Recommended Posts

Last time I checked a semi automatic pistol couldn't empty a 30 shot chamber in 4 seconds. A pistol is still a pistol, and an SMG is still an SMG regardless of how many shots their chambers hold. And walking around the streets with an SMG is absolutely insane.

Basically. It doesn't seem to be the cops fault.

By confronting the person in the first place, the cops instigated the confrontation. They should have observed out of site and tried not to confront the person.

This happens way too often. Someone calls the cops and says someone has a gun. 9 times out of 10 that person is not actually going to use it, but when confronted by cops yelling at them, the cops are the ones instigating it. It most cases, if the cops were never there, the person with the gun would have just gotten bored and put it away.

Cop points a gun at me, I have the same right to defend myself as the cop does. Cops are in the wrong way too often, busting into the wrong house more times than you think.

People give cops way too much credit, especially in this thread. They are way too anxious to get a kill shot.

Last time I checked a semi automatic pistol couldn't empty a 30 shot chamber in 4 seconds. A pistol is still a pistol, and an SMG is still an SMG....

1) my friends Uzi pistol is a semi-auto, not an SMG. I stated this upthread.

2) even so, with the proper ATF papers filled out, $200 tax and background check an SMG would still be legal under Federal law - though each state can still regulate this.

I wasn't disputing that it wasn't legal I just said that I think it's absolutely insane. But given how nutty America is for gun violence it probably shouldn't shock me as much as it does.

By confronting the person in the first place, the cops instigated the confrontation. They should have observed out of site and tried not to confront the person.

This happens way too often. Someone calls the cops and says someone has a gun. 9 times out of 10 that person is not actually going to use it, but when confronted by cops yelling at them, the cops are the ones instigating it. It most cases, if the cops were never there, the person with the gun would have just gotten bored and put it away.

Cop points a gun at me, I have the same right to defend myself as the cop does. Cops are in the wrong way too often, busting into the wrong house more times than you think.

People give cops way too much credit, especially in this thread. They are way too anxious to get a kill shot.

Seriously, you're saying I should be able to go down and rob a bank and because I might use the gun in a naughty way, the police should just hang back and give me a good chance at getting away?? LOL

Or what about if the cops just hung back and the POS kills some innocent bystander down the road?

You schmucks would then be whining "how come the cops didn't stop the luncatic with the gun?"

  • Like 1

No, what they're saying is that the police shouldn't go in guns blazing in situations where it's not merited. I know this is a thought foreign to most gun nuts but people dying is bad.

Perps etc. dying is never the preferred outcome, but sometimes it is the only option. In this case there was no way to tell if the guy's weapon was real or not other than a voice on the phone. Also, spoofing is common - painting over or removing the red tip, or painting one on a real weapon - so that's iffy. In the end the cops want to finish their shift without getting killed themselves, so presented with a deranged person that appears armed....

Another scenario: thug points his (illegal) weapon at a young teller/clerk/whatever, then a person with a carry permit puts one through his brain stem. Problem solved.

No, what they're saying is that the police shouldn't go in guns blazing in situations where it's not merited. I know this is a thought foreign to most gun nuts but people dying is bad.

The cops didn't go "guns blazing". Its not just cops who would've fired, even private citizens. You point something at me that looks VERY much like a real gun, I am going to shoot. Last time I checked, we humans have not developed the ability to read minds and know for 100% certain that it is not a real gun.

I am not immortal like Duncan McLeod on Highlander, I cannot take the chance it is a real gun or not. If it looks like it, I am going to defend myself.

  • Like 2

A third scenario: People have sensible attitudes towards lethal weapons, don't live like a bunch of yahoos with bloodlust, and make it harder for the criminal to get said weapon. Nobody dies. And to be honest DocM your attitude is telling anyway. You don't see the idea of killing a person in self defence as an unfortunate necessity, you seem to actually revel in the violence. From my experiences with American gun culture the only difference between a sensible and non sensible gun owners is the corpse count, "sensible" gun owners still seem to take delight in the violence of taking someone's life.

Seriously, you're saying I should be able to go down and rob a bank and because I might use the gun in a naughty way, the police should just hang back and give me a good chance at getting away?? LOL

Or what about if the cops just hung back and the POS kills some innocent bystander down the road?

You schmucks would then be whining "how come the cops didn't stop the luncatic with the gun?"

it's called reading the situation ....

A third scenario: People have sensible attitudes towards lethal weapons, don't live like a bunch of yahoos with bloodlust, and make it harder for the criminal to get said weapon. Nobody dies.

You assume that criminals get most of their weapons legally. They don't - gunrunning from overseas is alive & well in the US, and if you can't do that it's easy to make a SMG from metal stock found in most hardware stores.

As for the criminals - if they don't threaten or attack people, no one dies. And if someone is going to die, which is often their intent, better them than their victim(s.)

And to be honest DocM your attitude is telling anyway. You don't see the idea of killing a person in self defence as an unfortunate necessity, you seem to actually revel in the violence.

I don't revel in it, that's your mental invention, but I do see it as a necessary consequence of the actions of others. I most certainly won't shed tears over them, though I would feel bad for their relatives. That I don't have a "bloodlust" is that I've only had to fire on someone once in over 45 years, and that was to save my fathers life. The rest of the time I've made citizens arrests - something else that probably grinds you as being possible.

From my experiences with American gun culture the only difference between a sensible and non sensible gun owners is the corpse count, "sensible" gun owners still seem to take delight in the violence of taking someone's life.

That you can't tell the difference says more about your inflexibilty than about us.

  • Like 2

Your attitude portrays a very different story to what you're saying here, I've seen you talk without a great deal of glee about the damage your guns could do to a human body, sensible people don't do things like that. To a normal person, killing in self defence would be something that's viewed as unfortunate but unnecessary. You enjoy the thought of the amount of damage your guns could do so, and those simply aren't the words of a sensible person.

I have often tried to explain wound and firearms ballistics, combat tactics, US gun laws, etc. in terms people can understand. Often this is to explain current events, discount FUD, or correct misconceptions. If I add a tad of irony or even humor to lighten the subject and you don't like it too bad. Sue me. You don't like Americans or how we live? Fine, just don't expect anyone to take your apparent trolling seriously anymore.

Your attitude portrays a very different story to what you're saying here, I've seen you talk without a great deal of glee about the damage your guns could do to a human body, sensible people don't do things like that. To a normal person, killing in self defence would be something that's viewed as unfortunate but unnecessary. You enjoy the thought of the amount of damage your guns could do so, and those simply aren't the words of a sensible person.

So how is that any different than a guy who likes to talk about how his motorcycle can go 170 mph?? That's illegal everywhere in the US except on a track.

People like to talk about stats. They brag about the power their computer has, the power their cars have, and the power their gun has. It's not that difficult to understand. His hobby is guns, your hobby may be computers or cars or boats. Live with it.

By confronting the person in the first place, the cops instigated the confrontation. They should have observed out of site and tried not to confront the person.

This happens way too often. Someone calls the cops and says someone has a gun. 9 times out of 10 that person is not actually going to use it, but when confronted by cops yelling at them, the cops are the ones instigating it. It most cases, if the cops were never there, the person with the gun would have just gotten bored and put it away.

Cop points a gun at me, I have the same right to defend myself as the cop does. Cops are in the wrong way too often, busting into the wrong house more times than you think.

People give cops way too much credit, especially in this thread. They are way too anxious to get a kill shot.

Amen! There are far too many "god complex" cops these days.

So who is to blame then if that person runs in to a nearby home and kills 2 or 3 people because the police are "observing from out of site" and couldn't react in time?

That doesn't even begin to make sense. Remember the person they were dealing with is mentally unstable so they already would not be reacting as normal person would to police presence.

  • Like 1

If you are walking down a street with a gun, then you have already taken the first act.

You can't ask police to just sit back and wait for him to open fire. Once the police showed up, you have the option to drop the gun, hands on your head, etc. If you don't then police only option is to think that you are able and willing to use it, as such they have to render you inert. If they don't, and you open fire, and hit innocents, then the police are at fault.

I'm sorry the guy is dead, but he is the fraction of a percent that lives outside of the norm. The police need to operate by doing what is usually the best course of action, for most situations. Sometimes you meet someone outside of that, mentally disabled, idiots who pull out stuff from their pockets when the police tell them to freeze, etc.. But Most of the time the ones that aren't a thread surrender the second the police show up, and the ones that don't are a danger to everyone around.

Also, it's all nice that we can talk about it now, but when it happened, it happened in a fraction of a second.. I best most of the most liberal people would, in the same situation, seeing a man with what looks like a real gun starting to aim it your way, not decide to just wait and see what happens.

So how is that any different than a guy who likes to talk about how his motorcycle can go 170 mph?? That's illegal everywhere in the US except on a track.

People like to talk about stats. They brag about the power their computer has, the power their cars have, and the power their gun has. It's not that difficult to understand. His hobby is guns, your hobby may be computers or cars or boats. Live with it.

Those people don't take pride in their ability to kill.

Those people don't take pride in their ability to kill.

Neither does he, he merely talks about stats like anyone else with a hobby, everything else is simply your projection on him.

I particularly like where you project "glee" into his posts, how one can garner that from him talking about statistical analyses is beyond me, you must have some superhuman ability to read emotion from text that no one else on the planet has.

  • Like 2

I don't get him either, other than he's so rabidly anti-gun carry that he internally demonizes those who aren't.

My discussion of why wounding or warning shots are problematic, and even dangerous to others than the perp, is a good example. That knowledge comes from training, discussions with others who have 'been there' and experience with patients who were hit by supposed warning shots and attempts to wound. How he can get 'glee' out of that I don't know. Being up to your elbows in blood from one of those incidents is anything but gleeful.

As for perps - I have no sympathy for them because they are the victims of their own actions. That they ran head-on into someone who was prepared to defend themselves is their problem.

  • Like 1
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Glow 26.10 by Razvan Serea Glow provides detailed reporting on every hardware component in your computer, saving you valuable time typically spent searching for CPU, motherboard, RAM, graphics card, and other stats. With Glow, all the information is conveniently presented in one clean interface, allowing you to easily access and review the comprehensive hardware details of your system. Glow provides detailed information on various system aspects, including OS, motherboard, processor, memory, graphics card, storage, network, battery, drivers, and services. The well-organized format ensures easy access to the required information. You can export all the gathered data to a plain text file, facilitating sharing with others for troubleshooting purposes. No installation needed. Just decompress the archive, launch the executable, and access computer-related information. Glow runs on Windows 11 and Windows 10 64-bit versions. Glow 26.10 changelog: New Features The bootstrapping algorithm has been completely redesigned. The software can now launch directly without requiring TS Preloader. As part of this change, the startup splash screen displayed during initialization has been removed. In addition, spikes in CPU usage have been eliminated, resulting in a more stable architecture with significantly lower memory consumption. The Microsoft Office detection infrastructure within the Operating System section has been enhanced. Additional detection support has been added for Office C2R (Click-to-Run) installations. Furthermore, the license status evaluation system has been improved, and the priority order has been revised as follows: Licensed > Grace Period > Other (NOTIFICATIONS, EVALUATION, etc.). Glow now includes preliminary support for Wi-Fi 8 technology, allowing more detailed information to be displayed for Wi-Fi 8-compatible network adapters. Glow now provides full support for Bluetooth 6.2. Adapters supporting Bluetooth 6.2 can be analyzed in greater detail and with improved accuracy. The disk distribution view in the Disk section has been modernized, replacing the traditional table layout with a new 2×2 card-based design. The TS Custom Controls module has been updated to v26.7. Thanks to the new custom controls, all Türkaysoft applications now offer a more modern and consistent user interface aligned with Windows 11 design standards. Bug Fixes Potential line-ending handling issues in the Office detection code within the Operating System section have been resolved. Additionally, the output format has been standardized to UTF-8 to prevent character encoding issues and ensure consistent data processing. Several stability and file management issues within the Debugging infrastructure have been addressed. Problems that prevented new log files from being created after Debugging was disabled, as well as issues causing debug records to be lost, have been fixed. File deletion and reaccess issues that occurred after file locks were released have also been resolved. In addition, a bug that caused newly recreated log files to remain locked after deletion has been eliminated. Unnecessary blank lines within debug logs and the extra empty line that could appear at the end of log files have also been corrected. A shortcut key conflict caused by assigning identical hotkeys to both the DNS Test Tool and the Donation page has been fixed. The DNS Test Tool can now be accessed using CTRL + Shift + D, while the Donation page is available via CTRL + Alt + D. Changes The service responsible for providing the Public IP Address and Internet Service Provider information in the Network section has been updated to use the ipinfo.io infrastructure. This change improves the accuracy and consistency of the displayed data. (No external requests are made while Hiding Mode is enabled.) Some terms in the Dutch and Korean language files have been updated to make them clearer and more user-friendly. [TS Updater] Before the update process begins, users are now prompted to choose whether they would like to view the release notes. Note: Always unzip the program before using it. Otherwise you may get an error. Download: Glow 26.10 | 1.8 MB (Open Source) Links: Glow Homepage | Screenshot | Github Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Maradona if hydration breaks had existed in Mexico 86.
    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!