 |
You mean runaways or those who wander off with alzimers. They usually find the old people who wander off sometime, hopefully before they die, they form teams of searchers (posse, in your terminology) I'm not saying there aren't unsolved disappearances, my own town has a couple on the books but it is fairly rare. And runaways, well they turn up somewhere sooner or laterQuote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
What I mean is more like the occasional skeletal remains that turn up in remote areas... they most times were on the missing persons list... usually the killer is never found... evidence is too degraded... many times there is evidence of foul play.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
We do get the odd one usually someone missing for years on a large property but the only people in our remote areas really are indigenous, and they have a habit of wandering about so you wouldn't know if they are missing or not. Generally our missing people stay in the more hospitable regionsQuote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
As a general rule we don't have the same level of violent crime you do although recently the middle east crime gangs are on the rise and there is the usual drug related crime, drive by shootings, and so on associated with them. We are talking about something at much lower level than you experience it. Our police busted one of these gangs recently.Gun violence isn't tolerated.
There are parts of some major cities where you wouldn't choose to live unless you are part of that community.
Smoothy, generally this is a fairly pristine environment even in the cities, you don't see the degraded environments that are the result of urban decay. That might happen to us in fifty years but not now. We are fairly good at pulling down disused buildings unless some git slaps a heritage order on it
I'm not in such an area either... people wanting to build larger houses around here need to tear down perfectly nice $500K + homes to do it ( and by nice these are places that would be incredible in many other areas.. And there are a surprising number doing that.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
The new constructions go for well over a million. No urban decay around here.
But I am in one of the nicer areas too.
Yes I live in a quiet neighbourhood, wide streets, street trees, well kept lawns and a minimum of parked cars although in about two weeks the car races will mean lots of day parkers, I hope to be out of town for that
Speaking of gun violence, a school district just a ways down the road from me has taken a stand - before Sandy Hook I would add - but the signs just went up.
http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/u...1774667622.jpg
Glad I don't live there, the fact that this is needed.
We're glad you don't live here either.
You keep living that delusion, okie dokie?
I'm sure everyone was well aware of the recent LAX shooting, were you aware of this tragedy?
Sadly, nine people shot with three dead. Did you know?Quote:
Person of interest arrested in barbershop slayings
Created: 11/07/2013 3:05 PM
(AP) DETROIT - A convicted felon who was wearing body armor when police arrested him in a Detroit suburb will be questioned in an investigation into the fatal shooting of three men in a back gambling room of an east side barbershop.
Detroit Police Chief James Craig described the man as a person of interest in Wednesday evening’s shooting at Al’s Barber Shop that left six other people wounded. Speaking at a Thursday news conference at police headquarters, Craig said the bloodshed may have stemmed from an ongoing feud.
There have been shooting everyday last week. Nuts with guns killing their own families, kids too. Its sad man, people are getting crazier.
Yes things are bad all over, all the more reason to control gunsQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
What needs controlled are Liberals that have guns... that's where 99.9% of the shootings occur.
No, the control needs to be by the gun owners who don't properly lock up their guns. Most of the recent mass shootings have been by family members who have, for some reason, gone off the deep end and used legally owned firearms that were available in their own homes.Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
What isn't clearly understood is access to firearms is a problem, and the so called responsible gun owners need to realise that greater control is needed for public safety.Quote:
Yes things are bad all over, all the more reason to control guns
You cannot say, ah well, those people had a mental problem, it can't happen to me
Former advocate for disarming the population and now Detroit Police chief has some advice for the city's residents. Carry a gun.
Of course they had to find some pantywaist from San Francisco to counter his position, but not based on the evidence.Quote:
Detroit— If more citizens were armed, criminals would think twice about attacking them, Detroit Police Chief James Craig said Thursday.
Urban police chiefs are typically in favor of gun control or reluctant to discuss the issue, but Craig on Thursday was candid about how he’s changed his mind.
“When we look at the good community members who have concealed weapons permits, the likelihood they’ll shoot is based on a lack of confidence in this Police Department,” Craig said at a press conference at police headquarters, adding that he thinks more Detroit citizens feel safer, thanks in part to a 7 percent drop in violent crime in 2013.
Craig said he started believing that legal gun owners can deter crime when he became police chief in Portland, Maine, in 2009.
“Coming from California (Craig was on the Los Angeles police force for 28 years), where it takes an act of Congress to get a concealed weapon permit, I got to Maine, where they give out lots of CCWs (carrying concealed weapon permits), and I had a stack of CCW permits I was denying; that was my orientation.
“I changed my orientation real quick. Maine is one of the safest places in America. Clearly, suspects knew that good Americans were armed.”
Craig’s statements Thursday echoed those he made Dec. 19 on “The Paul W. Smith Show” on WJR (760 AM), when he said: “There’s a number of CPL (concealed pistol license) holders running around the city of Detroit. I think it acts as a deterrent. Good Americans with CPLs translates into crime reduction. I learned that real quick in the state of Maine.”
From The Detroit News: Detroit police chief: Legal gun owners can deter crime | The Detroit News
Excuse me, but the research does show decreased crime and fewer murders thanks to concealed carry, you need to show us the research that supports your claim. I think the good chief of Detroit is spot on, he ought to know, he lives it every day.Quote:
Robyn Thomas, director of the the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence in San Francisco, disagreed.
“I think at its core, his position is an emotional one, based on the idea that people feel safer when they have guns. But studies have shown more guns don’t deter crime,” Thomas said. “There’s no research that shows guns make anyone safer, and it does show that, the more guns in any situation, the higher the likelihood of them harming either the owner, or people who have access to them.”
Why do you feel it necessary to keep trotting out Lott and Mustard again. I think it was sufficiently addressed last time. Unless, this study provides some new information. It seems to be the same study as last time to me.
because he thinks that the opinion of one person proves his point, that an armed population is a safe population. It wasn't true in the 1880's and it isn't true now. This is cowboy mentality, the macho crap that leads to the violence in the first place. now Tutt you and I know better, removing guns from the population reduces gun violence. What I suggest is that all arms in private ownership should be kept in armories, that way ownership rights are not contravened, the militia can be formed at any time, but access is restricted to legitimate purposes. It has been proven that storage in homes is not secure
An unarmed population... is a population of unarmed future victims. Its not difficult to manufacture your own gun... even if you aren't an accomplished machinist. And that is if you don't buy on of they guys that are importing drugs by the metric ton...
Anyone that believes otherwise is deluding themselves... are do they want to take away hammers, bats, axes, anything sharp or pointy or hard enough to be a bludgeon....because even if they do that.....people dies at teh hands of others....literally....who use their hands as weapons....if someone wants to kill someone...not having a gun isn't going to slow them down much less stop them.
The authorities are the ones who should not be trusted... not the rest of the population.
Tired argument, look in the days of swords people carried swords and died in sword fights, carrying weapons didn't stop violence, we have progressed to the gun but we haven't progressed in our thinking. Along with removing guns from the streets must be reeducation into new ways of settling differences and handling crime. You think you can go out there and shoot it out with a perp, you are wrong, dead wrong
This explains it all.
Obama doesn't fear an armed populance he has one and understands that these are not the days of George Washington. The British don't live just over the border any more and the native tribes have been vanquished. The only thing an armed populance can do is make trouble for each other. The citizens militia is a myth, you have a militia in the person of the National Guard and the police force. are you suggesting the populance needs to protect itsself from these citizens?
Why criticize me for trotting out research instead of the guy pulling crap out of his rectum that denies the research exists? The stats don't lie, violent crime is down where concealed carry is allowed and high in places with the strictest gun controls. That Detroit's police chief who used to support such restrictions sees the benefit now is newsworthy.Quote:
Why do you feel it necessary to keep trotting out Lott and Mustard again. I think it was sufficiently addressed last time. Unless, this study provides some new information. It seems to be the same study as last time to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
His VP thinks you should step out on the porch and pump a couple blasts out of your shotgun.
The DHS and the new "Civilian Security Force" authorized by Obamacare (section 5210) are concerning, since they are not answerable to the Congress.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Obama's 'National Security Force?'
Quote:
This false claim is a badly distorted version of Obama's call for doubling the Peace Corps, creating volunteer networks and increasing the size of the Foreign Service.
I find it funny that when he shows what was stated by Obama the author of the article goes on to say well thats not what he really meant. lol
Some fact checking huh? The truth is he said it. That IS a fact. Watching this president rule by the seat of his pants rather then conventional means is turning this country into a laughing stock.
Speech, I don't think he was actually saying that there has been no research. I took his statement to mean the research that exists doesn't prove anything.
I would find it difficult for anyone to believe that no research has ever been done, but you never know I guess.
After the courts struck down Chicago's gun ban the city went back to the drawing board and decided to ban gun sales in the city as part of their crackdown on the second amendment.
How did that work out? Obama appointee Edmond Chang said no dice. According to Chang "the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self-defense “must also include the right to acquire a firearm.” Imagine that.
Federal judge rules city ban on handgun sales unconstitutional - Chicago Sun-Times
I wonder if Rahmbo screened this guy before giving him the green light? The ruling is here.
Meanwhile one of the mayors who left the rapidly declining Bloomberg group Mayors Against Illegal Guns had this to say:
And that is why we don't trust you anti-gun zealots because we believe that is your intent. Holler about background checks and such all you want, we're not buying it. You want to disarm law abiding citizens. Admit it.Quote:
I’m the mayor of one of the largest cities in the Hudson Valley, just 90 minutes north of New York City. I’m a life member of the National Rifle Association and a former member of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, or MAIG, started by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2006.
I’m no longer a member of MAIG. Why? Just as Ronald Reagan said of the Democratic Party, it left me. And I’m not alone: Nearly 50 pro-Second Amendment mayors have left the organization. They left for the same reason I did. MAIG became a vehicle for Bloomberg to promote his personal gun-control agenda — violating the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens and taking resources away from initiatives that could actually work to protect our neighborhoods and save precious lives. […]
It did not take long to realize that MAIG’s agenda was much more than ridding felons of illegal guns; that under the guise of helping mayors facing a crime and drug epidemic, MAIG intended to promote confiscation of guns from law-abiding citizens. I don’t believe, never have believed and never will believe that public safety is enhanced by encroaching on our right to bear arms, and I will not be a part of any organization that does.
Hello again, Steve:
Nahhh.. I'm a lib. I'm VERY liberal. I support the ENTIRE Constitution.. Over the ten years or so we've been talking, I've probably said that before. I dunno WHY you haven't heard me. ALL I've ever suggested, is that you pass a background check law that would PREVENT people LIKE me from getting guns..Quote:
You want to disarm law abiding citizens. Admit it.
But, for WHATEVER reason, you're SO twisted up in this gun rights thing, that you're FINE with REAL BAD people - and I mean REAL BAD people - scooping up as many guns as they can carry.. Then you have the balls to complain about Fast & Furious. At LEAST those guns went to Mexico. The guns YOU'RE allowing criminals to get, are IN your neighborhood.
I'm probably gonna have to say it again, aren't I???
excon
You don't even want a doctor asking you if you have a gun at home before he prescribes mind altering drugs for what ails you. Or he thinks you are dangerous before he describes the drugs.
Admit it, you want your stash to be a secret.
For the thousandth time, we have background checks. What you want is universal registry so stop the obfuscation, that's exactly what I'm talking about and exactly what this mayor and the 50 others that left the group is saying. You cloak yourselves in innocent sounding garbage while your intent is to disarm law abiding citizens. Be honest about it. And no,what I have in my house is not your business and it is not my doctor's business so leave me the hell alone, something your side USED to advocate.
It's everybody's business if you go NUTS, and shoot a bunch of people. Or sell a gun from your secret stash to your crazy cousin for grocery money. Speech I trust you, with my life, but not the rest of your clan.
To be honest, I don't trust everybody in my own clan, and we do have a few NUTS!! So don't take it personally.
Sorry, my business is my business, stay out of it. I've heard your side make that argument a thousand times, when did you decide to abandon that?Quote:
It's everybody's business if you go NUTS, and shoot a bunch of people. Or sell a gun from your secret stash to your crazy cousin for grocery money. Speech I trust you, with my life, but not the rest of your clan.
To be honest, I don't trust everybody in my own clan, and we do have a few NUTS!! So don't take it personally.
I express my own opinion, and like you I am not responsible for the words and actions of others, no matter what side. In truth, I have heard you make YOUR sides arguments a thousand times too. So what?
And back to the point, Bloomberg and his ilk want to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens. That's troubling, and a total sham of what their group claims to be doing. Agree or not?
Hello again, SteveNo, what you have is a law with a LOOPHOLE wide enough to drive a truck through. To pretend that you HAVE a LAW is disingenuous at best. ALL I've ever suggested, is that we pass a background check law that would PREVENT people LIKE me from getting guns..Quote:
For the thousandth time, we have background checks.
Here's how the loophole works. This weekend, they're having a gun show at the Evergreen County Fairgrounds in Monroe. You can tell WHO the licensed dealers are. They're inside with a booth, and they won't sell you a gun unless you pass a background check... You can ALSO tell WHO the private sellers are. They don't have a booth. They're standing around with several gun belts over their shoulders and guns sticking out of every pocket. You can buy LOTS and LOTS of guns from him and NEVER have to go through a background check. That means people like me can get all the guns they want, EASILY.
Now, right wingers will tell you that all I'd HAVE to do is run down to the hood to buy my guns.. So, preventing me from buying them at a gun show won't really STOP me. After all, criminals are ALL connected, aren't they??
Of course, that's SOOOOO stupid, I don't really know how to respond..
But, I will. I'm old. I'm white. I DON'T have a criminal ID card. I DON'T have tattoos. I DON'T know anybody in the hood who has guns for sale. If I wandered down to the hood with cash in my hand looking to buy a gun, I'd get my little white excon a$$ shot off.
Now, there are MILLIONS and MILLIONS of people like me. It would seem like right wingers would PREFER people like me NOT to have guns. But, they're SOOOO twisted up into this gun rights thing, that they're ACTUALLY FINE with people like me buying as many guns as they can carry.
Makes NO sense to me.
excon
Again, back to the point. Focus here people...Bloomberg and his ilk want to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens. That's troubling, and a total sham of what their group claims to be doing. Agree or not?
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:46 AM. |