And some people think that ...

[GregM]

and from abroad...

[GreyGeek]

I checked it again.
The facts, as reported, indicate the guys in the invaded trailer were expecting the visitors. "Home invasion" is perhaps not the best characterization of what happened there.

However, the first two words are "Investigators suspect". That's not proof. For 15 years I made part of my living by investigating homicides after investigators were finished. In most cases at least a year after they were done. Rarely did they suspect what actually happened, and their proofs for what they thought did happen were woefully shy of supporting facts or evidence. That's why I was called.

And, if the two groups in the home invasion were that familiar with each other what was the purpose of the mask(s)? Voices alone would be a dead give-away. And, I find the idea that some of group of invaders did not know that others in the group were carrying weapons (probably illegally) laughable. "I suspect" that more than likely they were ALL armed and those that escaped probably ditched their guns somewhere before they were apprehended.

[GregM]

and if the group in the house trailer was "expecting" them they would probably have had protective walls/barriers in place to hide behind and shoot from.
I would

[dibl]

However, the first two words are "Investigators suspect". That's not proof. ...

OK let me understand, please. You posted a link to a news article, offered as evidence that limits on magazine capacity would be unreasonable because people might break into your trailer with AR-15s. However, upon review of the opinion of the investigators of the incident, you dislike the conclusion they have reached. Therefore, you dispute the value of their opinions as "not proof", thereby disputing the credibility of your own post. Good one!

Regarding your 15 years of experience, and my 67 years of life, I would say this -- you were not there, and I was not there. It was an incident in a trailer park between two groups, each apparently armed with AR-15s, among other weapons. If nobody had had magazines with more than 8 or 10 rounds, then we don't know how many killed and wounded would be left today. So we actually have exactly zero more information about the wisdom of a limit on magazine capacity than we had yesterday. We only have a questionable anecdote about what MAY have happened in a trailer park one day.

[jglen490]

Commie newspeak
Someone comes through a window or door in the middle of the night with a weapon, it is no longer "a feud", if it ever was.

I love that judgment "commie (followed by anything)". it reminds me of the good old days in the Cold War - not really ...

The only thing that goes next to my bed at night are my slippers. And I sleep well.

[GreyGeek]

Of course I disagree. When did suspicions rise to the level of proof? And, disagreeing with speculation doesn't alter the intent or conclusion of my original post. And, it doesn't matter that both groups may have been involved in illegal enterprises and were competing, if that was what the "feud" was speculated to be. The occupants of the home were within their rights to defend themselves within their own home.

I posted that article to show that limits on magazine size are more dangerous to the law-abiding gun owner than thugs who ignore the law. The 5 (or 7?) people raiding the house could and probably would have outgunned the occupants save for the AR-15 used by an occupant, and its magazine capacity. That capacity could be either 10, 15, 20 or 30 rounds. Some drums have even 50 round capacities. But most smart thugs use 15-18 round dual stack Glocks or, if they use AR-15's, 30 round mags. If you, as the defender of your home and family, cannot match that capacity because some politician decided unilaterally that you shouldn't have access to that size of magazine then they might as well shoot you themselves. And Joe Biden's advice of using a double barrel shotgun and shooting two rounds into the air to "scare them off" is both an illegal discharge of a firearm in my state, and a stupid thing to do, especially if the thugs are already at the door or are inside.

Even if multiple intruders are only armed with knives and blackjacks the assault could result in the home owner's death. Within the last year here in Lincoln we've had two people killed by a single blow of a fist to their head. Knives and knucks only insure possible lethal results. The occupants are within their rights to use lethal force.

Here is a women using a dual stack firearm to ward off three ARMED home invaders. Even then, you can tell by the slide locked back that she had run out of ammo and wasn't carrying an extra mag. Lucky. Should have had an extra mag in her other hand, not a smart phone. You cannot have too much ammo in a gun fight.

[GregM]

The only thing that goes next to my bed at night are my slippers. And I sleep well.

Good for you.
It's your choice.
Thank god you have a choice

[Bings]

I am pretty sure that nobody on the internet has an opinion on gun control that can be influenced by another person's internet posting or probably anything. It's all just confirmation of bias.

[GreyGeek]

And some people think that ...

I am pretty sure that nobody on the internet has an opinion on gun control that can be influenced by another person's internet posting or probably anything. It's all just confirmation of bias.

Right. Every opinion, and even research or conclusions based on research can be called “confirmation bias”, thus that accusation has no strength as a counter argument or dismissal of one. It’s a gun the shoots in both directions, hitting the target and the shooter at the same time.

But, if one side of an issue, doesn’t present its views on a topic the other side “wins” be default because it appears that everyone agrees with the vocal side.

[GregM]

I am pretty sure that nobody on the internet has an opinion on gun control that can be influenced by another person's internet posting or probably anything. It's all just confirmation of bias.

Yes, if for no other reason than just ornery stubbornness.
However there is potential for the planting of a seed which may take root someday.

It happens with children a lot.
Usually they don't accept an elder's teachings until something happens to them that they will then reflect on, remember the words of wisdom and then learn from. (But not admit to.)

[TWPonKubuntu]

GregM: Hear! Hear!

That is the exact reason why one must make their views known. Particularly when they conflict with the views of others.

I think polite discussion is best, of course, but I've also seen that devolve into a "flaming" match, usually as a result of one side (or both) being unable to support their point of view.

In today's world of 'net connectedness, too many people think that it grants anonymity, that they are somehow insulated from the consequences of holding a stance which is at odds with that of someone else... Most often, in my experience, it is the younger age person who thinks they are "safe" behind their computer... They (the young) are also the first to be butt-hurt when they are called out on their viewpoint.

We've only to look at the current set of school children (all age ranges) to see this in action. I also see a driving force Behind those children which is using them to further other agenda... TPTB are using children to push their viewpoint, via the media which is more than willing to be used since it draws attention (and money) toward the media creators.

I hope the children have enough time to grown older and wiser... History suggested that is not going to happen for many.

[dibl]

I am pretty sure that nobody on the internet has an opinion on gun control that can be influenced by another person's internet posting or probably anything. It's all just confirmation of bias.

Yep. You could omit "on gun control" from that sentence, and make it even more true.

FWIW, I'm no gun control enthusiast, more of a "enforce what's on the books today" enthusiast. But it seems the feds can't, or won't. That opens the door for the control crowd. Too bad, really. I'm afraid it won't take all that many more mass shootings of children to swing the pendulum, hard, against law-abiding gun owners like myself. I'd rather accept a few controls around the edge, like magazine capacity limits, than see the pressure build to the point of bans on entire classes of weapons. I think it's actually headed that way, at this moment.

[GreyGeek]

....
I'd rather accept a few controls around the edge, like magazine capacity limits, than see the pressure build to the point of bans on entire classes of weapons. I think it's actually headed that way, at this moment.

"... a few controls around the edge ..." is the exact definition of "infringement".

History has shown, and the Left is currently proving, that their goal was and is total banning. Give an inch and they'll take the mile. Their current movement is to repeal the 2nd Amendment, which they have no hope of ever doing because it takes 2/3ds of state legislatures to approve that proposal and they don't control that many state houses. But, that position is their "throw-away" in pursuit of more concessions and controls. "We won't ask for repeal of the 2A if you agree to pass laws outlawing the possession of the AR-15". Agree to that and a year or two later, if that long, and after yet another psycho shoots up another XXX, they'll claim "we made a mistake, it wasn't the AR-15 that is the problem, it is the semi-auto handgun. We won't ask for the repeal of the 2A if you agree to making ownership of semi-auto handguns illegal. After all, you have your bolt action and muzzle loading hunting rifles, what more do you need?"

The 2A has never been about hunting. It has always been, and still is, about resisting government gone rogue. What is a rogue government? Show me a government that has weaponized the IRS against non-Leftists, who has armed the Congressional Library with a SWAT team, who has made the EPA and NASA into socialist propaganda organizations, who has sent swarms of armed agents to attack farmers and ranchers working in their fields and on lands they've rented for more than a generation, who created a phony gun-running scheme to enable them to accuse legal firearms dealers of selling illegal weapons to border gangs, and the list goes on and on .... show me that and I'll show you a rogue government.

We are at a point right now where the views that have been held by so many Americans for so long (nearly 250 years) are so diametrically opposite from the views expressed and nurtured by the Left that that compromise is no longer possible.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/...ral-segregate/
"California has such a different view of the relationship between citizen and state, it’s virtually seceding from the Constitution, overriding the First Amendment time and again for the sake of “social justice.” And now its legislature is even taking the first steps to implement a $400 billion single-payer health plan — a plan so expensive and radical that even Governor Brown is skeptical. The trends are clear. In the age of Trump, California is determined to go its own way."

There is no longer a "United" States. It is a country trying to accommodate two separate and politically opposite cultures. Walter Williams has a short piece at Townhall.com in which he makes this statement:
"I believe we are nearing a point where there are enough irreconcilable differences between those Americans who want to control other Americans and those Americans who want to be left alone that separation is the only peaceable alternative. Just as in a marriage, where vows are broken, our human rights protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution have been grossly violated by a government instituted to protect them."

Williams adds:
"I think it is already here. People who can afford to do so are already moving out of the failed Democrat cities and states like Los Angeles and California and seeking small-state/low-tax places like Texas. This, of course, is accelerating the fiscal collapse of the former. New Jersey and, perhaps, Massachusetts are attempting to reverse their fiscal collapse. Certainly, the voters in those states want their state governments to shrink. Everything, it seems, hinges on the results of this November’s mid-term elections."


Some are asking if it is possible the "cold" cultural war would turn hot? Not unless the Left disavows its hatred of guns and war and takes up guns to fight a war. Our nation solved one political stalemate by war: slavery. More Americans were killed in that civil war than were killed in all the other wars that Americans have been in, combined. I see the issue of American being a Republic under the Rule of Law determined by the Constitution versus attempts by "hope and change" to convert America into a Socialist state under a Marxist manifesto being one which could and would trigger another hot civil war.

This humorous email sums up the political differences:
https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.co...for-a-divorce/

but it is no longer a laughing matter, or one which can not be dismissed out of hand.

[GregM]

"Like"

[GreyGeek]

An increasingly common example of ...

what concerns me.
Suppose you are surfing the web and you make a comment on some site that the president of the bank you bank at disagrees with. He sends you a letter telling you to stop making such comments because they violate his guidelines. You didn't post it on the bank website, or on any website associated with the bank. The bank president decided unilaterally that he can use his economic power to silence you anywhere on the web. Just go to another bank? What if that is the only bank in town? Or, the bank presidents are colluding?

Here is an example of Patreon doing exactly that:



Notice the contradiction in the second paragraph:
"These guidelines are designed to ensure that content creators of all types can use Patreon effectively to build their creative business."

Obviously not. I left the Instagram link visible.

Fortunately for me, for the moment, Patreon's acts of free speech suppression of view points unapproved by Patreon owners Jack Conte and Sam Yam is not a problem for me, and probably never will be, because I have no plans to use Patreon for anything. But, if your creative talent isn't focused Left of center then you need not apply to Patreon as a transfer agent.