Violent attack, Cruisers injured, St Vincent & Grenadines, Union Island

[zboss]

I'll repeat something I mentioned in a different thread a while ago... most of the world simply doesn't have sufficient space or money to lock up violent criminals or even psychopaths, let alone those that could potentially be violent but have not yet been. They don't need guns and are highly unpredictable... some don't mean to me nuts and they try to take their drugs but sometimes they just run out and they the nut is set free.

These people roam freely on the beaches and communities we all like to visit without general supervision, parole officers, or any other type of tracking except that the other locals know who they are and keep an eye on them - if they act up, they will mention it to an officer or someone "in charge". Its the only way they can police their own communities. Often these folks look crazy and we can do our best to keep away from them but just as often they look like just normal folks. Maybe one is driving your taxi right now.

Of course, this doesn't include organized crime of which I am sure most cruisers will never encounter.

No amount of guns, pepper spray, or flashing lights will keep them away... they are by definition 'crazy' and are not able to draw a straight line between behavior and consequence.

Now, burglary of opportunity and of the non-violent type... its your fault for not locking your dinghy.

[minaret]

Originally Posted by zboss

I'll repeat something I mentioned in a different thread a while ago... most of the world simply doesn't have sufficient space or money to lock up violent criminals or even psychopaths, let alone those that could potentially be violent but have not yet been.

Too true. We can't even afford to lock up the crazies here in the states.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by zboss

I'll repeat something I mentioned in a different thread a while ago... most of the world simply doesn't have sufficient space or money to lock up violent criminals or even psychopaths, let alone those that could potentially be violent but have not yet been. They don't need guns and are highly unpredictable... some don't mean to me nuts and they try to take their drugs but sometimes they just run out and they the nut is set free.

These people roam freely on the beaches and communities we all like to visit without general supervision, parole officers, or any other type of tracking except that the other locals know who they are and keep an eye on them - if they act up, they will mention it to an officer or someone "in charge". Its the only way they can police their own communities. Often these folks look crazy and we can do our best to keep away from them but just as often they look like just normal folks. Maybe one is driving your taxi right now.

Of course, this doesn't include organized crime of which I am sure most cruisers will never encounter.

No amount of guns, pepper spray, or flashing lights will keep them away... they are by definition 'crazy' and are not able to draw a straight line between behavior and consequence.

Now, burglary of opportunity and of the non-violent type... its your fault for not locking your dinghy.

While there are always poor unfortunate types with mental illnesses , most are not in any way violent, the truly scary ones are usually not identifiable.

It would be wrong to suggest that all these communities have violent but jobs wandering around though.

Dave .

[Delfin]

Perhaps you can point to actual data that would contradict the simple observation that gun laws don't reduce violent crime, but I doubt it.

On the other side of the issue is actual research showing that what most enthusiasts believe about gun ownership and crime is simple fantasy. Like this, from Harvard: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/...useronline.pdf

Or this, from Australia: http://www.ssaa.org.au/capital-news/...un-buyback.pdf

Or, if research is not your thing, perhaps this editorial would be helpful: USATODAY.com - Gun laws don't reduce crime

Be that as it may, gun control advocates do not base their feelings about the virtues of disarming everyone but criminals, but on their feelings. And that's the problem with having an intelligent conversation on the subject.

[sailpower]

If eliminating gun violence were as simple as passing a law, Thou Shalt Not Kill would have worked by now.

I predict that no actual minds will be changed by continuing this "conversation".

[robert sailor]

Sailpower you at least have it figured out. This topic is akin to a religion and as we all know religion has all the answers and no tolerance for competing ideas.

[anjou]

If banning guns would work to make us all safer, our governments would also ban narcotics to stop people taking drugs.

Each to their own, we will NEVER agree on any gun related topic of conversation.

[vtsailguy]

Originally Posted by Delfin

On the other side of the issue is actual research showing that what most enthusiasts believe about gun ownership and crime is simple fantasy. Like this, from Harvard: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/...useronline.pdf

Delfin, I followed that link and read with diligence the paper. I was surprised at the findings to be honest. I quick jaunt around google shows that even news outlets are using the Harvard paper to challenge this idea.

Then I kept googling.....

it's not a Harvard study, it's just available for download from Harvard's servers. It's a spin piece written by two right wing pro-gun activists, neither of which ever went to or worked for Harvard. Don Kates Gary Mauser The Independent Institute that Kates works for is especially interesting. You can also learn how global warming is a hoax and how terrible Obama care is and how welfare pays more than work. FARK.com: (7908949) Harvard study to gun grabbers: let us show you just how wrong you are

To take just one debunking: Most incompetent pro-gun "researchers" tend to try to use at least slightly subtle methods for distorting and misrepresenting data. But Kates and Mauser raise the bar by simply using false data. It makes propagandizing so much easier! As has been pointed out on this board before, the authors quote the homicide rate of Luxembourg as 9.01/100K - this is completely out of the question, unless there were some kind of anomalous mass killing in that year. It is common knowledge that the only first-world nation with a homicide rate even close to that is the USA. What happened was there was a decimal point error: the Luxembourg homicide rate is actually 0.9/100K.. they refer directly to this supposedly sky-high homicide rate of Luxembourg , and highlight the number in Table 2.. This leaves us with the standard two possibilities for pro-gunner propaganda: 1) (Dishonesty) 2) (Incompetence) .. based on the quality of the rest of this paper, along with other things I've seen by Kates and Mauser, in this case it is possible that these guys are actually clueless enough to slide by with the incompetence defense. Daily Kos: Politicizing the tragedy

Gary Mauser is Professor at the Faculty of Business Adm .. at Simon Fraser Uni British Columbia.. President of Barnet Rifle Club .. also a Senior Fellow with the conservative Canadian think tank, Fraser Institute. His particular research interest is in critiquing gun control policies as being ineffective at reducing crime. His work has been criticised for inaccurately citing statistics.
..Mauser on the UN small arms treaty: There is a danger the UN will lose further trust and credibility around the globe, and ultimately take part in the prolongation of poverty, misery and the lack of prospect of entire peoples, by mistakenly directing its attention towards private gun ownership

I'd also like to point out the bias of the study's authors, who likely had their conclusions before they did the study.

**Don*B.*Kates*(LL.B.,*Yale,*1966)*is*an*American* criminologist*and*constitutional*
lawyer*associated*with*the*Pacific*Research*Instit ute,*San*Francisco.*

Text (Pacific Research Institute - SourceWatch)

'Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy', is a think tank founded in 1979 whose stated vision is the promotion of "the principles of individual freedom and personal responsibility. The Institute believes these principles are best encouraged through policies that emphasize a free economy, private initiative, and limited government." The institute is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation, and had $4.9M in revenue in 2005. [1] The Pacific Research Institute has associated with other think-tanks like the American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute.

PRI head Sally Pipes, a Canadian residing in the United States, frequently speaks and writes against universal health care. Her bio lists as healthcare topics she had addressed "the false promise of a single-payer system as exists in Canada, pharmaceutical pricing, solving the problem of the uninsured, and strategies for consumer-driven health care." She also authored a 2004 book titled, "Miracle Cure: How to Solve America?s Health Care Crisis and Why Canada Isn?t the Answer." [1
Corporations (contributing to them)
Altria
ChevronTexaco
Cypress Semiconductor
Exxon Mobil Corporation
Freedom Communications
Microsoft
Pfizer
PhRMA
SBC (now AT&T)
Verizon
White House Writers Group
Text (ExxonSecrets Factsheet: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy)
Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy has received $530,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998.

Publishes an annual "Index of Leading Environmental Indicators" on Earth Day, asserting that the environment is improving and there's no need to worry about global warming. The index is a collaborative project with the American Enterprise Institute.
Source: Pacific Research Institute documentary "A Convenient Fiction" website 2007




*Gary*Mauser*(Ph.D.,*University*of*California,*Irv ine,*1970)*is*a*Canadian*crimi-
nologist*and*university*professor*at*Simon*Fraser* University,*Burnaby,*BC*Canada.*

Text (Gary Mauser - SourceWatch)

Gary Mauser is Professor at the Faculty of Business Administration and the Institute for Urban Canadian Research Studies at Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, British Columbia.

He is also a Senior Fellow with the conservative Canadian think tank, the Fraser Institute. His particular research interest is in critiquing gun control policies as being ineffective at reducing crime. His work has been criticised for inaccurately citing statistics

Text (http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2004/06/mauser.php)
Above is a graph of the "horrifying increase in violent crime over the past decade" in Canada. If you compare the violent crime rate now with that of ten years ago, you'll see that it has actually gone down. There has been no increase, let alone a "horrifying" one. And guess where this graph comes from? His own Fraser Institute Study.. He even refers to it in his letter.

And look at the graph in Mauser's paper immediately before the one showing violent crime rates. In his letter Mauser writes "in contrast violent crime and homicide rates are plummeting in the United States". But his own graph shows that homicide rates are dropping in Canada in parallel with those in the US.

Of course, my readers will be well aware that Ayres and Donohue's more comprehensive study has shown that crime has actually tended to fall faster in the states without carry laws, and that Lott's results go away when his coding errors are corrected. Mauser is well aware of Ayres and Donohue's work---we discussed it at great length in 2002 and 2003 on the firearmsregprof list, a mail list that Mauser is on, and yet he does not mention their work at all. In fact he doesn't cite any critics of Lott at all

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Ah yes Grosmanns idiot piece , a calling card for the NRA , nothing more , badly thought out, badly researched s, badly written nonsense

Dave

Sheepdogs do exist and thank God they do. Here's a video of possibly the bravest sheepdog guarding a school, skip to minute 5:00. Sheepdogs come in all colors, genders and backgrounds.... never knowing when they'll be called upon to act.

SRO standoff with gunman at Sullivan Central.wmv - YouTube

[sailpower]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

Sailpower you at least have it figured out. This topic is akin to a religion and as we all know religion has all the answers and no tolerance for competing ideas.

Actually, it was humor but as with most humor, often there is a bit of reality.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Sheepdogs do exist and thank God they do. Here's a video of possibly the bravest sheepdog guarding a school, skip to minute 5:00. Sheepdogs come in all colors, genders and backgrounds.... never knowing when they'll be called upon to act.

That video sucked.

What happened?

Also that is foolish on the officers part. Unless she is clairvoyant she could not know at which second she would die. She was not trained that way.

[minaret]

Originally Posted by Therapy

That video sucked.

What happened?

Also that is foolish on the officers part. Unless she is clairvoyant she could not know at which second she would die. She was not trained that way.

Dude, she was the master! Surrounded by children arriving at school in the same building and people hiding under their desks in the offices around her, she kept her weapon trained on the gunman and talked to him without firing until the building was partially evacuated and police arrived. When they deemed it safe, the cops and this officer filled that guy with lead. He died on the way to the hospital. She may not have had the best form, but she has a huge pair of brass balls, and should not be spoken ill of! I think she judged the level of this guys resolve right away when he didn't fire immediately, and did the right thing. Very professional to attempt to diffuse the situation instead of just shooting at the front doors of a busy school with a parking lot full of children arriving. Hero! The world needs more women in roles like this, better judgment, more thought before action.

[klmmicro]

Well, neither side has convinced me to change the side of the "conversation" I am on, so I will simply carry on in my own way. There are idealogs on both sides of the fence.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Therapy

That video sucked.

What happened?

Also that is foolish on the officers part. Unless she is clairvoyant she could not know at which second she would die. She was not trained that way.

Here's officer Carolyn Gudger being interviewed by a reporter following the standoff, you'd best watch it before judging her. This woman is a hero in a league of her own. She did all of this without having on her ballistic vest, while the local cops took over 13 minutes to respond from outside the building. She protected several office workers behind her rather than take cover herself. Officer Gudger is welcome in our home and on our boat anytime. HERO!

Carolyn Gudger: In Her Own Words - YouTube

[minaret]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Here's officer Carolyn Gudger being interviewed by a reporter following the standoff, you'd best watch it before judging her. This woman is a hero in a league of her own. She did all of this without having on her ballistic vest, while the local cops took over 13 minutes to respond from outside the building. She protected several office workers behind her rather than take cover herself. Officer Gudger is welcome in our home and on our boat anytime. HERO!

When she says "it was just instinct" to step between the gunman and his target, that says it ALL. Sheepdog.



This guy thought he was a wolf, but when faced with a real protector he quickly realized he wasn't. She knew this from the start. Probably because she is familiar with the real deal. I would be happy to have this woman protecting my kids any day!