You had plenty of opportunity to post it. You just posted "common sense"
Nice try though.
I was too busy trying to figure out your correlation between the stats you posted and gun control in NYC via google seeing if there are some laws I missed down there or something. I guess I gave you too much credit.
Ahhhhhh.....That's what you were doing...got it. Thanks. :?
Did you know violence in NYC started on the decline When the Lion King started. I think that was the tipping factor.
I actually do for the most part. Cleaning up 42nd street, etc. had nothing to do with gun laws.
Don't get me wrong. I don't see how folks can be against background checks for ALL sales of guns (are they also against driver's licenses to use one of the favorite "analogies"), but I'm not sure NYC (or any major city) is a good example on either side (Chicago - I'm looking at you).
If you don't take care of the underlying problem (crime, squallor, mental health, etc.), the gun bans, etc. aren't going to do a whole lot. I will repeat again - all the guns in these incidents were LEGALLY owned.
And, yes, Bloomberg has reduced NYPD, and you can see the city slipping back into some of it's old "habits." I am a bit scared that the lag issue is comforting folks into feeling ok with what can only be termed a mistake on his part.
I am not talking about TImes Sqaure. Manhattan as a whole is a very different place than it was. You can argue that the violence is going other places but the city as a whole has changed, which I do think has played a factor in the gun violence.
I don't disagree with you at all on the mental health aspect of it and I have point out Chicago myself. It is obviously not just taking guns away from people, which in reality is not what the New York law is doing. LIke I said, responsible gun owners shouldn't have a problem with this law.
Like I said, I get that there are many other factors and I guess the point that we will disagree on is that I see the less guns out and about as a good thing and less likely to get in the wrong hands. I am very much in favor of the right to own guns, I just don't think it should be a free for all where anyone can buy any gun they want.
You don't think there is any correllation between the number of guns people are carrying illegally but may own legally and the number of homicides in New York?
Don't take everything so literally. 42nd Street was used as a microcosm of what Rudy did for the ENTIRE city (not just Manhattan).
And to your last question: No. See: Town, Chi
Fair enough.
So it is strictly that the size of the police force was increased 10 years ago?
Mark my words. Quote my post. Gun crime at this time in NY state will be the exact same next year as it is this year. I'm actually embarrassed as a NYS resident that trash like this can get passed and people applaud it. Way to posture governor cuomo in your "big stand". This was nothing more than the democratic run government of NY helping cuomo build his resume for a presidential run. He can now say he was the first governor to make a stance against gun control when if fact he did nothing. Paper legislation that does zippo to actually help with the issue. :fp:
You are of course hoping you are wrong, right?
Because we all want to see gun related crime go down, right?
Because that is far more important than the politics, right?
I think the fact that these questions were ignored is quite telling.
To me, magazine limits are worth a try, and it hardly puts gun owners at an inconvenience.
Getting rid of 30 round clips isn't an inconvienience, but making standard clip sizes illegal is a huge inconvenience and cost to an owner.
Not really. I have to re-find the exact language, but if you have a larger magazine, you can still use it, but you can't put more than seven rounds in it. If you are caught with more rounds in it, then it's a misdemeanor.
So no one has to go out an buy smaller magazines.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
So it is strictly that the size of the police force was increased 10 years ago?
No, it was how they changed the way laws were enforced, how the police were viewed. It was a NUMBER of things that Rudy did to make it good to be good, again.
If you want to link it to the gun thing - yes, enforcement of existing gun laws helped as with all law enforcement. But, there was no siginificant change in gun law (or ownership for that matter) when Rudy cut violent crime in HALF in his first year in office.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Mark my words. Quote my post. Gun crime at this time in NY state will be the exact same next year as it is this year. I'm actually embarrassed as a NYS resident that trash like this can get passed and people applaud it. Way to posture governor cuomo in your "big stand". This was nothing more than the democratic run government of NY helping cuomo build his resume for a presidential run. He can now say he was the first governor to make a stance against gun control when if fact he did nothing. Paper legislation that does zippo to actually help with the issue. :fp:
You are of course hoping you are wrong, right?
Because we all want to see gun related crime go down, right?
Because that is far more important than the politics, right?
I think the fact that these questions were ignored is quite telling.
Didn't see this post. Of course I want crime to go down. Who doesn't. This isn't the way though. Far from it.
So it is strictly that the size of the police force was increased 10 years ago?
No, it was how they changed the way laws were enforced, how the police were viewed. It was a NUMBER of things that Rudy did to make it good to be good, again.
If you want to link it to the gun thing - yes, enforcement of existing gun laws helped as with all law enforcement. But, there was no siginificant change in gun law (or ownership for that matter) when Rudy cut violent crime in HALF in his first year in office.
And yes, how the laws were being enforced is largely my point. There were already fairly strict gun laws on the book but the enforcement of them became a much bigger priority.
King Obama? Protecting guns is important. Respecting election results is apparently not.
listening tohalf the population and statevoices is importantand yeah Obama isacting like a king
love the bill he signed forhimself the king will have armedguards protection therest of his life
howironic
King Obama? Protecting guns is important. Respecting election results is apparently not.
listening tohalf the population and statevoices is importantand yeah Obama isacting like a king
love the bill he signed forhimself the king will have armedguards protection therest of his life
howironic
Did you and the spacebar get into an argument or something?
So it is strictly that the size of the police force was increased 10 years ago?
No, it was how they changed the way laws were enforced, how the police were viewed. It was a NUMBER of things that Rudy did to make it good to be good, again.
If you want to link it to the gun thing - yes, enforcement of existing gun laws helped as with all law enforcement. But, there was no siginificant change in gun law (or ownership for that matter) when Rudy cut violent crime in HALF in his first year in office.
And yes, how the laws were being enforced is largely my point. There were already fairly strict gun laws on the book but the enforcement of them became a much bigger priority.
And how we're those laws enforced? More police. Stiffer penalties. Accountability.
And how we're those laws enforced? More police. Stiffer penalties. Accountability.
Ahhh. Yeah, stronger enforcement (which included more police for a period of time) and prosecution of gun laws where an incredibly small percentage of civilians are allowed to carry a weapon. Exactly my point.
You can point to Chicago and I certainly think that would be a very interesting case study into why two areas with strict laws are seeing the murder rates go in opposite directions, but something is working in NYC and you can't necessarily say that it isn't the gun laws because they are taking a lot of guns off the street and if that article is correct, only 10% of the 8,000 they have taken are illegally owned.
i tend to stay away from shit slinging threads, but i'll throw in my two cents on this once since i have lived in both cities....
comes down to police presense for me. there is simply not enough in chicago. i am actually astounded at how invisible the police are in the downtown/high volume areas. i have NEVER felt unsafe in NYC, walking alone at all hours of the day and night simply because there are a handful of cops on every corner you turn. the sense of security you have there is incredible. you just can't help to find yourself more at ease.
chicago, i find myself looking over my shoulder more than i ever had in NYC.
Didn't see this post. Of course I want crime to go down. Who doesn't. This isn't the way though. Far from it.
Good. Too easy to lose sight of what is really important.
Exactly, and that reminds me.. personally, I think the new laws in NY are a good idea, but I dont think they'll have much an impact on crime stats. What we can hope for is that if a mass shooting occurs similar to one in CT, perhaps the shooter will have less means to carry out his plans. Many gun advocates say that no matter what, crazy determined people will find a way to carry out their plans of mass killing...so if they're going to do it anyways, why not try to limit what they can get their hands on? But if the exact same things happens 6 months from now, and the shooter only has a smaller magazine, maybe half the people die, or maybe we save one single life...then its worth it, but we may never be able to tell if the new laws made the difference or not.
At least the families of the victims can see that something is being done even if people feel it's nothing to be howling about ..
good to see the voice of reason
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
What did people expect that nothing was going to come from this one of the worst massacres in this country's history and small kids no less , the outcry was to loud for the powers that be not to listen to it ... SOMETHING HAD TO CHANGE
jesus greets me looks just like me ....
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
They were in such a hurry to pass the law that they forgot to exempt the police. Doh!
Comments
Did you know violence in NYC started on the decline When the Lion King started. I think that was the tipping factor.
Fair enough.
So it is strictly that the size of the police force was increased 10 years ago?
Terrible idea.
I think the fact that these questions were ignored is quite telling.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Not really. I have to re-find the exact language, but if you have a larger magazine, you can still use it, but you can't put more than seven rounds in it. If you are caught with more rounds in it, then it's a misdemeanor.
So no one has to go out an buy smaller magazines.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/01 ... -in-texas/
So again, you have nothing to add to this thread? Carry on...
No, it was how they changed the way laws were enforced, how the police were viewed. It was a NUMBER of things that Rudy did to make it good to be good, again.
If you want to link it to the gun thing - yes, enforcement of existing gun laws helped as with all law enforcement. But, there was no siginificant change in gun law (or ownership for that matter) when Rudy cut violent crime in HALF in his first year in office.
King Obama? Protecting guns is important. Respecting election results is apparently not.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Didn't see this post. Of course I want crime to go down. Who doesn't. This isn't the way though. Far from it.
As much relevance as the article you posted.
And yes, how the laws were being enforced is largely my point. There were already fairly strict gun laws on the book but the enforcement of them became a much bigger priority.
love the bill he signed forhimself the king will have armedguards protection therest of his life
howironic
I'm actually at a loss for words.
Did you and the spacebar get into an argument or something?
And how we're those laws enforced? More police. Stiffer penalties. Accountability.
Good. Too easy to lose sight of what is really important.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
Ahhh. Yeah, stronger enforcement (which included more police for a period of time) and prosecution of gun laws where an incredibly small percentage of civilians are allowed to carry a weapon. Exactly my point.
At least the families of the victims can see that something is being done even if people feel it's nothing to be howling about ..
i tend to stay away from shit slinging threads, but i'll throw in my two cents on this once since i have lived in both cities....
comes down to police presense for me. there is simply not enough in chicago. i am actually astounded at how invisible the police are in the downtown/high volume areas. i have NEVER felt unsafe in NYC, walking alone at all hours of the day and night simply because there are a handful of cops on every corner you turn. the sense of security you have there is incredible. you just can't help to find yourself more at ease.
chicago, i find myself looking over my shoulder more than i ever had in NYC.
Exactly, and that reminds me.. personally, I think the new laws in NY are a good idea, but I dont think they'll have much an impact on crime stats. What we can hope for is that if a mass shooting occurs similar to one in CT, perhaps the shooter will have less means to carry out his plans. Many gun advocates say that no matter what, crazy determined people will find a way to carry out their plans of mass killing...so if they're going to do it anyways, why not try to limit what they can get their hands on? But if the exact same things happens 6 months from now, and the shooter only has a smaller magazine, maybe half the people die, or maybe we save one single life...then its worth it, but we may never be able to tell if the new laws made the difference or not.
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
SOMETHING HAD TO CHANGE
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/n ... 86374.html