Jump to content

Is Political Correctness Impeding Our Rights To Be Safe?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

16 hours ago, Dago 3.0 said:

you didn't answer my question

Again, because the cartels can't create massive gun manufacturing plants to replace U.S. made weapons, which is what they rely on. You can grow weed and an amateur chemist and replicate some harder drugs, but they aren't going to be pumping out semi-automatic pistols. 

And again, the point was safety, and drugs aren't near as threatening to me as guns are. We could replace guns with cars here and my point would still stand. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Free Radical said:

Again, because the cartels can't create massive gun manufacturing plants to replace U.S. made weapons, which is what they rely on. You can grow weed and an amateur chemist and replicate some harder drugs, but they aren't going to be pumping out semi-automatic pistols. 

And again, the point was safety, and drugs aren't near as threatening to me as guns are. We could replace guns with cars here and my point would still stand. 

This is such a naive argument, I don't even know where to start. The cartels have AK-47's. The cartels have Lugers. Even if our gun manufacturing went down to 0, they would get them elsewhere. The only thing you would accomplish is making it more difficult for people living on the border to fight back, which some homeowners actually do. 

Besides guns, they make homemade bombs. They can make homemade bullets. The approach of banning guns entirely would literally ensure the only people that have them are criminals. It is naive to think their only source of weapons is the US. It is even more naive to think other countries wouldn't step up gun manufacturing in order to address the market we leave behind. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The AK type rifles they buy are coming from the US. They aren't buying original Russian made AKs. The vast majority of guns they use are bought in the US legally and smuggled across the border. So again, they don't have the means the come in and fill the market. 

This is all besides the point. The point was that the right to "safety" is bogus, and that banning all immigrants based on that idea is a pile of fail at based, because statistically I have far more to fear from an American with a gun or car than any terrorist from the Middle East. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Free Radical said:

It would work because we, the United States, are the supplier of the weapons, not cartels in South America. 

You literally have no idea what you're talking about. AKs and other manufacturers are all over the world. Russia manufacturer's enough Aks to give every al queda type 20 rifles a piece. The middle east is drowning in Aks and we didn't provide them diddle squat. You will not EVER outlaw the 2nd amendment and you liberals will NEVER confiscate guns out of law abiding citizens hands. 

Just more big government bullchi. for our resident marxist. Check out the socialist country's whom have outlawed gun ownership and you will see a trail of tears throughout there history.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Free Radical said:

The AK type rifles they buy are coming from the US. They aren't buying original Russian made AKs. The vast majority of guns they use are bought in the US legally and smuggled across the border. So again, they don't have the means the come in and fill the market. 

This is all besides the point. The point was that the right to "safety" is bogus, and that banning all immigrants based on that idea is a pile of fail at based, because statistically I have far more to fear from an American with a gun or car than any terrorist from the Middle East. 

You've posted more BS in this post then usual. Its pc that is unlawfully endangering and needlessly endangering america. Aks are being mass produced in America? Get it right.

Edited by dirtyhairy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Prime example:

REPORT: Migrants Committing Disproportionately High Crime In Germany While Media And Govt Focus on ‘Far Right’ Thought Crimes

A massive, migrant crime wave is surging across Germany according to figures buried in a new reportreleased by the country’s Interior Ministry. The data reveals that without migrants considered, crime rates in Germany would have remained roughly static since 2014. But, in fact, the country recorded an extra 402,741 crimes committed by migrants.

While much of this criminality concerned illegal border crossings, German authorities instead talked up a “record surge” in crimes by “right wing radicals”.

Concerning statistics from the 135-page report reveal that 70 per cent of pickpocketing, one of the crime types on the rise, was committed by non-Germans. Of this figure, 34 per cent was committed by recent asylum seekers, with the rest committed by “non-Germans”.

Foreign nationals are thought to account for around 11 or 12 per cent of the total population of Germany, but were over-represented in every area of crime.

Illegal immigrants and asylum seekers account for around 2.5 per cent of Germany’s population, but were also massively overrepresented.

Amongst total offences, non-Germans accounted for 27.6 percent while illegal immigrants and asylum seekers accounted for 5.7 percent. Of homicides, the figures are 29.3%/8.2%, and of sexual assaults, the figures were 20.5%/4.8%.

In all of these cases as well as those indicated in the chart below, non-Germans and illegal migrants outstripped their proportions of crime to their representation in German society.

Non-Germans accounted for 38 per cent of all robberies, 38 per cent of thefts, and 43 per cent of thefts that involved a level of aggravation such as assault or force.

They accounted for 40.2 per cent of burglaries, 43.5 per cent of shoplifting, and a whopping 75.7 of pick pocketing or purse snatching.

In the chart below, non-Germans are in light red while asylum seekers and illegal migrants are in deep red.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/05/23/germany-registers-surge-crimes-right-wing-radicals/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dirtyhairy said:

You've posted more BS in this post then usual. Its pc that is unlawfully endangering and needlessly endangering america. Aks are being mass produced in America. Get it right.

Shh child. If you want to comment, ask for permission, but only before you read and spend some time processing first. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Free Radical said:

Shh child. If you want to comment, ask for permission, but only before you read and spend some time processing first. 

More political correctness run amuck. Migrant crimes here in america are through the roof, including homicides, rape, DUI, property theft, assault and all that doesn't matter as long as the progressives get new voters. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the Cartel is crossing our borders to Hunt. http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/05/23/arizona-border-sheriff-warns-cartel-gunmen-hunting-rivals-u-s/

An Arizona border sheriff is warning his residents to take extra precautions in the coming days after intelligence reports point to Mexican cartel gunmen crossing into the United States to hunt down their rivals. Known as sicarios, the dangerous professional cartel assassins have previously crossed into the U.S. and are expected to cross to hunt down rival “rip crews” or groups who steal drugs from the cartels.

On Monday, Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu issued a warning to campers,hikers, mountain bikers and all terrain vehicle riders who frequent the wilderness areas of his county to be extremely cautious and to consider carrying a firearm for their safety.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just 2 stories to further understand the unravelling of western soceity to political correctness:

http://www.allenbwest.com/analytical-economist/muslim-who-beheaded-toddler-wont-be-punished-because

Back in February I reported on a grim story out of Moscow, whereas a nanny paraded the streets with the severed head of a toddler. Naturally, she chanted “Allah Akbar” during the ordeal (but of course)
 

Among her other chants included “I am a terrorist” – a statement I’m sure our leaders in the West would remind us hasnoooothing to do with Islam. Well, Western leaders haven’t commented on the story, but the Russian courts system appears to have made the same indictment they would’ve made anyway. As the Daily Mail reports:

The nanny who decapitated a girl, four, and paraded her severed head in the streets of Moscow will never face trial, say sources close to the criminal investigation.

Gyulchehra Bobokulova, 38, claimed she was inspired to kill the helpless child in a copycat of gruesome jihadist beheadings which she watched online.

 

So there we have it – she even went as far as to list Islam as her motive. But even that didn’t convince the idiots in Russia’s courts.

Earlier, the burka-clad babysitter had claimed that she killed the child on February 29 in revenge for Putin’s aerial bombardment of Muslims in Syria. She claimed she ordered by Allah to cut off the girl’s head.

Exclusive — Steve King: Remembering Iowa’s Sarah Root, 21-Year-Old Killed By Illegal Alien

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/05/24/exclusive-steve-king-remembering-iowas-sarah-root-21-year-old-killed-illegal-alien/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

Edited by dirtyhairy
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Free Radical said:

The AK type rifles they buy are coming from the US. They aren't buying original Russian made AKs. The vast majority of guns they use are bought in the US legally and smuggled across the border. So again, they don't have the means the come in and fill the market. 

This is all besides the point. The point was that the right to "safety" is bogus, and that banning all immigrants based on that idea is a pile of fail at based, because statistically I have far more to fear from an American with a gun or car than any terrorist from the Middle East. 

You missed the point. Countries will up manufacturing, exports, and smuggling of weapons because there will still be a market for guns. Cartels have bombs, which are already illegal. Cartels have automatic weapons, which are illegal for them to own. I'm sure our government will do just as good of a job banning guns as they have banning drugs. And I'm sure this will not result in any more non-violent offenders from going to prison.

You do realize that Mexico has extremely strict gun laws, don't you? So strict that the law-abiding citizens cannot fight back while the government can't protect that many communities. So strict that cartels get the cooperation of those communities because they have no choice without any legal mechanism to protect themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Free Radical said:

Again, because the cartels can't create massive gun manufacturing plants to replace U.S. made weapons, which is what they rely on. You can grow weed and an amateur chemist and replicate some harder drugs, but they aren't going to be pumping out semi-automatic pistols. 

And again, the point was safety, and drugs aren't near as threatening to me as guns are. We could replace guns with cars here and my point would still stand. 

and yet four times more people die of drug overdoses than from firearms

https://mises.org/blog/dea-releases-new-drug-overdose-death-figures-guns-safer-prescription-drugs

****, alcohol related deaths and non alcoholic vehicular deaths FAR outweigh homicides and accidents with firearms and yet you don't seem to advocate the banning of drugs or alcohol or express any concern for your safety in driving

furthermore, if crime rates would plummet with legalization, the disparity in deaths would be far greater

and not to be rude, you are delusional if you think organized crime couldn't have weapons manufacturing set up within a few months. or that the two companies based in Mexico that already manufacture arms couldn't expand their operations quite easily. or that they wouldn't funnel in arms from other countries to create a black market

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dago 3.0 said:

and yet four times more people die of drug overdoses than from firearms

https://mises.org/blog/dea-releases-new-drug-overdose-death-figures-guns-safer-prescription-drugs

****, alcohol related deaths and non alcoholic vehicular deaths FAR outweigh homicides and accidents with firearms and yet you don't seem to advocate the banning of drugs or alcohol or express any concern for your safety in driving

furthermore, if crime rates would plummet with legalization, the disparity in deaths would be far greater

and not to be rude, you are delusional if you think organized crime couldn't have weapons manufacturing set up within a few months. or that the two companies based in Mexico that already manufacture arms couldn't expand their operations quite easily. or that they wouldn't funnel in arms from other countries to create a black market

Did you read the second paragraph of that post?. You're focusing so much on guns and missing the general point being made. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dago 3.0 said:

and yet four times more people die of drug overdoses than from firearms

https://mises.org/blog/dea-releases-new-drug-overdose-death-figures-guns-safer-prescription-drugs

****, alcohol related deaths and non alcoholic vehicular deaths FAR outweigh homicides and accidents with firearms and yet you don't seem to advocate the banning of drugs or alcohol or express any concern for your safety in driving

furthermore, if crime rates would plummet with legalization, the disparity in deaths would be far greater

and not to be rude, you are delusional if you think organized crime couldn't have weapons manufacturing set up within a few months. or that the two companies based in Mexico that already manufacture arms couldn't expand their operations quite easily. or that they wouldn't funnel in arms from other countries to create a black market

People who overdose are doing it to themselves, which isn't the case with guns. 

Anyways... I AM NOT ADVOCATING we ban firearms. I am saying that the right to "safety" as stipulated by the federal government is a crock of ****. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Free Radical said:

People who overdose are doing it to themselves, which isn't the case with guns. 

Anyways... I AM NOT ADVOCATING we ban firearms. I am saying that the right to "safety" as stipulated by the federal government is a crock of ****. 

Can you clarify what the crock of **** is, as you see it?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, pzummo said:

Can you clarify what the crock of **** is, as you see it?  

The "right to safety" is arbitrary and non-existent. It has no definition, and advocating the ban of immigrants because "I have a right to safety" could be used for advocating the banning of guns, cars, and so on, because I am much more likely to get hurt by one of those than I am an immigrant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Free Radical said:

The "right to safety" is arbitrary and non-existent. It has no definition, and advocating the ban of immigrants because "I have a right to safety" could be used for advocating the banning of guns, cars, and so on, because I am much more likely to get hurt by one of those than I am an immigrant.

I see what you are saying, but I don't agree with your interpretation.  I view rights as applying to individuals (citizens), not the government.  I have the right to do what I feel is necessary to keep my family and myself as safe as possible.  I don't agree safety is "non-existent", it is just not absolute, as in we cannot eliminated 100% of risks.  However, we can make life safer for our family by planning for and reducing the impact of known risks.  We can't eliminate the risk of our government being toppled and the value of the $1 going to $0, but I can still save money to provide for my family if I were to lose my job.  If I save enough, I can even distribute my savings across different currencies to keep my wealth a bit safer.  My right to safety is not arbitrary or non-existent, because I define how it applies to me individually, and what I consider are risks to my family I can plan on handling with appropriate measures.  I think there's a pretty good risk my children will not get scholarships, so I mitigate it with gradual college savings that I can repurpose if they are not necessary.  I'm doing my best to protect their opportunity for higher learning, which I feel is a safer approach to risks on their future.  

The government cannot impede on that right by taking my guns away and saying they have the right to keep me safe from myself.  My personal right is protected, while the government should not have ANY protected rights.  The government ONLY has a RESPONSIBILITY to SERVE the people, which are the citizens that fund it.  If I lived with waterfront property on the Rio Grande and heavily armed cartel members have crossed nearby on assassin missions, maybe I do feel like I need a fully automatic weapon to protect my family.  There should be a legal means for me to obtain that if I feel it is necessary to provide safety for my family.  I should not be forced to rely on the government to plan for that protection properly, especially when they frequently change the budget for patrolling the border. 

The government does have the "responsibility" of protecting us the best they can "without impeding on people's rights".   The last portion of my statement is key, because that is the portion that keeps our government from stripping us of our freedom.  This is the foundation by which this country was built, and we should never stop fighting for that no matter how manipulative and/or convincing politicians might sound when trying to impede on this core value pretending like "it's in our best interest".  The mere thought of any spoken or written right being applied to the government is the wrong line of thinking in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...