| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
John Graeme
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:34 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
 |
|
On Jun 27, 10:47 am, Nick...@Click.com wrote:
| Quote: |
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:11:30 -0700 (PDT),John Graeme
jdgra...@my-deja.com> wrote:
On Jun 26, 2:01 pm, b...@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:55:44 -0400, "leonard7...@primus.ca"
Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights
Yea, a lousy 5-4 decision from people who are supposed
to be experts on "original intent". Shoulda been 9-0.
Maybe "W" will have the opportunity to get one more
'liberal' outta there before January .....
Souter especially has been a real disappointment. He's clearly not
been a friend of individual rights.
The p oint is that YOU considered the USSC worthless as
to what "rights" were---until you got a majority of
worthless "Federalist society" idiots to agree with you
Either the USSC is worthless, or it is not.
Hypocrisy seem a comfortable mantle to you.
|
Illogical thinking seems a comfortable mode to you. Things are not so
black and white as you imply. The Supreme Court sometimes gets it
right, often gets it wrong. Are we supposed to ignore all the
infringements on our rights because some rights are still upheld? For
example, should we ignore the fact that the Feds still use the
commerce clause to put people in prison for what they put into their
own bodies--and in the process waste billions of our tax dollars in
their "war on drugs"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
John Graeme
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:39 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
On Jun 27, 10:42 am, Nick...@Click.com wrote:
| Quote: |
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:57:15 -0700 (PDT),John Graeme
jdgra...@my-deja.com> wrote:
On Jun 26, 8:33 pm, Nick...@Click.com wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:46:34 -0400, "Topp@Work"
toppro...@comcast.net> wrote:
Funny though, crime in all those states went down....
No such thing
Crime went down in years where law enforcement was
funded properly.
Cops (generally) hate the idea of "more guns".
There is not one shred of hard evidence that the police have any
significant effect on crime.
Not true
Less cops mean more crime
|
Prove it. Or at least provide some evidence. I can cite several
studies by criminologists that found that the police have no
significant effect on crime.
Kansas City preventive patrol experiment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_City_preventive_patrol_experiment
The Kansas City preventive patrol experiment was a landmark
experiment...by the Kansas City Police Department. It was evaluated by
the Police Foundation. It was designed to test the assumption that the
presence (or potential presence) of police officers in marked cars
reduced the likelihood of a crime being committed.
Victim surveys, reported crime rates, arrest data, a survey of local
businesses, attitudinal surveys, and trained observers who monitored
police-citizen interaction were used to gather data.
Major findings
1. Citizens did not notice the difference when the frequency of
patrols was changed.
2. Increasing or decreasing the level of patrol had no significant
effect on resident and commercial burglaries, auto thefts, larcenies
involving auto accessories, robberies, or vandalism-crimes.
3. The rate at which crimes were reported did not differ
significantly across the experimental beats.
4. Citizen reported fear of crime was not affected by different
levels of patrol.
5. Citizen satisfaction with police did not vary.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Over 30 years of criminological research has shown that the ability
of police to influence crime is extremely limited. For example,
neither the number of police in a community nor the style of policing
appears related to the crime rate. In 1991, San Diego and Dallas had
about the same ratio of police to population, yet twice as many crimes
were reported in Dallas. Meanwhile, Cleveland and San Diego had
comparable crime rates even though Cleveland had twice as many police
officers per capita. And in 1992, the District of Columbia had both
the highest homicide rate and the most metropolitan police per square
foot of any city in the nation.
The most thorough study ever done, a 1981 analysis of police beats in
Newark, NJ, found that foot patrols had virtually no effect on crime
rates."
--Richard Moran, professor of criminology at Mount Holyoke College.
"Community Policing Strategies Do Little to Prevent Crime." In:
_Crime_ P. Winters, ed. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press, 1998.
"The New York Story: More Luck Than Policing." _Washington Post
National Weekly Edition_, Feb 17-23,1997.
A study of policing in Detroit from 1926 and 1977 found no
relationship between policing and crime rate (Ch 1)
--_What Works in Policing_ by David H. Bayley (Editor). New York:
Oxford University Press, 1998. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Morton Davis
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:40 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
"John Graeme" <jdgraeme@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:5e070887-578e-41cc-8096-d1f1deefcb6f@27g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: |
On Jun 26, 8:33 pm, Nick...@Click.com wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:46:34 -0400, "Topp@Work"
toppro...@comcast.net> wrote:
Funny though, crime in all those states went down....
No such thing
Crime went down in years where law enforcement was
funded properly.
Cops (generally) hate the idea of "more guns".
There is not one shred of hard evidence that the police have any
significant effect on crime. Indeed, several large studies (eg, the
Kansas City and Newark studies) found that the crime rate did not
change significantly with amount or type of policing.
|
In the real old days cops took the real bad guys down an alley and shot them
in the head. THAT did have a beneficial effect on crime. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Topp@Work
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:34 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
<Nicklas@Click.com> wrote in message
news:b9d864djs66p5jg2qcd9a0lhc447imqftc@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:46:34 -0400, "Topp@Work"
topprolmc@comcast.net> wrote:
Funny though, crime in all those states went down....
No such thing
|
Wrong...Try again....
| Quote: |
Crime went down in years where law enforcement was
funded properly.
|
Worng.....Cops have NO LEGAL OBLIGATION to protect you ...SCOTUS Ruled on
that too...
| Quote: |
Cops (generally) hate the idea of "more guns".
|
Wrong...
approx. 80% of LEO believe the citizen who is properly trained should have a
gun if they so choose...
After all, LEO's know that they don't solve crimes...they get the info from
the citizens... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Topp@Work
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:37 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
<Nicklas@Click.com> wrote in message
news:hcd8645u2ode1e0l20miuk7lafbmovv777@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:47:02 -0400, "Topp@Work"
topprolmc@comcast.net> wrote:
Nicklas@Click.com> wrote in message
news:der764toucc0pbc6s5gng31qd1u6chlu8q@4ax.com...
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:48:36 -0500, "LT"
craves9057@mypacks.net> wrote:
But the folks in DC, Chicago and other restricted cities are not out
of
the
woods. I would expect DC to impose very strict requirements, and a lot
of
red tape to be able to posses a gun.
So you're saying that some rationality still might
exist to counter gunloonery?
What do you find rational about disarming LAW ABIDING people to protect
themselves?
Because the stupidity of claiming that "more guns"
cause less crime is astoundingly juvenile
|
Example for you-
Criminal with ILLEGAL WEAPON (gun, knife...) walks down the street and sees
potential target...
Today, in DC, Chicago....He realizes thats an easy mark...
If the "Target" may be armed, the criminal will prolly not try to commit a
mugging, rape...
Is that simple enough for you?
| Quote: |
The idea of "individuals" enforcing laws or preventing
crimes, at best, is a puffed up anecdotal evidentiary
propaganda---and mostly the H ollyWood, John Wayne
version of society.
|
Hardly...A CCW stopped a bank robbery in Ohio just a week or two ago.
As a Citizen it is your DUTY to what you can, when you can...
| Quote: |
Now everyone can have one.
Now we can experience "shoot first", mentality of
anyone with a "criminal" mentality.
|
So far from the truth...you are really reaching.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Bob LeChevalier
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:52 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
"Felix D." <#1Chekist@OGPU.org> wrote:
| Quote: |
"B1ackwater" <bw@barrk.net> wrote in message
news:4863d914.27226046@news.east.earthlink.net...
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:55:44 -0400, "leonard78sp@primus.ca"
leonard78sp@primus.ca> wrote:
Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights
Yea, a lousy 5-4 decision from people who are supposed
to be experts on "original intent". Shoulda been 9-0.
Maybe "W" will have the opportunity to get one more
'liberal' outta there before January .....
From your lips to God's ears ... may it please be so.
|
The odds of any Bush nominee to the court submitted after this date
being confirmed by the Senate is somewhere between slim and fat.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
lojbab@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Sheldon
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:22 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
| Quote: |
Because the stupidity of claiming that "more guns"
cause less crime is astoundingly juvenile
|
Read your facts. In cities where open carry laws have been relaxed, gun
crimes have gone down. The bad guys know more and more people are carrying
guns and don't really want to take a chance as to whom they are targeting.
Remember, even if you take away "all" the guns, the bad guys will still have
them. Turned loose in an unarmed society the bad guys will rule.
| Quote: |
The idea of "individuals" enforcing laws or preventing
crimes, at best, is a puffed up anecdotal evidentiary
propaganda---and mostly the H ollyWood, John Wayne
version of society.
|
We all watch too much TV, but CC stats don't lie.
| Quote: |
The law in a high crime district was, at least, in part
mitigated by the strict gun laws.
|
DC's crime rate was totally out of proportion with their gun laws.
| Quote: |
Now we can experience "shoot first", mentality of
anyone with a "criminal" mentality.
Hasn't happened yet. And if you rely on 911 to take care of a situation |
with bad guys invading your home, they are going to find victims, not a
crime in progress. I used to live in DC and knew many cops there (worked
across the street from a police station). If you're not a vigilante cop,
and there are a lot of them, being a cop in DC is an easy job. You get a
911 call, arrive at the scene and call homicide to make a report on the
murders. When you really think about it, 911 is plan B. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:42 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:57:15 -0700 (PDT), John Graeme
<jdgraeme@my-deja.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 26, 8:33 pm, Nick...@Click.com wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:46:34 -0400, "Topp@Work"
toppro...@comcast.net> wrote:
Funny though, crime in all those states went down....
No such thing
Crime went down in years where law enforcement was
funded properly.
Cops (generally) hate the idea of "more guns".
There is not one shred of hard evidence that the police have any
significant effect on crime.
|
Not true
Less cops mean more crime |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:44 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:34:34 -0400, "Topp@Work"
<topprolmc@comcast.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
Worng.....Cops have NO LEGAL OBLIGATION to protect you ...SCOTUS Ruled on
that too...
|
That's nonsense. What USSC ruling was that?
| Quote: |
Cops (generally) hate the idea of "more guns".
Wrong...
|
The parade of Police Chiefs seem to disagree with you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:44 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:37:19 -0400, "Topp@Work"
<topprolmc@comcast.net> wrote:
anecdotal "evidence" is unarguably worthless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:45 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 22:23:16 -0500, "David Moffitt"
<dmoffitt@stomping-leftist-twits.org> wrote:
| Quote: |
|
| Eventuall, Americans cannot survive with murderous
| mentality promoted by the Nazi
Godwin's Law: prov.
“As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison
involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.”
|
Just describing conservative mentality, Stupid
Sure a shit wasn't a "liberal" who fomented war in
Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Scout
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:46 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
<Nicklas@Click.com> wrote in message
news:l1v964hv4juqs7i0oc4pj13giot53c0g1q@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:57:15 -0700 (PDT), John Graeme
jdgraeme@my-deja.com> wrote:
On Jun 26, 8:33 pm, Nick...@Click.com wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:46:34 -0400, "Topp@Work"
toppro...@comcast.net> wrote:
Funny though, crime in all those states went down....
No such thing
Crime went down in years where law enforcement was
funded properly.
Cops (generally) hate the idea of "more guns".
There is not one shred of hard evidence that the police have any
significant effect on crime.
Not true
Less cops mean more crime
|
No, better courts and jails mean less crime. If you keep releasing the
criminals back to the streets then all the police on the planet aren't going
to control your crime. MEANINGFUL enforcement will do more than cops to
reduce crime. Look at Richmond and Project Exile. It was meaningful
enforcement and actually keeping criminals in jail that lowered crime rates
significantly. I've never seen where increasing the number of officers has
ever reduced crime rates as long as the courts and jails keep releasing
them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:47 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:11:30 -0700 (PDT), John Graeme
<jdgraeme@my-deja.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 26, 2:01 pm, b...@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:55:44 -0400, "leonard7...@primus.ca"
leonard7...@primus.ca> wrote:
Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights
Yea, a lousy 5-4 decision from people who are supposed
to be experts on "original intent". Shoulda been 9-0.
Maybe "W" will have the opportunity to get one more
'liberal' outta there before January .....
Souter especially has been a real disappointment. He's clearly not
been a friend of individual rights.
|
The p oint is that YOU considered the USSC worthless as
to what "rights" were---until you got a majority of
worthless "Federalist society" idiots to agree with you
Either the USSC is worthless, or it is not.
Hypocrisy seem a comfortable mantle to you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Scout
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:04 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
<Nicklas@Click.com> wrote in message
news:f9v964ls7buhvcfr23497ppulgu2uf1adr@4ax.com...
| Quote: |
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:11:30 -0700 (PDT), John Graeme
jdgraeme@my-deja.com> wrote:
On Jun 26, 2:01 pm, b...@barrk.net (B1ackwater) wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:55:44 -0400, "leonard7...@primus.ca"
leonard7...@primus.ca> wrote:
Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights
Yea, a lousy 5-4 decision from people who are supposed
to be experts on "original intent". Shoulda been 9-0.
Maybe "W" will have the opportunity to get one more
'liberal' outta there before January .....
Souter especially has been a real disappointment. He's clearly not
been a friend of individual rights.
The p oint is that YOU considered the USSC worthless as
to what "rights" were---until you got a majority of
worthless "Federalist society" idiots to agree with you
Either the USSC is worthless, or it is not.
|
Sorry, but such dichotomy is normally untrue. Like all things there are an
infinite number of shades of grey between your black and white world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
RD (The Sandman)
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:01 pm Post subject: Re: Justices Rule for Individual Gun Rights |
|
|
Nicklas@Click.com wrote in news:l4v964lsdin8b00pjv9dvvuq47sn5i11g3@
4ax.com:
| Quote: |
On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:34:34 -0400, "Topp@Work"
topprolmc@comcast.net> wrote:
Worng.....Cops have NO LEGAL OBLIGATION to protect you ...SCOTUS Ruled
on
that too...
That's nonsense. What USSC ruling was that?
|
There is a whole string of them. Most folks really don't understand just
what that statement means. It really means that the police have no onus
to protect Nicklas@Click.com specifically against crime or injury. They
have an assignment to protect society as a whole. If in doing that, they
also protect you so be it. However, you cannot sue them if they fail to
respond to your 911 call.
| Quote: |
Cops (generally) hate the idea of "more guns".
Wrong...
The parade of Police Chiefs seem to disagree with you.
|
Try this survey:
http://www.aphf.org/surveyresults.pdf
--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsandman
"Idealism increases in direct proportion to one's distance
from the problem." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
106 Attacks blocked
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
