Side story on the recent gun spree

[Firn]

Nice link. Earlier in this thread I noted rather similar things after looking at the homicide stats in the US. When it comes to gun violence it is rather obvious that 'high-powered' handguns in the hands of gang members do a great amount of the killing and wounding. The far easier availabilty of guns is obviously a big part of the reason why so much more persons get killed on the American streets compared to good old Europe. As written before this is not just a matter of laws but also enforcements. All in all this perspective offers a good lever for the reduction of a good deal of the serious (hand)gun-related crime in the USA.

Personally I think that felons have for the good of the society no business to legally own or even carry lethal weapons and that said laws should be strictly enforced especially where the related gun violence is high.

P.S: A hunter with all the proper papers was recently stopped near a nearby village by the Carabinieri after they have been informed that somebody was flashing along the wineyards. During the car search they found 8 rabbits, flashlights and a .22 with a suppressor. At home another 20+ rabbits. The whole area is home of a great populations of those rodents, so no problem for the population. The rifle was legally held. The object which will cause him most trouble will be the suppressor, while arguably the biggest impact will be that everybody relevant around him knows. Personal inquires led me believe that he sold a good deal usually after the legal hunting period in the fall, which was quite plausible. Note that nobody even thinks that this man and his silenced rifle are a threat to somebody else.

[Fuchs]

the translation of "felon" is ambiguous; do you mean violent criminals or criminals in general?

I ask because I really don't see why a tax dodger or a sprayer should be turned into marked 2nd class citizens for life.
The revoking of active voting rights criminals in some American states is already awkward*.




* See? I can be polite!

[jmm99]

Thought you might like the links. :)

The US gang problem is complicated by (1) drug policies, (2) political correctness, and (3) Latin American immigration and assimilation.

The last segues from our Latin American neighbors' front and back yards, where the problem is even worse. BTW: my problem is not with Latin American immigration (it's with us for good), but how to create opportunities for complete assimilation. The Irish were, once upon a time, problem children - Gangs of New York (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangs_of_New_York). So also the Italians, but to a lesser degree. ;)

In my worst futuristic nightmares, I see a US containing enclaves that can be handled only by Snake Plissken (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_Plissken) and Soldier (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldier_(1998_American_film)).

Back to reality. You may be familiar with these two authors: Max G. Manwaring and John P. Sullivan. Examples of their takes:

Manwaring, STATE AND NONSTATE ASSOCIATED GANGS: CREDIBLE “MIDWIVES OF NEW SOCIAL ORDERS (www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB876.pdf)” (2009)

Sullivan, Criminal Insurgency in the Americas (smallwarsjournal.com/blog/journal/docs-temp/364-sullivan.pdf) (2010)

I expect you can Google up a dozen articles by each of them.

The problems of the Americas and the Americans (which include, but are not limited to, the USA and USAians) have from the 1960s heavily influenced me in my limited Worldview of US force projection. One has to clean up one's own front and back yards before even thinking of tackling the rest of the neighborhood.

--------------------------
Firn: I got your meaning fine, but "flashing" has a different connotation in the US ! :D

Going back a long time ago when I was a teenager, we backwoods types had a somewhat illegal (to the conservation enforcement officers) pastime of "shining" - white tail deer. Spotlight (hand or vehicle) + .22 LR pistol or rifle. Silencer ? - I heard of people making and using them, but had no experience with that device - Fed felony under the 1934 National Firearms Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act).

Actually, I had little experience with "shining" to kill deer because I was more afraid of my dad (who was simply a great woodsman and hunter) than the law. His view was that you didn't "shine" unless your family was starving and we were far from starving.

So, my only experience with "shining" was doing it sans rifle, just to tease the conservation officers. Something like American Graffiti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Graffiti):

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6b/JohnMilner.jpg

Description: John Milner (Paul Le Mat) is confronted by Officer Holstein (Jim Bohan).

Regards

Mike

[jmm99]

from Fuchs
* See? I can be polite!

OK. I'll try to put aside the snarling Brown Bear visage.

The quick answer to the querstion:


... do you mean violent criminals or criminals in general?

is neither. That doesn't tell you anything substantial.

I'll have to summarize:

1. What is a felony ?

2. What are the short-term consequences of a felony conviction ?

3. What are the long-term consequences of a felony conviction ?

All very doable, but I don't want to get too far down in the legal weeds on that.

The Wiki Felony (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony) is not especially helpful (it also looks like something out of the early 20th century). This is generally accurate for Fed and Michigan crimes:


In the United States, where the felony/misdemeanor distinction is still widely applied, the federal government defines a felony as a crime punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year. If punishable by exactly one year or less, it is classified as a misdemeanor.

Hence, Michigan's current system somewhat resembles what the Wiki says is the German system, on these two points (the other two points don't apply):


Felonies (Verbrechen) is defined as a crime that is punishable with a minimum of one year imprisonment. Misdemeanours (Vergehen) are all other crimes punishable by imprisonment of less than one year or by fine.

However, in some cases a very severe version misdemeanour may be punished with imprisonment of more than one year, yet the crime itself remains considered a misdemeanour. Same applies for a milder version of a felony that is punishable with imprisonment less than a year.

All that being said, the ballgame is ruled by the Michigan Sentencing Guidelines Manual (http://courts.michigan.gov/education/mji/Publications/Documents/sg-manual.pdf) (2012, 182 pp.). That covers the first two questions, but not the long-term consequences of a felony conviction.

I have to break for the afternoon. Download the Manual (2.4MB). I'll look at some other stuff later. BTW: The Michigan Judicial Institute (MJI) Publications (http://courts.michigan.gov/education/mji/Publications/Pages/default.aspx) (for judges, but used by all lawyers practicing criminal law) are a good entry into Michigan procedure (similar to Federal procedure).

Regards

Mike

[Firn]

@Fuchs: Without thinking in a precise legal category I meant a violent criminal. Such a ban could be automatically removed after, let us say, 10-15 years. Along with the suitable police work and tactics it should help to handle the spiral of violent escalation. As an gang member in the US it might seem be quite rational to carry a gun simply for self-defense as you have might have to deal with armed violent criminals with a far greater probability then the rest of the population. It is a bit of a prisoner dilemma.

@jimm99: Thanks for the links. I will read the first before making a comment on the issue.

I don't think many would call the police here if they saw somebody 'flashing' in an wineyard. ;)

Shining is arguably as old as powerful lights and is officially used here to get a 'count' of the various populations, especially deer. This count, even if done well, has little to do with the actual numbers but allows one to compare on year to the other. Even I used it a couple of times to check on the way home if some game is around after the legal shooting time. Hunting with flashlights is banned here, but of course practically impossible to police. It is, as we have seen, also done by poachers, often enough with the traditional .22+suppressor combination. Personally I dislike the use of the caliber for deer and bad shooting far more then the use of a suppressor, but the law sees it differently.

As I said before the funny thing is that in such 'traditional' circumstances people tend to say it is not ethical, poor rabbits :D but no one considered the man with his silenced weapon a danger to society. The guy in qestion is also from a 'good' family. We do tend to think in contexts. So let us get the right music (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_xyuy8CyGU).

[Fuchs]

A ponzi scheme guy, a pickpocket and a killer all belong into the "felon" category; this doesn't seem to make much sense as a basis for who shouldn't be allowed to own a firearm.
I'd rather expect that crimes involving violence or non-improvised weapons would shape a better category.


Concerning the German law; I didn't learn much about our criminal law (more about civil and constitutional law, though). As far as I can tell we make a major distinction between Straftat (crime) and Ordnungswidrigkeit (lesser illegal action). The latter is punishable only by fines (or if one cannot or doesn't want to pay few days in jail as a replacement) and/or withdrawal of a license (driving license, for example). The important difference is that an employer may ask you to show a certificate by the authorities about whether you've been criminal in the past, and Ordnungswidrigkeit would not show up (this is nowadays only relevant for certain professions, but was quite relevant in earlier decades).
I've yet to see anyone pay attention to the difference between Verbrechen and Vergehen.

In the end, it's not important; the legal norms and terms were not defined with the need to define a group of people who should not possess firearms in mind. One can expect that a new such definition is required in the U.S., and I would strongly suggest that violence and non-improvised weapons would make sense.

[Fuchs]

So let us get the right music (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_xyuy8CyGU).

This
http://www.myvideo.de/watch/2093635/Biscaya_James_Last
is how to play that instrument well !

[Firn]

This
http://www.myvideo.de/watch/2093635/Biscaya_James_Last
is how to play that instrument well !

Not bad. Good night and in bocca al lupo. Even if that is literally no longer allowed. :wry:

Luckily, crepi! is valid for deer and the Chamois (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamois) in question...

[Stan]

Move over dudes....

Number of women buying guns surges (http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2013/02/20/erin-lavandera-women-and-guns.cnn?iref=videosearch)

Flash Bang Holsters ?

[jmm99]

from the CNN transcript of Erin Burnett Outfront (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1302/19/ebo.01.html) ...

first, V.P. Biden:


(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: If you want to protect yourself, get a double barrel shotgun, have the shells, 12-gauge shotgun and I promise you, as I told my wife, we live in an area that's wooded and somewhat secluded.

I said, Jill, if there's ever a problem, just walk out on the balcony here, walk out, put that double barrel shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house. I promise you, whoever's coming in is not going -- you don't need an AR-15. It's harder to aim, it's harder to use, and in fact, you don't need 30 rounds to protect yourself. Buy a shotgun. Buy a shotgun.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

and then, CNN's Lavendara:


LAVANDERA: The gun industry is developing an arsenal of weapons and merchandise targeting women. There are guns and rifles with bright colors, animal print patterns, even holsters that can make a man blush.

KRISTAL REDEL, PISTOL CLUB MEMBER: The one I have right here is actually meant to put into your bra.

LAVANDERA: This one goes on your bra?

REDEL: This goes into your bra. So, it actually clips underneath and hides right into your cup.

LAVANDERA: They are actually called flash bang holsters.

(LAUGHTER)

REDEL: That is the flash bang.

LAVANDERA: Oh, really? Someone's coming after you, you distract them.

REDEL: Exactly.

Really makes one want to go out shopping. :)

Regards

Mike

[carl]

The women at that outdoor range in Austin were using something that looked like a two handed version of an old police crouch and shoot from the hip technique. I never saw that before. Do you guys know anything about that.

VP Biden's advice it to go out of your fort, fire off all your ammunition into the air and hope. He's right though, aiming is easy if your mark is the sky.

What can you say about a guy who figures 2 rounds is enough for for dealing with the unknown coming after you?

[ganulv]

I saw this truck parked outside the library today. What I wouldn't give to meet the owner.


http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8247/8492868431_b26e1a66a6.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mtbradley/8492868431/)

[davidbfpo]

ganulv,

It is a "honey trap".:wry:

[slapout9]

move over dudes....

number of women buying guns surges (http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2013/02/20/erin-lavandera-women-and-guns.cnn?iref=videosearch)

flash bang holsters ?

yes!

[slapout9]

The women at that outdoor range in Austin were using something that looked like a two handed version of an old police crouch and shoot from the hip technique. I never saw that before. Do you guys know anything about that.



That is exactly what it is. Looks like there was a lot of Jim Cirillo influence in the techniques.

[jmm99]

Based on his book, Guns, Bullets, And Gunfights: Lessons And Tales From A Modern-Day Gunfighter (http://www.amazon.com/Guns-Bullets-Gunfights-Modern-Day-Gunfighter/dp/0873648773/ref=la_B001KIJQBU_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1361473290&sr=1-1#_) (1996):

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51yCOdWTmRL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg

and, less formally:

http://www.tactical-life.com/online/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/jim.jpg

Of course, Jim Cirillo used more than one stance, etc. - depending on context.

Never having been involved in any "Jim Cirillo context", I can only posit that I'd revert to my other experiences with the few pistols and revolvers I own. Each having been fired at least in the hundreds of times, but in different contexts for each handgun; my guestimate is that, in a "Jim Cirillo context", I'd revert to type (prior experience) for each handgun. Hope never to find out.

Finally, some decent comments on Cirillo and others here, Subject: Gun Fight Myths Dispelled (https://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/29-4690-page1.aspx) (2006)(from p.5: "This was a great thread for talking about what bullets do when they hit people or things. No more 5.56 mm v. 7.62 nonsense."), with this about going from reality to training for reality (the following snipped from p.1):


Jim Cirillo, perhaps America's most experienced living police gunfighter, reported that he saw the front sight of his pistol in such sharp focus during his first gunfight that he noticed the little striations on the front sight of his S&W Model 10 as he felt it recoilling in his hand. Cirillo, though, had just burst out of a mop closet in a convenience store as it was being robbed. He reported that his heart was pounding, his legs felt like jelly, and that he remembered thinking "Who's shooting my pistol?," when he felt the recoil. He still got three hits on three robbers. When Cirillo retired from the NYPD he had been in 17 gunfights that resulted in 11 fatalities as a member of the now defunct, famous, infamous, NYPD Stakeout Squad.
...
>>He still got three hits on three robbers.<< Correction, he actually did better than that. He got two hits each on three different robbers, two of which were partially hidden behind the clerk for the first two shots, and running for the door for the second two. The time was estimated to be three to four seconds total. One robber was DRT, the other two were picked up later seeking treatment at a hospital ER. The old round nose .38 slugs hadn't dropped them even though Cirillo had two good hits on each man. The incident inspired the "Cirillo Drill" at matches and academies. Ray Chapman is reportedly the only man who has duplcated it on paper successfully. Cirillo admits that he's never been able to duplicate the feat again during range drills. Anyway, bottom line is that Cirillo knew he was about to be in a gunfight before the shooting started. The NYPD Stakeout Squad had very good hit percentages compared to most cops, but few of their gunfights involved them being in startle recovery mode. Most of their gunfights resulted after they initiated an armed confrontation in businesses that were being robbed.

Regards

Mike

[Stan]

This from an Arizona biker :D

I was worried that some Mod would take this down, at least until I saw Mike's recent pics :eek:

[Firn]

;)

I wonder what the writer might say if the he reads a sign pointing in the other direction with the words:

Dear friends

My next door neighbour wants to have GUNS, GUNS and more GUNS.

Their home is full of GUNS.

Due to their guns I can not protect you and him from the strongly increased risk to get shot.

...

Sad but true. Extremists are rarely right and that cuts both ways as one should know after having looked at the facts presented in this thread.

[carl]

Firn:

Stan's sign says 'My neighbor is defenseless.' Your sign says 'My neighbor is a criminal.'

Neither is extremist. Both are pithy statements regarding some disagreements about fundamentals amongst the Americans. In my view the two fundamentals and they are these. First, do you have the right to defend yourself, yourself. Essentially one side says yes, you do. The other side says no, you don't. If you believe you do have the right to defend yourself, then you have to the right to bear arms, because if you don't have recourse to arms, you can't defend yourself, McGyver and Jean-Claude Van Damme excluded. If you don't have the right to defend yourself, weapons are not needed. Make not mistake about this issue, in the US the choice is that stark. One side is completely against citizens right to bear any, any arms; check out the gun laws in NYC and Chicago for an illustration of that.

The other fundamental is, do you trust your fellow citizens to act responsibly on their own? One side does, the other doesn't. If you do, the simple possession of weapons by your neighbor means nothing. If you don't, the simple possession of weapons by your neighbor means everything. This particular disagreement is a big one. Again look at NYC for an example of the one side getting the upper hand. The city will send men with guns after you if you sell cups of soda pop bigger than 16 oz. because the citizenry can be trusted to know how much pop they should drink.

What all this comes down to in my opinion is this, will the overarching philosophy directing our system of government be that the individual has primacy or will it be the individual does not and the state has primacy? There is really no compromise between the positions. People in this country realize this and that is why there is so much passion in the debate.

[Stan]

;)
Sad but true. Extremists are rarely right and that cuts both ways as one should know after having looked at the facts presented in this thread.

Firn,

You're dead on the money regarding the "opinions" (not facts herein) within this thread. While my picture is a tad extreme, it points out exactly what most of us herein continue to support and agree with.

Carl could not have put it better.

Sorry bro, but I thought it was both funny and sadly very true. But then, that's just me :D

[Stan]

The women at that outdoor range in Austin were using something that looked like a two handed version of an old police crouch and shoot from the hip technique. I never saw that before. Do you guys know anything about that.

Carl,
The isosceles shooting stance is still being taught to military at the anti-terrorism courses. It is widely believed that in a "situation" you are most likely to hit your target without actually aiming, tunnel vision, et al.

We also had to place a round at point blank into your assailant's left or right hip while holding him with your free hand. Grab some neck meat, pinch hard, remove weapon from holster and hold it next to your head to aim, and fire into the hip.

Needless to say, I could barely hear at the end of the day. But, it was a blast :D

[carl]

Grab some neck meat, pinch hard, remove weapon from holster and hold it next to your head to aim, and fire into the hip.

Did that work? i don't like the idea of moving the gun up near my head in what might quickly turn into a wrestling match.

[jmm99]

There is a very clear and sharp contrast between anti-firearms people (Mike Bloomberg) and pro-firearms people ("Mike JMM"). That being said, a substantial group of people (as shown by polling both recent and historical) lie in the middle; that is, e.g., they support some "gun controls", but reject "gun bans"; or may simply be undecided on the various firearms issues.

Thus, the person (whether anti-firearms or pro-firearms) who says: "You're either for us or against us."; thereby unnecessarily creates a lot of opponents. Politically, the best COA is to separate the issues as much as possible, and vote each one up or down.

The "warring neighborhood" signs reflect a total divided situation - for example, as between the constitutional views of this "Mike" and that "Other Mike - where the twain shall never meet.

As an aside, The "Other Mike" has and will have bodyguards (either public or private), who will assure his security and that of his family.

The real question is how does one treat one's actual real-life neighbor. "Do unto him as you would have him do unto you"; or, "do unto him as he does unto you." Actually both answers are correct - it depends on the context.

It also depends on who is a "Tommy Atkins" and who isn't. From Kipling's Tommy (http://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/kipling/tommy.html):


I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:


O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play....

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;


While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind",
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.


For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool -- you bet that Tommy sees!

Regards

Mike

Sidebar: Kipling wrote two straight up histories of the Irish Guards (his son, an 18-year old subaltern in the 2nd Bn, was killed at Loos in 1915):

The Irish Guards in the Great War: The First Battalion (http://www.amazon.com/The-Irish-Guards-Great-War/dp/1862274045)

The Irish Guards In The Great War: The Second Battalion (http://www.amazon.com/The-Irish-Guards-Great-War/dp/188511950X)

Both excellent battalion histories - written by an old pro in the writing game.

[slapout9]

I don't use signs.....I live in a very,very,very low crime neighborhood. This really is downtown Slapout and alot of the guys on the truck (thats what we call em down here) are friends of mine.:)

[Stan]

Did that work? i don't like the idea of moving the gun up near my head in what might quickly turn into a wrestling match.

Carl,
Once you got the routine down, it worked well. A bit hesitant at first with the slide literally against your face knowing as a southpaw, the spent cartridge was going to hit you right on the nose. The point was to keep your weapon as far out of reach and still be able to aim.

Never got to see what happens when a round goes through the hip. I'm told it should immediately make the assailant collapse.

[ganulv]

ganulv,

It is a "honey trap".:wry:

Here is the honey trap! :D

http://store.afa-online.org/images/P/stickr_17230.jpg

[Stan]

Hey Matt,
Everything was kind of cool until I scrolled down to a Blackwater logo (https://www.google.com/search?q=support+your+right+to+arm+bears+support+y our+right+to+arm+bears+support+your+right+to+arm+b ears&hl=en&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=MQktUe67OcbV4QTo-4CoDg&ved=0CC8QsAQ&biw=1920&bih=955) :eek:

Even we have a limit to our madness !

My 12 year old recommended this (http://the-tshirts.com/cute-designs/Hello-Kitty-Kalashnikov-AK-47-TShirts/) however :o

[ganulv]

My 12 year old recommended this (http://the-tshirts.com/cute-designs/Hello-Kitty-Kalashnikov-AK-47-TShirts/) however :o
Good one! It takes all kinds (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/the_queens_diamond_jubilee/9300854/The-Queens-Diamond-Jubilee-60-years-in-60-photographs.html?frame=2234371), I guess.

[Stan]

That's priceless and going to be hard to beat!

Now if the Queen was firing from her shoulder instead of clamped down, whoa nellie :eek:

[jmm99]

Not this:

http://store.afa-online.org/images/P/stickr_17230.jpg

This is Polarbear1605 in normal mode. :)

Her Majesty's benchrest device certainly looks stable, but would appear to be a bit heavy to lug about the range.

She appears more comfortable with the piece than Piers Morgan, but wasn't she something of a huntress in her youth ?

Regards

Mike

[Stan]

... but wasn't she something of a huntress in her youth ?

Regards

Mike

Hei Mike !

According to this (http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2010/06/23/indepth-queen-elizabeth-ii.html), she can handle her own just fine :cool:


She has also run afoul of animal rights activists. In November 2000, Elizabeth was photographed wringing the neck of a wounded pheasant that a hunting dog had dropped at her feet. The next day, she showed up at church wearing a red hat accented with pheasant feathers.

Regards, Stan

[Firn]

She certainly always adored wildlife (http://ia700809.us.archive.org/24/items/TreeTops1955/TreeTops1955.pdf) and grew up in family of hunters.