Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 106

Thread: I got robbed at gunpoint today....

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    The problem with that is that 99.9% of cop work is dull, repetitive, paperwork that a high school dropout can do. Many places tend to discourage over-qualified applicants because they just get bored and quit quickly anyway, wasting the time and money it takes to get them up to speed.

    I agree it would be nice to have better qualified cops, the same way it would be nice if teachers were better. I'm just not sure there's a simple solution.

    I don't know the details of the bureaucracy are unknown so might very well be right. I'd you are correct part of the solution is top reduce paperwork. I recall reading of an initiative where police would wear cams that record their activities. While not the whole solution that should provide much better basis for a report than an account written well after the fact. IOW, if paperwork is the issue then that practice should be examined.
    Those overqualified candidates are FAR preferable to Wyatt Earp types. Besides if they are paid well enough even the overqualified will suffer through such jobs.
    Of course this is all armchair policy making, but what other kind is there?

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    355

    Default

    Related to the discussion, but there has been people disqualified from police officer jobs in USA for being too smart.

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-b...story?id=95836
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gn...be-a-good-cop/

    And my suggestion?
    Move.
    US cities are like little Africas in crime rate, and the rural areas are almost crime-free. If you live in southern USA, move north. New England is very light on crime.
    Even if guns were outlawed the crime would still be disproportionally high because of the dense amount of poverty in US cities. Crime follows poverty.
    Last edited by peppercats; 06-16-2013 at 04:00 PM.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    São Paulo, Brazil
    Posts
    73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nightmarex View Post
    If it was mine to run, the US would be much different. No handguns, decriminalized drugs, no insurance for preventable disease (such as from smoking) and for the love of God, sanctioned prostitution can I get an amen?
    Dude, I think you just want a piece of Brazil! xD

    Anyway, no amen from me. My plan is to move in and I kinda like it the way it is now (at least DC, I can't speak about the rest).

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    3

    Default People Kill People

    Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I have been around guns my entire life. I own guns, my brothers own guns, my parents own guns and it is amazing that there has never been a shooting at my house. As a matter of fact, my 5 and 11 year old's understand guns and gun safety. They know exactly where my guns are at all times and know what kind of trouble they would get into if they even so much as look in the drawer where my pistol is. It's about educating people. If someone is going to kill someone, it doesn't matter if you take their gun away, they will kill you with a toothpick. So should we take toothpicks away? How about forks, knives, shovels, cars, trucks? And we should definitely ask God to quit making it rain and snow. Nature causes so many deaths a year its crazy.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    3

    Default Gun Data

    As a follow up to my previous posting, here are some facts that may interest you.

    http://www.theguardian.com/news/data...hip-world-list

  6. #46

    Default Gun control?!

    The only place I've ever been threatened with a gun by a civilian was in Germany by a man who didn't take kindly to my rescuing his wife from his flailing fists.

    Here in the US, we're armed because your governments, and especially our government, are so well armed (and ours is getting frighteningly better armed, having just purchased 1.5 billion bullets and hundreds of armored vehicles) (What on earth could they be expecting?), and has proven itself all too happy to use them on us at every level, and at every turn. But we don't plan on becoming the next beneficiaries of the sort of domestic disarmament tactics used by such illustrious liberals as Pot, Lenin, Mao, and Hitler.

    A pleasant side-effect of all this weaponry is that your classic Jihadist tends to think twice about beheading anyone in our streets, in broad daylight no less, and in full view of the public; your average soccer fan tends to maintain his composure when his team loses (or wins); and your typically narcissistic university student, especially the foreign born, tend to butt out of our politics, and even out of our country. And we're quite happy with that.

    Have a nice day.

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Guns don't kill people*. Bullets kill people. So let guns stay legal and only ban the ammunition. Problem solved.

    Oakley Sunglasses


  8. #48
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius Maximus View Post
    Here in the US, we're armed because your governments, and especially our government, are so well armed (and ours is getting frighteningly better armed, having just purchased 1.5 billion bullets and hundreds of armored vehicles) (What on earth could they be expecting?), and has proven itself all too happy to use them on us at every level, and at every turn. But we don't plan on becoming the next beneficiaries of the sort of domestic disarmament tactics used by such illustrious liberals as Pot, Lenin, Mao, and Hitler.
    I'm not a big believer in gun control, but that's an idiotic argument. It was valid 200 years ago, not so much today. Go ahead and try using your assault rifles against a bunch of tanks, F22s, and nuclear missiles. We'll see who wins.

    Oh, also - hitler a liberal? That's a fairly interesting (and telling) remark. Sure he had some socialist policies, but above all he was a nationalist fascist - both qualities most associate strongly with modern right wing movements more than liberals. But really, anyone who tries to bring hitler into an argument is just obviously trying to tar and feather the opposition, without any real thought behind it.

    A pleasant side-effect of all this weaponry is that your classic Jihadist tends to think twice about beheading anyone in our streets, in broad daylight no less, and in full view of the public; your average soccer fan tends to maintain his composure when his team loses (or wins); and your typically narcissistic university student, especially the foreign born, tend to butt out of our politics, and even out of our country.
    Really? I thought one of the hallmarks of the classic Jihadists was their suicidal behaviour. It sure didn't see to stop the boston marathon bombers, for example.

    The biggest argument in favor of gun laws is to keep them out of the hands of crazy nutbags who don't care whether they die as long as they can take as many others as they want with them. The biggest argument against it is that those guys are going to do so anyway, so why bother restricting everyone else.

    Have a nice day.
    You too.
    Last edited by smitty3268; 09-12-2013 at 12:32 AM.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,559

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    I'm not a big believer in gun control, but that's an idiotic argument. It was valid 200 years ago, not so much today. Go ahead and try using your assault rifles against a bunch of tanks, F22s, and nuclear missiles. We'll see who wins.
    I disagree here.

    First of all, having a well-armed populace makes government violence on (and subjugation of) the people an extremely difficult path to even consider. Yeah they can do some heavy-hitting work with those tanks, but any kind of violent break-out is going to be a bloodbath. The type that requires a heavy stomach to endure. So government psychopaths and their minions might think twice.*

    Second is that those military arms might not be in complete control of the government's chain of command. Not everyone is going to just line up lock-step. Many will, of course, but not all. This is especially true when you consider the republican nature of the US. Yeah the president has control of each state's National Guard during a time of war. But if a civil war breaks out, all bets of strict obedience are off. States will answer to their governors.

    The third thing is that having superior firepower does not necessarily win a war. Look at Iraq and Afghanistan and the difficulties defeating essentially low-class guerrilla warfare. And what would even classify as a win for those who aren't going to submit easily? Killing everybody?

    The fourth part is the reality that the US hasn't won a war in 70 years other than the 1991 Persian Gulf War. I don't think our bumbling government even knows how to run a war with any sense of competence. Throw in the fact that the military has been turning into nothing more than a big social project for women and gays and, frankly, I like our chances.

    Finally, in any civil war there is a tendency for a third outside party to try to sweep in and take advantage of the situation and maybe even wrest control (or at least influence). I think such a country would be less inclined to do that when they realize that there are 300 million firearms in the hands of the citizenry.



    * "And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward." ― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

  10. #50
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Bucharest Romania
    Posts
    32

    Default

    Hello there,

    First. I am sorry for all this crap that happens in the human society. As it happens with every other tool on this world, it matters more the purpose of the one who handle the tool than the tool itself.
    Second: Directly at the robbery victim, sorry mate, but looking at the bright side, you're still alive (which is more than great) and you lost only 15 bucks which is bad indeed (even a cent will be bad from what i care ) but you could have been worse.
    Third: why are we debating the Second Amendment in a *nix dedicated forum?

    Best regards,
    a.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •