Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.mobile.android
Subject: Re: DOJ is correct that Apple iPhone is far less secure than Android when RCS messaging is involved
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:38:20 +1200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 120
Message-ID: <uvt3gs$2pgsl$1@dont-email.me>
References: <do8i1jt9d4rtocgtgv3jho5i1pvo9n032g@dim53.demon.nl> <uvsqt9$2ntk2$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 08:38:21 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="12d99a169e0ec4fe94376282e39beb71";
	logging-data="2933653"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1++E9I6Irl4Zh8t+P69Or4LF4eul35PyjQ="
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ROs1nes1rQ1Ilp7cz2wDngOZRtI=
Bytes: 7126

On 2024-04-19 04:11:19 +0000, The Real Bev said:
> On 4/18/24 3:46 PM, Your Name wrote:
>> On 2024-04-18 19:13:09 +0000, The Real Bev said:
>>> On 4/18/24 2:11 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>> On 2024-04-18 08:20, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>>> On 4/17/24 10:18 AM, Alan wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-04-17 10:05, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>>>>> On 4/15/24 11:48 PM, Chris wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pre-empirically carrying a gun is not "self-defence". Its weakness.
>>>>>>>> Billions of people are quite capable of not becoming a victim without
>>>>>>>> needing guns for "self-defence".
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, screaming I AM NOT A VICTIM at the thug with a knife will >>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> definitely send him on his way abashed and save Granny from 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> being >>>> >>>>>> harmed. Or perhaps you were thinking of the umbrella 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the >>>> >>>>>> sharpened tip?
>>>>>>>>>>> You still haven't explained why the US has so many more deaths than
>>>>>> other countries similar to it.
>>>>>>> I have no idea why.  Do you?  Perhaps we are just violent people.
>>>>>>> Given that this is true, how do we best protect ourselves when law >> 
>>>>>>> >>>>>> enforcement is too far away to be protective?
>>>>> The same way as other countries do: by banning weapons. You do not let
>>>> violent people easy access to weapons.
>>>>> Like Mexico...
>>>>> Knives, rebar, baseball bats, tennis rackets, 2x4s...
>>> With the possible exception of the cars, all of those personal
>> 'weapons' are impossible to use to kill and injure lots of people in a
>> short space of time ... unlike a moron with a (semi)automatic gun
>> spraying bullets around.
> 
> Black swan event.  Other ways of mass killing that don't involve guns. 
> Some think that the Islamist anti-Westerners have already won just 
> because they made us change the way we live, travel etc.
> 
>>>>> A few nights ago a guy pulled a knife on a woman, forced her to drive 
>>>>> >>>> to >> a different location and raped her.  This happened a few 
>>>>> blocks >>>> away. >> What should she have done?
>>>>> Same as in any modern and evolved country.
>>>>> Bend over and smile?
>>>>> She was sitting in her car in a restaurant parking lot at 8:30 at night 
>>>>> >> in a "safe" neighborhood.  He jumped into her car.  Perhaps she 
>>>>> should >> have locked her doors, but that's alien behavior here.
>>> A lot of common sense things are alien behaviour in America: owning
>> guns, not wearing seatbelts, electing lunatics as the President, not
>> knowing how to spell the words like "colour" or "aluminium", ...  :-\
> 
> The Swiss and possibly the Israelis are required to own guns.

Nope. Wrong on both.

Swiss law says you *can* own a weapong (with restrictions), but you are 
not "required to".

    If you are a Swiss citizen, you are generally permitted
    to own a weapon if:
      - you are at least 18 years old.
      - you are not subject to a general deputyship or are
        represented through a care appointee.
      - there is no reason to believe you may use the weapon
        to harm yourself or others.

The last point of which means you cannot use it to shoot anyone else - 
so basically pointless owning a gun, unless you're something like a 
duck hunter.


Israeli law says mainly only certain professionals can own a gun:

    Compared with the U.S., Israel has relatively restrictive
    firearm laws. It also has a mandatory national military
    service requirement for citizens over age 18, and with
    few exceptions, guns are restricted to Israelis with
    weapons training or in security professions.

There's no place on the planet with a law saying people "must own a 
gun". Even the idiotic law in Kennesaw, Georgia says: "everyone must 
own a gun unless they don't want to own a gun". (Another great example 
of the pointless stupidity of too many laws and stating the blatantly 
obvious.)



> That's not the problem.  I think we USE seatbelts most of the time.  
> And if you mean Trump, there's a lot to be said about having a loose 
> cannon for a president.  A little less trouble in the world during his 
> tenure, wouldn't you say?  And we've simplified spelling in order to 
> conserve ink, space and pixels.  A GOOD thing!
> 
>>>> If someone threatens you with ANY weapon they have forfeited their 
>>>> right to decent treatment.  Perhaps no weapon is required if they are 
>>>> physically threatening.  We should all be allowed to protect our own 
>>>> lives.  Period.
>>> 
>>> The number of people who successfully "protect their own lives" by
>>> owning a gun is FAR FAR FAR outweighed by the number of innocent people
>>> killed or seriuously injured by a looney with a gun.
>>> 
>>> You've got junior school kids "solving" their arguments by shooting
>> people. The country needs to obtain some form of common sense.
> 
> Far fewer mass shootings by loonies than one-on-one or gang squabbles. 
> If it weren't for the innocent bystanders, the gang squabbles might 
> actually be a plus.
> 
> Mainly, I think our elected officials are too stupid or venal to be 
> allowed to even think about changing the Constitution.

Most US citizens are sane and want the law changes. Many US politicians 
want the law changes. The only thing stopping them is that they're 
afraid of the loud-mouthed few lunatics who do want to keep playing 
wild west 'cowboys and indians' and those making money out of gun 
sales, etc., and of course all the taxes they rake in from such sales.  
:-\ It's not really any different to the reasons cigarette sales 
haven't been banned in many countries, something equally as stupid.

As for "We should all be allowed to protect our own lives" ... even if 
you actually shot someone when "protecting" yourself, you'll still find 
yourself in a court room having to prove that it was the only option, 
and most likely come out with some form of criminal record.