So far, [New York City Mayor Eric] Adams has ordered more police officers to be deployed to the subways as part of a plan with the state. The joint plan includes dispatching mental health professionals into the system. But hirings have yet to begin. On Friday the state released requests for proposals for community groups to respond.
Gun violence has abated in some neighborhoods but persisted in the Bronx and parts of northern Manhattan, where earlier this month a 19-year-old woman working at Burger King in East Harlem was fatally shot during a robbery.
In 2021, gun arrests citywide were up 6% over the prior year and 34% compared to 2019, according to crime figures. However, shootings have soared in other major U.S. cities, suggesting a national trend related to the pandemic.
The gun used by the Harlem shooter was a Glock with an additional magazine capable of firing upwards of 40 additional rounds. It had been reported stolen in 2017 from Baltimore, police said.
“Adams has to start thinking about how to disrupt the supply of guns to the street,” said Jeffrey Fagan, a Columbia Law School professor who studies policing. “We can’t arrest our way to safety any more than we could arrest our way out of a drug epidemic.”
The situation stands to worsen in the spring, he added, when the U.S. Supreme Court is weighing a ruling that would make it easier for people to carry guns in public.
Gun laws in New York City are among the strictest in the country. With only a few exceptions, a city resident who possesses a firearm must have a license issued by the NYPD, which can take over a year to obtain and is often granted only under the most stringent of circumstances.
The Brooklyn district attorney, Eric Gonzalez, has attributed 70% of guns seized to coming from southern states that have looser gun buying restrictions. However, some law enforcement members have argued that illegal guns circulate for years in the city and that crackdowns on smuggling have limited impact.
— Elizabeth Kim in Why Eric Adams Faces A Far More Difficult Test Than Previous Mayors In The War On Crime
Wouldn’t you have to arreat people to disrupt the supply of guns thereby arresting your way out of the situation?
He’s trying to set up a ‘gun grab/denial’ scenario for legal gun owners.
This statement also needs to be qualified “southern states that have looser gun buying restrictions.”
That’s really not true. What the qualification is that “southern states that have looser gun buying restrictions” in relation to those of New York which has gun control laws that are overboard and draconian intended for punishing and denying the right to law abiding citizens.
Southern states follow the same federal laws and general framework of gun ‘buying’ laws as New York does except they do not go overboard and draconian with their implementation and abide by the constitution (mostly) and do not implement their laws in a manner that’s punishing and denying to law abiding citizens.
Likely a “Plan B” if SCOTUS rules in favor of NYSRPA. A favorable ruling with effectively moot the Sullivan Act.
If they moot the Sullivan act be prepared for the great pistol shortage of 22.
“the great pistol shortage of 22”
nah. everyone in nyc who wants a gun has one already.
Rant you severely underestimate the numbers of people waiting for it to be possible to legally buy one. With that said you have an excellent point for the criminals, yes they all have guns if they want/can afford them.
The loosest gun buying restrictions are not “southern states”, they are New York City’s street sales, which Dimbulb Biden, faux President, has already announced we can’t do anything about.
The existence of guns are not the problem. That never was the problem. The problem is that there is no desire to deal with the problem. This is not about making anything safer. Public safety is not a factor here. If they were actually interested in public safety then they would not be opening jails and prisons letting criminals loose on society. You can’t fix this problem by taking guns away from the law abiding citizens of New York. They think they can but that completely ignores the problem and makes things worse at the same time.
The people of New York keep voting in Democrats that just keep making the problems worse. There is no talking them out of that. While this city and others tear themselves apart, everyone else buys guns and moves on.
There is no gun violence problem. The problem is that these places are controlled by lunatic Democrats thinking they can be tyrants with fiefdoms.
We know guns, and even gun regulations, aren’t the problem because Vermont exists.
Not a fair comparison as Vermont only has a little over half a million in population.
Dude (and Prndll),
Exactly.
The root problem is an environment where children grow up “on the streets” without physically, emotionally, and spiritually healthy and invested nuclear families. A child who grows up in that environment does not recognize (much less respect) the inherent value and dignity of their/our fellow human beings.
If you do not recognize nor respect the inherent value and dignity of your fellow human beings, nothing restrains you from using, exploiting, abusing, harming, or murdering your fellow human beings. Laws are largely meaningless and ineffective at that point.
My friend, I do not indiscriminately and arbitrarily recognize nor respect the inherent value and dignity of my fellow human beings, as I know full well that there are at least one or two, maybe, who have no inherent value or dignity whatsoever. I occasionally read about them in the news–more lately than usual, or so it would appear.
However, I restrain MYSELF from using, exploiting, abusing, harming, or murdering even those one or two, and laws have nothing to do with my forbearance, although they do serve to reinforce my continued good manners.
What’s wrong with me, and why would I be a rarity in, say, Washington DC, or Chicago, or Baltimore?
What does population have to do with anything, other than excuses? I bet there are boroughs (or whatever) within New York City which do not have a half million in population. Are they all perfectly safe, or even as safe as Vermont? Try neighborhoods in Chicago. Or Los Angeles. Laws purporting to “control” guns have absolutely no effect on criminals, and people who tend to shoot other people also tend to be criminals. There are a lot fewer of them than there are guns, why not just eliminate the CRIMINALS? Wouldn’t that be easy?
See also New Hampshire and Maine.
Prndll – They HAVE “dealt with the problem” in the typical racist NYC way. For years, in particular since the arrival of the chicom flu, they don’t arrest and turn loose the tribal barbarians of the demtard protected/voting class. They WANT animals roaming NYC. BIG part of this is the Soros stooge DA and Attorney General. This new mayor isn’t the ONLY moron running this. The favored ones include “Letisha” James and Alvin Bragg (a largely unknown to the nation idiot who is doing what he said he would do in his “campaign”/coronation). No jail for bros.
When you pick your “leaders” by the color of their skin, you get what you deserve.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nyc-district-attorney-alvin-bragg-blasted-by-critics-over-lighter-punishment-for-violent-criminals
That’s not dealing with the problem. That’s creating the problem.
Where firearms come from is a lame distraction. After all it is criminal nature to misuse anything they touch.
One big thing that would help lessen crime is cease feeding morons the Godless demoCrap that turns them into criminals. And, lock up wrongdoers and throw away the key. Put up billboards that say…Do the Crime Do The Time. If you do not outweigh commiting crime with the consequences for breaking the law it’s business as usual for criminals.
It would also be nice to cease forcing the taxpayer to pay for prisons which are more comfortable than anywhere these thugs have ever lived. There were prisons for 1000 years before air conditioning was invented, just as an example.
Trust me LarryinTX, ..I have worked in the prisons and they are not the “more comfortable” prisons that you envision. There is no air conditioning in any NYS prison except in the administration buildings.
“The Brooklyn district attorney, Eric Gonzalez, has attributed 70% of guns seized to coming from southern states that have looser gun buying restrictions.”
Oh, is that why 8 out of ten guns confiscated from criminals were traced back to being sold and stolen in New York state?
“Elizabeth Kim in Why Eric Adams Faces A Far More Difficult Test Than Previous Mayors In The War On Crime”
His difficulty is not treating it as a war on crime and treating is like more of a political tool. If it were really a war on crime… well, think about what happens to the enemy in a war when they are captured, why yes they get incarcerated as POW’s but in this “War On Crime” in New York they decarcerate (and don’t prosecute) as many as possible.
War on Crime my butt.
Giuliani’s NY arrested their way out of it. So did the whole country, starting in the nineties. We know the solution. Progs like Adams just lack the will.
Exactly.
Simple arrests for loitering, confiscation of weapon and drugs, release with a fine, and advised to sell drugs in areas with solid backstops and few public was a huge success.
The dealers could not afford to lose a gun every day. Later, when shot by competition, no innocents were hit.
A brilliant strategy that could be brought back.
Those be voters. If in jail MIGHT not be able to vote (or vote only once).
I bet he would jump at the idea of finding the perp, then arresting the nearest white guy.
I was going to say the same thing. Rudy not only “arrested his way to a safer NYC,” he did it with relatively minor offenses, too. Jaywalking, graffiti, etc were hammered by the cops under the Wilsonian theory of “broken windows” criminal environments.
Were I tasked with running NYC, you can bet the farm that I would be enforcing laws against property damage, graffiti, garbage in the streets, littering, etc. The reason why I would be doing it is because it took NYC from the criminality of David Dinkins’ administration to something far, far better (on paper at least).
It wouldn’t even be a thing in the first place if New York actually cared about enforcing law instead of setting criminals free. Keep the animals in their cages and it wont be a problem.
It isn’t even a theory. We have the data that proves it. The only thing standing in the way of making progress are the Progressives.
Keeping the animals in their cages can get rather expensive. Then the Feds hit the state with overcrowding of prisons. Pretty soon, most of the county lockups have a majority of felons in them because the state has to put the felons somewhere. In a couple of years, it is early release for all and then you get Calif with homeless everywhere. What percentage of Ca homeless do you think are felons on parole or ex-felons that have finished parole?
Don’t have references to back it up but from what I’ve seen of the “homeless” population is that few are ex felons, most are simply lazy hopeless bums wanting a free ride, and NO ONE telling them what they may/mayn’t do and when/where. They have been taught that they can get a free ride by simply refusing to work expecting”others” to feed, clothe, ouse them.
This situationis enhanced by the umbers NGO’s spending billons to perpetuate the cyrrent system rather than solving it. Read Christopher Rufo’s excellent work on the matter.
All the illegals are felons.
There are ways of handling prison over population. It’s just that no one actually wants to do it. Just like everything else. There is so much focus on the wrong things and so little attention given to the right things.
1) If we are going to make weed legal then it should be made legal and all this craziness needs to stop. If it’s going to be legal then NO ONE should be arrested for it much less be in jail or even prison for it. We need to get serious about this and decide if it is to be legal or not.
2) There is no reason to keep someone on death row for 20 years. A year or two is one thing but anything further is ludicrous.
3) A life sentence needs to actually mean LIFE. That means you die in prison. NO PAROLE. that means a life sentence should translate to death row AUTOMATICALLY. We keep playing around with all this and it becomes a major issue.
4) There is nothing gained by trying to fill OUR prisons with criminals from OTHER countries. The US border problem desperately need attention.
—
If we (as a nation) would get serious about all this and stop playing around and YES I said ‘playing’, we might could actually produce a safer and more civilized society. We let our language get butchered and words lose their meanings. Just like with what AR means. The left is most responsible for it but the right lets it happen.
New York Cant .
Why not quarantine the entire city, seal off all the entrances and just lock up the lot of them? We would need some really large lazy susans, like the ones in urban liquor stores, to supply their food, but they could be sure no new guns were entering the city and all of their politicians would be contained there.
Then if something happens we can send in Snake Plisskin.
😁
“if something happens we can send in Snake Plisskin.”
I heard he was dead…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt25m_agCbk
If there is anything more stupid than seeing someone with a face diaper, it’s seeing someone with a face diaper hanging off of one ear. Kinda makes them look like a tard.
that’s the best way to wear one. Dintchya know?
Me I just don’t bother to put one anywhere visible. I leave my tokem mug nappie out in the car. Never have a problem. I sincerely wish EVERYONE would begin doing that.
I’ve been saying since January 2020 that we weill be “requried” to don them as long as we continue doing so. When eough folks simply say NO it will end. BOris Johnson just ended the shole charaede in England. Good on ‘ih.
While the coof masks don’t do squat to protect people from the coof (a recent study on the “non-partisan” Democrat-loving news admitted this), they do foil the Chicom face scanners, which is a good reason people should wear them in public places such as the grocery store or anywhere else there might be cameras.
Nearly two years into it, and living in a state (Illannoy) that technically still has a mask mandate, I can say that I have yet to own a face diaper, or wear one anywhere. If there was a place that wouldn’t allow me in, I’d shop elsewhere. There were enough places that either didn’t care, or didn’t have much else to say after I told them that I was medically unable to wear one. At this point into it, it appears that almost all businesses are pretty much done with it themselves. While they may have signage on the door to comply with Gov. Prickster’s mandate, none of them care whether you have a diaper on or not. That’s how it should be.
Of course you can’t arrest your way to safety. It has to do with consequences of their actions. If criminals get arrested, but then get a slap on the wrist, a fine, and they’re back on the street again, what deterrent is that? Plus, if crime is easy and you don’t get penalized (or caught), your city is in a world of hurt.
If New York City would purchase a handgun for every head of household who was not already barred from owning a weapon, the problem would solve itself in relatively short order. Eliminate all the draconian anti-gun laws, and allow those heads of households to purchase a second, third, or fourth gun for law abiding members of the household. In the short term, “gun deaths” would rise, as criminals were killed off. In the long term, violence of all kinds will drop drastically.
But Democrats don’t want violence to end. Violence is too easy to capitalize on, politically.
AND really wouldn’t take very many handguns to meet your criteria. But that would be “discriminating” against the special class. Can’t have a handout that doesn’t go to them.
Not a fan of “stop n frisk” but stop & frisk! Not likely with a black ex-cop Dim. As mentioned it’s been done by a republican mayor named Guiliani.
Stop and frisk seems mighty unconstitutional to me.
I wouldn’t like it.
Possum, Regret to inform you that it is “stop. question and frisk”. The stop is based on observations made by the officer. the questions are for explanation of what the officer observed. IF the office feels he has probably cause to believe that the subject may have committed a crime or committing a crime, he then performs a frisk for a) his protection, and b) to see if his suspicions were correct.
Many an arrest has been made base on “stop, question and frisk”. Be glad that an officer has the professional ability to convert his observations into a lawful arrest.
What percentage are frisked and then arrested? I would bet it is less than 50%(unless the popo is planting evidence). Even if it were 99%, it would still be unconstitutional.
“Stop-and-frisk” its self is not unconstitutional. But the past Stop-and-frisk policy used by NYPD was ruled unconstitutional in New York because it largely singled out young black and Hispanic men (on grounds that it unfairly singled out racial groups).
(Judge Scheindlin in) Floyd v. the City of New York, Aug. 12, 2013: “In conclusion, I find that the City is liable for violating plaintiffs’ Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The City acted with deliberate indifference toward the NYPD’s practice of making unconstitutional stops and conducting unconstitutional frisks.
But Judge Scheindlin did not order the NYPD to end its stop-and-frisk program. Instead, the judge ordered remedies to ensure that it was carried out without violating the Constitution.
(Judge Scheindlin in) Floyd v. the City of New York, Aug. 12, 2013: “To address the violations that I have found, I shall order various remedies including, but not limited to, an immediate change to certain policies and activities of the NYPD, a trial program requiring the use of body-worn cameras in one precinct per borough, a community-based joint remedial process to be conducted by a court-appointed facilitator, and the appointment of an independent monitor to ensure that the NYPD’s conduct of stops and frisks is carried out in accordance with the Constitution and the principles enunciated in this Opinion, and to monitor the NYPD’s compliance with the ordered remedies.”
Judge Scheindlin further wrote “To be very clear: I am not ordering an end to the practice of stop and frisk,” she wrote. “The purpose of the remedies addressed in this Opinion is to ensure that the practice is carried out in a manner that protects the rights and liberties of all New Yorkers, while still providing much needed police protection.”
Judge Scheindlin wrote a few different times in her opinion that she did not consider the effectiveness of the program in her ruling.
(Judge Scheindlin in) Floyd v. the City of New York, Aug. 12, 2013: “I emphasize at the outset, as I have throughout the litigation, that this case is not about the effectiveness of stop and frisk in deterring or combating crime. This Court’s mandate is solely to judge the constitutionality of police behavior, not its effectiveness as a law enforcement tool. Many police practices may be useful for fighting crime — preventive detention or coerced confessions, for example — but because they are unconstitutional they cannot be used, no matter how effective.”
The judge also noted that she did not consider the testimony of one of the city’s expert witnesses, Dr. Dennis Smith, an associate professor at the Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service at New York University. Smith testified about the effectiveness of the stop-and-frisk program.
Judge Scheindlin also said “While Dr. Smith’s research makes him specially qualified to opine on the effectiveness of the NYPD’s practices in controlling crime, the effectiveness of stop and frisk is not at issue in this case, as I have repeatedly explained,” the judge wrote.
But Judge Scheindlin also ruled that stop and frisk, in practice, had a discriminatory effect on blacks and Hispanics, violating the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. “The Equal Protection Clause’s prohibition on selective enforcement means that suspicious blacks and Hispanics may not be treated differently by the police than equally suspicious whites,” the judge said.
NYC did ask the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to vacate the ruling, but the court said no. Scheindlin was removed from the case. The city later reached a settlement with the plaintiffs that involved withdrawing their appeal.
So it was ruled ‘unconstitutional’ for New York City in context with how NYPD did it in the past, but the practice its self in a non-discriminatory manner has not been ruled unconstitutional.
As long as “articulable probable cause” is present for the “contacting” off ice,r ther eis no problem. BUT when “articualbe probable cause” devolved to “walking while black” things go sideways quickly. Or maybe wearing a blue cap, on the gronds that some gang has selected blue as their”colour”. And this sort of thing was rampant.
I’ve been “contacted’ by cops for some prettylame things. Chip on their shoulder looking for a scrap, and to flex their “awTHOAR a teh” muscles a bit at someones expense. Thjey misread me, though, and I have the self control to not comply more than is absolutley necessary, stand my ground lawfully and deescalate their attempt t pick a fight with a stranger. Most folks raised in”da hood” will not be so successful. I remember in the hippie days being “contacted” walking along a stretch of highway betweenc cities, “contacting’ me because they were certain I had weed on me (I never did) and not being very polite OR subtle about it. some towns if you were just walking with a backpack they COULD bust you for some silly city ordinance they had invented just to “catch” hippies.
Same sort of sick powertripping mindset in NYC. Throw the spaghetti agaisnt the wall and see if anythjing sticks.
rt66paul Nope, it is not “unconstitutional.” You are dealing in an absolute. A police officer has the obligation to follow up on his reasonable suspicion. It is a police officer’s job to try to prevent a crime when it is being committed.
I’ll tell you a REAL LIFE experience. I just came out of the Hamilton Dinner in Poughkeepsie, NY where I was a police officer. I went to the call box to check back in (yes, when I was a cop, we did have call boxes) coming off my meal period. A Black gentleman walked up to me, threw back one side of his jacket, and asked me where a certain bar was. I observed a wooden handle stuck in his belt. Before he could react, I reached in and grabbed the wooden handle It turned out to be an ice pick. I asked his, “What are you doing with this”? “He responded, “Oh, I’m going to go and collect a debt.” Under NYS law possession of such is a violation of Penal Law Sec 265.01 Possession of a Weapon which designates “dirks” (which an ice pick is) as being a misdemeanor when you have the INTENT to use it.
I guess you could say his response showed an intent to use? The arrest resulted in a conviction and he did 30 days.
Now if I did not do stop, question and frisk, there could well have been a much more serious crime like murder committed that evening. (it was the 4/12 shift)
Good story, but that’s not the way it worked, or would ever work. Did you really think the cops were stopping and frisking equal parts grandmothers and gangbangers? Cops saw someone who “looked suspicious” and accosted them WITHOUT A WARRANT! That is unconstitutional, period. Generally speaking they could not get a warrant, because there was no probable cause. And it always was unconstitutional. If you claim it must be done anyway, the Amendment process awaits you, but you’re too busy for that, right?
LarryinTX, It’s not a “story”. It was what happened. The police did have some that abused the procedure of stop, question and frisk, but by in large it was used by officers to effect lawful searches and seizures.
In the case of “stop question and frisk” you do not need a search warrant as it comes under the heading of “exigent circumstances” which the Supreme Court has recognized. It is NOT unconstitutional. Do you understand the term “exigent circumstances?” Apparently and no to be mean or demeaning, you are operating here on the seat of you pants with these statements. I worked the streets. Did you?
I commented(loudly)about stop & frisk in the past. Now I don’t care. After the year of BlackLootersMurder and Antifools Eff me…
I agree Possum.
I should have guessed that Walter was an asshole cop who wants a Hitlerite State. Papers please! In the U.S. we do not have a thorough vetting system to weed out many of the sick people who gravitate to the police profession like flies are drawn to shit. This is one of the reasons so many U.S. cops are sick, brutal sadistic thugs in uniform. Its amazing there are not more police shootings considering their behavior towards the public.
In Germany applicants for law enforcement are thoroughly vetted and given 3 years of intensive training before they are even allowed to deal with the public. They are taught the law as to when they can and cannot shoot and they are taught de-escalation as well as emergency medical care. I have read about more than one case where U.S. untrained cops stood around and waited for the medical personnel to arrive which often times was way too late.
In 2012 U.S. mad dog Cops killed 1,200 people while in Germany they shot only 12 people and in China (with 4 1/2 times the U.S. population) only shot 4 people. It shows you how out of control killer cops are in the U.S.
dacian the dunce, Seems that arse hole is you, little fella. Now tell the truth. You Lefties are all about control over the individual for the protection of the state. Sounds an awful lot like “Hiterlite” fascism to me.
If you like Germany and their way of training police why don’t you go there on a one way ticket. We have had “de-escalation” here in the US for sometime. Fact is that they don’t work in about 50% of the time. Sometimes you just got to do what you have to do. Each police officer in NYS goes though use of force training a minimum of twice a year.
I am sure you have read just about every anti-police article there is out there berating the police.
Last year over 400 police officers were killed in the line of duty. But I am sure that you don’t care at all about those officers or their families. you would prefer to see your ANTIFA and BLM thugs running things.
Are you telling me you actually believe there has been a year in the past 100 years when the Chinese Communist Government only killed 4 of their subjects? It is not possible to be that stupid.
to Walter
quote—————you would prefer to see your ANTIFA and BLM thugs running things.———quote
Spoken like the true white racist pig that you are. In fact the majority of protests were peaceful and they were protesting thug cops like you that should never have been given a badge.
dacian, the dunderhead. Nice try, there lefty. You just love to throw around your race card. It’s all you really have, isn’t it? I’ll bet you were one of those drugged out hippies. The majority of the “protests” were “peaceful”? Using what criteria?
Seattle? Portland? New York City? You are either a liar (most likely) or delusional (could berry well be).
One thing for sure, you would not have had time to work the streets while you were being indoctrinated in your halls of academia.
It depends on how the tactic is used.
Of course, you have to question if it would be used appropriately by what amounts to a bunch of thugs in uniforms who will send 12 officers to harass the living shit out of a five year old for not having a vax-pass in a restaurant but ignore the stabbing going on across the street. Weird how the NYPD is totally willing to fuck with non-violent people but not the actual criminals and then cries when some cops get hurt doing their job.
At this point my position on LE, of whom I’ve generally been supportive, is that I don’t really trust Sheriff’s Deputies unless I know them or they demonstrate professionalism. Police Officers are, IMHO, entirely untrustworthy and to be avoided like the plague. I’d rather kick it with meth-heads than PD employees at this point.
ACAB? Hardly, that’s just the ones still working in blue cities where anyone with an ounce of ethics and 1/10th of a testicle would have resigned in protest and gone to work elsewhere. Cops generally being untrustworthy government thugs at this point? Well, in cities they’ve spent quite a while demonstrating that this is what they are so…
Sorry boys, you had two years of fucking up hard, I’m done. You’ll need 20 years of stellar work to regain my trust. At this point your peeps shot dead in the street don’t really bother me. You made that bed, have fun lying in it. I’m far more concerned about the innocent people not on .gov payrolls that are being harmed. Maybe stop a riot and I’ll be interesting in talking to you again. Until then the guys pushing brooms to sweep up used needles are both more honorable and more useful to society than you are.
Defund the PD and send the money to the Sheriff’s Department because at least the Sheriff is directly accountable to the public.
Regret to inform you, strychi9 but the restaurant has the absolute right to bar any person age not withstanding, from their establishment as long as it is not because of race, creed, national origin or sexual orientation (in NYS of which NYC is a part). If the owners decide that they will not allow people who are unvaxxed, in their premises, that is their right. It is called trespass. The owners grant people what in the law is called “license” to be in or on their premises. It an be revoked by the owner at his discretion. It is not the police who are doing the “evicting” but the owner which is his right to set the parameters of anyone entering his establishment.
You’re going to defend cops ignoring a stabbing 20 yards away from them in favor of, if we’re generous, a trespass charge which the owner may or may not actually agree with but was foisted on them by city regulation?
If you don’t see the issue there you’d probably lose a photography competition to Stevie Wonder.
Sad to say, but when you’re this far off target it’s time to hang up your guns before you hurt yourself.
May your chains set lightly upon you, Mr. Beverly.
Excuse me strych9 but what does that to do with this subject? The police cannot make a charge of trespass without a supporting deposition from the owner and the police won’t make an arrest without the owner pressing the matter. Again, you do not know how the law works.
What “stabbing” are you referring to? Maybe you need to be specific if you are going to make a charge of malfeasance. Sad to say you have a petulance to be anti-police, I dare say.
So businesses now have the absolute right to access our protected health information……. neat.
Ever heard of 4A and 5A, FWW?
Sure have. Have you ever heard of exigent circumstances?
I have, but NYC’s stop and frisk was not done on the basis of reasonable suspicion nor exigent circumstances.
My message was to Former Water Walker, not you, though.
Dave, I beg to differ. It seems that this “judge” was as Lefty, the kind that rights his own law. It also seems that the parties to the action settled the matter and that the what the judge said was in supplement to the decree that was agreed to by the City of New York (sic) and the plaintiffs.
Did you read the actual consent degree or did you just read a synopsis from a local rag?
Seems like lots of correlation between crime reduction with mass arrests and crime increases with no bail releases and creeping decriminalization.
I’m sure it’s nothing.
Shire-man,
Nah, just a bizarre coincidence. Nothing to see here, move along!
Bail is there to make sure the arrestee makes it to court. Many times bail is beyond the reach of the arrestee, so his family suffers(if he/she has an income), they keep him/her in lockup so that he/she might be open to a plea deal. They also use the department of child services as the boogeyman to place the child with family(by dragging their feet on vetting the family) instead of strangers. They definitely know how to push your buttons, they have done so for hundreds of years. Certain practices are stopped by the courts, so they invent new ones.
True – bro can’t sell pot/drugs (to the public) while in jail. Can’t run his string of hookers effectively. Can’t B&E or see his fence. Can’t steal, run, retail firearms either.
rt66paul You can look at it that way, if you please. The fact is that some rimes require incarcerating the alleged offender who has a LONG “yellow sheet” to prevent his/her committing crimes while out of bail. Very very few “families” are affected by this. If a couple is arrested for the same crime (it’s called aiding and abetting) Social Services has to be called in for the protection of the children. Or would you prefer that the children be left to their own devices while the parents are in jail?
“…suggesting a national trend related to the pandemic.”
It suggests nothing of the sort. Did anything other than the pandemic happen in the past two years? Covid is the most convenient excuse ever. I’ve seen countless articles placing the blame on the pandemic for every sort of failing from our dear leaders. Are 99% of journalists really that dumb or do they just lack integrity?
@Dude
Your last sentence is logically incorrect… you should replace “or do” with “and”…
Arrests may not be the solution but it sure is a hell of a start.
Pre bail reform absolutely, currently may be a bit more challenging (likely a feature not a bug)
Typical liberal Democrat stupidity.
When you blame the object instead of the person who has misused the object, you then ignore the criminal for the object.
That’s called transference.
It goes along with the democrat mentality of not holding people accountable for their actions.
And it’s a documented fact most firearms have spent years on the streets before they are used in a crime.
From the story that gun was stolen in 2017.
“And it’s a documented fact most firearms have spent years on the streets before they are used in a crime.”
before they can identify that they were used in a crime.
How many stickups are done without firing the gun?
yuo can no more end “gun violance” or “gun crime” by outlawing them than you can end drowinings byoutlawing water. Stupid contrl freaks.
All these guns on the street! I would like to adopt a Sig P210 and attempt to reform it from a life of crime to just legal shooting sports at a gun range. Just my attempt to get these criminal guns reformed and off the street for a better America.
I’m partial to my GLOCK Mod22 Gen4. God forbit I ever have to use it but I’m willing to protect my family and home.
Are there any NY’ers here? I’d like to hear if there’s been any pushback on this.
The ones that would do so have left the cesspool.
NY’ers here?
Given the overinflated and gnashing of teeth clothes rending being done by the NY Mayor, no NY’ers survived.
At least 6 moved up my way and 4 immediately bought rifles or shotguns. The other two we are hoping get bored and move down to Albany or Hudson.
Well, he’s not wrong, you can’t arrest to safety, but you can convict to safety. If 80% of the violence comes from gangs, and 20% of the gang members are responsible for 80% of the gang violence, then simple math says lock up that 20% and…voila. What’s weird is that we tried that approach in the 90’s and it worked really well. Instead of using a tried successful method we are experimenting with all sorts of things, none of which are working. Hmm.
Now don’t start with the “it works so let’s keep doing it” thing. NYC politicians will never go for that. It makes sense. Something they don’t have or understand.
The Economist pointed to the growing diversity of gun owners in America and noted that it is “bad for gun-control advocates.”
According to The Economist, a study by of Northeastern University shows that of the millions of first time buyers between January 2019 and April 2021, “half were female, a fifth black and a fifth Hispanic.”
Moreover, The Economist noted that “the share of black adults who joined the gun-owning ranks, 5.3%, was more than twice that of white adults.” (I’l assume they mean LEGAL PURCHASES vs stolen)
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/01/23/the-economist-growing-diversity-of-gun-owners-is-bad-for-gun-control-advocates/
quote—————–The Brooklyn district attorney, Eric Gonzalez, has attributed 70% of guns seized to coming from southern states that have looser gun buying restrictions. However, some law enforcement members have argued that illegal guns circulate for years in the city and that crackdowns on smuggling have limited impact.——-quote
Seventy percent is one hell of a lot of illegal guns coming in from outside the state. This is why a Federal Law is so necessary along with a Federal law that would mandate every second hand gun sold be vetted and that we also have a Federal law demanding safe storage of firearms. It has worked and worked very well in foreign countries something that the Far Right Neanderthals can never lie their way out of.
Lets face cold hard facts if every gun had to have paperwork the average citizen would not take the chance of being caught with an unregistered gun which would dry up the black market substantially. It already has been proven to work in other countries.
dacian, the dunce. 70%? of how many? Again, you resort to your fantasy world of every gun is bad and we gun owners are all racists, right? A Federal Law would be blatantly UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Ah, in addition, gun registration in this country is not the law and would probably be UNCONSTITUTIONAL as well.
But then what do you Lefties care about the Constitution?
Walter you dumb hill jack, the courts have overall been totally anti-gun down through history. Here is an education for you you dumb ass hick. The Supreme Court originally ruled that only military weapons were constitutional. They did this to ban short barreled shotguns. Then later they banned machine guns under Reagan’s anti-gun crusade. Later in time they ruled that civilian guns could also be banned (semi-auto’s) when Clinton went after assault rifles as well as the number of rounds in a magazine which dumb ass Walter claimed was unconstitutional. It wasn’t and the ruling proved it. The courts overturned few of the various bans on magazine capacities passed by a number of States. New York originally limited it to 7 rounds later changed to 10. That case was exceptional. But the point is 10 rounds is a ban also and is still law. Now Walter you hill jack explain this one. I will wait.
Even though it does not take much brain power to become a thug cop I am amazed they ever let Walter become one. If this guy could walk and chew gum at the same time I would be amazed.
dacian, the dunce, It seems that the “courts” have been overturned repeatedly when they infringe on the right to bear arms. Remember Heller, McDonald and a few other cases? You see we have this thing we call the Constitution. (You know that document you love to hate?)
Cite the case where the Supreme Court “originally ruled that only military weapons were constitutional?” Can you? Or is this another of your control freak fantasies? It is questionable as to whether or not 10 round magazines limits are constitutional.
It take no brain power at all to be an ANTIFA or BLM thug like your sorry posterior. I’m still waiting for your dissertation on the firing sequence of a cartridge. But I sure will not hold my breath.
To Walter the Hill Jack
Read the 1930’s ruling on the short barreled shotgun case you Dotard they said exactly that and that was that only military arms were covered. You idiot that is why they said they could ban short barreled shotguns precisely because they said the shotgun was not a military weapon. Of course their ruling was in error but that was the excuse they used and the ban remains in effect to this very day.
Stay out of the gun control debate you know less about that then you know about rocket science which is zero.
dacian, the Dunderhead. that case was an anomaly. It is the only decision that the court made and was overturned with Heller and McDonald. How can such an idiot like you keep making the same stupid mistakes even after he has been shown to be on the wrong side. You keep rambling on and on. Well, if it makes you fell good, have at it. But be advised that I will counter your drivel at every turn.
d,
This is THE USA whatever they do in other countries has no relation to this country or its laws.
If nyc and nys didn’t infringe on their residents rights so badly, said residents would be able to buy guns legally in their home state.
To Walter the Hill Jack
quote—————dacian, the Dunderhead. that case was an anomaly. It is the only decision that the court made and was overturned with Heller and McDonald————-quote
Debating with you is not a challenge you only succeed in making a complete clown and fool of yourself every time.
The short barreled shotgun ban ruling still stands, the ban on selling new machine guns to the public still stands, the NFA silencer restrictions still stand along with other bans too numerous to mention right now and here.
And Walter the Dotard the Scalia decision stated the courts reserved the right to “regulate” weapons (slick disingenuous term for ban or restrict) they considered a danger to the public or the government nullifying everything they previously stated in the decision. It was a slick piece of propaganda.
Try again Dotard this is not even a challenge.
dacian, the Dunderhead As it stand the short barrel shotgun does stand, as does the ban on AR-15’s in NY and California. but these ruling are going to be short lived. We have a Supreme Court that does not rewrite the Constitution to fit a Lefty’s whims. You would love to ban every kind of firearms including cap guns. Scalia’s opinion not withstanding was not that of the majority of the Court. Nice try but you still fall short of your goal.
If there is already a law against what is happening (as you assert, I dunno), why are you thinking ANOTHER law is what is needed? You figure maybe the criminals just did not understand the first law, we need to restate it more clearly, or are you just stupid enough that you believe that if 1000 laws make no difference, maybe # 1001 is going to make all the difference?
Bill DeBlackio isn’t going to clean up shit.
His public statements indicate three things: He wants his salary in crypto, he’s gonna carry a gun and you’re not going to carry a gun.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss but this one claims that he carries a gun and isn’t white. Woooo! Change you can believe in!
Progtards gonna progtard. Everything else is irrelevant. Have fun for the next four years NYC.
But hey, at least he takes crypto, forcing the city to pay transaction and gas fees to acquire $258,750 in crypto and then again to transfer it to him, a price I’m fairly confident he’s not just going to eat. That’s a small price for NYCers to pay for this guy to be the progtard Mayor essentially calling out the stellar job being done in the Eccles Building.
Boy, he sounded teal good for about 2 days, huh? Then it turns out he’s just another democrat. At this rate, NYC will need to find yet ANOTHER Democrat before too long. How’s it go, here comes another one, just like the other one … But god forbid we elect someone with policies which are actually different.
Funny how NYC can’t arrest it’s way out of the current crime wave, yet that’s precisely how NYC’s worst crime wave was stopped.
After decades of the worst possible governance under John Lindsay, Abe Beam and David Dinkins, the epidemic of violent crime in NYC was reduced by 65% and murder was cut 70% under Rudy Giuliani. This downward trend continued and crime rates were reduced even more under Bloomberg. NYC went from being an exceptionally dangerous city to the safest big city in America.
Thugs belong in prison. Catch and release is nothing more than suicide, and Mayor Adams is just another grifter. Welcome to de Blasio’s third term, New York. The government you voted for is the government you deserve. Good and hard.
After decades of the worst possible governance…
“Hold my beer and watch this!” -Modern Democrats
Painfully amusing, yeah strongly suspecting that bail reform was really passed to ensure a repeat of the 90’s crackdown would be impossible
I think your right yhey want to mess it up so bad that it won’t ever be right again.
Nuke it from orbit. Just to be sure.
Ralph and strych tend to be posters to watch closely for bigger picture issues.
I would suspect that it will be used as an argument for such but that’s not really the end goal. The end goal is a step or three farther down the road with the normalization of entirely suspending any notion of civil rights in favor of “safety” and to have the public begging for it.
I’ve pointed out for years that the Left constantly uses the same tactic and somehow the public never catches on to it.
That tactic is as follows:
1. Formulate Policy that Enhances Lefty Power-> 2. Create Crisis -> 2. Offer Prepackaged Solution (see #1) that Enhances Lefty Power.
Don’t get me wrong, the Right does the same sort of thing but in comparison to the Left the Right sucks at this game because, fundamentally, the Right doesn’t have the intuitive grasp of manipulation that the Left does.
Part of the reason for that is the type of personality drawn to each side but the larger part of it is that the Left inculcates this sort of thing into its members. The movers and shakers on the Left know they can’t win public-policy arguments so they tend to do end-runs around them. This is why people like the lady from BLM say things like “We’re trained Marxists”.
She’s not lying, they are most certainly trained, just not in the way she’d like to think they have been. She thinks they’ve learned all sorts of neat stuff and free thinking when in reality they’ve been trained like a seals or dogs, to behave in certain ways at the beck and call of their masters. It’s actually called Classical or Pavlovian Conditioning.
The trick is an educational system that hides that from the victims. We’ve had such a system since the late 1950’s. The Soviets showed the power of such a system in creating obedient subjects. Even where the conditioning didn’t really take they still essentially destroyed opposition by bastardizing methodology of thought.
The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist. -Verbal Kint.
“The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist. -Verbal Kint.”
I was told by the atheists but there was no such thing as God or the devil. Just as they said there was no such thing as Heaven or Hell.
But I do know one thing that is true. Legalizing drugs has never reduced or eliminated crime. The people who think otherwise are simply fools. They’re trying to create some type of utopian world. That has never existed on this planet.
Most criminals arrested especially those criminals that are repeat offenders are also some type of substance abuser. And they are looking to steal to help pay for their drugs.
If criminals don’t fear God. And I don’t fear the police. Then they can fear the retribution of the victims loved ones.
The process has already started. The police did nothing in 2020 and allowed cities to be burned to the ground and innocent people to be murdered. Now hundreds of people across the country are open carrying long guns. Patrolling their neighborhoods. And now there are massive numbers of new gun owners.
Once law enforcement is seen as being not reliable in the mind of a public. Then you will see Street Justice take hold.
I would still hold that legalizing all drugs is at least part of the *only* answer. Doing a half-assed job won’t work there or anywhere else. In the past the idea has been shot down by the extreme costs incurred by caring for all the dopers and ODs, just as though no one can see the obvious answer that if you don’t pay for your own medical care, you can die in the street in front of a hospital, and I don’t care a whit. “Free medical care” is something which occurs when doctors, nurses, and owners of hospitals, etc, agree to contribute their money and time without compensation, not when government steals money from some in order to buy votes from others.
Larry In TX. Horse pucky! Legalizing drugs will only have more people hyped up and being unproductive citizens. That philosophy is so flawed it’s not even realistic.
One thing for sure, the fact that approximately 80% of black kids don’t have a father around must NOT be an issue because no Democrat poltician or police chief ever mentions that.
Yep, 80% of black families being run by a single mother is definately A-OK and should continue to be praised by the media and politicians.
The loudest voices saying the government should stay out of everyone’s bedroom. Are also the same voices saying a father is not necessary in the home. They are the same voices who supported the welfare industrial complex.
And for some very strange reasoning they support gay marriage and them adopting children. So in they’re Twisted thinking they do support two adults raising children. These people just want to create chaos in a world that they hate.
I have seen evidence that a large percentage of black kids are not raised by a single mother, either, but by the single mother’s mother (grandma), possibly fair since she did not raise her own children either. I agree that is a formidable part of the problem, and I agree with those who assert that is the fault of liberal government forcing Dad out of the home before the free money spigot turns on. My preferred solution is “no free money”, but if we’re going to have that, the money should INCREASE if Dad is present.
Trying to blame their problems on other cities. If the other cities “loser” gun laws were the problem, why don’t those cities have the same or worse crime?
AS an outsider, and like most of the civilised world. I am greatly puzzled by the continuing selfserving and frankly illogical gun control debate in the USA. I understand that in a country so obsessed with anything that goes bang-bang that there may well be some justification for an element of self protection by the average person who carries a handgun in the USA.Butbthe undeniable fact is that they would be dead before they could use it, Why? Because the guy or gal pointing the gun at YOU if their first intent was to kill you they would do so immediately. If you go for it they certainly WILL kill you.
How many mad gun freaks in the ‘mass shooting’ game have been shot down by have been takenout bynthe ass they are shooting? Not a lot! Yet statistically seeing that there are probably as many MORE handguns in the USA s there are people good few of those ‘mass shooting victims MUST have been carrying handguns. The other thing that is beyond my understanding is that there seems to be aneven greater obsession to posses the ‘latest and greatest’ [suposedly!] out there when a BROWNING 9mm Hi=Power is hand gun enough for anybody’. OK They’re now a bit long in the tooth as it were but there is nothing a bloody Glock a can do that a Hi-Power in good fettle can’t And I’d saythat the Browning was a bloody sight handier for a clout around the head!
And, by the way I was for many years a Small Arms Instructor in the UK Armed Forces RAF and Army Infantry Reserves from a. 22 target pistol to a GPMG and prettymuch everything in between/
Albert Hall Most situations where a person is armed and using that gun to commit a crime, aren’t intent on committing murder. They are intent on obtaining your property, money, etc.
As to your “mass shooting” argument, most Americans do not carry, concealed or otherwise. the idea of carrying a firearm (handgun) is for personal self protection. So the chances of an armed citizen (good guy) coming up against a bad guy in a “mass shooting” situation is negligible, unfortunately. We who do carry do not go out looking for bad guys to shoot. As to your argument that there are more handguns than people, so what? Most people who own a hand gun own more than one. I for example own mine different handguns. I am also an NRA certified Instructor in 8 disciplines as well as having been a competitive shooter and a retired law enforcement officer.
Your argument in favor of the Browning Hi-Power is really moot. I personally favor the GLOCK Mod 22 (40 S&W cal), although I also own a SigSauer M-17 (9mm). The fact that the GLOCK has 27 moving parts as opposed to God knows how many the Browning has. Any engineer will tell you less moving parts means less chance for a failure to fire. Let me put it another way. Different strokes for different folks?
@Albert Hall
“Butbthe undeniable fact is that they would be dead before they could use it, Why? Because the guy or gal pointing the gun at YOU if their first intent was to kill you they would do so immediately. If you go for it they certainly WILL kill you.”
That’s a myth.
It is true that its possible if you ‘DRAW TO THE DROP’ (meaning if you draw after the bad guys gun is already pointed at you) but even then in over 70% of cases the victim is still able to fire and hit the offender. But also you are only 6% likely to be injured if you do ‘draw to the drop’ where as if you do not you are more than 80% likely to be injured.
“How many mad gun freaks in the ‘mass shooting’ game have been shot down by have been takenout bynthe ass they are shooting? Not a lot!”
What? In ‘mass shootings’ there are usually no people around that carry a gun, and the rest of them run away like they should. The reason? Its because most mass shootings take place in ‘gun free zones’ or ‘areas’ or in places where firearms carry is frowned upon.
In the last 30 years every mass shooting (if mass shooting is defined as 4 or more victims either present or actively under attack) that was either either underway or very likely to begin that took place where there was a concealed gun carrier that reacted and engaged the shooter has been stopped, or thwarted, or deterred, by the concealed carrier. Here is a very partial list:
1. November 2017– A man started firing in a parking lot of a crowded auto repair shop in Rockledge, FL killing one and paralyzing another. Two of the employees had concealed carry permits and fought back, shooting and injuring the attacker and preventing any more damage.
2. November 2017– An off-duty Kansas City police captain shot an armed man in a local Costco when he announced “I’m an off-duty U.S. Marshal, I’m here to kill people”. The off-duty cop told him to drop the gun and not to move. When the gunman aimed his pistol at the officer, he shot him. No other injuries were reported.
3. September 2017– A masked man entered a Nashville church and shot 7 people, killing one. A church usher was able to run to his car, grab a handgun and confront the shooter, saving untold lives.
4. May 2017– A man entered a bar in Arlington, TX yelling incoherently and began shooting, killing one. A customer with a concealed carry handgun engaged the shooter and prevented further injuries or deaths. There were more than a dozen customers in the bar, plus employees.
5. June 2016– A man began shooting outside a bar in Lyman, South Carolina. He shot 3 people before a fourth with a concealed weapons permit fired back, preventing more bloodshed.
6. July 2015– A Cincinnati man fired at 4 people, including a 1-year-old boy. One of the victims had a concealed weapons permit and shot back, hitting the attacker in the leg. No one died.
7. May 2015– In New Holland, SC a man pulled into a crowded fire department parking lot filled with children and firefighters and began firing into the air and pointing the gun at people. Two firefighters with concealed carry permits confronted the shooter and got him to put down his weapon. While no one was injured, this likely prevented a mass shooting.
8. April 2015– An Uber Driver with a concealed carry permit shot and injured a man firing a pistol into a group of people on a Logan Square sidewalk in Chicago.
9. March 2015– Police say a man likely saved the lives of several people when he shot and killed a gunman inside a West Philadelphia barbershop. During an argument, the man pulled out a gun and began shooting customers and barbers, there were even kids inside. Another man who had a legal weapons permit heard the shots from outside, rushed in and killed the shooter, likely saving lives.
10. July 2014– A psychiatric patient opened fire at a Pennsylvania hospital, killing one case worker. A doctor with a concealed weapons permit fired back and hit the shooter three times, allowing hospital personnel to tackle and subdue him. The police chief said “without a doubt, I believe the doctor saved lives. Without that firearm, [the shooter] could have went out in the hallway and just walked down the offices until he ran out of ammunition,”
11. July 2014– A military service member with a concealed carry permit shot and injured a man who fired at and threatened a group of four people outside a party in Chicago.
12. January 2014– After being turned away from a Portland strip club, a man returned with a gun and shot and critically injured the bouncer and proceeded to enter the club. Another bouncer with a concealed carry permit shot the attacker. There were 30 people inside.
13. December 2012– A man with a stolen AR-15 rifle entered the Clackamas Mall in Oregon and began shooting, killing 2 and critically injuring a third. Another man with a concealed carry permit confronted the shooter but didn’t fire because he feared he might shoot innocent bystanders. However, he claims the shooter saw him and this likely stopped the shooting spree, as he then ran into a stairwell and the next bullet the gunman fired was to kill himself. It’s debatable whether this mass shooting was stopped by this action, but there is evidence to support it.
14. April 2012– A man chased and shot at multiple church members in a church parking lot in Aurora, CO, killing one. An off-duty police officer happened to be there and shot the gunman, stopping the attack.
15. March 2012– A man kicked in and entered a side door in a Spartanburg, SC church with a shotgun and pointed it at the pastor and congregation. Another church member, a concealed weapon holder, acted quickly to subdue the attacker. No one was injured.
16. May 2009– During a birthday party two masked gunmen broke into an apartment in College Park, GA filled with 11 people. They separated the men from women, stole their wallets and cell phones, then proceeded to attempt to rape the women, mentioning they would kill them afterwards. One of the victims managed to grab his bag with a gun in it, then shot and chased off the attackers. The resident of the apartment said if not for the intervention, all the party goers would likely have been killed.
17. May 2008– A man entered a crowded bar near Reno, NV and fatally shot two brothers, as well as injuring others. When stopping to reload, another patron with a concealed weapons permit shot and killed him.
18. December 2007– After killing two at one Colorado church, a gunman drove to the New Life Church in Colorado Springs and began shooting members leaving a Sunday service. As the gunman entered the church, a woman stepped out from a doorway, confronted the gunman and then fired 10 shots from 63 feet away, hitting the attacker once in the wrist and twice in a leg. He died in the hallway, barely 40 feet from where he entered.
19. February 2007– A man with a shotgun and backpack full of ammunition opened fire at Trolley Square in Salt Lake City, killing 5 and wounding 4. The shooter was quickly and soundly stopped by the Salt Lake City SWAT, but not before an off-duty police officer with a gun had cornered him and engaged in a gun battle, preventing untold deaths to others.
20. January 2002– A distressed student facing suspension entered the campus of Appalachian School of Law and killed three people, including the dean, and injured three others. He was stopped and wrestled to the ground by three students who were trained police officers. One of which ran to his car to get his service pistol before confronting the attacker.
21. July 1999– After a man rented a semi-automatic rifle at a gun club, he held three employees hostage and threatened to kill them. One had a concealed handgun and shot the gunman. While he only directly threatened three people (not technically a mass shooting), his suicide note detailed his desire to take many other lives, so this likely prevented that.
22. April 1998– A middle school student took his father’s handgun and went to his middle school dance. He shot and killed one teacher and wounded 3 others. The owner of the dance hall grabbed his shotgun after hearing the shots and confronted and disarmed the shooter outside. It’s debatable whether or not this prevented any more deaths, as the student had stopped shooting, but he was still armed and capable to shoot more people.
23. October 1997– The Pearl High School shooting in Mississippi, which killed 2 and injured 7, was stopped by the assistant principal who got a pistol he kept in his truck to subdue the shooter.
24. December 1991– Two armed men herded 20 customers and employees of a Shoney’s restaurant in Anniston, Ala., into the walk-in refrigerator and locked it. Continuing to hold the manager at gunpoint, the men began robbing the restaurant. They were stopped by another customer, legally armed with a .45 semi-automatic pistol, who was hiding under a table. He fired five shots into that robber’s chest and abdomen, killing him instantly. It’s debatable if this would have been a mass shooting, but it was a hostage situation endangering at least 20 lives.
There are many more of these and if the FBI definition is used there are even more. If you consider in the act of other crimes there are literally thousands over the last 30 years, there are over 4,000 events daily in which 4 or more people are the target of a potential mass shooting during the commission of a crime, they are stopped by a gun carrier employing defensive gun use. Ya never hear about these on the news, and the anti-gun and gun-control crowd don’t consider them and never want to bring them up or talk about them.
@Albert Hall
And yes there are cases where the gun carrying person was not successful or did go the other way for some reason or another, in those mass shootings situations in the last 30 years.
Another thing too – people who carry guns in public (normal non-official duty citizens, not criminals) are not everywhere so the chances of an armed citizen (good guy) coming up against a mass shooter is slim to begin with.
actually its not just concealed carry people, its open carry people too that stop mass shootings when they are at a mass shooting event. Unfortunately people who carry guns in public, concealed or open carry, (normal non-official duty citizens, not criminals) are not everywhere so the chances of an armed citizen (good guy) coming up against a mass shooter is slim to begin with but in those cases where they have engaged a mass shooter they have overall performed admirably and heroically. The deaths and being spared injury of thousands of people is prevented daily around the country by good guys with guns.
I’m not sure why people in other countries and the U.S. don’t do a little more research instead of thinking like the media tells them. And all these myths they bring with them is astounding.
Thousands of people are spared death or injury daily in the U.S. by a good-guy with a gun.
Albert, you are demonstrably wrong in most every one of your bald-faced and simplistic assumptions, you might wish to examine the extent of indoctrination as opposed to education in your schooling.
You disrupt the supply of guns to the street by focusing enforcement action on the repeat offenders. Identify the black market sellers, the criminals running guns. Go after them, build cases. Team the local, county, state and Federal prosecutors to work together getting maximum punishments.
Same deal for those using the black market guns in crime. The repeat offenders are the main problem. Focus on them.
Instead of trying to limit criminals by focusing on what honest and law-abiding people do.
Sort of like hey, we were attacked out of Afghanistan so let’s invade Iraq!!!
Get it?
Watch your doors and corners Sounds like a plan to me. Add to it, reinstate Bail as it was before this dumb arse “reform.”
Yes you can lockup enough to slow it way way down.
That and more executions
“Can’t arrest its way back to safety” The hell it can’t. Lock up the non-violent offenders in makeshift jails while they await trial and make them do some time… disrupt their lives. Lock up the violent offenders in the big house. Reinstitute the death penalty for murders. That’ll change things.
Comments are closed.