as far into Milwaukee as I really ever wanted to go. Which is telling you something about Milwaukee.


#81

ZenMonkey

ZenMonkey

stienman said:
It would be nice if the federal government helped normalize some of the laws between the states, but i don't think that moving the whole kit and caboodle up to the federal government is a good idea on any other level.
Click to expand...
That seems like a reasonable conclusion.


#82

DarkAudit

DarkAudit

Let this be all I have to say about that...

There is no real beef with Jay. But the 'Merica! Did piss me off and I wanted to lash out in kind. It was a cheap shot and uncalled for. What has been said cannot be unsaid (deletion doesn't mean I didn't post it), but I wish I hadn't said it.


#83

Bubble181

Bubble181

I agree almost completely with Stienman. I'm all in favour of more gun control, as you might've picked up, but just putting all of it to the federal level won't solve anything and will cause illogical (in)consistencies. Anyone with half a brain will have to agree that there's a difference in owning, say, a hunting rifle when living in Alaksa vs living in Manhattan (which doesn't mean I think it should be impossible to own a hunting rifle in Manhattan. But there'll be less people needing it for legitimate reasons, and there's a lot more that can go wrong, so it's probably a good idea to be more restrictive and have more control over it all).

A federal bureau of some sort comparing and rationalizing state laws, and checking the permit suppliers/enforcement of the laws by the states/whatever might work, if it's not a corrupt band of desk jockeys or incompetent gun nuts (or one of many other negative stereotypes possible). Making and enforcing the laws themselves would probably be better off at a state level.

While I'm definitely not GasBandit, I do think lots of things are better taken care of at lower levels. See the EU and how detached from all reality and democracy our highest levels are getting...*sigh*


#84

GasBandit

GasBandit

Bubble181 said:
While I'm definitely not GasBandit, I do think lots of things are better taken care of at lower levels. See the EU and how detached from all reality and democracy our highest levels are getting...*sigh*
Click to expand...
And you guys have only been at it a few years! Imagine what it is after 200 or so! Yeeesh.


#85

strawman

strawman

Just keep in mind that Europe has half the area of the US and nearly double the population, and on top of that is very highly urbanized. Politics are going to be very different due to population distribution alone.

116 people per square kilometer for the EU vs 34 people per square kilometer for the US.


#86

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

To be fair, the EU was formed of preexisting countries with long standing rivalries and significant economic diversity. There were always going to be power players in the group because of this. More to the point, as long as countries like Germany (who basically finance the entire operation) are freely able to LEAVE the EU, they'll be able to call all the shots.


#87

LordRendar

LordRendar

Nah,we got so much riding on the EU we are more or less bound to this ship.


#88

Bubble181

Bubble181

AshburnerX said:
To be fair, the EU was formed of preexisting countries with long standing rivalries and significant economic diversity. There were always going to be power players in the group because of this. More to the point, as long as countries like Germany (who basically finance the entire operation) are freely able to LEAVE the EU, they'll be able to call all the shots.
Click to expand...
Pfft. Germany won't leave their Europe-unified-under-German-rule. They finally have what they wanted! (I kid, I kid)

Anyway, there's "power players" wherever, the difference of schale between Germany and, say, Greece, isn't that much different from California or New York vs Hawaii or South Dakota or whatever crappy little states of no real impact on national policy you care to think of :p

Besides, technically, nobody's free to leave. Yes, there's lots of discussion going on about Greece, and I'm willing to bet they will leave - but in the joining declaration of the EU, and all of its treaties and whatnots, not once is it stated anywhere, how, or why, or iunder what conditions, leaving the EU is possible or even allowed. No, we couldn't stop Germany if they wanted to leave...But there's no protocols for them doing so.

stienman said:
116 people per square kilometer for the EU vs 34 people per square kilometer for the US.
Click to expand...
Tell that to the Belgian government and thze idiots who maintain we're a unitary state and our regions don't need separate economic or social politics. 456 people per square kilometer for Flanders vs 198 ppkm² for Wallonia (and we consider that lightely populated! What the hell do you Americans do with all that space?! (...oh, right, build houses bigger than matchboxes. :p)


#89

AshburnerX

AshburnerX

A lot of the space we don't use for living is farmland, industrial areas, parks/protected areas, or just plain too far from water/infrastructure to be useful. There's also those huge mountain ranges, an entire desert, and miles of Alaskan wilderness.


#90

Bubble181

Bubble181

AshburnerX said:
A lot of the space we don't use for living is farmland, industrial areas, parks/protected areas, or just plain too far from water/infrastructure to be useful. There's also those huge mountain ranges, an entire desert, and miles of Alaskan wilderness.
Click to expand...
All of that applies to Nepal as well (overh alf the country is pretty much vertical), and their ppkm² is still 194. There's six times as many people living in Nepal, per area, as in the USA. That's madness.


(Tibet only has 1/10th of your pop density, though, so I'm sort of cherrypicking. Still, I knew the USA had a much lower density than us but I didn't realize the difference was that big)


#91

strawman

strawman

Move to Michigan. The housing market is depressed right now so you can get a 2400 square foot (222sq meters) home with a quarter acre of land (1,000 sq m) for under $90,000 [USD], or less than $800 per month on a thirty year loan. Within bus distance to a minor city, and bicycle distance to major stores (grocery, hardware, electronics, etc).


#92

Bubble181

Bubble181

stienman said:
Move to Michigan. The housing market is depressed right now so you can get a 2400 square foot (222sq meters) home with a quarter acre of land (1,000 sq m) for under $90,000 [USD], or less than $800 per month on a thirty year loan. Within bus distance to a minor city, and bicycle distance to major stores (grocery, hardware, electronics, etc).
Click to expand...
I own a 65m² apartment on the outskirts of Brussels, and it's valued at slightly over double that. That's just wrong. I want to trade my small theoretically-two-bedroom apartment for two big houses with huge gardens :(


#93



Magister Moonie

Can you get a job in Michigan?


#94

Azurephoenix

Azurephoenix

stienman said:
Move to Michigan. The housing market is depressed right now so you can get a 2400 square foot (222sq meters) home with a quarter acre of land (1,000 sq m) for under $90,000 [USD], or less than $800 per month on a thirty year loan. Within bus distance to a minor city, and bicycle distance to major stores (grocery, hardware, electronics, etc).
Click to expand...

Wow... that same home would probably cost you over $600,000 here in Calgary.


#95

strawman

strawman

Bubble181 said:
I own a 65m² apartment on the outskirts of Brussels, and it's valued at slightly over double that. That's just wrong. I want to trade my small theoretically-two-bedroom apartment for two big houses with huge gardens :(
Click to expand...
Well if it makes you feel better, my place used to be valued at slightly over double that too, until the housing bubble popped and the car industry crashed.

Still, land: they aren't making more of it (except for the Japanese. Obligatory MOON PEOPLE reference )[DOUBLEPOST=1344439340][/DOUBLEPOST]
Magister Moonie said:
Can you get a job in Michigan?
Click to expand...
Well I can.

Michigan unemployment has finally returned to average for the US. It's still high, but so is the US. There are only twelve states with worse unemployment rate, though, so it's not as good as, say, Utah or Massachusetts.

As long as you have a degree in a good field, you shouldn't have a problem getting a job here.[DOUBLEPOST=1344439395][/DOUBLEPOST]
Azurephoenix said:
Wow... that same home would probably cost you over $600,000 here in Calgary.
Click to expand...
And about a million dollars in California. The difference in cost of living around the us is very interesting.


#96

Charlie Don't Surf

Charlie Don't Surf

FBI is reporting the gunman shot himself in the head after being shot in the stomach.


#97

Bubble181

Bubble181

stienman said:
Well if it makes you feel better, my place used to be valued at slightly over double that too, until the housing bubble popped and the car industry crashed.

Still, land: they aren't making more of it (except for the Japanese. Obligatory MOON PEOPLE reference )[DOUBLEPOST=1344439340][/DOUBLEPOST]

Well I can.

Michigan unemployment has finally returned to average for the US. It's still high, but so is the US. There are only twelve states with worse unemployment rate, though, so it's not as good as, say, Utah or Massachusetts.

As long as you have a degree in a good field, you shouldn't have a problem getting a job here.[DOUBLEPOST=1344439395][/DOUBLEPOST]

And about a million dollars in California. The difference in cost of living around the us is very interesting.
Click to expand...

And Dubai and Qatar. And the Dutch. And, technically, us. We're still adding bits of land we're stealing from the sea, too.

And while I have two degrees, I doubt anyone's looking for a philosopher or a cultural management specialist :p


#98

strawman

strawman

Bubble181 said:
And while I have two degrees, I doubt anyone's looking for a philosopher or a cultural management specialist :p
Click to expand...
Heh, you might be surprised. I suspect that your second degree would be particularly useful for companies merging across borders, setting up new business units in other countries, and helping companies trying to deal with difficult outsourcing issues.

There's a ton of that going on in the US as a whole, and definitely in Michigan, given that the automotive suppliers make nearly everything that goes into a car outside the US. Mostly Mexico and Canada due to NAFTA, but a lot of stuff comes from Vietnam, Korea, china, Taiwan, and the Philippines. Not just parts, but a ton of programming, design work, etc.

The whole Volvo/Ford thing could have used a good cultural management specialist.

Not to mention the fact that designers and marketers need to better know how to get their products sold overseas. The fact that few American cars are successful in Europe as-is is due to culture, and a lot of that could be overcome if they understood better how people there view vehicles. Also if the lot of you would finally agree to drive on the right side of the road.


#99

checkeredhat

checkeredhat

North_Ranger said:
At least we will always have the male genitalia of a mythical bovine/humanoid hybrid.
Click to expand...
Minotaur Penis?



You're talking about Minotaur Penis, right?


#100

BananaHands

BananaHands

checkeredhat said:
Minotaur Penis?



You're talking about Minotaur Penis, right?
Click to expand...


#101

GasBandit

GasBandit

Bubble181 said:
I own a 65m² apartment on the outskirts of Brussels, and it's valued at slightly over double that. That's just wrong. I want to trade my small theoretically-two-bedroom apartment for two big houses with huge gardens :(
Click to expand...
It's always fun to go rafting with europeans in Colorado and watch them gape at all the empty, undeveloped land right on the river as we splash down the Arkansas.


#102

North_Ranger

North_Ranger

checkeredhat said:
Minotaur Penis?



You're talking about Minotaur Penis, right?
Click to expand...
Boy, I oughta slap you silly for explaining the joke.


#103

Tress

Tress

North_Ranger said:
Boy, I oughta slap you silly for explaining the joke.
Click to expand...
Boy, I oughtta slap you for missing his joke. Go watch Super Troopers.


#104

GasBandit

GasBandit

Tress said:
Boy, I oughtta slap you for missing his joke. Go watch Super Troopers.
Click to expand...
And you missed a perfectly good opportunity to further the gag by threatening to pistol whip him.


#105

Bubble181

Bubble181

stienman said:
Also if the lot of you would finally agree to drive on the right side of the road.
Click to expand...
Hey now. That's just those islanders off the coast of France. They're silly.
And Cretans.
And Egyptians, I think?
Oh, and South Africa and India, but they're not around here, either. :p


#106

Frank

Frank

Making new land. Just be like Denmark and try to claim Canadian islands every now and then.

Fucking Danish.


Top