Side story on the recent gun spree

[Fuchs]

Oh you're wrong. If you get a good gun it can be trusted. If you get a Glock it will go bang when you pull the trigger and it won't go bang if you don't.

There's no reason to trust that a gun is a reliable defence or even protection. Many times, having a gun will not protect you at all.

May I remind you at a certain man who possessed firearms, knew how to handle them, had them with him and still got shot dead recently?


A call for the police is no guarantee, pepper spray is none, a noise tool is none, a central lights switch for the entire house is none ... and guns are none.
________________

I totally skipped this so far:

Again, given that you grew up in the DDR it's understandable you'd be confused about this.

Ridiculous.
For starters, you don't know where I grew up and second, I didn't grow up in the DDR.

It shows how little you care about the difference between knowledge and fantasy, or about reality in general, though. You just didn't care that you were ignorant about my birthplace and simply moved on assuming your fantasy was real.

Now about who's the confused one here...

[J Wolfsberger]

For starters, you don't know where I grew up and second, I didn't grow up in the DDR.

I thought you used to reference a web site where you posted long form essays. I recalled comments about growing up in East Germany, and a few comments on the fall of the Berlin Wall. I tried to check, but couldn't find the link anymore, so went with my recollection. Maybe I had you confused with some other poster from Germany.

It was bad memory, not your accusations.

[Fuchs]

OK, fine. Everybody errs sometimes.
I can indeed figure out how this happened; prejudices.
__________________

regarding warning shots

According to Germany's Der Spiegel, German police shot only 85 bullets in all of 2011, a stark reminder that not every country is as gun-crazy as the U.S. of A. As Boing Boing translates, most of those shots weren't even aimed anyone: "49 warning shots, 36 shots on suspects. 15 persons were injured, 6 were killed."
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/globa...le-2011/52162/

That's competence, not an "invitation to criminally negligent homocide".
Supposing people should go for the kill with the first shot (or salvo) is such a thing instead.

[Stan]

regarding warning shots

According to Germany's Der Spiegel, German police shot only 85 bullets in all of 2011, a stark reminder that not every country is as gun-crazy as the U.S. of A. As Boing Boing translates, most of those shots weren't even aimed anyone: "49 warning shots, 36 shots on suspects. 15 persons were injured, 6 were killed."
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/globa...le-2011/52162/

That's competence, not an "invitation to criminally negligent homocide".
Supposing people should go for the kill with the first shot (or salvo) is such a thing instead.

Just my pesky self from this little corner of the earth

Did you read that link at Boing Boing ? Strange place for supporting information, but then, I have a few too

The only thing I really worry about when it comes to warning shots, is, they generally return to earth nearly as fast as they left. Serving in Africa where everything was a warning shot on full auto, I fear a lot more innocent people were shot than that of those actually being aimed at.

In defense of this post, I will only say that the BPOL as well as the German Border Guard (we work and train with both) are a tough crowd and have never appeared friendly. They mean business and using a firearm is the least of your worries. They do have some sweet looking H&Ks

[jmm99]

Good to see you're reading this thread - buttering you up like brioche.

In this post, Some Chasms are Too Wide to Bridge - pt 2, I linked to two monographs: Dave Kopel and Barbara Frey, to illustrate the gulf between the positions of Kopel and Frey (UN S.R., etc.). I did not discuss them substantively as they bear on genocide issues in Central Africa.

Discussing "gun control" and "gun possession" in Central Africa in this thread would take it far beyond its reasonable limits (HT to Steve Blair). However, your expertise in this area would be appreciated because both Kopel's and Frey's arguments are of interest to me.

So, if you want to, please take a look at the monographs and get back to me in a PM.

My personal view on the UN position (as applied to the US) is obviously negative. I think Dave (despite all his mastery of 2nd Amendment history here; and his being a Michigan Law grad and a Law Review editor ) is playing Pollyanna with respect to genocide (but, perhaps not).

Thanks in advance.

Regards

Mike

[Stan]

Discussing "gun control" and "gun possession" in Central Africa in this thread would take it far beyond its reasonable limits

Moi Mikka,

Mitä kuuluu ?

I would add (albeit dated info from the 90s) that genocide in Africa has very little to do with firearms. Of the estimated 800,000 in Rwanda and Zaire, most suffered far worse fate at the blade of a machete than that of any firearm.

There are barely any gun controls and firearms possession outside of the military and even then, are limited to the very elite, and they have no clue how to operate said.

Kopel argues that the UN tools in place are ineffective. Couldn't agree more. But he also likes to inject that "human rights" thing as if the players even cared. No good reasons to preach international law to people that never made it past 6th grade, dictator or otherwise.

We then wander off into what a State's obligation is regarding human rights.

They contend it seems that, civilians under no controls, possess firearms. Anyone that has been in Sub-Sahara can tell you that civilians do not possess anything and the military arm of the regime possesses and controls everything.

Regards, Stan

[Fuchs]

Stan, the GSG9 guys are only a tiny part of the German police special team s realm.

The police in German cities has what's known as MEK and SEK, with SEK being remotely similar to GSG9 (though not tasked to care about cases like kidnapped airliners, for example) while MEKs are a kind of reinforcement for arrests and also mobile observation units (for lengthy observations).
MEKs do their arrests when the suspect is moving in the public, while the SEK does so if much resistance is expected and in static (barricade, hostage) situations.

Again, the very existence of the MEK shows that German police work isn't much about guns. A MEK policeman can spend years in such a unit without ever needing to draw his weapon and aim at somebody.
Their surprise arrests are more about Ju Jutsu (a German-collected, Japanese-named collection of unarmed close combat techniques including plenty submission techniques; official German police sport) than about pointing guns.

The American approach is much more loose in regard to pointing guns at people (and more), and it shows in the quantity of shots fired at people.
This is mirroring the civilian approach, and I consider this reliance on guns very unsatisfactory, to say the least.

[Fuchs]

Just my pesky self from this little corner of the earth

Did you read that link at Boing Boing ? Strange place for supporting information,

I actually read the Spiegel article when it was published. It's citing a official report. The numbers have been similar in earlier years.
We're a nation of 80+ million people for whom needing guns to solve anything is such an exception that it's almost a rounding error. We've found better ways even for dealing with violent criminals.
I consider this a success.

I will only say that the BPOL as well as the German Border Guard (we work and train with both)

Strange. Bundespolizei and Bundesgrenzschutz are the same, for the latter was renamed into the former several years ago. I assume you thought of some state police.

[Stan]

I actually read the Spiegel article when it was published. It's citing a official report. The numbers have been similar in earlier years.
We're a nation of 80+ million people for whom needing guns to solve anything is such an exception that it's almost a rounding error. We've found better ways even for dealing with violent criminals.
I consider this a success.

Fuchs, indeed success... I agree. My point was also just how the BPOL and BGS perform their jobs and the way they intimidate (look) with an H&K dangling from their necks with hand on weapon and index finger at the ready. Only an idiot would beg for trouble. Behind the scenes is yet another matter.

Strange. Bundespolizei and Bundesgrenzschutz are the same, for the latter was renamed into the former several years ago. I assume you thought of some state police.

Back when I first went to school with the Germans, the Border Guard was a separate entity. When we restructured in 2005 so did the BPOL and BGS. At my age we tend to remember how things were before some politician decided on restructuring what already worked. As my BGS instructor told me, "we simply have more responsibilities and the same pay".

[Dayuhan]

The only thing I really worry about when it comes to warning shots, is, they generally return to earth nearly as fast as they left. Serving in Africa where everything was a warning shot on full auto, I fear a lot more innocent people were shot than that of those actually being aimed at.

The standard script for a Manila coup d'etat used to be that the rebellious soldiers would occupy a piece of urban real estate, the loyal soldiers would surround them, and at some point they would conduct what was called "acoustic warfare", which meant firing vigorously over the heads of the nominal antagonists. The law of gravity being what it is, this was not always a healthy thing for the surrounding neighborhoods.

[motorfirebox]

Bleh. I'd have hoped that this board, at least, could avoid the usual ideological traps that this debate inevitably slides into.

The issue most immediately facing the US, with regards to firearms, is criminal gun violence. That includes outliers like the recent spate of spree killings, but it mostly consists of criminals shooting each othe and, to a somewhat lesser degree, criminals shooting non-criminals.

Guns as a means of revolution isn't a real concern at this point. For those who want them, guns of the desired type are still readily available, limited only by manufacturing capacity; that is unlikely to change in the near future, and even if it does, the guns we already have will still be legal even in a worst-case scenario.

The guns most frequently used in crime (and even non-crime gun violence) are overwhelmingly cheap semi-automatic pistols. "Assault weapons" make up anywhere from 1-2%. There is absolutely no good reason to go after "assault weapons". It makes zero sense, from the perspective of attempting to solve the US's most pressing gun-related problem, to try to ban "assault weapons". I'm putting that phrase in quotes because it's a truly ridiculous phrase.

Again, what we need to focus on is keeping guns from getting into the hands of people who should not have them. That means un-castrating the ATF, it means monetizing gun busts for local law enforcement the way drug busts are handled now, it means enacting stronger penalties for straw buyers (here's a thought: jail time! We put guys in jail for years for ounces of weed, but we hand out light fines for pounds and pounds and pounds of guns?), it means lowering the evidence threshold to prosecute (again, currently you must show separate, concrete criminal intent for each and every gun in an alleged straw buy--it's ridiculous).

[carl]

The guns most frequently used in crime (and even non-crime gun violence) are overwhelmingly cheap semi-automatic pistols.

I am not so sure about the "cheap" part. Most of the guns hoods had that I saw were stolen and thieves stole what people had, and a lot of what they had was good. Slap would know much more about this.

Again, what we need to focus on is keeping guns from getting into the hands of people who should not have them. That means un-castrating the ATF, it means monetizing gun busts for local law enforcement the way drug busts are handled now, it means enacting stronger penalties for straw buyers (here's a thought: jail time! We put guys in jail for years for ounces of weed, but we hand out light fines for pounds and pounds and pounds of guns?), it means lowering the evidence threshold to prosecute (again, currently you must show separate, concrete criminal intent for each and every gun in an alleged straw buy--it's ridiculous).

Sounds sensible to me. I don't know how castrated the ATF actually is but the idea of adding crook guns to the preferred list (what I saw) of drunks and drugs is great. I think that many if not most of those guns are stolen. A program to help owners record and remember the serial numbers of their weapons would be of immense help. Perhaps a voluntary program whereby the owner is given a stiff laminated document with the serial number of the gun and a photo of it upon purchase would help, anything that will enable them to report a serial number if the thing is stolen.

[Stan]

The standard script for a Manila coup d'etat used to be that the rebellious soldiers would occupy a piece of urban real estate, the loyal soldiers would surround them, and at some point they would conduct what was called "acoustic warfare", which meant firing vigorously over the heads of the nominal antagonists. The law of gravity being what it is, this was not always a healthy thing for the surrounding neighborhoods.

Talk about a walk down memory lane circa 1985 in then Zaire. The louder, the better. Fierce looking Presidential Division soldiers (DSP) would down load hundreds of rounds with nearly every round a tracer... Independence day Zairian style

My garage had a cement roof and even our dog knew that was a safe bet with armageddon on the way.

Deep Sigh !