That's utter bullshit. Nobody needs to be in a gang. Most people in bad neighborhoods are not and they survive just fine. As for myself, I do take walks now and then, and we have a violent crime problem here. I take my gun with me. If needed, I will blow some lowlife away.
You are correct our deterrents are not strong enough as per the OP shows. Instead of making more stringent laws and penalties against law-abiding citizens, make them for the criminal instead.
Years ago a middle-east family bought a closed down store around the corner from me. I used to walk there for stuff like beer and cigarettes. One time when I went there the cops were leaving. I asked the young clerk what happened, and some drunk went into the store and took some cigarettes that were on display on the counter. So we got into a discussion about stealing.
After he moved here his grandmother back in the middle-east wanted to know of his new environment, so he sent her our local paper. She wrote back with great concern. She said we have more theft in our suburb in one week than the entire middle-east has in a years time. I asked him if that was true and he concurred.
He said back home if you are caught stealing, the police hold you down and off comes your hand, and I don't mean in a hospital either. Steal again and off comes your other hand. There is no third time.
The point I'm making is that a strong enough deterrent works every time it's tried.
Nobody needs to be in a gang. Great. Explain why the Militias who came running to the town when the Indians were near were great and patriotic, but the gang members who do the same to their neighborhood are awful. Compare and contrast if you prefer that term.
The truth is you can’t.
Because that is what humans have done since the dawn of time. Our Tribe or Village will fight to protect what we have. We will take from you if we can. Even today, look at the nation. Texas is fighting Federal Mandates. Why? Freedom is the claim, but it is simply put you are not going to tell us what to do in our state. They are opposing the outsiders. People in Washington who would tell them what to do and how to live.
We denounce it when the other side does it, and cheer it when our side does the same thing.
A city council or State Legislature votes to refuse to honor Remainder Requests, and they’re traitors to the nation. Here is an example that is pretty much the earlier version of this same thread. It’s all the Democrats fault.
Here we have democrats releasing violent criminals rather than give them to ICE....violent criminals, dangerous criminals........this is why we have crime in our major cities, and why we have gun crime in our major cities.....democrats are insane..... Illinois Sanctuary County Frees 1K Criminal...
www.usmessageboard.com
Ever since that Sanctuary City shit started. I said the same thing over and over. You can’t expect someone to enforce the law they are not charged with. City Cops are empowered to enforce within that city, the City Laws and the State Laws. Sometimes County Laws too. But you get the point. They are trained and certified by the State.
Feds can’t enforce State or City Laws. They are employed by and certified to enforce Federal Laws only. There must be an agreement before the Fed can do anything about State or Local Laws.
The thing the local cops can’t ignore is a warrant. Come up with a warrant and show that the local cops ignored it and you have a great case to send someone to jail. But that isn’t what happens. They are told to hold the guy because we want you to. They are told to call them when you suspect something.
And for that matter, my opinion on the Second Amendment Sanctuary shit is the same. The local cops are not required to enforce federal law. The term used to be used, but it is accurate. Unfunded Mandate. You can’t pass one. It is unconstitutional.
It is why the instant background checks are called into the FBI now, and not the local sheriffs. The Sheriffs sued and complained it was an unfunded mandate, and the courts agreed.
Now, onto your Middle East example. Things like that always make me laugh. You can’t cherry pick that shit. Otherwise you would admit that Norway has a better recidivism rate than we do because they focus on rehabilitation instead of punishment.
And crime in the Middle East? If a woman reports a rape, she’s liable to be killed for adultery. It was her fault being out without a male relative you see.
But no, you cherry pick it. While ignoring the intolerable elements that also come in. So lets pretend we chop off a guys hand when he’s caught. Then later we find that the storekeeper lied. Do we cut out his tongue for lying? How do we give the guy his hand back?
Our system is designed to give a reasonable punishment to the individual for the crime because we didn’t want instant justice. We wanted a system where guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. It is what our Ancestors fought for.
But you law and order types always hate the law. So explain to me why if law and order is so important, that the Founders gave about half of the bill of rights, to the rights of the accused? I mean, this was a simpler time wasn’t it? But they still insisted on giving so many rights to the accused. So many restrictions on Government.
Either you hate America, or you hate the Constitution. While you love the Second, you seem to disdain the remaining amendments.
I love America. I love the Constitution, and I would object, loudly, to any effort to subdue it. All of the Amendments matter. Every single one. It is why I support the second, as intended, which you do not.
But hey, suggest your system of chopping off hands. It might fly with a few of the other ignorant jackasses out there. It will never fly with the majority.
