|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/12/2013 09:35:13 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by Cory:
I think the fact that they owners are generally responsible, and wealthy (more wealthy than responsible in truth), probably account for this much better. |
As I said, ownership has been highly restricted since the Prhibition era.
Originally posted by Cory:
I do agree that we are again in a prohibition state, and that you are COMPLETELY right that the real source of the trouble is overzealous restrictions on freedoms. What baffles the snot outta me is that you realize that, yet you still wish to ban guns (starting with the least dangerous possible variety), and that you would support a measure which is yet another prohibition (on weapons, but it's not entirely different from other prohibitions).. |
I'm not really for banning so much as more effective registration and restrictions, so that as best as possible only "responsible" people get to have guns, and we have the means to hold them accountable if that estimation proves wrong. It's a lot what we try to do with those lethal autos you keep referencing, and why deliberate homicides rates by auto are almost certainly lower than those by fully-licensed guns, recent incident in Santa Monica notwithstanding. |
|
|
|
08/12/2013 09:43:15 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Cory:
I think the fact that they owners are generally responsible, and wealthy (more wealthy than responsible in truth), probably account for this much better. |
As I said, ownership has been highly restricted since the Prhibition era.
Originally posted by Cory:
I do agree that we are again in a prohibition state, and that you are COMPLETELY right that the real source of the trouble is overzealous restrictions on freedoms. What baffles the snot outta me is that you realize that, yet you still wish to ban guns (starting with the least dangerous possible variety), and that you would support a measure which is yet another prohibition (on weapons, but it's not entirely different from other prohibitions).. |
I'm not really for banning so much as more effective registration and restrictions, so that as best as possible only "responsible" people get to have guns, and we have the means to hold them accountable if that estimation proves wrong. It's a lot what we try to do with those lethal autos you keep referencing, and why deliberate homicides rates by auto are almost certainly lower than those by fully-licensed guns, recent incident in Santa Monica notwithstanding. |
I'm not sure how I feel about not allowing the poor to own weapons. On one hand, it's something that goes against a variety of American values - on the other hand, the poor really do account for a disproportionate number of crimes.
Maybe if we banned poverty instead. ;) (a joke, but it would work if we could eliminate poverty)..
To be fair, it's a lot harder to keep a stolen car hidden, while still being able to use it. :)
I don't know if I like the idea of only the wealthy(ish) owning guns. But it would work - the problem really is often those who have nothing to lose, or feel that they have nothing to lose, so this would work well.
We just have to ask ourselves if we want to go down that road. And of course, there's the slippery slope argument, which you can equate to cars, but it doesn't work, since the government doesn't seem to feel threatened by citizens owning cars, in fact, it's really highly encouraged for a variety of reasons.
|
|
|
|
08/12/2013 11:46:41 PM · #78 |
By the way - back on topic before we go to /rant.
There was a new post on LiveLeak, that really really speaks to my previous post - I just want to share this - it's pretty amazing, and totally supports my position here.
Just have a watch of this video - how illustrative is that?
Originally posted by Leo:
Originally posted by Cory:
Ok, I went and watched it. Guy was totally cool, and within his rights.
More people need to do this to the police. And in fact, more people ARE doing this to the police. Good for them, and GREAT on them for sharing. It's one thing to hear that you have these rights, but most people fold under the pressure of authority. The cops were wrong, but sounded authoritatively right. That's enough to get most people to do whatever you wish. Frankly, videos like this help people to see that if you DO actually stand up for yourself, then the police will eventually back off. I do think the guy made a small error in telling them which vehicle was his - he didn't have to answer that question either.
In the end, the police weren't overreacting, they were doing what they've been trained to do. The problem is that their training is in direct conflict with citizen's rights. They are taught to circumvent the law at every opportunity, and to bully suspects/citizens and are often either mistaken about what they are saying, or are outright lying. Neither inspires great confidence not speaks of true integrity.
Like it or not, the police have been trained to overreact to every situation... They wanted to talk to a guy with a gun, so they called four units and a helicopter. I think it's amazingly clear that this is an overreaction - but I don't blame the officers, I blame those folks who are training these officers, and those who are training the trainers. The US police culture is rotten - the men are almost universally good men, but the organization demands they act like thugs. A shame really, and there have been several recent threads on the subject. |
Always good to know we can rely on your expertise and knowledge in how the US police operate... |
Message edited by author 2013-08-12 23:48:32. |
|
|
|
08/12/2013 11:48:57 PM · #79 |
If you read some history, you will learn that guns are human-killing machines. The only other type of gun is the animal-killing machine, developed much later.
You can, if you like, use your human-killing machine for self-defense, target practice, a paperweight. You can also use your clock as a paperweight. It will still tell the time.
Of course, these arguments cycle round endlessly. I walk away for a few hours and already I see it cycling and cycling too many times to read.
One of the interesting differences I notice is that Cory and Cowboy visualize rural situations, and I visualize urban situations. An urban cop is walking among citizens, alert to any trouble that might start. The last thing he wants is all these citizens around him to have guns. Conservatives don't seem to understand that people don't come with labels that say good-guy and bad-guy. They're just people. They all have lizard minds, medulla oblongatas, mores, scruples, neuroses, good days, and bad days. I'm open to different gun laws in rural environments. But keep the rural mindset out of cities. It doesn't work.
"Us vs. them" doesn't work in cities, either. Too many thems. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:39:02 AM · #80 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
If you read some history, you will learn that guns are human-killing machines. The only other type of gun is the animal-killing machine, developed much later.
You can, if you like, use your human-killing machine for self-defense, target practice, a paperweight. You can also use your clock as a paperweight. It will still tell the time.
Of course, these arguments cycle round endlessly. I walk away for a few hours and already I see it cycling and cycling too many times to read.
One of the interesting differences I notice is that Cory and Cowboy visualize rural situations, and I visualize urban situations. An urban cop is walking among citizens, alert to any trouble that might start. The last thing he wants is all these citizens around him to have guns. Conservatives don't seem to understand that people don't come with labels that say good-guy and bad-guy. They're just people. They all have lizard minds, medulla oblongatas, mores, scruples, neuroses, good days, and bad days. I'm open to different gun laws in rural environments. But keep the rural mindset out of cities. It doesn't work.
"Us vs. them" doesn't work in cities, either. Too many thems. |
Negating all that came before - just one question comes to mind: Do you propose that self-defense is a non-valid reason for gun ownership? I ask this because I can totally follow your logic, and it is perfectly fine and sound, as long as one comes into it with a base assumption that humans are never a valid target under any circumstance.
-
There is also a major flaw in your logic that gun bans will improve something.
I lived in DC in 2001, I know how bad it was there. They lifted the gun ban, and magically gun crimes dropped. NY still has a gun ban, and they haven't seen a drop in gun crime.
The excuse of course is that guns flow in from other areas. So, unless you support banning guns everywhere, there's no benefit (and possibly a detriment) to banning firearms selectively within cities.
Honestly, look some of these things up, I'd post links, but it's better for you to go look at a variety of sources - but the fact remains that the bans did not reduce gun crime in DC or in NY, yet lifting the gun ban in DC did reduce gun crime. I think the trend is clear.
Message edited by author 2013-08-13 02:00:06. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:40:35 AM · #81 |
Did anyone actually watch that?
Pretty amazing stuff I think. Just a bit shocking, even by my standards. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 01:42:07 AM · #82 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
If you read some history, you will learn that guns are human-killing machines. The only other type of gun is the animal-killing machine, developed much later.
You can, if you like, use your human-killing machine for self-defense, target practice, a paperweight. You can also use your clock as a paperweight. It will still tell the time.
Of course, these arguments cycle round endlessly. I walk away for a few hours and already I see it cycling and cycling too many times to read.
One of the interesting differences I notice is that Cory and Cowboy visualize rural situations, and I visualize urban situations. An urban cop is walking among citizens, alert to any trouble that might start. The last thing he wants is all these citizens around him to have guns. Conservatives don't seem to understand that people don't come with labels that say good-guy and bad-guy. They're just people. They all have lizard minds, medulla oblongatas, mores, scruples, neuroses, good days, and bad days. I'm open to different gun laws in rural environments. But keep the rural mindset out of cities. It doesn't work.
"Us vs. them" doesn't work in cities, either. Too many thems. |
You can easily substitute a car, it makes an excellent "human killing machine". You don't even need a "machine", a baseball bat, axe handle, pipe, crowbar, hammer, chef's knife all make great human killing machines.
Maybe the urban cops in your city are walking among the citizens eyes peeled, alert for trouble, 24/7/365...one on every corner. I highly doubt it, but it's possible.
Detroit's finest are an hour away even in the most dire situations...maybe Detroit's not "urban" to you...I dunno. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 05:47:22 AM · #83 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Quit trying to say that guns are simply for killing. Guns are made for all kinds of purposes. |
What purpose do they have other than killing or practicing the skills needed to use them for killing? |
For starters, you can use them to shoot holes in doughnuts.
Not to mention the weight of all that metal turns them into a useful hammer (remember to remove the bullets first; their design unfortunately means you're highly likely to shoot yourself if you use one for something other than shooting) |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 08:24:21 AM · #84 |
The whole point of the video is to illustrate how the cops use bullying tactics to intimidate people into giving up their rights. You may think that you have nothing to hide, but your innocence may be called into question by something discovered during a search you consented to, but the police had no right to otherwise conduct. You think that the police are having a "friendly chat", they aren't, they're looking for ANY kind of opening, regardless of how it relates to whatever they're investigating, that will let them dig into your life fishing for more dirt. Remember Richard Jewell? His life was completely F'ed by the cops. Everyday, you read about people getting released who were wrongfully convicted on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence and have had their lives ruined, in some cases spending decades in jail. Don't help the cops make you that guy.
Even the cops will tell you "Never Talk To the Police" |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 10:48:00 AM · #85 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
You can easily substitute a car, it makes an excellent "human killing machine". You don't even need a "machine", a baseball bat, axe handle, pipe, crowbar, hammer, chef's knife all make great human killing machines. |
Cars are dangerous, and the U.S. regulates them better than they regulate guns, but they are not human killing machines, they are human moving machines. They were not specifically designed to kill people.
Cory, your arguments are individual, not relevant to legislation. The Government doesn't care about your self-defense, but rather public safety. Again, you are thinking "us vs. them" ... Them is outside and Us got a gun to protect from Them. This doesn't make sense to a government of all the people.
As to D.C. gun violence rates going down after a gun ban was lifted, please learn some basic things about how studies and science work. Correlation is not causation.
And round and round we go. I'm sure, as usual, the carousel will spin too fast for me to stay on. But if someone can actually move the discussion forward, I'll try to hang on. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 11:31:38 AM · #86 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Spork99:
You can easily substitute a car, it makes an excellent "human killing machine". You don't even need a "machine", a baseball bat, axe handle, pipe, crowbar, hammer, chef's knife all make great human killing machines. |
Cars are dangerous, and the U.S. regulates them better than they regulate guns, but they are not human killing machines, they are human moving machines. They were not specifically designed to kill people.
|
Guns aren't "human killing machines" either.
The only "human killing machine" I can think of is another human. Maybe the Terminator, but that's a movie, not reality. Maybe we should just outlaw people... |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:19:55 PM · #87 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Maybe we should just outlaw people... |
or poverty. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:29:19 PM · #88 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Guns aren't "human killing machines" either.
|
Notice that when I said cars aren't "human killing machines" I explained my statement. Notice that you are not explaining your statement.
Message edited by author 2013-08-13 12:29:27. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:35:16 PM · #89 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
The whole point of the video is to illustrate how the cops use bullying tactics to intimidate people into giving up their rights. You may think that you have nothing to hide, but your innocence may be called into question by something discovered during a search you consented to, but the police had no right to otherwise conduct. You think that the police are having a "friendly chat", they aren't, they're looking for ANY kind of opening, regardless of how it relates to whatever they're investigating, that will let them dig into your life fishing for more dirt. Remember Richard Jewell? His life was completely F'ed by the cops. Everyday, you read about people getting released who were wrongfully convicted on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence and have had their lives ruined, in some cases spending decades in jail. Don't help the cops make you that guy.
Even the cops will tell you "Never Talk To the Police" |
even the cops make reference to these videos being all the craze.
i'm trying to figure out how answering "i dont have to answer that" is a good answer to give to police when you've done nothing wrong, how is answering that question going to get teh video maker in trouble, unless taking photographs at 3am is a crime i dont know about. now if the person was dealing drugs and the cop asked the question, they wouldn't answer that question truthfully. The cops know that innocent people dont have anything to hide.
i realize the principle that is trying to be made but just like everything in life, use common sense. but if you want to make life difficult on yourself... by all means. my life is easier because folks like to give a hard time to police, customer service people, etc. im nice and cooperate and i usually get what I want and ask for because the world if full of dicks.
|
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:47:20 PM · #90 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
The whole point of the video is to illustrate how the cops use bullying tactics to intimidate people into giving up their rights. You may think that you have nothing to hide, but your innocence may be called into question by something discovered during a search you consented to, but the police had no right to otherwise conduct. You think that the police are having a "friendly chat", they aren't, they're looking for ANY kind of opening, regardless of how it relates to whatever they're investigating, that will let them dig into your life fishing for more dirt. Remember Richard Jewell? His life was completely F'ed by the cops. Everyday, you read about people getting released who were wrongfully convicted on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence and have had their lives ruined, in some cases spending decades in jail. Don't help the cops make you that guy.
Even the cops will tell you "Never Talk To the Police" |
I guess there's a difference between what the "point of the video" is and what a rational person might learn from watching the video: Some folks are so hell-bent on proving their rights through obnoxious methods that they completely lose the plot, pick idiotic battles to fight, and end up wasting not only their own time but the time and resources of civil servants, paid for by the rest of us.
There isn't much difference between what this guy is doing and a school child that holds his finger an inch from your face, proclaiming "I'm not touching you." He should be embarrassed.
In Germany there are serious fines for wasting public resources like this, and if it were in my community I'd join a civil suit to get this schmuck to pay back all the tax dollars spent on helicopter fuel. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:50:10 PM · #91 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Guns aren't "human killing machines" either.
|
Notice that when I said cars aren't "human killing machines" I explained my statement. Notice that you are not explaining your statement. |
You explained nothing. You simply noted that cars are dangerous, but since they provide utility to you, by moving people around (despite killing 30-40,000 people annually), they are OK. Was that your explanation?
Guns are dangerous too. They can provide a means of self-defense. They can provide a means to put meat on the table. Shooting sports of all kinds provide recreation for hundreds of thousands of people.
Nearly anything used irresponsibly or negligently can be used as a "human killing machine" by another human. Almost no machines are capable of killing maliciously on their own initiative, save the imaginary Terminator. I can agree to outlaw Terminators.
|
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:51:32 PM · #92 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
The whole point of the video is to illustrate how the cops use bullying tactics to intimidate people into giving up their rights. You may think that you have nothing to hide, but your innocence may be called into question by something discovered during a search you consented to, but the police had no right to otherwise conduct. You think that the police are having a "friendly chat", they aren't, they're looking for ANY kind of opening, regardless of how it relates to whatever they're investigating, that will let them dig into your life fishing for more dirt. Remember Richard Jewell? His life was completely F'ed by the cops. Everyday, you read about people getting released who were wrongfully convicted on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence and have had their lives ruined, in some cases spending decades in jail. Don't help the cops make you that guy.
Even the cops will tell you "Never Talk To the Police" |
LOL. Thanks for (re)posting that link - really... Everyone here should watch it, twice.
Of course, I think you're completely right. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:55:24 PM · #93 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
Originally posted by Spork99:
The whole point of the video is to illustrate how the cops use bullying tactics to intimidate people into giving up their rights. You may think that you have nothing to hide, but your innocence may be called into question by something discovered during a search you consented to, but the police had no right to otherwise conduct. You think that the police are having a "friendly chat", they aren't, they're looking for ANY kind of opening, regardless of how it relates to whatever they're investigating, that will let them dig into your life fishing for more dirt. Remember Richard Jewell? His life was completely F'ed by the cops. Everyday, you read about people getting released who were wrongfully convicted on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence and have had their lives ruined, in some cases spending decades in jail. Don't help the cops make you that guy.
Even the cops will tell you "Never Talk To the Police" |
I guess there's a difference between what the "point of the video" is and what a rational person might learn from watching the video: Some folks are so hell-bent on proving their rights through obnoxious methods that they completely lose the plot, pick idiotic battles to fight, and end up wasting not only their own time but the time and resources of civil servants, paid for by the rest of us.
There isn't much difference between what this guy is doing and a school child that holds his finger an inch from your face, proclaiming "I'm not touching you." He should be embarrassed.
In Germany there are serious fines for wasting public resources like this, and if it were in my community I'd join a civil suit to get this schmuck to pay back all the tax dollars spent on helicopter fuel. |
So, you'd support not only the over-response, but you'd bill the victim too?
That's an awesome revenue model - almost as good as Schlake's new trick of poking me with his camera, since I agreed to pay a dollar each time I touch it.. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:56:07 PM · #94 |
Originally posted by Mike:
Originally posted by Spork99:
The whole point of the video is to illustrate how the cops use bullying tactics to intimidate people into giving up their rights. You may think that you have nothing to hide, but your innocence may be called into question by something discovered during a search you consented to, but the police had no right to otherwise conduct. You think that the police are having a "friendly chat", they aren't, they're looking for ANY kind of opening, regardless of how it relates to whatever they're investigating, that will let them dig into your life fishing for more dirt. Remember Richard Jewell? His life was completely F'ed by the cops. Everyday, you read about people getting released who were wrongfully convicted on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence and have had their lives ruined, in some cases spending decades in jail. Don't help the cops make you that guy.
Even the cops will tell you "Never Talk To the Police" |
even the cops make reference to these videos being all the craze.
i'm trying to figure out how answering "i dont have to answer that" is a good answer to give to police when you've done nothing wrong, how is answering that question going to get teh video maker in trouble, unless taking photographs at 3am is a crime i dont know about. now if the person was dealing drugs and the cop asked the question, they wouldn't answer that question truthfully. The cops know that innocent people dont have anything to hide.
i realize the principle that is trying to be made but just like everything in life, use common sense. but if you want to make life difficult on yourself... by all means. my life is easier because folks like to give a hard time to police, customer service people, etc. im nice and cooperate and i usually get what I want and ask for because the world if full of dicks. |
Don't you think the people who HAVE been railroaded by the police were just like you? They wanted to help, they wanted to cooperate. That made them more suspect and they wound up in prison.
Some reward for helping out.
Message edited by author 2013-08-13 13:02:00. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:56:36 PM · #95 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by bohemka:
Originally posted by Spork99:
The whole point of the video is to illustrate how the cops use bullying tactics to intimidate people into giving up their rights. You may think that you have nothing to hide, but your innocence may be called into question by something discovered during a search you consented to, but the police had no right to otherwise conduct. You think that the police are having a "friendly chat", they aren't, they're looking for ANY kind of opening, regardless of how it relates to whatever they're investigating, that will let them dig into your life fishing for more dirt. Remember Richard Jewell? His life was completely F'ed by the cops. Everyday, you read about people getting released who were wrongfully convicted on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence and have had their lives ruined, in some cases spending decades in jail. Don't help the cops make you that guy.
Even the cops will tell you "Never Talk To the Police" |
I guess there's a difference between what the "point of the video" is and what a rational person might learn from watching the video: Some folks are so hell-bent on proving their rights through obnoxious methods that they completely lose the plot, pick idiotic battles to fight, and end up wasting not only their own time but the time and resources of civil servants, paid for by the rest of us.
There isn't much difference between what this guy is doing and a school child that holds his finger an inch from your face, proclaiming "I'm not touching you." He should be embarrassed.
In Germany there are serious fines for wasting public resources like this, and if it were in my community I'd join a civil suit to get this schmuck to pay back all the tax dollars spent on helicopter fuel. |
So, you'd support not only the over-response, but you'd bill the victim too?
That's an awesome revenue model - almost as good as Schlake's new trick of poking me with his camera, since I agreed to pay a dollar each time I touch it.. |
this guy isn't a victim, he is intentionally provoking the use of resources. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:57:43 PM · #96 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
You explained nothing. You simply noted that cars are dangerous, but since they provide utility to you, by moving people around (despite killing 30-40,000 people annually), they are OK. Was that your explanation? |
No, this was his explanation:
Originally posted by posthumous:
If you read some history, you will learn that guns are human-killing machines. The only other type of gun is the animal-killing machine, developed much later.
|
Comparing guns and cars is like comparing condoms and balloons. They can both accomplish the same thing, but one was invented and designed for that specific task. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:58:52 PM · #97 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
As to D.C. gun violence rates going down after a gun ban was lifted, please learn some basic things about how studies and science work. Correlation is not causation.
|
Ok, and what about New York? They haven't seen a decrease in the overall percentage of homicides by gun since passing bans. The overall murder rate has gone down, but it has gone down equally for all weapons (actually some more than firearms), indicating that the firearm ban in the city hasn't worked.
Also, while you were busy explaining how I didn't understand cause and effect, your distraction had the effect of causing you to completely miss my question regarding the conundrum of no guns in the city, while still having them be legal in the country - which, would almost certainly undermine any effort to remove illegal guns from the city - thereby ensuring that those who do not wish to follow the law will have a ready supply of new weapons. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 12:59:53 PM · #98 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Don't you think the people who HAVE been railroaded by the police were just like you? They wanted to help, they wanted to cooperate and they wound up in prison. Some reward, huh? As long as it doesn't happen to you, it's OK? |
if by the small chance it happens, so be it. i'm not going to start acting like an a-hole because i might end up in jail.
i just find it really hard to believe that someone could get thrown in jail for no reason at all and because they "cooperated" there is almost always an underlying cause. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 01:00:49 PM · #99 |
Originally posted by Mike:
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by bohemka:
Originally posted by Spork99:
The whole point of the video is to illustrate how the cops use bullying tactics to intimidate people into giving up their rights. You may think that you have nothing to hide, but your innocence may be called into question by something discovered during a search you consented to, but the police had no right to otherwise conduct. You think that the police are having a "friendly chat", they aren't, they're looking for ANY kind of opening, regardless of how it relates to whatever they're investigating, that will let them dig into your life fishing for more dirt. Remember Richard Jewell? His life was completely F'ed by the cops. Everyday, you read about people getting released who were wrongfully convicted on the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence and have had their lives ruined, in some cases spending decades in jail. Don't help the cops make you that guy.
Even the cops will tell you "Never Talk To the Police" |
I guess there's a difference between what the "point of the video" is and what a rational person might learn from watching the video: Some folks are so hell-bent on proving their rights through obnoxious methods that they completely lose the plot, pick idiotic battles to fight, and end up wasting not only their own time but the time and resources of civil servants, paid for by the rest of us.
There isn't much difference between what this guy is doing and a school child that holds his finger an inch from your face, proclaiming "I'm not touching you." He should be embarrassed.
In Germany there are serious fines for wasting public resources like this, and if it were in my community I'd join a civil suit to get this schmuck to pay back all the tax dollars spent on helicopter fuel. |
So, you'd support not only the over-response, but you'd bill the victim too?
That's an awesome revenue model - almost as good as Schlake's new trick of poking me with his camera, since I agreed to pay a dollar each time I touch it.. |
this guy isn't a victim, he is intentionally provoking the use of resources. |
So, legally walking around, while legally armed, is provoking the use of resources? Really? The guy did nothing illegal, and you want to bill him for an unnecessary, unreasonable, and overzealous police response?
Wow, please, please, please, never go into politics. |
|
|
|
08/13/2013 01:03:03 PM · #100 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by posthumous:
As to D.C. gun violence rates going down after a gun ban was lifted, please learn some basic things about how studies and science work. Correlation is not causation.
|
Ok, and what about New York? They haven't seen a decrease in the overall percentage of homicides by gun since passing bans. The overall murder rate has gone down, but it has gone down equally for all weapons (actually some more than firearms), indicating that the firearm ban in the city hasn't worked.
the gun ban itself wasn't solely the cuase, but a larger initiative, mainly stop and frisk and being allowed to jail a person for carrying the weapon. |
as an example, Philly has "stop and frisk" but the cops cant prosecute if the find a gun, they can only take it. that will get you locked up in NY and as a result the homicide rate is much higher in Philadelphia. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 11/03/2025 02:53:09 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 11/03/2025 02:53:09 PM EST.
|
