Let's Blow Away Some Southside Chicago Perceptions!

[cabse5]

idiocy #45 from your posts=trying to pretend that natural rights "don't exist" when in reality what is important is that the founders used that concept to set forth the scope of the amendment

comparing Chicago to old west cities (which had rather low rates of gun crime) is akin to comparing a Shakespearian Sonnett to a taco bell meal.

try confiscating guns from good people and see what Harm really means.

How would I solve gun violence in Chicago? well the gun laws didn't work so the first thing to do is scrap them

and then start giving 20+ year sentences (20 years seems to be the magic number to pretty much permanently incapacitate most violent criminals-by the time they get out, their physical peak is over) to those who actually commit real crimes; Plus enable honest citizens to KILL violent criminals who attack them

we've already tried your silly methods and they FAILED

(1)There may be natural rights but gun ownership isn't one of them. All our natural rights are enumerated in The Constitution and no where else.
(2) No one has tried my way, ever, so how can you say my way fails? Confiscate all guns in the inner city of Chicago. Put those who refuse in jail. Demilitarize the inner city of Chicago.

 

[TurtleDude]

(1)There may be natural rights but gun ownership isn't one of them. All our natural rights are enumerated in The Constitution and no where else.
(2) No one has tried my way, ever, so how can you say my way fails? Confiscate all guns in the inner city of Chicago. Put those who refuse in jail.

still stuck on silly in your posts. The natural right framework is what defines the scope of the bill of rights.

your suggestion is so stupid Its laughable-ever heard of the fourth amendment?

 

[TurtleDude]

No, I am not throwing up my hands. The people in those neighborhoods bring it upon themselves, and they reap what they sow by allowing it to go on.

You have to understand what you are dealing with. Some people's mentality is such that they feel a NEED to DO something about ANY possible problem. Actually SOLVING the problem is not what matters to them. Their psyches require SOMETHING BE DONE

 

[Goshin]

(1)There may be natural rights but gun ownership isn't one of them. All our natural rights are enumerated in The Constitution and no where else.
(2) No one has tried my way, ever, so how can you say my way fails? Confiscate all guns in the inner city of Chicago. Put those who refuse in jail.

1. Is bull****. Anyone with any slightest knowledge of the concept of rights know the Constitution/BoR was not meant to be all-inclusive, and that the concept of rights predate it.

2. Chicago spent decades as a city where it was nearly impossible for the law-abiding to legally purchase a gun. Didn't work. As for confiscation, criminals don't obey the law... you'd have to institute martial law and house-to-house sweeps of every building and vehicle in the city, and 24 hours after you were done more guns would pour in from outside to re-arm the bangers and crooks.
Not to mention humans were killing other humans in job lots LONG before guns...

 

[cabse5]

still stuck on silly in your posts. The natural right framework is what defines the scope of the bill of rights.

your suggestion is so stupid Its laughable-ever heard of the fourth amendment?

Isn't the 4th amendment in The Constitution?

 

[cabse5]

Haven't you ever heard of a voter needing to establish their identity before they can vote in an American election?
An airport security? Attaining information from the I phone of a known terrorist? No weapons at school? Are those illegal seizures and searches?

 

[cabse5]

1. Is bull****. Anyone with any slightest knowledge of the concept of rights know the Constitution/BoR was not meant to be all-inclusive, and that the concept of rights predate it.

2. Chicago spent decades as a city where it was nearly impossible for the law-abiding to legally purchase a gun. Didn't work. As for confiscation, criminals don't obey the law... you'd have to institute martial law and house-to-house sweeps of every building and vehicle in the city, and 24 hours after you were done more guns would pour in from outside to re-arm the bangers and crooks.
Not to mention humans were killing other humans in job lots LONG before guns...

Do the house to house searches.

 

[cabse5]

I guess when Eliot Ness and the FBI shut down that gang of thugs created by Prohibition that was a violation of the 4th amendment??

 

[Goshin]

Do the house to house searches.

I accept that you mean well and stipulate that your intentions are good. Thing is, it won't work.

First of all, do you have any idea how clever and inventive criminals are at hiding things? REALLY searching a house is a daunting task, when you're looking for something as small as a gun that may have been hidden. I've known criminals to hide things in innocuous containers in plain sight; in hollowed out books among a bookcase; in unused attic spaces between the insulation layers; inside walls with secret compartments.

You'd need gun-sniffing dogs. Training such dogs requires expert dog trainers and months or years of training; there would NEVER be enough dogs to do the job.

And even if you did get 99% of the guns, the criminals would simply re-arm. I've known felons (legally barred from gun ownership) to re-arm within 24 hours of getting out of prison. (Ex-cop).


Not to mention all the BoR stuff you're trampling... which cops are sworn to respect and uphold, btw. At least in theory.




Also I, for one, would not wish to live in such a police state, even for the sake of safety.



As I say, I don't doubt you mean well... but banning and confiscation won't work in a place like the USA where there are already more guns than people.

 

[TurtleDude]

Isn't the 4th amendment in The Constitution?

In the bill of rights-just like the second. Perhaps you should spend some time learning the constitution as well as the Bill of Rights and then come back with a suggestion that actually isn't offensive to several parts of that document

 

[TurtleDude]

I accept that you mean well and stipulate that your intentions are good. Thing is, it won't work.

First of all, do you have any idea how clever and inventive criminals are at hiding things? REALLY searching a house is a daunting task, when you're looking for something as small as a gun that may have been hidden. I've known criminals to hide things in innocuous containers in plain sight; in hollowed out books among a bookcase; in unused attic spaces between the insulation layers; inside walls with secret compartments.

You'd need gun-sniffing dogs. Training such dogs requires expert dog trainers and months or years of training; there would NEVER be enough dogs to do the job.

And even if you did get 99% of the guns, the criminals would simply re-arm. I've known felons (legally barred from gun ownership) to re-arm within 24 hours of getting out of prison. (Ex-cop).


Not to mention all the BoR stuff you're trampling... which cops are sworn to respect and uphold, btw. At least in theory.




Also I, for one, would not wish to live in such a police state, even for the sake of safety.



As I say, I don't doubt you mean well... but banning and confiscation won't work in a place like the USA where there are already more guns than people.

the one place where we disagree Goshin, is that bit about good intentions. The rest of your post is 100% correct IMHO

 

[chuckiechan]

The bad part of the constitution is that we can't just round them up and send them to re education camps and re civilize them in to productive citizens.

So it keeps on getting on. Does anyone wonder what will happen when border enforcement actually happens and the drug prices go up?

 

[katzgar]

is there an english version?

 

[BretJ]

Haven't you ever heard of a voter needing to establish their identity before they can vote in an American election?
An airport security? Attaining information from the I phone of a known terrorist? No weapons at school? Are those illegal seizures and searches?

How do you feel about "stop and frisk" out of curiosity?

 

[cabse5]

How do you feel about "stop and frisk" out of curiosity?

It works. Keep it. It save lives and, ironically, it stops the harassment from gangs, etc., in the inner city of Chicago.

 

[BretJ]

It works. Keep it. It save lives and, ironically, it stops the harassment from gangs, etc., in the inner city of Chicago.

Even though it has been banned as unconstitutional? So illegal search and seizure along with large scale racial profiling is fine with you. Why not just make possession of firearms illegal for African Americans? Ends justify the means eh?

 

[cabse5]

Even though it has been banned as unconstitutional? So illegal search and seizure along with large scale racial profiling is fine with you. Why not just make possession of firearms illegal for African Americans? Ends justify the means eh?

When did SCOTUS declare stop and frisk was unconstitutional? Is it illegal search and seizure? Yes. So is confiscating child's bubble guns in school. So is checking carry on bags and passengers at airports. So is searching the locked I Phone of known terrorists. So is having anyone who enters a political candidate's rally searched for metal objects. So is, if it gets this far, banning guns from movie theaters. It seems our American life is rife with illegal searches and seizures. You want them all done away with?

 

[BretJ]

When did SCOTUS declare stop and frisk was unconstitutional? Is it illegal search and seizure? Yes. So is confiscating child's bubble guns in school. So is checking carry on bags and passengers at airports. So is searching the locked I Phone of known terrorists. So is having anyone who enters a political candidate's rally searched for metal objects. So is, if it gets this far, banning guns from movie theaters. It seems our American life is rife with illegal searches and seizures. You want them all done away with?

Keep up with current events. NYPD's 'stop-and-frisk' practice unconstitutional, judge rules | Reuters Your little rant is comparing apples to banannas. Picking someone out on the street, then stopping them, searching their person without cause is unconstitutional. I am starting to think you probably think the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII was justifiable. After all, a few of them were probably Japanese spies....

So who gets to decide who's civil rights are removed in your closed little world?

 

[cabse5]

Keep up with current events. NYPD's 'stop-and-frisk' practice unconstitutional, judge rules | Reuters Your little rant is comparing apples to banannas. Picking someone out on the street, then stopping them, searching their person without cause is unconstitutional. I am starting to think you probably think the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII was justifiable. After all, a few of them were probably Japanese spies....

So who gets to decide who's civil rights are removed in your closed little world?

So, what is, for example, the cause for the TSA checking all those bags at airports? The cause for checking all those passengers at airports? The cause for checking goers at a political rally? Hum?

What's the cause for the police setting roadblocks on a Saturday night to catch drunk drivers? What's the cause for confiscating a child's bubble gun that can't actually hurt anyone.I understand the school's position, BTW. The school isn't concerned with the safety of students when they confiscated the bubble gun. The school is making a statement to all students that all guns are bad.

You are the one who lives in a fantasy land when you think all confiscations and searches need cause.

 

[TurtleDude]

When did SCOTUS declare stop and frisk was unconstitutional? Is it illegal search and seizure? Yes. So is confiscating child's bubble guns in school. So is checking carry on bags and passengers at airports. So is searching the locked I Phone of known terrorists. So is having anyone who enters a political candidate's rally searched for metal objects. So is, if it gets this far, banning guns from movie theaters. It seems our American life is rife with illegal searches and seizures. You want them all done away with?

Yes and why do you want to expand them? are YOU going to volunteer to go home to home searching-without a warrant or court order-for firearms?

 

[TurtleDude]

Keep up with current events. NYPD's 'stop-and-frisk' practice unconstitutional, judge rules | Reuters Your little rant is comparing apples to banannas. Picking someone out on the street, then stopping them, searching their person without cause is unconstitutional. I am starting to think you probably think the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII was justifiable. After all, a few of them were probably Japanese spies....

So who gets to decide who's civil rights are removed in your closed little world?

its sad how rapidly fascism and a hatred of freedom is spreading in this country

 

[BretJ]

So, what is, for example, the cause for the TSA checking all those bags at airports? The cause for checking all those passengers at airports? The cause for checking goers at a political rally? Hum?

What's the cause for the police setting roadblocks on a Saturday night to catch drunk drivers? What's the cause for confiscating a child's bubble gun that can't actually hurt anyone.I understand the school's position, BTW. The school isn't concerned with the safety of students when they confiscated the bubble gun. The school is making a statement to all students that all guns are bad.

You are the one who lives in a fantasy land when you think all confiscations and searches need cause.

Again, who gets to decide who loses their civil rights in your little, bigoted, close minded, racist world? I am seriously wondering if this discussion is simply some sort of middle school debate homework. I cannot believe anyone knows so little about civil rights.

 

[cabse5]

Yes and why do you want to expand them? are YOU going to volunteer to go home to home searching-without a warrant or court order-for firearms?

In certain areas and under certain circumstances, yes. The TSA demands weapon free zones at airports, for example. I think gun free zones should be enforced with the same vigor. Or they aren't gun free zones. Or they aren't effective in stopping gun violence.

 

[cabse5]

I guess you guys who are so concerned with individual guns rights aren't so concerned with the rights of those living in the inner city of Chicago. That's good to know.

 

[VanceMack]

idiocy #45 from your posts=trying to pretend that natural rights "don't exist" when in reality what is important is that the founders used that concept to set forth the scope of the amendment

comparing Chicago to old west cities (which had rather low rates of gun crime) is akin to comparing a Shakespearian Sonnett to a taco bell meal.

try confiscating guns from good people and see what Harm really means.

How would I solve gun violence in Chicago? well the gun laws didn't work so the first thing to do is scrap them

and then start giving 20+ year sentences (20 years seems to be the magic number to pretty much permanently incapacitate most violent criminals-by the time they get out, their physical peak is over) to those who actually commit real crimes; Plus enable honest citizens to KILL violent criminals who attack them

we've already tried your silly methods and they FAILED

Mandatory minimum sentencing is the answer. The problem...as soon as you suggest to anti-gun leftists that criminals should face mandatory minimum sentences for actually using a firearm in the commission of a violent crime (whaaaat? Targeting the actual problem???) they lose their **** and drone on about racism.

Sentence for the crime, plus a mandatory minimum of 30 years, to be served back to back, not concurrently. No parole consideration. That would do it.