The answer is always more guns

[Thumb]

I'm just saying that not all women in SoCal are 'plastic' anymore than you find in places like Dallas and Atlanta, two very superficial cities not nicked "TinselTown" because of the movie biz.

I understand. Though SoCal as a general area was never the location in question, it was specifically "Hollywood", which was what my response was based upon.

 

[turok]

?He probably would be out of my league,? Chapman tells FOX411.

I am in complete agreement with Chapman when he said this in that link:

?Prison is for the violent [criminals] ? not for the non-violent or someone who is maybe not educated enough and won?t commit the crime again,? he says.


?If it is non-violent, it means that people made mistakes. We are spending so much money on them and we have no room for the killers!?


Chapman believes many drug-related offenses would be better addressed with education and rehabilitation.



?The guy that gave dope to a little girl, keep him there. But [the non-violent drug users], you gotta get them out. We don?t need to be spending $360 a day. It costs more to keep a man in jail than it does to put that same man through a cheap college.?

 

[Spartanmack]

Nobody said that. Get someone to read it to you again.


EDIT: also, leave the East Lansing girls you described out of this.

How about for once you grow a set stand by some of the stupid nonsense you spew. People are understanding and they will make allowances for you because they know you're not very bright.

 

[Thumb]

How about for once you grow a set stand by some of the stupid nonsense you spew. People are understanding and they will make allowances for you because they know you're not very bright.

Whoa, burn. You're getting so good at this.

 

[Spartanmack]

Whoa, burn. You're getting so good at this.

Sounds familiar. Where have I heard that before? How does that saying go? Imitation is the sincerest from of flattery, right?

 

[Thumb]

 

[Monster]

 

[tigermud]

^^ Ok now that was funny ^^

 

[Spartanmack]

apparently, it's working in Detroit...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/16/detroit-police-chief-no-question-my-mind-legal-gun/

http://washingtonweeklynews.com/det...ses-opinion-legal-gun-owners-can-deter-crime/

 

[Michchamp]

apparently, it's working in Detroit...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/16/detroit-police-chief-no-question-my-mind-legal-gun/

http://washingtonweeklynews.com/det...ses-opinion-legal-gun-owners-can-deter-crime/

Define "working"... there is no real link between the two made, just the police chief's opinion that the drop in crime was related to it, no actual study about that. Crime rates have been declining significantly since the 90's already though, and not always in Detroit.

I like how you normally would hold Detroit city government up as an example of everything wrong with everything, except when you can cherry pick this one quote and stat out to back something up, then a Detroit official is suddenly a credible source.

and regardless, I hardly think it's an example worth emulating. Even if you could prove a link between increased gun ownership and a decline in crime in Detroit, that's because the city police budget is so gutted that it's basically the wild west in a lot of areas in terms of protecting yourself. I'd rather not see the rest of the country devolve to that point just so we can all carry guns and talk about how great it is we have guns. Yay, guns.

 

[Spartanmack]

working, as in there is a direct correlation between increased private, legal gun ownership and reduced crime in one of our Nation's highest crime cities. It's a much bigger stretch to link it to a general reduction in crime rates since the 90s.

As for you second paragraph - the logic here is classic michturd. I point to Detroit leadership for ruining the City so I must find fault with everything they do, even on the rare occasion when their actions align w/ my personal opinions. That is so dumb. Unlike a partisan hack like you, I don't think anyone can get everything wrong. But of all the people I know, you come closest to achieving that rate.

Finally, of course you don't - it contradicts your baseless anti-gun, anti-NRA, anti-conservative, anti-2nd Amendment narratives.

 

[Michchamp]

working, as in there is a direct correlation between increased private, legal gun ownership and reduced crime in one of our Nation's highest crime cities. It's a much bigger stretch to link it to a general reduction in crime rates since the 90s.

there is? Let's see it.

As for you second paragraph - the logic here is classic michturd. I point to Detroit leadership for ruining the City so I must find fault with everything they do, even on the rare occasion when their actions align w/ my personal opinions. That is so dumb. Unlike a partisan hack like you, I don't think anyone can get everything wrong. But of all the people I know, you come closest to achieving that rate.

sure, okay.

Finally, of course you don't - it contradicts your baseless anti-gun, anti-NRA, anti-conservative, anti-2nd Amendment narratives.

Just so I understand what you're saying here: wanting to live in a peaceful society that doesn't rely on gun ownership to deter crime is "anti-gun, anti-NRA, anti-conservative, and anti-2nd Amendment"???

Ironically, I'm a gun owner and you're not, so you don't practice what you preach, and I'm hardly the baseless gun-hater you wish I was because then you could possibly have a counter-argument not based on fantasy when it comes to guns.

 

[Spartanmack]

there is? Let's see it.



sure, okay.

Just so I understand what you're saying here: wanting to live in a peaceful society that doesn't rely on gun ownership to deter crime is "anti-gun, anti-NRA, anti-conservative, and anti-2nd Amendment"???

your stated motive of wanting to live in a peaceful society that doesn't rely on gun ownership to deter crime doesn't require you to perpetuate lies about gun violence, support egregious/extreme gun control measures, or be anti-NRA. Gun ownership is not exclusively about deterring crime.

Ironically, I'm a gun owner and you're not, so you don't practice what you preach, and I'm hardly the baseless gun-hater you wish I was because then you could possibly have a counter-argument not based on fantasy when it comes to guns.

Sure, okay. More classic michturd logic. How am I not practicing what I preach? I support every American's right to legally own a firearm if they chose to. And I see through the lies of the anti-gun lobby and the folly of their policies and I am against most of them. Choosing to not own a gun is not even remotely inconsistent with my position. I am practicing what I preach.

 

[Michchamp]

your stated motive of wanting to live in a peaceful society that doesn't rely on gun ownership to deter crime doesn't require you to perpetuate lies about gun violence, support egregious/extreme gun control measures, or be anti-NRA. Gun ownership is not exclusively about deterring crime.

I don't believe I've done any of those things, and I'd beg to differ with you that universal background checks - actually funded and enforced by the Federal government, more restrictive concealed carry, no open carry in urban areas, and some bans on high capacity magazines are "egregious/extreme" gun control measures.

Sure, okay. More classic michturd logic. How am I not practicing what I preach? I support every American's right to legally own a firearm if they chose to. And I see through the lies of the anti-gun lobby and the folly of their policies and I am against most of them. Choosing to not own a gun is not even remotely inconsistent with my position. I am practicing what I preach.

Still nothing on the link between gun ownership and a reduction in crime. Put up or shut up, loudmouth.

 

[TheVictors]

maybe the population drain has something to do with reduced crime. I would want to see per capita crime rates for Detroit proper first and then look at other, growing metro markets to see if the population increase has resulted in increased crime.

I know that in CO with the passing of Amendment 64 there was speculation that crime would increase because of legalized marijuana and that theory has been largely dispelled - that there would be more crime because of pot.

Instead, there has been a rather stark increase in crime and whether at local community meetings with the police or broader surveys of the Denver metro area, the cause for the uptick in crime has been population growth, period.

More people moving to a city increasing the density of the population without an appropriate increase in police capacity is resulting in increased crime. And a few months ago, my gun-owning buddy originally from Texas had his gun stolen during a break in.

That gun was used in an armed robbery about six weeks later. Responsible gun owner and all...

 

[Spartanmack]

I don't believe I've done any of those things, and I'd beg to differ with you that universal background checks - actually funded and enforced by the Federal government, more restrictive concealed carry, no open carry in urban areas, and some bans on high capacity magazines are "egregious/extreme" gun control measures.



Still nothing on the link between gun ownership and a reduction in crime. Put up or shut up, loudmouth.

read the article - it's right there. it's more compelling than the claim that stricter gun laws lower violent crime or murder rates, which is not supported by any studies. In fact, statistics show it's just the opposite - the areas with the strictest gun control laws in the US have the most gun murders (DC, Chicago, Baltimore)

 

[Spartanmack]

maybe the population drain has something to do with reduced crime. I would want to see per capita crime rates for Detroit proper first and then look at other, growing metro markets to see if the population increase has resulted in increased crime.

I know that in CO with the passing of Amendment 64 there was speculation that crime would increase because of legalized marijuana and that theory has been largely dispelled - that there would be more crime because of pot.

Instead, there has been a rather stark increase in crime and whether at local community meetings with the police or broader surveys of the Denver metro area, the cause for the uptick in crime has been population growth, period.

More people moving to a city increasing the density of the population without an appropriate increase in police capacity is resulting in increased crime. And a few months ago, my gun-owning buddy originally from Texas had his gun stolen during a break in.

That gun was used in an armed robbery about six weeks later. Responsible gun owner and all...

Here you go, data through 2013...

http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Detroit-Michigan.html

Detroit's population has been in decline for decades

 

[Michchamp]

read the article - it's right there. it's more compelling than the claim that stricter gun laws lower violent crime or murder rates, which is not supported by any studies. In fact, statistics show it's just the opposite - the areas with the strictest gun control laws in the US have the most gun murders (DC, Chicago, Baltimore)

I read both articles. His claim rests solely on his own assertion:

Detroit has experienced 37 percent fewer robberies than it did last year, and Police Chief James Craig is crediting armed citizens for the drop.

“Criminals are getting the message that good Detroiters are armed and will use that weapon,” said Chief Craig, who has been an open advocate for private gun ownership, the Detroit News reported. “I don’t want to take away from the good work our investigators are doing, but I think part of the drop in crime, and robberies in particular, is because criminals are thinking twice that citizens could be armed.

“I can’t say what specific percentage is caused by this, but there’s no question in my mind it has had an effect,” he added.
​

Again, I don't see any logical tie in and crime had been dropping for years already. The other link you posted shows crime indices in Detroit have jumped around wildly.

The idea that tougher gun laws result in more shootings in Chicago, DC, or Baltimore is stupid. Most of the guns used to commit crimes in Chicago for example come from the suburbs or Indiana, all of which have much more lax gun laws. If anything this shows stricter gun laws have to be uniform nationwide; it's easy to cross a state border if you want to get a gun to shoot someone.

If gun laws are to blame, why aren't shootings more widely spread throughout Chicago, instead of being concentrated in a handful of poor neighborhoods on the South and West sides?

the socio-economic conditions are a factor; gun laws are not. They are more or less irrelevent to crime rates.

Here you go, data through 2013...

http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Detroit-Michigan.html

Detroit's population has been in decline for decades

you're not very good at this whole "arguing" thing... did you even look at the link you posted? so crime in Detroit bottomed out in 2010, but shot back up in 2011... I guess the citizens sold their guns back, criminals knew this and started committing more crimes? or maybe it's obvious gun ownership has jack squat to do with crime?

just like the NRA, fitting data to your own premise, and ignoring anything that doesn't jive with it...

 

[Spartanmack]

I read both articles. His claim rests solely on his own assertion:

Detroit has experienced 37 percent fewer robberies than it did last year, and Police Chief James Craig is crediting armed citizens for the drop.

“Criminals are getting the message that good Detroiters are armed and will use that weapon,” said Chief Craig, who has been an open advocate for private gun ownership, the Detroit News reported. “I don’t want to take away from the good work our investigators are doing, but I think part of the drop in crime, and robberies in particular, is because criminals are thinking twice that citizens could be armed.

“I can’t say what specific percentage is caused by this, but there’s no question in my mind it has had an effect,” he added.
​

Again, I don't see any logical tie in and crime had been dropping for years already. The other link you posted shows crime indices in Detroit have jumped around wildly.

The idea that tougher gun laws result in more shootings in Chicago, DC, or Baltimore is stupid. Most of the guns used to commit crimes in Chicago for example come from the suburbs or Indiana, all of which have much more lax gun laws. If anything this shows stricter gun laws have to be uniform nationwide; it's easy to cross a state border if you want to get a gun to shoot someone.

If gun laws are to blame, why aren't shootings more widely spread throughout Chicago, instead of being concentrated in a handful of poor neighborhoods on the South and West sides?

the socio-economic conditions are a factor; gun laws are not. They are more or less irrelevent to crime rates.



you're not very good at this whole "arguing" thing... did you even look at the link you posted? so crime in Detroit bottomed out in 2010, but shot back up in 2011... I guess the citizens sold their guns back, criminals knew this and started committing more crimes? or maybe it's obvious gun ownership has jack squat to do with crime?

just like the NRA, fitting data to your own premise, and ignoring anything that doesn't jive with it...

No, crime hadn't been decreasing in Detroit already. The stats clearly demonstrate that. I'm not good at this arguing thing? How about you take a look at a time line before you start pointing out inconsistencies. The first article talks about crime in 2015. The second indicates that Craig didn't reverse his position on citizens legally arming themselves until 2013. After that gun ownership and CCW permits increased dramatically, and crime which hadn't been going down, has now gone down. The third only shows data through 2013 but it clearly answers Vic's question by showing the the population decline had no affect on crime. So why don't you go learn the number line and try to keep up before you go around accusing people of fitting data? At least you didn't accuse me of fabricating or falsifying data like a climate "scientist".

Oh, if gun laws are more or less irrelevant to crime rates as you say, why do we need stricter ones - again, you're not too good at this whole arguing thing but you're a wiz at contradicting yourself. Well done. By the way, thanks for repeating the dumbass mayor's talking points about less strict gun laws in nearby states. I got a kick out that - it was almost as funny as the time Mayor Coleman A Young blamed suburbanites for coming into Detroit and committing all the crime. I shouldn't have been surprised that you bought into it though. LOL

You make this too easy.

 

[TheVictors]

Here you go, data through 2013...

http://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Detroit-Michigan.html

Detroit's population has been in decline for decades

So a decline in population has now resulted in lower crime.