chuckwoww Posted January 21, 2007 Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 LOS ANGELES - A 14-year-old girl was killed by Hispanic gang members who police say were targeting blacks. A 9-year-old girl died after being hit by a stray bullet as gang members exchanged shots near her home. A cop was wounded in a gunbattle with a suspected gangster. The soaring violence is prompting police and politicians to promise one of the toughest crackdowns against gangs in city history. "This is the monster, this is what drives people's fears," said Deputy Chief Charles Beck, who oversees a South Los Angeles district where gang-related crime jumped 24 percent during the year ending in November. However, the effort has met skepticism in the city that has an estimated 700 gangs with 40,000 members â?? about four for every police officer â?? and that gave birth to some of the nation's most notorious gangs, including the Crips, Bloods and Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070121/ap_on_re_us/la_gangs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted January 21, 2007 Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 At one time there was no police. Then around about 1830 Police came into existence. The citizens helped the police and the police helped the citizens. The citizens were allowed to protect themselves. Today, the police are paramilitary. They do as they damn please. They choice easy targets such as you and me and forget the gangs because they don't want to get their asses kicked. If citizens were allowed to have guns and be allowed to protect themselves, and when needed, have the police back them up, the gangs would probably go away. Parents, employers, shop owners should be allowed to use physical force to discipline a person or at least be able to get them off of their property. But right now, the gangs tell us what to do. If we do not comply, the police come and arrest us. Figure it out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted January 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 "If citizens were allowed to have guns and be allowed to protect themselves, and when needed, have the police back them up, the gangs would probably go away." Hmmm. One could argue that the gangs ARE armed citizens protecting their neighbourhoods. I think that's the way they see it themselves. Obviously the police aren't doing their job and protecting law-abiding people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted January 21, 2007 Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 You can also look at it another way. After 9/11 I asked a Sherriff Deputy, "Now that people have less rights to protect and defend themselves, if 4 more planes were hijacked, would onlt 3 still reach their targets or would all 4 reach their targets?" It made him stop and think. Sure criminals have weapons and so do police. But if citizens were allowed to protect themselves, would criminals be so bold in what they do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted January 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 Sure criminals have weapons and so do police. But if citizens were allowed to protect themselves, would criminals be so bold in what they do? Hard to say. Criminals tend to pick the easy targets...old people, women with kids, drunks. I don't know if those people want to pack heat anyway. And what about airplanes? It would be crazy if everybody started blazing away just because some guy with a beard gets himself locked in the washroom. I am surprised convenience stores and gas station clerks don't shoot back more often. Are they allowed to have guns? I'm actually quite happy to see gangsters killing each other. But when innocent people get caught in the crossfire it doesn't seem right. When I lived in Oklahoma I kept a gun at home. Never had to use it. It was the local rednecks scared me more than any gangs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spirit_of_town_hall Posted January 21, 2007 Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 That was when populations were a lot smaller and more homogonous... STH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 [color:red]"Hard to say. Criminals tend to pick the easy targets...old people, women with kids, drunks. I don't know if those people want to pack heat anyway. [/color] Agree with you. Criminals pick the easy targets. But if the criminals know nobody can have weapons, doesn't it make their playing ground bigger? [color:red]"And what about airplanes? It would be crazy if everybody started blazing away just because some guy with a beard gets himself locked in the washroom. [/color] I do not know anybody with a concealed weapons permit, etc. who would be stupid enough to discharge a gun on a plane. But if the stewardess and stewards could provide themselves with protection such as pepper spray, stun guns, etc. that would make a difference. Even pilots armed with guns would get my nod if they could carry only low velocity ammo. If you have read the news, nobody has even considered this. STUPID! [color:red]"I am surprised convenience stores and gas station clerks don't shoot back more often. Are they allowed to have guns? [/color] Virtually all convenience stores and gas stations have a policy - no weapons. Locally, one man tried stopping a robbery in the store were he worked and was shot down dead. As for the police, they tell the stores they can not guarantee they can come each time there is a robbery.... but if you hire them as a security guard... the job can get done. Just another way of ripping of the tax payers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckwoww Posted January 22, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 "I do not know anybody with a concealed weapons permit, etc. who would be stupid enough to discharge a gun on a plane. But if the stewardess and stewards could provide themselves with protection such as pepper spray, stun guns, etc. that would make a difference. Even pilots armed with guns would get my nod if they could carry only low velocity ammo. If you have read the news, nobody has even considered this. STUPID!" Watch the CAPS pal if you want to continue this discussion. I don't keep up with all the gun laws and I'm happy to be informed, politely. So you think it should be OK for people with gun permits to take their weapons on planes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCgringo Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 another shooting in that area again last night.... I am sure it was a registered gun OC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian2 Posted January 22, 2007 Report Share Posted January 22, 2007 The problem is that legal gun owners kill themselves or others, deliberately or accidentally, at a ratio of several dozen to one that they kill bad guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.