Tor: Illegal Weapons
kukuruku.co
kukuruku.co
I think that is the stuff that both sides of second amendment shouting match fail to get - inventing deadly stuff is easy.
What you say is true, but being able to buy guns from Tor will save you a lot of hassle over trying to manufacture your own.
I think I am pretty open minded, but I was fairly shocked at what claimed to be available when I logged onto Tor to see what it was all about.
Our society fetishes guns enormously. I know some people who would be uncomfortable being in someone's house if they new they had a gun, even if they trust and know everyone in the house. Those same people are never scared by steak or hunting knives in the same house.
That said, I don't see this as a big deal. It's always been possible to mail weapons from a jurisdiction with easier access to them. Tor black markets just make it a little easier to organise.
I grew up in Port Lincoln in South Australia. My father owned a couple of .22 rifles, I've fired shotguns a few times, currently live in Launceston in Tasmania, more than half the 30 odd guys I work with own one or more (mostly more) guns. None of them require a firearm for work purposes, they're all hunters / enthusiasts.
Most of the people I know are comfortable with guns. None of the gun owners I know are "odd/unhinged", and I think that is an uncharitable characterisation of gun owners in this country.
For many people firearms are amazing creations of metallurgy and machining, and hold artistic values in and of themselves, in the same way some people appreciate knives or swords, or cars or aeroplanes.
And most Americans would be uncomfortable going to a nude beach with their German friends. That says nothing about its morality or safety.
Plenty of people don't like drugs, particularly banned narcotics and stimulants. I might even be uncomfortable in certain instances visiting someone who I know has drugs. Presumably if they have them, they use them on occasion. Let's ban drugs, right? Who cares whose privacy and property rights are violated as long as I feel better?
I don't understand why people can say, "oh he's a farmer, so he's not insane for having a gun" but the moment someone's not a farmer, they're suddenly unhinged or obsessed with violence, as opposed to perhaps, a target shooter or other kind of hobbyist. It's like they have this mental pattern "grandpa with a gun" where it's ok, and everything else just sets off alarm bells. It's odd, because it's usually liberals (in the US this is a liberal/conservative thing) that have more "openness to experience" but for some reason they are rarely open to the experience of growing up with guns, considering them dangerous but useful tools, using them for sport and hunting, and not being insane while doing so.
Weapons of war have historically become objects of sport: it happened with fencing and archery - firearms are no different.
They also might accidentally stab you with a knife or have horrible aim when trying to butcher a chicken you're holding, and cut off your hand with a cleaver. Is it reasonable, then, to be uncomfortable around knives in a kitchen, too? Even when they're not in use? Within certain boundaries of storage and safe handling and usage, knives are not dangerous.
It's the same with guns. Within certain boundaries of safe handling, by someone who you don't suspect is mentally unhinged, gun possession or use is a non-problem. Anyone who is unsafe with guns, around anyone who's familiar with gun safety, will quickly be educated about proper gun handling.
As with bows and arrows, and swords, and crossbows (which, when cocked, are not so different from guns... they must be handled very carefully, but where's the casual disparagement of crossbow owners?). And all other things that have their places in everyday use, sport or culture, even when they could be dangerous. The origins of guns as weapons is irrelevant. Guns are not unique in that respect, yet many people who dislike, or are afraid of guns, treat a gun phobia uniquely as something to be praised. "How would any reasonable person not be afraid of guns? They're instruments of death!" How would any reasonable person not be afraid of a crossbow, or a katana, or even a knife? We learn to use knives safely without fear, and learn not to be afraid of swords and (cross)bows when they're being stored or carried or used properly.
In Britain it is! Bin that knife, criminal!
I've never been able to fathom that argument. Even if a gun was made to kill people (one could equally argue that a particular gun is made for target practice or hunting and often that is true) the intentions of the maker of an object have absolutely nothing to do with whether you should be scared or not.
As an example, suppose someone hits you on the head with a hammer. As you sit in the hospital with a concussion is it any solace that the maker of the hammer intended it to be used on nails?
Sporting use or aesthetics are not relevant? There go javelins, bows and arrows, swords, etc.
Hunting is not relevant? I hope you don't eat meat, or perhaps you prefer the ethics of factory animal farming to the ethics of hunting with firearms?
Logical fallacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children
I know what you are saying, but most people outside of the US see gun owning as a pretty serious problem.
But yeah ... I think that current approach towards CP is misguided. We will be able to prevent the creation of the content if we screen and treat the persons for the mental illness they have. That is the real way to strangle demand.
And, for the most part, it has little to do with breaking the law. In many places, including the vast majority of the U.S., DIY weapons (with a few exceptions) are perfectly legal provided you are not a prohibited person.
> I think that is the stuff that both sides of second amendment shouting match fail to get - inventing deadly stuff is easy.
What makes you think that 2A supporters fail to understand this? The ubiquitous availability of deadly weapons of all forms is a common theme in the utilitarian argument against gun control.
And the feds actually have lots of tools with which to reduce gun ownership legally ... seems the whole issue is alive mostly because it channels away energy from the real issues.
Russia also knows how to go after Tor, as seen in Malware busts and the arrest of "Paunch" malware creator in Russia. http://geekslop.com/2013/blackhole-malware-creator-arrested-...
If individual guns can be sold online, it only means that Law Enforcement is not prioritising going after the sales of individual guns - right or wrong - they are not stopped by the use of Tor or even encryption.
No idea how they ship the ammo I hope they don't mail it as it goes on passenger planes and live ammunition has to be secured so an LD3 doesnt roll around, crush something then set off bullets flying through the cabin.
Could you explain me how GPS drop works (I couldn't find information on that topic via Google)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_drop
Think of it as an orienteering game with only two participants. You place the package in a location unlikely to be found accidentally. You transmit the GPS/Glonass location information to the second person. They go to the location and retrieve the package.
No, that's not a good idea; even if their fingers didn't feel the heat generated by the drill quickly enough, it was sufficient to set off the primer, which embedded itself into the guy's bicep. And the case split, but only spilled unburned powder on his hand, that situation wasn't enough to set it on fire or otherwise harm him.
So I tend to assume it's more of an accelerant problem than a primary fire hazard, especially since as far as I know, loaded cartridges with sharp, pointy bullets but also with extra hard military primers as sometimes sold and shipped in bulk packaging, "loose" inside a bag (! see e.g. http://www.natchezss.com/federal-5-56-62gr-fmj-green-tip-600...). That doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling, but apparently the biggest US ammo manufacturer, many distributors, and the US Department of Transportation and UPS are OK with shipping that by ground.