+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: AACbbs (/forum-460.html)
+---- Forum: Members (/forum-401.html)
+----- Forum: Rice (/forum-444.html)
+------ Forum: Rice Archives (/forum-640.html)
+------ Thread: Trump Administration (/thread-797972.html)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656
RE: Trump Administration - Rice93 - 05-29-2020 09:44 AM
(05-29-2020 08:51 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:(05-28-2020 11:39 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: Why is the cost of living lower in Indiana, only 30 miles away? What are the murder rates in Indianapolis vs. Chicago, more of an apples to apples comparison. What is the
COL in Indianapolis vs. Chicago? I don't know, but I bet it is higher in Chicago in both stats.
Really would not mind somebody answering my questions for once.
I wonder why Chicago is the poster city for gun violence in the face of gun control - more so than even NYC or LA, two other bastions of liberal correctness.
If Indiana gun laws are to blame, then it would follow that Indianapolis would be as bad or worse.
Did you read the article that I posted on this topic?
RE: Trump Administration - At Ease - 05-29-2020 10:28 AM
RE: Trump Administration - tanqtonic - 05-29-2020 10:48 AM
I would like Twitter to police the blue cars as much as they seemingly have a raging hard on to ticket the red cars.
Perhaps even the asshat 'chief of public discourse' (or some such title) at Twitter who has labeled Trump and this administration literally as "Nazis" in his own Twitter posts.
At least Twitter is now being explicit about the deep rooted hypocrisy and embedded bias that is rampant in its operation.
RE: Trump Administration - At Ease - 05-29-2020 11:06 AM
Right? Just because you advocate for and hire white nationalists, and your administration exhibits all of the signs of fascism, doesn't mean you're a NAZI. So unfair.
Quote:UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM
EARLY WARNING SIGNS OF FASCISM
1. Powerful and continuing nationalism
2. Disdain for human rights
3. Identification of enemies as a unifying cause
4. Rampant sexism
5. Controlled mass media
6. Obsession with national security
7. Religion and government intertwined
8. Corporate power protected
9. Labor power suppressed
10. Disdain for intellectual and the arts
11. Obsession with crime and punishment
12. Rampant cronyism and corruption
RE: Trump Administration - OptimisticOwl - 05-29-2020 11:58 AM
(05-29-2020 09:44 AM)Rice93 Wrote:(05-29-2020 08:51 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:(05-28-2020 11:39 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: Why is the cost of living lower in Indiana, only 30 miles away? What are the murder rates in Indianapolis vs. Chicago, more of an apples to apples comparison. What is the
COL in Indianapolis vs. Chicago? I don't know, but I bet it is higher in Chicago in both stats.
Really would not mind somebody answering my questions for once.
I wonder why Chicago is the poster city for gun violence in the face of gun control - more so than even NYC or LA, two other bastions of liberal correctness.
If Indiana gun laws are to blame, then it would follow that Indianapolis would be as bad or worse.
Did you read the article that I posted on this topic?
I read the part you thought was important enough to quote, but not the full article.
basically seemed to be blaming gang activity. I already said that most of the violence was probably gang related. I don't see what that has to do with the uselessness of the gun laws.
So why is gang activity more prevalent in Chicago? This city has been under the Democrats since Daisy was a pup. What have they done wrong, or failed to do right?
RE: Trump Administration - tanqtonic - 05-29-2020 12:21 PM
Looky at the tweet Twitter censored from Trump:
Quote:....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!
Yep, the fing tools at Twitter censored that one. In a statement, Twitter Comms said: “This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today.”
“We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance,” Twitter added. “As is standard with this notice, engagements with the Tweet will be limited. People will be able to Retweet with Comment, but will not be able to Like, Reply or Retweet it.”
As an example of public comments (from blue checks) that Twitter did not censor include:
"Black people have every right to burn down a country they built for free"
"burn it down. **** cops. **** property"
From Michael Moore:
"Good citizens burning down the evil police precinct in MN after all police were out & safe. All police should go home. No violence please. Police HQ must be demolished by the city tomorrow as a show of contrition to black America. Rebuild PD with decent kind ppl aka ppl of color"
RE: Trump Administration - Rice93 - 05-29-2020 12:58 PM
(05-29-2020 12:21 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: Looky at the tweet Twitter censored from Trump:
Quote:....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!
Yep, the fing tools at Twitter censored that one. In a statement, Twitter Comms said: “This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today.”
“We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance,” Twitter added. “As is standard with this notice, engagements with the Tweet will be limited. People will be able to Retweet with Comment, but will not be able to Like, Reply or Retweet it.”
As an example of public comments (from blue checks) that Twitter did not censor include:
"Black people have every right to burn down a country they built for free"
"burn it down. **** cops. **** property"
From Michael Moore:
"Good citizens burning down the evil police precinct in MN after all police were out & safe. All police should go home. No violence please. Police HQ must be demolished by the city tomorrow as a show of contrition to black America. Rebuild PD with decent kind ppl aka ppl of color"
I'm fine with them censoring Trump's calls for violence and, likewise, I think they should have censored the others as well.
RE: Trump Administration - OptimisticOwl - 05-29-2020 01:44 PM
(05-29-2020 12:58 PM)Rice93 Wrote:(05-29-2020 12:21 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: Looky at the tweet Twitter censored from Trump:
Quote:....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!
Yep, the fing tools at Twitter censored that one. In a statement, Twitter Comms said: “This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today.”
“We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance,” Twitter added. “As is standard with this notice, engagements with the Tweet will be limited. People will be able to Retweet with Comment, but will not be able to Like, Reply or Retweet it.”
As an example of public comments (from blue checks) that Twitter did not censor include:
"Black people have every right to burn down a country they built for free"
"burn it down. **** cops. **** property"
From Michael Moore:
"Good citizens burning down the evil police precinct in MN after all police were out & safe. All police should go home. No violence please. Police HQ must be demolished by the city tomorrow as a show of contrition to black America. Rebuild PD with decent kind ppl aka ppl of color"
I'm fine with them censoring Trump's calls for violence and, likewise, I think they should have censored the others as well.
Should have, but didn't. Another example of the double standard.
At least Trump's calls were in the furtherance of keeping order and protecting property.
RE: Trump Administration - Rice93 - 05-29-2020 01:54 PM
(05-29-2020 01:44 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:(05-29-2020 12:58 PM)Rice93 Wrote:(05-29-2020 12:21 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: Looky at the tweet Twitter censored from Trump:
Quote:....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!
Yep, the fing tools at Twitter censored that one. In a statement, Twitter Comms said: “This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today.”
“We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance,” Twitter added. “As is standard with this notice, engagements with the Tweet will be limited. People will be able to Retweet with Comment, but will not be able to Like, Reply or Retweet it.”
As an example of public comments (from blue checks) that Twitter did not censor include:
"Black people have every right to burn down a country they built for free"
"burn it down. **** cops. **** property"
From Michael Moore:
"Good citizens burning down the evil police precinct in MN after all police were out & safe. All police should go home. No violence please. Police HQ must be demolished by the city tomorrow as a show of contrition to black America. Rebuild PD with decent kind ppl aka ppl of color"
I'm fine with them censoring Trump's calls for violence and, likewise, I think they should have censored the others as well.
Should have, but didn't. Another example of the double standard.
At least Trump's calls were in the furtherance of keeping order and protecting property.
Pretty sure that I was expressing agreement with Tanq re: the media double standard.
RE: Trump Administration - tanqtonic - 05-29-2020 02:06 PM
(05-29-2020 12:58 PM)Rice93 Wrote:(05-29-2020 12:21 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: Looky at the tweet Twitter censored from Trump:
Quote:....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!
Yep, the fing tools at Twitter censored that one. In a statement, Twitter Comms said: “This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today.”
“We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance,” Twitter added. “As is standard with this notice, engagements with the Tweet will be limited. People will be able to Retweet with Comment, but will not be able to Like, Reply or Retweet it.”
As an example of public comments (from blue checks) that Twitter did not censor include:
"Black people have every right to burn down a country they built for free"
"burn it down. **** cops. **** property"
From Michael Moore:
"Good citizens burning down the evil police precinct in MN after all police were out & safe. All police should go home. No violence please. Police HQ must be demolished by the city tomorrow as a show of contrition to black America. Rebuild PD with decent kind ppl aka ppl of color"
I'm fine with them censoring Trump's calls for violence and, likewise, I think they should have censored the others as well.
Please do tell where is 'Trump's call for violence' there? If you are saying that 'Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts', I assume that this is the chief *law enforcement* official in the country speaking --- and noting that this country *will not tolerate* lawlessness.
So I am a little taken aback at your statement on "Trump's call for violence".
RE: Trump Administration - OptimisticOwl - 05-29-2020 02:20 PM
(05-29-2020 02:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:(05-29-2020 12:58 PM)Rice93 Wrote:(05-29-2020 12:21 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: Looky at the tweet Twitter censored from Trump:
Quote:....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!
Yep, the fing tools at Twitter censored that one. In a statement, Twitter Comms said: “This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today.”
“We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance,” Twitter added. “As is standard with this notice, engagements with the Tweet will be limited. People will be able to Retweet with Comment, but will not be able to Like, Reply or Retweet it.”
As an example of public comments (from blue checks) that Twitter did not censor include:
"Black people have every right to burn down a country they built for free"
"burn it down. **** cops. **** property"
From Michael Moore:
"Good citizens burning down the evil police precinct in MN after all police were out & safe. All police should go home. No violence please. Police HQ must be demolished by the city tomorrow as a show of contrition to black America. Rebuild PD with decent kind ppl aka ppl of color"
I'm fine with them censoring Trump's calls for violence and, likewise, I think they should have censored the others as well.
Please do tell where is 'Trump's call for violence' there? If you are saying that 'Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts', I assume that this is the chief *law enforcement* official in the country speaking --- and noting that this country *will not tolerate* lawlessness.
So I am a little taken aback at your statement on "Trump's call for violence".
A good example of the way the left slants the reporting of what Trump says to fit their narrative. Slips right by the true believers.
A true call for violence would be more like "let's go burn places and beat up people we don't like", AKA The Democratic Way.
Think about the last 50 times you have seen rioting in the streets, with buildings burned and looted and people attacked. How many of those were right wing protests?
RE: Trump Administration - OptimisticOwl - 05-29-2020 02:30 PM
So this is where yall get it from
Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn.,... "a president calling for the murder of political opponents and protesters." Outright lie.
"Similarly, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., a possible vice presidential pick for Biden, tweeted, "Trump's tweets yet again show what racism looks like. This is why we need new leadership." Straight to the racism card. I presume she is making the racist assumption that all the looters are black.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., also tweeted, "When someone tells you who they are, believe them. The Impeached President is a violent white supremacist." More unfounded accusations reported without any comment from the MSM
"This is what a racist president looks like," Beyer said about the statements." No wonder you guys think he is a racist - this is what your party leaders feed you.
the assumption on the part of the Democrats is that only black people riot and lot. Sounds racist to me.
RE: Trump Administration - Rice93 - 05-29-2020 02:32 PM
(05-29-2020 02:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:(05-29-2020 12:58 PM)Rice93 Wrote:(05-29-2020 12:21 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: Looky at the tweet Twitter censored from Trump:
Quote:....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!
Yep, the fing tools at Twitter censored that one. In a statement, Twitter Comms said: “This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today.”
“We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance,” Twitter added. “As is standard with this notice, engagements with the Tweet will be limited. People will be able to Retweet with Comment, but will not be able to Like, Reply or Retweet it.”
As an example of public comments (from blue checks) that Twitter did not censor include:
"Black people have every right to burn down a country they built for free"
"burn it down. **** cops. **** property"
From Michael Moore:
"Good citizens burning down the evil police precinct in MN after all police were out & safe. All police should go home. No violence please. Police HQ must be demolished by the city tomorrow as a show of contrition to black America. Rebuild PD with decent kind ppl aka ppl of color"
I'm fine with them censoring Trump's calls for violence and, likewise, I think they should have censored the others as well.
Please do tell where is 'Trump's call for violence' there? If you are saying that 'Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts', I assume that this is the chief *law enforcement* official in the country speaking --- and noting that this country *will not tolerate* lawlessness.
So I am a little taken aback at your statement on "Trump's call for violence".
I think threatening the use of deadly force against people robbing a store is a call for violence.
Separate this from the Minnesota situation. If a policeman sees a crook running out of a store with a stolen TV are you OK with said policeman killing that crook?
RE: Trump Administration - Owl 69/70/75 - 05-29-2020 02:34 PM
(05-29-2020 02:32 PM)Rice93 Wrote: Separate this from the Minnesota situation. If a policeman sees a crook running out of a store with a stolen TV are you OK with said policeman killing that crook?
Yep. Depends on circumstances, of course. But I don't have a problem with it, per se.
RE: Trump Administration - Rice93 - 05-29-2020 02:36 PM
(05-29-2020 02:34 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:(05-29-2020 02:32 PM)Rice93 Wrote: Separate this from the Minnesota situation. If a policeman sees a crook running out of a store with a stolen TV are you OK with said policeman killing that crook?
Yep. Depends on circumstances, of course. But I don't have a problem with it, per se.
Which circumstances? The cop knows nothing about the criminal but he knows that he has a stolen TV. Use deadly force? Really?
Do you think shoplifters should have their hands cut off as well?
RE: Trump Administration - Rice93 - 05-29-2020 02:36 PM
(05-29-2020 02:34 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:(05-29-2020 02:32 PM)Rice93 Wrote: Separate this from the Minnesota situation. If a policeman sees a crook running out of a store with a stolen TV are you OK with said policeman killing that crook?
Yep. Depends on circumstances, of course. But I don't have a problem with it, per se.
Which circumstances? The cop knows nothing about the criminal but he knows that he has a stolen TV. Use deadly force? Really?
Do you think shoplifters should have their hands cut off as well?
RE: Trump Administration - RiceLad15 - 05-29-2020 02:44 PM
(05-29-2020 02:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:(05-29-2020 12:58 PM)Rice93 Wrote:(05-29-2020 12:21 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: Looky at the tweet Twitter censored from Trump:
Quote:....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!
Yep, the fing tools at Twitter censored that one. In a statement, Twitter Comms said: “This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today.”
“We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance,” Twitter added. “As is standard with this notice, engagements with the Tweet will be limited. People will be able to Retweet with Comment, but will not be able to Like, Reply or Retweet it.”
As an example of public comments (from blue checks) that Twitter did not censor include:
"Black people have every right to burn down a country they built for free"
"burn it down. **** cops. **** property"
From Michael Moore:
"Good citizens burning down the evil police precinct in MN after all police were out & safe. All police should go home. No violence please. Police HQ must be demolished by the city tomorrow as a show of contrition to black America. Rebuild PD with decent kind ppl aka ppl of color"
I'm fine with them censoring Trump's calls for violence and, likewise, I think they should have censored the others as well.
Please do tell where is 'Trump's call for violence' there? If you are saying that 'Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts', I assume that this is the chief *law enforcement* official in the country speaking --- and noting that this country *will not tolerate* lawlessness.
So I am a little taken aback at your statement on "Trump's call for violence".
For someone who is absolutely incensed and utterly enraged, to the point that they write spittle-filled tirades about how wronged Flynn was, I am shocked that you view the chief law enforcement official in this country advocating for officers to shoot people without justice first being carried out in the court of law.
I guess we’re a country where justice can be served without a trial, and police are allowed to be judge, jury, and executioner, without regard to whether their immediate life is in danger. Just shoot away cus there is looting.
RE: Trump Administration - Hambone10 - 05-29-2020 02:48 PM
(05-29-2020 09:44 AM)Rice93 Wrote: Did you read the article that I posted on this topic?
I did, but it's forest:trees as far as I'm concerned.
The article basically says that the issues for Chicago are fairly complex... and that what works in LA or NY won't work in Chi. You have people on one side SEEMING to imply that gun laws don't work, but you also on the other side have people using this as an excuse to pass Federal (or at least more broad) laws.
How about Chicago fix those issues your article mentions that make them different from NY or LA and thus makes their gun laws so much less effective?
This is the problem with the left's solutions to this issue. Their solutions all involve imposing some sort of restrictions on 'others' so that we don't have to address the underlying problems.
How about this article? https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/national-international/chicago-gun-trace-report-2017/27140/
The top two sources of firearms recovered by police – Chuck’s Gun Shop in Riverdale and Midwest Sporting Goods in Lyons – have been the source of a disproportionate number of weapons for the better part of a decade, according to the report, providing a combined 11.2 percent of all crime guns recovered in Chicago.
so 11% come from just two gun shops... IN ILLINOIS. Out of the top 10, only 3 aren't in Illinois.... and those 3 (collectively) account for about the same as those top two do individually.... and the 'fastest growing' sources are both in Illinois.
40% come from Illinois. 21% from Indiana. Mississippi is at 5.1% and everyone else is 4% or less.... and the top 10 go down to 2%... so there must be about another dozen or so sources. Where is the 'low-hanging fruit'?
Of course, these stats don't tell you how those guns got there... they just say where they were originally purchased. i seriously doubt if many of the guns from far-flung places like Alabama, Georgia and Texas were the result of people driving across the border to make a gun purchase that would be illegal in Illinois, that is legal there.... and more likely were just part of the standard flow of people and drugs (or whatever else is part of the 'crime').
And that's really my point. Illinois itself, using data that focuses solely on 'original purchase information' completely controls their situation from soup to nuts on a minimum of 40% of their gun crimes. The guns were sold there... any transfers (legal OR illegal) took place there... and the ultimate crimes took place there. Another 20% from Indiana.... where defenders note that lots of people live there and work in Chicago.... and 40% came from (it seems) a dozen places... These guns from out of state could have transferred (legally OR illegally) in either state, or even a third. 95% were possessed by adults who weren't the original purchaser. It doesn't say how many of those sales were registered.
It would be one thing if 20% of the guns came from Illinois. It would be another thing if gun violence overall in Chicago were relatively low (as compared to other large cities). How about Illinois pass its own laws... and if necessary, work on some issues with Indiana police, at least those shops close to Illinois.
This is overwhelmingly a 'local' not a national issue.
First solve why Chicago is so violent
Second solve the local distribution
Illinois controls 100% of these issues.
Third reach out to Indiana, essentially saying... hey... we're going to get serious about addressing criminals which means they may come your way... let's work together
If you're successful there, THEN we can talk about 'Federal Intervention'.
RE: Trump Administration - RiceLad15 - 05-29-2020 02:49 PM
(05-29-2020 02:36 PM)Rice93 Wrote:(05-29-2020 02:34 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:(05-29-2020 02:32 PM)Rice93 Wrote: Separate this from the Minnesota situation. If a policeman sees a crook running out of a store with a stolen TV are you OK with said policeman killing that crook?
Yep. Depends on circumstances, of course. But I don't have a problem with it, per se.
Which circumstances? The cop knows nothing about the criminal but he knows that he has a stolen TV. Use deadly force? Really?
Do you think shoplifters should have their hands cut off as well?
I feel bad for the guy helping his friend pick up a new tv from the store, and is in a hurry. The cop was obviously in the right when he mowed him down
RE: Trump Administration - OptimisticOwl - 05-29-2020 02:51 PM
(05-29-2020 02:44 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:(05-29-2020 02:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:(05-29-2020 12:58 PM)Rice93 Wrote:(05-29-2020 12:21 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: Looky at the tweet Twitter censored from Trump:
Quote:....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!
Yep, the fing tools at Twitter censored that one. In a statement, Twitter Comms said: “This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today.”
“We’ve taken action in the interest of preventing others from being inspired to commit violent acts, but have kept the Tweet on Twitter because it is important that the public still be able to see the Tweet given its relevance to ongoing matters of public importance,” Twitter added. “As is standard with this notice, engagements with the Tweet will be limited. People will be able to Retweet with Comment, but will not be able to Like, Reply or Retweet it.”
As an example of public comments (from blue checks) that Twitter did not censor include:
"Black people have every right to burn down a country they built for free"
"burn it down. **** cops. **** property"
From Michael Moore:
"Good citizens burning down the evil police precinct in MN after all police were out & safe. All police should go home. No violence please. Police HQ must be demolished by the city tomorrow as a show of contrition to black America. Rebuild PD with decent kind ppl aka ppl of color"
I'm fine with them censoring Trump's calls for violence and, likewise, I think they should have censored the others as well.
Please do tell where is 'Trump's call for violence' there? If you are saying that 'Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts', I assume that this is the chief *law enforcement* official in the country speaking --- and noting that this country *will not tolerate* lawlessness.
So I am a little taken aback at your statement on "Trump's call for violence".
For someone who is absolutely incensed and utterly enraged, to the point that they write spittle-filled tirades about how wronged Flynn was, I am shocked that you view the chief law enforcement official in this country advocating for officers to shoot people without justice first being carried out in the court of law.
I guess we’re a country where justice can be served without a trial, and police are allowed to be judge, jury, and executioner, without regard to whether their immediate life is in danger. Just shoot away cus there is looting.
Isn't that what the protesters are doing - serving as judge, jury and executioner?
As for 'spittle-filled" how long have you been peering into Numbers' windows?