Guns from out-of-state make up the grand majority of city crimes

[Karee 4,191]

They've lost their constitutional rights at that point. Matter of a fact they should be deported and surrender their US citizenship. But that's for another debate.

It's the only way to clean up the country and remove the undesirables from the gene pool.

I bet crime would shrink to nothing if deportation was the end game.

I'm sure alot of people would be for that. Mostly folks like the KKK and the white supremacists out there, since the demographic with the highest rate of incarceration in this country is the black man. Glad to see you finally came out and showed us what you're all about.

[RGinWA 816]

I'm sure alot of people would be for that. Mostly folks like the KKK and the white supremacists out there, since the demographic with the highest rate of incarceration in this country is the black man. Glad to see you finally came out and showed us what you're all about.

A law applied to all indiscriminate of race is not racist.

What are you talking about?

After a few people get deported you'll see attitudes change dramatically.

It's not like you're killing anyone. Just permanently relocating them.

[Karee 4,191]

A law applied to all indiscriminate of race is not racist.

What are you talking about?

After a few people get deported you'll see attitudes change dramatically.

It's not like you're killing anyone. Just permanently relocating them.

Maybe not on the surface. But simple math will show you that since minorities are convicted of crimes at higher rates in relation to their percentage of the population, these suggested deportations would affect them disproportionately. You are right about one thing. You'd definitely see some attitudes change, but not the attitudes you think.

So where do we send them? Should we send the black criminals to Africa? I don't think David Duke was even that hardcore. Maybe deport the Hispanics to Mexico? Who would take them? Maybe we can make Guam a prison island and have a reality TV show about them killing each other.

[Karee 4,191]

It's the only way to clean up the country and remove the undesirables from the gene pool.

I remember a guy that had that idea once.

[RGinWA 816]

Maybe not on the surface. But simple math will show you that since minorities are convicted of crimes at higher rates in relation to their percentage of the population, these suggested deportations would affect them disproportionately. You are right about one thing. You'd definitely see some attitudes change, but not the attitudes you think.

So where do we send them? Should we send the black criminals to Africa? I don't think David Duke was even that hardcore. Maybe deport the Hispanics to Mexico? Who would take them? Maybe we can make Guam a prison island and have a reality TV show about them killing each other.

Give them a raft and some provisions and a selection of Atlantic or Pacific. It's natural selection at that point.

Put it on TV and I bet crime would PLUMMET in two weeks.

Then no more problem.

It seems to me you're admitting that blacks are disproportionately convicted in the US?

If you think "I'm" a racist that's fine but I never mentioned race at all, only behavior.

[Karee 4,191]

Give them a raft and some provisions and a selection of Atlantic or Pacific. It's natural selection at that point.

Put it on TV and I bet crime would PLUMMET in two weeks.

Then no more problem.

It seems to me you're admitting that blacks are disproportionately convicted in the US?

If you think "I'm" a racist that's fine but I never mentioned race at all, only behavior.

Good to hear you re-affirm your position.

[RGinWA 816]

I remember a guy that had that idea once.

How's it any different than locking them up forever? Warehousing verse freedom...I'll take freedom.

And a little history lesson for you, that guy "killed" people, not deported them.

Good to hear you re-affirm your position.

Thanks...

[Karee 4,191]

How's it any different than locking them up forever? Warehousing verse freedom...I'll take freedom.

And a little history lesson for you, that guy "killed" people, not deported them.

Actually I think it is you that needs a little history lesson.

http://www.jta.org/1942/07/19/archive/nazis-begin-mass-deportation-of-jews-from-paris-will-intern-those-permitted-to-remain

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/When_did_the_Nazis_begin_to_deport_Jews_for_extermination

That's just a few. You can google the other 1000s of pages that talk about it.

[Harsh_77 718]

When I adopted my Shepherd 6 years ago, not only did I have to provide references, but they actually sent someone out to my house to interview me and make sure the house was suitable for a dog of that size.

Teddy at that point you accepted the policy of pvt institution and you agreed to their regulation, you were not required by a state or federal regulation to give into the background check.

I also had to include references. And they called each and every one.

So, again, because it's in the constitution, the guns will get a free pass.

You did not answer, would you be ok if your other rights were taken away on some or other pretext?

[SMOKE 1,426]

Registering a weapon and getting your background checked only effects those NOT following the law and those who SHOULDN'T have a weapon.

i've seen you make this arguement several times in the last few days. let me bring you back to reality. there are two reasons the government wants people to register their firearms. 1 is possible future taxation. 2 is possible future confiscation. anyone that says different is either stupid or lying.

[RGinWA 816]

Actually I think it is you that needs a little history lesson.

http://www.jta.org/1942/07/19/archive/nazis-begin-mass-deportation-of-jews-from-paris-will-intern-those-permitted-to-remain

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/When_did_the_Nazis_begin_to_deport_Jews_for_extermination

That's just a few. You can google the other 1000s of pages that talk about it.

So you're saying Hitler only deported people? Because that's all I was suggesting. So he didn't kill anyone? Are you a holocaust denier?

Know I know why they say the first person to cry Hitler loses the argument.

Yes...it's my Austrian purification platform bleeding through. You're too funny now.

Edited August 2, 2013 by RGinWA

[Penny Lane 8,159]

Teddy at that point you accepted the policy of pvt institution and you agreed to their regulation, you were not required by a state or federal regulation to give into the background check.

You did not answer, would you be ok if your other rights were taken away on some or other pretext?

What other rights? Nobody's taking rights away.

Like many things in life, it should be that if you don't want to follow the rules and pay the fees required, then you don't get what you want. Simple as that.

Guns should not get a free pass and people should not lose their minds when talking about gun control REFORM. I know an old document from a few hundred years ago says your rights should not be "infringed upon" ... but let's be honest and admit it's a far different world now than it was when those words were written.

Do you think that today's world is what the 2nd amendment originally intended it to be? A gun free-for-all?

[Harsh_77 718]

I don't know

You guys act like there's no way to control guns. How would you know that? More importantly, why are you so afraid of a crack down like Germany or Soviet Russia since apparently laws never work. I don't think we need to go to their level but I do think they show laws imposed by a government can reduce guns in a country.

How do expanded magazines help anything? At all?

A database would be difficult to roll out with so many different laws in different state. The more I think about this, the more I think gun laws need to happen only at the federal level. That would make everything standard and would likely do so with less laws.

You started talking about crime in the inner city.

Pro gun ppl never said there is no way to reduce the gun crime all we have said the approach the present govt is taking is not correct.

As I have mentioned in my past post, there were 500K ppl that should have been investigated by feds only handful were done.

You agree the magazine size would not do solve anything but the laws passed by Bloomberg and other dem Governors are similar which does not make any sense nor they going to help in reducing anything.

These laws are just making it hard for law abiding citizens, even the local police and law enforcement agencies have voiced their disagreement with the new laws that Pres and Dems wanted to push.

You think the present gov did not wanted a nationalize database of ppl who own guns? I am sure you will tell me PRISM is also humbug and there is no such program as PRISM.

[RGinWA 816]

i've seen you make this arguement several times in the last few days. let me bring you back to reality. there are two reasons the government wants people to register their firearms. 1 is possible future taxation. 2 is possible future confiscation. anyone that says different is either stupid or lying.

I guess the argument is over then...you win.

That subject is all done...thanks for clearing that up.

[Karee 4,191]

So you're saying Hitler only deported people? Because that's all I was suggesting. So he didn't kill anyone? Are you a holocaust denier?

Know I know why they say the first person to cry Hitler loses the argument.

Yes...it's my Austrian purification platform bleeding through. You're too funny now.

No, not at all. Once again your English comprehension is failing you. I'm merely pointing out that you support some of the same policies Hitler instituted such as deporting criminals. You support that and he supported that. I never claimed that you support killing criminals.

I'm not one to use Hitler to win an argument, but in this case the similarities in your position and his position are so strikingly similar, it would be irresponsible of me not to bring it up.