Chicago likely to top 2015s shootings

lostboy819
Posts
11493
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Somewhere, CO US
Fantasy
1568th
9/12/2016 7:47pm
Exactly,and they are the cause of most government regulations when they feel the need to step in to protect the stupid people from themselves.
Mr. G
Posts
4188
Joined
12/23/2009
Location
Riverside, CA US
9/12/2016 7:55pm
My uncle had a problem with a drug dealer that would constantly speed down his street. So what he did was when the guy would drive by he would throw his trash can hitting the guys car. They guy moved on.
newmann
Posts
24444
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
US
9/12/2016 7:58pm
High capacity cars? Got a brand new purple Hellcat Challenger in today...wrecked. Actually wasn't his fault though, uninsured fugger hit him. He's understandably pissedPinch
tuggy450
Posts
1392
Joined
3/12/2016
Location
Massapequa, NY US
9/13/2016 6:56pm Edited Date/Time 9/13/2016 6:58pm
oh boy



kinda reminds me of this thread

The Shop

mxb2
Posts
22490
Joined
6/15/2010
Location
Bowie, MD US
9/13/2016 7:40pm
Mr. G wrote:
My uncle had a problem with a drug dealer that would constantly speed down his street. So what he did was when the guy would drive...
My uncle had a problem with a drug dealer that would constantly speed down his street. So what he did was when the guy would drive by he would throw his trash can hitting the guys car. They guy moved on.
A real drug dealer would have came back and confronted him lol.
Mr. G
Posts
4188
Joined
12/23/2009
Location
Riverside, CA US
9/13/2016 8:43pm
My uncle wouldn't have cared. He's one of those guys.
mxb2
Posts
22490
Joined
6/15/2010
Location
Bowie, MD US
9/13/2016 9:35pm
Mr. G wrote:
My uncle wouldn't have cared. He's one of those guys.
Haha hell yea.
tuggy450
Posts
1392
Joined
3/12/2016
Location
Massapequa, NY US
9/17/2016 7:13am
newman , that was just a disgusting article. The type of really "deplorable" behavior that usually get ignored by the liberal media. We spend all kinds of money on education and we can't teach our youth not to be scumbags, disgraceful. Sounds like you need hand grenades in that neighborhood and one of these, or you can wait for the cops to show up, lol

Jimmy_Sloan
Posts
1424
Joined
9/20/2015
Location
Oak Harbor, WA US
9/17/2016 9:53am
Then why have laws against murder, rape, and other violent crimes if the crime itself won't stop? The answer is because we need to punish those...
Then why have laws against murder, rape, and other violent crimes if the crime itself won't stop? The answer is because we need to punish those commit crimes when they are caught. Unless stricter gun laws are nationwide, they will not be effective in reducing gun related violence. You keep saying that you and other law abiding citizens would be the one's that would be punished, but that begs the question as to what rights you should have to begin with in regards to guns. If the laws are changed, then you are not being punished anymore than anyone else is since you no longer have that right to own that type of weapon. There are speed limits in place for the safety of all drivers, Some people break them, others don't. If there is a 70 m.p.h. speed limit and the state sees that accidents are happening due to high speed, and the speed limit is reduced to prevent further injuries and deaths, you don't get to cry foul just because you are a law abiding citizen. You don't get to say, "I drive safe and abide by the law so why should I be punished by your reducing the speed limit?"

So while guns may never go away, I have a feeling that gun laws will change since more and more people are supporting the idea there needs to be stricter gun laws. The more people that think this, the more chance voters will speak to law makers about this. So while it may be out of my control to get rid of guns, it's out of your control to prevent those with opposing views to push for stricter laws.
jpc63 wrote:
Are you suggesting that policies like the proposed "expanded" background checks or registration that would only apply to legal owners is more strict than current gun...
Are you suggesting that policies like the proposed "expanded" background checks or registration that would only apply to legal owners is more strict than current gun laws? Is the solution to a violent ex-con having a gun, really a registration program that courts have already decided can't be imposed on someone when it would force them to incriminate themselves??

Why aren't these guns murdering people in the areas outside Chicago, the places we're told don't have strict enough gun control.

I like the speed limit analogy, how about since some of us can't behave behind the wheel there should be no vehicles capable of exceeding the speed limit? After all, who needs 30 rnd mags or 3 sec 0-60 times & top speeds approaching 200 when we really only need about 75 mph.
There are gun murdering people everywhere, but higher incidences of crimes in cities is related to drug and gang activity. Gun advocates always go straight to crime when discussing gun control, and whole that is one of the bigger components, you'll note that I am very careful to say gun-related violence, which includes but is not limited to, accidental shootings, suicides, homicide, etc. Stricter gun laws, limited access to certain types of weapons, is no be-all-end-all solution, it is a start in reducing gun related violence and access to guns which has shown to be effective elsewhere. Your counter to my analogy is weakened by the fact that, first of all we are not asking for a complete ban on guns (so we would not ask for a complete ban on cars that exceed 75 m.p.h.), there are certain types of vehicles that are illegal to drive on public roads (just as we should have bans on certain types of guns), and there is no evidence to suggest that limiting cars to 75 m.p.h would reduce traffic related deaths since the majority don't occur at speeds excessively over 75 m.p.h.
Jimmy_Sloan
Posts
1424
Joined
9/20/2015
Location
Oak Harbor, WA US
9/17/2016 10:09am
Mr. G wrote:
"If it can save just one life". Rings any bells? I swear they walk right into it.
That is a strawman since the argument is not that laws [i]prevent[/i] people from committing crimes, but that stricter laws will have the effect of reducing...
That is a strawman since the argument is not that laws prevent people from committing crimes, but that stricter laws will have the effect of reducing gun related violence.
Mr. G wrote:
Now I get it. Laws don't prevent people from comitting crime but they prevent people from comitting crime.
What part of "gun related violence" don't you understand? I said that laws don't prevent people from committing crimes, but if put into place stricter laws, gun related violence will be reduced. In other words, there will still be crime and gun related violence (which isn't limited to homicides), but it will be reduced.
Jimmy_Sloan
Posts
1424
Joined
9/20/2015
Location
Oak Harbor, WA US
9/17/2016 10:13am
That is a strawman since the argument is not that laws [i]prevent[/i] people from committing crimes, but that stricter laws will have the effect of reducing...
That is a strawman since the argument is not that laws prevent people from committing crimes, but that stricter laws will have the effect of reducing gun related violence.
Mr. G wrote:
Now I get it. Laws don't prevent people from comitting crime but they prevent people from comitting crime.
lostboy819 wrote:
I also like the way Jimmy said when he is talking about banning some guns that "if its NOT your right to own certain types of...
I also like the way Jimmy said when he is talking about banning some guns that "if its NOT your right to own certain types of guns then you dont lose any rights". WoohooWoohoo So if they ban something its no longer your right to own it so you dont lose anything. Pinch
My point is that the 2nd Amendment is open to interpretation, and just because you may think you have certain rights it doesn't mean you do. If it is decided that you don't have the right to own such and such a weapon, then none of your rights are being taken away. As usual, when I posted the link to the article on the 2nd Amendment, there has been nothing but crickets from people like yourself.
hillbilly
Posts
9080
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Afton, TN US
9/17/2016 12:03pm
I think there was 2 cop shootings last night.

One in philly was a guy walking up to the cruiser and shooting her a bunch,then civilians killing one,then he got dead byanoother cop. They never said black so it means he was black.
akillerwombat
Posts
1973
Joined
10/16/2013
Location
Los Angeles, CA US
9/17/2016 2:47pm Edited Date/Time 9/17/2016 2:54pm
newmann wrote:
Stricter gun laws...LMAO One city, and all the gubmint in the country can't get a handle on the gangs. Truth be known, they could be stomped...
Stricter gun laws...LMAO

One city, and all the gubmint in the country can't get a handle on the gangs. Truth be known, they could be stomped out in a week. Everything is going just as planned.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2016/09/16/chicago-illinois-state-police-as…







It's hard to keep teens from drinking when everyone else in a 1 hour radius sells to minors.

Mr. G
Posts
4188
Joined
12/23/2009
Location
Riverside, CA US
9/17/2016 3:09pm
That is a strawman since the argument is not that laws [i]prevent[/i] people from committing crimes, but that stricter laws will have the effect of reducing...
That is a strawman since the argument is not that laws prevent people from committing crimes, but that stricter laws will have the effect of reducing gun related violence.
Mr. G wrote:
Now I get it. Laws don't prevent people from comitting crime but they prevent people from comitting crime.
What part of "gun related violence" don't you understand? I said that laws don't prevent people from committing crimes, but if put into place stricter laws...
What part of "gun related violence" don't you understand? I said that laws don't prevent people from committing crimes, but if put into place stricter laws, gun related violence will be reduced. In other words, there will still be crime and gun related violence (which isn't limited to homicides), but it will be reduced.
You ideas are in direct conflict with empirical evidence. This is also why people need to realize that anti-gunners are actually pro-crime. Thanks for helping.
9/17/2016 4:12pm Edited Date/Time 9/17/2016 4:13pm
More like pro-freedom-to-choose-to-be-law-abiding-or-to-be-a-criminal. Also known as America.


jpc63
Posts
24
Joined
9/11/2016
Location
Sun City Center, FL US
9/18/2016 6:41am Edited Date/Time 9/18/2016 6:53am
There are gun murdering people everywhere, but higher incidences of crimes in cities is related to drug and gang activity. Gun advocates always go straight to...
There are gun murdering people everywhere, but higher incidences of crimes in cities is related to drug and gang activity. Gun advocates always go straight to crime when discussing gun control, and whole that is one of the bigger components, you'll note that I am very careful to say gun-related violence, which includes but is not limited to, accidental shootings, suicides, homicide, etc. Stricter gun laws, limited access to certain types of weapons, is no be-all-end-all solution, it is a start in reducing gun related violence and access to guns which has shown to be effective elsewhere. Your counter to my analogy is weakened by the fact that, first of all we are not asking for a complete ban on guns (so we would not ask for a complete ban on cars that exceed 75 m.p.h.), there are certain types of vehicles that are illegal to drive on public roads (just as we should have bans on certain types of guns), and there is no evidence to suggest that limiting cars to 75 m.p.h would reduce traffic related deaths since the majority don't occur at speeds excessively over 75 m.p.h.
Oh so you don't want all the guns, just the ones that according to the FBI were used in roughly 300 killings last year I believe?

Then you'll leave us alone & won't even mention all the handguns used in majority of deaths that also happen to accept a 30 rnd mag & fire just as fast ?

Are you in favor of restricting the peaceable excercise of all rights or just the 2nd?

Makes no diff whether we're talking one model car or all of them, which is what you'll say when you finally learn how similar "certain weapon" are to many others. you don't feel there's any justification for me owning an AR & I don't feel there's any justification for you owning a vette.

And we do regulate certain types of guns, just like non street legal race cars but unlike those guns you can still go & buy street legal vehicle that will out perform many of the illegal race cars, just as easy as you can a Kia
jpc63
Posts
24
Joined
9/11/2016
Location
Sun City Center, FL US
9/18/2016 8:52am
My point is that the 2nd Amendment is open to interpretation, and just because you may think you have certain rights it doesn't mean you do...
My point is that the 2nd Amendment is open to interpretation, and just because you may think you have certain rights it doesn't mean you do. If it is decided that you don't have the right to own such and such a weapon, then none of your rights are being taken away. As usual, when I posted the link to the article on the 2nd Amendment, there has been nothing but crickets from people like yourself.
Are you in favor of restricting the peaceable excercise of all rights or just the 2nd?
lostboy819
Posts
11493
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Somewhere, CO US
Fantasy
1568th
9/18/2016 9:31am
What part of "gun related violence" don't you understand? I said that laws don't prevent people from committing crimes, but if put into place stricter laws...
What part of "gun related violence" don't you understand? I said that laws don't prevent people from committing crimes, but if put into place stricter laws, gun related violence will be reduced. In other words, there will still be crime and gun related violence (which isn't limited to homicides), but it will be reduced.
Like in Chicago right ?
jpc63
Posts
24
Joined
9/11/2016
Location
Sun City Center, FL US
9/18/2016 11:24am
What part of "gun related violence" don't you understand? I said that laws don't prevent people from committing crimes, but if put into place stricter laws...
What part of "gun related violence" don't you understand? I said that laws don't prevent people from committing crimes, but if put into place stricter laws, gun related violence will be reduced. In other words, there will still be crime and gun related violence (which isn't limited to homicides), but it will be reduced.
lostboy819 wrote:
Like in Chicago right ?
I still haven't figured out exactly which gun law isn't strict enough, or could it be the revolving door in Chicago that apparently doesn't keep these people locked up.
akillerwombat
Posts
1973
Joined
10/16/2013
Location
Los Angeles, CA US
9/18/2016 11:33am
What part of "gun related violence" don't you understand? I said that laws don't prevent people from committing crimes, but if put into place stricter laws...
What part of "gun related violence" don't you understand? I said that laws don't prevent people from committing crimes, but if put into place stricter laws, gun related violence will be reduced. In other words, there will still be crime and gun related violence (which isn't limited to homicides), but it will be reduced.
lostboy819 wrote:
Like in Chicago right ?
jpc63 wrote:
I still haven't figured out exactly which gun law isn't strict enough, or could it be the revolving door in Chicago that apparently doesn't keep these...
I still haven't figured out exactly which gun law isn't strict enough, or could it be the revolving door in Chicago that apparently doesn't keep these people locked up.
The gun laws are plenty strict and are working incredibly well. The problem is; every state in a 2 hour radius has extremely relaxed gun laws so everyone just drive out, loads up on guns, and heads back to Chicago.

jpc63
Posts
24
Joined
9/11/2016
Location
Sun City Center, FL US
9/18/2016 12:37pm
The gun laws are plenty strict and are working incredibly well. The problem is; every state in a 2 hour radius has extremely relaxed gun laws...
The gun laws are plenty strict and are working incredibly well. The problem is; every state in a 2 hour radius has extremely relaxed gun laws so everyone just drive out, loads up on guns, and heads back to Chicago.

So the laws are working except for the laws being ignored by the criminals?

I hear ya tho, I was almost labeled habitual traffic offender a while back & that would've never
happened if the auto industry didn't continue to produce vehicles capable of exceeding lawful speed limits.
akillerwombat
Posts
1973
Joined
10/16/2013
Location
Los Angeles, CA US
9/18/2016 12:55pm Edited Date/Time 9/18/2016 12:57pm
jpc63 wrote:
So the laws are working except for the laws being ignored by the criminals? I hear ya tho, I was almost labeled habitual traffic offender a...
So the laws are working except for the laws being ignored by the criminals?

I hear ya tho, I was almost labeled habitual traffic offender a while back & that would've never
happened if the auto industry didn't continue to produce vehicles capable of exceeding lawful speed limits.
The laws are working except for the relaxed pro-gun states surrounding Chicago that are eagerly supplying the Chicago based criminals (hence why they leave Chicago to buy guns)... it's like trying to pump up a flat as someone sits there poking holes in it.

Not saying we should ban all guns, I'm just saying if you're a habitual traffic offender maybe we should be able to prevent you from owning a car... or maybe you should only be allowed to rent one at the track (or range) where you are less likely to hurt anyone else.
newmann
Posts
24444
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
US
9/18/2016 1:20pm
lostboy819 wrote:
Like in Chicago right ?
jpc63 wrote:
I still haven't figured out exactly which gun law isn't strict enough, or could it be the revolving door in Chicago that apparently doesn't keep these...
I still haven't figured out exactly which gun law isn't strict enough, or could it be the revolving door in Chicago that apparently doesn't keep these people locked up.
The gun laws are plenty strict and are working incredibly well. The problem is; every state in a 2 hour radius has extremely relaxed gun laws...
The gun laws are plenty strict and are working incredibly well. The problem is; every state in a 2 hour radius has extremely relaxed gun laws so everyone just drive out, loads up on guns, and heads back to Chicago.

So people in Chicago can just drive to a gun store in Indiana and buy a pistol?
9/18/2016 1:23pm
lostboy819 wrote:
Like in Chicago right ?
jpc63 wrote:
I still haven't figured out exactly which gun law isn't strict enough, or could it be the revolving door in Chicago that apparently doesn't keep these...
I still haven't figured out exactly which gun law isn't strict enough, or could it be the revolving door in Chicago that apparently doesn't keep these people locked up.
The gun laws are plenty strict and are working incredibly well. The problem is; every state in a 2 hour radius has extremely relaxed gun laws...
The gun laws are plenty strict and are working incredibly well. The problem is; every state in a 2 hour radius has extremely relaxed gun laws so everyone just drive out, loads up on guns, and heads back to Chicago.

Ok then. Restrict every state. Make them all illegal. Then your graph will read under the red bar "outside the United States"

So logically, the only real thing to do is is ban all weapons world wide. Destroy every last one of them. And burn/crush/flood/destroy all the engineering behind them.

Then wait twelve years and ban show strings and wood carvers for when people start to fashion bows.


Nobody is filling up white vans in Ohio with legally purchased weapons and running to Chicago. Then opening the vans up on the south side of Chicago. It's not happening.
newmann
Posts
24444
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
US
9/18/2016 1:31pm
jpc63 wrote:
I still haven't figured out exactly which gun law isn't strict enough, or could it be the revolving door in Chicago that apparently doesn't keep these...
I still haven't figured out exactly which gun law isn't strict enough, or could it be the revolving door in Chicago that apparently doesn't keep these people locked up.
The gun laws are plenty strict and are working incredibly well. The problem is; every state in a 2 hour radius has extremely relaxed gun laws...
The gun laws are plenty strict and are working incredibly well. The problem is; every state in a 2 hour radius has extremely relaxed gun laws so everyone just drive out, loads up on guns, and heads back to Chicago.

Ok then. Restrict every state. Make them all illegal. Then your graph will read under the red bar "outside the United States" So logically, the only...
Ok then. Restrict every state. Make them all illegal. Then your graph will read under the red bar "outside the United States"

So logically, the only real thing to do is is ban all weapons world wide. Destroy every last one of them. And burn/crush/flood/destroy all the engineering behind them.

Then wait twelve years and ban show strings and wood carvers for when people start to fashion bows.


Nobody is filling up white vans in Ohio with legally purchased weapons and running to Chicago. Then opening the vans up on the south side of Chicago. It's not happening.
Jimmy_Sloan
Posts
1424
Joined
9/20/2015
Location
Oak Harbor, WA US
9/18/2016 1:34pm
There are gun murdering people everywhere, but higher incidences of crimes in cities is related to drug and gang activity. Gun advocates always go straight to...
There are gun murdering people everywhere, but higher incidences of crimes in cities is related to drug and gang activity. Gun advocates always go straight to crime when discussing gun control, and whole that is one of the bigger components, you'll note that I am very careful to say gun-related violence, which includes but is not limited to, accidental shootings, suicides, homicide, etc. Stricter gun laws, limited access to certain types of weapons, is no be-all-end-all solution, it is a start in reducing gun related violence and access to guns which has shown to be effective elsewhere. Your counter to my analogy is weakened by the fact that, first of all we are not asking for a complete ban on guns (so we would not ask for a complete ban on cars that exceed 75 m.p.h.), there are certain types of vehicles that are illegal to drive on public roads (just as we should have bans on certain types of guns), and there is no evidence to suggest that limiting cars to 75 m.p.h would reduce traffic related deaths since the majority don't occur at speeds excessively over 75 m.p.h.
jpc63 wrote:
Oh so you don't want all the guns, just the ones that according to the FBI were used in roughly 300 killings last year I believe...
Oh so you don't want all the guns, just the ones that according to the FBI were used in roughly 300 killings last year I believe?

Then you'll leave us alone & won't even mention all the handguns used in majority of deaths that also happen to accept a 30 rnd mag & fire just as fast ?

Are you in favor of restricting the peaceable excercise of all rights or just the 2nd?

Makes no diff whether we're talking one model car or all of them, which is what you'll say when you finally learn how similar "certain weapon" are to many others. you don't feel there's any justification for me owning an AR & I don't feel there's any justification for you owning a vette.

And we do regulate certain types of guns, just like non street legal race cars but unlike those guns you can still go & buy street legal vehicle that will out perform many of the illegal race cars, just as easy as you can a Kia
I think certain guns should be completely banned, yes. Along with that, it should be much harder to get guns that are legal. You're trying very hard to minimize the issues here, but the problem goes well beyond just making certain guns illegal since that has to be buttressed with stricter gun laws, and social programs since the problem extends into society itself.

Our rights are not unlimited, so ALL our rights are open to change, that is what amendments are for; amendments can be added to the Constitution so your claim that your rights are restricted is an entirely moot point.

The guns/cars analogy is not a very good one for the reasons I already addressed, but more importantly (since you persist in using it), guns are designed to kill for the most part (aside form target weapons and such) whereas cars are not. The primary issue with guns is how they are used and in what context; most homicides are not the result of someone using cars.
Jimmy_Sloan
Posts
1424
Joined
9/20/2015
Location
Oak Harbor, WA US
9/18/2016 1:36pm Edited Date/Time 9/18/2016 1:40pm
Mr. G wrote:
You ideas are in direct conflict with empirical evidence. This is also why people need to realize that anti-gunners are actually pro-crime. Thanks for helping.
And thank you for your baseless assertions and outright dishonesty.

Btw, most people who favor stricter gun laws and bans on certain types of guns, do not favor an outright ban on all guns, and do in fact agree with the right to own firearms so your claim that we are anti-gun is just as dishonest as your claim that we want more crime.

Post a reply to: Chicago likely to top 2015s shootings

The Latest