Balta1701 Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Feb 4, 2013 -> 04:06 PM) Oh, but that's one in a million, an outlier, doesn't count, didn't happen, was a planted story by the NRA....... Oh, ok, so I should go find the list of 100 people per day who get gunned down in this country and you'll be emotionally moved by each one of their stories? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 4, 2013 -> 03:07 PM) Oh, ok, so I should go find the list of 100 people per day who get gunned down in this country and you'll be emotionally moved by each one of their stories? Gunned down by people who have guns ILLEGALLY. Not law abiding gun owners. The 99+% who legally own guns do not commit the crimes you speak of that make up most if not all your statistics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 the easier it is to get legal guns, the easier it is to get illegal guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 4, 2013 -> 03:20 PM) the easier it is to get legal guns, the easier it is to get illegal guns. So punish the people that follow the law with more laws that do nothing to stop the problem. Got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Feb 4, 2013 -> 04:30 PM) So punish the people that follow the law with more laws that do nothing to stop the problem. Got it. How do you know that a law will do nothing to stop the problem if it is untried? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Feb 4, 2013 -> 03:31 PM) How do you know that a law will do nothing to stop the problem if it is untried? I know meth would seriously f*** me up and I haven't tried that.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Feb 4, 2013 -> 03:36 PM) I know meth would seriously f*** me up and I haven't tried that.... Or we could look at how well prohibitions have worked out historically in this country... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 4, 2013 Share Posted February 4, 2013 mildly successful, hampered by gun violence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Something tells me that if a Republican administration (and a President with a last name rhyming with "push") concluded this, the media would have caved in on themselves. But Obama? Nothing to see here, move along. http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/...-americans?lite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 that memo is absolutely terrible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 5, 2013 -> 02:11 PM) Something tells me that if a Republican administration (and a President with a last name rhyming with "push") concluded this, the media would have caved in on themselves. But Obama? Nothing to see here, move along. http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/...-americans?lite It's also showed up on basically every website I read, with words like chilling, murder applied to it. If you're genuinely outraged by it I'm happy to note agreement with that...yet somehow I'm skeptical that it's even worth my time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 right, let's note who this came from: ABC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 ok, perhaps i'm wrong. I didn't see it on any news coverage this morning on TV and it's not on cnn.com right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 5, 2013 -> 01:20 PM) right, let's note who this came from: ABC. You mean NBC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 5, 2013 -> 02:21 PM) ok, perhaps i'm wrong. I didn't see it on any news coverage this morning on TV and it's not on cnn.com right now. NBC was actually the ones who uncovered the white paper, and I'll happily applaud them. They did a good journalistic service here. It'd be very nice if there was actually some bit of public discussion on this, I think the lack of judicial review is appalling. But I know when I say those same things about the U.S. actually killing a legit terrorist, I hear crickets. Even if you note the huge number of collateral casualties, which the US DOD simply denies exist in one of the sickest jokes around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 (edited) Ah, right, for some reason I thought it was ABC that broke the story. Regardless, it's being reported by every media outlet. Every lefty blog I've seen is condemning it and drawing comparisons to John Yoo's torture memo. e.g. here's democracy now! on this: http://www.democracynow.org/2013/2/5/kill_...aked_obama_memo Edited February 5, 2013 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
farmteam Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 5, 2013 -> 01:28 PM) Every lefty blog I've seen is condemning it and drawing comparisons to John Yoo's torture memo. Probably the best comparison, though the torture memo isn't as cut-and-dry as the media wants people to think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 QUOTE (farmteam @ Feb 5, 2013 -> 02:32 PM) Probably the best comparison, though the torture memo isn't as cut-and-dry as the media wants people to think. This probably isn't either... Which means the proper response would be legislation to fix those loopholes. I could even tolerate something like the FISA court existing for this type of case, where I don't even have to see it or know about it unless I'm put on that list for some reason. But the reality is...Congress isn't going to react to protect the rights of accused terrorists. They're evil, and that's the standard. It's not getting as much press coverage as it should either...same reason. It's old news. The administration is killing a bunch of people with flying machines of death, some of them are occasionally bad people, and so it's ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/02/04/chi...some-911-calls/ So the Chicago Police won't come help you if your s*** gets stolen and the robbers are gone. I can't wait until this stupid City gets sued after someone gets killed/raped/assaulted when they report a crime, the police fail to show up, and the robber/criminal sticks around knowing the police won't show up. What a stupid, idiotic decision. And you people want to take away a persons ability to protect themselves? And really, isn't this giving criminals free reign? There's no fear that the cops will show up now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 (edited) IIRC there was a case in California several years ago where the police took an inordinate amount of time to respond to a call, the woman was raped and I think killed, but there was no finding against the police department. maybe this is what I was thinking of? similar, but I think there's another one out there http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics...cotus.html?_r=0 pretty sure this is the one I was thinking of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia Edited February 5, 2013 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 I'd argue the difference here is that their decision to no longer respond to the calls AT ALL, as a matter of procedure, is willful, which gets you past the immunity protections the city has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 5, 2013 -> 03:29 PM) IIRC there was a case in California several years ago where the police took an inordinate amount of time to respond to a call, the woman was raped and I think killed, but there was no finding against the police department. maybe this is what I was thinking of? similar, but I think there's another one out there http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics...cotus.html?_r=0 pretty sure this is the one I was thinking of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia Wow. Not a special relationship? Who the hell do they work for?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Is there some kind of ongoing budget battle? This could be a PR move to get more resources/officers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Feb 5, 2013 -> 03:32 PM) Is there some kind of ongoing budget battle? This could be a PR move to get more resources/officers. Oh I'm sure it's a cost cutting measure and the "we can devote more cops to 'future crime'" is the PR cover. It's just incredibly sad that the CPD is basically throwing up its hands and saying "yeah, we can't do anything for you anyway, so what's the point in talking to you face to face?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 No PD has unlimited resources, though. Prioritization decisions have to be made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts