My "we need to try something" is an acknowledgment that if we don't make some steps we are going to end up losing our guns. They continuously point at us and say that we have no suggestions and we fight any attempts to make progress and honestly it is a fairly convincing argument because we contribute very little towards any sort of prevention effort.

The right even fought against the CDC from conducting studies on firearm deaths which make us look like we don't even want to define the problem. Trump recently signed the legislation that rolled back part of that law and allows the CDC to study gun violence so maybe we are going to make more progress on defining the problem at least.

We keep certain sexual predators in jail past their jail sentence if a mental health professional deems them too likely to be a potential recidivist, so there is some legal precedent for jailing people on risk based factors. Now maybe you are against that policy with sexual predators too and that's fine. I can certainly see a slippery slope argument being made, but here is the thing: A threat isn't always clear but that doesn't mean its not a threat.

I think my suggestion to the problem you point out is that the red flags that people see should be the beginning of an investigation by appropriate authorities. If we see all the red flags in someone and sit back and just shrug our shoulders on the justification that the person hasn't committed a crime yet then we are missing the opportunity to prevent something. But if we notify law enforcement who makes further checks of the person's background and is able to investigate then maybe they will find evidence of a clear(er) threat that can be acted upon.

You still don't get it.

WHO decides what the red flags are?  I'll tell you who ---- lawmakers, politicians, and anti-gun groups. 
Member of a militia?  RED FLAG!! 
Member of an alt-Right or White Supremacist group as defined by the SPLC?  RED FLAG!! 
Member of the military serving in a combat role?  RED FLAG!! 
Bought more than 250 rounds of ammo in 3 months?  RED FLAG!!
Member of the NRA?  RED FLAG!!

Red flags don't have to be based on actual evidence that they predict behavior, just like trying to ban a specific type of firearm doesn't have to be based on evidence that doing so has any impact on crime -- the CDC reported there's no evidence to support an AW ban.  it's just a shoehorn into taking guns based on criteria that can be CHANGED to disarm anyone the lawmakers decide are "scary". (e.g. "Deplorables").

WHO decides what the red flags are?  I'll tell you who ---- lawmakers, politicians, and anti-gun groups. 

Are you believing that those aren't the best possible people to determine the proper criteria for disarming people? How'd you ever come up with an idea like that? Oh, yeah, you live Hawaii.

EEF, since u have access, look up how many suicides there are in Waikiki alone and what demographic does it.



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

You still don't get it.

WHO decides what the red flags are?  I'll tell you who ---- lawmakers, politicians, and anti-gun groups. 
Member of a militia?  RED FLAG!! 
Member of an alt-Right or White Supremacist group as defined by the SPLC?  RED FLAG!! 
Member of the military serving in a combat role?  RED FLAG!! 
Bought more than 250 rounds of ammo in 3 months?  RED FLAG!!
Member of the NRA?  RED FLAG!!

Red flags don't have to be based on actual evidence that they predict behavior, just like trying to ban a specific type of firearm doesn't have to be based on evidence that doing so has any impact on crime -- the CDC reported there's no evidence to support an AW ban.  it's just a shoehorn into taking guns based on criteria that can be CHANGED to disarm anyone the lawmakers decide are "scary". (e.g. "Deplorables").

I get all the points you are bringing up, what I don't get is that you don't bring anything to the issue but resistance.

You don't like the idea of red flags, so what is your suggestion? We can't reliably predict who will be violent so lets not even try?


But to answer your question, who decides what the red flags are? Depends on how the law is written. Lawmakers and mental health experts would be my suggestion with judges applying the law. None of the examples you fear would be part of a good red flag bill. You are resisting the idea of red flags based on what you fear they would be instead of trying to figure out a way that a red flag law could be done right.

EEF, since u have access, look up how many suicides there are in Waikiki alone and what demographic does it.



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I don't know if HPD publishes such data, at least not by specific area. I checked the crime map but they didn't have an option for suicide, only homicide.

https://www.crimemapping.com/map/agency/165

I could find demographic data nationwide though. The highest group is well to do white males, I recall that much.

I get all the points you are bringing up, what I don't get is that you don't bring anything to the issue but resistance.

You don't like the idea of red flags, so what is your suggestion? We can't reliably predict who will be violent so lets not even try?


But to answer your question, who decides what the red flags are? Depends on how the law is written. Lawmakers and mental health experts would be my suggestion with judges applying the law. None of the examples you fear would be part of a good red flag bill. You are resisting the idea of red flags based on what you fear they would be instead of trying to figure out a way that a red flag law could be done right.

My lack of offering a workable alternative is NOT an argument for your proposed non-workable solution.

Pre-crime is science fiction.  Pretending a "system" of red flag reporting will somehow change that is insanity.  Pure insanity.

Chicago is already using predictive models to identify people most at risk of being victims of crimes, and it's only a step away from using it to predict crimes before people commit them.

The implications are troubling.

...victims of assault and battery or shootings were much more likely to be involved in future shootings.
Arrests for domestic violence, weapons or drugs were much less predictive. Gang affiliation, which
applied to 16.3 percent of people on the list, had barely any impact on the risk score.

The algorithm has been updated several times, and Mr. Wernick noted that the variables of gang
affiliation and narcotics arrests were dropped from the most recent version. Those with a gang affiliation
make up roughly 2.4 percent of Chicago’s population of 2.7 million — so many people (nearly 65,000)
that it may explain why it has little predictive value.

...

Although the algorithm evaluates risk well, the gun violence at the highest levels of risk is not as
concentrated as some Chicago Police Department comments have suggested. A New York Times
article in May 2016 quoted the police chief, Eddie Johnson, as saying that “about 1,400 are responsible
for much of the violence.”

A CBS Chicago report from May 2016 cited the police department as saying that 1,500 people from the
S.S.L. are responsible for the majority of gun violence in Chicago.

The top 1,400 people have scores of 429 and up, and they are in fact disproportionately involved in
violence. But that disproportionate share amounted to less than 20 percent of the total gun violence in
Chicago in 2016.

Correlation does not equal causation.  Trends are great for predicting future numbers, but when isolating INDIVIDUALS, predictive factors fall far short of being accurate enough to justify all the false positives.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/upshot/what-an-algorithm-reveals-about-life-on-chicagos-high-risk-list.html

My lack of offering a workable alternative is NOT an argument for your proposed non-workable solution.

Pre-crime is science fiction.  Pretending a "system" of red flag reporting will somehow change that is insanity.  Pure insanity.

Chicago is already using predictive models to identify people most at risk of being victims of crimes, and it's only a step away from using it to predict crimes before people commit them.

The implications are troubling.

Correlation does not equal causation.  Trends are great for predicting future numbers, but when isolating INDIVIDUALS, predictive factors fall far short of being accurate enough to justify all the false positives.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/upshot/what-an-algorithm-reveals-about-life-on-chicagos-high-risk-list.html

I laid out an example of how red flags can be used as the first step to lead authorities to investigate and find evidence of an actual crime such as conspiracy to commit another crime. You want to throw the whole idea out instead of finding out what could work and using it for a more effective system.

So again, what suggestions do you have?

I laid out an example of how red flags can be used as the first step to lead authorities to investigate and find evidence of an actual crime such as conspiracy to commit another crime. You want to throw the whole idea out instead of finding out what could work and using it for a more effective system.

So again, what suggestions do you have?

Keep asking.  I'll keep ignoring your question.

You don't seem to learn.  i've said many times -- the benefits of informing on someone because they exhibit "red flags" as defined by the state/feds/whoever will never outweigh the cost in personal freedom, Constitutional due process, etc.

"We need a reason to search his home.  Maybe we can get his co-worker to flag him as a gun nut?"  Yeah, law enforcement will never abuse such a system.

I don't know if HPD publishes such data, at least not by specific area. I checked the crime map but they didn't have an option for suicide, only homicide.

https://www.crimemapping.com/map/agency/165

I could find demographic data nationwide though. The highest group is well to do white males, I recall that much.

Why would they publish such data? Ask anyone in that district. Theyll tell u and they dont even have to look it up either. Prob already know the #.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Keep asking.  I'll keep ignoring your question.

You don't seem to learn.  i've said many times -- the benefits of informing on someone because they exhibit "red flags" as defined by the state/feds/whoever will never outweigh the cost in personal freedom, Constitutional due process, etc.

"We need a reason to search his home.  Maybe we can get his co-worker to flag him as a gun nut?"  Yeah, law enforcement will never abuse such a system.

So you are basically admitting you have no idea what to do? And you refuse to even address the fact that a red flag system could find actual evidence of a crime even if it is done without any initial firearm revocation.

I have said this to you multiple times so you have no excuse. Red flags do not inherently mean no constitutional due process. How a law is written is what will determine whether there are due process protections. There is a difference between a concept and an implementation. You are resisting the idea because of your fear for how it will be implemented. Instead of stubbornly resisting based on your fear how about working towards something that will offer constitutional due process protections.

If you refuse to see the whole issue, the pros and cons of both sides, then I can't take your stance on this issue seriously.

Why would they publish such data? Ask anyone in that district. Theyll tell u and they dont even have to look it up either. Prob already know the #.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Ask a cop next time you see them and see if they know. I tried to find the answer to your question but the crime map didn't report that data.

Ask a cop next time you see them and see if they know. I tried to find the answer to your question but the crime map didn't report that data.

I've talked to multiple HPD in that district and all confirmed my number.  Crime map won't publish it and neither will the news.  You'll understand why once you find out.

Ask: How many jap tourist commit suicide every year in Waikiki alone?

I've talked to multiple HPD in that district and all confirmed my number.  Crime map won't publish it and neither will the news.  You'll understand why once you find out.

Ask: How many jap tourist commit suicide every year in Waikiki alone?

Do those Japanese tourist suicides go into the Hawaii or the Japan suicide stats?

Do those Japanese tourist suicides go into the Hawaii or the Japan suicide stats?

IDK, but it was 1 reason why most of the gun clubs closed down.  And why when you did go there, the cabled the barrels so you can't turn in on yourself as easily.

Still haven't figured out and no one knows why a jap tourist would spend all that money, just to commit suicide in HI.

IDK, but it was 1 reason why most of the gun clubs closed down.  And why when you did go there, the cabled the barrels so you can't turn in on yourself as easily.

Still haven't figured out and no one knows why a jap tourist would spend all that money, just to commit suicide in HI.

You should watch Leaving Las Vegas and Scent of a Woman.

People planning to end their lives aren't concerned with having a positive bank balance afterward.

"We need a reason to search his home.  Maybe we can get his co-worker to flag him as a gun nut?"  Yeah, law enforcement will never abuse such a system.

"the first step to lead authorities to investigate and find evidence of an actual crime"

Of course some HPD troll would like such a thing, a free license to go fishing in someone's home.

"Show me the man, I will find you a crime"  How very Soviet of HPD.

What all you guys are doing is dancing around a question.
How do we determine if someone is crazy?
If they are what do we do about it?
Back in the day Families rightly or wrongly dealt with it.
Thanks to Democrats families are so fragmented
they can't deal with it.
We get stuck with this.
There is no human solution and I'm not going to go religion
on a secular site.
Prepare for the worst.
Ignore Democrat un-constitional laws.
Don't talk to or cooperate with cops.
Do everything "under the table".
The Democrat government of Hawaii
is not your friend.
I'm probably "red flagged" at this but
all my guns are safely out of  reach of
Hawaii courts and cops.

I've talked to multiple HPD in that district and all confirmed my number.  Crime map won't publish it and neither will the news.  You'll understand why once you find out.

Ask: How many jap tourist commit suicide every year in Waikiki alone?

From what I have heard, quite a bit. Japan has a high suicide rate and I understand sometimes they plan out their suicide to end on a nice vacation. Treat yourself lavishly before dying.

Keep in mind as well that Waikiki is a highly densely populated area so we can't compare numbers in Waikiki to other specific areas the same way.

"the first step to lead authorities to investigate and find evidence of an actual crime"

Of course some HPD troll would like such a thing, a free license to go fishing in someone's home.

"Show me the man, I will find you a crime"  How very Soviet of HPD.

Of course there is a potential for abuse but your alternative is what? Never investigate anything until after it happens? Terrorist events have been prevented because police got a tip and went investigating.