Man started a gunfight in a gun range/shop. Found out why that was a stupid idea.

[satx78247]

i changed my avatar.. the donkey ran away.

Analog Kid,

OK.

FYI, I'm looking for a fast/smooth gaited SADDLE DONKEY or MULE that is BIG/STRONG ENOUGH to carry 185 pounds of me, plus saddle/tack, canteens, bedroll, carbine/scabbard & other misc. stuff OR about 250 pounds all day for trail-riding & big-game hunting..= Probably an animal of .over 13 hands & 800 pounds minimum.

yours, satx

 

[Axxe55]

SATX, you are such a hypocrite. You make long posts about freedom of speech, but go out of your way to chastise others for their freedom of speech, including insults and personal attacks on those that disagree with you on anything.

Maybe you should heed you own advice. If what other people post, even if it's silly cartoons as you imply, then go somewhere else and read other threads.

 

[Axxe55]

Analog Kid,

OK.

FYI, I'm looking for a fast/smooth gaited SADDLE DONKEY or MULE that is BIG/STRONG ENOUGH to carry 185 pounds of me, plus saddle/tack, canteens, bedroll, carbine/scabbard & other misc. stuff OR about 250 pounds all day for trail-riding & big-game hunting..= Probably an animal of .over 13 hands & 800 pounds minimum.

yours, satx

Just curious, you plan in taking it with you to Spain, or Italy or Portugal with you when you move? Or did you change your mind?

 

[Aus_Schwaben]

Anyone know what gun he had?

Based on the magazine, I am betting it was a Glock.

 

[satx78247]

Based on the magazine, I am betting it was a Glock.

Aus Schwaben,

Perhaps it was that, " VERY DANGEROUS FULL-AUTOMATIC MACHINE REVOLVER, that will fire over 100 times a minute without reloading & that sprays cop-killer bullets out to over 500 yards."

NO JOKE, a "talking blond empty-head" on CNN actually reported that FOOLISHNESS "on the morning news" some 18 months ago.= Some of the anti-gun crowd are TOO STUPID to be ALIVE.

yours, satx

 

[Analog Kid]

 

[Analog Kid]

newton co. Missouri... hmm, seems like a nice place to live.

 

[Analog Kid]

Just curious, you plan in taking it with you to Spain, or Italy or Portugal with you when you move? Or did you change your mind?

You know axxe, I reported this troll to the moderators.. they have an eye on him, obviously he doesn't want to be a friendly part of our family.. I am ignoring him till he shapes up. Every one else should do the same for now.

 

[Maverick44]

Anyone know what gun he had?

Just a guess, but probably a Glock. SGM makes 31 rd Glock mags for 40 S&W, and ETS makes 31rders for 9mm.

 

[bbbass]

You know axxe, I reported this troll to the moderators.. they have an eye on him, obviously he doesn't want to be a friendly part of our family.. I am ignoring him till he shapes up. Every one else should do the same for now.

I had planned to avoid putting people on IGNORE, that plan has failed. In case members are curious as to why I am not responding to a certain person... that is it. Enough BS has transpired that it seems disruptive.

 

[bbbass]

Just a guess, but probably a Glock. SGM makes 31 rd Glock mags for 40 S&W, and ETS makes 31rders for 9mm.

Agreed.

If it was a Glock 9mm OEM mag, it would be a 33rd.

 

[popper]

The REAL number of innocent people, who get "railroaded", is VERY FEW
True.
Like the guy who was let out, killed a gal & cut her heart out, took it home to cook with potatoes?

 

[Axxe55]

There are much better articles and a press briefing from Jefferson Parish Sheriff Lopinto here https://wwltv.com/embeds/video/289-79f33a51-5050-4562-9c01-0a3cd02cad56/iframe?jwsource=cl

This is very concerning, eery, and sad. They are having a hard time coming up with a motive. Why aren't they at least floating out there this may have been a hate crime. His mother has already posted on Facebook he did not shoot first, that the employees shot at him first. There is a ton of video disputing this. And to do this with his brother and brothers two young children...unbelievable. You just never, ever, know. Disturbing to say the least. Another situation that will be used against our 2nd Amendment rights.

Somehow, I knew that was going to surface at some point. He's a victim in some way. It's not his fault, or whatever stupid nonsense they can point to, that makes him the victim, rather than being responsible for his own actions that day.

 

[Axxe55]

The REAL number of innocent people, who get "railroaded", is VERY FEW
True.
Like the guy who was let out, killed a gal & cut her heart out, took it home to cook with potatoes?

Of course. Innocent people have never been imprisoned or executed for crimes they didn't commit.

You might really research that before posting something that can be proven false with an internet search of just a few minutes.

 

[bbbass]

The REAL number of people that don't belong in jail for any reason, logically is unknowable. But if we're going to guess, or extrapolate from anecdotal data, might as well consider this:

My stepdaughter works for the Parole Board for the Idaho state prison system. Her job is to interview existing prisoners and provide a report to the board that gauges the chance that they will re-offend and make a recommendation yay or nay for the prisoner's parole hearing. She says they are ALL asshole crims, will immediately re-offend, and should not be let out into society. Parole Board is releasing them all anyway. Covid, you know.

So there's that...

 

[satx78247]

The REAL number of innocent people, who get "railroaded", is VERY FEW
True.
Like the guy who was let out, killed a gal & cut her heart out, took it home to cook with potatoes?

popper,

I heard a report about that & immediately thought of SILENCE OF THE LAMBS.
(Also, the old controversy about does LIFE reflect ART or is it the reverse, came to mind??)

yours, satx

 

[Maverick44]

The REAL number of people that don't belong in jail for any reason, logically is unknowable. But if we're going to guess, or extrapolate from anecdotal data, might as well consider this:

My stepdaughter works for the Parole Board for the Idaho state prison system. Her job is to interview existing prisoners and provide a report to the board that gauges the chance that they will re-offend and make a recommendation yay or nay for the prisoner's parole hearing. She says they are ALL asshole crims, will immediately re-offend, and should not be let out into society. Parole Board is releasing them all anyway. Covid, you know.

So there's that...

According to US Sentencing Commission, violent offenders released from federal penitentiaries have a 64% chance of ending up back in prison within 8 years. For non-violent offenders, that number is 40%.

This might be an unpopular opinion, but...

Here's the thing with prison, it doesn't fix the problem. It just isolates it. It kicks the problem down the road so we have to deal with it later. Prison alone usually does not resolve problem behavior, especially for those who are not in prison for a one time mistake (i.e. career criminals). When they are eventually released, they are released with their problems intact and quite possible, a few more tacked on. Prison has this tendency to harden criminals. It makes them worse. It makes our problems with crime worse. You can't just lock all criminals up and throw away the key indefinitely either. At least not on a mass scale. That's not how the system works, nor is it how it's supposed to work. Outside of those serving life without parole or facing the death penalty, they WILL eventually be released.

To fix this would require major reforms in both the prison system, and in society as a whole, along with shifting the purpose of prison from being mainly a punishment, to being a form of rehabilitation. That's not to say that it shouldn't still punish offenders. They should still remain locked up and have their freedom severely limited. That shouldn't be the main purpose though. That behavior need to be addressed, any addictions need to be resolved in a way where they are less likely to relapse, and offenders need to be taught how to function and be successful enough in society that crime is no longer a tempting avenue. This would also require that employers be more open to hiring former offenders for jobs other than the lowest end ones. From an employer's standpoint, I can see that being a very unappealing thing to do, and I certainly don't feel that requiring it by law is the right way to go about that. It needs to be done willingly. Maybe use tax breaks as an incentive? Ultimately, those returned to society should be treated as full citizens with their rights reinstated. Prison should not be a life sentence. Once their debt to society and their rehabilitation is complete, that should be the end of it.

All of this would cost money, a lot of money. Most people are not going to be willing to have their taxes increase to help criminals, and again, I completely understand that. It needs to be said though that out current system does not work. You cannot just lock someone up for a few years and think that they'll be magically changed when they're released, It doesn't work that way. They are more than likely going to reoffend. What is it costing society to have to deal with this incredibly high recidivism rate, and what would it cost to solve the issue? Beyond just the safety aspect, there's a lot of money being lost through theft, and especially to fund the police, courts, and prisons to deal with these people. From the time a single criminal commits their crime, to the day they are released from any form of state/federal supervision, how much money have they cost the taxpayer? Personally, I think in the long run it would be cheaper to reform and significantly lower the recidivism rate. The problem is, getting people to take that step. In their mind, they're helping a criminal, which is true. It's also helping society a whole.

Say what you will about this, or criminals, or whatever. The prison system is broken, and it's not doing us any favors. You can't deny that.

 

[Axxe55]

According to US Sentencing Commission, violent offenders released from federal penitentiaries have a 64% chance of ending up back in prison within 8 years. For non-violent offenders, that number is 40%.

This might be an unpopular opinion, but...

Here's the thing with prison, it doesn't fix the problem. It just isolates it. It kicks the problem down the road so we have to deal with it later. Prison alone usually does not resolve problem behavior, especially for those who are not in prison for a one time mistake (i.e. career criminals). When they are eventually released, they are released with their problems intact and quite possible, a few more tacked on. Prison has this tendency to harden criminals. It makes them worse. It makes our problems with crime worse. You can't just lock all criminals up and throw away the key indefinitely either. At least not on a mass scale. That's not how the system works, nor is it how it's supposed to work. Outside of those serving life without parole or facing the death penalty, they WILL eventually be released.

To fix this would require major reforms in both the prison system, and in society as a whole, along with shifting the purpose of prison from being mainly a punishment, to being a form of rehabilitation. That's not to say that it shouldn't still punish offenders. They should still remain locked up and have their freedom severely limited. That shouldn't be the main purpose though. That behavior need to be addressed, any addictions need to be resolved in a way where they are less likely to relapse, and offenders need to be taught how to function and be successful enough in society that crime is no longer a tempting avenue. This would also require that employers be more open to hiring former offenders for jobs other than the lowest end ones. From an employer's standpoint, I can see that being a very unappealing thing to do, and I certainly don't feel that requiring it by law is the right way to go about that. It needs to be done willingly. Maybe use tax breaks as an incentive? Ultimately, those returned to society should be treated as full citizens with their rights reinstated. Prison should not be a life sentence. Once their debt to society and their rehabilitation is complete, that should be the end of it.

All of this would cost money, a lot of money. Most people are not going to be willing to have their taxes increase to help criminals, and again, I completely understand that. It needs to be said though that out current system does not work. You cannot just lock someone up for a few years and think that they'll be magically changed when they're released, It doesn't work that way. They are more than likely going to reoffend. What is it costing society to have to deal with this incredibly high recidivism rate, and what would it cost to solve the issue? Beyond just the safety aspect, there's a lot of money being lost through theft, and especially to fund the police, courts, and prisons to deal with these people. From the time a single criminal commits their crime, to the day they are released from any form of state/federal supervision, how much money have they cost the taxpayer? Personally, I think in the long run it would be cheaper to reform and significantly lower the recidivism rate. The problem is, getting people to take that step. In their mind, they're helping a criminal, which is true. It's also helping society a whole.

Say what you will about this, or criminals, or whatever. The prison system is broken, and it's not doing us any favors. You can't deny that.

I have to disagree to some extent Aaron. Prison is about punishment, because they have broken the laws or rules of society. Even children can comprehend the basics of right and wrong, so an adult who commits a criminal act knows they have done wrong.

You are completely right in that the penal and judicial systems are broken and need to be overhauled in major way. First, the judicial system. Too many cases are handled on plea bargain basis, simply because prosecutors are lazy and care more about a conviction rate than seeing justice done. A plea bargain is a win for the prosecutor, but what about the victims of the criminal act? Where is there justice for them? And the criminals, they know this just as well as the defense attorneys do. Get charged with 1st degree murder, which could carry up to life in prison, end up pleading to 3rd degree and out in five to ten years on good behavior. Yep, seems like a sweetheart deal to me too. Most criminals usually only spend about a third of the sentence they are given, if they act like model citizens while incarcerated, and can have even a little more time shaved off for working or going to school while incarcerated. The judicial system needs to be overhauled and quit acting like criminal cases are "Let's Make A Deal" game show. They should get a fair and just sentence, and serve every day of that sentence behind bars.

Then there is the penal system. With it's revolving doors out front. Many of them are just home away from home for the inmates. They have pretty much the same if not more benefits while incarcerated. Three meals a day. A bed and clothes. Free dental and medical. TV, radio and a library. Free education while they are there, plus a job where they can earn money. Remember last week all the snow and ice and people without electricity, heat and water? I guarantee you those inmates in prison didn't go without any of that last week.

Prison should be an environment where it's bad enough that a person doesn't want to return there again. Like they ran prisons many years ago. Work them from sunup, to sundown in the fields working. Not one luxury in life that free law abiding citizens enjoy. If a prisoner wants to be rehabilitated let them do that on their own time.

I'm also a firm believer in once a man has completed his entire sentence, he should be restored of all his rights, because he has paid his debt to society. And yes, even their right to own firearms. I have caught grief over that as well, but once a person leaves prison, they are suppose to be again a part of society, and should have the same rights as any other sentence. And if they are deemed so dangerous that they can't be trusted to possess a firearm once released, then one can postulate that they were too dangerous to be released in the first place.

But, this will never happen, simply because we have too many bleeding heart liberals that believe inmates should enjoy the same rights as law abiding citizens.

 

[Maverick44]

I have to disagree to some extent Aaron. Prison is about punishment, because they have broken the laws or rules of society. Even children can comprehend the basics of right and wrong, so an adult who commits a criminal act knows they have done wrong.

You are completely right in that the penal and judicial systems are broken and need to be overhauled in major way. First, the judicial system. Too many cases are handled on plea bargain basis, simply because prosecutors are lazy and care more about a conviction rate than seeing justice done. A plea bargain is a win for the prosecutor, but what about the victims of the criminal act? Where is there justice for them? And the criminals, they know this just as well as the defense attorneys do. Get charged with 1st degree murder, which could carry up to life in prison, end up pleading to 3rd degree and out in five to ten years on good behavior. Yep, seems like a sweetheart deal to me too. Most criminals usually only spend about a third of the sentence they are given, if they act like model citizens while incarcerated, and can have even a little more time shaved off for working or going to school while incarcerated. The judicial system needs to be overhauled and quit acting like criminal cases are "Let's Make A Deal" game show. They should get a fair and just sentence, and serve every day of that sentence behind bars.

Then there is the penal system. With it's revolving doors out front. Many of them are just home away from home for the inmates. They have pretty much the same if not more benefits while incarcerated. Three meals a day. A bed and clothes. Free dental and medical. TV, radio and a library. Free education while they are there, plus a job where they can earn money. Remember last week all the snow and ice and people without electricity, heat and water? I guarantee you those inmates in prison didn't go without any of that last week.

Prison should be an environment where it's bad enough that a person doesn't want to return there again. Like they ran prisons many years ago. Work them from sunup, to sundown in the fields working. Not one luxury in life that free law abiding citizens enjoy. If a prisoner wants to be rehabilitated let them do that on their own time.

I'm also a firm believer in once a man has completed his entire sentence, he should be restored of all his rights, because he has paid his debt to society. And yes, even their right to own firearms. I have caught grief over that as well, but once a person leaves prison, they are suppose to be again a part of society, and should have the same rights as any other sentence. And if they are deemed so dangerous that they can't be trusted to possess a firearm once released, then one can postulate that they were too dangerous to be released in the first place.

But, this will never happen, simply because we have too many bleeding heart liberals that believe inmates should enjoy the same rights as law abiding citizens.

You make some very good points.

The problem is, without the plea deal system, the whole justice system collapses under it's own weight. The vast majority of cases are dealt with through plea deal because the cost and time needed to take a case to trial is pretty high. You have a right to a speedy trial, but ironically if no one waved that right by accepting a plea deal, it would be nearly impossible for the court system to give you that speedy trial. The backlog of cases would be measured in years, not months. It's a huge mess, and I'm not entirely sure how it could be resolved. They do absolutely need to be harder on some types of crime though. Rape and murder should not come with second chances, and violent crimes of any degree should be handled harshly.

The problem with making prison an inhospitable place is that yes, those inmates do have rights as ruled by the SCOTUS in several cases throughout the last few decades, though severely limited rights. The court system is simply not going to allow you to make prison so unbelievably horrible that it acts as a real deterrence, and I question if it even would act as a deterrence if you could. If you look at the death penalty, that is supposed to be the ultimate deterrence, yet there's still a large amount of people out there who don't seem to care. They're still more than willing to kill without hesitation for very little if any reward. If you look at third world countries where life in prison is more horrible than could ever be allowed to exist in the US under any situation, there's still a lot of crime. Does prison act as a deterrence to some? Sure. To law abiding citizens, it's a deterrence. They don't want to go to prison and they'll follow the law period. The type of people to commit violent crimes or theft are different though. Either they consider the reward worth the risk, or they simply don't care. To drug offenders, their only concern in life is their next high. I doubt anything you do could deter them, and as proven far too often, their habits will often push them into situations where theft or violent crime become likely.

Don't take that to mean that I'm some bleeding heart that thinks we should be light on crime and nice to criminals. I'm not, and we shouldn't. My main concern is not the criminals, but reducing crime. Prison should be hard, and it most certainly shouldn't be a place people want to find themselves in, but the current system is broken and as I said before, we can't just lock everyone up indefinitely. We've got to find a way to fix the issue while working within the system we have now. I think that rehabilitation is the best way to do that under the set of circumstances we find ourselves in. They're stuck in there and we've got to deal with them anyways. Why not try to fix their issues so that they don't just get out and commit more crimes? I think that, grouped together with a system where they are only allowed a small number of convictions before they are locked away for good is our best chance at success.

It's an extremely complicated issue with no easy answers as to how to fix it.

 

[Axxe55]

You make some very good points.

The problem is, without the plea deal system, the whole justice system collapses under it's own weight. The vast majority of cases are dealt with through plea deal because the cost and time needed to take a case to trial is pretty high. You have a right to a speedy trial, but ironically if no one waved that right by accepting a plea deal, it would be nearly impossible for the court system to give you that speedy trial. The backlog of cases would be measured in years, not months. It's a huge mess, and I'm not entirely sure how it could be resolved. They do absolutely need to be harder on some types of crime though. Rape and murder should not come with second chances, and violent crimes of any degree should be handled harshly.

The problem with making prison an inhospitable place is that yes, those inmates do have rights as ruled by the SCOTUS in several cases throughout the last few decades, though severely limited rights. The court system is simply not going to allow you to make prison so unbelievably horrible that it acts as a real deterrence, and I question if it even would act as a deterrence if you could. If you look at the death penalty, that is supposed to be the ultimate deterrence, yet there's still a large amount of people out there who don't seem to care. They're still more than willing to kill without hesitation for very little if any reward. If you look at third world countries where life in prison is more horrible than could ever be allowed to exist in the US under any situation, there's still a lot of crime. Does prison act as a deterrence to some? Sure. To law abiding citizens, it's a deterrence. They don't want to go to prison and they'll follow the law period. The type of people to commit violent crimes or theft are different though. Either they consider the reward worth the risk, or they simply don't care. To drug offenders, their only concern in life is their next high. I doubt anything you do could deter them, and as proven far too often, their habits will often push them into situations where theft or violent crime become likely.

Don't take that to mean that I'm some bleeding heart that thinks we should be light on crime and nice to criminals. I'm not, and we shouldn't. My main concern is not the criminals, but reducing crime. Prison should be hard, and it most certainly shouldn't be a place people want to find themselves in, but the current system is broken and as I said before, we can't just lock everyone up indefinitely. We've got to find a way to fix the issue while working within the system we have now. I think that rehabilitation is the best way to do that under the set of circumstances we find ourselves in. They're stuck in there and we've got to deal with them anyways. Why not try to fix their issues so that they don't just get out and commit more crimes? I think that, grouped together with a system where they are only allowed a small number of convictions before they are locked away for good is our best chance at success.

It's an extremely complicated issue with no easy answers as to how to fix it.

And Aaron, we may disagree on some of the finer points, but you do make some really good counter-points that I need to think over.

The plea bargaining is a very good counter-point you made. I'm not saying all plea bargaining should be abolished, but for some crimes, especially violent criminal acts, maybe plea bargaining isn't the best solution to the problem. I also think many prosecutors are just lazy, or care about racking up another one in their win column. IMO, that is entirely the wrong attitude for any prosecutor to take. They are suppose to be representing the community, and the victims.

Let me mull over some of the other points, and add to the discussion more later. Good post Aaron.