That´s it. I´ve had it with this guy and his chasing his own tail. This time he won´t come off ignore again.
Bye bye.
Topic: Why aren´t U.S. mass shootings called for what they are - Terrorism (Read 2244 times)
December 06, 2015, 11:31:18 AM
December 06, 2015, 11:28:36 AM
Every Florida resident should be outraged at stories like this. 35 years old, 22 felony CONVICTIONS, and still out on the streets to terrorize law-abiding citizens??? And his bonds only total $27,500??? It is long past time to expand the scope of the three strikes law!!! Welcome to the insanity we call America.
The "human rights" organizations are campaigning quite heavily against the three-strikes law, and most of the American judges are not enforcing it due to the negative media publicity. Seems to me that the human rights are honored only for the criminals, and not for the innocent victims who were murders or raped by these thugs.
The ONLY reason to ever consider such a thing is if it were found that juries were letting people off the hook for their transgressions. Then suppose you try to code up a "fix" in law. Well, the "fix" has other problems.
It's a matter of intelligent gaming between parties, each for his perceived advantage.
Not only are the people in charge totally desperate for the citizenry to buy and buy more guns (every time they mention how guns are so bad, gun sales rocket) but they are also so very concerned about the human rights of criminals that run around terrorizing the population. Which leads me to believe, in fact I´m convinced that these people don´t have both oars in the water.
Personally I would FIRST secure the human rights of the law-abiding citizenry (part of which human rights is as safe environment as possible, I guess providing that is part of the job description of the people in charge) and THEN start paying particular attention to the human rights of murderers and rapists.
If the hypothesis is that stupidity can explain behavior, it's an error to look for complex conspiracy theories, double dealing, and reverse psychology to explain the same behavior.
I realize that your understanding of the connection between cause and effect is incomplete so I´m not surprised that you try to use the familiar thought dead-end stoppers.
Occam's Razor is not your friend, obviously.
The simple problem with your assertions is that without overwhelming evidence for a position that A=B, anyone can "prove" anything they like, anytime. We're not even discussing the level of cause and effect, but premises of arguments.
Assertion is not proof.
December 06, 2015, 10:44:52 AM
Every Florida resident should be outraged at stories like this. 35 years old, 22 felony CONVICTIONS, and still out on the streets to terrorize law-abiding citizens??? And his bonds only total $27,500??? It is long past time to expand the scope of the three strikes law!!! Welcome to the insanity we call America.
The "human rights" organizations are campaigning quite heavily against the three-strikes law, and most of the American judges are not enforcing it due to the negative media publicity. Seems to me that the human rights are honored only for the criminals, and not for the innocent victims who were murders or raped by these thugs.
The ONLY reason to ever consider such a thing is if it were found that juries were letting people off the hook for their transgressions. Then suppose you try to code up a "fix" in law. Well, the "fix" has other problems.
It's a matter of intelligent gaming between parties, each for his perceived advantage.
Not only are the people in charge totally desperate for the citizenry to buy and buy more guns (every time they mention how guns are so bad, gun sales rocket) but they are also so very concerned about the human rights of criminals that run around terrorizing the population. Which leads me to believe, in fact I´m convinced that these people don´t have both oars in the water.
Personally I would FIRST secure the human rights of the law-abiding citizenry (part of which human rights is as safe environment as possible, I guess providing that is part of the job description of the people in charge) and THEN start paying particular attention to the human rights of murderers and rapists.
If the hypothesis is that stupidity can explain behavior, it's an error to look for complex conspiracy theories, double dealing, and reverse psychology to explain the same behavior.
I realize that your understanding of the connection between cause and effect is incomplete so I´m not surprised that you try to use the familiar thought dead-end stoppers.
December 06, 2015, 10:36:34 AM
Every Florida resident should be outraged at stories like this. 35 years old, 22 felony CONVICTIONS, and still out on the streets to terrorize law-abiding citizens??? And his bonds only total $27,500??? It is long past time to expand the scope of the three strikes law!!! Welcome to the insanity we call America.
The "human rights" organizations are campaigning quite heavily against the three-strikes law, and most of the American judges are not enforcing it due to the negative media publicity. Seems to me that the human rights are honored only for the criminals, and not for the innocent victims who were murders or raped by these thugs.
The ONLY reason to ever consider such a thing is if it were found that juries were letting people off the hook for their transgressions. Then suppose you try to code up a "fix" in law. Well, the "fix" has other problems.
It's a matter of intelligent gaming between parties, each for his perceived advantage.
Not only are the people in charge totally desperate for the citizenry to buy and buy more guns (every time they mention how guns are so bad, gun sales rocket) but they are also so very concerned about the human rights of criminals that run around terrorizing the population. Which leads me to believe, in fact I´m convinced that these people don´t have both oars in the water.
Personally I would FIRST secure the human rights of the law-abiding citizenry (part of which human rights is as safe environment as possible, I guess providing that is part of the job description of the people in charge) and THEN start paying particular attention to the human rights of murderers and rapists.
If the hypothesis is that stupidity can explain behavior, it's an error to look for complex conspiracy theories, double dealing, and reverse psychology to explain the same behavior.
December 06, 2015, 10:08:22 AM
I think in every country definition of terrorism is different.
Ask question what is terrorism in Russia, China, USA or Iraq and you will receive very different answers.
For me, terrorism is every action which have goal to harm innocent people in order to destabilize society structure, divide people over religion and culture issues, start panic so that people loose feeling of safety etc.
Ask question what is terrorism in Russia, China, USA or Iraq and you will receive very different answers.
For me, terrorism is every action which have goal to harm innocent people in order to destabilize society structure, divide people over religion and culture issues, start panic so that people loose feeling of safety etc.
December 06, 2015, 09:00:20 AM
Just one problem with that.
1. I'm an Anarchist so I'm definitely not contributing to the problem
2. I'm British
December 06, 2015, 04:46:20 AM
Terrorism doesn't have to stem from Middle Eastern routes. A terrorist act can be from right at home and conducted by people of your home denomination.
December 06, 2015, 01:24:26 AM
Every Florida resident should be outraged at stories like this. 35 years old, 22 felony CONVICTIONS, and still out on the streets to terrorize law-abiding citizens??? And his bonds only total $27,500??? It is long past time to expand the scope of the three strikes law!!! Welcome to the insanity we call America.
The "human rights" organizations are campaigning quite heavily against the three-strikes law, and most of the American judges are not enforcing it due to the negative media publicity. Seems to me that the human rights are honored only for the criminals, and not for the innocent victims who were murders or raped by these thugs.
The ONLY reason to ever consider such a thing is if it were found that juries were letting people off the hook for their transgressions. Then suppose you try to code up a "fix" in law. Well, the "fix" has other problems.
It's a matter of intelligent gaming between parties, each for his perceived advantage.
Not only are the people in charge totally desperate for the citizenry to buy and buy more guns (every time they mention how guns are so bad, gun sales rocket) but they are also so very concerned about the human rights of criminals that run around terrorizing the population. Which leads me to believe, in fact I´m convinced that these people don´t have both oars in the water.
Personally I would FIRST secure the human rights of the law-abiding citizenry (part of which human rights is as safe environment as possible, I guess providing that is part of the job description of the people in charge) and THEN start paying particular attention to the human rights of murderers and rapists.
December 06, 2015, 01:12:27 AM
Yes, and in the interests of public safety, round up criminals and put them to work under military guard, building dams, repairing bridges and roads and other infrastructure, far away from law-abiding citizens. If they don´t play ball, shoot them.
That MIGHT be going a little bit too far. And I see a problem with putting them to work like that. It would take jobs away from hard working I think removing criminals would in itself create jobs. A safer and less stressful environment has to increase business in general. People will just be more active and confident. Criminals bring chronic uncertainty which is very unhealthy for business and commerce. So, getting rid of that would be very valuable I´m sure.
Not necessarily true. I've had a theory for quite a while that maximal profits to the Middle East oil producers occurs exactly when there is maximum tension, minor wars, terrorism, and such. Threats to the West of disruption of necessary oil for day to day life would of course increase the price of the commodity.
So there is at least one specific case where less safe and more stressful environment would seem to increase total business profits.
Yes, and the manufacture of arms does create jobs and to help keep those jobs secure and preferably create more well you need war. The stuff has to be used. It´s like in other manufacturing. Businessmen aren´t known for just filling all warehouses with stuff and then happily going out of business. No, they try to create business opportunities and weapons manufacturers are no different. So, war is business.
But I was talking about public safety, which I believe is a much healthier approach to job creation. I simply see nothing good about violence and war. Hang me for it.
December 06, 2015, 01:00:29 AM
Every Florida resident should be outraged at stories like this. 35 years old, 22 felony CONVICTIONS, and still out on the streets to terrorize law-abiding citizens??? And his bonds only total $27,500??? It is long past time to expand the scope of the three strikes law!!! Welcome to the insanity we call America.
The "human rights" organizations are campaigning quite heavily against the three-strikes law, and most of the American judges are not enforcing it due to the negative media publicity. Seems to me that the human rights are honored only for the criminals, and not for the innocent victims who were murders or raped by these thugs.
The ONLY reason to ever consider such a thing is if it were found that juries were letting people off the hook for their transgressions. Then suppose you try to code up a "fix" in law. Well, the "fix" has other problems.
It's a matter of intelligent gaming between parties, each for his perceived advantage.
December 06, 2015, 12:53:38 AM
Naw. Islamic terrorists are Islamic terrorists no matter where the rotten piece of wood they crawl out from under is located. No different than cockroaches. Do cockroaches have a nationality?
That's it, US won't call it terrorism unless the suspects nationality are sure not to be their own or else they are no different of that "cockroaches".
December 06, 2015, 12:08:30 AM
Every Florida resident should be outraged at stories like this. 35 years old, 22 felony CONVICTIONS, and still out on the streets to terrorize law-abiding citizens??? And his bonds only total $27,500??? It is long past time to expand the scope of the three strikes law!!! Welcome to the insanity we call America.
The "human rights" organizations are campaigning quite heavily against the three-strikes law, and most of the American judges are not enforcing it due to the negative media publicity. Seems to me that the human rights are honored only for the criminals, and not for the innocent victims who were murders or raped by these thugs.
December 05, 2015, 09:51:25 PM
if OPEC truly wanted to, they could have oil back at $80 in short order.
Some major economic war going on using oil, I am not even going to pretend I truly understand the who and why, but the fact that the gloves are off is plain for all to see.
Some major economic war going on using oil, I am not even going to pretend I truly understand the who and why, but the fact that the gloves are off is plain for all to see.
December 05, 2015, 09:03:56 PM
Yes, and in the interests of public safety, round up criminals and put them to work under military guard, building dams, repairing bridges and roads and other infrastructure, far away from law-abiding citizens. If they don´t play ball, shoot them.
That MIGHT be going a little bit too far. And I see a problem with putting them to work like that. It would take jobs away from hard working I think removing criminals would in itself create jobs. A safer and less stressful environment has to increase business in general. People will just be more active and confident. Criminals bring chronic uncertainty which is very unhealthy for business and commerce. So, getting rid of that would be very valuable I´m sure.
Not necessarily true. I've had a theory for quite a while that maximal profits to the Middle East oil producers occurs exactly when there is maximum tension, minor wars, terrorism, and such. Threats to the West of disruption of necessary oil for day to day life would of course increase the price of the commodity.
So there is at least one specific case where less safe and more stressful environment would seem to increase total business profits.
December 05, 2015, 07:07:20 PM
Legalize all drugs which would free up 50 percent of the jails and 50 percent of law enforcement and focus on violent crime
If any of you know junkies, I have never met a junkie to this day that could not find drugs. So no point in making drugs illegal. They find them no matter what. Spend the money on drug education and rehab.
If any of you know junkies, I have never met a junkie to this day that could not find drugs. So no point in making drugs illegal. They find them no matter what. Spend the money on drug education and rehab.
Yes, by removing criminals I have generally in mind violent ones, those who threaten and disturb the general order and terrorize the population.
December 05, 2015, 07:01:09 PM
Legalize all drugs which would free up 50 percent of the jails and 50 percent of law enforcement and focus on violent crime
If any of you know junkies, I have never met a junkie to this day that could not find drugs. So no point in making drugs illegal. They find them no matter what. Spend the money on drug education and rehab.
If any of you know junkies, I have never met a junkie to this day that could not find drugs. So no point in making drugs illegal. They find them no matter what. Spend the money on drug education and rehab.
December 05, 2015, 06:53:17 PM
Yes, and in the interests of public safety, round up criminals and put them to work under military guard, building dams, repairing bridges and roads and other infrastructure, far away from law-abiding citizens. If they don´t play ball, shoot them.
That MIGHT be going a little bit too far. And I see a problem with putting them to work like that. It would take jobs away from hard working I think removing criminals would in itself create jobs. A safer and less stressful environment has to increase business in general. People will just be more active and confident. Criminals bring chronic uncertainty which is very unhealthy for business and commerce. So, getting rid of that would be very valuable I´m sure.
December 05, 2015, 05:28:59 PM
Yes, and in the interests of public safety, round up criminals and put them to work under military guard, building dams, repairing bridges and roads and other infrastructure, far away from law-abiding citizens. If they don´t play ball, shoot them.
That MIGHT be going a little bit too far. And I see a problem with putting them to work like that. It would take jobs away from hard working December 05, 2015, 04:36:28 PM
Yes, and in the interests of public safety, round up criminals and put them to work under military guard, building dams, repairing bridges and roads and other infrastructure, far away from law-abiding citizens. If they don´t play ball, shoot them.
December 05, 2015, 04:20:32 PM
For the record I was right.
Most of us were, America just isn't the same as Europe, you can't compare the two and suddenly expect enacting a law to magically fix everything, I can guarantee the more they push for gun control in other states that the Mexican cartels over the border will switch to smuggling guns instead because it will be far more profitable than even drugs. The police will end up being stretched so thin the won't even be able to stop a robbery very easily because they're too busy trying to shut down all these people illegally buying guns and then another bunch of shooting will happen.
You can fix it.
Stop the NSA blanket surveillance. It's retarded you need to focus on individuals not the entire world.
Enforce gun rights for all states from the federal level. Concealed carry should be a right.
Get every US soldiers out of every other country except the USA.
Shut down immigration, travel visas etc with every Muslim country, except for emergency or important business type visits. Ban any person from European countries that has visits to the middle east.
Use the army that is now home instead of overseas to secure our borders.
But it's all too logical. Instead we will get the exact opposite of every point above.
Jump to: