There is a direct link from the democrat party policies and gun crime in the U.S.

[2aguy]

[Q


Amber Guyger killed a man in his own home with a gun. Surely you think she should spend the rest of her life in jail for her gun crime; right?

So are suggesting that police should have to turn in their service weapon when they leave the workplace because they may do something stupid with it?

Don't be dumb.

I'm suggesting that if you kill an unarmed person in his own home, you should go away for a very long time. Life in prison sounds good. So does at least 30 years. True...people make mistakes. But it's also true that people pay for them.

Nobody would disagree with holding people accountable for any crime that they commit.

The disagreement with the gun control debate comes with taking guns away from law abiding people because some non law abiding thugs may commit crimes with them.

The crime should never be the possession of the firearm. We have a Constitution that says very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The crime should be what is done with the firearm, no possessing the firearm.

Killing someone who isn’t armed with your gun in their own home is a crime, right?

That depends on the actual situation......do you understand that?

 

[Flash]

and up until 2 years ago, Harris County in Texas had a long line of Republican County Judges while HOUSTON had mayors who were democrat leaning.


Counties are the administrative wards of the State.

Houston isn't really in the list of cities that apply here... Texas in general is tough on gun crime.. And the STATE laws and sentencing TRUMP Harris county or Houston....

Funny...its a "democrat controlled" city; the 3rd or 4th largest in the nation. You'd call it a "mega city". Thanks for trashing your own argument.

The end result is this: if a crime takes place in the city limits, the city police force investigates. In unincorporated areas, the Sheriff's office or constables have jurisdiction. Regardless of who does the arresting, if the crime is serious enough, the county district attorney will indict. The mayor or what party she or he holds has zero to do with it. All of this is fact.

Here is what we have to get rid of:

I just looked up someone by birthdate (06-01-2000) in the Illinois Dept of Corrections. Not even sure what the guy's name is but here is his offense:
View attachment 308473

He was arrested for Aggrivated Unlawful Use of a Weapon and got a whopping 1 year. Easily, this should be 30 years. I'd go for life myself if the gun was fired. This is what we should get rid of.

Anyway, the mayor of Chicago had nothing to do with this sentence. Did the Democratic Party? Not sure. I don't know what judge sentenced him...I don't know if it was a jury trial or if this was plea-bargained. The County DA shouldn't have taken it whatsoever.

The democrat politicians create the laws....

California Democrats hate the gun, not the gunman – Orange County Register

Now that Democrats have supermajorities in the California state Legislature, they’ve rolled into Sacramento with a zest for lowering the state’s prison population and have interpreted St. Augustine’s words of wisdom to mean, “Hate the gun, not the gunman.”

I say this because, once they finally took a break from preaching about the benefits of stricter gun control, the state Senate voted to loosen sentencing guidelines for criminals convicted of gun crimes.

Currently, California law requires anyone who uses a gun while committing a felony to have their sentence increased by 10 years or more in prison — on top of the normal criminal penalty. If enacted, Senate Bill 620 would eliminate that mandate.

The bill, which passed on a 22-14 party-line vote, with support only from Democrats, now heads to the state Assembly for consideration.

Republicans and the National Rifle Association have vowed to campaign against it.

Why have Democrats suddenly developed a soft spot for criminals convicted of gun crimes? The bill’s author, state Sen. Steve Bradford, D-Gardena, says that he was motivated to write the bill after a 17-year-old riding in a car involved in a drive-by shooting was sentenced to 25 years in prison, even though he claims that he wasn’t the one who pulled the trigger.

and for all those anti-gunners who want to know where criminals get guns....well...this law lowers the prison time for those who give guns to criminals.....

Why is that?

Prop. 57, for example, very deceptively and fundamentally changed the definition of what constitutes a “non-violent” offense.


supplying a firearm to a gang member,

l
felon obtaining a firearm,

discharging a firearm on school grounds

Democrat judges and prosecutors implement their laws...

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/dart-sees-alarming-rise-in-gun-defendants-freed-on-electronic-monitoring/

Judges have treated felony gun charges in a dramatically different way since the reforms were implemented, according to data from the sheriff's office.

Over a nearly four-month period in 2016, judges gave out cash-based bonds in nearly 96 percent of felony gun cases and released just 2 percent on electronic monitors. In the 10 weeks after the bond order took effect in September, though, the number of cash-based bonds for gun cases plummeted to about 40 percent, while those freed on the electronic bracelets jumped to 22 percent.

The amount set for bonds also sharply fell on average, from nearly $134,000 in 2016 to almost $22,000 in 2017, according to the analysis.

By contrast, judges also boosted how often they ordered no bond for those charged with felony gun offenses, to more than 9 percent in 2017, compared with no cases at all in 2016, the analysis showed.

Pfft...

You're the one that wants no jail time for a woman who killed a man in his own home.

You know your posts on that are just silly...right?

I don't know why talking about that shooting has anything to do with the subject of this thread. That is why I didn't bother to answer the silly question.

The woman was an off duty police officer and would have had the gun no matter what the laws were for civilians.

Liberals love to deflect.

 

[2aguy]

Houston isn't really in the list of cities that apply here... Texas in general is tough on gun crime.. And the STATE laws and sentencing TRUMP Harris county or Houston....

Funny...its a "democrat controlled" city; the 3rd or 4th largest in the nation. You'd call it a "mega city". Thanks for trashing your own argument.

The end result is this: if a crime takes place in the city limits, the city police force investigates. In unincorporated areas, the Sheriff's office or constables have jurisdiction. Regardless of who does the arresting, if the crime is serious enough, the county district attorney will indict. The mayor or what party she or he holds has zero to do with it. All of this is fact.

Here is what we have to get rid of:

I just looked up someone by birthdate (06-01-2000) in the Illinois Dept of Corrections. Not even sure what the guy's name is but here is his offense:
View attachment 308473

He was arrested for Aggrivated Unlawful Use of a Weapon and got a whopping 1 year. Easily, this should be 30 years. I'd go for life myself if the gun was fired. This is what we should get rid of.

Anyway, the mayor of Chicago had nothing to do with this sentence. Did the Democratic Party? Not sure. I don't know what judge sentenced him...I don't know if it was a jury trial or if this was plea-bargained. The County DA shouldn't have taken it whatsoever.

The democrat politicians create the laws....

California Democrats hate the gun, not the gunman – Orange County Register

Now that Democrats have supermajorities in the California state Legislature, they’ve rolled into Sacramento with a zest for lowering the state’s prison population and have interpreted St. Augustine’s words of wisdom to mean, “Hate the gun, not the gunman.”

I say this because, once they finally took a break from preaching about the benefits of stricter gun control, the state Senate voted to loosen sentencing guidelines for criminals convicted of gun crimes.

Currently, California law requires anyone who uses a gun while committing a felony to have their sentence increased by 10 years or more in prison — on top of the normal criminal penalty. If enacted, Senate Bill 620 would eliminate that mandate.

The bill, which passed on a 22-14 party-line vote, with support only from Democrats, now heads to the state Assembly for consideration.

Republicans and the National Rifle Association have vowed to campaign against it.

Why have Democrats suddenly developed a soft spot for criminals convicted of gun crimes? The bill’s author, state Sen. Steve Bradford, D-Gardena, says that he was motivated to write the bill after a 17-year-old riding in a car involved in a drive-by shooting was sentenced to 25 years in prison, even though he claims that he wasn’t the one who pulled the trigger.

and for all those anti-gunners who want to know where criminals get guns....well...this law lowers the prison time for those who give guns to criminals.....

Why is that?

Prop. 57, for example, very deceptively and fundamentally changed the definition of what constitutes a “non-violent” offense.


supplying a firearm to a gang member,

l
felon obtaining a firearm,

discharging a firearm on school grounds

Democrat judges and prosecutors implement their laws...

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/dart-sees-alarming-rise-in-gun-defendants-freed-on-electronic-monitoring/

Judges have treated felony gun charges in a dramatically different way since the reforms were implemented, according to data from the sheriff's office.

Over a nearly four-month period in 2016, judges gave out cash-based bonds in nearly 96 percent of felony gun cases and released just 2 percent on electronic monitors. In the 10 weeks after the bond order took effect in September, though, the number of cash-based bonds for gun cases plummeted to about 40 percent, while those freed on the electronic bracelets jumped to 22 percent.

The amount set for bonds also sharply fell on average, from nearly $134,000 in 2016 to almost $22,000 in 2017, according to the analysis.

By contrast, judges also boosted how often they ordered no bond for those charged with felony gun offenses, to more than 9 percent in 2017, compared with no cases at all in 2016, the analysis showed.

Pfft...

You're the one that wants no jail time for a woman who killed a man in his own home.

You know your posts on that are just silly...right?

I don't know why talking about that shooting has anything to do with the subject of this thread. That is why I didn't bother to answer the silly question.

The woman was an off duty police officer and would have had the gun no matter what the laws were for civilians.

Liberals love to deflect.

she is derailing the thread because she can't respond to the underlying truth, facts and reality of my points.....

 

[candycorn]

Houston isn't really in the list of cities that apply here... Texas in general is tough on gun crime.. And the STATE laws and sentencing TRUMP Harris county or Houston....

Funny...its a "democrat controlled" city; the 3rd or 4th largest in the nation. You'd call it a "mega city". Thanks for trashing your own argument.

The end result is this: if a crime takes place in the city limits, the city police force investigates. In unincorporated areas, the Sheriff's office or constables have jurisdiction. Regardless of who does the arresting, if the crime is serious enough, the county district attorney will indict. The mayor or what party she or he holds has zero to do with it. All of this is fact.

Here is what we have to get rid of:

I just looked up someone by birthdate (06-01-2000) in the Illinois Dept of Corrections. Not even sure what the guy's name is but here is his offense:
View attachment 308473

He was arrested for Aggrivated Unlawful Use of a Weapon and got a whopping 1 year. Easily, this should be 30 years. I'd go for life myself if the gun was fired. This is what we should get rid of.

Anyway, the mayor of Chicago had nothing to do with this sentence. Did the Democratic Party? Not sure. I don't know what judge sentenced him...I don't know if it was a jury trial or if this was plea-bargained. The County DA shouldn't have taken it whatsoever.

The democrat politicians create the laws....

California Democrats hate the gun, not the gunman – Orange County Register

Now that Democrats have supermajorities in the California state Legislature, they’ve rolled into Sacramento with a zest for lowering the state’s prison population and have interpreted St. Augustine’s words of wisdom to mean, “Hate the gun, not the gunman.”

I say this because, once they finally took a break from preaching about the benefits of stricter gun control, the state Senate voted to loosen sentencing guidelines for criminals convicted of gun crimes.

Currently, California law requires anyone who uses a gun while committing a felony to have their sentence increased by 10 years or more in prison — on top of the normal criminal penalty. If enacted, Senate Bill 620 would eliminate that mandate.

The bill, which passed on a 22-14 party-line vote, with support only from Democrats, now heads to the state Assembly for consideration.

Republicans and the National Rifle Association have vowed to campaign against it.

Why have Democrats suddenly developed a soft spot for criminals convicted of gun crimes? The bill’s author, state Sen. Steve Bradford, D-Gardena, says that he was motivated to write the bill after a 17-year-old riding in a car involved in a drive-by shooting was sentenced to 25 years in prison, even though he claims that he wasn’t the one who pulled the trigger.

and for all those anti-gunners who want to know where criminals get guns....well...this law lowers the prison time for those who give guns to criminals.....

Why is that?

Prop. 57, for example, very deceptively and fundamentally changed the definition of what constitutes a “non-violent” offense.


supplying a firearm to a gang member,

l
felon obtaining a firearm,

discharging a firearm on school grounds

Democrat judges and prosecutors implement their laws...

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/dart-sees-alarming-rise-in-gun-defendants-freed-on-electronic-monitoring/

Judges have treated felony gun charges in a dramatically different way since the reforms were implemented, according to data from the sheriff's office.

Over a nearly four-month period in 2016, judges gave out cash-based bonds in nearly 96 percent of felony gun cases and released just 2 percent on electronic monitors. In the 10 weeks after the bond order took effect in September, though, the number of cash-based bonds for gun cases plummeted to about 40 percent, while those freed on the electronic bracelets jumped to 22 percent.

The amount set for bonds also sharply fell on average, from nearly $134,000 in 2016 to almost $22,000 in 2017, according to the analysis.

By contrast, judges also boosted how often they ordered no bond for those charged with felony gun offenses, to more than 9 percent in 2017, compared with no cases at all in 2016, the analysis showed.

Pfft...

You're the one that wants no jail time for a woman who killed a man in his own home.

You know your posts on that are just silly...right?

I don't know why talking about that shooting has anything to do with the subject of this thread. That is why I didn't bother to answer the silly question.

The woman was an off duty police officer and would have had the gun no matter what the laws were for civilians.

Liberals love to deflect.

No deflection.

The OP says bluntly that there should be uniform tough penalties for crimes.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, when you bring up Guyger, all of the sudden the penalties for killing a man in his own home become zero days in jail, nothing, nada, zip.

I’m all for blanket tough mandatory sentences for violent crime. It seems as you and the OP want to make exceptions.

Why is that?

 

[candycorn]

[Q


Amber Guyger killed a man in his own home with a gun. Surely you think she should spend the rest of her life in jail for her gun crime; right?

So are suggesting that police should have to turn in their service weapon when they leave the workplace because they may do something stupid with it?

Don't be dumb.

I'm suggesting that if you kill an unarmed person in his own home, you should go away for a very long time. Life in prison sounds good. So does at least 30 years. True...people make mistakes. But it's also true that people pay for them.

Nobody would disagree with holding people accountable for any crime that they commit.

The disagreement with the gun control debate comes with taking guns away from law abiding people because some non law abiding thugs may commit crimes with them.

The crime should never be the possession of the firearm. We have a Constitution that says very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The crime should be what is done with the firearm, no possessing the firearm.

Killing someone who isn’t armed with your gun in their own home is a crime, right?

That depends on the actual situation......do you understand that?

No.


The man is still dead.

Those are the circumstances

 

[Flash]

Funny...its a "democrat controlled" city; the 3rd or 4th largest in the nation. You'd call it a "mega city". Thanks for trashing your own argument.

The end result is this: if a crime takes place in the city limits, the city police force investigates. In unincorporated areas, the Sheriff's office or constables have jurisdiction. Regardless of who does the arresting, if the crime is serious enough, the county district attorney will indict. The mayor or what party she or he holds has zero to do with it. All of this is fact.

Here is what we have to get rid of:

I just looked up someone by birthdate (06-01-2000) in the Illinois Dept of Corrections. Not even sure what the guy's name is but here is his offense:
View attachment 308473

He was arrested for Aggrivated Unlawful Use of a Weapon and got a whopping 1 year. Easily, this should be 30 years. I'd go for life myself if the gun was fired. This is what we should get rid of.

Anyway, the mayor of Chicago had nothing to do with this sentence. Did the Democratic Party? Not sure. I don't know what judge sentenced him...I don't know if it was a jury trial or if this was plea-bargained. The County DA shouldn't have taken it whatsoever.

The democrat politicians create the laws....

California Democrats hate the gun, not the gunman – Orange County Register

Now that Democrats have supermajorities in the California state Legislature, they’ve rolled into Sacramento with a zest for lowering the state’s prison population and have interpreted St. Augustine’s words of wisdom to mean, “Hate the gun, not the gunman.”

I say this because, once they finally took a break from preaching about the benefits of stricter gun control, the state Senate voted to loosen sentencing guidelines for criminals convicted of gun crimes.

Currently, California law requires anyone who uses a gun while committing a felony to have their sentence increased by 10 years or more in prison — on top of the normal criminal penalty. If enacted, Senate Bill 620 would eliminate that mandate.

The bill, which passed on a 22-14 party-line vote, with support only from Democrats, now heads to the state Assembly for consideration.

Republicans and the National Rifle Association have vowed to campaign against it.

Why have Democrats suddenly developed a soft spot for criminals convicted of gun crimes? The bill’s author, state Sen. Steve Bradford, D-Gardena, says that he was motivated to write the bill after a 17-year-old riding in a car involved in a drive-by shooting was sentenced to 25 years in prison, even though he claims that he wasn’t the one who pulled the trigger.

and for all those anti-gunners who want to know where criminals get guns....well...this law lowers the prison time for those who give guns to criminals.....

Why is that?

Prop. 57, for example, very deceptively and fundamentally changed the definition of what constitutes a “non-violent” offense.


supplying a firearm to a gang member,

l
felon obtaining a firearm,

discharging a firearm on school grounds

Democrat judges and prosecutors implement their laws...

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/dart-sees-alarming-rise-in-gun-defendants-freed-on-electronic-monitoring/

Judges have treated felony gun charges in a dramatically different way since the reforms were implemented, according to data from the sheriff's office.

Over a nearly four-month period in 2016, judges gave out cash-based bonds in nearly 96 percent of felony gun cases and released just 2 percent on electronic monitors. In the 10 weeks after the bond order took effect in September, though, the number of cash-based bonds for gun cases plummeted to about 40 percent, while those freed on the electronic bracelets jumped to 22 percent.

The amount set for bonds also sharply fell on average, from nearly $134,000 in 2016 to almost $22,000 in 2017, according to the analysis.

By contrast, judges also boosted how often they ordered no bond for those charged with felony gun offenses, to more than 9 percent in 2017, compared with no cases at all in 2016, the analysis showed.

Pfft...

You're the one that wants no jail time for a woman who killed a man in his own home.

You know your posts on that are just silly...right?

I don't know why talking about that shooting has anything to do with the subject of this thread. That is why I didn't bother to answer the silly question.

The woman was an off duty police officer and would have had the gun no matter what the laws were for civilians.

Liberals love to deflect.

No deflection.

The OP says bluntly that there should be uniform tough penalties for crimes.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, when you bring up Guyger, all of the sudden the penalties for killing a man in his own home become zero days in jail, nothing, nada, zip.

I’m all for blanket tough mandatory sentences for violent crime. It seems as you and the OP want to make exceptions.

Why is that?

The affirmative action police girl was found guilty of shooting the pot head Negro.

If you wanted her to have harsher penalty then thank you for your opinion.

I personally could care less.

 

[candycorn]

The democrat politicians create the laws....

California Democrats hate the gun, not the gunman – Orange County Register

Now that Democrats have supermajorities in the California state Legislature, they’ve rolled into Sacramento with a zest for lowering the state’s prison population and have interpreted St. Augustine’s words of wisdom to mean, “Hate the gun, not the gunman.”

I say this because, once they finally took a break from preaching about the benefits of stricter gun control, the state Senate voted to loosen sentencing guidelines for criminals convicted of gun crimes.

Currently, California law requires anyone who uses a gun while committing a felony to have their sentence increased by 10 years or more in prison — on top of the normal criminal penalty. If enacted, Senate Bill 620 would eliminate that mandate.

The bill, which passed on a 22-14 party-line vote, with support only from Democrats, now heads to the state Assembly for consideration.

Republicans and the National Rifle Association have vowed to campaign against it.

Why have Democrats suddenly developed a soft spot for criminals convicted of gun crimes? The bill’s author, state Sen. Steve Bradford, D-Gardena, says that he was motivated to write the bill after a 17-year-old riding in a car involved in a drive-by shooting was sentenced to 25 years in prison, even though he claims that he wasn’t the one who pulled the trigger.

and for all those anti-gunners who want to know where criminals get guns....well...this law lowers the prison time for those who give guns to criminals.....

Why is that?

Prop. 57, for example, very deceptively and fundamentally changed the definition of what constitutes a “non-violent” offense.


supplying a firearm to a gang member,

l
felon obtaining a firearm,

discharging a firearm on school grounds

Democrat judges and prosecutors implement their laws...

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/dart-sees-alarming-rise-in-gun-defendants-freed-on-electronic-monitoring/

Judges have treated felony gun charges in a dramatically different way since the reforms were implemented, according to data from the sheriff's office.

Over a nearly four-month period in 2016, judges gave out cash-based bonds in nearly 96 percent of felony gun cases and released just 2 percent on electronic monitors. In the 10 weeks after the bond order took effect in September, though, the number of cash-based bonds for gun cases plummeted to about 40 percent, while those freed on the electronic bracelets jumped to 22 percent.

The amount set for bonds also sharply fell on average, from nearly $134,000 in 2016 to almost $22,000 in 2017, according to the analysis.

By contrast, judges also boosted how often they ordered no bond for those charged with felony gun offenses, to more than 9 percent in 2017, compared with no cases at all in 2016, the analysis showed.

Pfft...

You're the one that wants no jail time for a woman who killed a man in his own home.

You know your posts on that are just silly...right?

I don't know why talking about that shooting has anything to do with the subject of this thread. That is why I didn't bother to answer the silly question.

The woman was an off duty police officer and would have had the gun no matter what the laws were for civilians.

Liberals love to deflect.

No deflection.

The OP says bluntly that there should be uniform tough penalties for crimes.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, when you bring up Guyger, all of the sudden the penalties for killing a man in his own home become zero days in jail, nothing, nada, zip.

I’m all for blanket tough mandatory sentences for violent crime. It seems as you and the OP want to make exceptions.

Why is that?

The affirmative action police girl was found guilty of shooting the pot head Negro.

If you wanted her to have harsher penalty then thank you for your opinion.

I personally could care less.

Yet here you are commenting. Thanks for playing the race card. We all know this is the OP’s real objection to her sitting in jail...but it was nice to hear you confirm it.

 

[bluzman61]

Pfft...

You're the one that wants no jail time for a woman who killed a man in his own home.

You know your posts on that are just silly...right?

I don't know why talking about that shooting has anything to do with the subject of this thread. That is why I didn't bother to answer the silly question.

The woman was an off duty police officer and would have had the gun no matter what the laws were for civilians.

Liberals love to deflect.

No deflection.

The OP says bluntly that there should be uniform tough penalties for crimes.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, when you bring up Guyger, all of the sudden the penalties for killing a man in his own home become zero days in jail, nothing, nada, zip.

I’m all for blanket tough mandatory sentences for violent crime. It seems as you and the OP want to make exceptions.

Why is that?

The affirmative action police girl was found guilty of shooting the pot head Negro.

If you wanted her to have harsher penalty then thank you for your opinion.

I personally could care less.

Yet here you are commenting. Thanks for playing the race card. We all know this is the OP’s real objection to her sitting in jail...but it was nice to hear you confirm it.

????????????<<<<<<<<<<??????????????

 

[2aguy]

Pfft...

You're the one that wants no jail time for a woman who killed a man in his own home.

You know your posts on that are just silly...right?

I don't know why talking about that shooting has anything to do with the subject of this thread. That is why I didn't bother to answer the silly question.

The woman was an off duty police officer and would have had the gun no matter what the laws were for civilians.

Liberals love to deflect.

No deflection.

The OP says bluntly that there should be uniform tough penalties for crimes.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, when you bring up Guyger, all of the sudden the penalties for killing a man in his own home become zero days in jail, nothing, nada, zip.

I’m all for blanket tough mandatory sentences for violent crime. It seems as you and the OP want to make exceptions.

Why is that?

The affirmative action police girl was found guilty of shooting the pot head Negro.

If you wanted her to have harsher penalty then thank you for your opinion.

I personally could care less.

Yet here you are commenting. Thanks for playing the race card. We all know this is the OP’s real objection to her sitting in jail...but it was nice to hear you confirm it.

No.....the objection is proven in your inability to show the motive in the accusation that she "murdered," the guy. Nine pages of posts, and you still haven't bothered to explain why she went up to his apartment broke in and murdered him. Versus......her statement that she got off on the wrong floor, thought it was her apartment, found the door open and a strange man in what she thought was her apartment......

An accident, not murder.

You are throwing out...."racism, racism, racism," to distract from the point of this thread....that the real reason we have gun crime in the United States is the policies of the democrat party.

I have provided links and information supporting my position......you have provided a rare, one off case so you can throw out "racism, racism, racism...don't look at the idea in this thread...."

The gun violence in the United States is driven by the lax crime policies of the democrat party.......they let out violent, repeat gun offenders....the people who are committing the gun crime........because you guys hate guns and gun owners.......and do not care about actual crime.

In the last article I posted it was stated that in Balitmore, there are 100 known gang members doing almost all of the shooting and murder in that city.....and the democrat party in charge keeps letting them out of jail...on bond, often no cash bond......and out of prison with short sentences........my plan, which would put them in prison for 30 years if they are caught with an illegal gun and life if they use a gun in the commission of a crime....would actually work.

You don't care about stopping them. It doesn't get guns out of the hands of normal gun owners so it has no interest for you.

So you post "racism, racism racism...." to distract from the truth about the democrat party.

 

[Flash]

You know your posts on that are just silly...right?

I don't know why talking about that shooting has anything to do with the subject of this thread. That is why I didn't bother to answer the silly question.

The woman was an off duty police officer and would have had the gun no matter what the laws were for civilians.

Liberals love to deflect.

No deflection.

The OP says bluntly that there should be uniform tough penalties for crimes.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, when you bring up Guyger, all of the sudden the penalties for killing a man in his own home become zero days in jail, nothing, nada, zip.

I’m all for blanket tough mandatory sentences for violent crime. It seems as you and the OP want to make exceptions.

Why is that?

The affirmative action police girl was found guilty of shooting the pot head Negro.

If you wanted her to have harsher penalty then thank you for your opinion.

I personally could care less.

Yet here you are commenting. Thanks for playing the race card. We all know this is the OP’s real objection to her sitting in jail...but it was nice to hear you confirm it.

No.....the objection is proven in your inability to show the motive in the accusation that she "murdered," the guy. Nine pages of posts, and you still haven't bothered to explain why she went up to his apartment broke in and murdered him. Versus......her statement that she got off on the wrong floor, thought it was her apartment, found the door open and a strange man in what she thought was her apartment......

An accident, not murder.

You are throwing out...."racism, racism, racism," to distract from the point of this thread....that the real reason we have gun crime in the United States is the policies of the democrat party.

I have provided links and information supporting my position......you have provided a rare, one off case so you can throw out "racism, racism, racism...don't look at the idea in this thread...."

The gun violence in the United States is driven by the lax crime policies of the democrat party.......they let out violent, repeat gun offenders....the people who are committing the gun crime........because you guys hate guns and gun owners.......and do not care about actual crime.

In the last article I posted it was stated that in Balitmore, there are 100 known gang members doing almost all of the shooting and murder in that city.....and the democrat party in charge keeps letting them out of jail...on bond, often no cash bond......and out of prison with short sentences........my plan, which would put them in prison for 30 years if they are caught with an illegal gun and life if they use a gun in the commission of a crime....would actually work.

You don't care about stopping them. It doesn't get guns out of the hands of normal gun owners so it has no interest for you.

So you post "racism, racism racism...." to distract from the truth about the democrat party.

That wasn't gun violence. It was a gun accident by somebody that was trained to know better. She was found guilty so I don't know why the Liberals are complaining. Of course they are still complaining about the Travyon Martin case so go figure.

You presented a very logical argument and the only response you got was a poor attempt to deflect from the excellent point.

Most of the time is just a waste of time trying to educate the Liberals.

 

[candycorn]

I don't know why talking about that shooting has anything to do with the subject of this thread. That is why I didn't bother to answer the silly question.

The woman was an off duty police officer and would have had the gun no matter what the laws were for civilians.

Liberals love to deflect.

No deflection.

The OP says bluntly that there should be uniform tough penalties for crimes.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, when you bring up Guyger, all of the sudden the penalties for killing a man in his own home become zero days in jail, nothing, nada, zip.

I’m all for blanket tough mandatory sentences for violent crime. It seems as you and the OP want to make exceptions.

Why is that?

The affirmative action police girl was found guilty of shooting the pot head Negro.

If you wanted her to have harsher penalty then thank you for your opinion.

I personally could care less.

Yet here you are commenting. Thanks for playing the race card. We all know this is the OP’s real objection to her sitting in jail...but it was nice to hear you confirm it.

No.....the objection is proven in your inability to show the motive in the accusation that she "murdered," the guy. Nine pages of posts, and you still haven't bothered to explain why she went up to his apartment broke in and murdered him. Versus......her statement that she got off on the wrong floor, thought it was her apartment, found the door open and a strange man in what she thought was her apartment......

An accident, not murder.

You are throwing out...."racism, racism, racism," to distract from the point of this thread....that the real reason we have gun crime in the United States is the policies of the democrat party.

I have provided links and information supporting my position......you have provided a rare, one off case so you can throw out "racism, racism, racism...don't look at the idea in this thread...."

The gun violence in the United States is driven by the lax crime policies of the democrat party.......they let out violent, repeat gun offenders....the people who are committing the gun crime........because you guys hate guns and gun owners.......and do not care about actual crime.

In the last article I posted it was stated that in Balitmore, there are 100 known gang members doing almost all of the shooting and murder in that city.....and the democrat party in charge keeps letting them out of jail...on bond, often no cash bond......and out of prison with short sentences........my plan, which would put them in prison for 30 years if they are caught with an illegal gun and life if they use a gun in the commission of a crime....would actually work.

You don't care about stopping them. It doesn't get guns out of the hands of normal gun owners so it has no interest for you.

So you post "racism, racism racism...." to distract from the truth about the democrat party.

That wasn't gun violence. It was a gun accident by somebody that was trained to know better. She was found guilty so I don't know why the Liberals are complaining. Of course they are still complaining about the Travyon Martin case so go figure.

You presented a very logical argument and the only response you got was a poor attempt to deflect from the excellent point.

Most of the time is just a waste of time trying to educate the Liberals.

10 years for a murder conviction. If the DA would have gotten her for breaking and entering she would have gotten a more severe sentence.

 

[candycorn]

You know your posts on that are just silly...right?

I don't know why talking about that shooting has anything to do with the subject of this thread. That is why I didn't bother to answer the silly question.

The woman was an off duty police officer and would have had the gun no matter what the laws were for civilians.

Liberals love to deflect.

No deflection.

The OP says bluntly that there should be uniform tough penalties for crimes.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, when you bring up Guyger, all of the sudden the penalties for killing a man in his own home become zero days in jail, nothing, nada, zip.

I’m all for blanket tough mandatory sentences for violent crime. It seems as you and the OP want to make exceptions.

Why is that?

The affirmative action police girl was found guilty of shooting the pot head Negro.

If you wanted her to have harsher penalty then thank you for your opinion.

I personally could care less.

Yet here you are commenting. Thanks for playing the race card. We all know this is the OP’s real objection to her sitting in jail...but it was nice to hear you confirm it.

No.....the objection is proven in your inability to show the motive in the accusation that she "murdered," the guy. Nine pages of posts, and you still haven't bothered to explain why she went up to his apartment broke in and murdered him. Versus......her statement that she got off on the wrong floor, thought it was her apartment, found the door open and a strange man in what she thought was her apartment......

An accident, not murder.

You are throwing out...."racism, racism, racism," to distract from the point of this thread....that the real reason we have gun crime in the United States is the policies of the democrat party.

I have provided links and information supporting my position......you have provided a rare, one off case so you can throw out "racism, racism, racism...don't look at the idea in this thread...."

The gun violence in the United States is driven by the lax crime policies of the democrat party.......they let out violent, repeat gun offenders....the people who are committing the gun crime........because you guys hate guns and gun owners.......and do not care about actual crime.

In the last article I posted it was stated that in Balitmore, there are 100 known gang members doing almost all of the shooting and murder in that city.....and the democrat party in charge keeps letting them out of jail...on bond, often no cash bond......and out of prison with short sentences........my plan, which would put them in prison for 30 years if they are caught with an illegal gun and life if they use a gun in the commission of a crime....would actually work.

You don't care about stopping them. It doesn't get guns out of the hands of normal gun owners so it has no interest for you.

So you post "racism, racism racism...." to distract from the truth about the democrat party.

That she murdered someone isn’t an accusation; she was convicted.

Your plan is good. But for some reason you don’t want her convicted.

Flash revealed why you guys don’t want this murderer to do serious time

 

[candycorn]

I don't know why talking about that shooting has anything to do with the subject of this thread. That is why I didn't bother to answer the silly question.

The woman was an off duty police officer and would have had the gun no matter what the laws were for civilians.

Liberals love to deflect.

No deflection.

The OP says bluntly that there should be uniform tough penalties for crimes.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, when you bring up Guyger, all of the sudden the penalties for killing a man in his own home become zero days in jail, nothing, nada, zip.

I’m all for blanket tough mandatory sentences for violent crime. It seems as you and the OP want to make exceptions.

Why is that?

The affirmative action police girl was found guilty of shooting the pot head Negro.

If you wanted her to have harsher penalty then thank you for your opinion.

I personally could care less.

Yet here you are commenting. Thanks for playing the race card. We all know this is the OP’s real objection to her sitting in jail...but it was nice to hear you confirm it.

No.....the objection is proven in your inability to show the motive in the accusation that she "murdered," the guy. Nine pages of posts, and you still haven't bothered to explain why she went up to his apartment broke in and murdered him. Versus......her statement that she got off on the wrong floor, thought it was her apartment, found the door open and a strange man in what she thought was her apartment......

An accident, not murder.

You are throwing out...."racism, racism, racism," to distract from the point of this thread....that the real reason we have gun crime in the United States is the policies of the democrat party.

I have provided links and information supporting my position......you have provided a rare, one off case so you can throw out "racism, racism, racism...don't look at the idea in this thread...."

The gun violence in the United States is driven by the lax crime policies of the democrat party.......they let out violent, repeat gun offenders....the people who are committing the gun crime........because you guys hate guns and gun owners.......and do not care about actual crime.

In the last article I posted it was stated that in Balitmore, there are 100 known gang members doing almost all of the shooting and murder in that city.....and the democrat party in charge keeps letting them out of jail...on bond, often no cash bond......and out of prison with short sentences........my plan, which would put them in prison for 30 years if they are caught with an illegal gun and life if they use a gun in the commission of a crime....would actually work.

You don't care about stopping them. It doesn't get guns out of the hands of normal gun owners so it has no interest for you.

So you post "racism, racism racism...." to distract from the truth about the democrat party.

That wasn't gun violence. It was a gun accident by somebody that was trained to know better. She was found guilty so I don't know why the Liberals are complaining. Of course they are still complaining about the Travyon Martin case so go figure.

You presented a very logical argument and the only response you got was a poor attempt to deflect from the excellent point.

Most of the time is just a waste of time trying to educate the Liberals.

killing someone in their own home with a gun isn’t gun violence?

is home invasion still a crime?

 

[2aguy]

I don't know why talking about that shooting has anything to do with the subject of this thread. That is why I didn't bother to answer the silly question.

The woman was an off duty police officer and would have had the gun no matter what the laws were for civilians.

Liberals love to deflect.

No deflection.

The OP says bluntly that there should be uniform tough penalties for crimes.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, when you bring up Guyger, all of the sudden the penalties for killing a man in his own home become zero days in jail, nothing, nada, zip.

I’m all for blanket tough mandatory sentences for violent crime. It seems as you and the OP want to make exceptions.

Why is that?

The affirmative action police girl was found guilty of shooting the pot head Negro.

If you wanted her to have harsher penalty then thank you for your opinion.

I personally could care less.

Yet here you are commenting. Thanks for playing the race card. We all know this is the OP’s real objection to her sitting in jail...but it was nice to hear you confirm it.

No.....the objection is proven in your inability to show the motive in the accusation that she "murdered," the guy. Nine pages of posts, and you still haven't bothered to explain why she went up to his apartment broke in and murdered him. Versus......her statement that she got off on the wrong floor, thought it was her apartment, found the door open and a strange man in what she thought was her apartment......

An accident, not murder.

You are throwing out...."racism, racism, racism," to distract from the point of this thread....that the real reason we have gun crime in the United States is the policies of the democrat party.

I have provided links and information supporting my position......you have provided a rare, one off case so you can throw out "racism, racism, racism...don't look at the idea in this thread...."

The gun violence in the United States is driven by the lax crime policies of the democrat party.......they let out violent, repeat gun offenders....the people who are committing the gun crime........because you guys hate guns and gun owners.......and do not care about actual crime.

In the last article I posted it was stated that in Balitmore, there are 100 known gang members doing almost all of the shooting and murder in that city.....and the democrat party in charge keeps letting them out of jail...on bond, often no cash bond......and out of prison with short sentences........my plan, which would put them in prison for 30 years if they are caught with an illegal gun and life if they use a gun in the commission of a crime....would actually work.

You don't care about stopping them. It doesn't get guns out of the hands of normal gun owners so it has no interest for you.

So you post "racism, racism racism...." to distract from the truth about the democrat party.

That she murdered someone isn’t an accusation; she was convicted.

Your plan is good. But for some reason you don’t want her convicted.

Flash revealed why you guys don’t want this murderer to do serious time

The facts don't match the prosecution or the verdict.....it is kinda that simple......

So you think the Emmet Till jury was right too....interesting....

 

[candycorn]

No deflection.

The OP says bluntly that there should be uniform tough penalties for crimes.

I couldn’t agree more.

However, when you bring up Guyger, all of the sudden the penalties for killing a man in his own home become zero days in jail, nothing, nada, zip.

I’m all for blanket tough mandatory sentences for violent crime. It seems as you and the OP want to make exceptions.

Why is that?

The affirmative action police girl was found guilty of shooting the pot head Negro.

If you wanted her to have harsher penalty then thank you for your opinion.

I personally could care less.

Yet here you are commenting. Thanks for playing the race card. We all know this is the OP’s real objection to her sitting in jail...but it was nice to hear you confirm it.

No.....the objection is proven in your inability to show the motive in the accusation that she "murdered," the guy. Nine pages of posts, and you still haven't bothered to explain why she went up to his apartment broke in and murdered him. Versus......her statement that she got off on the wrong floor, thought it was her apartment, found the door open and a strange man in what she thought was her apartment......

An accident, not murder.

You are throwing out...."racism, racism, racism," to distract from the point of this thread....that the real reason we have gun crime in the United States is the policies of the democrat party.

I have provided links and information supporting my position......you have provided a rare, one off case so you can throw out "racism, racism, racism...don't look at the idea in this thread...."

The gun violence in the United States is driven by the lax crime policies of the democrat party.......they let out violent, repeat gun offenders....the people who are committing the gun crime........because you guys hate guns and gun owners.......and do not care about actual crime.

In the last article I posted it was stated that in Balitmore, there are 100 known gang members doing almost all of the shooting and murder in that city.....and the democrat party in charge keeps letting them out of jail...on bond, often no cash bond......and out of prison with short sentences........my plan, which would put them in prison for 30 years if they are caught with an illegal gun and life if they use a gun in the commission of a crime....would actually work.

You don't care about stopping them. It doesn't get guns out of the hands of normal gun owners so it has no interest for you.

So you post "racism, racism racism...." to distract from the truth about the democrat party.

That she murdered someone isn’t an accusation; she was convicted.

Your plan is good. But for some reason you don’t want her convicted.

Flash revealed why you guys don’t want this murderer to do serious time

The facts don't match the prosecution or the verdict.....it is kinda that simple......

So you think the Emmet Till jury was right too....interesting....

Juries make mistakes all the time as do prosecutors...and as do defense attorneys. Are you willing to go through the case of every murder committed by negro (as Flash put it) ghetto youths and render a verdict of your own? No? But you are willing to do it for this white lady? Interesting.

 

[2aguy]

The affirmative action police girl was found guilty of shooting the pot head Negro.

If you wanted her to have harsher penalty then thank you for your opinion.

I personally could care less.

Yet here you are commenting. Thanks for playing the race card. We all know this is the OP’s real objection to her sitting in jail...but it was nice to hear you confirm it.

No.....the objection is proven in your inability to show the motive in the accusation that she "murdered," the guy. Nine pages of posts, and you still haven't bothered to explain why she went up to his apartment broke in and murdered him. Versus......her statement that she got off on the wrong floor, thought it was her apartment, found the door open and a strange man in what she thought was her apartment......

An accident, not murder.

You are throwing out...."racism, racism, racism," to distract from the point of this thread....that the real reason we have gun crime in the United States is the policies of the democrat party.

I have provided links and information supporting my position......you have provided a rare, one off case so you can throw out "racism, racism, racism...don't look at the idea in this thread...."

The gun violence in the United States is driven by the lax crime policies of the democrat party.......they let out violent, repeat gun offenders....the people who are committing the gun crime........because you guys hate guns and gun owners.......and do not care about actual crime.

In the last article I posted it was stated that in Balitmore, there are 100 known gang members doing almost all of the shooting and murder in that city.....and the democrat party in charge keeps letting them out of jail...on bond, often no cash bond......and out of prison with short sentences........my plan, which would put them in prison for 30 years if they are caught with an illegal gun and life if they use a gun in the commission of a crime....would actually work.

You don't care about stopping them. It doesn't get guns out of the hands of normal gun owners so it has no interest for you.

So you post "racism, racism racism...." to distract from the truth about the democrat party.

That she murdered someone isn’t an accusation; she was convicted.

Your plan is good. But for some reason you don’t want her convicted.

Flash revealed why you guys don’t want this murderer to do serious time

The facts don't match the prosecution or the verdict.....it is kinda that simple......

So you think the Emmet Till jury was right too....interesting....

Juries make mistakes all the time as do prosecutors...and as do defense attorneys. Are you willing to go through the case of every murder committed by negro (as Flash put it) ghetto youths and render a verdict of your own? No? But you are willing to do it for this white lady? Interesting.

You brought up this specific case, not me. You asked me about it, I stated what I think. You brought up this case to distract from this thread and to call me a racist......typical behavior on your part when you can't actually engage intelligently on the actual thread premise.

 

[candycorn]

Im simply saying that if you are convicted of a gun crime, you should get the same sentence that the guy/gal got before you. I love the OP’s idea. Why he doesn’t want it enforced in her case...I think you characterized it right; the victim was a negro and because of that...there should be no penalty. It’s sad and disgusting but...that is your stance.

 

[2aguy]

[Q

killing someone in their own home with a gun isn’t gun violence?

is home invasion still a crime?

You are deflecting the thread.

Who gives a shit? The incompetent affirmative action woman police officer was found guilty of doing something she shouldn't have done.

What the hell does that have to do with the filthy ass Democrat gun polices, which is the subject of this thread?

We could have the strictest gun policies in the world and that dumb bitch would have still had her gun to shoot the guy because she was a police officer.

This is the CDZ. Watch your step son.

Im simply saying that if you are convicted of a gun crime, you should get the same sentence that the guy/gal got before you. I love the OP’s idea. Why he doesn’t want it enforced in her case...I think you characterized it right; the victim was a negro and because of that...there should be no penalty. It’s sad and disgusting but...that is your stance.

Again...you have no point, so you post "racism, racism, racism...."

You bring up her case out of the 10,265 other cases and have nothing to say about the premise of the thread.........

Her conviction was wrong, it was political...you still haven't told us what her motive was for killing the guy.......

 

[Flash]

The affirmative action police girl was found guilty of shooting the pot head Negro.

If you wanted her to have harsher penalty then thank you for your opinion.

I personally could care less.

Yet here you are commenting. Thanks for playing the race card. We all know this is the OP’s real objection to her sitting in jail...but it was nice to hear you confirm it.

No.....the objection is proven in your inability to show the motive in the accusation that she "murdered," the guy. Nine pages of posts, and you still haven't bothered to explain why she went up to his apartment broke in and murdered him. Versus......her statement that she got off on the wrong floor, thought it was her apartment, found the door open and a strange man in what she thought was her apartment......

An accident, not murder.

You are throwing out...."racism, racism, racism," to distract from the point of this thread....that the real reason we have gun crime in the United States is the policies of the democrat party.

I have provided links and information supporting my position......you have provided a rare, one off case so you can throw out "racism, racism, racism...don't look at the idea in this thread...."

The gun violence in the United States is driven by the lax crime policies of the democrat party.......they let out violent, repeat gun offenders....the people who are committing the gun crime........because you guys hate guns and gun owners.......and do not care about actual crime.

In the last article I posted it was stated that in Balitmore, there are 100 known gang members doing almost all of the shooting and murder in that city.....and the democrat party in charge keeps letting them out of jail...on bond, often no cash bond......and out of prison with short sentences........my plan, which would put them in prison for 30 years if they are caught with an illegal gun and life if they use a gun in the commission of a crime....would actually work.

You don't care about stopping them. It doesn't get guns out of the hands of normal gun owners so it has no interest for you.

So you post "racism, racism racism...." to distract from the truth about the democrat party.

That she murdered someone isn’t an accusation; she was convicted.

Your plan is good. But for some reason you don’t want her convicted.

Flash revealed why you guys don’t want this murderer to do serious time

The facts don't match the prosecution or the verdict.....it is kinda that simple......

So you think the Emmet Till jury was right too....interesting....

Juries make mistakes all the time as do prosecutors...and as do defense attorneys. Are you willing to go through the case of every murder committed by negro (as Flash put it) ghetto youths and render a verdict of your own? No? But you are willing to do it for this white lady? Interesting.

The Negros commit the great majority of the gun crimes in this country. Without the inner city Negro gun crime (gang bangers, druggies, street thugs, etc) the US would be far down the list of countries in gun crime.

These Democrat polices of not enforcing gun crime in the Negro population contribute to the problem. Democrats are in control of the government of the big city shitholes were the great majority of the gun crimes takes place but yet it continues to go on. See the problem?

 

[candycorn]

Yet here you are commenting. Thanks for playing the race card. We all know this is the OP’s real objection to her sitting in jail...but it was nice to hear you confirm it.

No.....the objection is proven in your inability to show the motive in the accusation that she "murdered," the guy. Nine pages of posts, and you still haven't bothered to explain why she went up to his apartment broke in and murdered him. Versus......her statement that she got off on the wrong floor, thought it was her apartment, found the door open and a strange man in what she thought was her apartment......

An accident, not murder.

You are throwing out...."racism, racism, racism," to distract from the point of this thread....that the real reason we have gun crime in the United States is the policies of the democrat party.

I have provided links and information supporting my position......you have provided a rare, one off case so you can throw out "racism, racism, racism...don't look at the idea in this thread...."

The gun violence in the United States is driven by the lax crime policies of the democrat party.......they let out violent, repeat gun offenders....the people who are committing the gun crime........because you guys hate guns and gun owners.......and do not care about actual crime.

In the last article I posted it was stated that in Balitmore, there are 100 known gang members doing almost all of the shooting and murder in that city.....and the democrat party in charge keeps letting them out of jail...on bond, often no cash bond......and out of prison with short sentences........my plan, which would put them in prison for 30 years if they are caught with an illegal gun and life if they use a gun in the commission of a crime....would actually work.

You don't care about stopping them. It doesn't get guns out of the hands of normal gun owners so it has no interest for you.

So you post "racism, racism racism...." to distract from the truth about the democrat party.

That she murdered someone isn’t an accusation; she was convicted.

Your plan is good. But for some reason you don’t want her convicted.

Flash revealed why you guys don’t want this murderer to do serious time

The facts don't match the prosecution or the verdict.....it is kinda that simple......

So you think the Emmet Till jury was right too....interesting....

Juries make mistakes all the time as do prosecutors...and as do defense attorneys. Are you willing to go through the case of every murder committed by negro (as Flash put it) ghetto youths and render a verdict of your own? No? But you are willing to do it for this white lady? Interesting.

You brought up this specific case, not me. You asked me about it, I stated what I think. You brought up this case to distract from this thread and to call me a racist......typical behavior on your part when you can't actually engage intelligently on the actual thread premise.

What you think was stated early on...30 years or whatever for gun crimes.

that only applies to some people apparently.