Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: The Spiral of Violence - Page 136







Post#3376 at 01-02-2013 04:49 PM by Copperfield [at joined Feb 2010 #posts 2,244]
---
01-02-2013, 04:49 PM #3376
Join Date
Feb 2010
Posts
2,244

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
For liberals and conservatives today, the distinctions or "battles" between "liberal and conservative" mean a lot. If you are not yourself a liberal or conservative, you might not relate to those terms, or to those folks who are being "turned against each other" along those lines. Since libertarians (among others) are neither liberal nor conservative, they cannot identify with either term. However, that does not mean the terms are meaningless for those who do identify as liberal or conservative. They are meaningful to us, if not to you, and we don't look upon them as signifying merely an "agenda imposed by the authorities," but as a real difference of opinion among the people concerning the priorities of our country and government.

It helps to keep in mind the Libertarian Party's own map of the political terms and their meanings, and give due recognition to the various opinions.
Santa is meaningful to some but that doesn't mean Santa has any real value outside of being a really, really good sales pitch.







Post#3377 at 01-02-2013 04:57 PM by Copperfield [at joined Feb 2010 #posts 2,244]
---
01-02-2013, 04:57 PM #3377
Join Date
Feb 2010
Posts
2,244

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
OK, I can buy them doing a forced entry, but I'll be waiting for your example of them murdering "harmless, unarmed folks".
The map linked contained many examples. Of course that is just a small sampling of paramilitary raids on innocent civilians and doesn't include your average, run-of-the-mill police killing. There are no shortage of those.







Post#3378 at 01-02-2013 05:05 PM by Copperfield [at joined Feb 2010 #posts 2,244]
---
01-02-2013, 05:05 PM #3378
Join Date
Feb 2010
Posts
2,244

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
The problem is that no-one who has weapons can be trusted any more than the government can be trusted. In fact, they are less to be trusted, because those in the government who have weapons are tasked with and paid for the specific job of protecting everyone within their jurisdiction.

Others also have the purpose of being armed to defend themselves against the government, which is in fact becoming an armed revolutionary like the Black Panthers were. And it also makes you in like manner a target for the government and the police. If your purpose for having firearms includes this, copperfield, then you are an armed revolutionary and a target.



Yes, but I also support the idea that such government(s) and their enforcers should be overseen and paid for by the people, including review boards with real power to investigate incidents and fire those who use weapons against the people unjustly. It does happen, I agree. The police forces work for the people. If they do not do their job properly, they can and should be fired or put in jail for crimes. Any policeman has, as an incentive, the requirement that they do their job properly if they want to keep it, which does not include shooting innocent people. An armed individual has no such incentives or requirements, beyond the law itself which applies to all.
In fact I trust my neighbors a lot more than I trust the government but then my neighbors usually don't get paid to make examples out of others when disobedience happens. Those in government are tasked with protecting government (law) and empire, not people. There is no law on the books that requires police to show up at your door.







Post#3379 at 01-02-2013 05:10 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
01-02-2013, 05:10 PM #3379
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by Copperfield View Post
In fact I trust my neighbors a lot more than I trust the government but then my neighbors usually don't get paid to make examples out of others when disobedience happens. Those in government are tasked with protecting government (law) and empire, not people. There is no law on the books that requires police to show up at your door.
Those in government are tasked with protecting the people who hire them. Policemen are not protecting empire, and the army (which does protect empire) does not show up at your door. If the police show up at your door without cause, they are criminals, because you're right; there is no law on the books that requires police to show up at your door, unless you are being investigated (or the cop is reporting to you that your family member is a victim), or have been charged with a crime yourself.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#3380 at 01-02-2013 05:14 PM by The Wonkette [at Arlington, VA 1956 joined Jul 2002 #posts 9,209]
---
01-02-2013, 05:14 PM #3380
Join Date
Jul 2002
Location
Arlington, VA 1956
Posts
9,209

Quote Originally Posted by Copperfield View Post
I want the option of being able to defend myself and my loved ones from those that would seek to do harm. If imagining other reasoning and terminology that better fits your narrow view of the world helps you get through your day then go for it I guess.
I could see the need for that type of arsenal in a scenario where civilization breaks down (ala Revolution). Is that what you have in mind?
I want people to know that peace is possible even in this stupid day and age. Prem Rawat, June 8, 2008







Post#3381 at 01-02-2013 05:18 PM by Copperfield [at joined Feb 2010 #posts 2,244]
---
01-02-2013, 05:18 PM #3381
Join Date
Feb 2010
Posts
2,244

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
Others also have the purpose of being armed to defend themselves against the government, which is in fact becoming an armed revolutionary like the Black Panthers were. And it also makes you in like manner a target for the government and the police. If your purpose for having firearms includes this, copperfield, then you are an armed revolutionary and a target.
Oh I almost forgot this. So you admit that your "professional" government types target people who don't break the law? Is that correct?







Post#3382 at 01-02-2013 05:21 PM by Copperfield [at joined Feb 2010 #posts 2,244]
---
01-02-2013, 05:21 PM #3382
Join Date
Feb 2010
Posts
2,244

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
...and the army (which does protect empire) does not show up at your door.
Actually the army often does show up at my door but usually not to protect the empire.







Post#3383 at 01-02-2013 05:21 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
01-02-2013, 05:21 PM #3383
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by Copperfield View Post
Santa is meaningful to some but that doesn't mean Santa has any real value outside of being a really, really good sales pitch.
You just have a different view of the range of political opinion than most others have, but you don't give any recognition to anyone else's views besides those who agree with yours.

I may not be much different, actually; but at least I recognize the existence of differences of opinion among the people, and don't consider these opinions to originate entirely from the authorities. The people are responsible for the opinions they hold, and for whom they vote; not the authorities, however much the authorities try to deceive the people, and however much they may succeed in doing so.

I and other liberals just have a different opinion than you libertarians and anarchists do of who believes myths and who understand realities. You and The Rani are at a different place on the political grid than I and other liberals (and conservatives) are, and that's all it amounts to. Since that is so, you guys say the terms for all views different from your own, and the political battles they stand for, are "meaningless." I don't say that any of the terms are meaningless, including the terms for your (in my opinion, misguided) views.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 01-02-2013 at 05:33 PM.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#3384 at 01-02-2013 05:27 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
01-02-2013, 05:27 PM #3384
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by Copperfield View Post
Oh I almost forgot this. So you admit that your "professional" government types target people who don't break the law? Is that correct?
They ( at least sometimes) target people with guns, yes; especially those who advertise the fact for the purpose of opposing them. Yes, unfortunately, the attack on such groups as the Black Panthers, I think were unfair and illegal. And the attack on the Branch Davidians was also unfortunate, and I don't think I agreed with it. I'm not sure these people were not "breaking the law" however. If they were stockpiling weapons, that may be against the law.

Actually the army often does show up at my door but usually not to protect the empire.
Why does the army show up at your door?

I've never heard of such a thing. They are out protecting the empire, and that means they are over in Afghanistan or Iraq or places like that, or training at military bases in various places.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 01-02-2013 at 05:29 PM.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#3385 at 01-02-2013 05:42 PM by Copperfield [at joined Feb 2010 #posts 2,244]
---
01-02-2013, 05:42 PM #3385
Join Date
Feb 2010
Posts
2,244

Quote Originally Posted by The Wonkette View Post
I could see the need for that type of arsenal in a scenario where civilization breaks down (ala Revolution). Is that what you have in mind?
What arsenal? What criteria need to be met for one to own an "arsenal"?

Now if you are asking me if I think things can go to shit for a brief or extended period of time, then yes, that is one reason to own a firearm or even several firearms. There are a great many other reasons why I own firearms as well.

And for the record I made it through maybe 10 minutes of Revolution before turning it off. When they introduced the love interest as a clean-shaven, fashionably dressed lad (after 15 years without electricity) I knew I was done with it. You could practically smell the aqua velva. I was always a Jericho guy myself.







Post#3386 at 01-02-2013 05:43 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
01-02-2013, 05:43 PM #3386
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Copperfield View Post
The map linked contained many examples. Of course that is just a small sampling of paramilitary raids on innocent civilians and doesn't include your average, run-of-the-mill police killing. There are no shortage of those.
The map showed nothng on my machine. As to the rage shooting, can you honestly say that having a gun in the car would have produced better results? I suspect that there would have been three dead instead of one. That doesn't lessen the sorrow and anger we should all feel for what actually did happen.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#3387 at 01-02-2013 05:51 PM by Copperfield [at joined Feb 2010 #posts 2,244]
---
01-02-2013, 05:51 PM #3387
Join Date
Feb 2010
Posts
2,244

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
Why does the army show up at your door?

I've never heard of such a thing. They are out protecting the empire, and that means they are over in Afghanistan or Iraq or places like that, or training at military bases in various places.
For beer usually, the thirsty bastards.







Post#3388 at 01-02-2013 05:56 PM by Copperfield [at joined Feb 2010 #posts 2,244]
---
01-02-2013, 05:56 PM #3388
Join Date
Feb 2010
Posts
2,244

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
The map showed nothng on my machine. As to the rage shooting, can you honestly say that having a gun in the car would have produced better results? I suspect that there would have been three dead instead of one. That doesn't lessen the sorrow and anger we should all feel for what actually did happen.
Where did I say that having a gun would resolve the situation? We were discussing so-called professionals who can't differentiate between a bright yellow power drill and a hand gun who sometimes kill unarmed people. You were asking for examples as I recall...







Post#3389 at 01-02-2013 06:07 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
01-02-2013, 06:07 PM #3389
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by Copperfield View Post
For beer usually, the thirsty bastards.
OK, but don't shoot them if they get drunk. You could start a revolution!
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#3390 at 01-02-2013 06:28 PM by Justin '77 [at Meh. joined Sep 2001 #posts 12,182]
---
01-02-2013, 06:28 PM #3390
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Meh.
Posts
12,182

Quote Originally Posted by Copperfield View Post
Where did I say that having a gun would resolve the situation? We were discussing so-called professionals who can't differentiate between a bright yellow power drill and a hand gun who sometimes kill unarmed people. You were asking for examples as I recall...
Following a link from the same article, let us not forget specially-trained, uniquely-capable so-called professionals. Who are a clear alternative to the mass collateral damage certain to be caused by an unprofessional. The one would "spray" bullets into the middle of a "crowded street"; whereas the other could be trusted to refrain from firing unless they were sure not only of their target, but of the environment behind their target.

Then again, there's something to be said for an incentive structure that lets costumed goons kill whoever they want so long as they and a friend are willing to lie in court that they were "doing their job". One gets, indeed, what one pays for.
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch

"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy

"[it]
is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky







Post#3391 at 01-02-2013 07:00 PM by Copperfield [at joined Feb 2010 #posts 2,244]
---
01-02-2013, 07:00 PM #3391
Join Date
Feb 2010
Posts
2,244

Quote Originally Posted by Justin '77 View Post
Following a link from the same article, let us not forget specially-trained, uniquely-capable so-called professionals. Who are a clear alternative to the mass collateral damage certain to be caused by an unprofessional. The one would "spray" bullets into the middle of a "crowded street"; whereas the other could be trusted to refrain from firing unless they were sure not only of their target, but of the environment behind their target.

Then again, there's something to be said for an incentive structure that lets costumed goons kill whoever they want so long as they and a friend are willing to lie in court that they were "doing their job". One gets, indeed, what one pays for.
Oh goodness yes. These spray and pray events have been going on for decades, for instance the shooting of Amadou Diallo for which there were no consequences other than a dead immigrant.

And why stop with simply hurling an overwhelming storm of bullets at surrendering civilians? These "professionals" also enjoy tossing the occasional flash-bang grenade into family living rooms.

It's unfortunate really, as I have known a few (and only a few) truly decent people who also happened to be police officers. Interestingly, I have found that the good ones are usually pretty easy to spot; they are almost always the ones who spend their spare time teaching civilians how to shoot. Funny...







Post#3392 at 01-02-2013 08:54 PM by Kepi [at Northern, VA joined Nov 2012 #posts 3,664]
---
01-02-2013, 08:54 PM #3392
Join Date
Nov 2012
Location
Northern, VA
Posts
3,664

Quote Originally Posted by Brian Beecher View Post
There has been a lot of talk since the Newtown massacre to try to keep guns out of the hands of mentally disturbed people. This is all well and good, but there has to be some criteria as to who fits that category. Perhaps a psychiatric exam prior to purchase. After all, if we can require background and drug checks for even insignificant employment such as for dishwasher, certainly we can do this for gun purchases. Anyone who owns a firearm ought to be alert to the potential dangers, just as much as when driving a car. In Chicago there was an increase in murders to 506 last year, and already three in the new year.
There's a major problem with requiring a psychiatric exam for anything, which is that a psychiatric exam has no real way of predicting violent behavior to a "beyond a reasonable doubt" or even "probable cause" standard that any judge would be comfortable denying someone their rights (especially when you have no prior criminal history). Also, mere psychiatric problems don't necessarily mean that they cannot be mitigated. Even something like schizophrenia can be overcome quite often with a regular regime of medication, if the patient is willing to follow it. While that's a big if, it doesn't necessarily mean a person is a danger to themselves or others, which is the level of danger one must represent in most places to for the government to be able to do anything to a person without their consent as far as mental health reasons go.

Further complicating the issue is the tendency for mental health professionals to exaggerate the extent of mental illness so insurances will cover it. So people who have a mild personality disorder will be diagnosed with full blown bipolar will then they really have a milder personality disorder to help them out. Now psychiatrists will be faced with the difficulty of costing a person rights at the expense of insurance coverage.

Finally, there's just the fact that paranoid snapcases will be less likely to seek help from anyone who is going to take something away from them. That makes them look less like a helping hand and more like an authority figure that is out to get them, which will reinforce their paranoia. So such a requirement would further encourage snapcase loons to hide their problems instead of seek help.

While I believe that people running criminal histories on dishwashers should have their genitals pounded on with a sledge hammer, the solution is in removing those stupid barriers, not creating more stupid barriers out of spite.







Post#3393 at 01-03-2013 02:08 PM by Bad Dog [at joined Dec 2012 #posts 2,156]
---
01-03-2013, 02:08 PM #3393
Join Date
Dec 2012
Posts
2,156

Lots of hate in here for cops. What about luring firefighters into ambushes? Speak to this, please, and include why police would feel more threatened, and use greater force in future if the suspect was known to be heavily armed. Even if the suspect is unarmed, as a police officer, not knowing this, what would you expect, say, if the cop were only reading posts on the internet from weapons enthusiasts?







Post#3394 at 01-03-2013 04:10 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
01-03-2013, 04:10 PM #3394
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Bad Dog View Post
Lots of hate in here for cops. What about luring firefighters into ambushes? Speak to this, please, and include why police would feel more threatened, and use greater force in future if the suspect was known to be heavily armed. Even if the suspect is unarmed, as a police officer, not knowing this, what would you expect, say, if the cop were only reading posts on the internet from weapons enthusiasts?
These are real issues. Once you raise the threat level, the potentially threatened act with far less reserve. Taken to the extreme, in an active war zone for example, shoot-think replaces think-shoot most of the time. Why would this be a good model for society in general?
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#3395 at 01-03-2013 04:16 PM by RyanJH [at joined Jan 2011 #posts 291]
---
01-03-2013, 04:16 PM #3395
Join Date
Jan 2011
Posts
291

Actual data is better than "what ifs", emotional appeals & insults.

For your consideration and comment (only 24 partial pages of reading)...

Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, Principles for Effective Gun Policy, 73 Fordham Law Review 589 (2004).
Available at: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol73/iss2/8
Ryan Heilman '68
-Math is the beginning of wisdom.







Post#3396 at 01-03-2013 04:30 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
01-03-2013, 04:30 PM #3396
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by Bad Dog View Post
Lots of hate in here for cops. What about luring firefighters into ambushes? Speak to this, please, and include why police would feel more threatened, and use greater force in future if the suspect was known to be heavily armed. Even if the suspect is unarmed, as a police officer, not knowing this, what would you expect, say, if the cop were only reading posts on the internet from weapons enthusiasts?
Yes; "off the pigs" and hating cops was a fun thing in my youth, and anarchy is an interesting fantasy, but I think we owe them some respect and consideration for putting their lives on the line to protect us from criminals, as long as they respect the rights of the people.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#3397 at 01-03-2013 05:19 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
01-03-2013, 05:19 PM #3397
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by Copperfield View Post
Where did I say that having a gun would resolve the situation? We were discussing so-called professionals who can't differentiate between a bright yellow power drill and a hand gun who sometimes kill unarmed people. You were asking for examples as I recall...
You cited actions like these as a justificaion for being armed. OK, then what would that have gained anyone in this case? For that matter, do we really know the facts, or just what made it to the 11 PM News? Has this case been resolved?

And for the record, I'm not a great fan of our criminal-justice system as it currently exists. It is what it is, because the majority seem to want it that way. We swing hard right on law-and-order, then we swing back the other way. Judging by the decline in the dealth penalty, I think we're heading away from overuse of the police powers of the state. Don't hold your breath, though. It will be decades in the making.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#3398 at 01-03-2013 05:43 PM by Brian Beecher [at Downers Grove, IL joined Sep 2001 #posts 2,937]
---
01-03-2013, 05:43 PM #3398
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Downers Grove, IL
Posts
2,937

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
You cited actions like these as a justificaion for being armed. OK, then what would that have gained anyone in this case? For that matter, do we really know the facts, or just what made it to the 11 PM News? Has this case been resolved?

And for the record, I'm not a great fan of our criminal-justice system as it currently exists. It is what it is, because the majority seem to want it that way. We swing hard right on law-and-order, then we swing back the other way. Judging by the decline in the dealth penalty, I think we're heading away from overuse of the police powers of the state. Don't hold your breath, though. It will be decades in the making.
Don't you feel that the 9/11 attacks culminated in a perfect storm of excuses to turn our society toward becoming a police state. When you see armed guards in McDonald's locations and in some cases even libraries, that does seem absurd. When I was young folks complained to high heaven about the police states of communist nations.







Post#3399 at 01-03-2013 05:43 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
01-03-2013, 05:43 PM #3399
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by RyanJH View Post
For your consideration and comment (only 24 partial pages of reading)...

Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, Principles for Effective Gun Policy, 73 Fordham Law Review 589 (2004).
Available at: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol73/iss2/8
Thanks. Of course, there is a real problem knowing the facts, since the NRA has actively made it illegal or finaincially unappealing for anyone to study the issue.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#3400 at 01-03-2013 06:37 PM by Kepi [at Northern, VA joined Nov 2012 #posts 3,664]
---
01-03-2013, 06:37 PM #3400
Join Date
Nov 2012
Location
Northern, VA
Posts
3,664

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
You cited actions like these as a justificaion for being armed. OK, then what would that have gained anyone in this case? For that matter, do we really know the facts, or just what made it to the 11 PM News? Has this case been resolved?

And for the record, I'm not a great fan of our criminal-justice system as it currently exists. It is what it is, because the majority seem to want it that way. We swing hard right on law-and-order, then we swing back the other way. Judging by the decline in the dealth penalty, I think we're heading away from overuse of the police powers of the state. Don't hold your breath, though. It will be decades in the making.
Unfortunately we don't have decades. The amount we spend on law enforcement, courts, and corrections are killing a lot of state governments. We don't have the cash for that.

Meanwhile, when you're talking about fire arms and self defense, while a lot of people live in places with relatively short police response times, a lot live in places with excessively long police response times. Those response times aren't bound by jurisdiction. There will be some places in many if not most jurisdictions that are 30 minutes to an hour's response time while the rest of it enjoys a 10 minute response. National or even state legislation cannot handle both, and even local in most places are questionable.

While I think the self-defense opportunities of guns are overstated by gun lobbies, I still can't say it's right to take reasonable options away from people living in more difficult to reach areas. Those reasonable options include semiautomatic weapons and hollow point bullets. I also think giving them a dozen rounds in a mag to hit their target in a stressful situation isn't unreasonable. A lot of people need these things, not because of everyday situations, but because of extreme situations. Just like a hunter who gets reared up on by a bear he thought was dead. Not an every day thing, but an extreme situation requiring a degree of respect for urgency.

There's a lot of stupid things in gun culture, and it leads to a lot of dumb results, but persecuting the paranoid to the detriment of the larger, quieter responsible majority is stupid.
-----------------------------------------