Refugees buy a bunch of cell phones, cops called.

[Blackhawk2001]

My concern is that almost ANY thing bought in mass quantity could be used for some nefarious scheme.

My gut reaction is that these are the few who have some money, contacts and speak a small amount of English about to become entrepreneurs and engage in the free market of buying cheap crap at Walmart and reselling it to their neighbors for a ridiculously high markup.

If they wanted to make a bomb they would only need a couple of cell phones, which wouldn't (and SHOULDN'T) raise much flags.

We consider ourselves so tough, so macho, so brave.... Yet we run around like a scared wimp at the drop of about any hat.

Perhaps we shouldn't worry about the NSA spying on us, we are doing the job for them.

Regards,

Doug

PS - And yes, they could be making bombs. And the next white guy to buy a gun along with 1,000 rounds of ammo could be about to shoot up another movie theater. Where do we stop? Better yet, let's not start.

While I take your point, we have here a situation where a great number of cell phones are being purchased - with cash - at an odd hour; stores are reporting the theft of propane tanks; and there are also reports of "middle eastern men" offering large sums of cash - 2 to 3 times "street value" for weapons, armor and tactical equipment. All of these are taking place in the same general area.

Now you can call me "paranoid" but I think we have every reason to be concerned based on the world situation and the events of last week. And I think our public officials - especially those in charge of Public Safety - would be criminally foolish not to be concerned about them as well.

If those folks bought those cell phones for a legitimate reason and can prove it, no problem. But if they no longer have them and can't or won't say WHO has them, then we have a potential problem.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Better question, is whether the guy would've thought it suspicious if the guys bought a few hundred rounds of 556.

 

[BogWalker]

Better question, is whether the guy would've thought it suspicious if the guys bought a few hundred rounds of 556.

Pretty much what Libertarian01 was getting at.

 

[oldpink]

Ugh!
It's not about "looking over our shoulders constantly" or turning ourselves into a society that would do the Stasi proud.
Excuse me if I repeat that term, a rather popular term for gun enthusiasts, particularly for those of us who carry daily: Situational Awareness

Learn the definition of your terms, and this silly false choice that is the premise of binary thinking can be totally dispelled.

 

[Libertarian01]

Ugh!
It's not about "looking over our shoulders constantly" or turning ourselves into a society that would do the Stasi proud.
Excuse me if I repeat that term, a rather popular term for gun enthusiasts, particularly for those of us who carry daily: Situational Awareness

Learn the definition of your terms, and this silly false choice that is the premise of binary thinking can be totally dispelled.

I agree that there is "situational awareness," but only to a limit. Beyond that limit and it becomes paranoia.

One beer, absolutely nothing. Two or three beers, tingly. Four or five beers, happily inebriated. Many beers, drunk. Many, many beers, plastered. To my thinking being completely oblivious is like one beer or less. Situational awareness is at two or three. We are approaching beyond that.

I liken it to the scene in the movie "Get Shorty," when Yayo was warned about ankle holsters on DEA agents by Delroy Lindo's character. He got so worked up everyone he looked at appeared to have an ankle holster. He realized he couldn't think right. He knew he got too paranoid.

I don't think we're as bad as Yayo was, but I am afraid we are getting there. Situational awareness and paranoid delusions are on the same line. The only difference is how low (or how high) the bar is set.

When I was a little kid it wasn't uncommon to have a picture of a naked toddler playing in the pool, laughing and giggling. Nobody thought a thing of it, just a little three year old having a blast in his or her birthday suit. Try getting that film developed today without a quick knock at the door by your friendly detective.

You and I both agree on the concept of situational awareness. And yes, perhaps, my sensitivity bar is indeed set too low. I will possibly concede that. However, I would caution us about setting that bar too high. Just ask Lenore Skenazy about how overly paranoid we have become. I see the two issues as linked.

Kind Regards,

Doug

 

[DragonGunner]

Better question, is whether the guy would've thought it suspicious if the guys bought a few hundred rounds of 556.

Depends…..is it common to buy hundreds of rounds of ammo……? Is that out of the norm, or normal? So then you would be saying its common place that folks buy large amounts of cell phones…..? Whats the ratio between the two group? How many people do you know that buy lots of ammo compared to people you know that buy lots of cell phones?

 

[Libertarian01]

Depends…..is it common to buy hundreds of rounds of ammo……? Is that out of the norm, or normal? So then you would be saying its common place that folks buy large amounts of cell phones…..? Whats the ratio between the two group? How many people do you know that buy lots of ammo compared to people you know that buy lots of cell phones?

What is "normal?" Who's "normal?"

When "I" buy ammo it is usually surplus, by the case (or three), and delivered from the net. That is normal for me. But I have also bought a box or two at a time to slowly stock up on some lesser used calibers.

What about fertilizer? How much is "normal" and to from whom? After all, good bomb making material there.

Let's talk about chlorine. Chlorine gas is a helluva weapon, so who's buying bleach? Should we monitor mommy units if they are buying more than the clerk would "normally" see? How much more? I used to know a guy who's father used to be a chemical weapons expert for the DoD. He could weaponize almost everything found under the kitchen sink. Maybe we should worry about Muslim women stocking up on detergent.

Maybe I am way out in left field, being a naive, rose-coloured glasses guy. But we have made a habit of massively overreacting to threats.

In the 80's it was Dungeons & Dragons. Oh yeah, and devil worshipers too. Just look at the massive witch hunt and persecution of the McMartins.
In the 90's it was child abductors. Yes, children were abducted. And yes, it was tragic. But when we look at the statistical risk...? Insignificant. Media hype. Yet today, how many parents are afraid to let their children go to the park alone??? Helicopter parents out of hyped threat.

Oh yeah, and we transformed the joy of Halloween trick-or-treating into a State controlled, State dictated time and system. Let's X-ray the candy! Curfews!!! I remember when you could stay out until midnight as long as folks had their porch lights on. And by the way, almost all of the reported tampered candy were hoaxes. But that justified modifying Halloween for everyone. And the media sold their stories...

These guys may have been up to no good. I am still guessing they were going to try to flip the phones for a profit, which may be illegal. And they may(?) have been part of a terrorist cell, but on the probability scale I'll go with ripping off their neighbors with overpriced phones.

Our media hypes crap and gets us wound up way too much and too easily. We scare too easy these days.

Again, just my opinion.

Kind Regards,

Doug

 

[2A_Tom]

I would be very fearful of using s prepaid phone as a detonator. Years ago I got one to keep in touch while I was out and about. Shoryly after I activated it I started receiving calls some were wrong numbers, some were for the previous owner of that number and some didn't even connect.

I have had a contract with sprint for over eight years with the same number and still receive calls from bill collectors for the previous owner of my number.

I can see mohamed sitting at his work bench, finishing his clock, hooks up the last wire and his house dematerializes.

 

[DragonGunner]

What is "normal?" Who's "normal?"

When "I" buy ammo it is usually surplus, by the case (or three), and delivered from the net. That is normal for me. But I have also bought a box or two at a time to slowly stock up on some lesser used calibers.

What about fertilizer? How much is "normal" and to from whom? After all, good bomb making material there.

Let's talk about chlorine. Chlorine gas is a helluva weapon, so who's buying bleach? Should we monitor mommy units if they are buying more than the clerk would "normally" see? How much more? I used to know a guy who's father used to be a chemical weapons expert for the DoD. He could weaponize almost everything found under the kitchen sink. Maybe we should worry about Muslim women stocking up on detergent.

Maybe I am way out in left field, being a naive, rose-coloured glasses guy. But we have made a habit of massively overreacting to threats.

In the 80's it was Dungeons & Dragons. Oh yeah, and devil worshipers too. Just look at the massive witch hunt and persecution of the McMartins.
In the 90's it was child abductors. Yes, children were abducted. And yes, it was tragic. But when we look at the statistical risk...? Insignificant. Media hype. Yet today, how many parents are afraid to let their children go to the park alone??? Helicopter parents out of hyped threat.

Oh yeah, and we transformed the joy of Halloween trick-or-treating into a State controlled, State dictated time and system. Let's X-ray the candy! Curfews!!! I remember when you could stay out until midnight as long as folks had their porch lights on. And by the way, almost all of the reported tampered candy were hoaxes. But that justified modifying Halloween for everyone. And the media sold their stories...

These guys may have been up to no good. I am still guessing they were going to try to flip the phones for a profit, which may be illegal. And they may(?) have been part of a terrorist cell, but on the probability scale I'll go with ripping off their neighbors with overpriced phones.

Our media hypes crap and gets us wound up way too much and too easily. We scare too easy these days.

Again, just my opinion.

Kind Regards,

Doug

Well today if you want to send your little kids to the park by themselves thats on you. I grew up in the 60's and Mom and Dad told me back then never get in a car with someone I didn't know, even if they told me they knew my mom and dad. We lived out in the country and walking back from the lake a guy tried getting me in his car, even said he knew my mom and dad and would take me home (only about 100 yards away) I said no and ended up almost having to run to get him to stop trying to get me in. He finally gave up and drove off, never found out who it was…….guess we just don't think alike….thank God my parents were aware long before your 90's came around. Carry on.

 

[Libertarian01]

Well today if you want to send your little kids to the park by themselves thats on you. I grew up in the 60's and Mom and Dad told me back then never get in a car with someone I didn't know, even if they told me they knew my mom and dad. We lived out in the country and walking back from the lake a guy tried getting me in his car, even said he knew my mom and dad and would take me home (only about 100 yards away) I said no and ended up almost having to run to get him to stop trying to get me in. He finally gave up and drove off, never found out who it was…….guess we just don't think alike….thank God my parents were aware long before your 90's came around. Carry on.

The odds of a child being abducted by a "stranger" are around 1 in 1,500,000. Here are some other odds from Penn & Tellers BS. Link: GorillaVid - Just watch it!

Suicide 1 in 28,000 (53 times more likely) Do you send you kids to a therapist to avoid depression?
Drowning 1 in 73,000 (20 times more likely) Do you warn you children to avoid all streams, rivers, and pools?
Firearms Accidents 1 in 200,000 (7.5 times more likely) I just KNOW you got rid of your guns to protect your kids, right?
Adverse Medical Care 1 in 1,300,000 Your kids are more likely to be killed by a trained medical professional than by a stranger on the street.

Yes, we CAN and often times do worry about things that are statistically extremely unlikely over things that are far more dangerous. I have NEVER, EVER said bad things don't happen or are done by bad people. What I am concerned about is how we as a society are pathetic in our bleeding heart, overly sensitive reaction to extremely rare events. When they DO happen they are horrible to be sure. But it is our push beyond what I see as a normal situational awareness that I find bothersome.

I want us to make logical, rational decisions about risk and our civil liberties. The parents whose kids were murdered in Sandy Hook are not the ones that I want making firearms policy decisions. What happened to them is tragic beyond comprehension, yet it is a statistical abnormality that should not guide our decision making.

Kind Regards,

Doug

 

[ajeandy]

The odds of a child being abducted by a "stranger" are around 1 in 1,500,000. Here are some other odds from Penn & Tellers BS. Link: GorillaVid - Just watch it!

Suicide 1 in 28,000 (53 times more likely) Do you send you kids to a therapist to avoid depression?
Drowning 1 in 73,000 (20 times more likely) Do you warn you children to avoid all streams, rivers, and pools?
Firearms Accidents 1 in 200,000 (7.5 times more likely) I just KNOW you got rid of your guns to protect your kids, right?
Adverse Medical Care 1 in 1,300,000 Your kids are more likely to be killed by a trained medical professional than by a stranger on the street.

Yes, we CAN and often times do worry about things that are statistically extremely unlikely over things that are far more dangerous. I have NEVER, EVER said bad things don't happen or are done by bad people. What I am concerned about is how we as a society are pathetic in our bleeding heart, overly sensitive reaction to extremely rare events. When they DO happen they are horrible to be sure. But it is our push beyond what I see as a normal situational awareness that I find bothersome.

I want us to make logical, rational decisions about risk and our civil liberties. The parents whose kids were murdered in Sandy Hook are not the ones that I want making firearms policy decisions. What happened to them is tragic beyond comprehension, yet it is a statistical abnormality that should not guide our decision making.

Kind Regards,

Doug

I agree with both of your posts. It's fear mongering and it's been happening since...well since anything bad has ever happened. It's the same force driving the "gun control." We try to control every aspect of life because we are afraid. We think we can prevent bad people from doing bad things, but we cannot. All we can do is prepare ourselves for the worst and hope for the best. The majority will never accept this and thus the "gun control" battle rages on.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

The odds of a child being abducted by a "stranger" are around 1 in 1,500,000. Here are some other odds from Penn & Tellers BS. Link: GorillaVid - Just watch it!

Suicide 1 in 28,000 (53 times more likely) Do you send you kids to a therapist to avoid depression?
Drowning 1 in 73,000 (20 times more likely) Do you warn you children to avoid all streams, rivers, and pools?
Firearms Accidents 1 in 200,000 (7.5 times more likely) I just KNOW you got rid of your guns to protect your kids, right?
Adverse Medical Care 1 in 1,300,000 Your kids are more likely to be killed by a trained medical professional than by a stranger on the street.

Yes, we CAN and often times do worry about things that are statistically extremely unlikely over things that are far more dangerous. I have NEVER, EVER said bad things don't happen or are done by bad people. What I am concerned about is how we as a society are pathetic in our bleeding heart, overly sensitive reaction to extremely rare events. When they DO happen they are horrible to be sure. But it is our push beyond what I see as a normal situational awareness that I find bothersome.

I want us to make logical, rational decisions about risk and our civil liberties. The parents whose kids were murdered in Sandy Hook are not the ones that I want making firearms policy decisions. What happened to them is tragic beyond comprehension, yet it is a statistical abnormality that should not guide our decision making.

Kind Regards,

Doug

This brings to mind Risk Management charts: We look at history and circumstances, the potential for an event, and the potential consequences of an event.

The event(s) of which we're speaking, we have a circumstance - or series of circumstances: large numbers of cell phones purchased at odd hours by foreign-sounding individuals; at the same time thefts of a significant number of propane tanks from the same general area; attempted purchases of firearms, body armor, and "tactical gear" for multiples of "street price" with cash by "Middle Eastern" men.

Now we have recent experiences: Recent use of propane tanks for IEDs; use of cell phones for one-time communications and as detonators for IEDs; recent multiple shootings by either foreign-born Muslims or home-grown Muslims on various targets.

Now we look at possible scenarios: multiple cell phones? Kirk came up with one possible scenario, but there are others, including what has become the stuff of "standard spook craft": using cheap cell phones for communications and IED detonators. Which of the possible scenarios poses a threat to the public and what might be the magnitude of that threat.

Oh, yeah, I forgot to insert another set of verified circumstances into our current situation: ISIS and Al-Qaeda and other radical Islamic groups are using social media to encourage attacks on Americans, 70% of Syrian refugees are military-aged men without families, there are indications that Muslims have entered the country illegally over our southern border with Mexico, and real-looking false Syrian passports have been discovered even while our government is inexplicably falling all over itself to import Syrian refugees.

So combine all those circumstances, mix in the most recent terrorist act, and then decide: if all these "factoids" are somehow related, what are the possible outcomes and how bad might those outcomes be? Looking at the possible outcomes, we can reasonably conclude that if these incidents are connected, we might expect a series of major attacks on either soft targets or infrastructure, either of which could have catastrophic consequences.

So looking at worst case scenarios - which any competent intelligence analyst is going to do - I don't see any problem with investigating the "innocent" purchase of cell phones. And don't forget that the government has been saying this for years: "If you see something, say something" If the San Bernardino shooters' neighbors had "said something" when they "saw something" that shooting might have been prevented.

 

[DragonGunner]

This brings to mind Risk Management charts: We look at history and circumstances, the potential for an event, and the potential consequences of an event.

The event(s) of which we're speaking, we have a circumstance - or series of circumstances: large numbers of cell phones purchased at odd hours by foreign-sounding individuals; at the same time thefts of a significant number of propane tanks from the same general area; attempted purchases of firearms, body armor, and "tactical gear" for multiples of "street price" with cash by "Middle Eastern" men.

Now we have recent experiences: Recent use of propane tanks for IEDs; use of cell phones for one-time communications and as detonators for IEDs; recent multiple shootings by either foreign-born Muslims or home-grown Muslims on various targets.

Now we look at possible scenarios: multiple cell phones? Kirk came up with one possible scenario, but there are others, including what has become the stuff of "standard spook craft": using cheap cell phones for communications and IED detonators. Which of the possible scenarios poses a threat to the public and what might be the magnitude of that threat.

Oh, yeah, I forgot to insert another set of verified circumstances into our current situation: ISIS and Al-Qaeda and other radical Islamic groups are using social media to encourage attacks on Americans, 70% of Syrian refugees are military-aged men without families, there are indications that Muslims have entered the country illegally over our southern border with Mexico, and real-looking false Syrian passports have been discovered even while our government is inexplicably falling all over itself to import Syrian refugees.

So combine all those circumstances, mix in the most recent terrorist act, and then decide: if all these "factoids" are somehow related, what are the possible outcomes and how bad might those outcomes be? Looking at the possible outcomes, we can reasonably conclude that if these incidents are connected, we might expect a series of major attacks on either soft targets or infrastructure, either of which could have catastrophic consequences.

So looking at worst case scenarios - which any competent intelligence analyst is going to do - I don't see any problem with investigating the "innocent" purchase of cell phones. And don't forget that the government has been saying this for years: "If you see something, say something" If the San Bernardino shooters' neighbors had "said something" when they "saw something" that shooting might have been prevented.

Careful…..that makes too much sense. Someone will be along to tell ya its ok to play in the rain during a lightning storm cause ONLY 300 people worldwide die from lightning strikes, no need for common sense here.

 

[HoughMade]

Large Cell Phone Purchase Rumor : snopes.com

 

[Libertarian01]

Large Cell Phone Purchase Rumor : snopes.com

Duh...!





Wait! NOW what are we supposed to argue about???

Doug

 

[HoughMade]

Cell phone trafficking....go figure.