Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
The Attic
Questions for liberals.
Page <prev 2 of 4 next> last>>
May 28, 2021 10:29:21   #
travelwp Loc: New Jersey
 
Kraken wrote:
Looks like you get a lot of that, ever wonder why?


I expected a response like yours:

1. A question was asked and you didn't answer it.
2. You provided a snarky remark.

Reply
May 28, 2021 10:34:15   #
travelwp Loc: New Jersey
 
bgate wrote:
480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago

344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore

333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit

119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)

So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities."


All those cities are controlled by one political party. It must be a coincidence.................?

Reply
May 28, 2021 10:36:39   #
travelwp Loc: New Jersey
 
bgate wrote:
Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs.

Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is control," not gun."


YES !!!

Reply
 
 
May 28, 2021 10:52:19   #
Leo_B Loc: Houston suburb
 
gorgehiker wrote:
In the United States, our per capita gun death rate is 8 times higher than in Canada and 100 times higher than in the United Kingdom. If you believe that easy access to guns in our country makes us safer, I've got a nice bridge for sale.


Based on your response, you are a much more likely bridge buyer than seller. bgate already responded really well so no need to go any further.

Reply
May 28, 2021 20:14:35   #
travelwp Loc: New Jersey
 
Kraken wrote:
Looks like you get a lot of that, ever wonder why?


I know why:.

Liberals agree to:

1. Taking money away from Police.
2. Firing police officers.
3. Attacking police officers.
4. Making police officers the object of your scorn.

Question for liberals:
How can these actions lead to better public safety?



Liberals can't answer this question, so they provide snarky comments instead.

Reply
May 29, 2021 06:06:34   #
dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho
 
gorgehiker wrote:
Have you paid any attention to the statements regarding the C*****l P****e officers being made in the last few days? How do you feel about Brian Sicknick's mother begging GOP senators to v**e for a commission to really find out what happened to her policeman son? Trump supporters brutally attacked police officers and conservatives are trying to pretend that J****** 6 was just a normal tourist day. Hypocrits!


Trump supporters brutally attacked police officers on J****** 6th??? Where did this happen? How oddly strange that not one police officers was beaten. Maybe you are thinking of the still unnamed police officer who shot and k**led Ashli Babbit when she was crawling through a window.

Dennis

Reply
May 29, 2021 10:45:25   #
Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan
 
travelwp wrote:
I know why:.

Liberals agree to:

1. Taking money away from Police.
2. Firing police officers.
3. Attacking police officers.
4. Making police officers the object of your scorn.

Question for liberals:
How can these actions lead to better public safety?



Liberals can't answer this question, so they provide snarky comments instead.


I will answer for them.

'People will naturally gravitate to operating on the honor system".

The question is, are Liberals liberal because they are stupid, or are they stupid because they are liberal?

Reply
 
 
May 29, 2021 11:32:28   #
FrumCA
 
travelwp wrote:
Liberals agree to:

1. Taking money away from Police.
2. Firing police officers.
3. Attacking police officers.
4. Making police officers the object of your scorn.

Question for liberals:
How can these actions lead to better public safety?


There was an excellent editorial by Peggy Noonan in the WSJ this morning where she talked about the aftermath of efforts to defund the police. Jurisdictions are losing police officers by the thousands. Peggy opines that the police are underfunded where they need instead more money to give the police the training and resources they need, not defunding. I don't have a link to the article but would encourage those of you who have WSJ subscriptions to read Ms. Noonan's column.

Reply
May 29, 2021 11:39:08   #
FrumCA
 
gorgehiker wrote:
In the United States, our per capita gun death rate is 8 times higher than in Canada and 100 times higher than in the United Kingdom. If you believe that easy access to guns in our country makes us safer, I've got a nice bridge for sale.

And as long as the police continue to be defunded this trend isn't going to get any better. Police departments across the nation will continue to loose officers and those that remain will be deprived of the training and resources they need. I don't know if you go along with the defunding efforts most of your ilk seem to support, but it's clearly not the right approach.

Reply
May 29, 2021 11:39:32   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
Incredibly good reply to this thread. Nothing like facts, as opposed to snark.
--Bob
bgate wrote:
Interesting read breaks gun "violence" down into statistics instead of giving you a blanket number the Democraps throw out to you...........
-Mike-

JUST HOW DANGEROUS ARE FIREARMS ???

There are 30,000 gun-related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun-related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:


65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws

15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified

17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug-related or mentally ill persons gun violence

3% are accidental discharge deaths


So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?

480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago

344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore

333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit

119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)


So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.


This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.


Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, so it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.


Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of the crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault all is done by criminals, and thinking that criminal will obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are criminals.


But what about other deaths each year?

40,000+ die from a drug overdose THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!

36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths

34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)


Now it gets good:

200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!


710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If Obama and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides.....Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!


So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple.:

The taking away of guns gives control to governments.

The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.


Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs.

So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force at the command of a Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."

Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is control," not gun."
Interesting read breaks gun "violence" d... (show quote)

Reply
May 29, 2021 11:44:07   #
FrumCA
 
bgate wrote:
Interesting read breaks gun "violence" down into statistics instead of giving you a blanket number the Democraps throw out to you...........
-Mike-

JUST HOW DANGEROUS ARE FIREARMS ???

There are 30,000 gun-related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun-related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:


65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws

15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified

17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug-related or mentally ill persons gun violence

3% are accidental discharge deaths


So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?

480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago

344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore

333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit

119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)


So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.


This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.


Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, so it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.


Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of the crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault all is done by criminals, and thinking that criminal will obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are criminals.


But what about other deaths each year?

40,000+ die from a drug overdose THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!

36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths

34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)


Now it gets good:

200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!


710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If Obama and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides.....Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!


So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple.:

The taking away of guns gives control to governments.

The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.


Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs.

So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force at the command of a Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."

Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is control," not gun."
Interesting read breaks gun "violence" d... (show quote)

Excellent analysis!! I expect that we will hear crickets from the left on this.

Reply
 
 
May 29, 2021 12:07:52   #
Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL
 
gorgehiker wrote:
In the United States, our per capita gun death rate is 8 times higher than in Canada and 100 times higher than in the United Kingdom. If you believe that easy access to guns in our country makes us safer, I've got a nice bridge for sale.


Makes me and mine safer. Obviously you prefer otherwise.

Reply
May 29, 2021 12:12:09   #
Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL
 
bgate wrote:
Interesting read breaks gun "violence" down into statistics instead of giving you a blanket number the Democraps throw out to you...........
-Mike-

JUST HOW DANGEROUS ARE FIREARMS ???

There are 30,000 gun-related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.000000925% of the population dies from gun-related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:


65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws

15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified

17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug-related or mentally ill persons gun violence

3% are accidental discharge deaths


So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?

480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago

344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore

333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit

119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)


So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.


This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.


Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, so it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.


Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of the crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault all is done by criminals, and thinking that criminal will obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are criminals.


But what about other deaths each year?

40,000+ die from a drug overdose THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!

36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths

34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)


Now it gets good:

200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!


710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If Obama and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides.....Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!


So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple.:

The taking away of guns gives control to governments.

The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.


Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs.

So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force at the command of a Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."

Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is control," not gun."
Interesting read breaks gun "violence" d... (show quote)


OUTSTANDING post!!!! So simple even a staunch Democrat could (if they would) understand it.

Reply
May 29, 2021 12:14:29   #
Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL
 
Fotoartist wrote:
I will answer for them.

'People will naturally gravitate to operating on the honor system".

The question is, are Liberals liberal because they are stupid, or are they stupid because they are liberal?


Pondering the unanswerable.

Reply
May 29, 2021 12:22:54   #
papakatz45 Loc: South Florida-West Palm Beach
 
Kraken wrote:
Looks like you get a lot of that, ever wonder why?


Because that is how liberals respond when they know they do not have a reasonable response.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 4 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
The Attic
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.