Ok.
|
Ok.
Here's a great idea... Bloomberg thinks cops should go on strike nationwide until they get gun control.
Um, and then we would need guns even more.Quote:
“I don’t understand why police officers across this country don’t stand up collectively and say we’re going to go on strike, we’re not going to protect you unless you, the public, through your legislature, do what’s required to keep us safe,’’ he told CNN’s Piers Morgan.
Amazing .NYC has some of the toughest gun laws in the nation ;and yet he still thinks there is a need to have a stop and frisk policy in the inner city to intercept "illegal "guns .What would change with more regulation?
Their would be less assault weapons and copkiller bullets on the streets.
Maybe the cops should go on strike since it's their lives on the line.
Here are the Nationwide stats for this year :
21 of the 53 officers who died in the first half of 2012 were killed in traffic related incidents
19 were shot to death, down 50 percent from last year.
13 officers died due to other causes.
The stats don't specify the type of gun used in the cop killings. Most likely they were hand held pistols .
So you're for anarchy.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
P.S. It's MY life and YOUR life on the line, too if the cops disappear. Besides the fact that cops typically can't go on strike that's a stupid idea.
Then tell your congressman you want some common sense restrictions and regulations that helps the cops do their job safely!
You can still hunt bambi without an assault rifle or hollow point bullets that penetrate a kevlar vest can't you? When is it anarchy to support a cop huh? Or a cop to support himself because you don't?
If the cops strike anarchy is what you'll get. You said you support a strike, you're going to get anarchy if that happens. And as tom showed, guns don't seem to be the cops' main problem, it's vehicles.
Tom is wrong. So are the stop and frisk freaks!
If you protect your local cop, he won't need to go on strike... DUH!!
Let me make it simple for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Tal: "maybe the cops should go on strike since its their lives on the line."
What would be the consequences of that?
If you protect your local cop, he won't need to go on strike..................DUH!!!!
How am I wrong ? I quoted actual stats ,and have already told you that I favor some of the restrictions you suggested ;and one I suggested that you didn't think of ,which was key to the Aurora case.
That's another dodge.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
That's all the Current Events board is - dodging and emotionally charged posts. You new here? LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
As me a question, I'll answer it.
People wondering how this miscreant got the money to purchase weapons ,ammo ,and body armor now have their answer ;Uncle Sam footed the bill.
He was awarded a $26,000 grant to study neuroscience at the University of Colorado ;and had his tuition paid for.
Weeks before the shooting ;he had taken what is described as an "intense oral exam" . The University to date has not disclosed the results of this exam... but something prompted him to abruptly quit the program.
http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com...17959542707630
Why is AMHD allowing campaign ads on this board ?
use Firefox with AdBlock - you'll never see ads.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hello tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Well, there you go.. All we got to do is stop writing checks. Problem solved.
How did I know this would be the government's fault?? Bwa, ha ha ha.
excon
That wasn't my question. Am I to conclude that AMHD is taking a position on the Presidential contest by the ads they allow ?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Ex ,I heard the question asked :where did he get the money " ? I was answering the question. Out in the web ,the conspiracy theories are being floated .
Hey the position is ! Now about the problem which is arms in the possession of miscreants has to be addressed why are you held captive by the NRA, by the right wing?
I assume they signed up with a service that provides ads and AMHD gets paid on clickthroughs. They are in they full right to do this. You have options which websites to use of course. Vote with your feet! :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hello again, tom:
I don't know if you answered the question or made an ideological complaint. Do you KNOW if he had ANY other sources of income?? No, you don't.. Maybe his GRANDMA sent him $5,000. I think SHE should be brought up on charges...
Bwa, ha ha ha.
excon
The NRA only has influence because the vast majority of Americans agree with them .
Ex I don't speculate.. I only provided known sources of revenue.
The NRA has influence because they bought and paid for it
Nope... if the Dems saw they could make hay by running on an anti-gun policy they would . Instead you have Obama tip toeing around tougher regulations ,and before him you had Kerry dressing like Elmer Fudd to prove he is a man of the people. In the last election you had Dem Sen Joe Manchin taking target practice with a high powered rifle (maybe an assault ?) in a very effective campaign ad. The only ones who make a strong statement for gun control are the ones that are in safe liberal districts. The NRA could only exist as a major influencing force if they did not reflect a vast majority opinion.
Correction: white American malesQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
FRom your hometown news paper :
Most Americans back gun lobby, right to use deadly force - Chicago TribuneQuote:
The online survey showed that 68 percent, or two out of three respondents, had a favorable opinion of the NRA, which starts its annual convention in St. Louis, Missouri, on Friday.
Eighty-two percent of Republicans saw the gun lobbying group in a positive light as well as 55 percent of Democrats, findings that run counter to the perception of Democrats as anti-NRA.
Who actually responded?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
According to Reuters, 1,922 people were surveyed.
Yeah most surveys and polls are about that number or less.
Why am I not doing cartwheels? And it wasn't random. It played to the gun-owner audience.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Oh I get it . The people vote in Reps who cowtow to the interests of the NRA instead of the will of the people who elected them ;and knowing that ,the people reelect these Reps who don't serve their interests .
You might have a case here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Quote:
1289 Caucasians, 219 African Americans and 267 Hispanics.
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
You're got it right. The people can only vote for candidates who can afford to run... Before Citizens United, the PEOPLE had a say in WHO that was. Since, Citizens United, the wealthy special interests are the ones who have a say.
The NRA is a wealthy special interest. That's why you saw some Democratics line up behind the right wingers to find Eric Holder in contempt of congress over Fast & Furious. They were from a SWING districts, and if they DON'T toe the NRA line, they'll be PRIMARYIED. You know that. I know that. EVERYBODY knows that.
NONE of that has anything to do with the "will of the people"..
excon
ummm I do believe that the NRA predates Citizens United by a number of years .Quote:
Before Citizens United, the PEOPLE had a say in WHO that was.
OK then ;so swing districts and districts that lean Republican all vote for candidates that agree with the NRA. That leaves ONLY safe liberal districts... a distinct minority... Sort of proves my point that the NRA represents the majority view in the country .Quote:
They were from a SWING districts
You left out this part :Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
1,922 Americans was interviewed online, including 650 Republicans, 752 Democrats, 520 Independents, 1289 Caucasians, 219 African Americans and 267 Hispanics.
The poll conducted counted more Dems . And in either case ,it was an overwhelmingly lopsided result in favor of gun rights.
Like all issues it depends on how you frame the question because like you Tom, most of the public favors common sense restrictions and regulations.
But the NRA makes a point to publicly let congress know that anything they don't like will be punished. And they keep score. They have effectively punked the democrats, all of them, top to bottom.
And tell how the "interview" was set up.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:31 PM. |