Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, April 03, 2014

OTP April 2014: BurstNET Sued for Not Making Equipment Lease Payments

Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 03, 2014 at 01:59 PM | 4718 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: 7 million aca signees and counting, i-95 south, nc, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 29 of 48 pages ‹ First  < 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 >  Last ›
   2801. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 25, 2014 at 01:49 PM (#4694193)
I rarely get machine gunned or nuked in my daily life. I'm not sure how the existence of those things makes life worse.

Was there ever a day in the 1830s or 1840s where 3,000 American civilians were killed in a single event?
   2802. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 01:50 PM (#4694195)
*And Europa Universalis IV.

Haven't been able to get into it. EU3 was decent, but not as good as EU2, IMHO. EU4 just hasn't grabbed me.
   2803. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 01:51 PM (#4694197)
Honestly guys, I know this doesn't do a thing for my reputation around here, but if anything happened to my wife I most likely would sell my house and move somewhere very rural, if not in complete wilderness.
I believe you left off some punctuation; it's supposed to say:

...but if anything "happened" to my wife I most likely would sell my house and move somewhere very rural, if not in complete wilderness
   2804. zonk Posted: April 25, 2014 at 01:51 PM (#4694199)
Bundy is a garden variety anti-tax crank. He's like the loons who claim that if you declare your house to be sovereign territory you no longer have to pay income or property taxes, or who claim that there is a missing (suppressed) Constitutional Amendment barring lawyers from holding political office.
there are issues with the Federal Government owning so much of the public land in the West, and their are issues with how the BLM manages that land and how it can get away with acting arbitrarily- but Bundy is not a good advocate or "face" for that cause.


That's the thing --

Perhaps the BLM/feds should be shedding some of that land... As I said, my dads now out in rural Nevada and I get regular updates on the crimes of Harry Reid and son (oddly/strangely enough, he hasn't said a word about Bundy... though, he's more of a Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly guy than a Sean Hannity guy, and my understanding is that Beck couldn't secure exclusive marketing rights to Bundy so he wasn't a fan... or something).

If someone wants to offer up a proposal that the BLM ought to have an old-fashioned, Oklahoma-style landgrab for the nation's poor -- pack up our wagons, start at the border, and you can have a couple acres free -- I'm perfectly fine with that.

My guess is that the land isn't very hospitable for subsistence living, but by all means -- sell it, give it away, etc... I'd just rather see it go to someone who has nothing as opposed to a rancher with a few hundred head of cattle. Growing up from farm stock myself - if you've got than many cows, you ain't poor.
   2805. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 01:53 PM (#4694201)
Was there ever a day in the 1830s or 1840s where 3,000 American civilians were killed in a single event?

Well, that event involved neither machine guns or nukes.

Also, back then, every month more than 3,000 civilians died of diseases that are totally curable today.

I don't see why 3,000 dying in a terrorist attack is worse than hundreds of thousands dying from typhus, and TB, etc.
   2806. Greg K Posted: April 25, 2014 at 01:54 PM (#4694203)
I think the point some people are making here is that the 21st century can be a cold, unforgiving place to a lot of people as well, just in different ways.

I'd agree. Quite a few of the problems of 21st century existence weren't there a few generations ago. But I think that drives a tendency to assume life used to be better. We're far more familiar with today's problems because we live them. Life in the 19th century looks so much more appealing because the struggles people faced then are easily dismissed. It's easy to be cavalier about modern medicine just prolonging lack-lustre 21st century lives into the 70s rather than the 60s, but it can be plenty frustrating when you die of something silly as a child.

It just strikes me as odd that when I hear about how life was better 200 years ago, the description of that life doesn't really mesh with what I understand life to have been. Not to sound snooty about it but I suspect if you'd rather have 19th century problems than 21st century problems, you don't know as much about life in the 19th century as you think you do.
   2807. Jolly Old St. Nick Still Gags in October Posted: April 25, 2014 at 01:55 PM (#4694206)
Was there ever a day in the 1830s or 1840s where 3,000 American civilians were killed in a single event?

Outside of NieporentLand, has there ever been a day in 2014 where about 2.5 million Americans were living in slavery?
   2808. zonk Posted: April 25, 2014 at 01:55 PM (#4694207)
*And Europa Universalis IV.

Haven't been able to get into it. EU3 was decent, but not as good as EU2, IMHO. EU4 just hasn't grabbed me.


Ugh... I need to get busy on having Szym spec out my desktop...

In theory, my laptop meets system requirements muster - but I've already got a couple of games off Steam that my laptop ought to run fine, but don't.
   2809. BDC Posted: April 25, 2014 at 01:57 PM (#4694210)
Only 20 people died, but the Great Fire of 1835 was eerily similar to 9/11 in its effect on lower Manhattan.
   2810. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 01:58 PM (#4694211)
I'd agree. Quite a few of the problems of 21st century existence weren't there a few generations ago. But I think that drives a tendency to assume life used to be better. We're far more familiar with today's problems because we live them. Life in the 19th century looks so much more appealing because the struggles people faced then are easily dismissed. It's easy to be cavalier about modern medicine just prolonging lack-lustre 21st century lives into the 70s rather than the 60s, but it can be plenty frustrating when you die of something silly as a child.

It just strikes me as odd that when I hear about how life was better 200 years ago, the description of that life doesn't really mesh with what I understand life to have been. Not to sound snooty about it but I suspect if you'd rather have 19th century problems than 21st century problems, you don't know as much about life in the 19th century as you think you do.


Agree, we greatly underestimate the physical suffering of people back then.

Even two generations ago, average people lived without central heat, and hot water, and little kids had to carry coal for the stove.

The real question for me is today vs. ~1970-75. I'd give up everything invented since then to live in the kind of close knit neighborhood we lived in as a kid.
   2811. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 01:59 PM (#4694212)
So enforcement of law depends on how convenient it is for the law breaker?


I have no sympathy for Bundy, I'm thinking more of how convenient it would be for the people tasked with you know, apprehending him, he's surrounded now by a lot or like-minded (and worse) nutjobs with guns. What happened to Koresh and many of his adult followers doesn't bother me, what bothers me is that a bunch of ATF agents got shot and later a lot of children were killed. Wasn't necessary and wouldn't have happened had they seized Koresh at some other time and place.
   2812. Greg K Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:00 PM (#4694213)
Haven't been able to get into it. EU3 was decent, but not as good as EU2, IMHO. EU4 just hasn't grabbed me.

I am absolutely in love with that game. It fixed almost every problem I have with the previous EU games (the trade system was too much like care-taking, the slider system made technology and development too passive, expanded and improved diplomacy, much more customization in the form of choosing which "Idea" trees to take and unique historical decisions for most nations, improved playability for non-European nations, even little things like sieges working on their own internal clocks based on the army, general, and fort, rather than just on a monthly clock)

But I admit, a lot of those things are just personal preference.

   2813. The Good Face Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:01 PM (#4694217)
Not to sound snooty about it but I suspect if you'd rather have 19th century problems than 21st century problems, you don't know as much about life in the 19th century as you think you do.


I suppose it depends on what your 21st century problems are. That said, it's pretty clear that some things in the 21st century are unambiguously better, such as medicine. My beef is with people who assume that ALL things in the 21st century are unambiguously better than ALL things in the 19th century.
   2814. Ron J2 Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:02 PM (#4694218)
#2792 One Canadian judge (John D. Rooke) got so tired of these types of arguments (which he called "Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Arguments") that he wrote a 192 page document detailing the specifics of the arguments -- and the legal grounds for rejecting them. Available here

Starts off:

This Court has developed a new awareness and understanding of a category of vexatious litigant. As we shall see, while there is often a lack of homogeneity, and some individuals or groups have no name or special identity, they (by their own admission or by descriptions given by others) often fall into the following descriptions: Detaxers; Freemen or Freemen-on-the-Land; Sovereign Men or Sovereign Citizens; Church of the Ecumenical Redemption International (CERI); Moorish Law; and other labels - there is no closed list. In the absence of a better moniker, I have collectively labelled them as Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument litigants [“OPCA litigants”], to functionally define them collectively for what they literally are. These persons employ a collection of techniques and arguments promoted and sold by ‘gurus’ (as hereafter defined) to disrupt court operations and to attempt to frustrate the legal rights of governments, corporations, and individuals.

[2] Over a decade of reported cases have proven that the individual concepts advanced by OPCA litigants are invalid. What remains is to categorize these schemes and concepts, identify global defects to simplify future response to variations of identified and invalid OPCA themes, and develop court procedures and sanctions for persons who adopt and advance these vexatious litigation strategies.
   2815. zonk Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:04 PM (#4694219)
If I were to go back in time to live -- and we're assuming I can return knowing all I know now -- I think I would probably go back further than the 19th century...

I doubt I'm going to be any more help developing antibiotics in 1840 vs 1640.

I'd probably pick a point where I knew some large swath of valuable land with hidden resources was just readily available, carve myself out an empire, and change the course of history just for fun...

I think I'd probably pick something in the California bay area a few thousand years before the age discovery, teach my native people the concept of property, and invade Eurasia -- or at least Europe -- right about the time black death had depopulated it to the point of being ripe for the taking.
   2816. Joe Kehoskie Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:05 PM (#4694220)
I have no sympathy for Bundy, I'm thinking more of how convenient it would be for the people tasked with you know, apprehending him, he's surrounded now by a lot or like-minded (and worse) nutjobs with guns. What happened to Koresh and many of his adult followers doesn't bother me, what bothers me is that a bunch of ATF agents got shot and later a lot of children were killed. Wasn't necessary and wouldn't have happened had they seized Koresh at some other time and place.

The U.S. has ~11 million illegal immigrants, including 850,000 who have been ordered deported who have absconded. Without a doubt, a large number of those ~11 million are violent criminals whose presence is more of a threat than some old kook whose cattle are grazing illegally.

Even if Bundy is 100 percent in the wrong, that the government sent dozens if not hundreds of armed agents to deal with one old guy whose cattle are grazing on public land just shows how out of whack the government's priorities have gotten.
   2817. zonk Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:06 PM (#4694222)
I am absolutely in love with that game. It fixed almost every problem I have with the previous EU games (the trade system was too much like care-taking, the slider system made technology and development too passive, expanded and improved diplomacy, much more customization in the form of choosing which "Idea" trees to take and unique historical decisions for most nations, improved playability for non-European nations, even little things like sieges working on their own internal clocks based on the army, general, and fort, rather than just on a monthly clock)

But I admit, a lot of those things are just personal preference.


Stop tempting me to be a rampant consumer and just buy the damn thing before I know if I'll be able to play it!
   2818. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:06 PM (#4694223)
The real question for me is today vs. ~1970-75. I'd give up everything invented since then to live in the kind of close knit neighborhood we lived in as a kid.

I'm sort of goofing on the 1830s/40s, more to make a point about the embedded premises of consumerism, but there's no doubt about now versus the immediate pre-decline years. The country and life for the regular American was clearly better then, as was the culture and society. This is a pessimistic, snarky, bitter, divisive time and the country is adrift, with troubled and crumbling institutions all around.

   2819. Greg K Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:06 PM (#4694225)
I suppose it depends on what your 21st century problems are. That said, it's pretty clear that some things in the 21st century are unambiguously better, such as medicine. My beef is with people who assume that ALL things in the 21st century are unambiguously better than ALL things in the 19th century.

Yeah I certainly don't take that position. I have my own romantic tendencies about the past (which partly explains my chosen profession). But as it's a package deal, I take the good with the bad and take solace from the fact that I'd rather be living now than at any time in history previously.
   2820. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:07 PM (#4694226)
I am absolutely in love with that game. It fixed almost every problem I have with the previous EU games (the trade system was too much like care-taking, the slider system made technology and development too passive, expanded and improved diplomacy, much more customization in the form of choosing which "Idea" trees to take and unique historical decisions for most nations, improved playability for non-European nations, even little things like sieges working on their own internal clocks based on the army, general, and fort, rather than just on a monthly clock)

But I admit, a lot of those things are just personal preference.


I found the military system very vexing. Same thing in Crusader King. You lose battles you shouldn't lose, and the enemy seems to be able to spam armies without limitation.

I especially hate the way dribs and drabs of enemy armies can keep entering a battle and propping up their morale while yours declines. In reality, a series of 1-3,000 man armies should be annihilated in turn by one 15,000 man army. 15th-18th century battles never lasted more than 2 days.
   2821. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:07 PM (#4694227)
I have no sympathy for Bundy, I'm thinking more of how convenient it would be for the people tasked with you know, apprehending him, he's surrounded now by a lot or like-minded (and worse) nutjobs with guns. What happened to Koresh and many of his adult followers doesn't bother me, what bothers me is that a bunch of ATF agents got shot and later a lot of children were killed. Wasn't necessary and wouldn't have happened had they seized Koresh at some other time and place.
I get that completely, but Bundy's been walking in and out of court for 20 years, more than enough convenient moments to have law enforcement walk up and ask him to take a walk with. Why hasn't this happened already? Why wait until he's basically seceded from the Union and armed up?
   2822. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:09 PM (#4694229)
The U.S. has ~11 million illegal immigrants, including 850,000 who have been ordered deported who have absconded. Without a doubt, a large number of those ~11 million are violent criminals whose presence is more of a threat than some old kook whose cattle are grazing illegally.
And as you've pointed out many times, more of those folks than ever have been deported than ever before. Bundy's actively threatened to shoot federal agents who have a perfectly legal right to enforce the lien on his cattle and arrest him for dodging federal fines and breaking trespass laws. That's gotta matter.
   2823. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:09 PM (#4694230)
This Court has developed a new awareness and understanding of a category of vexatious litigant. As we shall see, while there is often a lack of homogeneity, and some individuals or groups have no name or special identity, they (by their own admission or by descriptions given by others) often fall into the following descriptions: Detaxers; Freemen or Freemen-on-the-Land


Years ago I represented a bank in a dispute with a crank (a horse farmer on Long Island btw)- basically he borrowed money and wouldn't pay it back. His argument was the bank had not loaned him "money" money no longer existed since the US went off the gold standard, rather the bank had lent him "Treasury Notes" which he regarded as being worthless.

So, one day the judge finally asked him, "Ok, let's say you are right, they didn't lend you money, so you do not own them money, the contract get rescinded, but you took their "Treasury Notes"- which while you may claim are "worthless" are still tangible property, you would still have to give them back"
   2824. Rants Mulliniks Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:10 PM (#4694231)
Joe, that's my main issue with the Bundy thing (your last sentence). The priorities of this government, and most modern governments for that matter, are completely out of line with reality.

#2803 is pretty low, too.
   2825. Greg K Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:10 PM (#4694232)
I'd probably pick a point where I knew some large swath of valuable land with hidden resources was just readily available, carve myself out an empire, and change the course of history just for fun...

I think I'd probably pick something in the California bay area a few thousand years before the age discovery, teach my native people the concept of property, and invade Eurasia -- or at least Europe -- right about the time black death had depopulated it to the point of being ripe for the taking.

Man, you really are missing out with EU IV.

One recent game I played as the Incas. Sent out feelers to the Portugese colonies in Brazil to get their ideas and westernize as quickly as possible. I ended the game duking it out with New Spain over the Yucatan (which had become important because I'd colonized parts of Indonesia and was pushing all the trade towards Panama rather than around Africa).

In terms of real life, another plan for you might be jumping on all the guano deposits before anyone realized they were useful.
   2826. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:11 PM (#4694233)
Even if Bundy is 100 percent in the wrong, that the government sent dozens if not hundreds of armed agents to deal with one old guy whose cattle are grazing on public land just shows how out of whack the government's priorities have gotten.

This is the real issue; the militarization of policing in the US. There was no need to send paramilitary units after Bundy. Just put a damn lien on his bank account, like they do with the Amish who won't pay SSI taxes.

Why does the Bureau of Land Management even have its own SWAT team? So do the Department of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the FDA, the Department of Education, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

   2827. Rants Mulliniks Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:12 PM (#4694234)
#2826 - the USPS just bought a shitload of ammo too.
   2828. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:13 PM (#4694235)
more than enough convenient moments to have law enforcement walk up and ask him to take a walk with. Why hasn't this happened already?


When has he done what he's doing now before? Before this he was just a garden variety deadbeat- his obstructionism was of the legal variety.

   2829. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:13 PM (#4694236)
In terms of real life, another plan for you might be jumping on all the guano deposits before anyone realized they were useful.

Hell, just go back to 1600 and invent the flintlock musket. Whatever Monarch hires you is going to dominate Europe.
   2830. Greg K Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:15 PM (#4694239)
I found the military system very vexing. Same thing in Crusader King. You lose battles you shouldn't lose, and the enemy seems to be able to spam armies without limitation.

I especially hate the way dribs and drabs of enemy armies can keep entering a battle and propping up their morale while yours declines. In reality, a series of 1-3,000 man armies should be annihilated in turn by one 15,000 man army. 15th-18th century battles never lasted more than 2 days.

Ah right, the battle engine has its idiosyncrasies. I believe what you're seeing (at least in EU) is the AI's use of mercenaries. Good for quick troops, and eases the burden on your manpower. Though horribly crippling financially (which is of course only historically accurate when it comes to war in the early modern period). I find wars are won by meeting the opposing army on the field as quickly as possible and then pursuing them until it is destroyed. After that he can raise all the new armies he wants, they're easily destroyed piece-meal. Only go to war if you can annihilate the opposing army in the opening months.
   2831. zonk Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:16 PM (#4694240)
I get that completely, but Bundy's been walking in and out of court for 20 years, more than enough convenient moments to have law enforcement walk up and ask him to take a walk with. Why hasn't this happened already? Why wait until he's basically seceded from the Union and armed up?


My understanding is that the courts have just slapped fines on him/ruled against him... Ordinarily, I'm imagining that in such cases -- the way it works if the feds win a judgement against you and you fail to pay, there's a pretty long line of judgements until they eventually garnish your wages or start seizing bank accounts. In the case of someone more or less self-employed, who, by the sounds of things -- isn't loading a lot of assets/cash into a bank -- the options might be limited.... there's probably very little to just seize or garnish via paperwork.

I don't claim to be an expert in such things, but I think the mythologizing about jackbooted federal agents isn't really the case for most financial matters like this... That's not to say that the feds aren't ruthless is electronically seizing bank accounts, paper assets, et al -- but when it comes to seizing real property that you have to actually send people to take possession of, I'm just not so sure that they're all that good at it.
   2832. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:16 PM (#4694241)
Why does the Bureau of Land Management even have its own SWAT team?...and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.


Since a friend of mine once interned with the the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service- its because in many parts of the country they have to deal with/run into not infrequently groups of armed poachers, pot growers, moonshiners, white separatist fruitcakes, etc etc.
   2833. Rants Mulliniks Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:17 PM (#4694242)
Yeah, I can totally understand F&WS; agents being armed, we even have that in Canada.
   2834. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:18 PM (#4694244)
- but when it comes to seizing real property that you have to actually send people to take possession of, I'm just not so sure that they're all that good at it.


Actually that's what started this standoff, they were their to seize his cattle not arrest him.

   2835. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:19 PM (#4694246)
I find wars are won by meeting the opposing army on the field as quickly as possible and then pursuing them until it is destroyed. After that he can raise all the new armies he wants, they're easily destroyed piece-meal. Only go to war if you can annihilate the opposing army in the opening months.

Yeah, but this is completely untrue to the time period. There were few decisive battles. Wars were mostly decided by siege.
   2836. Greg K Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:25 PM (#4694251)
Yeah, but this is completely untrue to the time period. There were few decisive battles. Wars were mostly decided by siege.

Yeah can't win 'em all.

On the plus side, while the destruction of the opposing army is necessary for victory it doesn't always ensure it. You still have to go through the lengthy process of laying siege to the territories you want, which takes time, stretches you thin and leaves you vulnerable to your other enemies. Also the price of conquest is so high (in terms of the damaging effects of over-extension, and the cost of building cores, converting religions, and adapting cultures) that making more than a couple wars of conquest in one generation can lead to all sorts of internal instability which makes the siege portion of future wars almost impossible even without an enemy army in the field.

If I could change one thing about the combat system it would be to have the destruction of armies far less common. A defeated army may have to retire, and spend many months re-organizing, but not be obliterated.
   2837. zonk Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:27 PM (#4694253)
The U.S. has ~11 million illegal immigrants, including 850,000 who have been ordered deported who have absconded. Without a doubt, a large number of those ~11 million are violent criminals whose presence is more of a threat than some old kook whose cattle are grazing illegally.

And as you've pointed out many times, more of those folks than ever have been deported than ever before. Bundy's actively threatened to shoot federal agents who have a perfectly legal right to enforce the lien on his cattle and arrest him for dodging federal fines and breaking trespass laws. That's gotta matter.


I must have missed the armed standoff where an illegal/undocumented/pick your term basically defied deportation, got himself surrounded with like-minded anti-deportationists, and more or less refused to be deported. Actually, I think I haven't missed it -- I suspect it just hasn't happened because I'm sure I'd be hearing the Drudge siren even without visiting his site if anything remotely like that had happened... I suppose we could spend billions and hire hundreds of thousands more ICE personnel. It's a pretty simply matter of the numbers - setting aside the politics of the issue, doesn't seem to me that I can recall any instances of someone just "refusing" a deportation.

The closest I can recall was Elvia Arellano - who sought sanctuary in a Chicago-area church... when she left, she got arrested, and then deported. Despite becoming a celebrity in immigration reform circles, my recollection is that no armed horde of liberals surrounded the church and threatened to make for an ICE bloodbath or otherwise strategized to put "women in front" so as to show the world ICE's bloodthirstiness.
   2838. Steve Treder Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:28 PM (#4694254)
My guess is that the land isn't very hospitable for subsistence living

Yes, it's extremely arid and remote.
   2839. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:29 PM (#4694256)
Since a friend of mine once interned with the the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service- its because in many parts of the country they have to deal with/run into not infrequently groups of armed poachers, pot growers, moonshiners, white separatist fruitcakes, etc etc.

Yeah, I can totally understand F&WS; agents being armed, we even have that in Canada.

Armed, sure. The issue is a dedicated paramilitary unit.

If they run into real armed opposition, call the FBI. Not like the BLS SWAT team is going to be right there when the trouble happens.

But, if you give all these disparate agencies fancy paramilitary toys, they'll all be itching to use them.
   2840. spike Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:32 PM (#4694258)
#2826 - the USPS just bought a shitload of ammo too

They aren't coming to get you, I promise.
   2841. zonk Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:33 PM (#4694259)
Why does the Bureau of Land Management even have its own SWAT team?...and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.



Since a friend of mine once interned with the the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service- its because in many parts of the country they have to deal with/run into not infrequently groups of armed poachers, pot growers, moonshiners, white separatist fruitcakes, etc etc.


Right - I mean, you can't have it both ways...

Why does the NYPD need a SWAT team?

Judging by some of the rather frightening and intimidating scenes I've seen at the Bundy ranch -- I mean, I'd say they were army without uniforms except I distinctly remember seeing groups that were basically garbed in what looked like uniforms -- I'm almost wondering if the BLM doesn't need tanks.

I don't particularly care for law enforcement militarization either -- but it sure seems to me that it's more of an arms race the "government" or various agencies are just going to win, not one that they started.

If you want to push for more stringent gun control measures and also undertake the messiness of then disarming/confiscating the armories of so many individuals and groups of self-styled militias --- I will absolutely back action for action the de-militarization of any and every agency under the sun.
   2842. spike Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:34 PM (#4694261)
Why does the Bureau of Land Management even have its own SWAT team?

Because as the NRA constantly points out, bad guys have access to sophisticated weaponry, so LEOs and "law abiding citizens" require the same or better.
   2843. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:37 PM (#4694262)
Armed, sure. The issue is a dedicated paramilitary unit.


I blame Daryl Gates
   2844. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:39 PM (#4694264)
And as you've pointed out many times, more of those folks than ever have been deported than ever before. Bundy's actively threatened to shoot federal agents who have a perfectly legal right to enforce the lien on his cattle and arrest him for dodging federal fines and breaking trespass laws. That's gotta matter.

'How can you give me a speeding ticket when we have an inner city gang problem? Your priorities are so out of whack, dude.'

Yes, you want to work big to small, but you still have to work small or it becomes big.

I'm glad we got to hear Bundy's take on things, it's nice to hear someone actually say out loud these crazy things that are in so many people heads just to confront how crazy they are.
   2845. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:39 PM (#4694265)
Judging by some of the rather frightening and intimidating scenes I've seen at the Bundy ranch -- I mean, I'd say they were army without uniforms except I distinctly remember seeing groups that were basically garbed in what looked like uniforms -- I'm almost wondering if the BLM doesn't need tanks.

Why is the Government seeking armed confrontation with non-violent criminals? Why not just seize the guy's bank account?

Because as the NRA constantly points out, bad guys have access to sophisticated weaponry, so LEOs and "law abiding citizens" require the same or better.

And the Gov't should have it. No one is saying the FBI shouldn't have SWAT teams.

The issue is why does every Podunk Federal Agency need one? The more SWAT teams you have, the more likely they get used to justify their existence.

Read this article.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/376053/united-states-swat-john-fund

Feds are using SWAT teams to respond to student-loan fraud, and shipping unpasteurized milk across state lines.

It's absurd.
   2846. Joe Kehoskie Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:40 PM (#4694266)
And as you've pointed out many times, more of those folks than ever have been deported than ever before.

No, I haven't. Obama's deportation numbers are a sham, as even Jeh Johnson has admitted.

***
I must have missed the armed standoff where an illegal/undocumented/pick your term basically defied deportation, got himself surrounded with like-minded anti-deportationists, and more or less refused to be deported. Actually, I think I haven't missed it -- I suspect it just hasn't happened because I'm sure I'd be hearing the Drudge siren even without visiting his site if anything remotely like that had happened... I suppose we could spend billions and hire hundreds of thousands more ICE personnel. It's a pretty simply matter of the numbers - setting aside the politics of the issue, doesn't seem to me that I can recall any instances of someone just "refusing" a deportation.

The closest I can recall was Elvia Arellano - who sought sanctuary in a Chicago-area church... when she left, she got arrested, and then deported. Despite becoming a celebrity in immigration reform circles, my recollection is that no armed horde of liberals surrounded the church and threatened to make for an ICE bloodbath or otherwise strategized to put "women in front" so as to show the world ICE's bloodthirstiness.

You should have quit after the first paragraph, as your second one helped to prove my point.

Elvira Arellano is back in the United States. A government that can send dozens or hundreds of armed agents to raid some guy's ranch should be able to do a much better job keeping defiant dregs like Elvira Arellano out.
   2847. spike Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:51 PM (#4694268)
The issue is why does every Podunk Federal Agency need one?

Why don't you look at the pictures of what the protestors brought with them in terms of firepower and tell me?
   2848. zonk Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:52 PM (#4694271)

Armed, sure. The issue is a dedicated paramilitary unit.

If they run into real armed opposition, call the FBI. Not like the BLS SWAT team is going to be right there when the trouble happens.

But, if you give all these disparate agencies fancy paramilitary toys, they'll all be itching to use them.


Again, I'm no expert on the law... but the problem here is likely that it's not really the FBI's job nor under the FBI's purview to basically seize assets in what amounts to a failure to pay fines. Whatever else he is - Cliven Bundy isn't really a 'criminal organization' nor does he really fall under the jurisdiction of the FBI.

I just think back to 9/11 and a lot of the aftermath recommendations - i.e., lack of coordination between agencies. We draw a fine line between what certain agencies or departments are allowed to do, what their jurisdiction amounts to, etc for a reason.

There's a downside to what you propose -- 'disarm', or at least, 'demilitarize' every agency except for one....

Then - THAT agency - whoever it is we deem the "enforcer" becomes the single, domestic military force. It's why we don't call on the army to seize Bundy's cattle. Doing what you propose would create a single, extremely powerful armed force that would be expected to deal with everyone from the mob to inner gangs to separatists militias.

As odd is that might sound -- 'liberty' is probably better protected by a bunch of a federal agencies each having their own smallish SWAT teams than having a single, unified, designed to deal with all domestic contingencies.

I feel my own liberty - as someone with no interest of hording ammunition, firearms, or styling myself some sort of sovereign citizen not bound to the nation's laws - is a hell of a lot safer with a bunch of little fiefdom agencies than a single, unified domestic army.

If push comes to shove - and all hell were to really break loose - would you prefer a single, unified domestic army.... or a bunch of smaller ones, some/many/most of whom might very well turn their guns on the one or few rogue groups threatening domestic tranquility?

For better or worse, I'd rather have a bunch of little militaries than one big one.
   2849. zenbitz Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:55 PM (#4694273)
There are not many (any?) strategy games with realistic battle sub-systems. It makes it very hard to actually plan strategy.
   2850. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:55 PM (#4694275)
Elvira Arellano is back in the United States. A government that can send dozens or hundreds of armed agents to raid some guy's ranch should be able to do a much better job keeping defiant dregs like Elvira Arellano out.


That you think arresting her is more important than dealing with Bundy says a lot about you.
   2851. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:59 PM (#4694277)
No, I haven't. Obama's deportation numbers are a sham, as even Jeh Johnson has admitted.
I just can't keep up with talking points. One week, Obama's evil because he deports all these people, the next week Obama's evil because the exact opposite. Pick a side, we're at culture war. And since it's been brushed aside, it should be again pointed out that Bundy and friends have threatened to shoot federal agents carrying out a court order on land Bundy doesn't own.

The idea that fines that won't get paid and liens that won't get collected are somehow "enforcement" is crazy. It's like giving speeding tickets to speedsters, having none of them ever get paid, and shrugging it off.
   2852. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 02:59 PM (#4694278)
Then - THAT agency - whoever it is we deem the "enforcer" becomes the single, domestic military force. It's why we don't call on the army to seize Bundy's cattle. Doing what you propose would create a single, extremely powerful armed force that would be expected to deal with everyone from the mob to inner gangs to separatists militias.

As odd is that might sound -- 'liberty' is probably better protected by a bunch of a federal agencies each having their own smallish SWAT teams than having a single, unified, designed to deal with all domestic contingencies.

I feel my own liberty - as someone with no interest of hording ammunition, firearms, or styling myself some sort of sovereign citizen not bound to the nation's laws - is a hell of a lot safer with a bunch of little fiefdom agencies than a single, unified domestic army.

If push comes to shove - and all hell were to really break loose - would you prefer a single, unified domestic army.... or a bunch of smaller ones, some/many/most of whom might very well turn their guns on the one or few rogue groups threatening domestic tranquility?

For better or worse, I'd rather have a bunch of little militaries than one big one.


The issue is there is no need for more than one set of SWAT teams. These teams are being used because they exist, not because there are that many situations that require paramilitary force. The FBI doesn't need a huge paramilitary force, because the need isn't there.

There is one army, well really two, the US Army and the Marine Corps.

The entire paramilitary wings of every Federal and local police organization would be crushed in an afternoon by a battalion of real combat infantry with only their integral heavy weapons.

Push comes to shove, I also trust the US Military not to trample the rights of citizens, and not to support a ill-intentioned Gov't. I don't trust the Federal Police pseudo-soldiers much at all.
   2853. Joe Kehoskie Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:00 PM (#4694279)
That you think arresting her is more important than dealing with Bundy says a lot about you.

And that you think arresting an old rancher whose cattle are grazing illegally is more important than securing the border (and crafting sensible asylum rules) says quite a bit about you.

***
I just can't keep up with talking points. One week, Obama's evil because he deports all these people, the next week Obama's evil because the exact opposite. Pick a side, we're at culture war.

Obama is being hoisted by his own petard. He trumped up some phony deportation numbers so he'd look tough on illegal immigration while pushing for amnesty, and now those sham numbers are dishonestly and shamelessly being used against him by amnesty types, who know the numbers are a sham.
   2854. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:03 PM (#4694281)
Obama is being hoisted by his own petard. He trumped up some phony deportation numbers for p.r. reasons,
Which you reflexively jumped on as being something terrible. Again, pick a side.
   2855. Joe Kehoskie Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:04 PM (#4694283)
Which you reflexively jumped on as being something terrible. Again, pick a side.

Good thing this is a site for "thinking fans," because a lot of them sure can't read.

I don't need to "pick a side," because my position hasn't changed one iota.
   2856. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:06 PM (#4694284)
And that you think arresting an old rancher whose cattle are grazing illegally is more important that securing the border says quite a bit about you.


Let me fix that for you:

That I think arresting an old rancher who literally called in a private militia to obstruct and threaten Federal Agents after the serial liar rancher had lost every court battle over a period of 20 years is more important than arresting Elvira Arellano again, says quite a bit about me.


   2857. zonk Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:07 PM (#4694287)
The issue is there is no need for more than one set of SWAT teams. These teams are being used because they exist, not because there are that many situations that require paramilitary force. The FBI doesn't need a huge paramilitary force, because the need isn't there.

There is one army, well really two, the US Army and the Marine Corps.

The entire paramilitary wings of every Federal and local police organization would be crushed in an afternoon by a battalion of real combat infantry with only their integral heavy weapons.

Push comes to shove, I also trust the US Military not to trample the rights of citizens, and not to support a ill-intentioned Gov't. I don't trust the Federal Police pseudo-soldiers much at all.


But that's my point -- we purposely DO NOT ask the US military to do any sort of domestic law enforcement specifically because the US military's entire purpose for existing is to protect against FOREIGN threats.

The 'paramilitary wings' of every federal and local police org and agency would be collectively crushed because they are many, not one --

It's the Robert Baratheon riddle about what's the greater number -- one or five? One - if the one is a fist and the five are fingers.

What you're proposing is creating that one, domestic fist...

I'm not claiming it's a wonderful thing.

I'm just saying that I think I'd prefer a situation where the FBI's SWAT team had the capability to say, arrest the NYPD SWAT team because the NY State Police SWAT team would be backing them up (whatever) rather than having a single, "United States Federal SWAT team" that only the US Army itself would be able to bring to heel.
   2858. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:08 PM (#4694289)
I just can't keep up with talking points. One week, Obama's evil because he deports all these people, the next week Obama's evil because the exact opposite. Pick a side, we're at culture war.


You have to separate the sides:

the side/people whose talking point was that "Obama's evil because he deports all these people" is different from and in fact opposed to the people/side who say the exact opposite.

   2859. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:08 PM (#4694290)
That I think arresting an old rancher who literally called in a private militia to obstruct and threaten Federal Agents after the serial liar rancher had lost every court battle over a period of 20 years is more important than arresting Elvira Arellano again, says quite a bit about me.

Why are paramilitary Federal Agents being sent to enforce a property crime?

Why couldn't they simply put a lien on his bank accounts?
   2860. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:12 PM (#4694291)
What you're proposing is creating that one, domestic fist...

I'm not claiming it's a wonderful thing.

I'm just saying that I think I'd prefer a situation where the FBI's SWAT team had the capability to say, arrest the NYPD SWAT team because the NY State Police SWAT team would be backing them up (whatever) rather than having a single, "United States Federal SWAT team" that only the US Army itself would be able to bring to heel.


No, I'm not.

I'm not saying abolish State and Municipal SWAT teams. What they do is their business.

All I'm saying is that the Federal Police organizations do not need any more SWAT resources than the FBI currently possesses. I'm saying abolish every Federal paramilitary police group, except those of the FBI, and leave those the same size they are.

These SWAT teams don't exist because they are needed, they are used because they exist.

These are some of the departments that have their own SWAT teams:

Department of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Dept. of Education, the FDA, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

The Dept. of Education has literally no need ever for it's own SWAT. The Railroad Retirement board is hilarious.
   2861. zonk Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:12 PM (#4694292)

Why couldn't they simply put a lien on his bank accounts?


What if he doesn't have one?

I confess that I don't know the details of his finances, but based on the fact that the guy appears to be one of those sovereign citizen sorts -- I'm willing to bet he's not exactly conducting much business through Wells Fargo....
   2862. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:15 PM (#4694297)
But that's my point -- we purposely DO NOT ask the US military to do any sort of domestic law enforcement specifically because the US military's entire purpose for existing is to protect against FOREIGN threats.


In fact the founding fathers were very concerned about having a"standing" military at all, I think their platonic ideal was more along the lines of every town having its own voluntary militia that could/would be called up only when needed. Unfortunately that "system" really didn't work then, and now with a population of 300 million or so the idea of even trying is ludicrous.

I think we need to find some type of sweet spot between the size and distribution of policing and security functions- enough to maintain law order, not so much that you turn into police state, not so much concentration that civil government could be imperiled by a coup or something.

i
   2863. Bitter Mouse Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:15 PM (#4694298)
I assume you have all read the left wing Forbes and what they say about the cost to Russia of the Ukraine mess?

Earlier today Standard and Poor’s cut Russia’s sovereign debt rating one step to BBB-, the lowest investment grade and one level above “junk” status. While the Russians have predictably bemoaned the “political” nature of S&P’s move, the reality is that this is the country’s first debt downgrade since December 2008 when the global financial crisis was in full swing Russia was on the verge of a really nasty economic downturn. S&P based its decision on slowing economic growth, geopolitical tensions, and capital flight that reached $70 billion(!) in just the first quarter. It’s impossible to know exactly what will come of S&P’s downgrade (the ratings agencies themselves don’t have any real power or authority) but it reflects a rapid souring of the mood in Russia and an overall worsening of economic conditions.


I blame Obama for ruining the Russian economy, he is to blame for everything else after all.
   2864. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:17 PM (#4694301)
What if he doesn't have one?

I confess that I don't know the details of his finances, but based on the fact that the guy appears to be one of those sovereign citizen sorts -- I'm willing to bet he's not exactly conducting much business through Wells Fargo..


I doubt people are paying cash for his livestock.
   2865. Bitter Mouse Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:19 PM (#4694305)
I don't need to "pick a side," because my position hasn't changed one iota.


That position being Obama is wrong and evil. So you are correct when you say you have not changed you position. Well done. You do change your talking points in service of that position, but your position has in fact not changed.
   2866. Joe Kehoskie Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:20 PM (#4694306)
That position being Obama is wrong and evil. So you are correct when you say you have not changed you position. Well done. You do change your talking points in service of that position, but your position has in fact not changed.

Too dumb for a reply.

(But sort of funny, coming from the same person who just complained I "misread" his comments on a regular basis. Physician, heal thyself, etc.)
   2867. Publius Publicola Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:28 PM (#4694315)
I know a lot of you guys don't give two shits about the Constitution, but Bundy's argument is that the BLM has no legitimate claim to the public land in Nevada (which stems from the conditions attached to it gaining statehood).


Just out of curiosity, if he thinks the state of Nevada has no claim to that land, how does he rationalize his own claim to it? That he happens to live close to it? Thousands of others coudl make the same claim. Why does he think he deserves special treatment?
   2868. zonk Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:30 PM (#4694317)
In fact the founding fathers were very concerned about having a"standing" military at all, I think their platonic ideal was more along the lines of every town having its own voluntary militia that could/would be called up only when needed. Unfortunately that "system" really didn't work then, and now with a population of 300 million or so the idea of even trying is ludicrous.

I think we need to find some type of sweet spot between the size and distribution of policing and security functions- enough to maintain law order, not so much that you turn into police state, not so much concentration that civil government could be imperiled by a coup or something.


I agree...

Personally, and yeah - I just say this selfishly as an urban dweller who probably won't ever have sort of contact with the BLM (or ATF or DNR or whatever) - I'm a lot more unnerved by the firepower the Chicago Police Department could bring to bear than I am the BLM.

I'm not unnerved enough about it to demand the CPD eliminate its SWAT team because I also watch the news and see that there are situations where they need to enforce the law but would be horribly outgunned without it.

The same applies to the BLM -- I have also seen the news... the news that outlets like Fox were almost giddily highlighting up until this week... and while I have little doubt that the BLM basically retreated because no one (well, no one on the BLM side... dollars to donuts there were a lot of disappointed 'patriots' in Nevada) wanted a bloody confrontation -- seems pretty clear to me that the BLM probably also withdrew because they'd have been absolutely massacred... not a few agents shot or killed - perhaps something out of Somalia circa 1994.

Lawful agents of ANY agency executing an exhaustively litigated action aren't SUPPOSED to engage in some sort of "fair fight"...

Heavy-handed, perhaps -- but whether it's Ruby Ridge, Waco, or the Bundy ranch -- I'll cast my lot with the duly appointed authorities exiting the incident without harm to themselves. If that means APCs, automatic weapons, night vision gogles or whatever... well... we unfortunately have a heavily armed country filled with people that romanticize 'wars' of various sorts based on the flimsiest of arguments.
   2869. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:37 PM (#4694322)
Just out of curiosity, if he thinks the state of Nevada has no claim to that land, how does he rationalize his own claim to it? That he happens to live close to it? Thousands of others coudl make the same claim. Why does he think he deserves special treatment?

I believe he recognizes Nevada's claim to the land, and has said he'd paid usage fees to Nevada, but not the Feds. He's still a nutter.
   2870. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:41 PM (#4694325)
Lawful agents of ANY agency executing an exhaustively litigated action aren't SUPPOSED to engage in some sort of "fair fight"...

Heavy-handed, perhaps -- but whether it's Ruby Ridge, Waco, or the Bundy ranch -- I'll cast my lot with the duly appointed authorities exiting the incident without harm to themselves. If that means APCs, automatic weapons, night vision gogles or whatever... well... we unfortunately have a heavily armed country filled with people that romanticize 'wars' of various sorts based on the flimsiest of arguments.


The issue with these SWAT teams, is they encourage the Feds to engage in the most confrontational approach possible.

WACO is a great example. The local sheriff said he would be happy to arrest Koresh for them on one of his frequent solo visits to town.

Instead, the ATF had its shiny SWAT team, and insisted on launching a raid, in which they got their asses kicked, and got several of their members killed. They were then so pissed, that they attacked again (with machine guns and Bradley Fighting Vehicles) and burned down a building killing dozens of innocent women and children.

If a law enforcement agency is forced to request back-up from other agencies, it puts a natural brake on the ability of a few overly-jealous officers to do stupid things.

If the Feds want to execute a raid in NYC or Chicago, why shouldn't they have to ask the local police to supply the SWAT teams?
   2871. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:43 PM (#4694328)
I believe he recognizes Nevada's claim to the land, and has said he'd paid usage fees to Nevada, but not the Feds. He's still a nutter.
He's claimed he TRIED to pay usage fees to Nevada in 1993. The county assessor's office has testified that they have no record of any such attempts, and since it's federal and not state land, they would have voided out any payment attempts.
   2872. The Good Face Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:44 PM (#4694329)
Heavy-handed, perhaps -- but whether it's Ruby Ridge, Waco, or the Bundy ranch -- I'll cast my lot with the duly appointed authorities exiting the incident without harm to themselves. If that means APCs, automatic weapons, night vision gogles or whatever... well... we unfortunately have a heavily armed country filled with people that romanticize 'wars' of various sorts based on the flimsiest of arguments.


But you lefties here keep telling us how crime is lower than it's EVER been thanks to Obama's healing hands or whatever. Why do you need a plethora of paramilitary organizations to deal with the piddling amounts of crime we now have?
   2873. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:44 PM (#4694330)
He's claimed he TRIED to pay usage fees to Nevada in 1993. The county assessor's office has testified that they have no record of any such attempts, and since it's federal and not state land, they would have voided out any payment attempts.

That's consistent with him believing Nevada can charge him, but not the Feds.
   2874. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:48 PM (#4694336)
He's claimed he TRIED to pay usage fees to Nevada in 1993. The county assessor's office has testified that they have no record of any such attempts, and since it's federal and not state land, they would have voided out any payment attempts.

That's consistent with him believing Nevada can charge him, but not the Feds.
But up until 1993, Bundy had no problems with paying federal grazing fees. The changes in grazing restrictions were what made him decide to go all stars-and-bars; up until then he recognized federal ownership just fine.
   2875. spike Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:48 PM (#4694337)
The entire paramilitary wings of every Federal and local police organization would be crushed in an afternoon by a battalion of real combat infantry with only their integral heavy weapons.

A battalion is 300-1300 people. I don't mind the analogy per se, but I don't think this is anywhere close to true. There are thousands of local swat officers in this country before we even get to the Feds, and many of them have MRAPS (thanks W!) and similar heavy equipment. Regiment I think is what you wanted here.
   2876. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:49 PM (#4694338)
This is the real issue; the militarization of policing in the US. There was no need to send paramilitary units after Bundy. Just put a damn lien on his bank account, like they do with the Amish who won't pay SSI taxes.

Why does the Bureau of Land Management even have its own SWAT team? So do the Department of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the FDA, the Department of Education, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.


Because we've lost our way and are in decline. Overzealousness and lack of perspective and balance and sense are the tenor of the times.
   2877. CrosbyBird Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:55 PM (#4694343)
I'm not religious like Snapper, but we agree (presumably, Snapper can speak for himself) that promiscuity is bad for society.

I only think promiscuity is a bad thing in the absence of protection from disease or birth control. Bonobos (one of our closest genetic relatives) are the strumpets of the animal kingdom and also among the least violent.
   2878. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 03:55 PM (#4694344)
A battalion is 300-1300 people. I don't mind the analogy per se, but I don't think this is anywhere close to true. There are thousands of local swat officers in this country before we even get to the Feds, and many of them have MRAPS (thanks W!) and similar heavy equipment. Regiment I think is what you wanted here.

A Regiment would absolutely annihilate them. At the Regimental level, the Army will be deploying tanks in at least company strength, as well as 155mm howitzers. But, a battalion would still crush them.

A US Army Mechanized Infantry Battalion would deploy something like 750 men, with 50 Bradley Fighting Vehicles (each with a TOW heavy ATGM, and a 25mm auto-cannon), 6 120mm mortars, 27 Javelin medium ATGMs, and well over 100 MGs (vehicle mounted and dismounted).

Add on top of that the far superior training, unit cohesion, and elan of real combat infantry, it would be very very ugly for the coppers.
   2879. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:00 PM (#4694348)
Instead, the ATF had its shiny SWAT team, and insisted on launching a raid, in which they got their asses kicked, and got several of their members killed. They were then so pissed, that they attacked again (with machine guns and Bradley Fighting Vehicles) and burned down a building killing dozens of innocent women and children.


Au contraire-
it was the FBI (the one you wnat with the swat capacity) that came back later with the paramilitary unit and APCs.

Though I do agree as I mentioned upthread that the ATF was wrong to have attempted to storm the compound and arrest Koresh in the manner that they did.

   2880. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:00 PM (#4694349)
Because we've lost our way and are in decline.


DRINK!
   2881. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:03 PM (#4694351)
Au contraire-
it was the FBI (the one you wnat with the swat capacity) that came back later with the paramilitary unit and APCs.

Though I do agree as I mentioned upthread that the ATF was wrong to have attempted to storm the compound and arrest Koresh in the manner that they did.


OK, thanks for the clarification. I don't want the FBI to have any additional SWAT capabilities, I just want every other Federal agency to have none.

The general rule should be that Federal agencies enforce their police powers through, or at least in conjunction with, the local police agencies.
   2882. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:05 PM (#4694354)
That's consistent with him believing Nevada can charge him, but not the Feds.


Consistently believing incorrect things is not a point in one's favor.
   2883. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:05 PM (#4694355)
I could be wrong, but I don't think Fat Boy's grand father or father ever had themselves photographed in such a manner, I guess it's just a sign that other societies and not just ours have lost their way and are in decline.

   2884. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:06 PM (#4694358)
Consistently believing incorrect things is not a point in one's favor.

No, he's a nut. I was just pointing out that does actually believe someone owns the land.
   2885. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:06 PM (#4694361)
I only think promiscuity is a bad thing in the absence of protection from disease or birth control.


Casual sex that doesn't lead to unwanted pregnancy is no greater threat to society than a drink after work.
   2886. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:08 PM (#4694363)
I could be wrong, but I don't think Fat Boy's grand father or father ever had themselves photographed in such a manner, I guess it's just a sign that other societies and not just ours have lost their way and are in decline.

Sure, I mean today's dictators are total pikers compared to the old days. Stalin would have already annexed half of Ukraine, shot 25,000 politicians and army officers, and sent 3 million people to the Gulag. And that's just before lunch.
   2887. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:09 PM (#4694364)
Honestly guys, I know this doesn't do a thing for my reputation around here, but if anything happened to my wife I most likely would sell my house and move somewhere very rural, if not in complete wilderness.


If I outlive my wife I will inevitably move back to the swamps. Roots die hard.
   2888. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:09 PM (#4694366)
the general rule should be that Federal agencies enforce their police powers through, or at least in conjunction with, the local police agencies.


Actually its my understanding that at the last minute the ATF did get the local Air Guard to contribute 3 helicopters (as a "distraction")- once the ATF operation started the Helos immediately began taking fire from the compound (so that's what the ATF meant by distraction...), and their pilots immediately got the hell out of dodge.
   2889. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:10 PM (#4694367)
Casual sex that doesn't lead to unwanted pregnancy is no greater threat to society than a drink after work.

But the history is that it does lead to huge numbers of out-of-wedlock births (wanted or not) and huge numbers of kids being raised by only one parent, with serious negative consequences. Not to mention disease.
   2890. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:11 PM (#4694368)
But the history is that it does lead to huge numbers of out-of-wedlock births (wanted or not) and huge numbers of kids being raised by only one parent, with serious negative consequences. Not to mention disease.


Well, stop opposing tech to combat this problem then.
   2891. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:11 PM (#4694369)
Actually its my understanding that at the last minute the ATF did get the local Air Guard to contribute 3 helicopters (as a "distraction")- once the ATF operation started the Helos immediately began taking fire from the compound (so that's what the ATF meant by distraction...), and their pilots immediately got the hell out of dodge.

Yeah, most soldiers, sailors and airmen ain't stupid. They're not going to die because of some cop's stupidity.
   2892. spike Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:13 PM (#4694370)

But the history is that it does lead to huge numbers of out-of-wedlock births (wanted or not) and huge numbers of kids being raised by only one parent, with serious negative consequences. Not to mention disease.


If only everyone had access to birth control through their insurance...

//and "it does lead to huge numbers of out-of-wedlock births" is getting perilously close to rank assertion territory again.
   2893. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:15 PM (#4694372)
Well, stop opposing tech to combat this problem then.

The tech exists, is wide spread, and cheap. Have you ever heard me propose banning contraceptives? Why would someone listen to religion saying "don't use contraception", when they completely ignore those same religions saying "don't fornicate"?

The issue is most of the unwed parents want the kids, but they don't want to, or can't figure out how to, provide a stable, married home for them.

   2894. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:16 PM (#4694373)
The issue is most of the unwed parents want the kids, but they don't want to, or can't figure out how to, provide a stable, married home for them.


This is true. The problem are people who think "my life is terrible and I'm sad, if I had a kid I'd be happy and someone would love me." Get a ####### dog.

EDIT: This is why we should sterilize children in grade school.
   2895. spike Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:17 PM (#4694374)
The issue is most of the unwed parents want the kids, but they don't want to, or can't figure out how to, provide a stable, married home for them.


Rank assertion.
   2896. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:17 PM (#4694375)
Yeah, most soldiers, sailors and airmen ain't stupid. They're not going to die because of some cop's stupidity.


I have no doubt that the pilots were thinking, "J____ CH____, WTF are these morons doing!?"
   2897. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:18 PM (#4694377)
If only everyone had access to birth control through their insurance...

... women would still be getting knocked up by the millions with kids they can't afford. You don't need insurance to make a guy wear a jiffy, or to get on the pill. The pill is $50/month or less.

Stop apologizing for this ####. It's unbecoming.


   2898. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:18 PM (#4694378)
If only everyone had access to birth control through their insurance...

Everyone can go to CVS and buy a condom. That doesn't stop people from having kids. Many of them want the kids, especially the guys who are knocking up multiple women, and not paying anything in support. They're getting a fantastic free ride from society.

//and "it does lead to huge numbers of out-of-wedlock births" is getting perilously close to rank assertion territory again.

The rate of unwed births is approaching 50%. Do you really deny that the change in social mores in re casual sex hasn't contributed greatly to this?
   2899. zonk Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:19 PM (#4694379)
Indeed.

...the Onion reference seems to me to be just about perfect.
   2900. spike Posted: April 25, 2014 at 04:20 PM (#4694380)
... women would still be getting knocked up by the millions with kids they can't afford. You don't need insurance to make a guy wear a jiffy, or to get on the pill. The pill is $50/month or less.


So what? The assertion was that rank promiscuity causes these problems, and these would definitely be ameliorated by more widespread access to birth control
Page 29 of 48 pages ‹ First  < 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
James Kannengieser
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 7-22-14
(9 - 9:21pm, Jul 22)
Last: Rafael Bellylard: Built like a Panda.

NewsblogThree Moves The Red Sox Should Make - Tony Massarotti - Boston.com
(31 - 9:19pm, Jul 22)
Last: Dale Sams

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread- July 2014
(820 - 9:12pm, Jul 22)
Last: PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth)

NewsblogTony Oliva turns 76; Gardenhire: 'He should be in hall of fame'
(46 - 9:10pm, Jul 22)
Last: DavidFoss

NewsblogChase Headley traded to New York Yankees from San Diego Padres - ESPN New York
(79 - 9:05pm, Jul 22)
Last: shoewizard

NewsblogMLB: Astros telecasts catching on to advanced metrics
(10 - 9:02pm, Jul 22)
Last: Astroenteritis (tom)

NewsblogCowboy Monkey Rodeo taking the Minors by storm
(5 - 9:01pm, Jul 22)
Last: A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose)

NewsblogPoll: Does Citizens Bank Park really need metal detectors at the gates?
(28 - 8:56pm, Jul 22)
Last: RMc's desperate, often sordid world

NewsblogOTP - July 2014: Republicans Lose To Democrats For Sixth Straight Year In Congressional Baseball Game
(2714 - 8:47pm, Jul 22)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogAs shifts suppress offense, time has come to consider a rule change
(19 - 8:47pm, Jul 22)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

SABR - BBTF ChapterWho's going to SABR??
(38 - 8:29pm, Jul 22)
Last: Mike Emeigh

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1956 Ballot
(6 - 7:33pm, Jul 22)
Last: Chris Fluit

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1956 Discussion
(33 - 7:31pm, Jul 22)
Last: Chris Fluit

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 7-22-2014
(16 - 7:16pm, Jul 22)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogRangers' Yu Darvish Pushes for a Six-Man Pitching Rotation - NYTimes.com
(11 - 7:07pm, Jul 22)
Last: Srul Itza

Page rendered in 1.4194 seconds
52 querie(s) executed