Islamic Terrorism

[reddogblitz]

No, you want to monitor the person who is in possssion of the gun, unless you believe that the gun is going to let itself out of the house and go for a stroll on its own without calling to check in on your 1-800-GO-HUNTN hotline first.

Would be a good way to locate a stolen gun. Sort of like locating a stolen car or cell phone.

[Justice]

At 06:43 PM you said:

 

 

At 07:47 PM you repeat the "bad idea".

 

 

So apparently it was only a bad idea for about an hour. Truth once again doesn't appear to be very important to you.

You certainly are helpless. I admit to a bad idea and I'm the untruthful one? Then you take one line out of what I said without showing the rest and what I was responding to and I'm the dishonest one? Please.

[Greg F]

You certainly are helpless. I admit to a bad idea and I'm the untruthful one? Then you take one line out of what I said without showing the rest and what I was responding to and I'm the dishonest one? Please.

You really have a hard time with the truth.

 

Greg F, on 17 Jun 2016 - 6:35 PM, said:

We already have the technology to put GPS trackers in just about anything you would want. The problem is it is trivial to defeat the tracking. You need to take a basic physics course then understand how GPS works. After that you will understand that a metal box or some aluminum foil will totally defeat any GPS tracker. And as Tom has pointed out, you have to have a way of transmitting the GPS data to someone who cares. The transmit also could be easily defeated by the same techniques mentioned above. Technology only appears to be magic by those who don't understand it. Those same people also don't understand the limitations dictated by the basic laws of physics.

To which you responded:

 

Justice, on 17 Jun 2016 - 6:43 PM, said:

Gotcha. Bad idea.

In response to your "If it prevents one shooting it's worth doing" I posted:

Greg F, on 17 Jun 2016 - 7:28 PM, said:

You not only don't understand basic physics, you don't understand basic economics. Please acquaint yourself with 'opportunity costs'. 'Opportunity costs' basically says if you spend money on one thing you give up being able to spend it on another. So for the sake of argument lets say you can equip every gun with a GPS device for $1. A hundred million guns would cost $100,000,000. At the same time you determine that spending that same $100,000,000 on highways would reduce traffic fatalities by 50 per year. IOW, spending the money to get the most bang for the buck is the rational choice. Spending it to prevent "one shooting" is emotional foolery.

To which you replied (Bold was what I didn't quote that your claiming removes context)

 

Justice, on 17 Jun 2016 - 7:47 PM, said:

I never said add trackers to already existing guns. I said from here on out. How often do you see a gun from 100 years ago? Eventually all guns will be equipped with it.

The bold part has nothing to do with if it will work, it is clearly a response to the economics which you didn't grasp. Oh and by the way, the dollar figure was used just to demonstrate how opportunity costs work, it isn't a real number. Having spent a fair amount of my working life in manufacturing $1 is very generous. Add cell data charges to actually track something is hundreds of dollars a year.

 

The part not in bold is you repeating the belief that GPS will work contradicting your admission that it is a "bad idea". Nothing out of context there, just more proof that honesty is not something you value.

[Justice]

You really have a hard time with the truth.

 

 

To which you responded:

 

 

In response to your "If it prevents one shooting it's worth doing" I posted:

 

To which you replied (Bold was what I didn't quote that your claiming removes context)

 

 

The bold part has nothing to do with if it will work, it is clearly a response to the economics which you didn't grasp. Oh and by the way, the dollar figure was used just to demonstrate how opportunity costs work, it isn't a real number. Having spent a fair amount of my working life in manufacturing $1 is very generous. Add cell data charges to actually track something is hundreds of dollars a year.

 

The part not in bold is you repeating the belief that GPS will work contradicting your admission that it is a "bad idea". Nothing out of context there, just more proof that honesty is not something you value.

After I said "bad idea" at 6:43 you should've let it go, but noooooo, you had to dig up a quote from 6:15. It's you that's being untruthful, not me. I tried to change subjects until you brought it back up. Once you brought it back up I was explaining my thought process that I used during THAT TIME before I said, "bad idea". Duh. Edited June 18, 2016 by Justice

[reddogblitz]

It's only a matter of time before there's tracking capability on EVERYTHING, including guns. Not today, not tomorrow, but definitely within 10 years.

[Justice]

It's only a matter of time before there's tracking capability on EVERYTHING, including guns. Not today, not tomorrow, but definitely within 10 years.

Don't tell Greg Focker that. It's impossible and always will be.

[Justice]

Quit calling me dishonest. I have some of the most unpopular opinions on the board and that's evidence of my honesty.

 

Why don't you try going back and reading all the posts from when I first brought up the idea. Then hopefully your reading comprehension skills kick in and you'll see how things really went down. Keep it in context and pay attention to who and what I'm replying to.

[4merper4mer]

It's only a matter of time before there's tracking capability on EVERYTHING, including guns. Not today, not tomorrow, but definitely within 10 years.

Maybe. But that depends on something called economies of scale which capitalism produces. capitalism is being banned faster than guns.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

What the !@#$? How is DHS now the language police?

 

The Homeland needs protecting. Remember, 'he who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.'

 

 

Money launderers? Probably.

 

We don't often agree, but when we do you're always spot on.

[GG]

True, but most people don't even know how to turn the GPS off on their phone or apply privacy settings to their SpaceBook account. And most criminals don't know their travels can be tracked by their cell phone when committing crimes.

Most common criminals aren't smart. The guys who are intent on mowing down as many people as possible, probably would go through the steps of disabling surveillance.

[reddogblitz]

All signs point to it. Do you have a better theory?

I'll give it to you again since you missed it the first time.

 

Obviously it's stupid and unjustified. I'm in no way justifying it. However, he did tell the 911 operator, the black lady at the club, and put it on FaceBook.

I'm just saying we're blaming everything else, "assault weapons", Muslims, Islam, Trump, Obama, homophobia, him being gay, etc. Can't we even consider that attacking other countries and playing a large part in promoting chaos in the Middle East might piss some people off? Why should we close our ears and deny it when it comes back and bites us in the ass?

 

Blowback

Edited June 18, 2016 by reddogblitz

[Greg F]

After I said "bad idea" at 6:43 you should've let it go, but noooooo, you had to dig up a quote from 6:15. It's you that's being untruthful, not me. I tried to change subjects until you brought it back up. Once you brought it back up I was explaining my thought process that I used during THAT TIME before I said, "bad idea". Duh.

Your the one that couldn't let it go as you repeated the same claim at 7:47 with your "Eventually all guns will be equipped with it". Keep digging.

It's only a matter of time before there's tracking capability on EVERYTHING, including guns. Not today, not tomorrow, but definitely within 10 years.

As I stated before we could do it today. The problem being it is trivial to defeat.

[Justice]

I never said add trackers to already existing guns. I said from here on out. How often do you see a gun from 100 years ago? Eventually all guns will be equipped with it.

Hey, Greg, you see that word, "said". I used it twice. Past tense, buddy, meaning I'm explaining myself from before the "gotcha. Bad idea". That whole paragraph is in context and a reply to your stupid ass, unnecessary remark about $100,000,000 being used to install trackers on all guns already made and sold, when I clearly said install the trackers on all guns made from here on out.

 

I only brought it up again because I was responding to YOU.

 

I'll take courses in physics if you take them in English. Reading comprehension isn't your strong-suit.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Justice

[Greg F]

Don't tell Greg Focker that. It's impossible and always will be.

 

More dishonesty from you. You responded to my post where I stated:

 

We already have the technology to put GPS trackers in just about anything you would want.

[Justice]

 

More dishonesty from you. You responded to my post where I stated:

 

I've reached my limit. Please. Pretty please. Stfu.

[Greg F]

Hey, Greg, you see that word, "said". I used it twice. Past tense, buddy, meaning I'm explaining myself from before the "gotcha. Bad idea". That whole paragraph is in context and a reply to your stupid ass, unnecessary remark about $100,000,000 being used to install trackers on all guns already made and sold, when I clearly said install the trackers on all guns made from here on out.

 

I only brought it up again because I was responding to YOU.

 

I'll take courses in physics if you take them in English. Reading comprehension isn't your strong-suit.

 

Let see if you can follow this.

 

The $100,000,000 was in response to your "If it prevents one shooting it's worth doing". It was an economic argument to expose the reality of trade offs. That a single minded attempt to preventing "one shooting" has consequences since those resources cannot be used elsewhere. It had zip nadda nothing to do with whether GPS on a gun was at all practical.

 

It simple doesn't matter if you "install the trackers on all guns made from here on out". It is still trivial to defeat the technology. What part of that don't you understand?

I've reached my limit. Please. Pretty please. Stfu.

 

I don't think your dishonesty has any limit. Your statement that "Don't tell Greg Focker that. It's impossible and always will be" after I clearly stated prior to that "We already have the technology to put GPS trackers in just about anything you would want".

[Justice]

 

Let see if you can follow this.

 

The $100,000,000 was in response to your "If it prevents one shooting it's worth doing". It was an economic argument to expose the reality of trade offs. That a single minded attempt to preventing "one shooting" has consequences since those resources cannot be used elsewhere. It had zip nadda nothing to do with whether GPS on a gun was at all practical.

 

It simple doesn't matter if you "install the trackers on all guns made from here on out". It is still trivial to defeat the technology. What part of that don't you understand?

 

 

I don't think your dishonesty has any limit. Your statement that "Don't tell Greg Focker that. It's impossible and always will be" after I clearly stated prior to that "We already have the technology to put GPS trackers in just about anything you would want".

Sad. Pathetic. I went through great lengths to prove to you you're wrong but yet here you are calling me a liar. I guess you don't know what said means.

[3rdnlng]

Sad. Pathetic. I went through great lengths to prove to you you're wrong but yet here you are calling me a liar. I guess you don't know what said means.

Seriously, you are doing battle over this? This is meant for Greg "Focher" too, even though he's technically kicking your ass.

[Justice]

Seriously, you are doing battle over this? This is meant for Greg "Focher" too, even though he's technically kicking your ass.

Really? Kicking my ass? Jeez. I guess you guys are incapable of seeing the truth.

 

Facts

 

1. I admitted to it being a bad idea.

2. I changed subjects

3. I responded to Greg's response from something I said at 6:15

4. I used the word "said" in my reply to him two times proving I was speaking from my opinion at that time (6:15).

5. I went an hour without bringing up that topic. I only brought it up when he brought it back up.

 

I know you guys are just egging me on. I'm done with it. Think what you want. I don't care.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Justice

[Greg F]

Sad. Pathetic. I went through great lengths to prove to you you're wrong but yet here you are calling me a liar. I guess you don't know what said means.

 

Let refresh your memory.

 

Your statement that "Don't tell Greg Focker that. It's impossible and always will be" after I clearly stated prior to that "We already have the technology to put GPS trackers in just about anything you would want".

 

Since I didn't say it was impossible your claim that I did is a lie. Pretty simple really.