Infowars/Prison Planet.com

[Deadmanwalking_05]

http://www.infowars.com/protest-marc...rally-in-ohio/

Jeanne Starmack
Vindy.com
April 14, 2010

A rally that was planned to protest a ban on gun sales within city limits is turning into a quick protest march, and its organizer is backing out of promoting it.

The Youngstown State University branch of the Young Americans for Liberty had planned a rally at the city building on Tenney Avenue on Saturday afternoon.

But Varg Freeborn, the YSU chapter’s president, said Tuesday that the city police chief has ordered the group to pay $2,000 for four to six police officers to work at the rally.

Freeborn said the group is withdrawing its request for a permit to have the rally because it doesn’t have the money.

Freeborn told The Vindicator that it appears the group is being made to pay for exercising its right to free speech...

[Deadmanwalking_05]

“We have the right to peaceably assemble,” he said.

Freeborn said they were told last week by city officials that there would be no fees or permits associated with the rally, but Tuesday, they were told about having to pay the $2,000.

“We promoted it, and now today, they tell us that per the chief, it’s $2,000 for four to six police officers for one to two hours,” he said.

Chief Gus Sarigianopoulos could not be reached to comment.

Freeborn said that even though there won’t be a rally and YAL will not be involved, Ohioans for Concealed Carry is expected to assemble at city hall for a protest march. It will start at 2 p.m.

The march is to protest an ordinance that bans the sale of guns in the city...

[Deadmanwalking_05]

The ordinance bans all gun sales within city limits but was in the process of being amended to exclude private sales by residents. The intent of the ordinance is to prohibit gun stores in the city and was drafted after a Hubbard man’s attempt to open a gun-repair shop on Robinson Road in October.

Law Director Mark Kolmacic advised council in March to repeal the ordinance, which violates Ohio law. Ohioans for Concealed Carry threatened to sue the city over the ordinance.

The ordinance has the support of the city’s police, who say gun stores pose a problem for their understaffed department.

The ordinance was tabled and sent back for committee consideration after Kolmacic’s advisement.

It is expected to be brought out soon and voted on, said Councilwoman Juanita Rich, a gun-rights supporter who is planning to be at the march Saturday.

Ohioans for Concealed Carry also will attend, said Freeborn. On its Web site, that group encourages supporters to attend “carrying firearms openly or not.”

Rich says she doesn’t remember the city’s charging organizations $2,000 for assemblies in the past.

“That’s insane,” she said. “Aren’t they on duty anyway? And why do you need that many policemen? It’s a peaceful rally anyway.”

Rich said the ordinance is expected to be repealed, but there likely will be opposition to that action.

“They [YAL] wanted to show support,” she said.

Unlike the concealed-carry group, YAL is not a gun-rights organization, Freeborn said. He said the group protests constitutional violations.

http://www.vindy.com/news/2010/apr/1...y-i/?newswatch

[Gothic.net]

Ok, seriously, stop with the copy paste. It's getting in the realm of unacceptable plagiarism. If you have an argument to make, make it in your own words. Links to support your point are ok, but you need to be able to express your ideas yourself first.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Gothic.net

Ok, seriously, stop with the copy paste. It's getting in the realm of unacceptable plagiarism. If you have an argument to make, make it in your own words. Links to support your point are ok, but you need to be able to express your ideas yourself first.

THANK YOU. (Sincerely)

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Not a problem.

The last article I posted dovetails in with what I've been posting as far as Individual rights being suppressed by Big Gov. Cronies,which seems to be happening more frequently these days.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

http://www.infowars.com/police-need-...-police-chief/

Mail Online
April 15, 2010

Police officers must be armed with even more powerful weapons to deal with a Mumbai-style terrorist attack in the UK, a top officer said last night.

Scotland Yard Assistant Commissioner John Yates said officers needed a huge boost to their firepower to combat an atrocity where the aim is to kill as many innocents as possible in a matter of minutes.

His comments reflect grave concerns that Britain may not be able to cope with a copy-cat attack and suggest moves toward the greater use of ‘heavy ballistic weapons’ including rapid-fire assault rifles and C9 Minimi machine guns, as used by the SAS, as well as more powerful bullets...

Read entire article here

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ice-chief.html


The Nanny state that is the U.K. has effectively disarmed the majority of it's Children (read that as former Citizens),and has been increasing the firepower of it's enforcement agencies.

[Ben Lahnger]

I'm sorry, but did you have a point to make? Because most of that was still a "copy and paste" of someone else's article. The last line appears to be a statement in your own words, but how is the disarming of the populace by the government a bad thing.

Most of the public, in MHO, behave as irrationally as you do, so why would I want any of them to be armed. But more importantly, are you just going to make that statement without explaining your rationale behind it?

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Not a problem.

The last article I posted dovetails in with what I've been posting as far as Individual rights being suppressed by Big Gov. Cronies,which seems to be happening more frequently these days.

Right here.

[Ben Lahnger]

Yep, still too irrational to be trusted with firearms. Well, you probably knew your chances of converting me were slim to start with.

[Deadmanwalking_05]

I wasn't trying to convert you,I'm trying just reason with you.

[Ben Lahnger]

No, you're trying to let the writers of articles you copy and paste here reason with me. So far, the authors you've chosen remain unconvincing.

[vindicatedxjin]

*and the conversation repeats itself*

[Entropic]

Alright, I'll bite.

American police have had access to M4s for years, so the 'rapid-fire assault rifles' that the British police want would only bring them on par with American police. I don't understand why they would want an LMG, but add a Beta C mag to an M4 (which I've seen American police do) and you have the exact same thing. Considering that the C9 is too impractical to carry around on a regular basis, only specialist teams are likely to carry them, again, bringing them in line with American police.

In other words, the less armed British police want to be on par with American police. So, in pure false dichotomy style, do you want to arm British police (and thereby have the terrible nanny state) or disarm American police (and therefore have even more police officers die)?

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Entropic

Alright, I'll bite.

American police have had access to M4s for years, so the 'rapid-fire assault rifles' that the British police want would only bring them on par with American police. I don't understand why they would want an LMG, but add a Beta C mag to an M4 (which I've seen American police do) and you have the exact same thing. Considering that the C9 is too impractical to carry around on a regular basis, only specialist teams are likely to carry them, again, bringing them in line with American police.

In other words, the less armed British police want to be on par with American police. So, in pure false dichotomy style, do you want to arm British police (and thereby have the terrible nanny state) or disarm American police (and therefore have even more police officers die)?

But what is the main difference between the two countries?

The Citizenry (I'm not saying one group is better than the other group)

Why is there a difference?

Group A is armed to the same scale (and with some personal collections more so than others but you get the idea) as the police forces.

Group B is not allowed to arm themselves with weapons similar to police (If they so choose) and are at the mercy of those in high authority as well as the lowly street thugs.

[Entropic]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Group A is armed to the same scale (and with some personal collections more so than others but you get the idea) as the police forces.

Group B is not allowed to arm themselves with weapons similar to police (If they so choose) and are at the mercy of those in high authority as well as the lowly street thugs.

And the difference doesn't matter.

The only reason you would need such arms is either defense against a foreign country or defense against the military. You're not going to be fighting the police, since any large scale revolt will involve declaration of martial law and deployment of the military. If that happens, you are screwed because:

a.) Military firepower is vastly superior to civilian firepower
b.) Coup d'etats generally fail unless you have the support of the military
c.) Even when asymmetrical warfare goes well, it tends to be a Pyhrric victory

In other words, you're just as much at the mercy of higher authorities, whether or not you have an M4 or a peashooter.

Once you've done that, you need to compare violent crime rates to see if the difference in armament changes how prevalent violent crimes are. In this case, the United States beats out the UK in murders, murders with firearms, murders committed by youths, rapes, and assaults (all per capita). The only time the UK is higher is in burglaries and car thefts, in which I'd readily argue it's better to lose your car and be alive than to be killed in your car.

(Yes, I know I'm using NationMaster. I'll go pull up more data if asked.)

[Ben Lahnger]

Entropic ++

[Deadmanwalking_05]

Originally Posted by Entropic

Once you've done that, you need to compare violent crime rates to see if the difference in armament changes how prevalent violent crimes are. In this case, the United States beats out the UK in murders, murders with firearms, murders committed by youths, rapes, and assaults (all per capita). The only time the UK is higher is in burglaries and car thefts, in which I'd readily argue it's better to lose your car and be alive than to be killed in your car.

(Yes, I know I'm using NationMaster. I'll go pull up more data if asked.)

A few questions.

When were those numbers compiled?

Where were the largest numbers of reported violent crimes (murders, R@pe, armed robbery,ect) located City or Country (Out in the sticks,not other sovereign nations)?

My guess would be City in both instances then it is a simple matter of asking which cities in particular,then you need to look at firearms laws in those cities.

You will find the harsher the gun restrictions the higher the violent crime rate (Chicago,D.C., N.Y.C.,and L.A. ).

[Deadmanwalking_05]

How about we take the rest of this discussion to pro-gun/anti-gun?

[Deadmanwalking_05]

This is fucked up !



http://www.prisonplanet.com/school-spy-laptops-took-thousands-of-photos-of-students-in-homes.html

Shocking New Details In School Laptop Spying Case

Steve Watson
Prisonplanet.com
Friday, April 16th, 2010

Related Reading: Students Spied On With School Issued Laptops

Related Reading: School Spycams Case Explodes As Feds Initiate Probe

Startling new evidence has emerged in the ongoing case of the Lower Merion school district in Philadelphia accused of spying on students in their homes via school issued laptops.

The lawyer for the family of the student whose school issued computer was allegedly remotely accessed while in his home, says that thousands of images were taken, including photographs of other students in their homes, web sites they visited, and excerpts of their online chats.

The case, Blake J. Robbins v. Lower Merion School District (PDF), was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Tuesday, February 16, 2010.

According to the filing, the actions of the school district were exposed when one of the school’s vice principals disciplined Mr Robbins’ son for “improper behavior in his home,” and used a photo taken from the computer camera as evidence.

Though the district superintendent had denied that the laptops were remotely accessed for any purpose other than to track ones that had been lost or stolen, a new motion filed in the suit against the district asserts that the camera on Robbins’ laptop took photos of the boy partially undressed and also as he slept in his bed (see image above).

“Each time, it fired the images off to network servers at the school district.” reports the Philadelphia Inquirer.

The motion states that the system was designed to take a new picture every 15 minutes, along with a screenshot and a recording of the IP address, in order that the machine could be located.

It also contends that employees at district offices with access to the images ogled them and reveled in the tracking software. One staffer referred to the software as like “a little LMSD soap opera,” in an e-mail to Carol Cafiero, the administrator running the program.

“I know, I love it,” Cafiero is quoted as having replied.

The Robbins family have suggested that Cafiero, currently suspended, “may be a voyeur” who may have downloaded some of the laptop photos of students on her home computer.

Cafiero’s lawyer disputes the charge, and has stated that the claims have been falsified to prop up a failing case against the school district.

The district has declined to comment on the new motion and says it is not aware of any misuse of the images taken from the laptops. The case is ongoing.

[Entropic]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

When were those numbers compiled?

Between 1998 and 2002.

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

Where were the largest numbers of reported violent crimes (murders, R@pe, armed robbery,ect) located City or Country (Out in the sticks,not other sovereign nations)?

I'd have to dig up the references in the main studies, but the general rule is that they're in large countries.

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

My guess would be City in both instances then it is a simple matter of asking which cities in particular,then you need to look at firearms laws in those cities.

It's per capita, which eliminates the need for examining on an individual city level. So, it actually isn't a simply of asking "which cities in particular". Especially considering that we're comparing the overall effectiveness of the laws between the UK and the US, not the laws comparing the differences between London and New York.

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

You will find the harsher the gun restrictions the higher the violent crime rate (Chicago,D.C., N.Y.C.,and L.A. ).

Again, we're not comparing intra-country politics, we're comparing inter-country politics.

Besides which, your argument can't support itself because virtually all major cities have largely restrictive gun laws.

Even if we look at the top ten cities by population (at least according to the FBI, I've seen differing population statistics elsewhere), 2 out of the top 10 major cities are in California, 1 is in New York, 1 is in Chicago, 1 is in Nevada, and 1 is in Arizona, all of which aren't particularly "gun friendly". That leaves four cities which could be considered "gun friendly".

When you compare those cities, Pennsylvania actually leads in violent crime, followed very closely by Houston, San Antonio, and Dallas. Chicago may fall in there, but they didn't submit total violent crime data. Either way, we have the inverse of your thesis. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_..._by_crime_rate

We went over this in another thread. Did you listen?

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

How about we take the rest of this discussion to pro-gun/anti-gun?

Are you simply going to say, "Interesting point. Pro-gun/anti-gun?" like you do to most rational points in that thread?

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

This is fucked up ! [Follow with long ass article]

Originally Posted by Gothic.net

Ok, seriously, stop with the copy paste. It's getting in the realm of unacceptable plagiarism. If you have an argument to make, make it in your own words. Links to support your point are ok, but you need to be able to express your ideas yourself first.

Hey Admin, you told him not to do the copypasta thing, and he just did it. Are you actually going to do anything about it?

[Ben Lahnger]

Originally Posted by Entropic

Hey Admin, you told him not to do the copypasta thing, and he just did it. Are you actually going to do anything about it?

Especially in light of the fact that he's already created several threads on this very same subject, all of which were copy and paste jobs. The most recent one is now on Spooky News page 3 ... since he's started so many copy/paste threads since then.

[CptSternn]

Originally Posted by Deadmanwalking_05

This is fucked up !



[color="DarkRed"]http://www.prisonplanet.com/school-spy-laptops-took-thousands-of-photos-of-students-in-homes.html

Shocking New Details In School Laptop Spying Case

This is the second time you have posted about this matter, and the second time you used a single, edited source to try and back a failed premise.

Your own asstertion, which you start with, is 'this is fucked up'

If you check out a proper new article from a reputible news source, like the AP as you see here:

http://tinyurl.com/y83wgkf

The LANrev software program took screen shots and webcam photos every 15 seconds when activated. The district thereby captured over 400 screen shots and webcam images of Harriton High School sophomore Blake Robbins, according to court filings this week in his lawsuit.

...

Mark Haltzman, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of Robbins and his family, said evidence now shows the district used the tracking software for non-authorized reasons — for instance, when students failed to pay the required insurance or return the laptops at year's end.

If you check earlier articles, even the one you posted, you will see that contrary to the lawyers statement, the students had to sign a waiver prior to taking the laptops, and that the webcam could be activated if it was reported stolen/missing.

The kid(s) in question here did not return a school owned computer and claimed it was stolen, all the while it was sitting in their bedroom(s). That is not some Big Brother scenario - that is a simple - they stole a laptop, grand larceny considering the cost of the laptops, and now are looking to shift blame and claim their rights were violated. I mean, seriously, if you read that as anything else, then you should be back in school, riding the short bus to get there.

I don't even see how they can claim there was a rights violation when the students in question refused to return a laptop they did not even own and themselves broke the law, in a much more illegal kind of way.

If someone stole my laptop and I remotely turn on the webcam to find it, I'll be damned if the thief then tries to sue me for illegal wiretap. It's my damn laptop. It would be a different story if any of the kids OWNED their OWN laptop, but this is school property they STOLE - thats right - STOLE. If you have property that you do not have a right to be holding onto that legally belongs to someone else, that is THEFT.

More importantly it is a government funded school, so they are actually stealing from TAX PAYERS like YOU. You are also footing the legal bill for this non-sense.

It's to bad nut jobs like yourself and alex jones are too busy trying to fit this story into your fantasy world of a big brother government take over to see that it is not about civil rights, it is about kids STEALING and trying to get away with it.

[Ben Lahnger]

CptSternn ++

[Raptor]

Our police forces are almost entirely without firearms; generally they have batons and CS spray. With very few exceptions armed police are only used to guard nuclear facilities and as response units to counter armed criminals. That article is just talking about giving those elements extra weapons, it doesn't really make much difference.

Originally Posted by Entropic

The only time the UK is higher is in burglaries and car thefts, in which I'd readily argue it's better to lose your car and be alive than to be killed in your car.

And those two are crimes that usually happen when the owner is away right? The victim wouldn't be able to defend against them even if they were armed.