|Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Current Events > Topic: How many bank robberies have been prevented...|
How many bank robberies have been prevented...
Posted - 12/28/2012 10:52:36 AM | show profile | flag this post
liberals will call others stupid-when they themselves lack understanding.
"cruster/cdnreprtr" one in the same.
"does NOT represent liberal thinking anymore than you are the poster child for Conservatism."
old chap, you may just understand why i do not represent any cause.
"libs have such a inferiority complex" FoxNews bullshit."
"The list of countries 'better than us' is embarassing to say the least." <<<< this is you. and those of liberal thinkeration are often times comparing and wishing we be more like europe. "FoxNews bullshit."? not so much.
"Why do you keep quoting made up numbers??"
those numbers come from dod and fbi data.
"Comparing gun deaths in any city in the country to the TWO WARS. That's below slime."
tell that to those who live in these liberal blue cities where they have bars on their windows, or have their windows boarded up, and are afraid to go out at night and let their kids play outside during the daytime.
feels like a war zone to them. a lot deadlier than either iraq or afghanistan. ask them how those strict guns laws are working.
the lefts war on guns is nothing more than a aunt sally for their failed liberal social engineering/experimenting.
Posted - 12/28/2012 11:49:49 AM | show profile | flag this post
Here's one for the lists: con can't write a comprehensible post.
I really do hope the Literacy Fairy sprinkles the magic dust on you some night, con.
Posted - 12/28/2012 2:06:44 PM | show profile | flag this post
"Comparing gun deaths in any city in the country
to the TWO WARS. That's below slime."
No, you're deliberately...ahh, let's say misstating...again. The comparison is to ONE war...Afghanistan, which is still ongoing.
And the ONLY reason it's below slime to you is because you don't like the results of the comparison. The FACT is that two and a half times more people were murdered in Chicago than died in the war (US forces casualties) during the same period of time.
Posted - 12/28/2012 2:12:01 PM | show profile | flag this post
The reason Chicago is a tough comparison for the left
is because Chicago is Obama's home town, its mayor is Obama's good buddy and former chief of staff, the governance of Chicago is a model of left wing machine politics and...most importantly...even though Chicago has some of the toughest firearms laws in the nation...it hovers near the top of the list of the deadliest cities due to gun crime.
It knocks everything you left wingers say about gun control into a cocked hat.
Posted - 12/28/2012 2:48:53 PM | show profile | flag this post
(you)you're deliberately...ahh, let's say misstating...again. The comparison is to ONE war...Afghanistan"
(con) "more americans have been killed by guns in obamaland than in iraq and afghanistan."
"iraq and afganistan" So, please, don't call me a liar when it's right there.
It's a ridiculous and insane comparison. 'Gun laws don't work'--'Just look at the 150,000+ people killed or wounded in a couple of wars!!'
Good Grief Almighty. Even LaPierre isn't stupid enough to bring that up. thank god he has you two wingnuts to pick up the slack.
Posted - 12/28/2012 3:40:03 PM | show profile | flag this post
which is why chi-town is often called obamaland. it is fair to look at americans killed in iraq and afghanistan compared to americans killed in these liberal cities with the strictest gun laws.
the left can't face the results of their social engineering/experimenting.
until liberals change their ways- violence will always plague our cities.
Posted - 12/28/2012 3:52:55 PM | show profile | flag this post
"So, please, don't call me a liar"
I...ME...MYSELF ONLY...PLAINLY specified ONLY Afghanistan in BOTH of my posts on this topic.
Therefore you have misstated. Live with that.
In your attempt to take the sting out of what I said you're attempting to wrongfully tie it into something others have said. And you're trying to trivialize the comparison by throwing in unrelated factoids...which is a device you oftem employ to try to obfuscate the issue when your assertions are righteously contradicted.
Posted - 12/28/2012 3:56:51 PM | show profile | flag this post
500 americans have been murdered in chicago so far this year.
how many american troops have been killed this year in afghanistan?
yet it is totally insane to compare a american city to a war zone.
Posted - 12/28/2012 4:29:33 PM | show profile | flag this post
thought process, never mind logical train of thought.
Gun laws don't work--Just look at a War.
Yea. That makes perfect sense. Gun laws sure didn't help Europe from 1939 to 1945. See? Told ya. (head shake)
"chi-town is often called obamaland". No it's not. It's not even called chi-town. And besides that, why bring up Chicago if you're not going to bring up NYC?? "New York City's murder rate is expected to hit a record low this year, and shootings are at their lowest point in at least 18 years." Why?? "
The NYPD began increasing its focus on stop and frisk as a crime-fighting tool in the mid-1990s. The stops have rocketed up on Bloomberg's 11-year watch, hitting a high of 684,330 last year.
The stops net 8,000 weapons a year, including 800 illegal guns, Kelly said.
The point is this: Sometimes individual cities passing laws just doesn't work. This isn't Gaza. There are no checkpoints at the 'Chicago Border'. or the Illinois border for that matter. You walk across with an illegal gun. Now, in NYC, you do that and you might be stopped. IF ANYTHING--ANYONE arguing that 'city-wide' laws don't work--THAT'S THE POINT. If it's not national, it won't work.
And comparing any American city stats with a WAR is pointless. IF we handled Chicago like we handled Baghdad--you know the whole airstrikes and Humvee patrols thing--I'd say it was a pretty safe bet people would be kind of pissed off.
I'm done with you two on this thread. You're just friggin crazy.
Posted - 12/28/2012 7:09:38 PM | show profile | flag this post
interesting that liberal blue NYC is considered the safest large city in the world and in 2012. NYC will have the lowest homicide rate in 50 years. maybe Chicago should take some cues.
Posted - 12/28/2012 10:10:51 PM | show profile | flag this post
"If it's not national, it won't work"
Oh, boy! If he's never shown his radical left colors before, he did with that post.
Sorry to be the bearer of this bad news, pal, but this is a federation...a federal government that has limited authorities and responsibilities and the several states, which are sovereign with rights and freedoms that are guaranteed through both the US Constitution and through their own governing documents.
It is only radical left wingers who want a huge, all-powerful centralized government...and your president is chief among those.
Posted - 12/28/2012 10:22:19 PM | show profile | flag this post
Thought we settled that
in 1865. You're side lost.
As Shelby Foote so aptly put it, before then "The United States were...after that, the United States was". Lincoln was a "radical left winger". Who knew.
Posted - 12/28/2012 11:21:36 PM | show profile | flag this post
That is non-responsive and doesn't even make any sense. Have you lost it, old bean?
Posted - 12/28/2012 11:41:25 PM | show profile | flag this post
actually, it makes perfect sense..
to anyone who made it past the eighth grade..
Posted - 12/29/2012 2:50:30 PM | show profile | flag this post
That lets you out, pal.
Posted - 12/29/2012 5:02:32 PM | show profile | flag this post
yeah.. i just bypassed eighth grade..
on my way to those two degrees..
Posted - 12/31/2012 9:19:44 AM | show profile | flag this post
Interstate commerce, cruzo...
Perhaps the most powerful driving factor that led to the creation of the Constitution.
And, yes, it would take a national standard for the sale of guns to make a difference.
Posted - 12/31/2012 9:31:28 AM | show profile | flag this post
cruise (and the NRA) have no problem with a national data base of mental patients, but a national gun law? Well that's just crazy talk.
The FBI, BATF, IRS, FAA, FTC, FDA, Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs, Justice Department, the Supreme Court, and a hundred other examples--
'We're just a 'Federation' of States my ass. The States would cease to exist if it wasn't for Washington...for all it's warts and gridlock.
It's true--We have thousands and thousands of small, individual gun laws. Just like speed limits for driving. But truly 'National' laws are few and far between; and most of them are weak as hell.
Posted - 12/31/2012 11:55:17 AM | show profile | flag this post
"but a national gun law? Well that's just crazy talk"
Not crazy at all. But we have just enough national gun laws now. The laws on the books restrict American civilians to only hand- and shoulder-fired arms...and nothing fully automatic.
We DO NOT need to be any more restrictive as to the types of firearms Americans can possess and use.
We CAN...and should...restrict high capacity magazines, armor-piercing amunition and "Devastator" (exploding) bullets.
Any further laws need to be for the purpose of controlling PEOPLE who use firearms...and such controls need to include those of questionable mental and emotional stability as well as the extensive list of those currently prohibited by 18 USC 922.
And we need background checks for the private sale of firearms, not just those from licensed dealers.
Beyond all this, we need dilligent enforcement of these laws.
"Gun control" is a myth dreamed up by Democrats and liberals who don't have the stones to address the PEOPLE problem that is at the heart of this issue.
Posted - 12/31/2012 12:23:24 PM | show profile | flag this post
Honestly don't know what's worse
(or more annoying); the lying or the contradictions.
"...and nothing fully automatic." That is a FLAT OUT LIE. And you know it. If you don't mind the paperwork, and have a ton of time and money, you can buy a fully automatic. (Class 3, made before 1986). Gun shows are FULL of them. Hell you can buy one on-line. Not cheap--but you can do it. Everyone knows that. (Google 'Can you buy a fully automatic')
"Gun control" is a myth dreamed up by Democrats and liberals"
Really? Then why did you list many reasonable gun control measures? That you and I both agree on?? You Dem/Lib you.
A very small example of a national gun law I didn't even know existed--and why it's not strong enough:
"For example, a 1986 law prohibits A.T.F. agents from making more than one unannounced inspection a year on a gun dealer, a rule that serves no purpose other than protecting unscrupulous dealers. (As it is, a lack of agents means that a gun shop can go years between inspections.)"
If that's not annoying enough--try this one, again, about the BATF: "has been without a permanent full-time director for six years — ever since the National Rifle Association persuaded Congress that the position should require Senate confirmation. Mr. Obama’s 2010 nomination of Andrew Traver, now head of the bureau’s Denver division, has stalled for no good reason, except for N.R.A. opposition and White House reluctance to wage a battle to fill the post.
"the PEOPLE problem that is at the heart of this issue." The PEOPLE problem is that they have access to guns that aren't used for hunting. Mental patients and sane people who want kill other people. You have two choices. Kill all those people. Right now. (Let's do a 'Hunger Games' Super Bowl) Or, wild thought, get rid of the guns so they don't have access to them.
Posted - 12/31/2012 1:08:15 PM | show profile | flag this post
"Or, wild thought, get rid of the guns so they
don't have access to them"
This, of course, is the bottom line and the fervent wish of liberals and Democrats who don't have the balls...or the intelligence...to solve the people problem.
But people die every day in cars but we don't "get rid of (cars) so thay don't have access to them."
People die climbing mountains but we don't "get rid of (ropes, carabiners and pitons) so they don't have access to them."
People die on skis and snowboards but we don't "get rid of (them) so they don't have access to them."
People die on amusement park rides but we don't "get rid of (roller coasters) so they don't have access to them."
People die as a result of jet skis but we don't "get rid of (them) so they don't have access to them."
Do you begin to realize just how ridiculous and heavy-handed your one-size-fits-all argument sounds? I doubt it...you're not perceptive enough. For a supposedly intelligent individual you sure don't exhibit much rationality.
But then liberals are reactionary and driven by raw emotion.
Posted - 12/31/2012 1:14:19 PM | show profile | flag this post
"Or, wild thought, get rid of the guns so they
don't have access to them."
Once again, you would deprive more than 300 million people of the perfectly legal and legitimate recreational, provisioning and self-defense measures just because you and your brethren don't have the balls to solve the real problem.
Posted - 12/31/2012 3:04:58 PM | show profile | flag this post
The difference here, cruzo..
is the items you mentioned are not designed specifically to kill people with the greatest efficiency.
Assault weapons, when coupled with high volume magazines, are designed specifically for that purpose.
Limit access to killing machines and you limit the ability of people to kill large numbers of people efficiently.
That gets to the core of the problem.
Posted - 12/31/2012 3:08:51 PM | show profile | flag this post
the point might have been more effectively put this way: "Have armed guards in banks eliminated bank robberies?"
True, we'll never know how many robberies were prevented. But we do know that there were 1,081 bank robberies last year.
We also know that at Columbine, the shooters TWICE engaged armed security and TWICE out-shot them.
Turning our schools into prisons and our country into a police state is the exact opposite of what our founders wanted for this country.
Posted - 12/31/2012 3:25:03 PM | show profile | flag this post
"That gets to the core of the problem"
The core of the problem...no matter how you left wingers try to slice it...is PEOPLE. In order to solve the problem you have to solve that component.
Your approach is as silly as Puritan religious leaders admonishing their adherents not to discuss sex. That didn't prevent babies.
Try to keep up.