Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

A Sickness in US Society

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

A Sickness in US Society

Old 1st Sep 2015, 17:04
  #161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: egsh
Posts: 415
A new gun company claims to have a smart gun. It uses a fingerprint to allow firing. Can you imagine depending on that to work every time? Does it work on your cellphone EVERY time? And of course our idiot politicians are looking into it as a future feature requirement.

Once again, none of this is mentioned in the 2nd Amendment.
It would have required more foresight than that available to the drafters of the 2nd Amendment to provide for that nuance.

In 2015 things are possible which were not when the 2nd amenment was drafted.

The drafters were understandably a little stuck in their time and context.
wings folded is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2015, 17:38
  #162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 602
The drafters were understandably a little stuck in their time and context.
Quite right. Amazingly, the nation has persisted, as have their "antiquated" ideals of freedom, for close to 250 years. (With a few hiccups along the way.)

We change those "antiquated" ideals of freedom at our peril.
obgraham is online now  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 03:39
  #163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NV
Age: 71
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by wings folded View Post
It would have required more foresight than that available to the drafters of the 2nd Amendment to provide for that nuance.

In 2015 things are possible which were not when the 2nd amenment was drafted.

The drafters were understandably a little stuck in their time and context.
My point is there is no biological access method that works first time, every time. A cut on your finger will confuse the reader software. A medical change in your eyeball will confuse an optical sensor. Needing a gun in a situation will most likely increase pulse and perspiration confusing that type of sensor.
IBMJunkman is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 04:13
  #164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 54
Posts: 302
Junkman,

And of course seeing as the device would include a software component, what level of safety criticality would you have to set?

The simplest solutions are the safest, as soon as you add complexity you just increase the number of things that can go wrong....
Ogre is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 04:18
  #165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 71
Posts: 1,809
We change those "antiquated" ideals of freedom at our peril.
Seems to me like there's a great deal of confusion amongst many Americans between "ideals of freedom" and everyday regulations, rules and ordinances required to ensure a safe, peaceable and civil society.
The 2nd Amendment was not brought down from Mt Sinai on two stone tablets, as many Americans appear to believe.
Laws are required to be altered (read="amended" ) regularly to meet current social needs and technological developments.

The 2nd Amendment is a constitutional law which was designed to specifically defeat disarming of the nation by tyrannical rulers to ensure those tyrants could reduce opposition to their aims of tyrannical power.

In the 1700's, the idea that an armed civilian populace could resist, counter or overthrow a tyrannical Govt or ruler was quite feasible.
However, in the 21st century, the concept of civilians trying to assemble a multitude of armed civilian rabble into a force able to counter a Govt-organised attack on the civilian population, is laughable.

The fact that any Govt would launch a massive armed attack on their own people is laughable - yet tens of millions of Americans seem to believe this is going to happen - and they still need those handguns to ward off the tanks and nukes!
onetrack is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 05:02
  #166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,597
The fact that any Govt would launch a massive armed attack on their own people is laughable
Many said that exact same thing in 1930s Germany.
That didn't turn out so well.
In fact, genocide against significant portions of the population by it's own government have been all too common over the last 75 years, with a death toll in the tens of millions.
As for the general populace being capable of countering a tyrannical government, look no further than today's Middle East. The outcome may be a cluster, but don't say it's not feasible.

Last edited by tdracer; 2nd Sep 2015 at 05:12.
tdracer is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 08:50
  #167 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 72
Posts: 1,561
That is a good point, onetrack. In fact, the Supreme Court did take a new stance on the 2nd Amendment within living memory.

The 2nd Amendment reads so:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Here's a brief summary from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second...s_Constitution

Basically, the latest Supreme Court interpretation uncouples that first part, about the "well regulated militia" from the second part, "the right ... to bear arms .... "

An alternate interpretation is that the various state National Guard units form that "well regulated militia," with the right to keep and bear arms. In fact, they are often very heavily armed, but also strictly controlled. You may see Guardsmen patrolling but that's subject to orders from their state government; it's not like these amateur "Oath-keepers" and such, often just heavily armed riff-raff enjoying their current 2nd Amendment rights.

I think that the only way for things to change is for a new Supreme Court interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. That's perfectly possible, however it seems that we have a very short attention span on this issue. Each gun outrage triggers a flood of rhetoric, as here, but there are powerful political and economic forces that work to keep the present interpretation of the 2nd Amendment in place.

It's telling that, even here, one of the most vocal "anti-gun" voices also notes that he enjoyed the use of guns in the States. If he were truly, profoundly anti-gun then I think he would not have enjoyed shooting on the level he said that he did. As it is, this is like reading an account from a vegetarian of his visit to a famous steak house. Guns are both deadly and fun!

I was living and working in Miami in the early Eighties, when things were a bit wild there. At one point I was thinking about buying a very nice S&W .357 magnum pistol, because of a few encounters I had had, particularly one late at night on A1A when a couple of heavily tanned fellows in a battered pickup tried to force me onto the shoulder. I think they had robbery on their minds, and all I had was Mother's old Ka-Bar under the front seat of my car; something more seemed to be called for then.

Anyway, I thought about spending rather a lot of my dough on this nifty shooter, then I thought about how much trouble I could get into, either hitting some toe-rag and having to answer to the law, or else missing and ending up on the bottom of the second page of the Miami Herald as just another local corpse. Finally I just left Miami and the States, since that seemed the better option for many different reasons.

If I had stayed, then I suppose I would have bought that gun, not that that should make me "pro-gun" as such, given that I never bothered to own one later when living in Vermont, where having one is is less controlled than holding an open can of beer.
chuks is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 10:44
  #168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 142
Ok, who are you and what have you done with the real chuks?
Octopussy2 is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 12:21
  #169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 72
Posts: 1,561
Please define "real."

"Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes."

Wind-ups for the wind-up artists, reason for the reasonable, and would you like fries with that?
chuks is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 14:34
  #170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NV
Age: 71
Posts: 150
Originally Posted by Ogre View Post
Junkman,

And of course seeing as the device would include a software component, what level of safety criticality would you have to set?

The simplest solutions are the safest, as soon as you add complexity you just increase the number of things that can go wrong....
I don't want any controls other than mechanical ones. Like they already have.
IBMJunkman is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 20:20
  #171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 236
However, in the 21st century, the concept of civilians trying to assemble a multitude of armed civilian rabble into a force able to counter a Govt-organised attack on the civilian population, is laughable.
Ah yes. Then we must update the 2nd amendment to include all manner of man portable weapons. (manpads, antitank, mines etc etc) More importantly, electronic warfare devices and hacking software too.

Wait, the 2nd already covers these?

What's more valuable to partake in an insurgency these days? A gun store or a toy store?
FakePilot is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 21:15
  #172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,437
What's more valuable to partake in an insurgency these days? A gun store or a toy store?
One of each, obviously, so you can put together your own armed drone.
Gertrude the Wombat is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 21:47
  #173 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 72
Posts: 2,394
Originally Posted by Gertrude the Wombat View Post
One of each, obviously, so you can put together your own armed drone.
Can't do that, against the law.
con-pilot is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 21:50
  #174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,437
Can't do that, against the law.
The question seemed to about "insurgents", whom one might expect not to worry too much about what's against the law.

Anyway, if the bad guys have got armed drones you've gotta get one yourself, haven't you, to defend yourself.

Gertrude the Wombat is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 22:03
  #175 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 72
Posts: 2,394
Originally Posted by Gertrude the Wombat View Post
The question seemed to about "insurgents", whom one might expect not to worry too much about what's against the law.

Anyway, if the bad guys have got armed drones you've gotta get one yourself, haven't you, to defend yourself.


My comment was about the Law, you of course respect the Law. Nothing to do with "insurgents", but about discharging a fire arm from any civil aircraft or drone in the US. It is against the law, Federal Law.

Course just mounting a firearm in a drone could be legal, as long as you do not discharge said firearm.

You wouldn't do that would you, of course not, you obey and respect the law as we all do or should do.

By the way, I do not own a drone, how about you, you got one?
con-pilot is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 23:10
  #176 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
There is a video created by a Russian which depicts a drone mounted with a machine gun.

G-CPTN is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2015, 23:15
  #177 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 72
Posts: 2,394
Originally Posted by G-CPTN View Post
There is a video created by a Russian which depicts a drone mounted with a machine gun.

Yes, I've seen that video before, turns out it was faked.
con-pilot is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2015, 00:41
  #178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Western Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 809
the concept of civilians trying to assemble a multitude of armed civilian rabble into a force able to counter a Govt-organised attack on the civilian population, is laughable.
Don't be so sure on that, its important to keep in context the time frames and evolution of that potential.

The fact that any Govt would launch a massive armed attack on their own people is laughable - yet tens of millions of Americans seem to believe this is going to happen - and they still need those handguns to ward off the tanks and nukes!
Large internal civil wars are the worse and potentially hardest to take care of. Such a eventuality would only happen after a long slow build up, and you would find your states and military would split as that sort of thing happens.

So thinking theres going to be a sudden application of force by a central government in the foreseeable future is unlikely, that may not always be the case.

The fact is, we are slowly become a fractured society with a large difference in values. When that happens, society become unstable and conflicting interests can cause it fracture.

If it gets bad enough, then sooner or later someone decides they won't go along with the democratic result, and hence resort to forcing there own way.

Whether they be a freedom fighter or terrorist, is dependent on their support in the base population.
rh200 is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2015, 01:21
  #179 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 72
Posts: 2,394
The fact that any Govt would launch a massive armed attack on their own people is laughable
Oh really, never heard of the term 'Civil War'? A government at war with its citizens. Even Great Britain had one.

Hardly a laughing matter.
con-pilot is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2015, 03:22
  #180 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 51
Posts: 1,687
IBMJ, I appreciate your information regarding bullet ID schemes. I understand the microprinting guns can easily be modified with a file and it only applies to semi-automatic weapons that eject their casings.

What I was thinking of was more along the lines of the micro ID discs fired from tazer guns - if somehow these could be made to survive the firing process.

It is interesting to note that prior to the 1960's a full 70% of Americans favored hand gun control. That figure is reversed today.

I think that the only way for things to change is for a new Supreme Court interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.
Might have to wait a bit, because it will never happen in the Roberts court although it came close with the case regarding a hand gun ban in DC. (5-4). Justice Scalia's ideaology led to the decoupling of the phrase "well regulated militia" from the "right to keep and bear arms".
vapilot2004 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.