So do you think the crime rate will go up?

except the machine feeds on vice crimes. the catagory will continue to expand and penalties will become harsher.

well that certainly came out of nowhere, didn't it?

So clear it up. What did you mean when you suggested I was channeling Midnight Funeral?

No, it follows directly from a discussion of how to reduce crime. Inevitably, some whinging pissant comes along with the "eliminate their reason for committing crimes " bullshit, and then some other fucktard has to drop the "just take away their guns and we'll all be safe " turd log.

I'm just preempting it.

The claim that people in certain neigborods want to be criminals is just the sort of thing he'd say. And he's equal opportunity on that. He targets minorities, poor, religions he doesn't like. That you use a less targeted brush doesn't exonerate you for using similarly failed logic. Not racist, just indignant about people not like you.

Don't hold your breath waiting for me to show remorse about suggesting people in low-income shitholes resent being cock-blocked every time they want to victimize someone.

What if, instead of "stop and frisk," there was a cop literally on every fucking corner? Ignore the obvious about budgetary concerns and police state, for the sake of discussion.

I say it would discourage crime, and it would result in the same wailing about the "civil right" to mug tourists, steal cars and sling crack.

Alberta isn't even trying anymore. He extolls the virtue of stop & frisk because he thinks increased police presence and pre-emptive activity on the streets will deter crime, yet turns around and proclaims that he himself would never comply with such a policy, and by virtue of his non-cooperation thereby contribute to the "arrestable offense" statistic.

I can only pray that when he resists arrest there is someone there with a smart phone to record the drama - I want the whole package, mace, tasers, billy clubs, pistol whipped. Damn I'd pay good money to see that.

Alberta is smart enough to avoid going full-Tasvir and targeting minorities specifically. Instead he uses the Pat Buchanon approach. You remember - we must take back our streets! From who? Oh you know, "them." Them who? And so on.....

which is followed by reducing crime by granting unlimited powers of search without cause isn't acceptable. fuck crime prevention. I'm not about to support codifying randomly stopping anyone the cops decide doesn't look right.

I know that's whinging pissantery to you...deal with it.

And who's fucking guns are being taken away? Where was that part of the topic?

or are we talking about disarming the po-po to promote public safety? if we can't have a gun in every glove compartment, it's the next best thing.

You don't even read what I fucking post, do you?

It's always part of the "crime prevention" topic, and it's certainly relevant to any discussion of crime in that anti-gun hell-hole known as NY.

Yep, no need to call you a racist. The word is fascist.

Another turd tube who only skims for trolling material.

You're the guy advocating for a police state. When I call you on it, that isn't trolling, just observation.

There's maybe a half dozen posts disproving that in this thread alone, fucktard.

Go try you remedial trolling on someone else.

That's because the whites are packing heat to protect themselves from the black and hispanics.

Anyone ever read "Blood Meridian?"

It takes place in the Southwest in the mid-to-late 19th Century. A hired army of American gunmen arrive to "protect" some Mexican villages from the occasional Apache raid. The "protectors" turn out to be far more brutal and destructive than the "threat" posed by the Apaches. Eventually, one of the villagers, as a sign of discontent, grafittis a wall with Mejor los Indios: "Better (to live with) the Indians."

So, when it comes to the police "protecting" us by trampling on our right to privacy? Mejor los Indios.

This is the guy who used to argue that laws weren't absolute, just words on paper that could be changed on a whim. Now he's Inspector Javert, in love with the idea of a police state where jackkbooted thugs patrol every street corner. But his newly discovered fascination with despotism is only for the rest of us. If the police state takes away his ability to do business with his local pot dealer then see how fast he switches horses.

He should just be honest about it.

Show me one example of me being dishonest about anything, you slimy little crapweasel. Be warned, you may have to do more than skim if you want to discern my actual intent.

You're kidding, right? In this thread alone, you've at least twice suggested that certain neighborhoods should replaced under police authority. How else should I interpret this?

Quote those posts in their entirety.

http://www.wordforge.net/search.php?searchid=4041843

You really need to start reading and understanding what you've written.

Brian: "Do you listen to yourself when you talk?"
Peter: "Eh, I drift in and out."

Introducing a "what if" scenario for the sake of discussion is not a wholesale support for that thing to happen.

So, here we go.

"What if" and "sake of discussion" != "should be placed."

I don't see any policy or course of action being advocated there. Perhaps you would point it out for the rest of the class?

I do, and apparently that makes one of us.

You seem to have some issues with imprecision, in that case.

I had no trouble understanding him.

Well zippity do dah for you!

Whatever it takes to make you feel better. But word of advice, just because Tamar can see through your thrashed diction, don't expect it from everyone. What you wrote appeared to many of us to suggest support for a police state. You can claim all you want that it doesn't, but it's a valid reading of your statements just the same. If you don't want to be labeled an authoritarian and a hypocrite, you need to work on better expressing your ideas. Otherwise, expect to continue being misunderstood.

I bet that's part of the angry, isn't it, that so many seem not to understand the peculiar workings of your brain. What does your therapist say about this?