• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

PSA to gun advocates: They won't save you from the Aryan Brotherhood

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
PSA to gun advocates: They won't save you from the Aryan Brotherhood
The AB is a large and very violent organized crime gang.

A more logical conclusion is that this story illustrates the need for assault type weapons with large magazines.

Going up against a gang of organized killers with a two-shot double barrel shotgun or a 6 shot revolver is unlikely to very successful. You need more firepower; that's what this story demonstrates.

To conclude the polar opposite is ridiculous.

Fern
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
10,898
1,042
126
The AB is a large and very violent organized crime gang.

A more logical conclusion is that this story illustrates the need for assault type weapons with large magazines.

Going up against a gang of organized killers with a two-shot double barrel shotgun or a 6 shot revolver is unlikely to very successful. You need more firepower; that's what this story demonstrates.

To conclude the polar opposite is ridiculous.

Fern
While I don't agree with you here, you make a well thought out point. This might be the start of a thread backfire.
 

Triumph

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
15,032
13
81
I only seem like a troll because you are so incredibly stupid.

Me: The U.S. government kills lots of people.

You: But, uh, which part of the government?

Me: The entire government, in general.

You: But, uh, which part of the government?

Me: The military, for instance.

You: I'm still confused. Who specifically in the government kills lots of people? Are you saying the military kills lots of people?

Me: Didn't I just say that?

You: Can you clarify what you mean?

Me: I just did.

You: But I'm still confused!
lol, that's what I'm thinking.

Lets make it clear, militaries throughout history have killed plenty more innocent people than private citizens with guns have killed innocent people. So, tell me why only the military should have guns?
 

Geosurface

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2012
5,777
3
0
More people shoot and kill their friends, family members, other people by accident in the US than they shoot assailants in self defense in the US. Even more people also commit suicide by firearm than the above.
Oh no!

I... I had no idea... so you mean to tell me that other people are exercising their rights in irresponsible ways that turn out badly for them sometimes? Well then, by all means, take my rights away. Why didn't you say this from the beginning?
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
103,500
18,063
136
What reason does the OP claim that the murders were committed by the Aryan Brotherhood? It's far more likely that they were committed by Mexican drug cartels armed with Obama's Fast N Furious guns.
you can always try and read the articles....
 

Juror No. 8

Banned
Sep 25, 2012
1,108
0
0
Lets make it clear, militaries throughout history have killed plenty more innocent people than private citizens with guns have killed innocent people. So, tell me why only the military should have guns?
"But, but, but... because Government is God and we just need to trust and worship it! If you worship Government, it will take care of you from cradle to grave! Give up your guns! Give up your rights! Give up your freedom and bow down before big, central Government!"
 

2timer

Golden Member
Apr 20, 2012
1,803
0
0
I only seem like a troll because you are so incredibly stupid.

Me: The U.S. government kills lots of people.

You: But, uh, which part of the government?

Me: The entire government, in general.

You: But, uh, which part of the government?

Me: The military, for instance.

You: I'm still confused. Who specifically in the government kills lots of people? Are you saying the military kills lots of people?

Me: Didn't I just say that?

You: Can you clarify what you mean?

Me: I just did.

You: But I'm still confused!
So you went through all that trouble just to say that "The military has killed more people with guns than citizens?"

You are simply brilliant, just brilliant. I would have never guessed the military kills more people with guns than civilians! Thank you for pointing that incredible fact out to me!

Here, this is for you:

 

2timer

Golden Member
Apr 20, 2012
1,803
0
0
lol, that's what I'm thinking.

Lets make it clear, militaries throughout history have killed plenty more innocent people than private citizens with guns have killed innocent people. So, tell me why only the military should have guns?
It would have been pretty easy to distinguish between the military and the federal government from the beginning, wouldn't it?

If you go back and read the posts, you can see it takes Juror #8 5 times before he finally gets there. :colbert:
 

2timer

Golden Member
Apr 20, 2012
1,803
0
0
The AB is a large and very violent organized crime gang.

A more logical conclusion is that this story illustrates the need for assault type weapons with large magazines.

Going up against a gang of organized killers with a two-shot double barrel shotgun or a 6 shot revolver is unlikely to very successful. You need more firepower; that's what this story demonstrates.

To conclude the polar opposite is ridiculous.

Fern
Well all the facts aren't totally out yet, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say your conclusion is wrong.

Quote from the story:

McLelland said he carried a gun everywhere he went and was extra careful when answering the door at his home.
He took every precaution and armed himself, and he was still killed. Can you explain to me exactly how more bullets in the magazine would have changed the outcome at all? And please, if you can't answer the question directly, just say so. I'm really tired of going around in circles, trying to get a straight answer.

Something else to add here: is your logic that bigger weapons are the solution to crime problems absolutely? I wonder if you think so. :colbert:
 

Juror No. 8

Banned
Sep 25, 2012
1,108
0
0
It would have been pretty easy to distinguish between the military and the federal government from the beginning, wouldn't it?

If you go back and read the posts, you can see it takes Juror #8 5 times before he finally gets there. :colbert:
Sweetie, maybe it's not clear to you, but the U.S. military operates under the chain of command of the U.S. federal government. The military carries out the policies of the federal government. The president of the United States is the commander-in-chief of U.S. military forces. So when I, or anyone else, says the U.S. government kills people, that includes the military as well. This isn't rocket science.

For people who possess a brain, there doesn't need to be any distinguishing between the two.
 

2timer

Golden Member
Apr 20, 2012
1,803
0
0
Sweetie, maybe it's not clear to you, but the U.S. military operates under the chain of command of the U.S. federal government. The military carries out the policies of the federal government. The president of the United States is the commander-in-chief of U.S. military forces. So when I, or anyone else, says the U.S. government kills people, that includes the military as well. This isn't rocket science.

For people who possess a brain, there doesn't need to be any distinguishing between the two.
Did you just call me sweetie?

 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
Well all the facts aren't totally out yet, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say your conclusion is wrong.

Quote from the story:



He took every precaution and armed himself, and he was still killed. Can you explain to me exactly how more bullets in the magazine would have changed the outcome at all? And please, if you can't answer the question directly, just say so. I'm really tired of going around in circles, trying to get a straight answer.

Something else to add here: is your logic that bigger weapons are the solution to crime problems absolutely? I wonder if you think so. :colbert:
I thought I made it clear in my post above.

The AB are professional killers, carrying out contract hits for the mafia etc.

Yeah, he was armed, but what was he armed with?

Did he take on a gang of professional killers with one handgun with 6 bullets? (He said he was always armed, that could be interpreted to mean carrying around a small concealed handgun.) If so, good luck with that because unless you're some kind of awesome trick shot as soon as you run out of ammo you're dead; they'll use suppressing fire to keep you pinned down and move in and kill you.

Would an assault rifle with one or two 30 round magazines have been better? I think clearly so.

I suspect his problem was that he was out-manned and out-gunned. He could have been killed with sniper-type fire. We don't know all the facts yet. But to claim that a gun won't help you when somebody with a gun is coming after you is ridiculous: That's exactly when a gun does help. And the most effective to have when protecting yourself from an assault is an assault rifle with a large cap mag. That's what they are made for.

In the Heller case the SCOTUS noted several reasons for having a gun that are constitutionally protected, self-defense being one. Accordingly, a weapon specifically designed for self-defense, like an assault rifle with a 30 round mag, seems perfectly legitimate. I don't understand the foolishness of people like Joe Biden suggesting you re-purpose a hunting gun, like a double-barreled shotgun, for self defense purposes. For self-defense, use a gun designed for self-defense. If in a pinch you need to re-purpose, fine, but that's not ideal.

Fern
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
Well, first this DA had been instrumental in taking down a large portion of a violent Aryan Brotherhood gang. Second, interesting thing about those Fast and Furious guns is that the reason they ended up in the hands of the cartels is because of weak gun laws that made it near impossible to prosecute a lot of the straw buyers. Then again I know this because I educated myself by reading dozens and dozens of pages of information on Fast and Furious, how many right wing blogs on it did you read?
Bullshit Thraash, you read a handful of left wing Democrat protectionist rags.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
If you try really, really hard, you might figure that one out.

*hint* its in the article I linked in the 1st post *shhhh don't tell*
What evidence asshole? Other then a small speculative passage in a story?
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
you can always try and read the articles....
Here you go dumbshit, i'll link some passages from the article.

While investigators gave no motive for the killings, Forney Mayor Darren Rozell said: "It appears this was not a random act."
a couple of months after Kaufman County Assistant District Attorney Mark Hasse was killed in a parking lot a block from his courthouse office. No arrests have been made in Hasse's slaying Jan. 31.
El Paso County, Colo., sheriff's spokesman Sgt. Joe Roybal said investigators had found no evidence so far connecting the Texas killings to the Colorado case, but added: "We're examining all possibilities."
McLelland, elected DA in 2010, said his office had prosecuted several cases against racist gangs, who have a strong presence around Kaufman County, a mostly rural area dotted with subdivisions, with a population of about 104,000.

"We put some real dents in the Aryan Brotherhood around here in the past year," he said.

In recent years, the DA's office also prosecuted a case in which a justice of the peace was found guilty of theft and burglary and another case in which a man was convicted of killing his former girlfriend and her 10-year-old daughter.
The number of attacks on prosecutors, judges and senior law enforcement officers in the U.S. has spiked in the past three years, according to Glenn McGovern, an investigator with the Santa Clara County, Calif., district attorney's office who tracks such cases.
One mention of the AB with absolutely no evidence to back it up and some other mentions of violence against prosecutors, again with no evidence or connection to the AB.

We have this story with some unsubstantiated allegations, but no proof. You really need to learn how to read and comprehend a news story.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
You need to chill out with the personal attacks. That's uncalled for. Nobody is forcing you to comment, if you don't like the thread just stay out of it.
I like the thread. I also like insulting you when you lie about what a story says and post garbage.
You post a troll topic title and complain when you get insulted?
 

2timer

Golden Member
Apr 20, 2012
1,803
0
0
I thought I made it clear in my post above.

The AB are professional killers, carrying out contract hits for the mafia etc.

Yeah, he was armed, but what was he armed with?

Did he take on a gang of professional killers with one handgun with 6 bullets? (He said he was always armed, that could be interpreted to mean carrying around a small concealed handgun.) If so, good luck with that because unless you're some kind of awesome trick shot as soon as you run out of ammo you're dead;
This is the problem with loony gun advocates: always paranoid and envisioning "worst case scenarios."

If the logic behind self defense was always the worst case scenario imaginable, pretty soon we'd be a nation of arms dealers.


they'll use suppressing fire to keep you pinned down and move in and kill you.
If by "they" you mean multiple trained people using assault weapons to attack you, I don't think having an assault weapon of your own will save your ass. It didn't for Christopher Dorner. So what now Fern, higher a personal security team?

Would an assault rifle with one or two 30 round magazines have been better? I think clearly so.
Sure there's always a better alternative to what's available, doesn't mean it should be legal.

I suspect his problem was that he was out-manned and out-gunned. He could have been killed with sniper-type fire.
We'll see, but if it *was* a "long range" sniper rifle, which I doubt, how would an assault rifle help?

But to claim that a gun won't help you when somebody with a gun is coming after you is ridiculous: That's exactly when a gun does help.
Owning a gun didn't save his life, and he was an ex-soldier.

And the most effective to have when protecting yourself from an assault is an assault rifle with a large cap mag. That's what they are made for.
Nope.
 

2timer

Golden Member
Apr 20, 2012
1,803
0
0
I like the thread. I also like insulting you when you lie about what a story says and post garbage.
You post a troll topic title and complain when you get insulted?
I just checked the forum guidelines, and it appears personal attacks have been allowed. Darn.

Oh well, I take comfort knowing that you are on the lowest level of the hierarchy of disagreement.

And there are no lies in the story I posted, that is your own allegation, which I don't see you offering any proof of whatsoever.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
I just checked the forum guidelines, and it appears personal attacks have been allowed. Darn.

Oh well, I take comfort knowing that you are on the lowest level of the hierarchy of disagreement.

And there are no lies in the story I posted, that is your own allegation, which I don't see you offering any proof of whatsoever.
There is absolutely no proof that the AB committed the murders. None. However the title of your post makes the claim. Who's the one that's lying? You are.

Perhaps you can ask for admittance to the DNC. They have stricter rules and although I give Charles a hard time he's a good man and a good moderator of that forum.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2300612
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
103,500
18,063
136
Here you go dumbshit, i'll link some passages from the article.


One mention of the AB with absolutely no evidence to back it up and some other mentions of violence against prosecutors, again with no evidence or connection to the AB.

We have this story with some unsubstantiated allegations, but no proof. You really need to learn how to read and comprehend a news story.
so, the murdered DAs have a long history of taking out AB members, and police investigations have been directed that way, with no leads--REPORTED to the press as of yet.

Under investigation. So, the reporters are simply reporting what the investigators are telling them, thus making no allegations, simply publishing the current info that they are privy to.


are you as dumb as you post?
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
Originally Posted by Fern
I thought I made it clear in my post above.

The AB are professional killers, carrying out contract hits for the mafia etc.

Yeah, he was armed, but what was he armed with?

Did he take on a gang of professional killers with one handgun with 6 bullets? (He said he was always armed, that could be interpreted to mean carrying around a small concealed handgun.) If so, good luck with that because unless you're some kind of awesome trick shot as soon as you run out of ammo you're dead;
This is the problem with loony gun advocates: always paranoid and envisioning "worst case scenarios."

If the logic behind self defense was always the worst case scenario imaginable, pretty soon we'd be a nation of arms dealers.
WTH?

You're the one who made this whole thing about the AB. It's in the damn thread title.

And yes, they are "worst case".

So no, I'm not the "loon" here, you are. It's your scenario and it bit you on the azz.

If by "they" you mean multiple trained people using assault weapons to attack you, I don't think having an assault weapon of your own will save your ass. It didn't for Christopher Dorner. So what now Fern, higher a personal security team?
By "they" I mean the professional killers that the AB is.

If you're out-manned enough and out-gunned enough having an assault weapon may not save you in the end. But I'd rather have some chance rather than no chance, which is what you've got with no gun.

Originally Posted by Fern
Would an assault rifle with one or two 30 round magazines have been better? I think clearly so.
Sure there's always a better alternative to what's available, doesn't mean it should be legal.
Self-defense in an enumerated constitutional right according to the SCOTUS. So yes, a gun designed for that purpose (within reason) should be legal.


We'll see, but if it *was* a "long range" sniper rifle, which I doubt, how would an assault rifle help?
Probably won't, especially if they get you with the first shot. So what?

And the most effective weapon to have when protecting yourself from an assault is an assault rifle with a large cap mag. That's what they are made for.
Nope.
"Nope". Just "nope"?

Fern
 
Last edited:

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
so, the murdered DAs have a long history of taking out AB members, and police investigations have been directed that way, with no leads--REPORTED to the press as of yet.

Under investigation. So, the reporters are simply reporting what the investigators are telling them, thus making no allegations, simply publishing the current info that they are privy to.


are you as dumb as you post?
Tell me where in the story that the "investigators" said it was the AB ? You can't. You can only show me some idle speculation.
 

2timer

Golden Member
Apr 20, 2012
1,803
0
0
There is absolutely no proof that the AB committed the murders.
My title didn't say "Proof the Aryan Brotherhood killed the Kaufman County DA." Did it? No.

The Aryan Brotherhood is mentioned as a strong possibility within various media sources, because there is strong circumstantial evidence and reason to believe so.

Who's the one that's lying? You are.
That's not a lie, that's called an "assumption based upon circumstantial evidence." Perhaps you don't understand the distinction between the two.
And I never suggested you were lying - that's your paranoia speaking.

Perhaps you can ask for admittance to the DNC. They have stricter rules and although I give Charles a hard time he's a good man and a good moderator of that forum.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2300612
Perhaps I will, and perhaps I won't. I never mentioned the DNC, but thanks for the suggestion.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
My title didn't say "Proof the Aryan Brotherhood killed the Kaufman County DA." Did it? No.

The Aryan Brotherhood is mentioned as a strong possibility within various media sources, because there is strong circumstantial evidence and reason to believe so.
Sorry, they only mentioned the AB boogieman is passing with no "circumstantial evidence" at all. None.


That's not a lie, that's called an "assumption based upon circumstantial evidence." Perhaps you don't understand the distinction between the two.
And I never suggested you were lying - that's your paranoia speaking.
Bullshit, there is no "circumstantial evidence" mentioned in the story. None.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY