Christophe Noel
Expedition Leader
Is that directed at me?
Do you feel the need to be unarmed and defensless while camping?
- Thread starter shogun
- Start date
- Status
Christophe Noel
Expedition Leader
To put this in context, I was referring to anyone lumped in the "anti-gun" crowd and how not all of us have a desire to see guns removed from the hands of responsible individuals. Just because some of us see room for more effective regulations, that should not read as - we want to ban guns.
plainjaneFJC
Deplorable
rayra
Expedition Leader
Sorry, but you rebutted your own post. The actual facts are quite different from the media hype.
US annual murders - all kinds - are about 10,000, not the 33,000 the anti-gun nexus repeatedly asserts. The latter figure includes suicides, accidents, police shootings etc.
US per capita murder rate (~3.8) is 121st out of 218 nations. And almost ALL of the 120 nations with a higher murder rate than the US have official disarmament of their civilian populations.
US homicides have declined steadily over the last 30yrs - and continue to do so, despite media glorification of 'mass' shootings - and that's another aspect of the frauds perpetrated by the anti-gun media et al. 'Kids killed by guns' includes people 19-26yrs of age, criminals gunned down by police, gang bangers shooting gang bangers, etc. ACTUAL 'kids, toddlers, CDC data shows more of them drown in BUCKETS and TOILETS than are killed by firearms.
Those 10,000 annual murders - in a nation of 330,000,000 people - there's less than 400 killed with rifles of ANY kind, mush less the 'evil black assault rifles' the anti-gun folks fetishize.
That homicide rate that's been declinging in the USA the last 20yrs? 120,000,000 firearms have been sold since the current President took office, based on NICS data. 220,000,000 have been sold since that system went live in 1998. There's credible argument to be made that there are AT LEAST half a billion firearms in the United States. More than one for every man woman and child. DESPITE a huge growth in firearms ownership in the US, homicide rates are declining. Many studies have shown these declines in States enacting or broadening conceal carry regulations and 'castle doctrine' laws conveying presumption of no guilt in lethal self-defense in one's home.
I'm glad you've never felt the need for one. Your anecdotal feelings and needs have got nothing to do with mine, or my Constitutional rights. Don't want one, don't have one. You've got no business deciding I don't 'need' one.
Lastly, re Australia, your per capita homicide rate is 1.1. Superficially 1/3 of the US rate. But given the actual meaning of the numbers - 1.1 out of 100,000 vs 3.8 out of 100,000 - the ACTUAL difference in the rates is statistically meaningless. 0.0011% of your people vs 0.0038% of our people.
review the data for yourselves. The 'common wisdom' about America and its guns is all distortion and nonsense. Look for yourselves. The actual data will reflect what I've stated here.
eta btw, the REAL situation is even more inverted than you surmise, when you look at the international per capita rape and violent assault rates. The USA comes off even better than almost all the western democracies. You might pride yourselves on your enlightened banning of guns, but you lot are stabbing, beating and raping each other like all get out. While you lecture 'Cowboy America' about its guns.
rayra
Expedition Leader
'more effective regulations'
more effective than the thousands of regulations already on the books at every governmental level? Go read a Form 4473 some time. All the things you think you want are ALREADY 'regulated'. Everythign is already erected / in place. It isn't being enforced or handled correctly by the same governmental bodies making demands. Those adjudicated as mental defectives are barred from purchasing arms. Felons are committing fresh crimes to even attempt to buy a firearm.
The 1934 Gun Control Act (GCA) restricted machinegun (ACTUAL, not the deliberately muddling terms of 'automatic' or 'assault weapons') ownership, requiring a $200 tax stamp at a time that Thompson submachinegun didn't even cost $200, and a per capita average ANNUAL income was scarely more than that. And furthermore set minimum barrel lengths on long arms.
The 1968 GCA required all firearms to be serialized, the sales to be fully documented and records retained, forbade (with one exception) the simple mail-order purchase of firearms with shipment direct to the purchaser. For nearly FIFTY YEARS any mail order (and subsequently) Internet-purchased firearms must be sent to an FFL dealer, for logging and lawful transfer to an identified lawful purchaser.
The 1986 Firearms Owner Protection Act (FOPA) capped the total available pool of machineguns available for civilian purchase - which is legal in ~45 states btw - which immediately spiked their prices 3-10x and even higher in subsequent years. They are now investment articles, the price speculation is so rampant.
The Lautenberg amendment elevated misdemeanor domestic violence to a firearms-excluding event. And does so without due process via fraudulent application of restraining orders on uninvestigated hearsay. It's now a common attack method in hostile divorce proceedings.
You've got to be 18 to buy a long gun from an FFL. You've got to be 21 to buy a handgun from an FFL. Beyond that the States have variations on person to person transfers, many require full registration of the purchase, some do not. States' rights.
Many states and even cities have made highly restricted dictats about how arms must be stored or utilized. Many states require a victim of an assault to retreat and retreat some more until the cannot anymore, before allowing them to defend themselves with appropriate force or with a firearm.
Many states will PUT YOU IN JAIL (NJ and NY in particular), despite Federal 'peaceable journey' laws that state if your firearm is lawful for you to possess at your origin and at your destination that you are then entitled to travel thru a more restrictive zone. Pffft. NY and NJ don't care and the FedGov doesn't care to make them care. People languish in jail cells today because of it.
Then there's laws criminalizing failure to lock up a firearm in your own home. DC's series of deliberately erected hurdles to firearm ownership is so egregious they've been spanked for it in Federal courts repeatedly. Likewise other states.
L.A. City just last month criminalized ownership of magazines holding more than 10rds, with no recourse other than surrender, despite CA State law providing a grandfather clause for those 10+ mags that were owned before Jan 1 2000, when the state ban took effect. AND the new L.A. law makes no exemption for the various other incorporated cities embedded within, landlocked by, Los Angeles City. Residents of those cities risk arrest to transport their 10+ mags thru L.A., despite doing so being legal in state law, to go shoot them on state lands.
NJ criminalizes certain kinds of ammunition. Many 'northeastern' states and cities do.
There are literally thousands of restrictions and limitations on what can be owned where, when and by who. And that's on top of Murder and Violent Assault being 'illegal'.
Then there's HIPAA that forbids relating of medical conditions to 3rd parties. And the dismantlement of our asylum system, such that schizoids / psychotics walk amongst us, free to stop taking their stabilizing medications whenever they feel like it. And the practice of a feminized public education system drugging legions of boys to 'settle them down', despite medical study after medical study showing that steeping developing brains in methamphetamin - that's what Ritalin and Adderol are, btw, meth, speed, it's all the same chemical - renders them psychotic. Likewise studies with SSRIs, those anxiety medications whose commercials are 1/3 pitch and 2/3 warnings that suddenly ceasing the medication may result in suicidal ideations.
School counselors won't report people like Cho (VA Tech shooter), are the cretin in Santa Barbara. Consdier themselves barred from doing so. Most states - and I'll let you guess which party rules them - refuse to cooperate with the feds and report disqualifying medical conditions to the Federal government / FBI to factor into their National Instant Check System (NICS).
When a jihadist terrorist commits a mass shooting on a group of innocents in a 'Gun Free' zone, in a governmetn agency and a county that specifically refuses the right of armed self-defense to its subjects and leading national politicians take to the media before the bodies are even cold to say guns must be restricted, taken away, CONFISCATED, when the media ignorantly or deliberately mislabels the weapons as machineguns, the 'bullet button' as a device which enables full-auto fire (it does nothing of the sort, quite the opposite in fact), firearms owners and supporters of 2nd Amendment RIGHTS have every reason in the world to say 'No' and 'Not another inch'.
Christophe, given what I have described above, just what sort of 'more effective regulations' do you propose? Actual workable enforceable regulations? I'd like to here them. I'd like the opportunity to demonstrate to you and our audience how they might be effected, or how difficult or bloody they might be.
rayra
Expedition Leader
It's an apt simile. And it's endemic in our media culture. So much so that on the firearms boards I frequent it has become common practice to scour the early news reports of terrible shootings, so that pro-RKBA can get to the actual source data before the media distortions are promulgated and social media information related to the criminals is scrubbed.
Christophe, I realize it is the holidays and there are more important things to do right now, but I really would like to discuss your ideas. Or provide you (and our audience) more information about what the state of things actually is. Slogans and spiking sentiment are never a sound basis for law, but are often used to skew new law. That urge should be resisted in favor of a more studied and informed approach.
There are a lot of things we should be doing and despite official protestations of determination, they never get done. HIPAA should be amended such that psychosis becomes a mandatory reporting item, just like child porn and and other criminal acts. There should be a reporting and review process that temporarily bars people under treatment for psychosis, schizophrenia, high anxiety and severe depression from purchasing or owning arms. There should be a required medical review process for anyone prescribed Ritalin / Adderol or SSRIs, before they are allowed ot by firearms and regulation requiring arms they might have access to in their homes be secured from them. EVERY dysfunctional 20-seomthing white male mass / school shooter in the last 20yrs has been on one form of these medications or another. It never gets mentioned or dwelt upon long enough to do anything about it.
Meanwhile, the NICS system shows that over 120,000,000 new firearms (at a minimum, the checks are of the purchaser / per transaction, could be more than one gun at a time) have been purchased since 2008. And that over 220,000,000 have been purchased since the system went live in 1998. That 17 years that a system that is arranged to incorporate mental health data as a disqualifier has been DENIED that medical information be the same politicians that are crying 'something must be done'.
It's right on the Form 4473, question 11f, 'ever been adjudicated mentally defective. 11e, addicted to mind-altering narcotics, legal or illegal. etc etc all those questions are supposed to be cross checked against information forwarded to the FBI by all the States. Few of them send the medical info.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/guns/documents/tracing-2.html
https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/atf-form-4473
The rest of the issues and arguments are far more political and I will not broach them lest it be seized upon as an excuse to delete my writings or this topic. But I will answer questions on history and the laws as they stand or are proposed in as factual and unbiased manner as I can. It's important that everybody on all sides of the issue have a more accurate understanding of the situation, if anything is ever to be legitimately worked out about it. Calls for disarmament, edicts and sweeping declarations are a non-starter and are the sorts of things guarded against when the entire Bill of Rights was first hammered to secure individual protections as a balance to the centralization of Federal power in order to get our Constitution ratified in the first place.
It's impossible to discuss the issue without political context, but it is possible to do so with out partisan vituperations
Christophe, I realize it is the holidays and there are more important things to do right now, but I really would like to discuss your ideas. Or provide you (and our audience) more information about what the state of things actually is. Slogans and spiking sentiment are never a sound basis for law, but are often used to skew new law. That urge should be resisted in favor of a more studied and informed approach.
There are a lot of things we should be doing and despite official protestations of determination, they never get done. HIPAA should be amended such that psychosis becomes a mandatory reporting item, just like child porn and and other criminal acts. There should be a reporting and review process that temporarily bars people under treatment for psychosis, schizophrenia, high anxiety and severe depression from purchasing or owning arms. There should be a required medical review process for anyone prescribed Ritalin / Adderol or SSRIs, before they are allowed ot by firearms and regulation requiring arms they might have access to in their homes be secured from them. EVERY dysfunctional 20-seomthing white male mass / school shooter in the last 20yrs has been on one form of these medications or another. It never gets mentioned or dwelt upon long enough to do anything about it.
Meanwhile, the NICS system shows that over 120,000,000 new firearms (at a minimum, the checks are of the purchaser / per transaction, could be more than one gun at a time) have been purchased since 2008. And that over 220,000,000 have been purchased since the system went live in 1998. That 17 years that a system that is arranged to incorporate mental health data as a disqualifier has been DENIED that medical information be the same politicians that are crying 'something must be done'.
It's right on the Form 4473, question 11f, 'ever been adjudicated mentally defective. 11e, addicted to mind-altering narcotics, legal or illegal. etc etc all those questions are supposed to be cross checked against information forwarded to the FBI by all the States. Few of them send the medical info.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/guns/documents/tracing-2.html
https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/atf-form-4473
The rest of the issues and arguments are far more political and I will not broach them lest it be seized upon as an excuse to delete my writings or this topic. But I will answer questions on history and the laws as they stand or are proposed in as factual and unbiased manner as I can. It's important that everybody on all sides of the issue have a more accurate understanding of the situation, if anything is ever to be legitimately worked out about it. Calls for disarmament, edicts and sweeping declarations are a non-starter and are the sorts of things guarded against when the entire Bill of Rights was first hammered to secure individual protections as a balance to the centralization of Federal power in order to get our Constitution ratified in the first place.
It's impossible to discuss the issue without political context, but it is possible to do so with out partisan vituperations
Christophe Noel
Expedition Leader
I'm still reticent to dig back into this discussion, but I have to laud you for your thoughtful additions. Each side of this discussion is represented by voices that either advance the legitimacy of their position, or erode it with vitriol, snark, innuendo, or just good old ignorance. Then, in the middle, or close to it, there are people like me, eager to hear sound arguments which may help us better understand the overall challenges and hopeful solutions. I am swayed by a good talking point. My heels are not dug in blindly.
The twisting of statistics, misuse of analogous examples, and continual misdirect (by both sides) are what have led us to where we are today, at a loggerheads.
And I'll be the first to admit, I don't have the answer to the end goal of reducing gun violence. I have ideas, as do most people.
jeep-N-montero
Expedition Leader
Do you in all honesty lack enough sense to the point you actually believe in this statement???? Do you live under a rock? Tell us how you feel after someone breaks into the home of someone you know and rapes and/or kills them because those living in the home were passive like yourself and had such a belief that the government would 'protect them', when in reality it was your government who took away their right to protect themselves while the criminal can still acquire guns illegally. Does any of that sink in or are you still walking with blinders on?
Last edited:
This is a pretty difficult discussion to have intelligently over the internet, as we are all pretty aware....
..i guess if I had a contribution to make, i would probably sum it up with my own life experience. The short, 2 liner version of that would be that I came out of college a hard core left wing supporter, and very anti gun, for all the reasons people are. In between college and the military I did a near decade long stint at a major metropolitan police department where carry of concealed firearms was a luxury reserved for the politically connected. Nothing has made me more pro RKBA than my time on the street.
-Any able bodied adult of sound mind should be able to possess and carry a weapon without unreasonable barrier. Open carry should be permitted in rural areas.
-Background checks are completely reasonable and should not be opposed by anyone. There is no reason you should not have to submit to a background check to obtain your firearm. The rub comes in when purchases and background checks are kept on file by the government. As katrina/No showed us, the government will take armed men and go door to door with those records and seize your arms. This is unacceptable and should be opposed.
-We need to evaluate what we are doing in our mental health treatment system. Kids are seriously under disciplined, under parented, over medicated, and heavily neglected across the economic and racial spectrum.(some, not all....) We need to seriously look at the kinds of medication getting pushed out by big pharma. With very few exceptions, almost all of our "mas cas" incidents not tied to a particular religion, can be put squarely in the lap of a psychotropic drug. Where is the cut off for this? I dont presume to have the answers. The concern here, obviously, is that "anyone who sees a psychologist" will be prohibited, which isnt the answer.
-We need to have SERIOUS reform to our legal system. This "court room immunity" needs to go away. What judges and lawyers do in courtrooms, if people paid attention, would be grounds to riot. I cannot begin to tell you the number of cases I worked where the prosecutor, in an effort to keep a "winning record" would offer the defense "I'll drop the aggravated/weapon related charge if you'll plea to the property crime" Armed robberies became theft. Home invasions became burglary or theft. Violent felonies became misdemeanors at the snap of a finger. We have seriously dangerous people walking the streets free today because we refuse to dramatically punish violent crimes.
-some right wing Gun nuts need to calm the hell down. The stuff I see on the interwebs does nothing to help the cause.
-some on the left need to calm the hell down. The demagoguery and false narrative surrounding some of the reporting is dishonest at best.
-we need to start having a real conversation about the problem of violence in our country, and it aint about the guns. Its about society. Like it or not, convenient to your sensibilities or not, the truth is this: the vast majority of all crimes -especially violent ones- are committed by racial minorities in economically depressed urban environments. Period. If we want to see things in this country change, we need to get serious about engaging our communities and turning lives around at a cultural level. I dont pretend to have the answers for that. That is a complex problem I dont see a solution to because of how entrenched in politics we have become, and how politicized every facet of that issue has been made. But banning john-q-public from possessing a legal firearm because a criminal illegally used an illegally obtained weapon is like cutting your neighbors balls off in hopes of preventing a pregnancy of your own. Its lunacy of the highest order.
-The media is outright responsible for the narrative going on right now. I'm really tired of seeing what they have done with their reporting of some of these incidents, and these protests are out of control. In short, if a cop has done wrong, then they need to stand before a jury of their peers and face the music. But just because a cop used force against someone that is unarmed doesnt make it unreasonable, despite what the media wants to parlay for ratings. I have seen examples of both in this last year that have been sensationalized in the media. The problem I have is how disingenuous the narrative is.
The hardest part about all of this is having a conversation that resembles sensible discourse. That is almost impossible given how entrenched people have become, on both sides, largely around what they see politicized. Youve got people on the left that want to horribly distort the history of this country and what these rights mean for the citizen with their incredibly warped view of the concept of the bill of rights. Combine that with extreme naivety, and you have a recipe for victimization. Youve got people on the right saying that "by gaw-damnit, ISS MAH RAAAGHT TUH HAS UH DA GAWN JAVELIN MISSILE LAUNCHER!." Its ridiculous. Sensible regulation does not equate to infringement.
In my opinion, any citizen should be permitted the arms allowed to their locals police force. Im tired of hearing police refer to citizens as "civilians". Police forget that they too, are civilians.
That's my $.02
..i guess if I had a contribution to make, i would probably sum it up with my own life experience. The short, 2 liner version of that would be that I came out of college a hard core left wing supporter, and very anti gun, for all the reasons people are. In between college and the military I did a near decade long stint at a major metropolitan police department where carry of concealed firearms was a luxury reserved for the politically connected. Nothing has made me more pro RKBA than my time on the street.
-Any able bodied adult of sound mind should be able to possess and carry a weapon without unreasonable barrier. Open carry should be permitted in rural areas.
-Background checks are completely reasonable and should not be opposed by anyone. There is no reason you should not have to submit to a background check to obtain your firearm. The rub comes in when purchases and background checks are kept on file by the government. As katrina/No showed us, the government will take armed men and go door to door with those records and seize your arms. This is unacceptable and should be opposed.
-We need to evaluate what we are doing in our mental health treatment system. Kids are seriously under disciplined, under parented, over medicated, and heavily neglected across the economic and racial spectrum.(some, not all....) We need to seriously look at the kinds of medication getting pushed out by big pharma. With very few exceptions, almost all of our "mas cas" incidents not tied to a particular religion, can be put squarely in the lap of a psychotropic drug. Where is the cut off for this? I dont presume to have the answers. The concern here, obviously, is that "anyone who sees a psychologist" will be prohibited, which isnt the answer.
-We need to have SERIOUS reform to our legal system. This "court room immunity" needs to go away. What judges and lawyers do in courtrooms, if people paid attention, would be grounds to riot. I cannot begin to tell you the number of cases I worked where the prosecutor, in an effort to keep a "winning record" would offer the defense "I'll drop the aggravated/weapon related charge if you'll plea to the property crime" Armed robberies became theft. Home invasions became burglary or theft. Violent felonies became misdemeanors at the snap of a finger. We have seriously dangerous people walking the streets free today because we refuse to dramatically punish violent crimes.
-some right wing Gun nuts need to calm the hell down. The stuff I see on the interwebs does nothing to help the cause.
-some on the left need to calm the hell down. The demagoguery and false narrative surrounding some of the reporting is dishonest at best.
-we need to start having a real conversation about the problem of violence in our country, and it aint about the guns. Its about society. Like it or not, convenient to your sensibilities or not, the truth is this: the vast majority of all crimes -especially violent ones- are committed by racial minorities in economically depressed urban environments. Period. If we want to see things in this country change, we need to get serious about engaging our communities and turning lives around at a cultural level. I dont pretend to have the answers for that. That is a complex problem I dont see a solution to because of how entrenched in politics we have become, and how politicized every facet of that issue has been made. But banning john-q-public from possessing a legal firearm because a criminal illegally used an illegally obtained weapon is like cutting your neighbors balls off in hopes of preventing a pregnancy of your own. Its lunacy of the highest order.
-The media is outright responsible for the narrative going on right now. I'm really tired of seeing what they have done with their reporting of some of these incidents, and these protests are out of control. In short, if a cop has done wrong, then they need to stand before a jury of their peers and face the music. But just because a cop used force against someone that is unarmed doesnt make it unreasonable, despite what the media wants to parlay for ratings. I have seen examples of both in this last year that have been sensationalized in the media. The problem I have is how disingenuous the narrative is.
The hardest part about all of this is having a conversation that resembles sensible discourse. That is almost impossible given how entrenched people have become, on both sides, largely around what they see politicized. Youve got people on the left that want to horribly distort the history of this country and what these rights mean for the citizen with their incredibly warped view of the concept of the bill of rights. Combine that with extreme naivety, and you have a recipe for victimization. Youve got people on the right saying that "by gaw-damnit, ISS MAH RAAAGHT TUH HAS UH DA GAWN JAVELIN MISSILE LAUNCHER!." Its ridiculous. Sensible regulation does not equate to infringement.
In my opinion, any citizen should be permitted the arms allowed to their locals police force. Im tired of hearing police refer to citizens as "civilians". Police forget that they too, are civilians.
That's my $.02
Last edited:
jeep-N-montero
Expedition Leader
Really, is that the best you can come up with?? Did you even read AND COMPREHEND the points made in this thread?
jeep-N-montero
Expedition Leader
What a great way of deflecting any responsibility for a thoughtful response onto someone else, after 30 pages you are yet to actually add credible and quantifiable data to support your position in the matter, while many others have presented plenty to support their positions.
And since you asked for honesty, you will not be among those who survive when the government you put so much faith in falls to pieces and this country cannot support all of those who cannot defend or provide for their families due to lack of preparation.
jeep-N-montero
Expedition Leader
Scroll back a few pages and you will see that gun-related shootings are a lesser percentage when compared to even hammer-related violence, but yet you almost never hear of someone being killed by a hammer in a domestic violence dispute, why do you think that is? Perhaps it's all about agenda/propaganda with intent to mislead uneducated voters. While myself and many others have never had to use a weapon in self-defense, it is nice knowing I can if a situation requires deadly force. And while I agree we need to do more to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them, it is difficult to do so without infringing upon the rights of those who are legal and competent owners.
Christophe Noel
Expedition Leader
Some people, and I'm just going to jump in and say those like you, don't realize that the very sentence above is what many of us, whom you assume are "anti-gun," are hoping we can achieve. For the vast majority of people you elect to diametrically oppose, the end game is not to remove your ability to defend yourself. It is to address that issue of doing more to, just as you said: keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them.
That doesn't make you, me, or the tree out back, anymore or less ant-gun than the next guy.
If I analyze the opinions of those who are technically on the opposite end of my position, I can see a host of sound arguments or common ground. Many of us on both sides feel that societal elements in America simply make it a very violent place. Lack of mental healthcare, or means to thrive socially and financially, bring many people to the brink of violence. Within that context, not better understanding who we're giving guns to is just - a bad idea.
This problem is a many-headed hydra. At the root of it is the nexus when a good guy crosses the line and becomes a bad guy. For many, that's just as easy as checking "no" boxes on the Form 4473 knowing the means to fully complete the background checks may not exist. It could be as easy as a good guy becoming complicit with a bad guy with the private sale of a gun, one with no background checks at all. We make the transition from good guy to bad guy, a short trip.
It's also difficult to conceptualize how pairing an already violent society with even more guns with fewer regulations could be anything other than a recipe for more violence. A lot of this is really just common sense.
I can tell you this much. A resolution that benefits everyone will not be found on the far fringes. Those strongly entrenched in their extreme positions - will lose. The middle ground, where compromise thrives, is where the reasonable and effective solution will be found. As the old saying goes, when you reach to grab across the whole table, you risk losing the entire arm.
jeep-N-montero
Expedition Leader
There are no easy answers as evidenced by this thread, I myself am much more into hunting and fishing than the tactical weapon crowd but will defend my home as needed, owning dogs helps a bit as well. Having grown up with guns in our home, attended hunter safety when I was 10 or 11, then spent 5 years in the Army I can say that guns do not scare me. And while I have been around a few folks who somehow legally possess firearms that I would prefer to never be around again, the majority of folks who carry do so maturely and confidently/discreetly. So we can all agree that it is the user and not the firearm that is usually to blame, if you can educate the user then you can limit many of the dangers.
As a side note, if you want to be entertained, go watch some of the tactical wannabe videos on youtube.
- Status