1 - 10 Next
In response to:

The Future of the Gun

Schism Wrote: Sep 14, 2014 8:18 PM
It's called, "evolution in action"...
"This Week's Economic Data Should Be Taken With a Large Grain of Salt!" You mean there's so much "meat" there that it will take a large dose of salt to properly season it? Or maybe not...
In response to:

Ferguson and the Militarization Myth

Schism Wrote: Aug 23, 2014 4:27 PM
In all honesty, I'm not sure exactly where to start. You've go so many jingoistic, pro-force, pro-cop myths going here as to be completely opaque. "However, most SWAT elements do employ the use of fully automatic weapons, enhanced body armor, and equipment to address special threats and circumstances. But, far from "military" these teams are subject to the same rules of deadly force and civil liability as any other law enforcement officer. SWAT doesn't employ the use of hand grenades or bayonets, nor can they call in an air strike from a loitering drone. The bad guys have automatic weapons and so does SWAT, end of story." Point one, SWAT is was indeed developed to address "special threats and circumstances." So why is SWAT being deployed over 70,000 times a year across the country, with a significantly low fraction of these events resulting in any serious arrest or finding of meaningful evidence. And, for "elite troops", how is it possible for them to wind up at so many wrong addresses and shooting so many people who aren't even suspects? Hand grenades? Do you really want to go there in the light of the 9 month old baby who had one go off in his face, in his crib? Permanent injuries from a "distraction device", anyone? And please don't even start on the "same laws as everyone else" routine. If I ran around shooting family pets like SWAT does, I'd be spending a lot of time in jail. If I shot unarmed people on my property because "I felt in fear of my life", I'd be in jail. Even with a Castle Law and a Stand Your Ground Law, I'd be in jail. If I left homes splintered and partially disassembled behind me, I'd be paying for repair of damages for the rest of my life. "Qualified Immunity" is not invoked for the benefit of those hosting SWAT teams. It's not the equipment, John. It's the attitudes behind that equipment. The feeling on the part of so many LEO's, and "civilians" in reverse, that the cops are really all that's holding society together in the face of medieval hordes, and that most of those who give LEO's any static whatsoever prove, by their very resistance, that they are part of those hordes and therefore deserving of whatever measures any LEO wishes to dish out to them that get the rest of us resisting in fact.
So. Explain how Tomahawk missiles, using GPS, can hit within 10 meters of their target spot...every time.
I note that the article complains about a specific problem, notes is seriousness...and completely fails to say WHY this inaccuracy exists. Are there technical problems that prevent accurate locating? What are they? (Oh, you're calling from INSIDE a building! That doesn't define a technical problem, it merely implies one.) Is there some impact on the cell phone company's bottom line that contributes to this? Not discussed. This is not an article of analysis, it's just rabble rousing.
In response to:

Ebola Scare Hits NYC

Schism Wrote: Aug 05, 2014 1:02 AM
IIRC 3 days before you show any symptoms. Dead before you can spread it? Maybe out in the bush in Africa, but not in the common US environment.
Okay, I need to ask a dumb question here. Why does Congress need to do ANYTHING about the "border crisis"? Don't we already have several hundred laws on the books that tell us, in some detail and with agonizing precision, exactly who must do what in this particular situation? What (or who) is stopping up the works, and what's it going to take to break loose this particular plug in the pipe?
Learn theory and use of VPN's (Virtual Private Network), use them religiously, and use Opera for most of your browsing.
Aren't they doing something like that already in China at the behest of the Chinese government? That's probably why they think it's ok to do it here.
The greatest threat of the autonomous vehicle is that it is determinedly anti-liberty. When I'm behind the wheel of my car, I go where I want to. In an autonomous vehicle, I go only where it will let me. Even then, if mis-identified by the system or a human supervisor as some sort of threat, the vehicle would easily be re-tasked to deliver me to a (to me) completely unknown destination, a situation that may remain unknown to me until the final seconds before the vehicle stops, shuts down and keeps all doors and windows shut and locked to avoid having me escape. Imagine the smug joy of a policeman who doesn't even have to go and arrest me, but merely enter a code into the transportation computer and then wait for me to be delivered to his jail. Arrest warrant? Oops! We forgot about that. Best talk to the judge in the morning. Kids in the car with you? That's ok, we have a DCS office here in the building. I'm sure your kids will enjoy talking to our agents there. The possibilities for abuse are almost too numerous to note, and almost impossible to defend against. How long until anything other than instant, abject obedience to any cops least whim winds up with your car carrying you to the worst part of town, dumping it's remaining fuel on the road under it and popping all the locks to leave to completely vulnerable to the local gangs...all without any "evidence" being left in the computer to show what happened.
1 - 10 Next