New York marks fewest murders ever

[SmarterthanYou]

The constitution does not guarantee you the right to own vehicles.

yes, it does. A vehicle is nothing more than physical property. The framers were very expressive about the right to own property.

I should say the constitution does not specifically enumerate that right.

are you trying to make the argument that the only rights we have are those specifically enumerated?

 

[Topspin]

Jeffy, YOU are the one with condescending attitude, then you get all pissy when I simply PROVE YOU WRONG WITH FACTS. If you talk smack to someone, expect to get it back and don't whine about it. Like the typical intellectually bankrupt neocon, you go on the personal attack to try and dodge that you were proven wrong.

Bottom line: you're a cowardly little LIAR. You don't have the maturity to admit you're wrong about something on a format as anonymous as this. The chronology of the posts shows this.

NICE GED NEOCON BURN!!!

 

[USFREEDOM911]

The constitution does not guarantee you the right to own vehicles.

But it doesn't also forbid them, so why not??

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Okay you have a valid argument, I should say the constitution does not specifically enumerate that right.

Neither does it make Blacks free, or give women the right to vote.........SPECIFICALLY!!

 

[Jeff]

that's why 17,000 murders annually will never go way down, wingnuts don't think 17,000 murders are too much

Absolutely it is Topspin, but just as in the thread you started about the 3 year old, that child would of still been Killed it was a cops gun that killed him, had the Gun been secured the child would be alive, also out of 17,000 how many are done with legal guns? my guess would be not to many

Instead of outlawing guns maybe there should be stricter laws to those who have done everything legally but then act recklessly with those guns, and those caught with illegal guns punished harder ??

 

[Topspin]

Absolutely it is Topspin, but just as in the thread you started about the 3 year old, that child would of still been Killed it was a cops gun that killed him, had the Gun been secured the child would be alive, also out of 17,000 how many are done with legal guns? my guess would be not to many

Instead of outlawing guns maybe there should be stricter laws to those who have done everything legally but then act recklessly with those guns, and those caught with illegal guns punished harder ??

of course that's your guess, you check your NRA talking points card right.
it took me 3 seconds to find three accidental shootings with legal guns. I'd say most of them are committed with legal guns.

 

[Jeff]

of course that's your guess, you check your NRA talking points card right.
it took me 3 seconds to find three accidental shootings with legal guns. I'd say most of them are committed with legal guns.

Honestly topspin I don't much care for the NRA, and as they say my guess is as good as yours

I have owned guns all my life and have never had a accident happen to me personally, but I keep my guns secured, and my children( who also own guns) are taught at a young age that ya can't take the bullet back once it is fired, safety is the main issue here

But think about it, why would someone go aboutbuying his/hers gun legally to commit crimes with?

 

[Jeff]

NICE GED NEOCON BURN!!!

Burn ??????

LMAO , your buddy Libby is a pussy Topspin, he spins things to make himself look good and then when taken up on his tuff guy ways he places ya on ignore and crawls back into his pussy ways

I feel so burned from a guy named Libby

 

[Topspin]

Burn ??????

LMAO , your buddy Libby is a pussy Topspin, he spins things to make himself look good and then when taken up on his tuff guy ways he places ya on ignore and crawls back into his pussy ways

I feel so burned from a guy named Libby

He smoked your ass like a turkey

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

What Jarod, unable to refute the argument I've presented?

 

[Jarod]

You can own the latter two. It's even expressed and intended in the constitution.

But you cant, try to get one.....

 

[Jarod]

Pretty clear they intended your average citizen to be able to purchase some heavy duty stuff. Especially since we are one of the few nations that still retain the ability to grant Letters of Marque.

I still dont see how that gives you the right to own any weapon in existance. The point is that the right to bear arms shall not be abridged "shortened". Common sense reasonable restrictions or assault rifles and other arms is not in contravention of the Amendment, just like common sense reasonable restrictions or the right to free speech are not in contravention of the Constitution. Its not legal to yell fire in a crowded theater or to use words likely to cause a riot.

 

[Jeff]

He smoked your ass like a turkey

First off that may be were we disagree I don't want another Man's ass, and again he acted just as I knew he would , he changed things around to make himself look correct, you and I had been speaking of illegal guns, ooo hell no sense in trying to explain, LOL

I wonder if Libby's lover is Topspin, LMAO

 

[wiseones2cents]

Sorry, I'll use red....I just don't understand why we have all these options yet they don't work. Oh well.

Why cant you just{quote}{/quote} my replies and then answer them? This way I still have to go back and see what I am responding to..

I said I was wrong....don't expect me to kiss your ass about it. And yeah, 10 points to Rudy for promoting Bratton, but MINUS 100 for falsely taking credit for the man's work.

No NOW you admitted you were wrong. Moving along......

Pay attention: Maples developed Compstat, Bratton worked out further implementations of the plan with Maples (both men were under the Dinkins administration at the time)and took Maples and his idea along with him when he was promoted to Commish.....Dinkins Never had the chance to do anything further with what Bratton/Maples came up with, as he lost the election. I said this before.

No you pay attention: maple developed Charts of the Future. Bratton developed Compstat AFTER he became commissioner under Giuliani.

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compstat[/ame]

CompStat was started by Jack Maple when he was a Transit police officer. It was called Charts of the Future and was simple - it tracked crime through pins stuck in maps. Charts of the Future is credited with cutting subway crime by 27 percent. Chief of New York City Transit Police William J. Bratton was later appointed Police Commissioner by Rudolph Giuliani, and brought Maple's Charts of the Future with him. Not without a bit of struggle, he made the NYPD adopt it after it was updated as CompStat, and it was credited with bringing down crime by 60%. There was a CompStat meeting every month, and it was mandatory for people to attend. Basically, everyone humiliated everyone else into action. "Why were there so many murders (or rapes or robberies) in your precinct this month, and what did you do about it, hmm?" Although it was brutal, it was effective. The year after CompStat was adopted, 1995, murder was down to 1,181. In 2003, there were 596 murders - the lowest numbers since 1964.


Now can you be sure that Dinkins would have promoted Bratton to commissioner and have merged both Housing and Transit copstogether for Compstat to have progressed as much as it did? No.

You are just grasping at straws.

You're "logic" is based more on suppostion than accurate analysis of the facts

Unfortunately that would be you.

Oh blow it out your butt, Wise. Every blessed time you can't prove your point your start in with wild speculation and accusations.

Yawn. I've done more than prove my point. You have failed to prove yours. Why? Because your political loyalties are clouding your judgement. I have no political affiliations and my opinions are not slanted or biased. In fact? I dont like Guiliani, but acknowledge credit when credit is due.

I am not denying that Dinkins, Bratton and Maple deserve credit, but so does Giuliani. And as was noted? Compstat played a part, but it was not the entire reason crime was down.

Sorry to inform you, genius...but just because black folk are unemployed doesn't automatically mean they resort to crime. I wonder what bigoted rags/sites/jackasses are filling your head with that mindset...or are you coming up with this crap all by yourself? Bottom line: you couldn't refute the stats, so you just blow bigoted smoke.

In many cases it does. Where there is unemployement, there is a rise in crime. Even among whites. As far as your comments regarding bigotry? I have done more for the black community/black rights than you will ever do.

I didn't say "none", I said he deserved to be exposed for the exaggerated credit folk like you seem all to willing to give him. HE LIED....plain and simple. Deal with it.

Even if you can prove that he wanted full credit?Does not negate the fact that I stated that Guiliani was a major reason crime started to decrease and Bloombergs leadership, contributed to the trend.

This is what you deny and cannot prove. And the entire reason for this debate.

And you're willfully ignorant of the facts. Do some research as to what the PBA (if it weren't for them, Giuliani wouldn't have gotten into office) had to say about Rudy just before 9/11, and what the skinny was on NYC's fiscal situation towards the end of Pataki's term as well.

Can you post the facts?

Please dont post a link supporting Guiliani again as evidence.LOL

Fine: But what YOU are trying to do is deny the chicanery he's done on this instance...and I won't let you do it.

You have still yet to prove this chicanery.lol There seems to have been a clashing of egos, though Bratton resigned because he was under investigation for taking bribes(pretty much)accepting gifts and trips from corporations.

Spare me the BS, chuckles...either you can or can't refute what was written. Your opinion isn't worth squat....tell me exactly what is wrong in the article and why.

What was written was that the article states Giuliani was wrongly criticised. How does that support your position???

That was the OPINION of the writer, which did NOT reflect the FACTS that even he had to concede to in his review, which did not bode well for the Giuliani legacy. Evidently, you turn a blind eye to what you don't like. Here chuckles, read this and get educated before your fingers hit the keys next time. I don't feel silly, I feel embarassment on your behalf.

Do you still feel embarrased?lol

It states he had around 3000 police(more than likely in key areas.) And the article claims that was respectable.

Even this site states that Guiliani did what 2 mayors before himfailed to do.

Merge both Housing and Transit cops.

I apologize but I am being rushed out the door and cant read the entire article right now. But most has nothing to do with crime.

Therefore I still acknowledge, Guiliani played a significant role in reducing crime in New York.

 

[Topspin]

First off that may be were we disagree I don't want another Man's ass, and again he acted just as I knew he would , he changed things around to make himself look correct, you and I had been speaking of illegal guns, ooo hell no sense in trying to explain, LOL

I wonder if Libby's lover is Topspin, LMAO

just cause you righty toetappers like the man love doesn't mean liberals do.
You fudgepacker GED framer

 

[Jeff]

just cause you righty toetappers like the man love doesn't mean liberals do.
You fudgepacker GED framer

LMAO, you don't have to be embarrassed your amongst friends Topspin, you and Libby make a nice pair, LOL, I think y'all are actually rather cute, LOL

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

I still dont see how that gives you the right to own any weapon in existance. The point is that the right to bear arms shall not be abridged "shortened". Common sense reasonable restrictions or assault rifles and other arms is not in contravention of the Amendment, just like common sense reasonable restrictions or the right to free speech are not in contravention of the Constitution. Its not legal to yell fire in a crowded theater or to use words likely to cause a riot.

Of course you don't see the difference between the two. So I'll be happy to explain it for you.

First and foremost laws against the yelling of "FIRE!" in a crowded area, so often used to prop up other supposed "reasonable" rights restrictions, do not apply in this case. The yelling of "FIRE!" is an act that is shown to be harmful to others liberties and freedoms. By contrast my ownership of a machine gun/tank/helicopter is in no way, shape, or form, threatening anyone or their life or freedoms. So your argument already fails there.

Next my friend, we already have laws to handle to criminal misuse of firearms, so further adding to them offers little in returns to us as citizens.

Finally, such "reasonable" restrictions are against the very intent of the amendment, that citizens are armed so as to provide a bulwark against a oppressive government. Not to mention that the Supreme court has stated that the 2A does protect all firearms suitable for military service and that would be used by soldiers/militia members.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Why cant you just{quote}{/quote} my replies and then answer them? This way I still have to go back and see what I am responding to..



No NOW you admitted you were wrong. Moving along......



No you pay attention: maple developed Charts of the Future. Bratton developed Compstat AFTER he became commissioner under Giuliani.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compstat

CompStat was started by Jack Maple when he was a Transit police officer. It was called Charts of the Future and was simple - it tracked crime through pins stuck in maps. Charts of the Future is credited with cutting subway crime by 27 percent. Chief of New York City Transit Police William J. Bratton was later appointed Police Commissioner by Rudolph Giuliani, and brought Maple's Charts of the Future with him. Not without a bit of struggle, he made the NYPD adopt it after it was updated as CompStat, and it was credited with bringing down crime by 60%. There was a CompStat meeting every month, and it was mandatory for people to attend. Basically, everyone humiliated everyone else into action. "Why were there so many murders (or rapes or robberies) in your precinct this month, and what did you do about it, hmm?" Although it was brutal, it was effective. The year after CompStat was adopted, 1995, murder was down to 1,181. In 2003, there were 596 murders - the lowest numbers since 1964.


Now can you be sure that Dinkins would have promoted Bratton to commissioner and have merged both Housing and Transit copstogether for Compstat to have progressed as much as it did? No.

You are just grasping at straws.



Unfortunately that would be you.



Yawn. I've done more than prove my point. You have failed to prove yours. Why? Because your political loyalties are clouding your judgement. I have no political affiliations and my opinions are not slanted or biased. In fact? I dont like Guiliani, but acknowledge credit when credit is due.

I am not denying that Dinkins, Bratton and Maple deserve credit, but so does Giuliani. And as was noted? Compstat played a part, but it was not the entire reason crime was down.



In many cases it does. Where there is unemployement, there is a rise in crime. Even among whites. As far as your comments regarding bigotry? I have done more for the black community/black rights than you will ever do.




Even if you can prove that he wanted full credit?Does not negate the fact that I stated that Guiliani was a major reason crime started to decrease and Bloombergs leadership, contributed to the trend.

This is what you deny and cannot prove. And the entire reason for this debate.



Can you post the facts?

Please dont post a link supporting Guiliani again as evidence.LOL



You have still yet to prove this chicanery.lol There seems to have been a clashing of egos, though Bratton resigned because he was under investigation for taking bribes(pretty much)accepting gifts and trips from corporations.



What was written was that the article states Giuliani was wrongly criticised. How does that support your position???



Do you still feel embarrased?lol

It states he had around 3000 police(more than likely in key areas.) And the article claims that was respectable.

Even this site states that Guiliani did what 2 mayors before himfailed to do.

Merge both Housing and Transit cops.

I apologize but I am being rushed out the door and cant read the entire article right now. But most has nothing to do with crime.

Therefore I still acknowledge, Guiliani played a significant role in reducing crime in New York.

I've tried the multi quote thing...for some reason it doesn't work for me. No big deal.

As for your Wikipedia quote....it keeps leaving out the crucial bits of chronology and information that I've previously provided. Bottom line: you keep repeating yourself, which doesn't change ALL the facts once presented. You Wiki leaves out that Bratton and Maple worked together under Dinkins...and YOU cannot guarantee that Compstat wouldn't have been implemented had Dinkins been re-elected. What YOU AND I CAN BE ASSURED OF IS THE FACT THAT GIULIANI TOOK CREDIT FOR BRATTON'S WORK.

That is your problem...YOU don't want to acknowledge that Giuliani LIED. YOU don't want to acknowledge that Compstat along with NYC gun laws have worked together to lower NYC crime rate...both being of utmost importance. YOU want to minimalize Giluiani's faults..and history just won't let you. You distort what the article I presented stated, that Giuliani's merging of housing/transit was more of acquiesence of things already in motion as opposed to leadership brilliance. You just stubbornly repeat your claim regarding the stats about black crime given WITHOUT offering any alternative information for that particular incidence that would support your opinion....a prejudgement on your part that you stubbornly hold onto, no matter how you slice it. And if you read the article that says Giuliani was wrongly criticised, you would have noticed the amount of FACTS that were grudgingly acknowledged that coincide with what I'm saying.....the author just didn't like those facts and stated that many were irrelevent (in his opinion).

Bottom line: Giuliani can take credit for hiring Bratton, but NOT for innovations that Bratton was truly responsible for.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Rudy_Giuliani_Crime.htm


As usual Wise, you ignore/disregard facts that you don't like, you don't read carefully and comprehensively what disagrees/disproves your contentions and beliefs. You should lay off the condescending chuckles and declarations of others looking foolish when you yourself can't get deal with the WHOLE truth.

 

[wiseones2cents]

I've tried the multi quote thing...for some reason it doesn't work for me. No big deal.

As for your Wikipedia quote....it keeps leaving out the crucial bits of chronology and information that I've previously provided. Bottom line: you keep repeating yourself, which doesn't change ALL the facts once presented. You Wiki leaves out that Bratton and Maple worked together under Dinkins...and YOU cannot guarantee that Compstat wouldn't have been implemented had Dinkins been re-elected. What YOU AND I CAN BE ASSURED OF IS THE FACT THAT GIULIANI TOOK CREDIT FOR BRATTON'S WORK.

That is your problem...YOU don't want to acknowledge that Giuliani LIED. YOU don't want to acknowledge that Compstat along with NYC gun laws have worked together to lower NYC crime rate...both being of utmost importance. YOU want to minimalize Giluiani's faults..and history just won't let you. You distort what the article I presented stated, that Giuliani's merging of housing/transit was more of acquiesence of things already in motion as opposed to leadership brilliance. You just stubbornly repeat your claim regarding the stats about black crime given WITHOUT offering any alternative information for that particular incidence that would support your opinion....a prejudgement on your part that you stubbornly hold onto, no matter how you slice it. And if you read the article that says Giuliani was wrongly criticised, you would have noticed the amount of FACTS that were grudgingly acknowledged that coincide with what I'm saying.....the author just didn't like those facts and stated that many were irrelevent (in his opinion).

Bottom line: Giuliani can take credit for hiring Bratton, but NOT for innovations that Bratton was truly responsible for.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Rudy_Giuliani_Crime.htm


As usual Wise, you ignore/disregard facts that you don't like, you don't read carefully and comprehensively what disagrees/disproves your contentions and beliefs. You should lay off the condescending chuckles and declarations of others looking foolish when you yourself can't get deal with the WHOLE truth.

Actually. It does say they worked together. Maple worked under Bratton.

I cannot guarantee but it sounds like a safe bet, since according to the article you supplied? Both mayors before Guiliani tried unsuccesfully merging the housing and transit cops.That includes Dinkins. Therefore without this happening? Compstat would have not been able to fully evolve as it did.

No, I do acknowledge it was a number of factors(not only compstat as you claim). It seems YOU want to give full credit to Bratton and Compstat and absolutely none to Guiliani. That doesn't fly.

At the same time you complain that Guiliani took full credit. Fine. That was noted and he doesn't deserve full credit. Though he does deserve alot of credit. Regardless of whether he lied and other things he did wrong.This is where me and you disagree.

I'm not repeating anything. I'm just pointing out your errors.

P.S. Your style of debate is familair.Is this vincent from the wot board?lol

 

[Minister of Truth]

just cause you righty toetappers like the man love doesn't mean liberals do.
You fudgepacker GED framer

LOLZ Toppy hates the framers for writing the 2nd Amendment and being gun nuts.

This is known as a Freudian Slip.