Re: DOJ is correct that Apple iPhone is far less secure than Android when RCS messaging is involved

On 2024-04-18 20:58, The Real Bev wrote:

On 4/18/24 3:14 PM, Alan wrote:

On 2024-04-18 12:13, The Real Bev wrote:

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...
>

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.
>
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.

>
So again, yes or no:
>
Are you advocating that every person carries a firearm on his or her
person at all times?

 No.  There are a lot of stupid people out there.  But, with certain exceptions, we should have that right.

And naturally, you would class yourself with those who should have the right...
But tell me:
What would you make those exceptions?
Would that mean you'd have to do some checks BEFORE someone could acquire a firearm?

 Apparently this is standard practice for criminals.

What is "standard practice"?