Crime is Bush's fault
-
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
So you would prefer a police state?
No, because I disagree with you in that I don't think a larger police would make a substanial difference in crime, unless taken to extremes. I think a police force should be large enough to respond to crimes, not to prevent them. I just find it odd that you think increasing the police for would be effective, yet you would be against it. A well-armed and moral society (which requires morality instilled at a young age) is the key to low crime.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
You seem to be obsessed by weed. Were your parents hippies? Did you watch "Reefer Madness" too many times in college at your Young Republican/Hitler Youth meetings? Is that what made you this way?
I just have the sneaking suspicion that your "libertarian" stance comes from your fear of having your weed taken away. The libertarian party was pretty much founded on this concern.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Leave it to you to both miss the point and prove it in a single sentence.
I got your point, but you clearly missed mine.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
espeir wrote:
The libertarian party was pretty much founded on this concern.
what? the libertarian party stance may be permissive in this regard but the same is true of small government conservatives. check out Buckly's opinion on the subject.
Mike Dear NYT - the fact is, the founding fathers hung traitors. Vincent Reynolds: My opposition is as enlightened as your support, jackass. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
-
espeir wrote:
The libertarian party was pretty much founded on this concern.
what? the libertarian party stance may be permissive in this regard but the same is true of small government conservatives. check out Buckly's opinion on the subject.
Mike Dear NYT - the fact is, the founding fathers hung traitors. Vincent Reynolds: My opposition is as enlightened as your support, jackass. dennisd45: My view of the world is slightly more nuanced dennisd45 (the NAMBLA supporter) wrote: I know exactly what it means. So shut up you mother killing baby raper.
I think Libertarians have somewhat diversified their stance to something that resembles compulsory anarchy. However, if you go back to the earlier days of the Libertarian Party, legalizing pot was their primary platform. I saw a live political debate for a local office when I was 18 or so and the Libertarian candidate literally reframed every issue into pot. It was pretty funny.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
-
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
So you would prefer a police state?
No, because I disagree with you in that I don't think a larger police would make a substanial difference in crime, unless taken to extremes. I think a police force should be large enough to respond to crimes, not to prevent them. I just find it odd that you think increasing the police for would be effective, yet you would be against it. A well-armed and moral society (which requires morality instilled at a young age) is the key to low crime.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
You seem to be obsessed by weed. Were your parents hippies? Did you watch "Reefer Madness" too many times in college at your Young Republican/Hitler Youth meetings? Is that what made you this way?
I just have the sneaking suspicion that your "libertarian" stance comes from your fear of having your weed taken away. The libertarian party was pretty much founded on this concern.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Leave it to you to both miss the point and prove it in a single sentence.
I got your point, but you clearly missed mine.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
espeir wrote:
No, because I disagree with you in that I don't think a larger police would make a substanial difference in crime, unless taken to extremes. I think a police force should be large enough to respond to crimes, not to prevent them. I just find it odd that you think increasing the police for would be effective, yet you would be against it.
You can disagree with me all you want, but it remains a fact that increased police presence results in a corresponding decrease in violent crime. Non-violent crimes go underground, violent crimes go elsewhere, everyone in that community is happy, those in neighboring communities, not so much. Do you also find it odd that someone would consider a tourniquet to be an effective way of keeping an injured person from bleeding to death, while at the same time discarding it as a viable long-term solution?
espeir wrote:
A well-armed and moral society (which requires morality instilled at a young age) is the key to low crime.
I imagine you quietly humming "Onward, Christian Soldiers" to yourself as you typed that sentence. An educated, moral, ethical, and compassionate society is the key to low crime. If you have those, you don't need to be well-armed.
espeir wrote:
I just have the sneaking suspicion that your "libertarian" stance comes from your fear of having your weed taken away. The libertarian party was pretty much founded on this concern.
And the weed obsession continues...
-
espeir wrote:
No, because I disagree with you in that I don't think a larger police would make a substanial difference in crime, unless taken to extremes. I think a police force should be large enough to respond to crimes, not to prevent them. I just find it odd that you think increasing the police for would be effective, yet you would be against it.
You can disagree with me all you want, but it remains a fact that increased police presence results in a corresponding decrease in violent crime. Non-violent crimes go underground, violent crimes go elsewhere, everyone in that community is happy, those in neighboring communities, not so much. Do you also find it odd that someone would consider a tourniquet to be an effective way of keeping an injured person from bleeding to death, while at the same time discarding it as a viable long-term solution?
espeir wrote:
A well-armed and moral society (which requires morality instilled at a young age) is the key to low crime.
I imagine you quietly humming "Onward, Christian Soldiers" to yourself as you typed that sentence. An educated, moral, ethical, and compassionate society is the key to low crime. If you have those, you don't need to be well-armed.
espeir wrote:
I just have the sneaking suspicion that your "libertarian" stance comes from your fear of having your weed taken away. The libertarian party was pretty much founded on this concern.
And the weed obsession continues...
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
You can disagree with me all you want, but it remains a fact that increased police presence results in a corresponding decrease in violent crime. Non-violent crimes go underground, violent crimes go elsewhere, everyone in that community is happy, those in neighboring communities, not so much. Do you also find it odd that someone would consider a tourniquet to be an effective way of keeping an injured person from bleeding to death, while at the same time discarding it as a viable long-term solution?
They teach this in psych 101. Deterents such as the police are only effective so long as there is a belief that there is an immediate police presence. As such, there would have to be a substantial increase (not even doubling or tripling) of the police force in an area to see any noticable decrease in crime. Violent crime doesn't necessarily migrate and there's no evidence of that.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
I imagine you quietly humming "Onward, Christian Soldiers" to yourself as you typed that sentence. An educated, moral, ethical, and compassionate society is the key to low crime. If you have those, you don't need to be well-armed.
Education does not correlate to low crime. If that were the case, then prior to the 20th century there would have been limitless crime and the opposite is true. Moral erosion causes crime. Being well-armed discourages criminal from risking their life. That is constant throughout history.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
And the weed obsession continues...
I call 'em like I see 'em. I'll bet you're high right now.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
-
espeir wrote:
a pivot points in the late 1960's. Before then murder rates were consistently very low and afterwards they were high. I'm sure it's more than coincidence that this point in US history marked the rapid increase in divorce, abortion and moral permisiveness.
In the 1960s is also when praying and bible reading was taken out of schools.
A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity. - Sigmund Freud
Score: 1.0 (3 votes). wrote:
In the 1960s is also when praying and bible reading was taken out of schools.
The 1960s also included civil rights, equal rights for women, and the Peace Corps. Should we roll them all back? Do you think national disillusionment brought on by a presidential assassination, as well asyoung men drafted before they could vote and sent to fight a war of questionable justification, might have been factors as well? Do you think the matter might just be a tad more complex than "no Bibles in school"?
Score: 1.0 (3 votes). wrote:
A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.
Yeah, and obsession with weapons is a sign of overcompensation. Freud had issues.
-
Score: 1.0 (3 votes). wrote:
In the 1960s is also when praying and bible reading was taken out of schools.
The 1960s also included civil rights, equal rights for women, and the Peace Corps. Should we roll them all back? Do you think national disillusionment brought on by a presidential assassination, as well asyoung men drafted before they could vote and sent to fight a war of questionable justification, might have been factors as well? Do you think the matter might just be a tad more complex than "no Bibles in school"?
Score: 1.0 (3 votes). wrote:
A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.
Yeah, and obsession with weapons is a sign of overcompensation. Freud had issues.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
The 1960s also included civil rights, equal rights for women, and the Peace Corps. Should we roll them all back? Do you think national disillusionment brought on by a presidential assassination, as well asyoung men drafted before they could vote and sent to fight a war of questionable justification, might have been factors as well? Do you think the matter might just be a tad more complex than "no Bibles in school"?
It is clearly more complex and includes all the facets of the left-wing cultural expansion. Presidents and wars existed before the 1960's and had no such influence.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
-
Score: 1.0 (3 votes). wrote:
In the 1960s is also when praying and bible reading was taken out of schools.
The 1960s also included civil rights, equal rights for women, and the Peace Corps. Should we roll them all back? Do you think national disillusionment brought on by a presidential assassination, as well asyoung men drafted before they could vote and sent to fight a war of questionable justification, might have been factors as well? Do you think the matter might just be a tad more complex than "no Bibles in school"?
Score: 1.0 (3 votes). wrote:
A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.
Yeah, and obsession with weapons is a sign of overcompensation. Freud had issues.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Do you think the matter might just be a tad more complex than "no Bibles in school"?
I never said i thought otherwise.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Yeah, and obsession with weapons is a sign of overcompensation. Freud had issues.
Thanks for clearing that up for me. :rolleyes:
A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity. - Sigmund Freud
-
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
You can disagree with me all you want, but it remains a fact that increased police presence results in a corresponding decrease in violent crime. Non-violent crimes go underground, violent crimes go elsewhere, everyone in that community is happy, those in neighboring communities, not so much. Do you also find it odd that someone would consider a tourniquet to be an effective way of keeping an injured person from bleeding to death, while at the same time discarding it as a viable long-term solution?
They teach this in psych 101. Deterents such as the police are only effective so long as there is a belief that there is an immediate police presence. As such, there would have to be a substantial increase (not even doubling or tripling) of the police force in an area to see any noticable decrease in crime. Violent crime doesn't necessarily migrate and there's no evidence of that.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
I imagine you quietly humming "Onward, Christian Soldiers" to yourself as you typed that sentence. An educated, moral, ethical, and compassionate society is the key to low crime. If you have those, you don't need to be well-armed.
Education does not correlate to low crime. If that were the case, then prior to the 20th century there would have been limitless crime and the opposite is true. Moral erosion causes crime. Being well-armed discourages criminal from risking their life. That is constant throughout history.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
And the weed obsession continues...
I call 'em like I see 'em. I'll bet you're high right now.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
espeir wrote:
Violent crime doesn't necessarily migrate and there's no evidence of that.
Hidden crime doesn't migrate or decrease. Street crime certainly does. The evidence is particularly compelling for areas in the US and UK that are put under video surveillance.
espeir wrote:
Education does not correlate to low crime. If that were the case, then prior to the 20th century there would have been limitless crime and the opposite is true. Moral erosion causes crime. Being well-armed discourages criminal from risking their life. That is constant throughout history.
Sure it does. Education correlates to employment, employment inversely correlates to drime. Prior to the 20th century, the education/employment correlation was much weaker. Being well-employed, well-educated, and well-parented keeps people from being criminals in the first place. Then you don't need to defend yourself. Your right to bear arms remains a right, but is no longer a necessity.
espeir wrote:
I call 'em like I see 'em. I'll bet you're high right now.
I'm riding a powerful buzz of good music, caffiene, and intellectual superiority. You should try the first two sometime. Or find a nearby grade school or primate house and try the third.
-
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
The 1960s also included civil rights, equal rights for women, and the Peace Corps. Should we roll them all back? Do you think national disillusionment brought on by a presidential assassination, as well asyoung men drafted before they could vote and sent to fight a war of questionable justification, might have been factors as well? Do you think the matter might just be a tad more complex than "no Bibles in school"?
It is clearly more complex and includes all the facets of the left-wing cultural expansion. Presidents and wars existed before the 1960's and had no such influence.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
espeir wrote:
It is clearly more complex and includes all the facets of the left-wing cultural expansion. Presidents and wars existed before the 1960's and had no such influence.
Obviously, if only the hippies and Communists hadn't questioned the upstanding, Bible-based, family-oriented morality that led us into Viet Nam, there would be no crime today. Not even thoughtcrime. Everything would be doubleplusgood.
-
espeir wrote:
Violent crime doesn't necessarily migrate and there's no evidence of that.
Hidden crime doesn't migrate or decrease. Street crime certainly does. The evidence is particularly compelling for areas in the US and UK that are put under video surveillance.
espeir wrote:
Education does not correlate to low crime. If that were the case, then prior to the 20th century there would have been limitless crime and the opposite is true. Moral erosion causes crime. Being well-armed discourages criminal from risking their life. That is constant throughout history.
Sure it does. Education correlates to employment, employment inversely correlates to drime. Prior to the 20th century, the education/employment correlation was much weaker. Being well-employed, well-educated, and well-parented keeps people from being criminals in the first place. Then you don't need to defend yourself. Your right to bear arms remains a right, but is no longer a necessity.
espeir wrote:
I call 'em like I see 'em. I'll bet you're high right now.
I'm riding a powerful buzz of good music, caffiene, and intellectual superiority. You should try the first two sometime. Or find a nearby grade school or primate house and try the third.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Hidden crime doesn't migrate or decrease. Street crime certainly does. The evidence is particularly compelling for areas in the US and UK that are put under video surveillance.
Link?
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Sure it does. Education correlates to employment, employment inversely correlates to drime. Prior to the 20th century, the education/employment correlation was much weaker. Being well-employed, well-educated, and well-parented keeps people from being criminals in the first place. Then you don't need to defend yourself. Your right to bear arms remains a right, but is no longer a necessity.
This goes back to the dichotomy between the rich and poor. You can make a much better living today than 200 years ago being uneducated in either case. However, today an XBox is perceived as a necessity and if you don't have what the entitlement culture promises, then you go out and take it. That factor can be eliminated, but morality cannot.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Or find a nearby grade school or primate house and try the third.
So that's where you like to hang out? I must admit that it's a creepy.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
-
espeir wrote:
It is clearly more complex and includes all the facets of the left-wing cultural expansion. Presidents and wars existed before the 1960's and had no such influence.
Obviously, if only the hippies and Communists hadn't questioned the upstanding, Bible-based, family-oriented morality that led us into Viet Nam, there would be no crime today. Not even thoughtcrime. Everything would be doubleplusgood.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
pstanding, Bible-based, family-oriented morality that led us into Viet Nam
Ummmm...The left actually did lead us into that war. Conservatives (Nixon) withdrew.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
-
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
pstanding, Bible-based, family-oriented morality that led us into Viet Nam
Ummmm...The left actually did lead us into that war. Conservatives (Nixon) withdrew.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
espeir wrote:
Ummmm...The left actually did lead us into that war. Conservatives (Nixon) withdrew.
I bet this will be voted down very soon. The truth hurts. :)
A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity. - Sigmund Freud
-
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Hidden crime doesn't migrate or decrease. Street crime certainly does. The evidence is particularly compelling for areas in the US and UK that are put under video surveillance.
Link?
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Sure it does. Education correlates to employment, employment inversely correlates to drime. Prior to the 20th century, the education/employment correlation was much weaker. Being well-employed, well-educated, and well-parented keeps people from being criminals in the first place. Then you don't need to defend yourself. Your right to bear arms remains a right, but is no longer a necessity.
This goes back to the dichotomy between the rich and poor. You can make a much better living today than 200 years ago being uneducated in either case. However, today an XBox is perceived as a necessity and if you don't have what the entitlement culture promises, then you go out and take it. That factor can be eliminated, but morality cannot.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Or find a nearby grade school or primate house and try the third.
So that's where you like to hang out? I must admit that it's a creepy.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
espeir wrote:
Link?
I don't have time to recap my reading for your benefit. Google "surveillance displaces crime". Consider British police officer Wesley Sharp's point: "Certainly the crime goes somewhere. I don’t believe that just because you’ve got cameras in a city centre that everyone says ’Oh well, we’re going to give up crime and get a job.’"
espeir wrote:
This goes back to the dichotomy between the rich and poor. You can make a much better living today than 200 years ago being uneducated in either case. However, today an XBox is perceived as a necessity and if you don't have what the entitlement culture promises, then you go out and take it. That factor can be eliminated, but morality cannot.
Reducing everything to morality, and insisting that church -- your church -- is the sole arbiter of morality, is very simple-minded.
espeir wrote:
So that's where you like to hang out? I must admit that it's a creepy.
Guess you would find the primate house creepy. Lower primates looking out, higher primates looking in, and you in the middle providing unwilling, but nonetheless compelling evidence for the theory of evolution.
-
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
pstanding, Bible-based, family-oriented morality that led us into Viet Nam
Ummmm...The left actually did lead us into that war. Conservatives (Nixon) withdrew.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
espeir wrote:
Ummmm...The left actually did lead us into that war. Conservatives (Nixon) withdrew.
Congratulations on an as yet unbroken string of points missed.
-
espeir wrote:
Ummmm...The left actually did lead us into that war. Conservatives (Nixon) withdrew.
I bet this will be voted down very soon. The truth hurts. :)
A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity. - Sigmund Freud
Score: 1.0 (3 votes). wrote:
I bet this will be voted down very soon. The truth hurts.
What truth? Who is claiming that the right took us to war? Johnson is responsible for escalating the conflict. Kennedy might have ended it, had he lived. Bush got us into Iraq, somebody from some party will get us out. Who started the war has no bearing on its morality or justification. The point I was making had nothing to do with right and left, and everything to do with right and wrong. That is the aspect of the war that contributed to the disillusionment of the sixties.
-
espeir wrote:
Link?
I don't have time to recap my reading for your benefit. Google "surveillance displaces crime". Consider British police officer Wesley Sharp's point: "Certainly the crime goes somewhere. I don’t believe that just because you’ve got cameras in a city centre that everyone says ’Oh well, we’re going to give up crime and get a job.’"
espeir wrote:
This goes back to the dichotomy between the rich and poor. You can make a much better living today than 200 years ago being uneducated in either case. However, today an XBox is perceived as a necessity and if you don't have what the entitlement culture promises, then you go out and take it. That factor can be eliminated, but morality cannot.
Reducing everything to morality, and insisting that church -- your church -- is the sole arbiter of morality, is very simple-minded.
espeir wrote:
So that's where you like to hang out? I must admit that it's a creepy.
Guess you would find the primate house creepy. Lower primates looking out, higher primates looking in, and you in the middle providing unwilling, but nonetheless compelling evidence for the theory of evolution.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
I don't have time to recap my reading for your benefit. Google "surveillance displaces crime". Consider British police officer Wesley Sharp's point: "Certainly the crime goes somewhere. I don’t believe that just because you’ve got cameras in a city centre that everyone says ’Oh well, we’re going to give up crime and get a job.’"
Done. And I see nothing except for blog references claiming "numerous studies have shown" but no actualy studies. However, the Department of Justice [^] states: "On the other hand, the growth in CCTV installations demonstrates a general consensus that the presence of cameras seems to deter crime. Moreover, so far no one has been able to prove definitively that the use of cameras in one area displaces crime to neighboring areas."
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Reducing everything to morality, and insisting that church -- your church -- is the sole arbiter of morality, is very simple-minded.
Why? You claim that your church's morality is superior to mine. Only I have to conform to your church whereas you do not have to conform to mine. Anyway, not everything is reduced to morality, but that (crime) is the topic of discussion. Immoral people do commit crime. Immoral people do not. Educated people do commit crime, however.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Guess you would find the primate house creepy. Lower primates looking out, higher primates looking in, and you in the middle providing unwilling, but nonetheless compelling evidence for the theory of evolution.
I guess I see how you could find the creepiness of hanging out at grade schools inexplicable.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45
-
espeir wrote:
I would think
Your thoughts are of little import, motoring offences are NOT criminal offences.
Truth is the subjection of reality to an individuals perception
In Arizona, 20mph above the posted limit becomes a 'criminal' violation as opposed to a 'civil' or 'moving' violation.
-
espeir wrote:
Ummmm...The left actually did lead us into that war. Conservatives (Nixon) withdrew.
Congratulations on an as yet unbroken string of points missed.
You're constantly trying to excuse your idiocy by saying that. But it only digs you deeper into your own hole.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
-
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
I don't have time to recap my reading for your benefit. Google "surveillance displaces crime". Consider British police officer Wesley Sharp's point: "Certainly the crime goes somewhere. I don’t believe that just because you’ve got cameras in a city centre that everyone says ’Oh well, we’re going to give up crime and get a job.’"
Done. And I see nothing except for blog references claiming "numerous studies have shown" but no actualy studies. However, the Department of Justice [^] states: "On the other hand, the growth in CCTV installations demonstrates a general consensus that the presence of cameras seems to deter crime. Moreover, so far no one has been able to prove definitively that the use of cameras in one area displaces crime to neighboring areas."
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Reducing everything to morality, and insisting that church -- your church -- is the sole arbiter of morality, is very simple-minded.
Why? You claim that your church's morality is superior to mine. Only I have to conform to your church whereas you do not have to conform to mine. Anyway, not everything is reduced to morality, but that (crime) is the topic of discussion. Immoral people do commit crime. Immoral people do not. Educated people do commit crime, however.
Vincent Reynolds wrote:
Guess you would find the primate house creepy. Lower primates looking out, higher primates looking in, and you in the middle providing unwilling, but nonetheless compelling evidence for the theory of evolution.
I guess I see how you could find the creepiness of hanging out at grade schools inexplicable.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45
espeir wrote:
Done. And I see nothing except for blog references claiming "numerous studies have shown" but no actualy studies. However, the Department of Justice [^] states: "On the other hand, the growth in CCTV installations demonstrates a general consensus that the presence of cameras seems to deter crime. Moreover, so far no one has been able to prove definitively that the use of cameras in one area displaces crime to neighboring areas."
Feel free to install a PDF viewer and dig away. Or visit your local library or bookstore. Also, feel free to rebut common sense. Do you actually believe that police presence reforms criminals?
espeir wrote:
Why? You claim that your church's morality is superior to mine. Only I have to conform to your church whereas you do not have to conform to mine. Anyway, not everything is reduced to morality, but that (crime) is the topic of discussion. Immoral people do commit crime. Immoral people do not. Educated people do commit crime, however.
My church? Which church would that be? Oh, that's right, you see every school of thought as a church, and the world as a system of competing churches. How very...religious of you. Moral people do not commit crime? What do you mean by "moral person"? What are the requirements? Do moral people commit sin?
-
You're constantly trying to excuse your idiocy by saying that. But it only digs you deeper into your own hole.
"I curse economic prosperity as it puts an end to much-needed poverty, famine and pestilence." -dennisd45 "I fully support Communists in key positions of our government. I believe that they contribute positively to the liberal ideal." -dennisd45 "Liberals do not exist. You invented them to facilitate your strawman arguments." -dennisd45 "The Communist Manifest was written 150 years ago. It has been rigorously tested and is accepted by left"
You insist on arguing political issues on their morality, and issues of morality, on their politics. That was my point. You missed it. Again. You should just learn to live with your shortcomings, monkey boy.