NYPD Seeks Cure For Gun Violence !
- Thread starter GOYABEAN
- Start date
More guns in everyone's hands will help end "gun" violence.
ArmedCorgi
.475 A&M Magnum
So "gun violence" is an illness now? Great. It was bad enough as a political buzz phrase.
Celt
.338 Win Mag
I hate the propaganda term "gun violence". Want to stop violence? Heres a few ideas...
-enforce violent crime punishments with max sentences and no early release.
-disourage inner city girls from getting pregnant by not rewarding them with more free stuff everytime they pop a new kid out. And hold fathers accountable whether the girl pursues support or not. If the fathers dont pay then they get forced community service.
-Fix the education system to give people a better chance of being a productive member of society.
And there are plenty of other ways.
-enforce violent crime punishments with max sentences and no early release.
-disourage inner city girls from getting pregnant by not rewarding them with more free stuff everytime they pop a new kid out. And hold fathers accountable whether the girl pursues support or not. If the fathers dont pay then they get forced community service.
-Fix the education system to give people a better chance of being a productive member of society.
And there are plenty of other ways.
Bananabandit
.338 Win Mag
Take them away from the NYPD.
Too soon?
Too soon?
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Time for this again:
In life, words mean a great deal. Words are very powerful and the words we choose can significantly change the meaning of conversation and dialogue. Although some may consider it semantics, it is important to make this distinction. Custodial engineer or sanitation engineer sound very different than janitor or garbage man, and can change the whole tone of a discussion.
When was the last time you heard of someone killed by a drunk driver being called "alcohol violence" or "car violence"? When was the last time you heard of a stabbing referred to as "knife violence"? When was the last time you heard of a bombing killing innocent people described as "bomb violence"? I find it interesting that in those situations we blame the driver, attacker and bomber, not the instrument they used to harm others. Alcohol, cars, knives and bombs are nothing more than tools or things. They are inanimate objects. We don't make them into entities. Why isn't that done with guns also? Why do we blame the gun and not the person who shot the gun? The reason is very evident to me.
It is used this way by those who have an agenda, by those who have fear, those misguided and ignorant. It is done to accomplish a goal. That goal is making society so afraid of firearms that people will stop at nothing to get rid of them. All of them. It perpetuates the myth that guns are solely used to do harm without any ability to protect and do good. It is used by those who want to "feel safe", even though nobody is owed safety. Safety is not a birth right, only life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are. Don't get me wrong, I am all for people feeling safe and secure. In fact, that is why I believe in the ability for a law abiding citizen to own firearms and do so myself. Unfortunately there are those who feel the need to take away my right so they can feel "safe", when the real root of the problem is their fear. If someone chooses not to own a firearm, they have that right. They just don't have the right to make me defenseless so they can feel "safer".
Lets now look at the word "weapon". Can a hammer become a weapon? How about your fist? Any object has the ability to turn into a "weapon". We don't however refer to most objects as "weapons". You don't normally refer to something as anything other than what it is. Can a hammer build something? A hammers main purpose is to drive a nail. Can your hands create something useful? Well, like it or not, a firearm is designed to do something and that something is shoot. The purpose you use it for is a whole other story. Since a firearm can be used to protect and for sport, it shouldn't casually be referred to as something that only has the intention of doing harm, a weapon. Again, it can be with bad intent, but it is the intent or individual that makes the distinction, not the firearm.
Lets also take the term "illegal gun". When it comes down to it, there is also no such thing. Here we go with semantics again. Someone who has a gun that shouldn't is either an illegal (gun) owner, a person who has a gun illegally, or a person who illegally owns a gun. The gun itself isn't "illegal" because it is just what it is, a gun. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't misunderstand or misrepresent what I am saying here. Nobody is saying that a gun in the hands of a bad or stupid person doesn't have the ability to lead to a violent outcome, but the person is the reason. The individual would be the violent factor, not the gun.
To sum things up, in order for there to be "gun violence", the gun needs to get up, get dressed, load itself and leave the building to cause death and destruction on its own. Guns have no more of an ability to become "violent" than any other tool or inanimate object. Why not "human" or "people violence"? By using the terms like "gun violence", "illegal gun", etc., we make the mistake of making the gun responsible instead of the person using it, just as those who want to take our rights away would want. Please watch the words you use and correct others when they use them.
In life, words mean a great deal. Words are very powerful and the words we choose can significantly change the meaning of conversation and dialogue. Although some may consider it semantics, it is important to make this distinction. Custodial engineer or sanitation engineer sound very different than janitor or garbage man, and can change the whole tone of a discussion.
When was the last time you heard of someone killed by a drunk driver being called "alcohol violence" or "car violence"? When was the last time you heard of a stabbing referred to as "knife violence"? When was the last time you heard of a bombing killing innocent people described as "bomb violence"? I find it interesting that in those situations we blame the driver, attacker and bomber, not the instrument they used to harm others. Alcohol, cars, knives and bombs are nothing more than tools or things. They are inanimate objects. We don't make them into entities. Why isn't that done with guns also? Why do we blame the gun and not the person who shot the gun? The reason is very evident to me.
It is used this way by those who have an agenda, by those who have fear, those misguided and ignorant. It is done to accomplish a goal. That goal is making society so afraid of firearms that people will stop at nothing to get rid of them. All of them. It perpetuates the myth that guns are solely used to do harm without any ability to protect and do good. It is used by those who want to "feel safe", even though nobody is owed safety. Safety is not a birth right, only life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are. Don't get me wrong, I am all for people feeling safe and secure. In fact, that is why I believe in the ability for a law abiding citizen to own firearms and do so myself. Unfortunately there are those who feel the need to take away my right so they can feel "safe", when the real root of the problem is their fear. If someone chooses not to own a firearm, they have that right. They just don't have the right to make me defenseless so they can feel "safer".
Lets now look at the word "weapon". Can a hammer become a weapon? How about your fist? Any object has the ability to turn into a "weapon". We don't however refer to most objects as "weapons". You don't normally refer to something as anything other than what it is. Can a hammer build something? A hammers main purpose is to drive a nail. Can your hands create something useful? Well, like it or not, a firearm is designed to do something and that something is shoot. The purpose you use it for is a whole other story. Since a firearm can be used to protect and for sport, it shouldn't casually be referred to as something that only has the intention of doing harm, a weapon. Again, it can be with bad intent, but it is the intent or individual that makes the distinction, not the firearm.
Lets also take the term "illegal gun". When it comes down to it, there is also no such thing. Here we go with semantics again. Someone who has a gun that shouldn't is either an illegal (gun) owner, a person who has a gun illegally, or a person who illegally owns a gun. The gun itself isn't "illegal" because it is just what it is, a gun. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't misunderstand or misrepresent what I am saying here. Nobody is saying that a gun in the hands of a bad or stupid person doesn't have the ability to lead to a violent outcome, but the person is the reason. The individual would be the violent factor, not the gun.
To sum things up, in order for there to be "gun violence", the gun needs to get up, get dressed, load itself and leave the building to cause death and destruction on its own. Guns have no more of an ability to become "violent" than any other tool or inanimate object. Why not "human" or "people violence"? By using the terms like "gun violence", "illegal gun", etc., we make the mistake of making the gun responsible instead of the person using it, just as those who want to take our rights away would want. Please watch the words you use and correct others when they use them.
Good point
Doesn't fit the statist agenda - besides, any libtard trying to read it would have a Class 5 head explosion before the end of the 1st paragraph. It's TOO logical, it depends on TOO much common sense.
It's toxic to libtards.
On second thought, make them read it in its entirety - could solve a few problems.
Saltwater60
.950 JDJ
This just follows the same trend as it has some oh 1995 just like 99% of the other cities in the USA. The only places gun crimes and murders are up is the cities where the BLM movement is large and the cops have been neutered to not do their jobs. I love how they stayed arrests are down because we stopped arresting people for weed. Why don't we talk about bombings and knife attacks in NYC. Oh did I say that because that would make NYC look bad.
Doctors cure (or attempt to) illnesses don't they? Don't they need crazy insurance to work? Is each member of the NYPD going to get malpractice insurance to continue to work? (sorry for the good ones)
Anyway, I have an easy cure for "Gun violence". Make saying "Gun violence" illegal and there will no longer be "Gun violence". Just "violence" and then they can start actually working on the problem.
You cannot apply reason to a heated emotional argument...
There is no "GUN" violence, no more than there are "ASSAULT" weapons...
They are arbitrary descriptives utilized to effectuate a prescribed response by jellyfish brains unable to formulate objective reasoning on its own.
The NYPD however, operates in a wide ever expanding mandate of free expression in LE through freedoms not only given to it post 9-11 with self-justifying necessity, but taken because nobody gives a shit enough to question what they do and are doing. Too much to go into, but the X-ray vans, the FB algorithms used to "MINORITY Report" potential crimes and even criminals are eye opening...
Anyways, back to my tinfoil hat
There is no "GUN" violence, no more than there are "ASSAULT" weapons...
They are arbitrary descriptives utilized to effectuate a prescribed response by jellyfish brains unable to formulate objective reasoning on its own.
The NYPD however, operates in a wide ever expanding mandate of free expression in LE through freedoms not only given to it post 9-11 with self-justifying necessity, but taken because nobody gives a shit enough to question what they do and are doing. Too much to go into, but the X-ray vans, the FB algorithms used to "MINORITY Report" potential crimes and even criminals are eye opening...
Anyways, back to my tinfoil hat
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
maybe sodium cyani something