... only the Tupac Al-Shakur Martyrs' Brigade will have guns.
Friday, June 15, 2007
Mike, besides being racist, what are you trying to articulate with this comment about the linked video. Be explicit.
That's a harsh sideswipe of a charge, anonymous one. First of all, I don't believe there are different races to be racist among.What did you find racist?
I think the police are still supposed to have guns even if they are illegal for everyone else. So your comment is inaccurate.
Eng,So if see a gentleman like the one in the video breaking into your home late at night, you're gunna call 911 and wait 10 minutes for a cop? Give me a fucking break! Better grab a butter knife to use in your defense against a gangsta thug who has an unregistered handgun. At least you'd be considered a martyr by the far left gun control lobby.
Only a fucking idiot would want to live in a country where only the police had guns. Take a look at our RCMP, and the crap going on within its ranks. Oh yeah, I trust them completely.
I will ask again, "what are you trying to articulate with this comment about the linked video. Be explicit."
Anonymous,"What is Mike trying to articulate with the linked video"What he is trying to articulate is that only ghetto hood thugs like the ones in the video will have handguns if we only allow the police to use them legally. This is a valid argument to talk about because of the rash of gun crime in not only Toronto, but here in London as well.Accusing someone of being racist when discussing a valid social topic like gun and gang crime is exactly what "hug a thug" liberals like yourself do when you have no argument. The racist card is used as a distraction and not a valid debate. It's people like you who have made our justice system as pathetic as it currently is.
Here here, Jake! Excellent point.I've never understood how the fucking gun registry was suppose to make me feel safer - it certainly made me feel poorer - safer, NO!Criminals like the ones in the video don't register illegal weapons - those are the only people who worry me, not hunters or homeowners who choose to keep weapons.I really don't get the racist comment. It's completely invalid here.Hey Anonymouse, "what are you trying to articulate with this racist accusation?"
So if see a gentleman like the one in the video breaking into your home late at night, you're gunna call 911 and wait 10 minutes for a cop? Give me a fucking break! Better grab a butter knife to use in your defense against a gangsta thug who has an unregistered handgun. At least you'd be considered a martyr by the far left gun control lobby.No, I would run away while the police come. Probably I would run away before calling them, since I would not want the sounds of calling 911 to alert the thug.And what would you do? Would you prefer to confront an armed person? What are you packing? Maybe he would have the Mac-11 submachine gun that you could rent from the Driftwood Crips up until last week.Do you have something better than the Mac-11? It fires 20 rounds a second. What are you packing? Do you want all gun laws repealed so you can have an Uzi for your own protection? What if the thug has one?What if the cops show up since someone else called in the suspicious person? Will you show up as a registered gun owner? I suspect not, if you are packing a prohibited weapon such as a full automatic Uzi. So the cops show up and how do they know you are the homeowner and not the thug? With no licenced owner they would assume you are the thug.They would also look at what colour you are and if you are the wrong colour, they would be more likely to shoot you, especially if there was no registered gun owner there. That's why there is talk of racism in this topic. If you are black and defending your own home with firearms, the cops are more likely to drop you. Not because they are racist, simply because there are more black thugs per capita, and fewer blacks owning homes per capita.Why does every comment you make have to include pejoratives such as "hug a thug liberals", and various statements about "people like you". If your arguments had any validity, you would not require insult laced responses. But if it makes you feel better, go ahead. If you believe it will provoke an angry response, you will continue to be disappointed.
Anonymous, my post was apparently clear enough for everyone else.On the other, more interesting hand, the impetus for your "racism" thing is unclear to everyone but you. Why did you reach for that, in particular?Please do explain what led you to that evaluation. Sargon is trying to help, but you have to let him in first. Then, refer with great caution to the monitory example of the well-programmed Jeff P, who believes that my words are "equally violen[t]" as a punch in the face. (Reading Jeff P is a bit disillusioning, in a way. After all this time hearing activists talking about how violence against women is supposedly bad and wrong, it finally turns out that domestic abuse is really no worse than some web page on the internet. ARGH! So what was the big deal with "violence against women" for all these years?! Have we finally heard the end of it? Though Jeff P may think punching a woman is as trivial as pressing the POST button on a webpage, I still hold that physical assault is a worse thing to do than writing a blog.)
Eng,You would run away from an armed suspect if you know that he/she is in your home? C'mon buddy! How would you leave your home? Jump out the second floor window? Not only would that critically injure you in the process but it would make way more noise than dialing 9/11 on a telephone.And assuming that the police would consider you a suspect in YOUR OWN HOME during a B&E is so fucking ridiculous it doesn't even need to be debated. You have to fight fire with fire against an intruder and you cannot rely on the state alone.Since you are wondering what I would do in this situation, I would grab my REGISTERED gun and fire a warning shot with plenty to spare. If a criminal hears a high caliber rifle up close, they'd run like hell since he/she knows that someone in the home is armed. A criminal won't waste their time since the noise from the bullet would wake the neighborhood and that they can't stick around trying to rob you.And to use the race card as anonymous did previously is pathetic. To insinuate that the police are racially profiling you for being the "wrong colour" is an insult to the men and women who serve on the force.The reason why I use the term "hug a thug liberal" is because that is the exactly what you are proposing--let only criminals have guns and let then get off with a slap on the wrist as a reward, leaving the rest of the law-abiding, taxpaying public defenseless to protect their property and family.I'm just calling a spade a spade, that's all.
How cute is that? the anti-war, hug-a-thug, terrorist supporting glowtardian Londoncoma inducers declaring war on the London fog. Did we hurt your widdle feelings by pointing out what a weak willed useless troll you are Jeff? Bring it on you wuzzy whingers.
Elaine, one of the stranger complaints about us at that post is that we don't censor our comments. We do, but only for spam and the thankfully rare occasional hateful comment that is beneath discussion. We love disagreement here. The usually unspoken idea that has evolved among us is, I think, that the easiest and most productive policy is one where our silence should not be taken to imply sympathy. A comment is the work of the commenter. No one has time or inclination to spend time with every comment, a-weighing deleting it, versus taking the time to clarify oneself in light of the comment, versus just ignoring it. Much better to stay hands off and allow the marketplace of ideas, which is to say, diversity, to do what it does in whatever small way here. And once we start cutting comments corruption will lead us to lazily cut out disagreement instead of engaging should one of us choose. For example, it must be hard for the moderators there to decide whether to chop Jeff's post, in defence of intellectual honesty and respect for the significance of the concept "racism", versus leaving it there to lie, in defence of some other value. Anyways, we choose classical liberalism via applied laziness theory.Speaking of which, I would like to be chilling out playing "Dwarf Fortress" but I happened to ALT-TAB back and see your comment. >:/I feel like I'm in public school saying this, but in no respect is the London Commons "at war" (??) with The London Fog or vice versa. I think that web site makes London more fun. I hope they make a lot of money with it, or if they prefer, an advantageous share of whatever dry goods are to be permitted in the future bartering system.
It was the irony of it Mike. The anti-war protesters calling their coalition of 'peace at any price' to arms. I just found it comical. I am thinking perhaps they could get that liberal city lawyer ...what's his name..eddy corkigan?? to write us all letters to stop making fun of them...oh yeah I forgot he would be busy hunting for that whack of money that went missing from the liberal riding association. What is it with liberals and missing money? They are forever misplacing it.
Mercy! I am concerned now. You know how peaceniks have a tendency to have a passive agressive sort of personality defect going on....well I certainly hope I didn't piss Jeff P off enough that he would be calling in his buddies to do me in. It is probably just coincidence, but I am throwing on my burqa just in case.....http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/06/exclusive_suici.html
I just read most of the comments over at smalldeadanimals concerning this video it seems that there are a lot of ill informed rascists around. Most of the comments here seem to be a pissing match between local bloggers. Fortunately I'm blissfully ignorant of the history there.Back to the video. I think it'd be a fascinating social experiment to take one of the kids in that video out of his environment. Take away his clothes, friends and gun and move him out to Fort McMurray for 6 months. Give him a job in the oil fields and demand he show up and work. I'd love to see what would happen to him after he was done.Being a quasi-Libertarian I firmly believe in personal freedom and personal responsibility. These kids have the freedom part down pat. Freedom to dress, shout and wave a gun around. But what responsibilities do they have? Do they have to pay the rent, go to work, go to school, be responsible for their criminal actions. I'm guessing the answer is no on all counts. The welfare state strips these kids of all responsibility and leads to this kind of lifestyle. Just my opinion...
Sad but true, rights and entitlements without responsiblity. They are ghetto kids, they know the system. What is the worse thing that can happen to them if they kill someone? They get status amongst the gangsta crowd, sent to jail for a few years where they get all the sex, drugs and fun programs they can handle. The liberal crowd will keep beating it into their heads they are victims of circumstances and nothing is expected from them. Society should take a good look at the real racist here. A real racist is one who expects fuck all from another human being because they believe they are encapable of contributing to society, pounding it into their melons from the day they are born that whatever anti-social behaviour they want to engage in, is A-Ofucking-K because they are a victim.
Since you are wondering what I would do in this situation, I would grab my REGISTERED gun and fire a warning shot with plenty to spare. If a criminal hears a high caliber rifle up close, they'd run like hell since he/she knows that someone in the home is armed. A criminal won't waste their time since the noise from the bullet would wake the neighborhood and that they can't stick around trying to rob you.Since your weapon is registered, it will be no match for what the bad guy could have, such as the Mac-11 that Toronto police took from the Driftwood gang. This is getting pretty hypothetical, but why do you assume they would run away after a warning shot? Do you think they will run across your yard where you can pick them off? No, they have to stay hidden, though they know they need to leave soon. Since you gave away your position by firing, they know where you are. Since you are armed, there must be something worth taking from you.Why not just have a dog? The dog will wake up while the bad guy is breaking in, you might not. The dog is more likely to scare the guy away, since the dog cannot be reasoned with. You can be reasoned with. A short burst "across the bow" from the Uzi would intimidate you, but not the dog. The guy can run and knows the dog will not shoot him, and at some point will stop chasing him. And the dog will not be able to ID him so no need to kill it.So my argument is that there is always a bigger gun. Unless you get into illegal arms too, but then they will come to steal them.You need to find some other way to discourage them, such as the dog would.
Personally, I would just shoot them, no warning shot. I am old enough to realize that the police are just reporters of crime, not preventers. I think about the article of Pizza man that was on here not that long ago. He shot gangsta boy. Can you imagine the surprise of the gansta community in Toronto if your everyday kind of person said enough of this shit, and just shot them. Criminals count on fear and intimidation, and the police are a joke to them, thanks to the liberal government. Might not be able to stop gangsta's, by shooting them, but you can sure as hell make a couple of them think.What is the worse thing that could happen to you if you shot a gangsta breaking into your home? You might get some time in club fed, three meals a day and no responsiblities.Being a female, the silver-spooned socialist would be tripping over themselves to give me triple-A victimhood status. Lots of media coverage, a spot on the Oprah show and some money for writing a book. Don't sound all that bad to me.
Post a Comment