Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[Pattern Ghost]

6 hours ago, TrickstaPriest said:

Even if I wonder what the hell happened to the ATF in all of this, and who might have systematically undermined them to help create the crises we are now experiencing...

 

What happened to the ATF and which crises, exactly?

[TrickstaPriest]

3 minutes ago, Pattern Ghost said:

 

What happened to the ATF and which crises, exactly?

The ATF is supposed to watch and track gun ownership.  My limited awareness of them is they've been hampered and cut down.  Largely because they aren't allowed to keep records of gun owners anymore?

 

I'm just wondering how many of these shootings could have been prevented with better ability of the ATF to monitor this kind of activity.

[Pattern Ghost]

4 hours ago, TrickstaPriest said:

The ATF is supposed to watch and track gun ownership. 

 

Not exactly, but I'll get back to this at the end.

 

4 hours ago, TrickstaPriest said:

My limited awareness of them is they've been hampered and cut down. 

 

I can only find some stories about staff reductions from budget cuts around 2011/2012 time frame. I'm not aware of any more recent budget cuts. The up surge in gun sales during the Obama administration, and the rising popularity of suppressors has caused them a huge workload that they struggle to keep up with. Processing for NFA items (more on this in a minute) has been pretty slow the last few years, for example. I'm not aware of anything else going on at the moment. They've always had a hard time with record keeping for the purposes of traces (more on that below, too.)

 

4 hours ago, TrickstaPriest said:

Largely because they aren't allowed to keep records of gun owners anymore? 

 

They never actually have. It's not really one of their functions. More on this, too in a minute.

 

4 hours ago, TrickstaPriest said:

I'm just wondering how many of these shootings could have been prevented with better ability of the ATF to monitor this kind of activity. 

 

The answer is zero. The ATF's role isn't one that would have a very direct impact on preventing shootings.

 

With regards to private firearms sales, the ATF's role is primarily enforcing regulations. You have to have a license to sell firearms or manufacture firearms for sale. The ATF is the enforcer of these licenses. The National Firearms Act of 1934 made it more difficult to obtain certain classes of weapons, including fully automatic weapons, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns and silencers (among others). It did not make them illegal, but there is a requirement for a tax stamp to transfer an item on the NFA list. The cost of the stamp is $200 (fairly prohibitive in 1934; the average annual income was $1600 according to Google). The ATF manages the applications for tax stamps. Finally, when someone purchases a firearm, they fill out ATF Form 4473, which the ATF processes.

 

When you fill out a form 4473, you're basically attesting that you aren't a prohibited person. Lying on the form is a criminal offense. The background check is run trough the NICS by the gun shop after filling out the 4473. Most states also require a state and/or local level background check, and some impose further licensing or permitting requirements. So, from the buyer standpoint, here's what typically happens: You go to the retailer, you decide to buy a firearm, and the store fills out a 4473, then phones in the NICS check. If there's no state level background check or waiting period requirement (almost always is), then you get your gun and walk out the door. In Washington, for example, there's a requirement for a state background check for a handgun, which usually takes a couple of days to get back. It's waived if you have a valid concealed pistol license. In other states, there may be a mandatory waiting period.

 

Now, from the LE side, the ATF has a couple of additional roles it plays. First, it enforces laws against straw purchases. A straw purchase is basically when someone who isn't a prohibited person buys a firearm for someone who is. Most gun stores are actually very proactive in spotting these, and they're required to report them to the ATF. The ATF sometimes does sting operations to catch straw purchasers. Or, in the case of Operation Fast and Furious, facilitates the straw purchases (:facepalm:).

 

Another role the ATF plays is in tracing firearms. Their system for traces is frequently criticized (rightfully, IMO) for being antiquated. (I'd advise fact checking or bias checking anything from Vice, but that article is still pretty spot on as far as how bad the system is.) But as far as keeping track of who owns what? Not so much.

 

Edit: Another thing the ATF does to prevent trafficking is to investigate multiple gun sales within a short period of time. Link with info on that.

 

When you fill out a form 4473, the gun shop/seller keeps the form on file. All FFLs are required to keep the forms on file for (IIRC) 20 years. After that, they can do whatever they want. Many destroy the forms. If an FFL goes out of business, then their existing paperwork all goes to the ATF. This has been until very recently actual paper forms. (Some shops now use an electronic form, which should provide for better record keeping.)

 

I think the two links two paragraphs up pretty much cover traces. Traces are, of course, only useful after a crime has been committed. As for prevention? The ATF plays no role. That's on the background check system. The system needs an overhaul.

 

Here's a link from the ATF's What We Do page about their role with firearms.

 

In the case of many of the recent mass shooters, the systematic failure was in various agencies failing to get the shooter onto the prohibited persons list. We don't have nearly the level of reporting that we should.

 

Final thoughts: I get the impression that when you're mainly talking about the recent problems we've had here with mass shootings.I believe mass shootings are contagious in the same way that suicides are contagious. Remember the recent suicides of Anthony Bourdain and Kate Spade one after another? Calls to suicide prevention hotlines increased after these deaths, and there was a fair bit of additional advertising in my area for the hotlines.  It's because it has been very well known for decades that when suicides get a lot of press, people commit more suicides. I believe the same kind of contagion is true in the case of mass shooters. Most of them who leave manifestos specifically mention their predecessors. Washington Post link. The Atlantic link. Scientific American link.

 

I think one thing we can do is figure out a way to get more agencies to report possible prohibited persons.

 

I think we have a fair idea of some indicators of potential shooters. The Parkland turd gave more than ample warning signs, but law enforcement failed at early intervention.

 

I think that once a mass shooting is in progress, it has been proven that rapid, competent engagement is the best response. That doesn't mean a school resource officer and two local PD sitting outside the building like cowards. It means competent, brave individuals meeting force with force. Like this man. (Also at Parkland, but off duty.) Or this one: Lone resource officer's quick action stopped the Maryland school shooter within seconds. Unfortunately, we don't have a sufficient supply of such people.

 

Disclaimer: I made a bunch of assertions in this post that I felt needed some links to provide further clarity/information. Aside from straight informational links from government sources, I'm not endorsing any of these articles. I scanned them and believe them to be generally accurate in their factual assertions, but it's up to the reader to detect any political bias or slant in the articles and to critically assess any large claims made in anything they read.

 

Well, this got quite long, apologies to anyone who suffered all the way through it.

 

[csyphrett]

6 minutes ago, Pattern Ghost said:

 

Not exactly, but I'll get back to this at the end.

 

 

I can only find some stories about staff reductions from budget cuts around 2011/2012 time frame. I'm not aware of any more recent budget cuts. The up surge in gun sales during the Obama administration, and the rising popularity of suppressors has caused them a huge workload that they struggle to keep up with. Processing for NFA items (more on this in a minute) has been pretty slow the last few years, for example. I'm not aware of anything else going on at the moment. They've always had a hard time with record keeping for the purposes of traces (more on that below, too.)

 

 

They never actually have. It's not really one of their functions. More on this, too in a minute.

 

 

The answer is zero. The ATF's role isn't one that would have a very direct impact on preventing shootings.

 

With regards to private firearms sales, the ATF's role is primarily enforcing regulations. You have to have a license to sell firearms or manufacture firearms for sale. The ATF is the enforcer of these licenses. The National Firearms Act of 1934 made it more difficult to obtain certain classes of weapons, including fully automatic weapons, short barreled rifles, short barreled shotguns and silencers (among others). It did not make them illegal, but there is a requirement for a tax stamp to transfer an item on the NFA list. The cost of the stamp is $200 (fairly prohibitive in 1934; the average annual income was $1600 according to Google). The ATF manages the applications for tax stamps. Finally, when someone purchases a firearm, they fill out ATF Form 4473, which the ATF processes.

 

When you fill out a form 4473, you're basically attesting that you aren't a prohibited person. Lying on the form is a criminal offense. The background check is run trough the NICS by the gun shop after filling out the 4473. Most states also require a state and/or local level background check, and some impose further licensing or permitting requirements. So, from the buyer standpoint, here's what typically happens: You go to the retailer, you decide to buy a firearm, and the store fills out a 4473, then phones in the NICS check. If there's no state level background check or waiting period requirement (almost always is), then you get your gun and walk out the door. In Washington, for example, there's a requirement for a state background check for a handgun, which usually takes a couple of days to get back. It's waived if you have a valid concealed pistol license. In other states, there may be a mandatory waiting period.

 

Now, from the LE side, the ATF has a couple of additional roles it plays. First, it enforces laws against straw purchases. A straw purchase is basically when someone who isn't a prohibited person buys a firearm for someone who is. Most gun stores are actually very proactive in spotting these, and they're required to report them to the ATF. The ATF sometimes does sting operations to catch straw purchasers. Or, in the case of Operation Fast and Furious, facilitates the straw purchases (:facepalm:).

 

Another role the ATF plays is in tracing firearms. Their system for traces is frequently criticized (rightfully, IMO) for being antiquated. (I'd advise fact checking or bias checking anything from Vice, but that article is still pretty spot on as far as how bad the system is.) But as far as keeping track of who owns what? Not so much.

 

When you fill out a form 4473, the gun shop/seller keeps the form on file. All FFLs are required to keep the forms on file for (IIRC) 20 years. After that, they can do whatever they want. Many destroy the forms. If an FFL goes out of business, then their existing paperwork all goes to the ATF. This has been until very recently actual paper forms. (Some shops now use an electronic form, which should provide for better record keeping.)

 

I think the two links two paragraphs up pretty much cover traces. Traces are, of course, only useful after a crime has been committed. As for prevention? The ATF plays no role. That's on the background check system. The system needs an overhaul.

 

Here's a link from the ATF's What We Do page about their role with firearms.

 

In the case of many of the recent mass shooters, the systematic failure was in various agencies failing to get the shooter onto the prohibited persons list. We don't have nearly the level of reporting that we should.

 

Final thoughts: I get the impression that when you're mainly talking about the recent problems we've had here with mass shootings.I believe mass shootings are contagious in the same way that suicides are contagious. Remember the recent suicides of Anthony Bourdain and Kate Spade one after another? Calls to suicide prevention hotlines increased after these deaths, and there was a fair bit of additional advertising in my area for the hotlines.  It's because it has been very well known for decades that when suicides get a lot of press, people commit more suicides. I believe the same kind of contagion is true in the case of mass shooters. Most of them who leave manifestos specifically mention their predecessors. Washington Post link. The Atlantic link. Scientific American link.

 

I think one thing we can do is figure out a way to get more agencies to report possible prohibited persons.

 

I think we have a fair idea of some indicators of potential shooters. The Parkland turd gave more than ample warning signs, but law enforcement failed at early intervention.

 

I think that once a mass shooting is in progress, it has been proven that rapid, competent engagement is the best response. That doesn't mean a school resource officer and two local PD sitting outside the building like cowards. It means competent, brave individuals meeting force with force. Like this man. (Also at Parkland, but off duty.) Or this one: Lone resource officer's quick action stopped the Maryland school shooter within seconds. Unfortunately, we don't have a sufficient supply of such people.

 

Disclaimer: I made a bunch of assertions in this post that I felt needed some links to provide further clarity/information. Aside from straight informational links from government sources, I'm not endorsing any of these articles. I scanned them and believe them to be generally accurate in their factual assertions, but it's up to the reader to detect any political bias or slant in the articles and to critically assess any large claims made in anything they read.

 

Well, this got quite long, apologies to anyone who suffered all the way through it.

 

It's cool. I remember reading somewhere that since Congress won't let the ATF computerize a gun registry, they have to take the serial number and go to the original gun shop and run things down from there until they find the last owner of record which could take days.

 

The bias comes in when the reason the ATF can't computerize these purchases is because of NRA/lobbying interests.

 

Personally I feel that if fingerprints and DNA and tire prints and turkey stuff can all be tracked with a government  database, I have no problem with a gun registry, because the gun should already be registered.  Every time I hear the government is coming to get my guns, I think they should because you are a big idiot and you shouldn't own a firearm.

CES  

[Pattern Ghost]

15 minutes ago, csyphrett said:

I remember reading somewhere that since Congress won't let the ATF computerize a gun registry,

 

That's addressed in the Vice article I linked. It probably bears some fact-checking, but outlines some of the barriers involved. (I just noticed it incorrectly names the Firearm Owner's Protection Act as the Firearms Protection Act. Vice stuff usually requires some effort to fact check, but the rough outline there seems decent enough.)

 

18 minutes ago, csyphrett said:

The bias comes in when the reason the ATF can't computerize these purchases is because of NRA/lobbying interests. 

 

The ATF doesn't keep a record of sales. The FFL (dealer) keeps the record. The only case where the ATF keeps the records is as I stated above, when the FFL goes out of business. I personally don't think they should have what would amount to a de facto national registry.

 

20 minutes ago, csyphrett said:

I have no problem with a gun registry, because the gun should already be registered. 

 

I disagree.

 

20 minutes ago, csyphrett said:

Every time I hear the government is coming to get my guns, I think they should because you are a big idiot and you shouldn't own a firearm.

 

Um. No, you?

 

 

I don't actually think anyone's coming for any guns any time soon. But things change. If we provide the current government with too much leeway in violating our constitutional rights (not just the right to keep and bear arms, but all of the others that have been weakened by first the War on Drugs and lately the War on Terror), then we're potentially screwing over people down the road. So, IMO, not letting the government chip away at our rights isn't an entirely bad thing.

 

[DShomshak]

The cartoon in the July 14, 2018 issue of the Economist certainly called it. As the National Public Radio reporter who covered the Helsinki press conference put it, Trump constantly presents himself as this big tough alpha male, but there was only one alpha male on stage in Helsinki, and it wasn't Donald Trump.

 

I'd put it a little more crudely: Any country's leader watching that press conference could only conclude that he'd do better to make a deal with Putin, because Trump is Putin's bitch. Dunno whether it's because Putin has some incredible kompomat or other leverage on Trump as Nancy Pelosi suggests, or if Trump's obsession with strength and power impels him to fawn on men who really have the power and dominance he craves and merely pretends to possess.

 

The reporter also commented upon Trump's extraordinary babbling digression about Hillary Clinton and her emails. 18 months in office, Trump is still trying to tear her down as if there was doubt he really won the election. Reminds me of a child caught misbehaving, desperately trying to deflect the grown-up's attention onto something, anything, else.

 

All in all, a bizarre and appalling performance.

 

Dean Shomshak

 

 

[Lord Liaden]

Trump's behavior during the recent conferences is typical for a bully. The EU/NATO leaders treated him with the respect and deference due his office, which he interpreted as weakness, so he walked all over them. Putin made Trump wait forty-five minutes overtime for their meeting, to establish his dominance, and Trump folded like a cheap suit.

 

Notice that now that Trump is back in his own yard, he's started barking again.

[Lord Liaden]

3 hours ago, DShomshak said:

The cartoon in the July 14, 2018 issue of the Economist certainly called it. As the National Public Radio reporter who covered the Helsinki press conference put it, Trump constantly presents himself as this big tough alpha male, but there was only one alpha male on stage in Helsinki, and it wasn't Donald Trump.

 

 

In my opinion, Donald Trump has spent his whole life playing games with the equivalent of monopoly money, in which his family's wealth and status, and the cleverness of his lawyers and accountants, have shielded him from the worst consequences of his many faults and failures. I believe this has led him to believe he's much tougher, smarter, and more successful than he actually is. But in Vladimir Putin, and to a lesser extent Kim Jong-un, he's dealing with men who have spent most of their lives learning to survive and succeed at games where the stakes are literal life or death. Trump hasn't a clue how to play on that field.

 

Comparing Putin with Trump is like comparing a barracuda with a blowfish.

[Pattern Ghost]

1 hour ago, Lord Liaden said:

Notice that now that Trump is back in his own yard, he's started barking again. 

 

This analogy* is unfair to dogs.

 

 

 

*Edit: Hmm. It's probably more of a metaphor than analogy come to think of it.

[Lord Liaden]

3 hours ago, DShomshak said:

The reporter also commented upon Trump's extraordinary babbling digression about Hillary Clinton and her emails. 18 months in office, Trump is still trying to tear her down as if there was doubt he really won the election. Reminds me of a child caught misbehaving, desperately trying to deflect the grown-up's attention onto something, anything, else.

 

 

Deflection is the go-to defense used by both Trump and many of his media supporters. To which I wish I could respond, whatever Hillary Clinton did or didn't do, she isn't President of the United States. She isn't the representative of America to the world. She doesn't make decisions affecting billions of lives. Her culpability and fitness aren't the pressing issues.

 

But repeatedly impugning the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton's election conduct is a tactic to try to discredit whatever conclusion the Mueller investigation comes to. Which is a big reason why Trump doesn't want to support the conclusion that Russia interfered with the American election. Because if he acknowledges that, it actually would cast doubt on whether he really won.

[Old Man]

NYT: Trump was shown undeniable proof of Putin's interference in the 2016 elections on January 6 2017 and has publicly denied it ever since

 

Bonus linked article: Russia is preparing a cyberattack on US electrical and water infrastructure

[Lord Liaden]

President Trump seems to share the same philosophical orientation as his supporters:

 

[Cygnia]

With more poop flinging

[Lord Liaden]

Israel adopts divisive Jewish nation-state law

 

It feels like the ideal of the community of humankind is in retreat around the world recently.

 

[DShomshak]

2 hours ago, Lord Liaden said:

President Trump seems to share the same philosophical orientation as his supporters:

 

Except in this case, perhaps it should be interpreted as "See no facts, hear no facts, speak no facts."

 

Trump certainly speaks plenty of evil.

 

Dean Shomshak

[Starlord]

Cohen recorded Trump discussing payment to Playboy model

[Old Man]

AIUI he recorded way more than that.

 

Meanwhile,

 

[Old Man]

[Vondy]

"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." --James Madison.

 

Trump just had a Neville Chamberlain moment.

 

I presume his meeting with Putin will amount to peace in our time....

[csyphrett]

Mike Cernovich, Author of pizzagate, blasts Disney's Twitter until they fire James Gunn for bad jokes he made ten years ago. Online petition has reached almost a hundred k to have him hired back.

CES 

[TrickstaPriest]

It'd be really nice if we had an electorate that was concerned about global warming and how the combination of abusive rhetoric and eroding rights would be used to exploit the inevitable emergency situations to follow, crushing the brief concepts of individual rights and freedom that exist in our entire world until automation turns even the concept of citizenry superfluous.

 

Don't worry, you may still be able to get a job as a medical slave.

[TrickstaPriest]

Sorry for being so negative.  It just astounds me that the biggest concern some people have is 'that mexico wall' or how people 'don't appreciate what Trump's done with North Korea'.  If all that anger about political correctness went to something actually useful...

 

Man, North Korea might be the only thing he's ever done that I ~might~ like... if he doesn't eff it up.

[Lord Liaden]

We do have such an electorate. The issue is that they're not the whole of the electorate, and not the part that's supporting the parties currently controlling government.

[Old Man]

1 hour ago, TrickstaPriest said:

Man, North Korea might be the only thing he's ever done that I ~might~ like... if he doesn't eff it up.

 

I have some bad news for you.

[Lord Liaden]

7 hours ago, Old Man said:

 

I have some bad news for you.

 

In private, Trump vents frustration over lack of progress on North Korea

 

“Trump has been hit with a strong dose of reality of North Korea’s negotiating style, which is always hard for Americans to ­understand,” said Duyeon Kim, a Korea expert at the Center for a New American Security.