 |
Baltimore Mayor Jack Young wants residents to stop shooting each other because they need the hospital beds for Wuhan Flu patients .
“we cannot clog up our hospitals and their beds with people that are being shot senselessly because we’re going to need those beds for people infected with the coronavirus. And it could be your mother, your grandmother or one of your relatives. So take that into consideration.”
https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2020/...afvSoAcOXXu_Fw
These type of arse wipes will make any excuse to take LAW ABIDING CITIZENS firearms away from them: Typical Bolshevik B.S.....guy needs to go read the Constitution or renounce his citizenship and go to Red China.
Maybe I missed it vac but where in the article says anything about taking away your lawful guns? Sounds like the 2nd amendment types are paranoid.
@ Tom, criminals rarely take time off and maybe we should expect an uptick in crime when the economy goes south.
Crime is of opportunity to execute a criminal act.
Take away food from my family and I may become criminal.....and, certainly criminals will come as they smell blood in the water.
However, I reserve the right to defend my family and what is mine from anyone.....If you take law abiding citizens weapons, then law abiding citizens will becomes victims of criminal elements....Law Enforcement will not be able to prevent mass attacks on innocents in these time....the innocents must be able to protect themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
so it is alright at other times for the residents to shoot each other and fill hospital beds but not now. How many residents are shot a day to fill those hospital beds. Perhaps there is a toilet paper crisis there fueling violence or is it a gun crisis. Just maybe there are places in the world where guns should be confiscated
Just the normal stuff of the criminal ilk awakening after the winter slumber Clete.
do they slumber over there tal, hibernate for the winter perhaps coming out after groundhog day?
Not really, but warm weather tends to drive people outside especially at night. LOL, it only takes one incident though to get attention and scare the heck out of people. Just a reminder that though the news is about other stuff, the same stuff is still there. Local gangs no matter the race, which is more or less a product of who is where, have existed in cities since forever. It's no different here than in any other parts of the world bereft of economic opportunities.
Guns and the people with them with bad intentions haven't gone anywhere just off the frontpage. Current events have just added to the problems that were there already. Eventually they will have to be tested too!
so you could hope CV will take out a few criminals
No doubt it will but so what? There are no shortages of criminals or criminal activity streams to replace sick criminals unlike sick nurses/doctors who are extremely hard to replace.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
I thought that was an interesting quote. It would seem that they have been completely OK to "stand for mass shootings" and crime increases, but now they are not. It would have been nice to have not stood for such things for the simple reason that they are illegal and mayors are supposed to fight crime. Well, at least he is starting to sound less and less like a liberal dem.Quote:
“We will not stand for mass shootings and an increase in crime.”
Well he had to say something about the event amid all the other crap he is dealing with. Why are you politicizing it? Like he didn't care about the illegal activity before.
He had to say something? Is that what this is about, a person having to say something? Maybe it should be about a mayor undertaking his responsibilities and doing what is in the best interests of the people of Baltimore, and doing that all of the time and not just for a few months.
Don't get your draws in a bunch dude over one instance, and one statement. It's been going on for decades. They always issue a statement, until the next instance. You just happen to jump on a piece of it since the entire theme was about the coronavirus.
Oh. Well that makes it alright. I'm sure that if Trump had said it, your point of view would be quite different.
I never said the mayor was WRONG for what he said.
I didn't say he was wrong. I do think it would be a lot better if he had said that on the first day of his mayorship.
What makes you think he didn't? Do you know something I don't? Care to share?
I think if he had been saying it from day one, then there would be no need to make a big deal of saying it now. I don't think even you believe he has said it all along. And if he had been saying it and truly doing it, then the crime rate in Baltimore would not be sky high.
I don't assume what he says on a regular basis I don't know, and have only a small snapshot of one event. That's as far as I go with that. As for a crime rate, many things play into that circumstance in urban settings from long term systemic conditions. Poverty being the biggest driver, for most of those conditions. Most urban settings are a mixed bag any way between riches and rags and various degrees in between but we know what makes headlines don't we?
The issue of single parent families is a much bigger driver of crime than poverty. In fact, single parent homes even drives poverty. It is a huge negative. If I could change any one factor, it would be the issue of single parent homes. Change that, and the improvement in many areas would be dramatic.
Can't say your wrong at all but I see the issue as there are single parent families and what should be done about it, and all the issues that come with it and that's where the failure becomes stark and real. That's not even considering the role divorces play into that equation.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Maybe we could join together in a call to preserve sex for marriage. Single parent families would begin to diminish by the year.
You're joking, right?! What's more important, even urgent to young people? -- a couple's sexual attraction for one another or JL's purity mandate? "A call to preserve sex for marriage" won't work.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Not joking at all. It worked quite well until the fifties, and then the sexual revolution began to take hold. As to "what's more important" for young people, would you include getting drunk and using drugs in that category? Should we stop discouraging those activities?Quote:
You're joking, right?! What's more important, even urgent to young people? -- a couple's sexual attraction for one another or JL's purity mandate? "A call to preserve sex for marriage" won't work.
Always disappointed when you mock any call for responsible living. It's a shame that it's only my call for purity, one which you have adamantly refused to join.
Why didn't "it work" after the '50s? (Oh, yeah. You males didn't know -- or care -- about the auntie-induced abortions back then during and before the '50s or that Sally's six-month-long visit to her relatives in Oregon was how the family hid Sally during her pregnancy and put the newborn up for adoption.)Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Always disappointed when you have no realistic suggestions for responsible living.Quote:
Always disappointed when you mock any call for responsible living. It's a shame that it's only my call for purity, one which you have adamantly refused to join.
You're not aware either, but you might want to know that sexaul activity amongst teens has actually decreased significantly over the past ten or fifteen years, so that would certainly seem to knock your theory in the head that teens are helpless to control themselves. Black girls in particular have shown a significant decrease. https://www.childtrends.org/indicato...ty-among-teensQuote:
Why didn't "it work" after the '50s? (Oh, yeah. You males didn't know -- or care -- about the auntie-induced abortions back then during and before the '50s or that Sally's six-month-long visit to her relatives in Oregon was how the family hid Sally during her pregnancy and put the newborn up for adoption.)
Most women who married in the fifties were virgins at that point. That is certainly not the case now, but I'm happy to report that the trend over the past twenty years has been moving back to that decision. It is a small movement, but the data does bear it out. I don't know if that disappoints you or not.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...FinerTable.jpg
I'm so glad your voice was not heard when the campaign against smoking began decades ago. While it has been hard and not completely successful, it has also saved many tens of thousands of lives. Would you have suggested it was all in vain back then? And if that could be done, then why not this? What do you have against purity that you cannot speak a single kind word about it?
What happened to your accusation about chastity "until the fifties, and then the sexual revolution began to take hold"?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
You think.... Oh, yeah. You're a guy and weren't ever part of the gossip mill. Um, there wasn't much to do back then, just a movie at a theater or drive-in, ice cream sundaes at the local Dairy Queen, and then what? Hmm....Quote:
Most women who married in the fifties were virgins at that point.
Smoking??? That's not the topic on the table!Quote:
I'm so glad your voice was not heard when the campaign against smoking began decades ago. While it has been hard and not completely successful, it has also saved many tens of thousands of lives. Would you have suggested it was all in vain back then? And if that could be done, then why not this? What do you have against purity that you cannot speak a single kind word about it?
Again I say:
Always disappointed when you have no realistic suggestions for responsible living.
The No word comes to mind it is useful in many situations but little used
The fifties were not ten or fifteen years ago.Quote:
What happened to your accusation about chastity "until the fifties, and then the sexual revolution began to take hold"?
Sorry, but your anecdotal memories add nothing.Quote:
You think.... Oh, yeah. You're a guy and weren't ever part of the gossip mill. Um, there wasn't much to do back then, just a movie at a theater or drive-in, ice cream sundaes at the local Dairy Queen, and then what? Hmm...
No, but your utter refusal to believe that public pressure can bring about change is.Quote:
Smoking??? That's not the topic on the table!
Of course I do. It's the same answer for smoking, drinking, or drug usage. It's for people to simply say "no" and do the responsible thing. It is always so very disappointing to see your absolute refusal to take a stand for purity.Quote:
Again I say:
Always disappointed when you have no realistic suggestions for responsible living.
My approach is education and prevention, what's yours?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
We have laws against underaged drinking and using drugs, and the jails are full of those folks that get caught, and still the ones that don't are still doing it. You can call for purity all you want, but it's not mockery to point out that the call goes unheeded by enough to perpetuate the problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
On the practical side given any change for the better comes after years and decades with no quick fixes, so we are left with how to deal with impure humans.
so this thred went from an absurd comment by the mayor to teen sex.
I expect so except that now we live in virtual martial law . Everyone had a hissy fit over stop and frisk . Wait until you see what's coming .Quote:
@ Tom, criminals rarely take time off and maybe we should expect an uptick in crime when the economy goes south
Big difference Tomder between law and order, or someones version of it, and health quarantines. I think even crazy NY'ers can understand that, and get with it. Of course some will balk and holler freedom!
you think it is us conservatives that will be the problem ? Lol il Duce Cuomo was going nuts Saturday because it was the libs of NYC that did not get the concept of social distancing . He noted parents letting kids play together in the play grounds ;pick up baskeball games all over the city and people crowding together in public parks .
It's neither conservatives nor liberals Tom, some people just don't get it yet. You think those beaches in Florida are just liberals? Cuomo also said he doesn't have the money to supply hospitals with what they need, or compete with other states to get those resources. I doubt he is in the boat by himself.
LOL, when they shut down Dallas, the folks just went down the highway to party. Our governor just made it a statewide thing.
mostly ...they were kids on spring break .Quote:
You think those beaches in Florida are just liberals
The blue states have had irresponsible spending and priorities for years . It is states ;not the Federal Government that decides levels of staffing and supplies for their hospitals . No one told NY STATE to keep a low reserve of respirators and N95 masks . I can tell you where the Federal government fell short .Quote:
Cuomo also said he doesn't have the money to supply hospitals with what they need, or compete with other states to get those resources. I doubt he is in the boat by himself.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-03-20/disaster-foretold-shortages-ventilators-medical-supplies-warned-aboutQuote:
In 2005, the administration of President George W. Bush published a landmark “National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza.” The document, among other things, highlighted the need for plans to distribute necessary medical supplies from the nation’s Strategic National Stockpile and to support state and local efforts to “surge” medical personnel and facilities to handle an outbreak.
Medical equipment such as masks and protective clothing in particular were given high priority as planners recognized that doctors, nurses and other medical staff were most vulnerable.
After the swine flu epidemic in 2009, a safety-equipment industry association and a federally sponsored task force both recommended that depleted supplies of N95 respirator masks, which filter out airborne particles, be replenished by the stockpile, which is maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
That didn’t happen, according to Charles Johnson, president of the International Safety Equipment Assn.
The stockpile drew down about 100 million masks during the 2009 epidemic, Johnson said.
“Our association is unaware of any major effort to restore the stockpile to cover that drawdown,” he said.Last month, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said that available supplies included just 12 million N95 masks and 30 million surgical masks, a tiny fraction of the 3.5 billion masks one of Azar’s deputies later testified the nation’s healthcare system would need.
also buried deep in this Bloomberg report
Quote:
The national stockpile used to be somewhat more robust. In 2006, Congress provided supplemental funds to add 104 million N95 masks and 52 million surgical masks in an effort to prepare for a flu pandemic. But after the H1N1 influenza outbreak in 2009, which triggered a nationwide shortage of masks and caused a 2- to 3-year backlog orders for the N95 variety, the stockpile distributed about three-quarters of its inventory and didn't build back the supply
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...7t6_Y-KTpMVvVI
LOL, conservative kids don't go on spring breaks so they must all be liberals? OOOOKAY! Another LOL, is states tell hospitals what to do about staffing and resources for a worst case scenario? Red states are as strapped as blue states so I wonder why that is. Everybody dropped the ball with other priorities on every level and that's why everybody is scrambling to catch up NOW.
I mean that as everybody in the world, not just us. This isn't the first time we have been caught with our pants down you know.
You guys are up waaayyyyyy too early.
No need to get up early they just shut down Australia but in true fashion they left the liquor stores open
Gotta have those essentials.Quote:
in true fashion they left the liquor stores open
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:05 PM. |