Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27
Rikkitic
Awrrr
12948 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1199006 17-Dec-2014 12:19
Send private message

I have tried to stay out of this thread as much as possible because I don’t think it can go anywhere but I do want to make this comment: A definition of insanity (or maybe it is just stupidity), is doing the same thing over and over when it has been shown not to work. This is what the American experience demonstrates. Giving everyone easy access to guns does not solve the problem of violence; it just escalates the scale. People get frustrated when they see bad guys ignoring the rules that they feel bound by. They feel unsafe when they have to wait for help instead of defending themselves. The desire to go around armed is an emotional response to feeling vulnerable, especially when those authorised to use force on our behalf are under-resourced. But it is not the answer. Probably there isn’t an answer, though better policing would certainly improve things. By better I don’t mean more, but better quality – higher admission standards with better pay, better training, cops back on street beats, zero tolerance but without the macho attitude. The issue is mutual respect, not more guns.

 

 





I don't think there is ever a bad time to talk about how absurd war is, how old men make decisions and young people die. - George Clooney
 


Geektastic
14835 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1199008 17-Dec-2014 12:20
Send private message

heylinb4nz:
Geektastic:
roobarb:
Geektastic: However, you cannot have it both ways. If I am to take responsibility for my own safety,  I want Castle Doctrine in NZ and the right to concealed carry. You cannot deny me the right to defend myself if necessary on the one hand, and then say that the government should not do it instead on the other.


Despite the colours on both the ISIS flag and the All Blacks kit, the world is not black and white.

You can deny concealed carry and not be able to stop all terrorist attacks. That's the situation now.



I don't think you can ever stop all terrorist attacks short of 100% genocide of the races that carry them out.

However, neither do I think that anyone has suggested that being able to defend yourself would stop all terrorist attacks.

Imagine if a couple of the Sydney hostages had had Glocks and training. The outcome may have been a different one.


I think alot of people are scared at the very notion of non government people (ie joe public) having firearms in the course of their everyday lives, many people have been "conditioned" to think that this privileged falls on those in power, forgetting that they are just regular people like you and me and their rights are no greater than your rights under common law.

I see someone commented before on how great police are and all the training they do (conflict resolution pffft). Or how soldiers are so crash hot because they have been in war zones. 

Well fact is any half switched on person can be trained to use a firearm very proficiently, safely and specifically for the purpose of conceal carry and self defence...none of this playing solider \ police conflict resolution BS...simply ending an obvious threat when \ if your life is threatened....plain and simple. 

Those that would have you believe any different are just buying into the conditioning and making excuses. Denying your rights based on their own fears and insecurities.


The hilarious thing is that 'the police' are Joe Public with training, not bionic supermen. Ergo, any reasonably sane, non-criminal Joe Public person can undertake the same firearms training - and commonly do in the USA.





 
 
 
 


heylinb4nz
659 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user


  #1199012 17-Dec-2014 12:26
Send private message

roobarb:
heylinb4nz: vs the stick your head in the sand approach ?


Let's add in all the classroom massacres, the stand-your-grounds, the "but I was only cleaning it", and the "but I thought he had a gun", the every dairy owners that now has to be armed because every villain has to now be armed.



More standard anti-gun rhetoric, I don't know where to start. What has ANY of this got to do with TRAINED, LICENSED concealed carry permit holders who are NOT the problem ?.

You're also chucking accidents and negligent storage in there as well to further confuse things, and please the old crims arming themselves argument seriously not understanding how a criminal mind functions...they are already armed.

Shooting someone for "thinking" they have a gun ?? cops do it all the time yet you have no issue with them carrying. 

Key point for civilians vs cops is cops respond to crime, civilians are almost always the victims so are in a way better position to judge when their life is in danger.



ajobbins
Awesome
4891 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  #1199013 17-Dec-2014 12:26
Send private message

Conceal Carry/gun laws have little/nothing to do with mass surveillance laws. Any discussion of them here in this thread should be limited to how they directly relate to surveillance laws. All this talk of merits of training etc is well off topic.




Twitter: ajobbins


Rikkitic
Awrrr
12948 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1199019 17-Dec-2014 12:32
Send private message

heylinb4nz: Spoken by someone who has most likely never fired a handgun in his life or had any training. 

 

 

 

 

Actually I have had weapons training, though it was a very long time ago. I just don't care much for guns, or those who see them as a solution to anything. I don't have a problem with people who enjoy them for sport.

 





I don't think there is ever a bad time to talk about how absurd war is, how old men make decisions and young people die. - George Clooney
 


heylinb4nz
659 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user


  #1199030 17-Dec-2014 12:40
Send private message

Rikkitic: I have tried to stay out of this thread as much as possible because I don’t think it can go anywhere but I do want to make this comment: A definition of insanity (or maybe it is just stupidity), is doing the same thing over and over when it has been shown not to work. This is what the American experience demonstrates. Giving everyone easy access to guns does not solve the problem of violence; it just escalates the scale. People get frustrated when they see bad guys ignoring the rules that they feel bound by. They feel unsafe when they have to wait for help instead of defending themselves. The desire to go around armed is an emotional response to feeling vulnerable, especially when those authorised to use force on our behalf are under-resourced. But it is not the answer. Probably there isn’t an answer, though better policing would certainly improve things. By better I don’t mean more, but better quality – higher admission standards with better pay, better training, cops back on street beats, zero tolerance but without the macho attitude. The issue is mutual respect, not more guns.


The problem is we keep using the USA as an example and cherry picking anti gun propaganda rather than focusing on the bits that do work and have been shown to be effective. Than applying that to our own country which is already well ahead of USA.

a) good registration and licencing system

b) safe storage standards

c) ingrained safety awareness

d) different culture

 


Completely missing the point again (cops vs joe public) cops respond to crime, joe public are victims of crime....when its just you and the crim who is in the best position to respond. The key is


- regular training & competency asessments
- clear laws that define appropriate use of force
- justice system that is not geared up to the defender not the offender


As for carrying being an emotional reponse to feeling vulnerable, what about the the emotional response of the control freak antis who want everything banned or controlled to create their false sense of safety.

 

Criminals are real, people get raped, assualted, murdered, daily, they don't give a crap about laws, or quality of policing, they are animals, we could pussy foot around with more policing and disempowering victims further, or we can simply put some common sense controls in place to allow victims to not be victims....perhaps eliminating some criminal scum along the way.

Geektastic
14835 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1199042 17-Dec-2014 12:47
Send private message

Rikkitic: I have tried to stay out of this thread as much as possible because I don’t think it can go anywhere but I do want to make this comment: A definition of insanity (or maybe it is just stupidity), is doing the same thing over and over when it has been shown not to work. This is what the American experience demonstrates. Giving everyone easy access to guns does not solve the problem of violence; it just escalates the scale. People get frustrated when they see bad guys ignoring the rules that they feel bound by. They feel unsafe when they have to wait for help instead of defending themselves. The desire to go around armed is an emotional response to feeling vulnerable, especially when those authorised to use force on our behalf are under-resourced. But it is not the answer. Probably there isn’t an answer, though better policing would certainly improve things. By better I don’t mean more, but better quality – higher admission standards with better pay, better training, cops back on street beats, zero tolerance but without the macho attitude. The issue is mutual respect, not more guns.


As the late Col Jeff Cooper memorably remarked:

"One bleeding-heart type asked me in a recent interview if I did not agree that 'violence begets violence.' I told him that it is my earnest endeavor to see that it does. I would like very much to ensure — and in some cases I have — that any man who offers violence to his fellow citizen begets a whole lot more in return than he can enjoy."





 
 
 
 


dickytim
2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user


  #1199056 17-Dec-2014 12:56
Send private message

heylinb4nz:
roobarb:
heylinb4nz: vs the stick your head in the sand approach ?


Let's add in all the classroom massacres, the stand-your-grounds, the "but I was only cleaning it", and the "but I thought he had a gun", the every dairy owners that now has to be armed because every villain has to now be armed.



More standard anti-gun rhetoric, I don't know where to start. What has ANY of this got to do with TRAINED, LICENSED concealed carry permit holders who are NOT the problem ?.

You're also chucking accidents and negligent storage in there as well to further confuse things, and please the old crims arming themselves argument seriously not understanding how a criminal mind functions...they are already armed.

Shooting someone for "thinking" they have a gun ?? cops do it all the time yet you have no issue with them carrying. 

Key point for civilians vs cops is cops respond to crime, civilians are almost always the victims so are in a way better position to judge when their life is in danger.





FYI we live in New Zealand, just saying.

Mark
1551 posts

Uber Geek


  #1199063 17-Dec-2014 12:59
Send private message

heylinb4nz:
roobarb:
heylinb4nz: vs the stick your head in the sand approach ?


Let's add in all the classroom massacres, the stand-your-grounds, the "but I was only cleaning it", and the "but I thought he had a gun", the every dairy owners that now has to be armed because every villain has to now be armed.



More standard anti-gun rhetoric, I don't know where to start. What has ANY of this got to do with TRAINED, LICENSED concealed carry permit holders who are NOT the problem ?.

You're also chucking accidents and negligent storage in there as well to further confuse things, and please the old crims arming themselves argument seriously not understanding how a criminal mind functions...they are already armed.

Shooting someone for "thinking" they have a gun ?? cops do it all the time yet you have no issue with them carrying. 

Key point for civilians vs cops is cops respond to crime, civilians are almost always the victims so are in a way better position to judge when their life is in danger.




Gosh you do spout some cr@p don't you!

The reason most of the public trust the police to have a gun is that we are paying them to do it!  
We pay for their training, we pay for their certifications, we pay for the reviews of their skills .. all so that we can then pay them some more to shoot bad/out of control people .. and then we pay even more for the review board to go over the shooting to check its legality, and yet more money again to review that the police office is still mentally balanced enough to carry on with his job.

If we did not pay a subset of the police to do this job what would we do when Mr Nutjob decides that primary school kids are the spawn of Satan and must be killed ?  Maybe we write Mr  Nutjob a strongly worded letter asking him to sit down and have a cup of tea and talk about his issues ?  Or call you ?  Cause you are so highly trained and qualified from shooting some paper targets ? 

And while we are on the topic .. where the hell does this "TRAINED, LICENSED concealed carry permit holders" thing come from ?

 


Rikkitic
Awrrr
12948 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1199079 17-Dec-2014 13:17
Send private message

ajobbins: Conceal Carry/gun laws have little/nothing to do with mass surveillance laws. Any discussion of them here in this thread should be limited to how they directly relate to surveillance laws. All this talk of merits of training etc is well off topic.

 

 



 

 

I agree and actually I find the original issue of mass surveillance and government abuse of it much more important. Also, one of the things I value about Geekzone is the civility of discourse here. On some things people will never agree. We have all made our feelings known and I think we should move on. I promise to make my heart stop bleeding all over everything.

 

 





I don't think there is ever a bad time to talk about how absurd war is, how old men make decisions and young people die. - George Clooney
 


Geektastic
14835 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1199086 17-Dec-2014 13:22
Send private message

ajobbins: Conceal Carry/gun laws have little/nothing to do with mass surveillance laws. Any discussion of them here in this thread should be limited to how they directly relate to surveillance laws. All this talk of merits of training etc is well off topic.


It's an off topic forum. You don't have people constraining your conversations in the pub - why should this be different?





heylinb4nz
659 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user


  #1199088 17-Dec-2014 13:24
Send private message

Mark:
heylinb4nz:
roobarb:
heylinb4nz: vs the stick your head in the sand approach ?


Let's add in all the classroom massacres, the stand-your-grounds, the "but I was only cleaning it", and the "but I thought he had a gun", the every dairy owners that now has to be armed because every villain has to now be armed.



More standard anti-gun rhetoric, I don't know where to start. What has ANY of this got to do with TRAINED, LICENSED concealed carry permit holders who are NOT the problem ?.

You're also chucking accidents and negligent storage in there as well to further confuse things, and please the old crims arming themselves argument seriously not understanding how a criminal mind functions...they are already armed.

Shooting someone for "thinking" they have a gun ?? cops do it all the time yet you have no issue with them carrying. 

Key point for civilians vs cops is cops respond to crime, civilians are almost always the victims so are in a way better position to judge when their life is in danger.




Gosh you do spout some cr@p don't you!

The reason most of the public trust the police to have a gun is that we are paying them to do it!  
We pay for their training, we pay for their certifications, we pay for the reviews of their skills .. all so that we can then pay them some more to shoot bad/out of control people .. and then we pay even more for the review board to go over the shooting to check its legality, and yet more money again to review that the police office is still mentally balanced enough to carry on with his job.

If we did not pay a subset of the police to do this job what would we do when Mr Nutjob decides that primary school kids are the spawn of Satan and must be killed ?  Maybe we write Mr  Nutjob a strongly worded letter asking him to sit down and have a cup of tea and talk about his issues ?  Or call you ?  Cause you are so highly trained and qualified from shooting some paper targets ? 

And while we are on the topic .. where the hell does this "TRAINED, LICENSED concealed carry permit holders" thing come from ?



FYI NZ police train on paper targets too, and if you believe they shoot thousands of rounds and train monthly you are deluded. Ive seen qualifying first hand as well as AOS training and you would be very surprised at how limited it is.

Im not saying joe public should do AOS duties either, im saying that under CCW permit arrangement with good training joe public should be able to defend themselves and where appropriate respond to help someone else.

 

Other than uniform and government mandate a police officer is no different or special, and in many cases some civilians are way more proficient in use of firearms.

 




 

 

Geektastic
14835 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #1199090 17-Dec-2014 13:25
Send private message

heylinb4nz:
Mark:
heylinb4nz:
roobarb:
heylinb4nz: vs the stick your head in the sand approach ?


Let's add in all the classroom massacres, the stand-your-grounds, the "but I was only cleaning it", and the "but I thought he had a gun", the every dairy owners that now has to be armed because every villain has to now be armed.



More standard anti-gun rhetoric, I don't know where to start. What has ANY of this got to do with TRAINED, LICENSED concealed carry permit holders who are NOT the problem ?.

You're also chucking accidents and negligent storage in there as well to further confuse things, and please the old crims arming themselves argument seriously not understanding how a criminal mind functions...they are already armed.

Shooting someone for "thinking" they have a gun ?? cops do it all the time yet you have no issue with them carrying. 

Key point for civilians vs cops is cops respond to crime, civilians are almost always the victims so are in a way better position to judge when their life is in danger.




Gosh you do spout some cr@p don't you!

The reason most of the public trust the police to have a gun is that we are paying them to do it!  
We pay for their training, we pay for their certifications, we pay for the reviews of their skills .. all so that we can then pay them some more to shoot bad/out of control people .. and then we pay even more for the review board to go over the shooting to check its legality, and yet more money again to review that the police office is still mentally balanced enough to carry on with his job.

If we did not pay a subset of the police to do this job what would we do when Mr Nutjob decides that primary school kids are the spawn of Satan and must be killed ?  Maybe we write Mr  Nutjob a strongly worded letter asking him to sit down and have a cup of tea and talk about his issues ?  Or call you ?  Cause you are so highly trained and qualified from shooting some paper targets ? 

And while we are on the topic .. where the hell does this "TRAINED, LICENSED concealed carry permit holders" thing come from ?



FYI NZ police train on paper targets too, and if you believe they shoot thousands of rounds and train monthly you are deluded. Ive seen qualifying first hand as well as AOS training and you would be very surprised at how limited it is.

Im not saying joe public should do AOS duties either, im saying that under CCW permit arrangement with good training joe public should be able to defend themselves and where appropriate respond to help someone else. Other than uniform and government mandate a police officer is no different or special, and in many cases some civilians are way more proficient in use of firearms.


 


They even train on exactly the same range I do - we hire it to them...!





heylinb4nz
659 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user


  #1199093 17-Dec-2014 13:27
Send private message

Rikkitic:
ajobbins: Conceal Carry/gun laws have little/nothing to do with mass surveillance laws. Any discussion of them here in this thread should be limited to how they directly relate to surveillance laws. All this talk of merits of training etc is well off topic.


I agree and actually I find the original issue of mass surveillance and government abuse of it much more important. Also, one of the things I value about Geekzone is the civility of discourse here. On some things people will never agree. We have all made our feelings known and I think we should move on. I promise to make my heart stop bleeding all over everything.


We should have a wider topic thread for the greater abuse of government power not limited to just mass surveillance laws which can be summerised as


a) lots of laws because I want to feel safe and the government need to protect me

b) limited laws because I value my freedom and governments abuse power

Rikkitic
Awrrr
12948 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #1199101 17-Dec-2014 13:35
Send private message

heylinb4nz:

We should have a wider topic thread for the greater abuse of government power not limited to just mass surveillance laws which can be summerised as


a) lots of laws because I want to feel safe and the government need to protect me

b) limited laws because I value my freedom and governments abuse power


 

 

I agree. If you want to start one I will be happy to contribute.

 





I don't think there is ever a bad time to talk about how absurd war is, how old men make decisions and young people die. - George Clooney
 


1 | ... | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic





News »

Vodafone enables 5G roaming - for when international travel comes
Posted 30-Oct-2020 15:03


Spark awards funding to Kiwi businesses in 5G funding initiative
Posted 30-Oct-2020 14:58


Huawei launches IdeaHub Pro in New Zealand
Posted 27-Oct-2020 16:41


Southland-based IT specialist providing virtual services worldwide
Posted 27-Oct-2020 15:55


NASA discovers water on sunlit surface of Moon
Posted 27-Oct-2020 08:30


Huawei introduces new features to Petal Search, Maps and Docs
Posted 26-Oct-2020 18:05


Nokia selected by NASA to build first ever cellular network on the Moon
Posted 21-Oct-2020 08:34


Nanoleaf enhances lighting line with launch of Triangles and Mini Triangles
Posted 17-Oct-2020 20:18


Synology unveils DS16211+
Posted 17-Oct-2020 20:12


Ingram Micro introduces FootfallCam to New Zealand channel
Posted 17-Oct-2020 20:06


Dropbox adopts Virtual First working policy
Posted 17-Oct-2020 19:47


OPPO announces Reno4 Series 5G line-up in NZ
Posted 16-Oct-2020 08:52


Microsoft Highway to a Hundred expands to Asia Pacific
Posted 14-Oct-2020 09:34


Spark turns on 5G in Auckland
Posted 14-Oct-2020 09:29


AMD Launches AMD Ryzen 5000 Series Desktop Processors
Posted 9-Oct-2020 10:13









Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.