Criminal gangs in the USA have swelled to an estimated 1 million members responsible for up to 80% of crimes in communities across the nation, according to a gang threat assessment compiled by federal officials. [More]
Say, I've got a swell idea...
Let's disarm you and me...
13 comments:
The paramilitary approach to the War on Drugs. When your enemy becomes ruthless, the only way to survive and prosper is to build your own army, complete with foot soldiers, cannon fodder and tacticians. And since dealing in drugs can mean a life sentence, why not get into everything else?
INTENDED consequences. When a barbarian army rules parts of your city, only a real army can stop them, goes the theory. The King's Army will burn the peasants' fields and huts rather than let the barbarians benefit from them. And rather than let the peasants go armed and defend them.
Worse than medieval.
And with a million jobs a day being erased, what are people supposed to do?
$6 billion dollar of Obama's stimulus package is going to ACORN, the organiation that rallied voters to elect him, and is accused of vote fraud. Honest conservative/libertarian types can dry up and blow away. Literally.
Funny you don't see this stuff in the main stream propaganda spew.
This is a huge point that needs to be addressed as David puts in in, lets disarm you and me. Lets change the way we deal with criminals and not lawful citizens.
But the problem with that would be less criminals so what are the parasites in the criminal justice system going to do for work?
Interesting the article mentioned encrypted email. Don't ever expect email to be private unless you use encryption. This goes for criminals, governments, and patriots alike. GNUpg ftw.
"Whenever someone gets shot, ever notice how they always want to take the guns away from the ones who DIDN’T do it?"
Worse, the guns are taken away from those who defended themselves!
list of countries by size of armed forces (active troops).
1. PRC: 2,255,000
2. USA: 1,380,000 (we hire a lot of mercenaries, mind you)
3. india: 1,325,000 (they can't even handle 11 terrorists, though)
4. russia: 1,245,000 (tough as nails)
5. DPRK: 1,106,000 (probably 95% starving farmers)
6. US gangs: ~1,000,000 (trained in prisons)
7. ROK: 687,000
and how many gun owners are there in the US? 80 million households?
Has anyone stopped to consider:
1. The timing of this report.
2. Who will use it.
3. How it will be used & portrayed.
4. What solutions will be offered.
WP, yeah, I kind of thing David's last sentence indicates that he has considered it.
As well as the rest of us.
The presence of more guns won't help the situation...don't y'all know that. A gang member is more likely to take away your gun and use it against you than you use against them.
I'm glad I sold all my guns. The world is a safer place now.
Right, JM.
If it keeps just one child safe.
BTW - some folks might actually believe that what you wrote wasn't tongue in cheek...
Thank The ACLU for its help with police attempts to work on gangs with anti gang loitering suits. All the way back to 1997 and 1999.
May they sleep in the bed they made.
anti-loitering laws are nothing more than a violation of our constitutional right to free assembly. Look it up, first amendment.
I don't like criminal gangs either, but if we trample the constitution to abuse them, even if they deserve it, we can thusly be trampled as the precedent will have been established.
Don't we have enough of that now? What with "free speech zones" etc.
Not for me, catch them breaking the law, do the work and put them away for what they actually do that is harmful.
Loitering laws are punishment of potential behavior. That is indeed a travesty in a free society. Can you prove to me that you will never molest a child, rob a bank, jack a car, deal dope, or rape an old woman or man? NO! You cannot.
Yet you have the potential to do all these things. Gun control laws are nothing but punishment of potential behavior. See the connection? I thought we were fighting that crap.
Bad behavior itself can and should be punished if it is criminal. But we should not be able to punish someone for what they might maybe perhaps are going to do in our opinions.
Surely you can see that. Either we believe in liberty and its most strenuous guidelines and strictures as written in the constitution or we have no claim on those principles of liberty ourselves.
Maybe the numbers have gone up because they must now include bankers in that number.
Post a Comment