New L.A. gun control law proposed

[Heracles 417]

When did I say that? I am quite happy to have some gun legislation that can usefully be used - for example the suggestion in the OP that if you commit certain crimes you lose your right to gun ownership. What I am not happy about is using dodgy rationale to target ethnic groups for 'special treatment' all in the name of public safety. I don't want to live in a totalitarian state.

Correction. Target the majority of gang bangers. Why should Koreans or Japanese be targeted when they have done no wrong?

Edited February 13, 2009 by Aficionado

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Dunno about "proof" but your reasoning seems to indicate that not only should he expect to be pulled over, but be happy about it too because its better than being dead.

As to the other point - I'm suggesting the completely outrageous possibility that a person seen (any person really) engaging in a suspicious activity can expect to be asked questions by a passing police patrol.

Simply being "hispanic" and out late - is not a reason for suspicion.

Let me sum up your logic: As long as a gang member is not stereotyped nor their civil rights violated all is good. If an innocent bystander happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, then they should have 'known better'. So if your spouse six ends up in a bad neighborhood then she deserved it. Lets not proactively clean up these neighborhoods. Rather, lets just ensure their civil rights and various amendments are not violated. The victims after all are just collateral damage of a free society.

I am sure you can suggest this all while living in the comfort of your middle to upper class neighborhood. Good old out of sight out of mind argument. God help anyone who tries to clean up those neighborhoods in America. It will turn in a Iraq situation where those who are there to clean up are the bad guys for stirring up the gangs resulting in the deaths of others.

I didn't say any of that stuff BY, nor does it reflect my opinion in any way whatsoever.

That reasoning amounts to an epic fail on my part, and yet more evidence of how badly the Australian public school system failed you.

I can't imagine struggling with basic literacy into my 30s. You have my sympathies.

[Heracles 417]

I suspect BY wants to "rule" a totalitarian state.

I wonder if he's cultivated a mustache yet - the Hitler one-incher or the Joe Stalin / Tom Selleck. What an agonising choice.

I am sure this is coming from the guy living in a nice safe community.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

When did I say that? I am quite happy to have some gun legislation that can usefully be used - for example the suggestion in the OP that if you commit certain crimes you lose your right to gun ownership. What I am not happy about is using dodgy rationale to target ethnic groups for 'special treatment' all in the name of public safety. I don't want to live in a totalitarian state.

Correction. Target the majority of gang bangers. Why should Koreans or Japanese be targeted when they have done no wrong?

Perhaps you didn't think this one through either....

You're still talking about ethnic groups, and you're still making the case that the majority of blacks and hispanics are gang members. At least - that's how it reads.

[Heracles 417]

I didn't say any of that stuff BY, nor does it reflect my opinion in any way whatsoever.

That reasoning amounts to an epic fail on my part, and yet more evidence of how badly the Australian public school system failed you.

I can't imagine struggling with basic literacy into my 30s. You have my sympathies.

So now we are resulting to personal insults. Here is another thread play out to the tee.

But anyway, you are so predictable.

PS I am still waiting for some proof of your own to back your own opinions and assumptions. Seems I will be waiting a long time.

Edited February 13, 2009 by Aficionado

[Peikko 1,575]

When did I say that? I am quite happy to have some gun legislation that can usefully be used - for example the suggestion in the OP that if you commit certain crimes you lose your right to gun ownership. What I am not happy about is using dodgy rationale to target ethnic groups for 'special treatment' all in the name of public safety. I don't want to live in a totalitarian state.

Correction. Target the majority of gang bangers. Why should Koreans or Japanese be targeted when they have done no wrong?

I don't want anyone 'targeted' except when they give just cause for the police to act. When you understand that being a gang member is a very small subset of people living in the US then you might understand why it's unacceptable to simply use someone's ethnicity as a basis of an assumption that they are up to no good when out and about on public streets.

As for this suggestion that based on a larger % of latinos and blacks being gang members suddenly no latinos and blacks should be gun owners, that's about as bigoted as you can get, mate.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I suspect BY wants to "rule" a totalitarian state.

I wonder if he's cultivated a mustache yet - the Hitler one-incher or the Joe Stalin / Tom Selleck. What an agonising choice.

I am sure this is coming from the guy living in a nice safe community.

I live in a "nice safe community" do I...? Nice to know!

[Marilyn. 340]

When did I say that? I am quite happy to have some gun legislation that can usefully be used - for example the suggestion in the OP that if you commit certain crimes you lose your right to gun ownership. What I am not happy about is using dodgy rationale to target ethnic groups for 'special treatment' all in the name of public safety. I don't want to live in a totalitarian state.

Correction. Target the majority of gang bangers. Why should Koreans or Japanese be targeted when they have done no wrong?

crime is not only committed by gangs...

criminals should be targeted regardless of what colour their skin is

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Thanks for proving my point. The fact is that they come in all sizes and shapes so let's not go the 'but there are more of them who are XXX so that gives us the right to treat everyone who is XXX differently route' shall we?

Proving you point? 79% of gang members are Hispanic and Black.

her point is that, not because a big majority of gangs are black and/or hispanic, doesn't give anyone the right to treat blacks and hispanic differently

Like the LAPD, for instance?

[Ban Hammer 13,360]

Thanks for proving my point. The fact is that they come in all sizes and shapes so let's not go the 'but there are more of them who are XXX so that gives us the right to treat everyone who is XXX differently route' shall we?

Proving you point? 79% of gang members are Hispanic and Black.

her point is that, not because a big majority of gangs are black and/or hispanic, doesn't give anyone the right to treat blacks and hispanic differently

Like the LAPD, for instance?

la poker, where a handful of clubs beats kings?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I didn't say any of that stuff BY, nor does it reflect my opinion in any way whatsoever.

That reasoning amounts to an epic fail on my part, and yet more evidence of how badly the Australian public school system failed you.

I can't imagine struggling with basic literacy into my 30s. You have my sympathies.

So now we are resulting to personal insults. Here is another thread play out to the tee.

But anyway, you are so predictable.

PS I am still waiting for some proof of your own to back your own opinions and assumptions. Seems I will be waiting a long time.

BY - you must admit that you are horrifically bad at comprehending people's opinions.

[Peikko 1,575]

When did I say that? I am quite happy to have some gun legislation that can usefully be used - for example the suggestion in the OP that if you commit certain crimes you lose your right to gun ownership. What I am not happy about is using dodgy rationale to target ethnic groups for 'special treatment' all in the name of public safety. I don't want to live in a totalitarian state.

Correction. Target the majority of gang bangers. Why should Koreans or Japanese be targeted when they have done no wrong?

crime is not only committed by gangs...

criminals should be targeted regardless of what colour their skin is

But, but, if more black (or hispanic, whichever) people are in prison then surely more black people commit crimes than white people, so that means black people shouldn't own guns and black people should expect to be stopped and searched...in fact they should be glad to be stopped and searched because that means that the horrible people from within their own group will be flushed out and everyone will live happily ever after.

...familiar?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

her point is that, not because a big majority of gangs are black and/or hispanic, doesn't give anyone the right to treat blacks and hispanic differently

pedro, you might be a great guy, a wonderful father, a terrific husband, a law abiding taxpayer, and a contributing part of society, but you have to admit that some hispanics are out of control, and are not living within the societal norm. you will also remind me that some blacks are out of control, and outside the societal norm, and that some whites are, as well. trouble is, the ratio is something like 18.5 to 14.5 to 1, H/B/W.

when you look at it this way, you see why we have gotten a little frustrated with the situation. your assistance as a role model and stabilising influence in your own quarter is greatly appreciated, but

you have to admit that law enforcement efforts should be directed towards the area of perceived difficulty. if one guy is 18 times as likely to be trouble as the other, who gets searched first?

Police efforts generally focus on "reasonable suspicion" - like being caught with the gun in your hand, or loading stolen property into the back of your car.

Being black or hispanic isn't "reasonable suspicion".

Or being of "color" in a white neighborhood? You mean the same as being white in a non-white neighborhood means you are looking for drugs or prostitutes?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

her point is that, not because a big majority of gangs are black and/or hispanic, doesn't give anyone the right to treat blacks and hispanic differently

pedro, you might be a great guy, a wonderful father, a terrific husband, a law abiding taxpayer, and a contributing part of society, but you have to admit that some hispanics are out of control, and are not living within the societal norm. you will also remind me that some blacks are out of control, and outside the societal norm, and that some whites are, as well. trouble is, the ratio is something like 18.5 to 14.5 to 1, H/B/W.

when you look at it this way, you see why we have gotten a little frustrated with the situation. your assistance as a role model and stabilising influence in your own quarter is greatly appreciated, but

you have to admit that law enforcement efforts should be directed towards the area of perceived difficulty. if one guy is 18 times as likely to be trouble as the other, who gets searched first?

Police efforts generally focus on "reasonable suspicion" - like being caught with the gun in your hand, or loading stolen property into the back of your car.

Being black or hispanic isn't "reasonable suspicion".

Or being of "color" in a white neighborhood? You mean the same as being white in a non-white neighborhood means you are looking for drugs or prostitutes?

It does? Who knew!

[Peikko 1,575]

her point is that, not because a big majority of gangs are black and/or hispanic, doesn't give anyone the right to treat blacks and hispanic differently

pedro, you might be a great guy, a wonderful father, a terrific husband, a law abiding taxpayer, and a contributing part of society, but you have to admit that some hispanics are out of control, and are not living within the societal norm. you will also remind me that some blacks are out of control, and outside the societal norm, and that some whites are, as well. trouble is, the ratio is something like 18.5 to 14.5 to 1, H/B/W.

when you look at it this way, you see why we have gotten a little frustrated with the situation. your assistance as a role model and stabilising influence in your own quarter is greatly appreciated, but

you have to admit that law enforcement efforts should be directed towards the area of perceived difficulty. if one guy is 18 times as likely to be trouble as the other, who gets searched first?

Police efforts generally focus on "reasonable suspicion" - like being caught with the gun in your hand, or loading stolen property into the back of your car.

Being black or hispanic isn't "reasonable suspicion".

Or being of "color" in a white neighborhood? You mean the same as being white in a non-white neighborhood means you are looking for drugs or prostitutes?

Neither assumption makes sense. Why would one seek to justify either?