Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO
- 76,340
- 151,476
was there another correlation that i was supposed to take away from that chicago map?
please do tell.
Gun control
- Thread starter Saladus
- Start date
please do tell.
Ignatius
#thePewPewLife
- 4,658
- 6,211
Excidium
Trakanon Raider
- 840
- 1,295
Goatface
Avatar of War Slayer
- 9,375
- 14,474
well crap, you are correct, normally gun nazis would be all over a mistitled pic, it is a Smith & Wesson M&P15-22That's a .22
Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Correspondent / Stock Pals CEO
- 76,340
- 151,476
This, in combination with all the claptrap that gun control activists are trying to push right now [that they are not trying to take guns away] is beyond patronizing.
B_Mizzle
Golden Baronet of the Realm
- 7,181
- 13,913
Excidium
Trakanon Raider
- 840
- 1,295
No emotion and it sounds heavily rehearsed. She insists that the she is not mad at this man, but is mad at the government for its laws. That is a normal tactic for lobbying groups both in the US and in Canada. I have seen these same type of theatrical pleas to the government in response to a social issue like clear cutting and oil sands developement. Facts don't drive fear into the populace, emotional responses like this one do. And for hers, I don't buy it. I have watched too many people in my life tell me a sad story about how they lost a loved one due to disease, they always break down a little inside telling it.
I have seen at least three episodes of "The First 48" that a bystander pulled a gun to prevent a robbery or crime, and wound up dead. No episodes I have watched where the only death was the person committing the crime. I know its not the best sample size so bitch to me about some real cases that I don't know about.
And I love the LA riot comment, a bunch of pissed off non white people rioting because of the most blatant abuse of power by a bunch of racist cops who got away with it. A whole lot less BS would have happened if police and army aren't scared of their own people shooting at them. I live in a Canadian city that riots every fucking time they lose the Stanley Cup, and nobody dies or gets shot (minus the rioter who died to a teargas canister). If somebody was holding an assault rifle guarding their property, it would be a whole new ballgame for the police to deal with.
Blakkheim
Karazhan Raider
- 8,019
- 36,117
What color is the sky in the alternate version of reality that you live in?
Seriously though, its like you are just trying to come up with any lame ass excuse that you can just to be contradictory. Canada is a culturally and racially homogenous country that does not share a boarder with a 3rd world country. Who gives a flying fuck about how your government has turned you all into a bunch of pussies who enjoy having a jackboot rammed up your twat.
On the other hand, I do love your comment about the police being scared of their own people shooting at them. It reminds me of a certain favorite quote of mine,
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny." - Thomas Jefferson.
Eomer
Trakanon Raider
- 5,472
- 272
Canada is not a culturally or racially homogenous country. In fact, Canada has twice the number of foreign born citizens as the US does, on a per capita basis (about 20% vs 10%, give or take). No, we don't have the large black or hispanic populations the US does, things are certainly more mixed around in that respect. But saying that Canada is "culturally or racially homogenous" is just plain false.
Other than unique cases like Persian Gulf states, Switzerland and Israel, Canada along with New Zealand actually has the highest proportion of foreign born citizens on the planet:
http://www.migrationinformation.org/...arts/6.2.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigra...migration_rate
Other than unique cases like Persian Gulf states, Switzerland and Israel, Canada along with New Zealand actually has the highest proportion of foreign born citizens on the planet:
http://www.migrationinformation.org/...arts/6.2.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigra...migration_rate
Excidium
Trakanon Raider
- 840
- 1,295
The Okanagan valley is picked almost 100% by mexicans. There are no gun crimes in that valley that aren't gang related.
And most of the violent problems in Mexico are directly related to US policy on drugs. All that gang violence would disappear if drugs were not prohibited, you saw it with alcohol during the prohibition. Stockpiling guns is not going to fix the real problem, and scared people with guns wreck shit. Can somebody pull up the accidental shootings due to guns? Hell your Vice President even took an unattended bullet, but we already knew he went full retard.
Excidium
Trakanon Raider
- 840
- 1,295
Timothy McVeigh and all those right wing nuts from Waco sure as hell were scared of the government impeding their rights to arms.
- 6,338
- 7,144
Because it's christmas, I won't say that you are consistently posting some of the stupidest shit that I've ever read. Why is it that drug-loving hippies believe that if just drugs were legal all of our problems would go away!? Imagine how great the world would be if we all had unlimited access to weed, heroin, and meth! Because they all do such wonderful things for people!!!!!
Caliane
Avatar of War Slayer
- 14,679
- 10,243
fanaskin
Well known agitator
- 55,859
- 137,964
Try not paying the illegal income taxes from an amendment never ratified, we'll see how quickly anyone learns to fear an government out of control.
Before the income tax government had to learn to live on only on excise taxes and tariffs. If those conditions where still true the government wouldnt have the money to act like a power drunk maniac.
It's that revenue stream that empowers them the most.
fanaskin
Well known agitator
- 55,859
- 137,964
gun handlers in the police cannot be above a certain IQ level, let me repeat that so you can talk about armed morons again.
THE POLICE WILL NOT HIRE ANYONE ABOVE AN IQ OF 106 or so.
just smart enough to be able to handle the equipment, dumb enough not to figure out and question their surroundings.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-b...6#.UNnBPLa0NpU
https://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/09/n...iq-scores.html
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn.../#.UNnBXLa0NpU
these are the people you want to place your total trust into? it's insanity, the police are obvious trained thugs whose main job in life in protecting commerce(corporations).
Ontop of this the police have no legal order to protect people, it's been ruled on in supreme court case after supreme court case, the police do not have the mandate to protect citizens
The police cannot protect every citizen. and it's not their job, anyway. The police's job is retribution. That's all.They find the bad guy and get him before he hurts someone else.
We're each responsible for our own safety.
Police have no legal duty to respond and prevent crime or protect the victim.There have BEEN OVER 10 various supreme and state court cases the individual has never won. Notably, the Supreme Court STATED about the responsibility of police for the security of your family and loved ones is "You, and only you, are responsible for your security and the security of your family and loved ones. That was the essence of a U.S. Supreme Court decision in the early 1980's when they ruled that the police do not have a duty to protect you as an individual, but to protect society as a whole."
"It is well-settled fact of American law that the police have no legal duty to protect any individual citizen from crime, even if the citizen has received death threats and the police have negligently failed to provide protection."
Sources:
7/15/05 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 04-278 TOWN OF CASTLE ROCK, COLORADO, PETITIONER v. JESSICA GONZALES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT BEST FRIEND OF HER DECEASED MINOR CHILDREN, REBECCA GONZALES, KATHERYN GONZALES, AND LESLIE GONZALES
On June 27, in the case of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, the Supreme Court found that Jessica Gonzales did not have a constitutional right to individual police protection even in the presence of a restraining order. Mrs. Gonzales' husband with a track record of violence, stabbing Mrs. Gonzales to death, Mrs. Gonzales' family could not get the Supreme Court to change their unanimous decision for one's individual protection. YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN FOLKS AND GOVERNMENT BODIES ARE REFUSING TO PASS THE Safety Ordinance.
(1) Richard W. Stevens. 1999. Dial 911 and Die. Hartford, Wisconsin: Mazel Freedom Press.
(2) Barillari v. City of Milwaukee, 533 N.W.2d 759 (Wis. 1995).
(3) Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (7th Cir. 1982).
(4) DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989).
(5) Ford v. Town of Grafton, 693 N.E.2d 1047 (Mass. App. 1998).
(6) Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. 1981).
"...a government and its agencies are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular individual citizen..."-Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. App. 1981)
(7)"What makes the City's position particularly difficult to understand is that, in conformity to the dictates of the law, Linda did not carry any weapon for self-defense. Thus by a rather bitter irony she was required to rely for protection on the City of NY which now denies all responsibility to her."
Riss v. New York, 22 N.Y.2d 579,293 N.Y.S.2d 897, 240 N.E.2d 806 (1958).
(8)"Law enforcement agencies and personnel have no duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of others; instead their duty is to preserve the peace and arrest law breakers for the protection of the general public."
Lynch v. N.C. Dept. of Justice, 376 S.E. 2nd 247 (N.C. App. 1989)
New York Times, Washington DC
Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect SomeoneBy LINDA GREENHOUSE Published: June 28, 2005
The ruling applies even for a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.