Wisdom Ignored

jmick

jmick

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2813619
Overturning the ban will have an immediate impact as far as lowering crime. Crooks aren't complete fools. In a survey of convicted criminals over 30% said they had been captured/injured/prevented from committing a crime by an armed victim and better than 60% said they either had or know someone else who had.
Not all thieves are dumb. They will target areas where it is less likely they will meet with armed resistance. An area with a gun ban is going to be one where they are less likely to encounter an armed homeowner.
This has some interesting info about the Georgia town that required residents to have a handgun
http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...or.html?cat=17

I agree with you from that angle that someone will be much less inclined to break into your home if they think you might have a gun. A lot of the violence we are seeing is gang related and is being committed by young people against young people. These people will continue to kill each other regardless of the gun ban.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by Jmick
http:///forum/post/2813652
I agree with you from that angle that someone will be much less inclined to break into your home if they think you might have a gun. A lot of the violence we are seeing is gang related and is being committed by young people against young people. These people will continue to kill each other regardless of the gun ban.
Legalizing Marijuana and cocaine would help with the gang wars. A big factor in that is drug dealing territory. Then you take the users out of jail and throw them in rehab where they belong. After that you make prison a very unenjoyable experience again and utalize the space for gang bangers and drug dealers.. Problem solved
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Jmick, do some reading on the fairness doctrine. This is the forst strike at the first amendment. It will force Radio stations to conform to a programing set forth by the government. Not what their listeners wish to hear or want to discuss but what the government feels is balanced. The radio staions are private owned businesses and have a right to air what they wish within FCC guidelines and should not be told they have to air an equal number of democrats and republicans. The radio stations play what people are willing to listen to.
This is mainly at talk radio which is mainly conservative. There is air america but their ratings are floundering compared to talk radio. It is essentially a way to silence the otherside some. While I personally dislike Rush Limbaugh...the radio station has a right to play him as much as they want if it gets them ratings and sells advertisement. The government should not be able to them what they have to air.
It is called the fairness doctrine, but is only being applied to talk radio, nothing else...not T.V., music radio or anything. It is a blatant attempt to limit the voice of a certain amount of people...Which is wrong.
Now I don't expect you to agree with this as it doesn't affect your side in this...but it is a first step towards limiting the 1st amendment. Would you force a country station to play hip hop, or a hip hop station to play heavy metal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top