U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)

[jollyjacktar]

Lol. Solid pick up of a typo... you've really added to this discussion

I like to be helpful.  >

 

[Jed]

I don't think there was any big hand small map, at least not intentionally. 

I stated that criminal acts and combat are different and have different controls. As for any assertion that giving your wallet, etc if a gun was pulled on you means you wouldn't be a good soldier, I disagree. The controls of the two situations are different. Soldiers in combat surrender if surrounded and in a hopeless situation if needed.

Statistically the evidence shows that escalation of a situation by an untrained individual leads to higher murder and death rates. The average citizen isn't trained in dealing with crimes, hostage negotiation, investigations, or anything like that.

What the advocation of property protection implies is a castle society mentality. "Sheeple" in the forces and society are bad. This can include those who refuse to take a rational look at gin statistics as well as anyone else.

Just stop with the obtuse assumptions you apply to my comments.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Or not. There's no rational way of making that conclusion. One could put up one of those "this house doesn't call 911" signs I suppose but would the criminal, if desperate know there was actually a gun or take a chance that the sign was just there? What if the criminal thought there'd be a gun so brought his own gun? What if the thought that there was a gun put the criminal on alert, raising the chance of firing? Hypothetical scenarios are poor at making analytical cases. Like if you see snow- it doesn't mean that the earth isn't slowly warming

There are some studies out there where they interviewed criminals in jails , who made the point that they were more afraid of armed home owners than cops, as they felt they were more likely to be shot by the citizen. That modified their behaviour to break into non-occupied houses. Whereas there are more break in in Canada when the homeowners are home as there is less fear of being shot.

 

[mariomike]

When somebody pulls a gun to accost you on the street you have to assume they are going to shoot you in the face. 

ok, I'll play along.

So, with that in mind, my wife and I flee Canada for the safety of the US.

A ) I'm not armed on the street.

Somebody pulls a gun on my wife on the street. I have to assume they are going to shoot her in the face.

In the old movies they used to say, "Your money or your life."

I hand over my debit card. It's how I pay for things - even haircuts.

B ) I buy a gun to carry on the street.

Somebody pulls a gun on my wife on the street. I have to assume they are going to shoot her in the face.

In the old movies they used to say, "Your money or your life."

I hand over my debit card. It's how I pay for things - even haircuts.

He also tells me to drop my gun. So I drop it - I don't lay it down gently - I drop it. Just like the man says.

As I see it, my only responsibility is the protection of my wife's life. So I have to do what I think will give her the best chance of survival.

The debit card and gun can be replaced, she can't.

 

[Jarnhamar]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bsAMSQ13bY

The "problem" with us Canadians when discussing gun control in the US (and by extension here) is that on average we're not exposed to the same kind of violent crime that people in the US get exposed to. Often on a regular basis.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

There are some studies out there where they interviewed criminals in jails , who made the point that they were more afraid of armed home owners than cops, as they felt they were more likely to be shot by the citizen. That modified their behaviour to break into non-occupied houses. Whereas there are more break in in Canada when the homeowners are home as there is less fear of being shot.

Link?

 

[mariomike]

This is what I replied to,

When somebody pulls a gun to accost you on the street you have to assume they are going to shoot you in the face."

If a guy already had his gun pointed at my wife's face, or any other part of her body, the decision to draw my gun, or drop it, would belong to me when it comes to my life, or my wife's life - which is the same thing, as far as I am concerned.

I have never been in that situation. But, I've had plenty of experience making fast decisions.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I edited my post to try and get back on topic but there's lots of video evidence of guns used successfully to defend ones self or others, including when a gunman has a loaded gun pointed at the victim.  As you say it's an in the moment decision.

 

[mariomike]

I edited my post to try and get back on topic but there's lots of video evidence of guns used successfully to defend ones self or others, including when a gunman has a loaded gun pointed at the victim.  As you say it's an in the moment decision.

I probably watched too many Saturday afternoon westerns at the corner theatre as a kid.
Even saw Gene Autry "live and in person" with Trigger at Maple Leaf Gardens. 

But, unless you have the reflexes of Chuck Connors, when a bad dude gets the drop you, I don't see a lot of options at my age. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrOPVo5GFY4
Trifecta!

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=mariomike]

But, unless you have the reflexes of Chuck Connors, when a bad dude gets the drop you, I don't see a lot of options at my age. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrOPVo5GFY4
Trifecta!
[/quote]

This 71 year old probably watched the same movies as a kid

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39_c27nwyKI

 

[mariomike]

Nice.

Bank managers in Toronto used to have guns. The practice ended in the late 1950s after a bank employee was killed by a manager's ricocheting bullet meant for a robber.

 

[kkwd]

Awww.... what a sweet 'happily ever after' fairy tale.  No wonder America is the crime-free paradise that it is.  :nod:



(Bonus points: no actual facts or statistics were disturbed in making your post!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BncHC_tL1E4 
Sure, my story is made up. But it makes sense, who wants to potentially get shot for a few dollars. What I should have added is that even thinking a potential victim is armed is a deterrent. Just like the police having take home cars keeps people in line as they go about their daily off duty routine. There is one thing there though, they are armed.

 

[Journeyman]

....who wants to potentially get shot for a few dollars.

Well, if you actually look at those pesky statistics (2015), 327,526 robberies and 7,993,686 property crimes (burglary, larceny-theft, etc) were committed by those who wanted to potentially get shot.... in the most heavily citizen armed country. 

Now if you were really sharp, you'd respond with either another Monty Python clip or say "but we don't know how many crimes were averted." I'd agree with the latter, but I'd say "regardless, those numbers are significantly  higher than Canada, such that your argument does not make sense."

Of course, you're free to believe whatever you wish.  :cheers:

 

[mariomike]

Just like the police having take home cars keeps people in line as they go about their daily off duty routine. There is one thing there though, they are armed.

That's called Overtime and Paid Duty where I live. 

How many members of American emergency services actually live, sleep, and "go about their daily off duty routine" in the cities that pay their salaries? 

How many cars would be required? Which municipality would pay for them? The employer city, or the residential community?

To "keep people in line" I assume they would have to be marked?

If unmarked, most street savvy types can spot an unmarked car a mile away.

The fleet costs would skyrocket. Buying all those take home cars, maintenance, fuel, insurance.

What if the employee was injured serving the municipality of another employer?
Which municipality would pay her/his salary, benefits and replaced overtime while they recovered - assuming they were not permanently disabled and never work again for the city that hired them.

Most members of Toronto's emergency services no longer live in the city. The Residency Requirement was eliminated after I joined.
https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2016/02/12/most-of-torontos-newest-police-dont-live-in-toronto.html

The issue of where members of city emergency services live is also hot topic in the US,

"Today, only 15 of America's largest police departments have a strict residency requirement for police officers, and a majority of cops live outside the cities they serve."
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/reexamining-residency-requirements-for-police-officers/

Regarding cottage cars  "take home cars":

The only people I knew of who had unmarked take home cars, of any emergency service, were HQ desk jockeys in cushy offices - who had not worked the streets in years.

Complete with semi-hidden red lights, child car seats and dog hair. 

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Nice.

Bank managers in Toronto used to have guns. The practice ended in the late 1950s after a bank employee was killed by a manager's ricocheting bullet meant for a robber.

My friend used to put ads in the paper for old guns, he ended buying a lot of .38 special revolvers with the blueing worn off one side of the cylinder, these were those bank guns, floating around the managers desk drawers and wearing out the blueing as the drawer opened and closed.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

You can thank my uncle for being allowed to live where you want, mariomike.

He was a senior civl servant of the City of Montreal in the early 60's who lived in one of the suburb when then mayor Drapeau brought in residency obligations for civil servants of the city. He fought through the courts and won all the way to the Court of Appeals, on the basis that it was an infringement on the right to free movement of Canadians to impose such restriction, and that it could only be imposed on people for whom a clear and indisputable requirement for the job made it necessary that they live within a specific distance/time to get to work.

P.S.: For all those here who are anti-Trudeau's Charter of rights, I would like to point out that there were no Charter of right in place anywhere at that time. This was decided on the basis of the fundamental rights of all subjects under English common law. Personal view here: We never needed a continental European style Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

 

[mariomike]

My friend used to put ads in the paper for old guns, he ended buying a lot of .38 special revolvers with the blueing worn off one side of the cylinder, these were those bank guns, floating around the managers desk drawers and wearing out the blueing as the drawer opened and closed.

There used to be a shooting range in the basement of the old Bank of Toronto building downtown where managers practiced.

FBI Presses Banks to Boost Security as Robberies Rise
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1034030710746936680
But Bankers Fear Adding Guards, Barriers Will Lead to Violence and Ruin Ambience

I remember reading years ago that bank robberies increased as branches were located in convenient locations - such as near highway on-ramps.

But, as we head towards a cashless society and direct pay deposit and deductions, online banking etc., perhaps bank robberies will decrease?

You can thank my uncle for being allowed to live where you want, mariomike.

That was put to the test on 11 Sept., 2001 in New York City.
Members may reside in Westchester, Putnam, Rockland, Orange, Nassau or Suffolk Counties.

But, applicants living in Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Queens, Staten Island receive extra points on the exam.

Never happened in my memory, but we could be put on Standby. I believe American cities may have similar agreements with their members.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

One of my assistants worked for TD as a teller, she was robbed about 30 times and finally quit as she could not take it anymore.

 

[kkwd]

Well, if you actually look at those pesky statistics (2015), 327,526 robberies and 7,993,686 property crimes (burglary, larceny-theft, etc) were committed by those who wanted to potentially get shot.... in the most heavily citizen armed country. 

Now if you were really sharp, you'd respond with either another Monty Python clip or say "but we don't know how many crimes were averted." I'd agree with the latter, but I'd say "regardless, those numbers are significantly  higher than Canada, such that your argument does not make sense."

Of course, you're free to believe whatever you wish.  :cheers:

Using your stats and figures from Stats Can and populations of both countries for indicated years brings out the following property crime rates.
US - 2509 per 100,000
Canada - 3602 per 100,000

Stats Can http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/170724/t001b-eng.htm
The numbers I used in the calculations were for a population of 320.9 million for the US and 36.29 million for Canada. The crime rates were 7,993,686 for the US and 1,163,647 for Canada. The formula used was crimes divided by population times 100,000. Could someone check my figures as it is good to have a second set of calculations.

 

[mariomike]

Using your stats and figures from Stats Can and populations of both countries for indicated years brings out the following property crime rates.

You mention Canada. The only civilian I know of ( no doubt there are others that I do not know of ) with an Authorization to Carry ( ATC ) was Norm Gardner.

The permit said, "for protection-of-life only". He had apparently received a death threat, he said.

So, I don't know what good that permit to carry would have been for a property crime such as stealing a radio from a parked car.