Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 12

 

2006-05-26 12:56:10
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7077

Horseman 77 wrote:

The biggest Common denominator is the criminal.
Thats a little harder to address.
You have to build prisons.
So you have to raise taxes.
No one wants them built in their neighborhood.
Then the people who are in jail say they are being discriminated against. etc.

At the best it will accomplish nothing, at the worst it will make more criminals.

When they made smoking Marijuana illegal, People who smoked it became a new class of criminal.

mikkel wrote:

I noticed the complete lack of examples in your post, and figured that if you could just come in and say that you were right without backing it up, I'd be just as much entitled to it.
You can't read the above statement? I made several examples.

Horseman 77 wrote:

At the best it will accomplish nothing, at the worst it will make more criminals.

When they made smoking Marijuana illegal, People who smoked it became a new class of criminal.

mikkel wrote:

Criminalising knives might make for more harmless "criminals" in the short run,
Here you actually Say it will make more criminals. I only said "at the worst it will make more criminals."

mikkel wrote:

but I can assure you that it will make for much fewer violent criminals who actually commit the crimes that the law aims to lessen.
Please show me how you came to this conclusion. I see no argument for it in your posts.

You should have left it alone.
2006-05-26 13:03:55
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7077

[CANADA]_Zenmaster wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

[CANADA]_Zenmaster wrote:

In Canada, it is extremely rare to see or hear of anyone going out armed for "defense." I go out with just my clothes and my normal wallet, watch, necklace etc., I don't have to change anything. The only problem spots we have here are Edmonton and Toronto, where knife gangs have sprouted much like in Europe.

It seems these kinds of problems are related to population density, and as you get into a larger city, you get more and more problems. Well Canada has such a small pop, that most of our cities and towns don't have these kinds of problems. We do have a growing crystal-meth problem though in all cities and towns.

An interesting thing to note, is that 75% of all property crime in Oregon, a place very much like Canada, (I believe you guys call Oregon the Canada of California lol), anyway 75% of property crime (which is all crime except violent assault, rape etc.), is due to crystal-meth junkies trying to get enough cash for another fix. While this is not related to knife fighting or any of that shit, it is a scary statistic that Meth is taking over North America.
Some what off topic in places but good point.

I have not heard of meth being a big deal here. I still frequent NYC almost daily, but my experience with Drugs is Zero.
I don't really follow the population density thing as Manhattan is surely Dense yet very safe.
Nor is it strictly poverty related. Its more like Heavy drug area's. You usually have drug problems when you have poverty but not necessarily. Our Previous Mayor came down very hard on criminals and tried to totally eliminate parole for violent offenders. It did seem to do the Trick. Places that were WAR Zones 8 years ago are Very nice now. Just my personal experience.
Yea but here you are talking about prevention and enforcement and its related effectiveness, which as you say in Manhattan is working - I know nothing about it. Remove that prevention and enforcement, and see what happens though.
Exactly, they tried the fluffy feel good stuff,

like making it a "Special extra super crime " to carry a gun near a school !
as if some one who would commit murder would even care that  he was violating some lesser law.
When it gets really bad they have to let the fantasy stuff slide. When it got really bad NYC said " we got to get a conservative in here " enter Rudy Guliani.

Last edited by Horseman 77 (2006-05-26 13:08:14)

2006-05-26 13:23:23
mikkel
Member
+383|6841

Horseman 77 wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

The biggest Common denominator is the criminal.
Thats a little harder to address.
You have to build prisons.
So you have to raise taxes.
No one wants them built in their neighborhood.
Then the people who are in jail say they are being discriminated against. etc.

At the best it will accomplish nothing, at the worst it will make more criminals.

When they made smoking Marijuana illegal, People who smoked it became a new class of criminal.

mikkel wrote:

I noticed the complete lack of examples in your post, and figured that if you could just come in and say that you were right without backing it up, I'd be just as much entitled to it.
You can't read the above statement? I made several examples.
Those aren't examples. That's you telling me how things work in your head.

Horseman 77 wrote:

Horseman 77 wrote:

At the best it will accomplish nothing, at the worst it will make more criminals.

When they made smoking Marijuana illegal, People who smoked it became a new class of criminal.

mikkel wrote:

Criminalising knives might make for more harmless "criminals" in the short run,
Here you actually Say it will make more criminals. I only said "at the worst it will make more criminals."
You also said "at best it will accomplish nothing", and I do believe that lowering the number of violent crimes is better than "nothing".

Horseman 77 wrote:

mikkel wrote:

but I can assure you that it will make for much fewer violent criminals who actually commit the crimes that the law aims to lessen.
Please show me how you came to this conclusion. I see no argument for it in your posts.

You should have left it alone.
Heh, I think you're the one who should have left it alone.

I came to that conclusion by looking at the basis of all laws. Laws exist to prevent things from happening, and if every single government in the entire history of mankind doing it isn't argument enough in itself, I don't think the term "big-headed" covers exactly how highly you think of yourself.

Last edited by mikkel (2006-05-26 13:25:29)

2006-05-26 13:42:24
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7077
This has become Circular, Cancel the insults. Please as it doesn't further your point.

Here I list the things that happen when you aggressively fight crime and make arrests and some fairly obvious observations about crime

you say are " only in my head "

1.The biggest Common denominator is the criminal. True or False ?

You have to build prisons. True or False ?

So you have to raise taxes. True or False ?

No one wants them  ( prisons ) built in their neighborhood. True or False ?

Then the people who are in jail say they are being discriminated against. etc.  True or False ?

When they made smoking Marijuana illegal, People who smoked it became a new class of criminal.
True or False ?

address this separately

" At the best it will accomplish nothing " Example .

Will a Dangerous demented or Criminal type turn in a weapon because it is a crime to carry one?

Yes or No? please be honest!

" at the worst it will make more criminals" You already acknowledged this.

I dislike people who cast about unwarranted insults, I made that clear but I never said or even implied I was Superior to you, you came to this conclusion by yourself. I believe I have yet to insult you.

Last edited by Horseman 77 (2006-05-26 13:44:53)

2006-05-26 15:25:17
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6922|Canada

[CANADA]_Zenmaster wrote:

In Canada, it is extremely rare to see or hear of anyone going out armed for "defense." I go out with just my clothes and my normal wallet, watch, necklace etc., I don't have to change anything. The only problem spots we have here are Edmonton and Toronto, where knife gangs have sprouted much like in Europe.

It seems these kinds of problems are related to population density, and as you get into a larger city, you get more and more problems. Well Canada has such a small pop, that most of our cities and towns don't have these kinds of problems. We do have a growing crystal-meth problem though in all cities and towns.

An interesting thing to note, is that 75% of all property crime in Oregon, a place very much like Canada, (I believe you guys call Oregon the Canada of California lol), anyway 75% of property crime (which is all crime except violent assault, rape etc.), is due to crystal-meth junkies trying to get enough cash for another fix. While this is not related to knife fighting or any of that shit, it is a scary statistic that Meth is taking over North America and destroying families and people, meanwhile the hot topic of the day, is Fox News or CNN talking some bullshit out of their ass about Iraq, or the latest religious schpeel.

I highly suggest checking out the web for accurate information, over what you get on American news channels - most informed Americans actually watch CBC from Canada, and CBC is good but not infallible, and it doesn't cover everything that Americans are interested in. Anyway, I watch PBS Frontline online, Nova and 60 minutes when I can download episodes.

Check this one out about meth though, it was a bit sobering:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth/view/

Private warriors and the one on Rumsfeld was really good too. Theres tons more and I'm still making my way through them.
Zen, you must never have been to downtown east Van.  More shootings and AIDS per capita, hookers per block, killings per shooting, drunks per people, crackshacks per houses.  It's the poorest area in canada, and the worst for crime, outside similar parts of TO
2006-05-26 15:39:33
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6922|Canada
I believe that if you make weapons more expensive and make  more red tape, it will have to solve many problems.  There will always be rich weapon owners, but the difference is they generally don't find themselves in situations where they 'must' use a weapon, for whatever reason, mainly that they are rich and would be better off forgetting about it because they can.  Organized crime is not the problem in most cases.  People involved are VERY methodical, and don't let stupid bullshit dictate their actions.  It can be said that they will mind their own business.  They'd much rather be seen less anyway.  The real problem is EVERYDAY people like those on this forum that think they 'need' one more than the next guy, or because the next guy has one.  I don't mean to sound critical, but Gunslinger and Horseman, if you believed there was no reasonable threat to your lives, would you then carry?  Making weapons more expensive only breeds homemade weapons.  But in the likelihood of ACTUALLY encountering someone liable to USE a weapon, I'd rather it was a prison shank than a hunting blade.  Really, most of the time ONLY really desperate people actually use weapons.  It may be differet in places in the US where shootings and whatnot happen so regularly that the police simply can't find all of the criminals.  All the more reason to make them more expensive to thin out those weapon users most likely to USE a weapon.  Let's say everyone packed heat.  some because they want to use it, some for protection.  Upon raising prices, who will be the last gun owners?  The ones who still feel the need to protect themselves.  I can't say the same for the US, your 4th amendment is actually one of the things most hurtful to youtr own liberty.
2006-05-26 15:49:31
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6922|Canada

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

rh27 wrote:

For people who still think being allowed carrying guns to defend yourself in the street is a good idea, consider that most of the people who mug you at gun point could be using a perfectly legal weapon.
Consider that you can be shot just as dead with an illegal as with a legal weapon. Always consider that a mugger may be so violent as to shoot/stab you anyway, even if you do comply with every "request."

Tip: a pocketed hammerless .38 is a good way to "fish for your wallet."
consider that you are more violent than the mugger.  He's only likely to kill someone in anger if it's the last minute of his life.  Muggers have brains too and won't be SO stupid without a good reason.  He wants jail time like you want a cap in your ass.

Drunks are another matter.  But that's an alcohol problem, not a weapon problem.  Drunks will use anything.
Anyone in a club in Vancouver is another matter.  Go into these places if you enjoy a vibe of intolerance and the stench of hate hanging heavy in the air, heavier than the chaachy colognes.  These are the really dangerous people.  Drunken losers who have to hate just to feel proud, and ruin peoples lives without the slightest consideration for their OWN future.  THESE are the stupidest, most dangerous, and careless people in the world and putting guns in their hands means trouble for anyone.  What they need is a hug and a bedtime story they never got from mommy.  I bet if you look at all the murders, most of them are in some way related to trying to be impressive.  Not for defence, not for robbery.  For being fucking stupid.

All you gun toting fubu wearing cowards are in MY sights.  Listen to your music with its gun sound effects and everything.  I like music which includes some hip hop.  That does not include anything to do with guns.  All of you with guns tattoed to yourselves are dumb fucking pawns, and you should slap on a coke symbol or a chevy sign while you're at it for all it's worth.  For all you fucks too stupid to relate to anything other than that, go watch Friday and see what Ice Cube's (lol) dad says about USING YOUR FISTS

Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-05-26 16:02:31)

2006-05-26 15:58:43
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6884

Spumantiii wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

rh27 wrote:

For people who still think being allowed carrying guns to defend yourself in the street is a good idea, consider that most of the people who mug you at gun point could be using a perfectly legal weapon.
Consider that you can be shot just as dead with an illegal as with a legal weapon. Always consider that a mugger may be so violent as to shoot/stab you anyway, even if you do comply with every "request."

Tip: a pocketed hammerless .38 is a good way to "fish for your wallet."
consider that you are more violent than the mugger.  He's only likely to kill someone in anger if it's the last minute of his life.  Muggers have brains too and won't be SO stupid without a good reason.  He wants jail time like you want a cap in your ass.

Drunks are another matter.  But that's an alcohol problem, not a weapon problem.  Drunks will use anything.
the fact that he is breaking the law in the first place means that he is putting himself in a position for incarceration.  whats to stop him from keeping you from reporting the crime.  you cant possibly live in area with much crime, which is good, if you think that criminals are going to abide by certain set of rules

Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2006-05-26 15:59:08)

2006-05-26 16:04:41
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6922|Canada
but they do, and he'd just as likely escape before you alert the authorities.  I guess people here have slightly different conventions regarding hurting other people.

I used to know some dumb thugs.  Not your typical muggers mind you, but the last thing they wanted to do was have to use a weapon.  All they wanted was money.  They were good about being unpredictable, and never got caught
QED

You're right I'm glad I don't live in LA.  Flush it down, learn to swim -Tool

Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-05-26 16:08:33)

2006-05-26 16:04:42
DaZeD863
Member
+11|6791
why do you need to carry a knife anyway? there is no real practical reason for someone to carry them unless maybe they work some type of construction or in agriculture. unless of course it is to do harm.
2006-05-26 16:10:25
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6884

Spumantiii wrote:

but they do, and he'd just as likely escape before you alert the authorities.  I guess people here have slightly different conventions regarding hurting other people.

I used to know some dumb thugs.  Not your typical muggers mind you, but the last thing they wanted to do was have to use a weapon.  All they wanted was money.  They were good about being unpredictable, and never got caught
QED

You're right I'm glad I don't live in LA.  Flush it down, learn to swim -Tool
i used to know a lot of criminals and getting money was secondary to the amount of power they felt putting fear into someone.
2006-05-26 16:12:55
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6922|Canada
did they also have the conviction required to take life and the consequences it would have on the rest of their lives, or were they only thinking in the moment?  Intimidation is only good when it works, then what, did the start shooting?

Did they use their weapons?
It's like a bluff in poker only it's wih a human life, causing fear is easy.  Killing someone, I would hope, is not.

Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-05-26 16:15:20)

2006-05-26 16:16:47
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6884
a lot of them have and are doing various prison terms
2006-05-26 16:19:38
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6922|Canada
you must then agree that
criminals will be caught, and that weapons on the streets are  needlessly dangerous?
I'd be more scared carrying a weapon just thinking about possible confrontations than if I were simply going about my business

Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-05-26 16:20:52)

2006-05-26 16:33:45
GunSlinger OIF II
Banned.
+1,860|6884
so you are willing to be that victim that gets killed or disabled so that criminal will learn his lesson to not break the law?
2006-05-26 16:44:34
LT.Victim
Member
+1,175|6803|British Columbia, Canada

Bubbalo wrote:

And you don't think that maybe combatting criminal culture could have prevented anything?  Britain and Australia both have less violent incidents than the US, and both have far stricter gun laws.  Explain that.
Canada has more Guns per capita then the US, and we dont have neary as many incidents then the US, explain that?
2006-05-26 16:45:39
Horseman 77
Banned
+160|7077

Spumantiii wrote:

I believe that if you make weapons more expensive and make  more red tape, it will have to solve many problems.
This has never happened in any case. In fact research shows the opposite always occurs.

Spumantiii wrote:

There will always be rich weapon owners, but the difference is they generally don't find themselves in situations where they 'must' use a weapon, for whatever reason, mainly that they are rich and would be better off forgetting about it because they can.
If this means that most rules and problems don't really apply to the rich, I agree. So by making the Legal guns expensive you deny the less affluent the ability to protect them selves if they need to.

Spumantiii wrote:

Organized crime is not the problem in most cases.  People involved are VERY methodical, and don't let stupid bullshit dictate their actions.  It can be said that they will mind their own business.  They'd much rather be seen less anyway.
I agree. This is a fact. It is the Gang banger Street level criminals many of who use killings as a rite of passage or initiation.

Spumantiii wrote:

The real problem is EVERYDAY people like those on this forum that think they 'need' one more than the next guy, or because the next guy has one.
I disagree here. The average people who work, Vote and Pay taxes are the very fabric and backbone of our Nation and can be trusted to Serve their Country in its time of need and posses a firearm for any reason they see fit without any problem. This has been the case for over 200 years.

Spumantiii wrote:

I don't mean to sound critical, but Gunslinger and Horseman, if you believed there was no reasonable threat to your lives, would you then carry?
I don't carry now, It is however my decision Under the US Constitution and I feel it should remain so. That is my point.

Spumantiii wrote:

Making weapons more expensive only breeds homemade weapons.  But in the likelihood of ACTUALLY encountering someone liable to USE a weapon, I'd rather it was a prison shank than a hunting blade.  Really, most of the time ONLY really desperate people actually use weapons.  It may be differet in places in the US where shootings and whatnot happen so regularly that the police simply can't find all of the criminals.
Actually You mean making "Legal" Weapons more expensive and Doing so makes a black market and a new class of criminals and crime but doesn't drive up the price of illegal weapons.
It is also glaringly apparent that the people with the most disposable cash are the criminal Drug element who do most of the killing,

Spumantiii wrote:

All the more reason to make them more expensive to thin out those weapon users most likely to USE a weapon.
Making Legal weapons expensive does not make illegal weapons more expensive nor does it make them harder to get. Just as making drugs illegal has not lessened there availability here.

Spumantiii wrote:

Let's say everyone packed heat.  some because they want to use it, some for protection.  Upon raising prices, who will be the last gun owners?
The only places where everyone does " Pack Heat " are actually very safe crime free areas, I don't think that was your point though.

Spumantiii wrote:

The ones who still feel the need to protect themselves.  I can't say the same for the US, your 4th amendment is actually one of the things most hurtful to youtr own liberty.
I believe you mean the Second amendment, and I think you meant to say it is a threat to our safety, Hundreds of Studies show us otherwise.
It is the very cornerstone of our liberty and its attempted infringement actually sparked our Nations birth.
2006-05-26 16:48:41
Sgt.Davi
Touches Himself At Night.
+300|6883|England
For all of you Yanks that say we are tools cuz we are cracking down on knife crime can go fuck yourself. Tahadar was right about those videos, they were sickening. Kids in Britain are buying stab vests just to protect themselves. Hell, I go to private school but our 'lesser' (*cough dumber*) students carry knifes. I was walking behind a gang of them and one of thier knifes fell out their back pockets. He turned around and saw me looking at the blade and looked like he was gonna shove me against the wall and stab me till I bleed gravy. Luckily I got off with a push, a threat and angry looks in the corridor. I would tell a teacher but thier helpless too. The fucking government hasn't got a clue (Labour out, Tories in pls) All they have done is said: Put your knifes in a bin please, kthnxbi and gived a 2 year jail sentence if you are caught in possession. Now that may sound harsh but woth the yob culture we have in Britain today, there will still be knife crime.

going back to teachers, school staff having been given permission to search students. What the fucks that gonna do? Teacher finds a knife, student stabs teacher and legs it.

Some of you have said, people kill others when they are bored and wanna look cool. With yob culture, nothing makes you look cooler than having a knife. Stabbing someone is considered an amazing feat! Not to mention the incredible levels of Racial Hate. It sickens me to have our local Indian restauranteers bullied by the local yobs. They smoke weed and take God knows what behind the restaurant and when he comes out to tell em to piss off, they prolly threaten him with a knife.


Now as for sorting it out, the sentence for possession should be 4 years, 6 if you intend to use it and 10 if you attempt murder (Life if you are successful) Then, install metal detectors at the entrances of schools. Finally, ASBOs handed out for Racism. Persistant racism is disgusting and an ASBO away from the premisis of the bullied person is required. If you think having a knife is cool, then you're stupid. If yo ucarry a knife for protection, don't go into areas where you will need protection........

[/rant]
2006-05-26 16:50:50
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6922|Canada
It has worked pretty well making weapons more expensive here in canada.

Rather than taking away the right to protect themselves, they simply must look to other methods of self defence.  Since wealthy communities are some that have high gun ownership, it proves rich people are less likely to use their weapons for fear of losing material wealth or getting a record.

The price of legal weapons directly corresponds to the price of illegal weaopns.  Where do the black markets get their guns?  Mexico?   Where did they get them?  The US.  lol.

I believe in rights.  BUT if it were my right to kill someone I still wouldn't.

I firmly believe that amendment was for the benefit of American people at one point in history, but look at the problems it causes today?
PS the USA is the only country that hasn't changed it's constitution (for 100+ years) to reflect modern life.

I'm sorry but I just can't find those studies credible.  Cigarette companies also produce studies that prove smoking cannot cause cancer.

It was the very cornerstone of your liberty and its attempted infringement actually sparked your Nations birth.
over 200 years ago.

If this amendment was ever 'amended' (lol) then the whole legal/illegal weapon schism would not exist, since there would be far less weapons all over the world.

Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-05-26 17:05:27)

2006-05-26 16:54:19
yerded
Bertinator
+255|6877|Westminster, California
The more outrageous a governments behavior the more likely it is to want to disarm a population. It comes as a complete surprise that  free people tolerate weapons bans as such things throughout history have always precluded a slaughter either by the government itself or outside invaders.
     In light of the outrageous lack of a border we have it should come as no shock that gun laws are harsh in California;  if the people could put up a fair fight there would be civil war right now.
     I'm starting to wonder if there shouldn't be one.

Last edited by yerded (2006-05-26 16:55:41)

2006-05-26 16:59:02
RicardoBlanco
The English
+177|6808|Oxford
I'd hate to think how many people are killed in accidents with guns, for that reason alone they should be banned for most people. All the crap about the constitution is so lame, the only reason people like guns is because they are cool and they can blow shit out of animals. Theres nothing wrong with that but guns in america are too easy to get hold of, the government should only allow RESPONSIBLE people to own firearms. Let us not forget how dangerous guns are, one slip and its game over.
2006-05-26 17:09:31
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6922|Canada
I bet, according to stats, that I will look into, that MORE Americans have been killed by themselves or friendly fire, or property trespassing misunderstandings, than by murders, perhaps even wars in the 20th century.  This wouldn't speak well for an amendment that defends a people's safety.

Americans kill more Americans than anyone else kills anyone else.


EDIT
pffft is Dick Cheney enough of an example for you?

Last edited by Spumantiii (2006-05-26 17:13:38)

2006-05-26 17:17:24
Spumantiii
pistolero
+147|6922|Canada

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

would you really risk being unarmed and at the mercy of some doped up junky trying to get some money for his fix.  So he mugs, you, ok.  So now he has what he wants hes gonna let you go on your merry way to report the crime?  dont be naive.  whats that famous saying, appeasement only feeds the aggressors appetite or something like that.  I am not willing to put my life in the hands of a criminal just so I dont have to worry about the legal repurcussions.  Goddamnit you only get one life in this world and Ill be damned if Im gonna be at the mercy of a mugger.
As much as I agree with what you're saying, If I'm gonna go out, I'd rather it be an example for others rather than a stupid case of violence begets violence.  Just like the forefathers of your country, I'd gladly take a bullet if it meant a safer world for others.
2006-05-26 17:32:25
yerded
Bertinator
+255|6877|Westminster, California

RicardoBlanco wrote:

I'd hate to think how many people are killed in accidents with guns, for that reason alone they should be banned for most people. All the crap about the constitution is so lame, the only reason people like guns is because they are cool and they can blow shit out of animals. Theres nothing wrong with that but guns in america are too easy to get hold of, the government should only allow RESPONSIBLE people to own firearms. Let us not forget how dangerous guns are, one slip and its game over.
Think about this:

a. The number of physicians in the US is 700,000.
b. Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year is 120,000.
c. Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171. (US Dept. of Health & Human Services)

Then think about this:

a. The number of gun owners in the US is 80,000,000.
b. The number of accidental gun deaths per year (all age groups) is 1,500.
c. The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is .0000188.

Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.

FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.

Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets out of hand. As a public health measure I have withheld the statistics on lawyers for fear that the shock could cause people to seek medical attention.
2006-05-26 21:37:08
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6801
yerded: Poor example, when people go to doctors they are already unwell.  Most people are pretty healthy when the get shot.

Can anyone comment on the veracity of this website?

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 12

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard