Told to "Embrace stop and frisk" Policing....

truth

pewpewpew
Sep 19, 2009
423
101
28
Seabeck, WA
Nothing to do with racism and I wont acquaint myself with the arguments that say it is so or the best thing to do is wall the city and let them kill each other.

One point of your post is telling.....

"During those 27 years I never owned a gun and never had a violent encounter."

Of course you didnt because you are not in that segment of the community that looks on shootings as part of doing business or engages in the gang activity.

So because you are not affected nothing should be done?

Thats been Rahms position and that is why he is leaving.

How about the young family working their asses off trying to do the right thing with only enough money to live in a crime ridden area? The mom that used her Hi Point carbine to chase off home invaders in that area is my hero. I wish she would get some help from her officials her taxes pay the salary of.

But she wont because the shootings dont effect contributions to politicians, in fact they enhance them, as donors donate to ensure that crime stays contained to the "bad" areas and never comes to their neighborhoods.

Changes need to be made in the courts.

They need to start treating gun criminals the way they want to treat lawful gun owners.

Abuse your freedoms protected from infringement in the Constitution there should be a high bar to jump to get them back and a serious loss of freedom.

Probation isnt the answer.
We agree on nearly everything here. I was just trying to give some perspective from someone that literally spent a decade in the from 97-07 walking the streets being discussed. It chafes me when ignorance from afar is proffered up as gospel as it with the tribulations of Chicago. No one wants to discuss that the problem started back in back in 1933...

"The fate of public housing in America — its rise, much of it in the form of towers like Cabrini-Green, and its fall as those towers came down — is the story of urban poverty as an unsteady political priority. In his first year as president, in 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt created the federal Housing Division, as part of the Public Works Administration. The P.W.A. built the country’s first 51 public-housing developments, including three in Chicago. By then the shortcomings of the for-profit real estate market were evident in eviction riots, in sprawling homeless encampments and in cities overflowing with mile after mile of cheap, decrepit frame dwellings. In segregated black neighborhoods, where families were excluded from competing for housing on the open market, the conditions were more dire. Without government intervention in some form, private developers and landlords were never going to build or maintain anywhere near enough homes for the urban poor. Like other New Deal assistance programs — relief for farmers, aid to senior citizens through Social Security, food stamps — public housing treated poverty as a widespread social and economic injustice that the country was obligated to right. The subsidy was also intended to help jump-start the economy by rebuilding moribund cities and creating jobs. In 1937, Congress passed more extensive legislation, establishing a federal housing agency; Chicago and other cities formed their own housing authorities to operate the program locally. “I see one-third of a nation ill housed, ill clad, ill nourished,” Roosevelt announced that year. “The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/06/...-with-them-the-promise-of-public-housing.html
 
Last edited:

ArmyJerry

Staff Sergeant
Nov 22, 2012
7,291
7,483
113
If a former felon is free from jail they should have all their rights returned. Having Americans in the street without full freedom is a danger to is all

My comment above about guns and "people that should not have them" may irk some.

Doesnt the Second Amendment provide for everyone to defend themselves?

No.

Felons have decided to live outside the Constitution and therfore they are not allowed the freedoms it recognizes and prevents government from infringing on.

It surprises me when people proclaim "Why wasnt he in jail" when some career criminal commits a heinous crime.

He wasnt in jail because that serves no purpose to govt right now.

You, on the other hand, commit some process crime with your firearm you will be used as the example of why more Second Amendment restrictions are needed. You will help to serve the govts current agenda.
 

pmclaine

Gunny Sergeant
Nov 6, 2011
8,188
5,232
113
50
MA
If a former felon is free from jail they should have all their rights returned. Having Americans in the street without full freedom is a danger to is all
Completed their debt to society and outside the probation system sure.

Thing is there is a population that is forever somehow involved in some sort of supervision or they have established a cycle of recidivism.

Are there people that refuse to allow you your pursuit of happiness because they see it as their right, in error, to fuck with you?

Do they get full rights for the short periods they are between felonies?
 

truth

pewpewpew
Sep 19, 2009
423
101
28
Seabeck, WA
If they are not in jail they should have full rights.
Agreed. If we feel otherwise then we need to address the failures of the system of incarceration until it's effectively rehabilitating prisoners. Not sure the privatized prison profiteers will bite though. It's more profitable to simply warehouse them in a system that virtually ensures a revolving door of repeat offenders and thus heads inl beds.
 

Mooncake

Sergeant of the Hide
May 29, 2018
544
642
93
Central Mountains, CO
We agree on nearly everything here. I was just trying to give some perspective from someone that literally spent a decade in the from 97-07 walking the streets being discussed. It chafes me when ignorance from afar is proffered up as gospel as it with the tribulations of Chicago. No one wants to discuss that the problem started back in back in 1933...

"The fate of public housing in America — its rise, much of it in the form of towers like Cabrini-Green, and its fall as those towers came down — is the story of urban poverty as an unsteady political priority. In his first year as president, in 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt created the federal Housing Division, as part of the Public Works Administration. The P.W.A. built the country’s first 51 public-housing developments, including three in Chicago. By then the shortcomings of the for-profit real estate market were evident in eviction riots, in sprawling homeless encampments and in cities overflowing with mile after mile of cheap, decrepit frame dwellings. In segregated black neighborhoods, where families were excluded from competing for housing on the open market, the conditions were more dire. Without government intervention in some form, private developers and landlords were never going to build or maintain anywhere near enough homes for the urban poor. Like other New Deal assistance programs — relief for farmers, aid to senior citizens through Social Security, food stamps — public housing treated poverty as a widespread social and economic injustice that the country was obligated to right. The subsidy was also intended to help jump-start the economy by rebuilding moribund cities and creating jobs. In 1937, Congress passed more extensive legislation, establishing a federal housing agency; Chicago and other cities formed their own housing authorities to operate the program locally. “I see one-third of a nation ill housed, ill clad, ill nourished,” Roosevelt announced that year. “The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/06/...-with-them-the-promise-of-public-housing.html

There you go quoting nonsense that's not fit to print. The New York Times is nothing if not a propaganda machine. Pull your head out of your ass -- it smells better out here.
 

pmclaine

Gunny Sergeant
Nov 6, 2011
8,188
5,232
113
50
MA
Agreed. If we feel otherwise then we need to address the failures of the system of incarceration until it's effectively rehabilitating prisoners. Not sure the privatized prison profiteers will bite though. It's more profitable to simply warehouse them in a system that virtually ensures a revolving door of repeat offenders and thus heads inl beds.
I can agree with this but we are a population of 350 plus million.

In anything in life you get 1-2 percent that dont get it.

By laws of human nature we should have 7m imprisoned and we are at 2m.

we can cut that 350m figure down some because lets say 0-17 and 60-80 do not represent the criminal population. So subtract approx 74m and 53m = +/- 130m = 220m X .02 = 4,400,000

We are at half the expected incarceration rate so we are not doing to bad as far as crime goes. we have half the expected rate in jail.

Imagine how much we could cut that if we did away with some social welfare programs that encourage activity that leads to crime or has kids growing up in atmospheres that give them no opportunities beyond crime?

Nothing scientific above, all just based on bogus Google searches and 50 years observation of people fucking up myself included.

So fine restoration of rights once releases but we need to come to a realization that some people can never be released.

China figured it out and they suffer neither from over incarceration or recidivism.
 

truth

pewpewpew
Sep 19, 2009
423
101
28
Seabeck, WA
I can agree with this but we are a population of 350 plus million.

In anything in life you get 1-2 percent that dont get it.

By laws of human nature we should have 7m imprisoned and we are at 2m.

we can cut that 350m figure down some because lets say 0-17 and 60-80 do not represent the criminal population. So subtract approx 74m and 53m = +/- 130m = 220m X .02 = 4,400,000

We are at half the expected incarceration rate so we are not doing to bad as far as crime goes. we have half the expected rate in jail.

Imagine how much we could cut that if we did away with some social welfare programs that encourage activity that leads to crime or has kids growing up in atmospheres that give them no opportunities beyond crime?

Nothing scientific above, all just based on bogus Google searches and 50 years observation of people fucking up myself included.

So fine restoration of rights once releases but we need to come to a realization that some people can never be released.

China figured it out and they suffer neither from over incarceration or recidivism.

There's no arguing that some will always be beyond fixing. Using China as an example of anything regarding there treatment of criminals is disturbing. I think your point regarding "opportunities beyond crime" is getting closer to the root of the problem. Welfare reform has been long overdue. Creating a system that rewards people for working to improve their situation vs penalizing it is so fucking obvious it's painful to even type it. Knee jerk calls for the suspension of the social safety net aren't even worth responding to. How many people here have a mortgage backed by the gov that they deduct from their taxes? How many could afford to own a home without it? The article repeatedly maligned here as being from the failing NYT offers...

"Maybe most telling, the same Depression-era legislation that funded the first public-housing complexes also created the federally insured private home loan. With this revolution in home financing, buyers were able to put down as little as 10 percent of a house’s cost and pay off their mortgages in small increments over an unprecedented 30 years. Even today, the federal government devotes three times as much each year to mortgage-interest deductions and other subsidies to the speculative real estate market — essentially public housing for homeowners — than to the entire annual budget of the Department of Housing and Urban Development."
 

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
3,282
3,311
113
Dallas, TX
Do they get full rights for the short periods they are between felonies?
They don't seem to have any issue getting whatever guns or other "rights" they want, with or without societies consent, the worse of a criminal you are, the easier it seems for them to get guns or anything else they want.

So I don't know that it will actually matter if they got their rights back. It might actually give them a bit of incentive to behave.
 

Veer_G

Beware of the Dildópony!
Jun 15, 2008
9,096
6,481
113
SEPA
I think PMcC sees it, too. There's a portion of bad puppies who refuse to learn discipline no matter how hard you try. Do we continually ransom them from the pound no matter how much death and destruction they visit upon others? Making felony a permanently prohibiting condition of release is a management tool, but if there were any great demand to change this and toss their felony tools out the door and at their dusty feet à la classic Western films, sentencing would need to be much, much more punitive than it is,. Similarly, probation and parole revolving doors would need to nailed fairly shut. Could politicians sell this and keep their cushy positions?

If they are not in jail they should have full rights.
If a former felon is free from jail they should have all their rights returned. Having Americans in the street without full freedom is a danger to is all
Completed their debt to society and outside the probation system sure.

Thing is there is a population that is forever somehow involved in some sort of supervision or they have established a cycle of recidivism.

Are there people that refuse to allow you your pursuit of happiness because they see it as their right, in error, to fuck with you?

Do they get full rights for the short periods they are between felonies?
 
Likes: Bender

pmclaine

Gunny Sergeant
Nov 6, 2011
8,188
5,232
113
50
MA
There's no arguing that some will always be beyond fixing. Using China as an example of anything regarding there treatment of criminals is disturbing. I think your point regarding "opportunities beyond crime" is getting closer to the root of the problem. Welfare reform has been long overdue. Creating a system that rewards people for working to improve their situation vs penalizing it is so fucking obvious it's painful to even type it. Knee jerk calls for the suspension of the social safety net aren't even worth responding to. How many people here have a mortgage backed by the gov that they deduct from their taxes? How many could afford to own a home without it? The article repeatedly maligned here as being from the failing NYT offers...

"Maybe most telling, the same Depression-era legislation that funded the first public-housing complexes also created the federally insured private home loan. With this revolution in home financing, buyers were able to put down as little as 10 percent of a house’s cost and pay off their mortgages in small increments over an unprecedented 30 years. Even today, the federal government devotes three times as much each year to mortgage-interest deductions and other subsidies to the speculative real estate market — essentially public housing for homeowners — than to the entire annual budget of the Department of Housing and Urban Development."
Fuck off.

You make it seem that our money is the govts money and we should be :thankful" for that which they let us keep.

We have a regular Nancy Pelosi here.

Housing is essential and like other necessities it should be tax free. As well that which I spend on essentials should be deducted.

The govt is a money sucking leviathan.

Now regards welfare reform....

Stop punishing people that work. Establish a budget, get a job and the govt makes up that which you need to get through tough times. Work should not be penalized. Any kid you squirt out while on assitance means you share what you already get. You dont get rewarded with more.
 

ArmyJerry

Staff Sergeant
Nov 22, 2012
7,291
7,483
113
Yeah I didnt say it was going to be easy, but hell man, someone fks up they get a felon, you are close to my age I am sure you seen people get felons for dime bags because that is what the limit was when I was a kid, how many lives were ruined with that shit. How many people get turned bad by the system after an innocuous fuck up?Once they get out of prison for anything other than a violent crime they should have record expunged so they can get a dam job. Not saying all prisoners are on a good track but hell they should not be let out then.Pay yout debt and start clean with an opportunity or two.

I think PMcC sees it, too. There's a portion of bad puppies who refuse to learn discipline no matter how hard you try. Do we continually ransom them from the pound no matter how much death and destruction they visit upon others? Making felony a permanently prohibiting condition of release is a management tool, but if there were any great demand to change this and toss their felony tools out the door and at their dusty feet à la classic Western films, sentencing would need to be much, much more punitive than it is,. Similarly, probation and parole revolving doors would need to nailed fairly shut. Could politicians sell this and keep their cushy positions?
 

Culpeper

One divided by F
Nov 25, 2006
2,506
878
113
59
Roswell NM
During bad times the gov't should be running at a deficit. During good times it needs to collect revenue for the next bad time. What most people don't know is that most people are not in compliance on their taxes. This means most people that are complaining really are not walking the walk. Works on both sides of the aisle. Liberals whining about there should be more gov't spending are not paying their taxes correctly and are actively in collections. Conservatives are the biggest tax evaders but will at least make suspense payments if they don't have the right connections. Thus, the odds are pretty good that half you people are full of shit about the govt ability to tax and why. And right at the top of this heap is our taxation with representation slight of hand fucking grifter lying bullshit. The closest I have ever seen this in action is when somebody gets caught and hires a lawyer. The biggest joke I hear is the constant double taxation is unconstitutional. I keep a pocket copy, hand it to them, and ask to them to show me. Trust me in the last twenty years I have heard and seen it all. People are no damn good.
 

Culpeper

One divided by F
Nov 25, 2006
2,506
878
113
59
Roswell NM
I despise private prison systems. It's cowardice corruption and a failure of our population to treat prisoners as they should be treated. Rehabilitation if possible if not keep them in jail. And stop jailing so many frikken people.
Having audited several of these private companies I can assure you they pay a shitload of taxes either up front or on the backend. What is good for the enterprise is good for everyone.
 

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Oct 1, 2005
3,282
3,311
113
Dallas, TX
Conservatives are the biggest tax evaders but will at least make suspense payments if they don't have the right connections. Thus, the odds are pretty good that half you people are full of shit about the govt ability to tax and why. And right at the top of this heap is our taxation with representation slight of hand fucking grifter lying bullshit..
I'm not sure where you get your information from but I think you'll find that a good part of the hard working middle class producers pay a lot more of their income as a percentage in taxes than most others, and many of those tend to be conservative.

Considering our current taxation system is basically thinly veiled bunch of moochers hiring somebody else to liberate ever increasing amounts of money from those that work at gunpoint, I consider it immoral to pay any more taxes than you absolutely legally have to after using every legal avenue to pay as little as possible.

Idiots gave the government unlimited power to tax... that doesn't mean you have to enjoy, worship taxes or make it easy for them to take your money without having to do as much paperwork as they make you do.
 

gigamortis

Habitual Sender
Oct 23, 2013
242
211
43
Under the current "felon for life" system, there's simply not anything left for them to lose when they have finished their sentences. This only encourages further lawless behavior.

Another discrepancy in the definition of "felon" is that certain violations that are felonies in one state are just mere misdemeanors in other states, or not even illegal at all. Get caught posessing hollow points in New Jersey and you have earned national felon status. Yet in all other 49 states, perfectly legal.
 

Mooncake

Sergeant of the Hide
May 29, 2018
544
642
93
Central Mountains, CO
Considering our current taxation system is basically thinly veiled bunch of moochers
Let’s talk about how the rest of the free world basically gets a pass with respect to having a minimal defense budget while we pay for air superiority and a giant fleet to the tune of $600 BILLION annually, more than half our discretionary spending! And then the libtards point at Norwegian countries that are racially and, more importantly, educationally and socioeconomically homogeneous and cry about how great their free healthcare system is. Well, yeah duh they don’t have shit else to pay for BECAUSE THEY GET A FREE RIDE and they all work!

NATO is a crock of shit and way bigger moochers than any shitbag domestic welfare rats.
 

Culpeper

One divided by F
Nov 25, 2006
2,506
878
113
59
Roswell NM
I'm not sure where you get your information from but I think you'll find that a good part of the hard working middle class producers pay a lot more of their income as a percentage in taxes than most others, and many of those tend to be conservative.

Considering our current taxation system is basically thinly veiled bunch of moochers hiring somebody else to liberate ever increasing amounts of money from those that work at gunpoint, I consider it immoral to pay any more taxes than you absolutely legally have to after using every legal avenue to pay as little as possible.

Idiots gave the government unlimited power to tax... that doesn't mean you have to enjoy, worship taxes or make it easy for them to take your money without having to do as much paperwork as they make you do.
I agree that people should not pay one cent more than are required. But based on my experience most people no matter what class in society are not reporting and paying correctly. A corporation would take this as a bad debt deduction. The government makes up for the loss with higher tax rates across the board. Or it will lower rates for a certain class that needs it or demands it and reduce unnecessary services. But on the extreme ends whether conservative or liberal are the people that believe with great fervor preposterous things that just happen to coincide with their self-interest. "Tax protesters" have convinced themselves that wages are not income, that only gold is money, that the Sixteenth Amendment is unconstitutional, and so on. These beliefs all lead--so tax protesters think--to the elimination of their obligation to pay taxes. The government may not prohibit the holding of these beliefs, but it may penalize people who act on them.
 

truth

pewpewpew
Sep 19, 2009
423
101
28
Seabeck, WA
Sounds awfully Heller from Milo Minderbinder. A profiteer. You're way off, numbnuts.
Actually those quotes would be "What's good for Milo Minderbinder, is good for the country" or ""What's good for M&M Enterprises, is good for the country" or ""What's good for the syndicate, is good for the country" if you're playing off Heller, however, Heller stole it from Charles Wilson. Unfortunately good old Chuck had said "What's good for General Motors is good for the country" in testimony to congress regarding his ability to act against the interest of his former employer in his current role as Sec. of Defense (1953-57).

Hmmm..in that context perhaps it is bit more fascist than marxist.
 
Likes: Culpeper