LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Kismet wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:44 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:41 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 1:15 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:31 amThe US military attacking American citizens will never happen. When I was in the army I would have steadfastly refused ANY order to engage American citizens. We all pledged to defend the country against all enemies foreign and domestic. Our fellow Americans are not and never will be the enemy. Law enforcement needs to take care of that problem, if it ever becomes one.

I really 100% hope you're right, but right there in the oath is "defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic"

Who decides who is a domestic enemy? If the ruling class and higher ups in the ranks beat the drums for years and say ______ is an enemy of the people / US / Constitution, they can slowly make people believe it is true. It's happened for centuries in a wide variety of countries and governments. You even see it at Trump rallies with the hate and vitriol from his supporters directed at the media covering those events.

I hope we as Americans are strong enough to do the right thing against these demagogues.

Any order to ever draw down on any American citizen is IMO an unlawful order. Way back when I was a young GI that was a big thing. The genesis was Lt William Calleys actions at Mai Lai. Any GI has the right and obligation to disobey any unlawful order. Any officer issuing an order to engage an American citizen would have to explain to the soldier that his or her order was lawful. That soldier has the right and obligation to contest such an order up the chain of command. Any one paying attention understands that is exactly why the US military brass gave Trump such huge static about engaging US forces in the recent riots. That us not their job. That us not what they are trained to do. Leave our active duty forces the gell out of it. Thanks for clarifying the military oath for me. I took liberties with it I should not have.

Good for you, Cradle. Thx for your service.
BTW its My Lai for the record.

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:27 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:18 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 1:52 pm An interesting twist.

I learned something new today. Thanks.

https://www.brown.edu/Facilities/John_C ... avery.html

They'll soon be after Hopkins for all the testing they did on blacks.

Then #CancelYale, for the founder being a slave owner.

Dartmouth Founder owned at least 19 slaves...Peter Carini has discovered that Wheelock owned at least nineteen enslaved persons during his lifetime. Their labors supported the well-being of President Wheelock’s family and his students and contributed to the maintenance of his home and the school’s buildings.

Can't leave out Princeton...That a slave sale took place on campus and that the first nine Princeton presidents were slaveholders at some point in their lives are two of the major findings from a sweeping new endeavor by Princeton scholars and students to explore the ties of early University trustees, presidents, faculty and students to the institution of slavery.

You guys should be ashamed of yourselves.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:52 pm Hopkins is not immune.

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:59 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:52 pm Hopkins is not immune.

No one is immune that was in operation back then. Did Southern colonies trade with the North? Yes. So they took financial advantage of slavery, too.

And obviously, Europe and the UK are on the hook for trading with the South.

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:46 pm

foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:36 pm

6ftstick wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:20 pmWell that's a convenient interpretation.

My intention was the exact opposite. If you're going to put thousands of people in the streets for weeks over the death of one black man,You should be able to generate some interest in the violence and slaughter of 100 blacks in Chicago over the weekend.

Instead nothing

What you clearly continue to miss, the one black man, this time, was just enough to make it boil over.

Get used to it...nothing changes until all of us are dead, maybe our grandchildren will get it done.

and the cynic in me whispers.....

"a white cop killing a black man inflames racial tension and distracts from the class disparity that exists, while examples of the daily despair that exists in our cities would have the unfortunate affect of shining a bright light on the elites centuries of indifference toward the poor"

foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:20 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:46 pm

foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:36 pm

6ftstick wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:20 pmWell that's a convenient interpretation.

My intention was the exact opposite. If you're going to put thousands of people in the streets for weeks over the death of one black man,You should be able to generate some interest in the violence and slaughter of 100 blacks in Chicago over the weekend.

Instead nothing

What you clearly continue to miss, the one black man, this time, was just enough to make it boil over.

Get used to it...nothing changes until all of us are dead, maybe our grandchildren will get it done.

and the cynic in me whispers.....

"a white cop killing a black man inflames racial tension and distracts from the class disparity that exists, while examples of the daily despair that exists in our cities would have the unfortunate affect of shining a bright light on the elites centuries of indifference toward the poor"

For sure....it does. And 'round and 'round we go. We don't have answers.

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:15 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:59 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:52 pm Hopkins is not immune.

No one is immune that was in operation back then. Did Southern colonies trade with the North? Yes. So they took financial advantage of slavery, too.

And obviously, Europe and the UK are on the hook for trading with the South.

Don't forget to add all the rulers on the Barbary coast in North Africa.....it was the Muslims who used white people before America was even a thought, & the Ottaman Empire into the early 20th century.

Bottom line....it is inescapable, and IS part of human history...everywhere. Which leads me to argue "look how far we have come".

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:34 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:15 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:59 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:52 pm Hopkins is not immune.

No one is immune that was in operation back then. Did Southern colonies trade with the North? Yes. So they took financial advantage of slavery, too.

And obviously, Europe and the UK are on the hook for trading with the South.

Don't forget to add all the rulers on the Barbary coast in North Africa.....it was the Muslims who used white people before America was even a thought, & the Ottaman Empire into the early 20th century.

Bottom line....it is inescapable, and IS part of human history...everywhere. Which leads me to argue "look how far we have come".

Should have had a constitution.

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:37 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:34 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:15 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:59 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:52 pm Hopkins is not immune.

No one is immune that was in operation back then. Did Southern colonies trade with the North? Yes. So they took financial advantage of slavery, too.

And obviously, Europe and the UK are on the hook for trading with the South.

Don't forget to add all the rulers on the Barbary coast in North Africa.....it was the Muslims who used white people before America was even a thought, & the Ottaman Empire into the early 20th century.

Bottom line....it is inescapable, and IS part of human history...everywhere. Which leads me to argue "look how far we have come".

Should have had a constitution.

Had to first fight off those damned red coats and idiots like Benedict Arnold.

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:34 pm

foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:20 pm

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:46 pm

foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:36 pm

6ftstick wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:20 pmWell that's a convenient interpretation.

My intention was the exact opposite. If you're going to put thousands of people in the streets for weeks over the death of one black man,You should be able to generate some interest in the violence and slaughter of 100 blacks in Chicago over the weekend.

Instead nothing

What you clearly continue to miss, the one black man, this time, was just enough to make it boil over.

Get used to it...nothing changes until all of us are dead, maybe our grandchildren will get it done.

and the cynic in me whispers.....

"a white cop killing a black man inflames racial tension and distracts from the class disparity that exists, while examples of the daily despair that exists in our cities would have the unfortunate affect of shining a bright light on the elites centuries of indifference toward the poor"

For sure....it does. And 'round and 'round we go. We don't have answers.

+1
Oh there are answers, I am afraid everyone is far too uncomfortable to actually speak up about them...on all sides.

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:40 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:37 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:34 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 3:15 pm

a fan wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:59 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:52 pm Hopkins is not immune.

No one is immune that was in operation back then. Did Southern colonies trade with the North? Yes. So they took financial advantage of slavery, too.

And obviously, Europe and the UK are on the hook for trading with the South.

Don't forget to add all the rulers on the Barbary coast in North Africa.....it was the Muslims who used white people before America was even a thought, & the Ottaman Empire into the early 20th century.

Bottom line....it is inescapable, and IS part of human history...everywhere. Which leads me to argue "look how far we have come".

Should have had a constitution.

Had to first fight off those damned red coats and idiots like Benedict Arnold.

Barbary coast countries did that?

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 1:58 pm
Joe Biden just announced he’s for regime change in Venezuela. What’s his party again? Trump is now to the left of Biden on foreign affairs. Lol.

https://www.rt.com/news/492626-trump-bi ... me-change/

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:10 am

foreverlax wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 9:06 am

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 8:21 am

6ftstick wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 7:26 am Another 3 year old shot in Chicago—not a peep from the TDS BLM gang here. You know his name?

Another 13 year old shot in Chicago—not a peep from the TDS BLM gang here. You know her name?

14 shot dead in Chicago last weekend—not a peep from the TDS BLM gang here. Know any names?

104 total shot in Chicago this weekend—not a peep from the TDS BLM gang here.

254 murdered by guns in one city, Chicago, year to date.

Thankfully Democrats focus on urgent priorities like tearing down statues of white Jesus and Andrew Jackson.

So far only one person has suggested tearing down the white Jesues images....pretty far cry from your assessment of all Demcocrats.

yeah the white jesus thing is a bit of a misdirect by the right.

although with that said - there are people in the political extremes who would run with those kinds of thoughts with actions if given any wiggle room to do so. The extremes are filled with extremists (who knew?). The extremists have been encouraged by a combination of finding like-minded lunatics on the internet and the media's last gasp efforts for eyeballs making them willing co-conspirators by giving the haters air-time....

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 2:41 pm

holmes435 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 1:15 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:31 amThe US military attacking American citizens will never happen. When I was in the army I would have steadfastly refused ANY order to engage American citizens. We all pledged to defend the country against all enemies foreign and domestic. Our fellow Americans are not and never will be the enemy. Law enforcement needs to take care of that problem, if it ever becomes one.

I really 100% hope you're right, but right there in the oath is "defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic"

Who decides who is a domestic enemy? If the ruling class and higher ups in the ranks beat the drums for years and say ______ is an enemy of the people / US / Constitution, they can slowly make people believe it is true. It's happened for centuries in a wide variety of countries and governments. You even see it at Trump rallies with the hate and vitriol from his supporters directed at the media covering those events.

I hope we as Americans are strong enough to do the right thing against these demagogues.

Any order to ever draw down on any American citizen is IMO an unlawful order. Way back when I was a young GI that was a big thing. The genesis was Lt William Calleys actions at Mai Lai. Any GI has the right and obligation to disobey any unlawful order. Any officer issuing an order to engage an American citizen would have to explain to the soldier that his or her order was lawful. That soldier has the right and obligation to contest such an order up the chain of command. Any one paying attention understands that is exactly why the US military brass gave Trump such huge static about engaging US forces in the recent riots. That us not their job. That us not what they are trained to do. Leave our active duty forces the gell out of it. Thanks for clarifying the military oath for me. I took liberties with it I should not have.

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:03 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:48 am

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:21 am

DocBarrister wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 9:32 am

ChairmanOfTheBoard wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 9:26 am not that i disagree doc, but what will happen with the next school shooting (it's coming, unfortunately).

isnt the media going to jump all over some local school district because security didnt approach the perpetrator?

and security will get dragged through the mud, fired, attacked on social media, death threats to the house, etc.

so the real question is- what do we send security in with- if it's a psychology degree, to talk with the shooter about mommy issues, i think security will board up behind a door instead. just a question.

Ban all new sales of semi-automatic weapons (handguns and rifles).

Band all handgun sales to civilians.

Institute a mandatory gun buyback program (all handguns and all semi-automatics weapons of any type).

Let’s do what every other rational modern nation has done and do what we can to prevent such shootings from happening. We need to treat gun violence like the public health problem it is (prevention) and not like medicine (putting band aids on the mayhem and murders).

Besides, there’s been a long history of an association between the gun industry and white supremacist movements and ideology. Time to disarm the domestic terrorists.

DocBarrister

Doc - with all due respect - there is a long history of association between gun ownership and any level of success of the black community protecting itself.

You hear what you are saying right? ... let's make COPs the only people with GUNS??!!?? You are NOT going to find a whole lot of takers in the black community for banning guns. In response the typical leftist quip of "what do you need a gun for, are you going to fight the Army and cops when they show up?" the unequivocal answer is YES. The black community knows this. They have had to resort to it. In our lifetimes. Can a bunch of citizens defeat the US military with their planes and bombs and rockets? Maybe not, but numbers matter. And maybe, just maybe, there will be enough members of the military who when faced with the decision of (a) dropping a bomb on their neighbors because some pin-head power monger in DC (who could be Trump or his Dem equivalent) wants to make them do their bidding and (b) not - maybe that soldier will chose his countrymen over the governing class.

If the animosity and hyperbole keeps up, we all may have a chance to decide which is more important - a stupid political talking point or our freedom.

.. you make a good point as far as it goes. Why are the COPs so nervous and trigger fingered to begin with? The fact that there are so many guns worries the COPs if you listen to them.

Guns are clearly a two edged sword that really aren't the issue or even a big part of the problem at this point. The disparity and treatment of whites vs minorities is the big problem. The guns aren't the ones making this choice. We have been kicking this can down the road for a couple hundred years with it getting better each generation, but we still have people who think this situation is alright. If time isn't really up, I think the minorities have decided it really should be. And they are right.

I am all for getting guns off the streets. The streets would be far safer. I believe we have more guns than people in this country. Complete insanity. How are all these illegal guns making there way into our inner cities? Law enforcement is that bad in this country?

wgdsr wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 5:02 pm someone that knows more about the laws and more about gun ownership attitudes can chime in, but for starters:
1) guns are legal if they are registered, and required to be brought in once per year and discharged for ballistics. and upon purchase. otherwise, they are illegal. also, it's required that you report any stolen gun immediately (this is the law already, but emphasizing and maybe it needs to be toughened up).
- now, there are any number of legitimate gripes about slippery slopes here when "the gov't might come to take away your guns". i would expect they could get access to info on your legal purchase from years ago if that was some eventual mission, but say they couldn't... the quid pro quo would have to be law that your registered gun could not be seized for any future law, order, etc. federal or state. never superseded and sealed up by scotus. ironclad. would either side be willing to do this? maybe not or doubtful, but ya never know.
- with the above, i would think it would be a lot less likely that friends or fam would be ok with a firearm in their name out on the streets to do whatever. locking them up in a safe place probably happens more frequently as well.

2) black market - this will thrive in the absence of being able to get guns easily from your pals or burglaries, so how does it get sealed up? how much comes originally from overseas? my guess is a lot. this would take a decent amount of dough. from what i remember from "the wire", some tiny percentage of imported goods ever gets checked. so cash to expand and investigate their port of entry. if the smith and wessons and brownings are also allocating some % of guns to go to anything other than legitimate gun dealers here domestically, i'm sure that could be tracked down if we care to.
3) mail order parts/build your own and dark web - if peeps can find these places, our law enforcement should be able to also. legislation on these specifically if need be.

whomever has good solutions, it will take time. tanker won't shift on a dime. bad solutions... will make things worse. duh.

if "good" gun owners want to help with the solutions for the epidemic of "bad" gun owners, they will have their smart guys or just en masse help with real solutions. benefits everybody.

any and all of this might be garbage or a non-starter. imo, outlawing all guns definitely is, so someone really get on it.

wgdsr wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 5:02 pm

Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:03 pm

jhu72 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:48 am

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:21 am

DocBarrister wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 9:32 am

ChairmanOfTheBoard wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 9:26 am not that i disagree doc, but what will happen with the next school shooting (it's coming, unfortunately).

isnt the media going to jump all over some local school district because security didnt approach the perpetrator?

and security will get dragged through the mud, fired, attacked on social media, death threats to the house, etc.

so the real question is- what do we send security in with- if it's a psychology degree, to talk with the shooter about mommy issues, i think security will board up behind a door instead. just a question.

Ban all new sales of semi-automatic weapons (handguns and rifles).

Band all handgun sales to civilians.

Institute a mandatory gun buyback program (all handguns and all semi-automatics weapons of any type).

Let’s do what every other rational modern nation has done and do what we can to prevent such shootings from happening. We need to treat gun violence like the public health problem it is (prevention) and not like medicine (putting band aids on the mayhem and murders).

Besides, there’s been a long history of an association between the gun industry and white supremacist movements and ideology. Time to disarm the domestic terrorists.

DocBarrister

Doc - with all due respect - there is a long history of association between gun ownership and any level of success of the black community protecting itself.

You hear what you are saying right? ... let's make COPs the only people with GUNS??!!?? You are NOT going to find a whole lot of takers in the black community for banning guns. In response the typical leftist quip of "what do you need a gun for, are you going to fight the Army and cops when they show up?" the unequivocal answer is YES. The black community knows this. They have had to resort to it. In our lifetimes. Can a bunch of citizens defeat the US military with their planes and bombs and rockets? Maybe not, but numbers matter. And maybe, just maybe, there will be enough members of the military who when faced with the decision of (a) dropping a bomb on their neighbors because some pin-head power monger in DC (who could be Trump or his Dem equivalent) wants to make them do their bidding and (b) not - maybe that soldier will chose his countrymen over the governing class.

If the animosity and hyperbole keeps up, we all may have a chance to decide which is more important - a stupid political talking point or our freedom.

.. you make a good point as far as it goes. Why are the COPs so nervous and trigger fingered to begin with? The fact that there are so many guns worries the COPs if you listen to them.

Guns are clearly a two edged sword that really aren't the issue or even a big part of the problem at this point. The disparity and treatment of whites vs minorities is the big problem. The guns aren't the ones making this choice. We have been kicking this can down the road for a couple hundred years with it getting better each generation, but we still have people who think this situation is alright. If time isn't really up, I think the minorities have decided it really should be. And they are right.

I am all for getting guns off the streets. The streets would be far safer. I believe we have more guns than people in this country. Complete insanity. How are all these illegal guns making there way into our inner cities? Law enforcement is that bad in this country?

i don't know if i put it on law enforcement without beefing up their budgets or directives for it and changing some laws.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/where-do-criminals-get-guns
if the numbers are close to being accurate, it's about what i expected. black market in many shapes and friends and fam.

someone that knows more about the laws and more about gun ownership attitudes can chime in, but for starters:
1) guns are legal if they are registered, and required to be brought in once per year and discharged for ballistics. and upon purchase. otherwise, they are illegal. also, it's required that you report any stolen gun immediately (this is the law already, but emphasizing and maybe it needs to be toughened up).
- now, there are any number of legitimate gripes about slippery slopes here when "the gov't might come to take away your guns". i would expect they could get access to info on your legal purchase from years ago if that was some eventual mission, but say they couldn't... the quid pro quo would have to be law that your registered gun could not be seized for any future law, order, etc. federal or state. never superseded and sealed up by scotus. ironclad. would either side be willing to do this? maybe not or doubtful, but ya never know.
- with the above, i would think it would be a lot less likely that friends or fam would be ok with a firearm in their name out on the streets to do whatever. locking them up in a safe place probably happens more frequently as well.

2) black market - this will thrive in the absence of being able to get guns easily from your pals or burglaries, so how does it get sealed up? how much comes originally from overseas? my guess is a lot. this would take a decent amount of dough. from what i remember from "the wire", some tiny percentage of imported goods ever gets checked. so cash to expand and investigate their port of entry. if the smith and wessons and brownings are also allocating some % of guns to go to anything other than legitimate gun dealers here domestically, i'm sure that could be tracked down if we care to.
3) mail order parts/build your own and dark web - if peeps can find these places, our law enforcement should be able to also. legislation on these specifically if need be.

whomever has good solutions, it will take time. tanker won't shift on a dime. bad solutions... will make things worse. duh.

if "good" gun owners want to help with the solutions for the epidemic of "bad" gun owners, they will have their smart guys or just en masse help with real solutions. benefits everybody.

any and all of this might be garbage or a non-starter. imo, outlawing all guns definitely is, so someone really get on it.

HooDat wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 5:32 pm

wgdsr wrote: ↑Tue Jun 23, 2020 5:02 pm someone that knows more about the laws and more about gun ownership attitudes can chime in, but for starters:
1) guns are legal if they are registered, and required to be brought in once per year and discharged for ballistics. and upon purchase. otherwise, they are illegal. also, it's required that you report any stolen gun immediately (this is the law already, but emphasizing and maybe it needs to be toughened up).
- now, there are any number of legitimate gripes about slippery slopes here when "the gov't might come to take away your guns". i would expect they could get access to info on your legal purchase from years ago if that was some eventual mission, but say they couldn't... the quid pro quo would have to be law that your registered gun could not be seized for any future law, order, etc. federal or state. never superseded and sealed up by scotus. ironclad. would either side be willing to do this? maybe not or doubtful, but ya never know.
- with the above, i would think it would be a lot less likely that friends or fam would be ok with a firearm in their name out on the streets to do whatever. locking them up in a safe place probably happens more frequently as well.

2) black market - this will thrive in the absence of being able to get guns easily from your pals or burglaries, so how does it get sealed up? how much comes originally from overseas? my guess is a lot. this would take a decent amount of dough. from what i remember from "the wire", some tiny percentage of imported goods ever gets checked. so cash to expand and investigate their port of entry. if the smith and wessons and brownings are also allocating some % of guns to go to anything other than legitimate gun dealers here domestically, i'm sure that could be tracked down if we care to.
3) mail order parts/build your own and dark web - if peeps can find these places, our law enforcement should be able to also. legislation on these specifically if need be.

whomever has good solutions, it will take time. tanker won't shift on a dime. bad solutions... will make things worse. duh.

if "good" gun owners want to help with the solutions for the epidemic of "bad" gun owners, they will have their smart guys or just en masse help with real solutions. benefits everybody.

any and all of this might be garbage or a non-starter. imo, outlawing all guns definitely is, so someone really get on it.

you put the control right in the hands of the folks that a lot of the "good" gun owners fear the most. They really take seriously the idea that the government should be a little worried about an armed citizenry. They see that tension as a vital part of self-governance and a way to make sure it doesn't slip into dictatorship. And, truth be told, I think they are right.