JF_Gophers
2147483647
We agree on that!
I doubt France has mass shootings every few months like the US. Despite their gun laws. But that messes up the narrative.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Paris Under Attack....the hell?
- Thread starter Greyeagle
- Start date
I doubt France has mass shootings every few months like the US. Despite their gun laws. But that messes up the narrative.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Paris Under Attack....the hell?
I meant the "...good guy with a gun" argle bargle. It's already out there.
If everybody were armed and ready to take out bad guys (and the gun lobby was as rich as the Defense Department), every loud noise would leave five innocent bystanders dead. The best argument against a well armed society is to just look at the driver whenever you pass a car with an NRA sticker on it.
I meant the "...good guy with a gun" argle bargle. It's already out there.
If everybody were armed and ready to take out bad guys (and the gun lobby was as rich as the Defense Department), every loud noise would leave five innocent bystanders dead. The best argument against a well armed society is to just look at the driver whenever you pass a car with an NRA sticker on it.
If there is, it's almost certainly located within five miles of Sturgis, SD.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Woodstock
leswp1
Well-known member
Re: Paris Under Attack....the hell?
Who would pay for their support? Many of the refugees are actually professionals. The intellectuals are targeted because they are the ones that see through the nonsense.Ummm...I wasn't advocating putting the dad in Gitmo.I would bring women and children over first as I think they'd need less vetting, then the fathers after a thorough check.
No they brought joints, not guns
Altamont
Re: Paris Under Attack....the hell?
He might have meant Woodstock II, which I am so glad I DIDN'T go. Was seriously thinking about it.
He might have meant Woodstock II, which I am so glad I DIDN'T go. Was seriously thinking about it.
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
Re: Paris Under Attack....the hell?
1994 was the major crap that went down.
I stand corrected. It WAS '99. My bad.
1994 was the major crap that went down.
I stand corrected. It WAS '99. My bad.
Re: Paris Under Attack....the hell?
Police raid on suspected terrorists. One officer reported shot. Status unclear. Not many details yet.
Given the timing and area? Just gonna leave that there for now...need more info, but there are some deductions that could be had...
Police raid on suspected terrorists. One officer reported shot. Status unclear. Not many details yet.
Given the timing and area? Just gonna leave that there for now...need more info, but there are some deductions that could be had...
Re: Paris Under Attack....the hell?
The problem with profiling is not its accuracy. Strangely enough most of these events described as terrorist acts end up having been committed by young men with a middle eastern appearance. Any APB for the guys that ripped off your 401(k) better start with "white male, dressed in business suit, glued to cellphone," just like the search for a sexual predator typically begins, "white male, poor social skills, loner, but may live with parents."
Again, the problem isn't accuracy. These descriptions, 99% of the time will turn out very accurate. The problem is the collateral damage. We let the government run wild with these profiles and there are any number of posters here who are going to spend some time speaking with the police.
I'm not sure that profiling based upon sex and age is a slope we want to start down, any more than profiling on race, religion or national origin.
The problem with profiling is not its accuracy. Strangely enough most of these events described as terrorist acts end up having been committed by young men with a middle eastern appearance. Any APB for the guys that ripped off your 401(k) better start with "white male, dressed in business suit, glued to cellphone," just like the search for a sexual predator typically begins, "white male, poor social skills, loner, but may live with parents."
Again, the problem isn't accuracy. These descriptions, 99% of the time will turn out very accurate. The problem is the collateral damage. We let the government run wild with these profiles and there are any number of posters here who are going to spend some time speaking with the police.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Paris Under Attack....the hell?
It's also a huge drain on resources that could be better deployed. We could vet every single Muslim in the US, and tie up our intelligence, security and law enforcement for decades, or we could apply simple layered scoring of risk factors, reduce the search field 99%, and actually get stuff done and find the bad guys.
It's also a huge drain on resources that could be better deployed. We could vet every single Muslim in the US, and tie up our intelligence, security and law enforcement for decades, or we could apply simple layered scoring of risk factors, reduce the search field 99%, and actually get stuff done and find the bad guys.
So profiling bad, unless it's detailed enough to be good?
(I'm not arguing that would be an inconsistent position - just asking for clarification)
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Paris Under Attack....the hell?
Kind of. Profiling on Arabs or Muslims is stupid -- it's so broad you might as well profile on "people with brown hair" since people with brown hair do commit the majority of terrorist acts.
Profiling on people who subscribe to "Dabiq Magazine," on the other hand, is a really good strategy.
Profiling is a funnel, and the trick is to place the sieve high enough to catch most of the perps but low enough so that you don't spend all your time having to cull false positives. Ma and Pa Kettle think "Muslim" is a rare, suspect attribute because they only ever see Muslims on the nightly news. But there are far more Muslims world-wide than Catholics, and I doubt they'd have favored profiling Catholics for investigations of the IRA.
Nor does the wider attribute make sense as an "AND" condition on the search, if you're choosing your other terms well. In the example above, if you're subscribing to "Dabiq" I really want to have a talk with you regardless of whether you show up as Muslim or not. It's not Muslim-ness that's a problem.
This is not an easy problem. I've never read the full text of all the opinions in Korematsu v. United States, but that may be a good place to start. There's lots of complexity here and the truth lies somewhere between "deport everybody with a head scarf" and "let everybody in and only pursue after the explosions."
I do think it's important to consider that the VAST majority of refugees not only are entirely non-violent, but also are running from the very same monsters we are trying to fight. They are on our side. Not to mentjon that recruiting from among them is GREAT resource for counter-terrorism. Mormon Mike from Montana means well, but he doesn't know jack sh-t about the situation on the ground and he's not going to be very useful for infiltrating ISIS. Akbar from Aleppo, on the other hand...
Kind of. Profiling on Arabs or Muslims is stupid -- it's so broad you might as well profile on "people with brown hair" since people with brown hair do commit the majority of terrorist acts.
Profiling on people who subscribe to "Dabiq Magazine," on the other hand, is a really good strategy.
Profiling is a funnel, and the trick is to place the sieve high enough to catch most of the perps but low enough so that you don't spend all your time having to cull false positives. Ma and Pa Kettle think "Muslim" is a rare, suspect attribute because they only ever see Muslims on the nightly news. But there are far more Muslims world-wide than Catholics, and I doubt they'd have favored profiling Catholics for investigations of the IRA.
Nor does the wider attribute make sense as an "AND" condition on the search, if you're choosing your other terms well. In the example above, if you're subscribing to "Dabiq" I really want to have a talk with you regardless of whether you show up as Muslim or not. It's not Muslim-ness that's a problem.
This is not an easy problem. I've never read the full text of all the opinions in Korematsu v. United States, but that may be a good place to start. There's lots of complexity here and the truth lies somewhere between "deport everybody with a head scarf" and "let everybody in and only pursue after the explosions."
I do think it's important to consider that the VAST majority of refugees not only are entirely non-violent, but also are running from the very same monsters we are trying to fight. They are on our side. Not to mentjon that recruiting from among them is GREAT resource for counter-terrorism. Mormon Mike from Montana means well, but he doesn't know jack sh-t about the situation on the ground and he's not going to be very useful for infiltrating ISIS. Akbar from Aleppo, on the other hand...
Last edited: