Well written but still poorly researched DIE-HARD PARTISAN CRAP. (Nationwide.)
Nicely written but still poorly researched, poorly thought, and dead wrong on most counts. For starters, your 'storming the beach' assessment regarding troop losses in Afghanistan is fatally flawed. In fact, your second line states an absolute indisputable mathematical falsehood.
You said "For someone who considers himself a student of history and facts I find you lack insight, let's begin with troops loses in Afghanistan under Bush vs Obama. Bush began the conflict, soldiers under him were the first responders so to speak and charged the beachheads figuratively speaking so of course his ratio of soldiers deaths were higher than under Obama".
I lack insight huh? Such a claim is laughable coming from someone who made such a dum-fuk assumption with regard to those troop losses and actually had the nerve to state it so authoritatively without checking the numbers first. Especially given the fact that I mentioned the years of 2006, 2007, and 2008 in particular when first making reference to the trend of higher troop losses in Afghanistan (initial flat-foot entry, read it again).
No you partisan whack-ass, it's not that troop losses in Afghanistan were higher under Bush. THEY WERE LOWER YOU HALF-WIT. But the trend of higher troop losses in Afghanistan which many a partisan puppet blame Obama for exclusively, began in 2006. OVER FOUR YEARS AFTER THE INITIAL INVASION and three years before Obama took office. The trend continued to grow in 2007 and 2008 and for another two or three years under Obama resulting in higher overall troop losses in Afghanistan under his administration. It was then reversed. Like I said, the initial effort in Afghanistan did produce results (which as an unaffiliated free thinker, I have no problem giving the Bush administration some credit for) but it was crystal clear by 2006 that some of the progress made was being lost. So your 'storming the beach' assessment doesn't work.
Damn right I have disdain for die-hard partisans. They are among the most active all over the web and talk radio. Die-hard conservatives in particular. In general, they are less informed than centrists, leftists, and oddball free thinkers like myself but they have made their ignorant voices heard and their absurd statements read millions of times resulting in a dumber America. That, I have a HUGE problem with. It is true that many a die-hard liberal have made absurd comments as well but in general, liberals are more rational than conservatives. After all, I'm not aware of a single liberal who fears that assault rifles and grenades will end up in vending machines across America. But I shouldn't have to remind you or anyone else just how many die-hard conservative wackos have been screaming this 'coming to get our guns' CRAP at the top of their lungs and typing their fingers to the bone with this 'disarm America' CRAP. IT IS FXXXXXX ABSURD WACKO PARANOIA. NOTHING BUT DIE-HARD PARTISAN FEAR MONGERING CRAP. UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S VERY EFFECTIVE FEAR MONGERING CRAP. INNOCENT MEN, WOMEN, AND CHILDREN HAVE BEEN SHOT DEAD BECAUSE OF IT.
So yeah, damn right I have disdain for die-hard partisans. Not necessarily those who lean in one direction or another but certainly those who lean sharply or entirely. In particular, die-hard conservatives. For they are the type most likely to make dum-fuk assumptions, most likely to spread their idiotic CRAP, and most likely to inspire politically motivated killings. If you have the nerve to challenge me on this claim, I will post a long list for you to consider.
By the way, before you make another dum-fuk assumption, of course I acknowledge the issue of religiously motivated killings. 9/11 in particular. Also, those which take place in Iraq as we type. Religious extremism is even more illogical than political extremism. But the vast overwhelming majority of religiously motivated killings are inspired almost exclusively by religion with very little regard for liberal or conservative political ideology. The killings of abortion doctors are notable exceptions but I do acknowledge the real world moral dilemma those killers struggle with.
Although I find the very concept of a god illogical, I won't lump those who kill abortion doctors in with wackos who kill hoping to score with a dozen virgins courtesy of Ala. Not that I have anything against Muslims in general. I don't. For the vast overwhelming majority, easily 99% of those who live in the developed world are peaceful and moderate. They have no belief whatsoever in that 'dozen virgins' crap and no desire to kill the rest of us for our own beliefs. That's a fact. Otherwise, we would all be in deep sxxx. After all, Muslims do represent roughly 1/6 of the world population.
I submitted the above hoping to prevent another dum-fuk assumption on your part. Of course, I acknowledge the issue of religiously motivated killings. I've been accused of having no regard for them several times already by die-hard conservatives who take offense when I make reference to the innocent men, women, and children who have been killed because of their outrageous and illogical 'disarm America' 'coming to get our guns' CRAP.
Crap which many of you die-hard conservatives and your sold-out pundits continue to spew all over the web and talk radio. This puts our leaders at the Federal level in a very difficult position. For they are unable to take ANY ACTION WHATSOEVER ON THE ISSUE OF GUN CONTROL without driving even more die-hard conservative wacko gun freaks right over the edge resulting in more politically motivated killings.
Did I mention my disdain for die-hard partisans? Die-hard conservatives in particular? Damn right.
Obama isn't doing anything whatsoever to address the issue of immoral and illogical wealth concentration. Not when it's all said and done. For every time he takes action to support the low end of the American populous, he turns right around and does a favor for the rich to make damn sure they star far, far, FAR AHEAD. The favors for Wal-Mart and the banking industry come to mind immediately. Not to mention those done for filthy disgusting rich PIG individuals like Warren Buffet, Oprah Winfrey, Ellen Degeneres, Tiger Woods, Beyonce, and Brad Pitt. He has done favors for all of the above who continue to concentrate wealth with no regard whatsoever for the distribution. When it's all said and done, the overall concentration is ongoing but not accelerating under Obama. It certainly would be if it weren't for those actions taken to support the low end.
The difference between Democrats and Republicans on this issue is that Democrats are better at pretending as if they care about the poor. They act in the interests of the lower majority more often than Republicans because they are pressured to do so by their voters.
Again, your response on the issue of wealth distribution, like those of virtually all of my die-hard partisan critics was utterly predictable. In fact, I addressed your latest dum-fuk assumption regarding the issue even before you stated it yourself. That's right puppet. I specifically addressed your dum-fuk assumption regarding static wealth (the pie of predetermined size) in my previous entry. AGAIN, I have never implied that wealth is necessarily static. I've debated the issue of distribution many times and I've never implied that even once. Not even with the multiple references to the game of Monopoly. For anyone familiar with the game should know that wealth is 'created' with every improvement to properties held. Also, that more and more currency comes into play with each round.
However, anyone familiar with the game should also know that as more and more wealth is concentrated, the system begins to stall resulting in slower growth, less 'creation', reversed growth, and finally a dead stop.
Fortunately, the world's wealth will never be held entirely by one player or the richest 1%. Otherwise, it would result in the violent collapse of society itself. Blood would be spilled on a scale never seen before. However, because of greed, corruption, and the very concept of extreme personal wealth, most Americans and certainly most people worldwide are living as if they are the losing players in a game of Monopoly struggling to survive as the final few rounds are played.
You see, the 'creation' of net wealth isn't anywhere near as simple as the masses are led to believe by virtually every public figure. Otherwise, there would be no such thing as de-industrialization or the resulting red tape, neglected infrastructure, gang activity, ect. The ugly fact is that when new wealth is 'created' there is usually a lagging downside. A newly developed community here. A neglected community there. A new shopping center here. An abandoned shopping center there. A new mansion here. A dozen boarded up houses there. It's all related.
When it's all said and done, distribution matters. For you can not stabilize any economy of any size and concentrate it's wealth at the same time. It is mathematically impossible. For this reason, the majority of stimulus and 'welfare spending' dollars that so many of you die-hard partisans throw a bloody fit over are absolutely necessary. Otherwise, we would be in the midst of a severe depression already. One which would remain severe until significant measures were taken by government, the masses, or both to redistribute a portion of existing wealth and/or create 'net' wealth (again very tricky) to benefit the lower majority EXCLUSIVELY.
There is no other way to recover from an economic depression. There never has been and there never will be. Unless of course, a double digit portion of the lower majority is simply put to death. Even that would be a temporary measure. For the existing wealth would continue to concentrate.
Damn right I'm angry with my fellow citizens. The 'everyday people' you refer to. I care about the vast overwhelming majority but if it were within my power, I would wring their miserable necks for voluntarily giving so much of their money to the rich. If they hadn't done so, then we would not be in this mess. Our sold-out representatives and their lying pig pundits never would have become so corrupt. Our entire society would be much more stable and peaceful. Instead, those very few of us who truly understand socioeconomics have no choice but to watch society degrade as our efforts to inform the masses are met with colossal counter-efforts to make them even dumber than they already are.
Steve Jobs was not part of the solution. He was part of the problem. It didn't have to be that way. His field at one time, had the potential to work wonders. It had the potential to do far more good than harm. Instead, in large part because of him, we have a society truly obsessed not with the good that could have been achieved through technology, but with the gadgets themselves. It's gone way too far. If you don't see the problem I'm referring to, then like many others, you are blind.
I'm aware of the criticism of Greenspan. I'm also aware that he has been made a scapegoat by people like you. For the interest rates you refer to didn't cause the problem. Not even early on when Greenspan worked for your favorite President. Those rates have always been adjusted in response to carefully calculated trends and projections. Always with 'growth' in mind. The problem is that economic 'growth' doesn't necessarily benefit the masses. For the most part, it hasn't in nearly 40 years. In fact, the middle and lower classes were much better off when we had a much smaller but also more just economy. I do however, give Greenspan credit for finally addressing the issue of distribution in the spring of '05'.
The era following WWII is a different story entirely. There was unprecedented 'growth'. But again, the masses benefited from a significant redistribution of wealth. I can not emphasize this enough.
Still, you people seem hell-bent on dumbing America down even further with your repeated calls for 'growth'. Newsflash: We already have, BY FAR, the largest economy in the world. It is the largest by every relevant measure including per capita. So tell me, how much more must it 'grow' before the lower majority finally benefit?
That's a serious question. Answer it.
There you go again. Assuming that I'm a fan of Al Gore. Of course, I believe in Anthropogenic Global Warming but not because of Al Gore. Because of the science involved. In particular because of two facts. The two which I find the most compelling as a free thinker. My guess is that you can't guess either one of them. Go ahead and try. Make two more dum-fuk assumptions. I'll be happy to call them out or give you an ounce of credit in the unlikely event that you guess either one of them. I'll even drop two clues which I will follow up on with my next reply:
#1. Rate.
#2. Altitude.
Those clues are damn near dead giveaways. Again, they represent the two facts regarding Anthropogenic Global Warming which I find the most compelling. I have yet to hear or read a decent attempt to refute them.
Damn right Al Gore is a hypocrite. Damn right he is a profiteer. Damn right he is a pig. If you were anything but a partisan puppet, you would have expected me to acknowledge this. Instead, you made yet another dum-fuk assumption.
Unfortunately, the issue of Anthropogenic Global Warming is real.
I'm aware of the Einstein quote regarding insanity. It's been thrown in my face many times. I'm also aware that it doesn't apply to me. For I'm not posting all over the web hoping to resolve a single issue effecting the masses. I'm posting all over the web fully expecting to help offset the relentless efforts of others to dumb down my fellow citizens with more DIE-HARD PARTISAN CRAP. That, I've done well. That, I will continue to do until the day I die.
If any of you partisan pigs hope to break my will, then you will have to break my neck first. You sure as hell can't intimidate me, confuse me, or overwhelm me. Not a chance.
That doesn't make me a narcissist. My focus is on the issues. My contempt for people like you and the arrogant tone I often use with people like you have nothing to do with a desire to feel important. They have everything to do with a desire to expose you people for what you truly are. PARTISAN PUPPETS. This, to help offset your relentless efforts to dumb down my fellow citizens.
You want me to consider the possibility that you are anything but an utterly predictable partisan puppet? Fine. Name one significant campaign issue on which you agree more with Democrats and less with Republicans. Then explain why. Make it sincere. No tricks or word games. Just name the issue and then explain why you agree more with Democrats and less with Republicans on that particular issue. Do that, and I will gladly acknowledge the possibility that you have the capability of free thought.
By the way, I agree with Republicans almost entirely on the issues of abortion, illegal immigration, voter registration, and the mandates of Obamacare.
I've already proven myself to be an unaffiliated free thinker. I'm still waiting for a shred of evidence to indicate anything but die-hard partisanship on your part.
You should have known better than to expect I would give a damn about spelling errors. I didn't check, I didn't notice, and I almost never make reference to them.
Next.
Tuesday, July 22, 2014
My critics in Chicago are pathetic cowards. This includes any who may own or work at Craigslist. Deleted entry #3.
More cops die because of high capacity magazines. Read up critics. (Nationwide.)
GUN FREAKS: Soon, I will write a new essay which will address every single argument you gun freaks have come up with against gun control so far. I intend to destroy every single one of them. From your 'capacity doesn't matter' bit to your 'regulations don't work' bit to your 'big bad tyrannical government wants to oppress and/or kill us' bit and everything in between. Every single one of them will be destroyed with common sense and actual statistics. EVERY SINGLE ONE. I'll get to it next week. In the meantime, read the following article. It's not mine but that really doesn't matter. It's damn good:
Sorry, there are no cute little kiddy signs. This one was posted by a grown up.
"On New Year's Eve, ShotSpotter, the technology that the Oakland Police Department uses to detect gunshots, recorded nearly two hundred incidents of shots fired in the city from 10 p.m. until 2 a.m. At 10:30 that night, ShotSpotter detected a crackle of heavy-caliber gunfire near 84th Avenue and Dowling Street in East Oakland. After a brief car chase, OPD officers cornered and arrested Steven Stevenson, a 31-year-old Oakland resident, on 77th Avenue near Hillside Street. While searching Stevenson's car, officers discovered a Colt DPMS assault rifle and a drum magazine that holds up to 100 rounds of ammunition.
The high-capacity magazine attached to Stevenson's assault rifle is similar to the 100-round drum used in the movie theater massacre last July in Aurora, Colorado -- an incident that left 12 people dead and 58 wounded. Oakland police say extended clips that carry up to thirty bullets for assault rifles and pistols are not uncommon on city streets and are easily obtained in neighboring states -- such as Nevada and Arizona -- that do not share California's law banning the sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than ten rounds.
Officer David Wong, a former Marine who runs OPD's armory, verifies the make, model number, and capacity of weapons seized in Oakland by city police. He told me that the 100-round drum magazine seized on New Year's Eve is one of three such drums that he recalls were taken off the streets by OPD since 2011 -- the other two being ones for AK-47 assault rifles. While these super-large magazines are not exceedingly common in Oakland, Wong said he has seen significant numbers of high-capacity magazines that hold more than ten bullets for rifles and handguns. On a recent afternoon, Wong displayed two 7.62-caliber clips for AK-47 and SKS-model assault rifles seized by OPD in late 2010, along with two rifles. According to Wong, 7.62-caliber rounds are capable of piercing body armor. "I've seen them go through the outer walls of a structure, as well as two inner walls," Wong said.
Weapons with such modified ammunition devices are also capable of rapid rates of fire, even if they aren't fully automatic. A 30-round AK-47 clip can be emptied in less than 25 seconds, while a 9 mm Glock pistol equipped with a drum magazine can fire all 50 rounds in the loader in 14 seconds. "If you have a person who is even minimally trained with a particular assault weapon, an AK-47 with a 30-round clip can be murderous enough to keep police officers at bay for quite a while," said Wong, whose forearm bears a tattoo with the date 3/21/09 under an OPD badge partially covered with a black band, in reference to the four officers killed by parolee Lovelle Mixon. SWAT team sergeants Daniel Sakai and Ervin Romans were cut down by 7.62 mm bullets from an AK-47 when they stormed the East Oakland apartment in which Mixon was holed up not long after he had killed Sergeant Mark Dunakin and Officer John Hege during a car stop.
According to the 2011 management report for OPD's Criminal Investigations Division, the department's gang unit took eighteen rifles off the street that year, and eight arrests by OPD resulted in assault weapons charges filed by the Alameda County District Attorney's Office. OPD does not keep statistics on the number of drum magazines or extended-capacity clips it recovers, however.
Extended 30- and 28-round clips for handguns, particularly 9 mm Glocks and Berettas, have become popular in recent years among Oakland's violent street gangs, police say. Wong noted that from the middle of 2011 through the first quarter of 2012, roughly 10 percent of all handguns seized by OPD officers had high capacity clips. One criminal enterprise that favored such munitions is the Burn Out Family, an East Oakland street gang heavily involved in the heroin and cocaine trade in the area of 82nd Avenue and Birch Street, 72nd Avenue and Hawley Street, and 88th Avenue and A street. A federal racketeering indictment made public last July resulted in charges against forty people who allegedly formed the core of the Burn Out Family.
Captain Ersie Joyner, who started the Burn Out Family investigation in 2007, said the gang's profitability was due in no small part to the propensity for violence by its members. "They were involved in more than ten murders from 2007 onwards, as well as over fifty shootings," Joyner told me. Burn Out Family's members also did not limit themselves to their East Oakland turf, Joyner said. They operated in "West Oakland, North Oakland, even up in Antioch," he added. Although gang members were documented using rifles that took heavy-caliber 7.62 mm and .223 mm ammunition, OPD said they were notorious for their use of 30-round extended clips for semi-automatic pistols.
Wong said he and agents from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms became particularly interested in the magazines used by Burn Out Family members because they were in such good condition. "They were pretty nice, they hadn't been used previously, so that got our attention," said Wong.
Law enforcement officials say another major problem with extended-capacity magazines is that they are all but impossible to trace back to their point of origin. Steven Stevenson's Colt DPMS rifle, for example, would have been traceable back to the seller had its serial number not been obliterated. The drum magazine found on the rifle had no serial number. Wong said that is because ammunition magazines for public sale are not serialized. The only exceptions, he said, are for prototype munitions tested by the military.
Oakland's seriously understaffed police department (612 officers, down from more than 800 in late 200 is struggling to tamp down violence in 2013 after more than 130 people were killed in the city last year, the highest death toll since 145 people were slain in 2006. For example, New Year's Eve was the first time that OPD had officers on the street to respond to ShotSpotter alerts since July 4. "If you have the technology and we don't have anyone to respond correctly, we're not going to catch the guys," Joyner told ABC 7's Mark Matthews earlier this month.
As of January 13, six people had already been slain in Oakland, and last weekend, eleven people suffered non-fatal gunshot wounds in the city, police said. And the caliber and types of weapons available on city streets, particularly the high-capacity magazines and drums, increases the likelihood for carnage.
The four homicides that took place last Friday were no exception. An AK-47, an SKS rifle, and a modified Tommy Gun were among the eleven firearms recovered by OPD in response to the retaliatory violence between two feuding groups of young men. Eddiebo Rodriguez, 20, was slain with an assault rifle on 34th and West streets and police arrested a man in connection with his shooting on Friday evening.
Weapons traffickers also can make a handsome profit selling military-grade ammo magazines in Oakland. Luis Cardenas-Morfin, a West Oakland Norteño gang member currently serving time in federal prison for weapons trafficking, sold an AR-15 equipped with a 90-round drum magazine to undercover OPD Officer Eric Milina in 2010 for $2,500 (see "Getting Away with Murder," 11/16/12). An agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms traced the weapon back to a gun shop in Columbus, Georgia.
Nationally, the massacre of 27 people, including 20 children, in Newtown, Connecticut in December has reignited the national debate over gun control and high-capacity magazines, which were illegal under the federal assault weapons ban that ran from 1994 through 2004. Following the ban's expiration, many municipalities and states passed strict laws mirroring the lapsed federal ban. And since the Aurora shooting, US Senator Dianne Feinstein of California has been pressing for a renewal of the ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. "Who needs these military-style assault weapons? Who needs an ammunition feeding device capable of holding 100 rounds?" Feinstein wrote in a July 29 opinion piece in the San Francisco Chronicle following the Aurora shooting. Under the ban, the manufacture and sale of extended-capacity magazines would be illegal, as it was for a decade.
However, there are no laws requiring criminal background checks for people purchasing ammunition. That could change for California residents if a bill introduced last week by East Bay Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner is approved by the legislature. AB 48 also would ban kits used to convert ammunition clips into high-capacity magazines, would require identification for ammunition purchases, and would create a licensing system for ammunition vendors and a statewide database of ammunition sales similar to that used for pseudoephedrine sales. "It is easier to buy ammo than to buy cold medicine, alcohol or tobacco," Skinner said in a statement last week. "It's time for buying deadly bullets to fall under the same controls as guns and Sudafed."
But even if Skinner's bill passes, the four-hour drive to Reno -- and Nevada's free-for-all gun laws -- will still be a draw for those seeking assault weapons and high-capacity magazines to use on the streets of Oakland."
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/high-capacity-magazines-flood-oakland/Content?oid=3436991
GUN FREAKS: Soon, I will write a new essay which will address every single argument you gun freaks have come up with against gun control so far. I intend to destroy every single one of them. From your 'capacity doesn't matter' bit to your 'regulations don't work' bit to your 'big bad tyrannical government wants to oppress and/or kill us' bit and everything in between. Every single one of them will be destroyed with common sense and actual statistics. EVERY SINGLE ONE. I'll get to it next week. In the meantime, read the following article. It's not mine but that really doesn't matter. It's damn good:
Sorry, there are no cute little kiddy signs. This one was posted by a grown up.
"On New Year's Eve, ShotSpotter, the technology that the Oakland Police Department uses to detect gunshots, recorded nearly two hundred incidents of shots fired in the city from 10 p.m. until 2 a.m. At 10:30 that night, ShotSpotter detected a crackle of heavy-caliber gunfire near 84th Avenue and Dowling Street in East Oakland. After a brief car chase, OPD officers cornered and arrested Steven Stevenson, a 31-year-old Oakland resident, on 77th Avenue near Hillside Street. While searching Stevenson's car, officers discovered a Colt DPMS assault rifle and a drum magazine that holds up to 100 rounds of ammunition.
The high-capacity magazine attached to Stevenson's assault rifle is similar to the 100-round drum used in the movie theater massacre last July in Aurora, Colorado -- an incident that left 12 people dead and 58 wounded. Oakland police say extended clips that carry up to thirty bullets for assault rifles and pistols are not uncommon on city streets and are easily obtained in neighboring states -- such as Nevada and Arizona -- that do not share California's law banning the sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than ten rounds.
Officer David Wong, a former Marine who runs OPD's armory, verifies the make, model number, and capacity of weapons seized in Oakland by city police. He told me that the 100-round drum magazine seized on New Year's Eve is one of three such drums that he recalls were taken off the streets by OPD since 2011 -- the other two being ones for AK-47 assault rifles. While these super-large magazines are not exceedingly common in Oakland, Wong said he has seen significant numbers of high-capacity magazines that hold more than ten bullets for rifles and handguns. On a recent afternoon, Wong displayed two 7.62-caliber clips for AK-47 and SKS-model assault rifles seized by OPD in late 2010, along with two rifles. According to Wong, 7.62-caliber rounds are capable of piercing body armor. "I've seen them go through the outer walls of a structure, as well as two inner walls," Wong said.
Weapons with such modified ammunition devices are also capable of rapid rates of fire, even if they aren't fully automatic. A 30-round AK-47 clip can be emptied in less than 25 seconds, while a 9 mm Glock pistol equipped with a drum magazine can fire all 50 rounds in the loader in 14 seconds. "If you have a person who is even minimally trained with a particular assault weapon, an AK-47 with a 30-round clip can be murderous enough to keep police officers at bay for quite a while," said Wong, whose forearm bears a tattoo with the date 3/21/09 under an OPD badge partially covered with a black band, in reference to the four officers killed by parolee Lovelle Mixon. SWAT team sergeants Daniel Sakai and Ervin Romans were cut down by 7.62 mm bullets from an AK-47 when they stormed the East Oakland apartment in which Mixon was holed up not long after he had killed Sergeant Mark Dunakin and Officer John Hege during a car stop.
According to the 2011 management report for OPD's Criminal Investigations Division, the department's gang unit took eighteen rifles off the street that year, and eight arrests by OPD resulted in assault weapons charges filed by the Alameda County District Attorney's Office. OPD does not keep statistics on the number of drum magazines or extended-capacity clips it recovers, however.
Extended 30- and 28-round clips for handguns, particularly 9 mm Glocks and Berettas, have become popular in recent years among Oakland's violent street gangs, police say. Wong noted that from the middle of 2011 through the first quarter of 2012, roughly 10 percent of all handguns seized by OPD officers had high capacity clips. One criminal enterprise that favored such munitions is the Burn Out Family, an East Oakland street gang heavily involved in the heroin and cocaine trade in the area of 82nd Avenue and Birch Street, 72nd Avenue and Hawley Street, and 88th Avenue and A street. A federal racketeering indictment made public last July resulted in charges against forty people who allegedly formed the core of the Burn Out Family.
Captain Ersie Joyner, who started the Burn Out Family investigation in 2007, said the gang's profitability was due in no small part to the propensity for violence by its members. "They were involved in more than ten murders from 2007 onwards, as well as over fifty shootings," Joyner told me. Burn Out Family's members also did not limit themselves to their East Oakland turf, Joyner said. They operated in "West Oakland, North Oakland, even up in Antioch," he added. Although gang members were documented using rifles that took heavy-caliber 7.62 mm and .223 mm ammunition, OPD said they were notorious for their use of 30-round extended clips for semi-automatic pistols.
Wong said he and agents from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms became particularly interested in the magazines used by Burn Out Family members because they were in such good condition. "They were pretty nice, they hadn't been used previously, so that got our attention," said Wong.
Law enforcement officials say another major problem with extended-capacity magazines is that they are all but impossible to trace back to their point of origin. Steven Stevenson's Colt DPMS rifle, for example, would have been traceable back to the seller had its serial number not been obliterated. The drum magazine found on the rifle had no serial number. Wong said that is because ammunition magazines for public sale are not serialized. The only exceptions, he said, are for prototype munitions tested by the military.
Oakland's seriously understaffed police department (612 officers, down from more than 800 in late 200 is struggling to tamp down violence in 2013 after more than 130 people were killed in the city last year, the highest death toll since 145 people were slain in 2006. For example, New Year's Eve was the first time that OPD had officers on the street to respond to ShotSpotter alerts since July 4. "If you have the technology and we don't have anyone to respond correctly, we're not going to catch the guys," Joyner told ABC 7's Mark Matthews earlier this month.
As of January 13, six people had already been slain in Oakland, and last weekend, eleven people suffered non-fatal gunshot wounds in the city, police said. And the caliber and types of weapons available on city streets, particularly the high-capacity magazines and drums, increases the likelihood for carnage.
The four homicides that took place last Friday were no exception. An AK-47, an SKS rifle, and a modified Tommy Gun were among the eleven firearms recovered by OPD in response to the retaliatory violence between two feuding groups of young men. Eddiebo Rodriguez, 20, was slain with an assault rifle on 34th and West streets and police arrested a man in connection with his shooting on Friday evening.
Weapons traffickers also can make a handsome profit selling military-grade ammo magazines in Oakland. Luis Cardenas-Morfin, a West Oakland Norteño gang member currently serving time in federal prison for weapons trafficking, sold an AR-15 equipped with a 90-round drum magazine to undercover OPD Officer Eric Milina in 2010 for $2,500 (see "Getting Away with Murder," 11/16/12). An agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms traced the weapon back to a gun shop in Columbus, Georgia.
Nationally, the massacre of 27 people, including 20 children, in Newtown, Connecticut in December has reignited the national debate over gun control and high-capacity magazines, which were illegal under the federal assault weapons ban that ran from 1994 through 2004. Following the ban's expiration, many municipalities and states passed strict laws mirroring the lapsed federal ban. And since the Aurora shooting, US Senator Dianne Feinstein of California has been pressing for a renewal of the ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. "Who needs these military-style assault weapons? Who needs an ammunition feeding device capable of holding 100 rounds?" Feinstein wrote in a July 29 opinion piece in the San Francisco Chronicle following the Aurora shooting. Under the ban, the manufacture and sale of extended-capacity magazines would be illegal, as it was for a decade.
However, there are no laws requiring criminal background checks for people purchasing ammunition. That could change for California residents if a bill introduced last week by East Bay Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner is approved by the legislature. AB 48 also would ban kits used to convert ammunition clips into high-capacity magazines, would require identification for ammunition purchases, and would create a licensing system for ammunition vendors and a statewide database of ammunition sales similar to that used for pseudoephedrine sales. "It is easier to buy ammo than to buy cold medicine, alcohol or tobacco," Skinner said in a statement last week. "It's time for buying deadly bullets to fall under the same controls as guns and Sudafed."
But even if Skinner's bill passes, the four-hour drive to Reno -- and Nevada's free-for-all gun laws -- will still be a draw for those seeking assault weapons and high-capacity magazines to use on the streets of Oakland."
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/high-capacity-magazines-flood-oakland/Content?oid=3436991
My critics in Chicago are pathetic cowards. This includes any who may own or work at Craigslist. Deleted entry #2.
The correlations between gun laws and gun crimes in America. (Nationwide.)
Again, you die-hard conservatives begin by redefining the base of the issue and diverting as much attention as possible from details which are vital to understanding. You do so on every major issue. Below are some of the relevant factors with regard to gun crime which you chose to ignore.
The reported statistics do indicate that gun crime rates in America, in general, have been falling since 1993. That's no secret. It's been reported hundreds or thousands of times on television and radio. It's been acknowledged and discussed in dozens of debates that I've taken part in. Surely, thousands across America. It's no secret. It's also been reported thousands of times that there are far more guns in America now than there were 40 years ago. All of the above is common knowledge. However, those statistics and apparent correlations are nowhere near as simple as you die-hard conservatives believe. In fact, much of what you believe is the exact opposite of reality.
Over the last 20 years or so, more and more states have been adopting more strict gun laws. Some even have their own bans on assault weapons (defined by law). These more strict gun laws do not place limits on the number of guns that citizens are allowed to own. They do not involve black vans showing up in the drive ways of gun owners in order to confiscate their arsenals. They simply add logical steps and verification to the process of acquisition, possession, use, and transport in order to prevent criminals, those under the influence, those unqualified, and the mentally ill from acquiring them so easily and using them so irresponsibly. The only outright 'bans' involve the sales and transfers of very specific types and models. Types and models which far exceed the level of firepower necessary for hunting or self defense.
In general, these states have lower rates of gun homicide per capita. There are anomalies but in general, that's the rule. Once the more strict gun laws are given time to have their desired effect in a given state, they do. It's well documented. These states are considered with all others when National gun crime rates are calculated.
For many years now, there have been extraordinary efforts on the part of law enforcement to reduce the numbers of guns on the street. Hundreds of thousands have been confiscated from criminals or bought back through well publicized events. Tens of thousands have been melted down. Tens of thousands more have been sold to gun shops who then re-sell them to law abiding citizens. Either way, the overall effect is positive. These efforts do effect national gun crime rates.
These efforts have been necessary to counter the constant flow of guns into America and onto the streets. Overall, the efforts of law enforcement are positive but it's a constant battle. One problem is that gun owners often sell them out of their garage or to a friend. They do so with no back round check. Others are stolen from irresponsible gun owners who fail to store or secure them properly. Because of these factors, street gangs and drug dealers are far more heavily armed now then they were 40 years ago. This is well documented.
In order to be prepared for what they often encounter, law enforcement agencies across America have had no choice but to drastically increase their own arsenals and levels of firepower. This helps to compensate for the sheer volume of guns on the streets of most major cities. Also for the wide-spread possession of assault weapons by ordinary citizens.
Another factor regarding those statistics is that street gang members and other criminals are far less likely to report gun crimes. Otherwise, the overall gun crime statistics would be slightly higher.
Regarding the Assault Weapon Ban in effect from 1994-2004. It's been reported to have a slight effect on overall gun crime rates but for the most part, it was designed specifically to effect the trend of mass shootings. In particular, those with higher body counts. This, it did very well. By reducing overall access to assault weapons and higher capacity magazines, psychos were made less likely to acquire them by any means. As a result, the trend of higher body count mass shootings was reversed almost immediately. In fact, that ten year time frame is the only ten year span within the last several decades in which no shooter, acting alone, was able to make the current 'Top Ten' list. Not a single one from 1994-2004.
Unfortunately, that federal ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines expired in 2004. Since then, we have seen the sharpest rise ever in higher body count mass shootings.
Now for a look at the dates of the top ten most deadly mass shootings in US history, the weapons used, the body counts, and the relevance of the now expired AWB.
#10. 1949. (Camden NJ, One handgun.)13 dead. Pre-ban.
#5. 1966. (University of Texas, Multiple firearms.) 16 dead. Pre-ban.
#4. 1984. (San Ysidro McDonald's, One UZI ASSAULT RIFLE with HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES, one handgun with HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINE, and one shotgun.) 21 dead. Pre-ban.
#6. 1986. (Edmond PO, Three handguns. One of which (the Ruger) may have been of high capacity. No confirmation.) 14 dead. Pre-ban.
#3. 1991. (Luby's Cafeteria, Two handguns. One or both with HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES.) 23 dead. Pre-ban.
Notice that a growing trend was evident as of 1991. Assault weapons and/or high capacity magazines were being used more often to achieve higher body counts.
#7. 1999. (Columbine, Two attackers. Multiple firearms and use of explosives.) 13 dead. Mid-ban.
The assault on Columbine High School was the only 'mass shooting' to make the current top ten list mid-ban. Unlike the others, that incident involved two attackers working together with explosives and extensive preparation. The firearms used were not effected by the AWB.
The ban on 'assault weapons' and high capacity magazines expired in 2004.
#8. 2009. (Immigration Services, Two hand guns with PREVIOUSLY BANNED HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES.) 13 dead. Post-ban.
#9. 2009. (Fort Hood, Two handguns. One or both with PREVIOUSLY BANNED HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES.) 13 dead. Post-ban.
#1. 2007. (Virginia Tech, Two separate attacks spaced roughly two hours apart. Two hand guns, 19 magazines, some of which were of PREVIOUSLY BANNED HIGH CAPACITY.) 32 dead. Post-ban.
#2. 2012. (Sandy Hook, ONE PREVIOUSLY BANNED AR-15 ASSAULT RIFLE with PREVIOUSLY BANNED HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES plus two handguns. EVERY SINGLE VICTIM WAS SHOT AT LEAST ONCE WITH THE PREVIOUSLY BANNED AR-15 ASSAULT RIFLE EQUIPPED WITH PREVIOUSLY BANNED '30 ROUND' MAGAZINES. EVERY SINGLE VICTIM.) 26 dead. Post-ban.
Again, 6 or 7 of the top 10 most deadly 'mass shootings' in US history have been carried out primarily, or in part with 'assault rifles' and/or high capacity magazines. This includes #1, #2, #3, #4, #8, #9, and possibly #6. Plus #11 and another 'mass shooting' which took place a few months ago in New Mexico. All four of the most recent top ten most deadly 'mass shootings' were carried out using previously banned 'assault weapons' and/or previously banned high capacity magazines. Record-high body counts were achieved as a direct result. The statistics above do not account for the deaths of the shooters.
The now expired ban saved lives not only by banning the sale of specific models of 'assault rifle' but also by banning the sale of high capacity magazines to private citizens. This effectively reduced access. Again, five of the top ten most deadly mass shootings in US history took place before the enactment of that ban. Two or three of which were carried out primarily, or in part, with specific models and/or magazines that would have been covered by that ban. Another four of the top ten most deadly mass shootings in US history have taken place since the expiration of that ban. Those four were all carried out primarily, or in part, using previously banned models and/or previously banned high capacity magazines. When high capacity magazines are used, they give the shooter the ability to carry more rounds, fire more shots, reload less often, and achieve a higher body count with greater ease. Confidence is almost certainly a factor as well.
The very presence of these 'assault weapons' in our society appears to have a negative influence on some. Adam Lanza and Nehemiah Greigo were both raised by gun fanatics. Both had access to a parent's AR-15 and high capacity magazines which they used to commit mass murder.
With all of these factors and details to consider, it is safe to say that 'more guns equals less crime' is a belief held by the terribly misinformed. The low information voter.
Just for the record: I am not a democrat. I am not anti-gun. I am a free thinking non-partisan owner of multiple firearms who believes in strong regulation. Regulation which no law abiding citizen has any reason to fear.
Again, you die-hard conservatives begin by redefining the base of the issue and diverting as much attention as possible from details which are vital to understanding. You do so on every major issue. Below are some of the relevant factors with regard to gun crime which you chose to ignore.
The reported statistics do indicate that gun crime rates in America, in general, have been falling since 1993. That's no secret. It's been reported hundreds or thousands of times on television and radio. It's been acknowledged and discussed in dozens of debates that I've taken part in. Surely, thousands across America. It's no secret. It's also been reported thousands of times that there are far more guns in America now than there were 40 years ago. All of the above is common knowledge. However, those statistics and apparent correlations are nowhere near as simple as you die-hard conservatives believe. In fact, much of what you believe is the exact opposite of reality.
Over the last 20 years or so, more and more states have been adopting more strict gun laws. Some even have their own bans on assault weapons (defined by law). These more strict gun laws do not place limits on the number of guns that citizens are allowed to own. They do not involve black vans showing up in the drive ways of gun owners in order to confiscate their arsenals. They simply add logical steps and verification to the process of acquisition, possession, use, and transport in order to prevent criminals, those under the influence, those unqualified, and the mentally ill from acquiring them so easily and using them so irresponsibly. The only outright 'bans' involve the sales and transfers of very specific types and models. Types and models which far exceed the level of firepower necessary for hunting or self defense.
In general, these states have lower rates of gun homicide per capita. There are anomalies but in general, that's the rule. Once the more strict gun laws are given time to have their desired effect in a given state, they do. It's well documented. These states are considered with all others when National gun crime rates are calculated.
For many years now, there have been extraordinary efforts on the part of law enforcement to reduce the numbers of guns on the street. Hundreds of thousands have been confiscated from criminals or bought back through well publicized events. Tens of thousands have been melted down. Tens of thousands more have been sold to gun shops who then re-sell them to law abiding citizens. Either way, the overall effect is positive. These efforts do effect national gun crime rates.
These efforts have been necessary to counter the constant flow of guns into America and onto the streets. Overall, the efforts of law enforcement are positive but it's a constant battle. One problem is that gun owners often sell them out of their garage or to a friend. They do so with no back round check. Others are stolen from irresponsible gun owners who fail to store or secure them properly. Because of these factors, street gangs and drug dealers are far more heavily armed now then they were 40 years ago. This is well documented.
In order to be prepared for what they often encounter, law enforcement agencies across America have had no choice but to drastically increase their own arsenals and levels of firepower. This helps to compensate for the sheer volume of guns on the streets of most major cities. Also for the wide-spread possession of assault weapons by ordinary citizens.
Another factor regarding those statistics is that street gang members and other criminals are far less likely to report gun crimes. Otherwise, the overall gun crime statistics would be slightly higher.
Regarding the Assault Weapon Ban in effect from 1994-2004. It's been reported to have a slight effect on overall gun crime rates but for the most part, it was designed specifically to effect the trend of mass shootings. In particular, those with higher body counts. This, it did very well. By reducing overall access to assault weapons and higher capacity magazines, psychos were made less likely to acquire them by any means. As a result, the trend of higher body count mass shootings was reversed almost immediately. In fact, that ten year time frame is the only ten year span within the last several decades in which no shooter, acting alone, was able to make the current 'Top Ten' list. Not a single one from 1994-2004.
Unfortunately, that federal ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines expired in 2004. Since then, we have seen the sharpest rise ever in higher body count mass shootings.
Now for a look at the dates of the top ten most deadly mass shootings in US history, the weapons used, the body counts, and the relevance of the now expired AWB.
#10. 1949. (Camden NJ, One handgun.)13 dead. Pre-ban.
#5. 1966. (University of Texas, Multiple firearms.) 16 dead. Pre-ban.
#4. 1984. (San Ysidro McDonald's, One UZI ASSAULT RIFLE with HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES, one handgun with HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINE, and one shotgun.) 21 dead. Pre-ban.
#6. 1986. (Edmond PO, Three handguns. One of which (the Ruger) may have been of high capacity. No confirmation.) 14 dead. Pre-ban.
#3. 1991. (Luby's Cafeteria, Two handguns. One or both with HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES.) 23 dead. Pre-ban.
Notice that a growing trend was evident as of 1991. Assault weapons and/or high capacity magazines were being used more often to achieve higher body counts.
#7. 1999. (Columbine, Two attackers. Multiple firearms and use of explosives.) 13 dead. Mid-ban.
The assault on Columbine High School was the only 'mass shooting' to make the current top ten list mid-ban. Unlike the others, that incident involved two attackers working together with explosives and extensive preparation. The firearms used were not effected by the AWB.
The ban on 'assault weapons' and high capacity magazines expired in 2004.
#8. 2009. (Immigration Services, Two hand guns with PREVIOUSLY BANNED HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES.) 13 dead. Post-ban.
#9. 2009. (Fort Hood, Two handguns. One or both with PREVIOUSLY BANNED HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES.) 13 dead. Post-ban.
#1. 2007. (Virginia Tech, Two separate attacks spaced roughly two hours apart. Two hand guns, 19 magazines, some of which were of PREVIOUSLY BANNED HIGH CAPACITY.) 32 dead. Post-ban.
#2. 2012. (Sandy Hook, ONE PREVIOUSLY BANNED AR-15 ASSAULT RIFLE with PREVIOUSLY BANNED HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES plus two handguns. EVERY SINGLE VICTIM WAS SHOT AT LEAST ONCE WITH THE PREVIOUSLY BANNED AR-15 ASSAULT RIFLE EQUIPPED WITH PREVIOUSLY BANNED '30 ROUND' MAGAZINES. EVERY SINGLE VICTIM.) 26 dead. Post-ban.
Again, 6 or 7 of the top 10 most deadly 'mass shootings' in US history have been carried out primarily, or in part with 'assault rifles' and/or high capacity magazines. This includes #1, #2, #3, #4, #8, #9, and possibly #6. Plus #11 and another 'mass shooting' which took place a few months ago in New Mexico. All four of the most recent top ten most deadly 'mass shootings' were carried out using previously banned 'assault weapons' and/or previously banned high capacity magazines. Record-high body counts were achieved as a direct result. The statistics above do not account for the deaths of the shooters.
The now expired ban saved lives not only by banning the sale of specific models of 'assault rifle' but also by banning the sale of high capacity magazines to private citizens. This effectively reduced access. Again, five of the top ten most deadly mass shootings in US history took place before the enactment of that ban. Two or three of which were carried out primarily, or in part, with specific models and/or magazines that would have been covered by that ban. Another four of the top ten most deadly mass shootings in US history have taken place since the expiration of that ban. Those four were all carried out primarily, or in part, using previously banned models and/or previously banned high capacity magazines. When high capacity magazines are used, they give the shooter the ability to carry more rounds, fire more shots, reload less often, and achieve a higher body count with greater ease. Confidence is almost certainly a factor as well.
The very presence of these 'assault weapons' in our society appears to have a negative influence on some. Adam Lanza and Nehemiah Greigo were both raised by gun fanatics. Both had access to a parent's AR-15 and high capacity magazines which they used to commit mass murder.
With all of these factors and details to consider, it is safe to say that 'more guns equals less crime' is a belief held by the terribly misinformed. The low information voter.
Just for the record: I am not a democrat. I am not anti-gun. I am a free thinking non-partisan owner of multiple firearms who believes in strong regulation. Regulation which no law abiding citizen has any reason to fear.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)