CDZ The best strategy, disarming law abiding gun owners, or keeping criminals locked up.

[Blues Man]

Stop with the histrionics

The majority of people in this country have never been involved in an active shooter drill

I've had them at two past employers...

I also got to watch a "What to do if a crazy person starts shooting up this theater" message after Aurora.

I would say it ruined the movie for me, but it was "Star Trek: Into Darkness" So really, ruining that movie would have been redundant.

So you are everyone in the country now?

I cant help if you live and work in a shithole

I never saw any such nonsense at a movie theater and I go to the movies almost every week

 

[2aguy]

Yeah just ignore that 50% that the relationship is unknown

because they don't know who killed them...

This is another problem with your "lock em up" strategy. Right now, in Chicago, only 17% of murder cases are cleared. (But the cops did prove Jussie Smollet beat himself up... that's the important thing.)

Do you understand why only 17% of Chicago murders are solved? Because the democrat party judges let repeat, violent gun offenders out on I-Bonds...which means they shoot someone, someone sees it, then the witness has to live with the concept that the killer is back on the streets in a matter of hours or days......so they don't tell the police anything.....and if it isn't the killer threatening them, it is his gang member buddies.....who also get out on I-Bonds when they are caught....

 

[JoeB131]

The problem in Chicago is democrat judges letting repeat gun offenders out of prison on Bond.....and giving them less than 3 years in prison for repeat violent gun offenses.....

Guy, you spend all this time whining about how broken our bond system is... which it is...

But all the cases you whine about, the guy got a bond because he wasn't convicted yet.

This is a problem, because the gangbangers can get the gang to all chip in for a bond. So there's that.

Nothing to do with the fact that incarceration fails as a deterent... because most crooks don't think they will get caught.

 

[2aguy]

The problem in Chicago is democrat judges letting repeat gun offenders out of prison on Bond.....and giving them less than 3 years in prison for repeat violent gun offenses.....

Guy, you spend all this time whining about how broken our bond system is... which it is...

But all the cases you whine about, the guy got a bond because he wasn't convicted yet.

This is a problem, because the gangbangers can get the gang to all chip in for a bond. So there's that.

Nothing to do with the fact that incarceration fails as a deterent... because most crooks don't think they will get caught.

They had repeat felonies and repeat gun offenses.....known to the judge at the time they were released.....then they are sentenced, as repeat gun offenders to less than 3 years...

Incarceration that lasts 30 years is a deterrent, especially for that particular criminal....letting the shooters out on I-Bonds, back into the neighborhood where you expect the people to help the police...is the reason they have a 17% conviction rate...

 

[miketx]

Not if you idiots keep letting them out! What part of that doesn't your lying ass understand?

Who are we letting out?

The Prison-Industrial Complex is at its heart, self-defeating. Once you put someone in jail, for something petty like, "Having a gun when we said you can't have a gun", you've pretty much made him unemployable for the rest of his life.

If we locked up the petty criminals forever, we'd have a prison population of ten million... we can't afford that. We can't really afford what we are doing now.

Criminals, using guns, liar. As to your poor, typical deflection, we are not talking about locking up petty criminals, and you know it. Why do you play games like this?

 

[JoeB131]

They had repeat felonies and repeat gun offenses.....known to the judge at the time they were released.....then they are sentenced, as repeat gun offenders to less than 3 years...

Incarceration that lasts 30 years is a deterrent, especially for that particular criminal....letting the shooters out on I-Bonds, back into the neighborhood where you expect the people to help the police...is the reason they have a 17% conviction rate...

We don't have room to lock people up for 30 years.... that's the problem. We don't have space to lock up everyone awaiting trial, either. As it stands now, we have more young black men in prison than college, and they both cost about as much.

The police have a 17% conviction rate because they are corrupt, incompetent and not trusted by the community. LIke this guy who shot the mentally disabled man and the woman who was in her house behind him. Didn't go to jail, took about three years to fire him, and the Fascist Order of Police (FOP) is still screaming about the injustice of firing him.

That's why no one cooperates with the cops..

 

[JoeB131]

Criminals, using guns, liar. As to your poor, typical deflection, we are not talking about locking up petty criminals, and you know it. Why do you play games like this?

Again, we've tried the Prison-Industrial complex. We went from 500K people in jail in 1980 to 2 Million today.

And crime is just as bad as it was then.

 

[miketx]

Criminals, using guns, liar. As to your poor, typical deflection, we are not talking about locking up petty criminals, and you know it. Why do you play games like this?

Again, we've tried the Prison-Industrial complex. We went from 500K people in jail in 1980 to 2 Million today.

And crime is just as bad as it was then.

That's right troll, keep pretending like you don't know what the topic is.

 

[JoeB131]

That's right troll, keep pretending like you don't know what the topic is.

We've established the topic. The topic is "Let's throw more people in jail for merely HAVING guns, if they happen to be poor, minority and have a criminal record for some petty offense".

The problem with that is manifold. The first is, we are already locking up 2 million people, and if we want to put more in jail, we are going to have to let other people out.

The other problem is, of course, that because our justice system is so inherently racist, we all know how this is going to work out.

Felicity Huffman gets 14 days for paying a bunch of bribes to get her daughter into college. Tanya McDowell lied about her address to get her daughter into a school where they don't have metal detectors gets five years.

Yeah, I'm not keen on expanding THAT level of stupidity.

 

[Blues Man]

That's right troll, keep pretending like you don't know what the topic is.

We've established the topic. The topic is "Let's throw more people in jail for merely HAVING guns, if they happen to be poor, minority and have a criminal record for some petty offense".

The problem with that is manifold. The first is, we are already locking up 2 million people, and if we want to put more in jail, we are going to have to let other people out.

The other problem is, of course, that because our justice system is so inherently racist, we all know how this is going to work out.

Felicity Huffman gets 14 days for paying a bunch of bribes to get her daughter into college. Tanya McDowell lied about her address to get her daughter into a school where they don't have metal detectors gets five years.

Yeah, I'm not keen on expanding THAT level of stupidity.

No it's about enforcing gun laws that we have on the books

It has been proven to work in the past.

You cannot argue that you want to have tough gun laws then argue in the same breath that you do not want people who break gun laws put in jail.

And how any times do you have to be told that we lock up the wrong people?

 

[JoeB131]

No it's about enforcing gun laws that we have on the books

It has been proven to work in the past.

You cannot argue that you want to have tough gun laws then argue in the same breath that you do not want people who break gun laws put in jail.

And how any times do you have to be told that we lock up the wrong people?

Uh, we can have tough gun laws without throwing ANYONE in jail.

The Germans, Japanese, British, etc. all prove this already. They have very few people in prison, no one has guns.

 

[miketx]

That's right troll, keep pretending like you don't know what the topic is.

We've established the topic. The topic is "Let's throw more people in jail for merely HAVING guns, if they happen to be poor, minority and have a criminal record for some petty offense".

The problem with that is manifold. The first is, we are already locking up 2 million people, and if we want to put more in jail, we are going to have to let other people out.

The other problem is, of course, that because our justice system is so inherently racist, we all know how this is going to work out.

Felicity Huffman gets 14 days for paying a bunch of bribes to get her daughter into college. Tanya McDowell lied about her address to get her daughter into a school where they don't have metal detectors gets five years.

Yeah, I'm not keen on expanding THAT level of stupidity.

Filthy liar. The topic is stop releasing violent criminals.

 

[JoeB131]

Filthy liar. The topic is stop releasing violent criminals.

Except that's not what was being discussed. What was being discussed was throwing people in jail for having guns if they have a record and are black and poor.

that's what's being discussed.

When you throw an affluent white kid in prison for breaking the law, get back to me.

 

[miketx]

Filthy liar. The topic is stop releasing violent criminals.

Except that's not what was being discussed. What was being discussed was throwing people in jail for having guns if they have a record and are black and poor.

that's what's being discussed.

When you throw an affluent white kid in prison for breaking the law, get back to me.

Never stop lying.

 

[JoeB131]

Never stop lying.

Never start thinking... it might hurt your brain.

 

[miketx]

Shills gotta shill, huh sgt frag?

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

A mixture of harsher sentences for gun crimes and much more invasive background checks is needed. Neither of which disarm anyone.

Background checks have proven to be as worthless as tits on a boar hog. They are an invasion of privacy; they make a mockery of the Fourth Amendment and do not stop crime.

I could offer something much better without the cost and no gun control. The solution, however, doesn't fit on a bumper sticker.

Background checks have kept weapons away from 1.8 million people who shouldn’t have had the guns. They work as well as they can; which is why we need to strengthen them.

You do know people straw purchase to bypass those checks and also the Orlando shooting was a failure of LEO when the shooter should have been stopped from buying a firearm because he was on a list.

So your background checks are not going to stop criminals at all, hence why they are criminals

 

[JoeB131]

You do know people straw purchase to bypass those checks and also the Orlando shooting was a failure of LEO when the shooter should have been stopped from buying a firearm because he was on a list.

So your background checks are not going to stop criminals at all, hence why they are criminals

Good point. Let's own all private gun ownership. Problem solved.

 

[Blues Man]

No it's about enforcing gun laws that we have on the books

It has been proven to work in the past.

You cannot argue that you want to have tough gun laws then argue in the same breath that you do not want people who break gun laws put in jail.

And how any times do you have to be told that we lock up the wrong people?

Uh, we can have tough gun laws without throwing ANYONE in jail.

The Germans, Japanese, British, etc. all prove this already. They have very few people in prison, no one has guns.

No when people break the law even in the UK they go to prison



Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[candycorn]

A mixture of harsher sentences for gun crimes and much more invasive background checks is needed. Neither of which disarm anyone.

Background checks have proven to be as worthless as tits on a boar hog. They are an invasion of privacy; they make a mockery of the Fourth Amendment and do not stop crime.

I could offer something much better without the cost and no gun control. The solution, however, doesn't fit on a bumper sticker.

Background checks have kept weapons away from 1.8 million people who shouldn’t have had the guns. They work as well as they can; which is why we need to strengthen them.

You do know people straw purchase to bypass those checks and also the Orlando shooting was a failure of LEO when the shooter should have been stopped from buying a firearm because he was on a list.

So your background checks are not going to stop criminals at all, hence why they are criminals

Its like saying you shouldn’t brush your teeth because you still get cavities from time to time….
Gun nuts are so stupid.