OAKTOWN so wild even cops are running scared


Recommended Posts

Guns will be there regardless. They can be smuggled like drugs, and anyone with decent metalworking skills can make a submachine gun from hardware store parts. Seriously.

Also, because liberals promote a social welfare state where slackers and criminals like these can get by without accepting an education, working or taking responsibility for their actions. Repeat for a few generations and you have Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, Oakland and East St. Louis.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont throw a blanket statement like that - tell us why cutting welfare is not the answer, tell us why this will exist, in your opinion, if there was no welfare.

They will still be poor in a place that has virtually no authority, with exactly the same level of access to (insert bad thing here - illegal guns, drugs, etc) . Simple, really. Chopping welfare will have zero effect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is such a multi-headed beast, each variable more convoluted than the next.  Nobody here has the answer.  Everything seems simple when you dont know the details.

For instance, the comments about education, you need to consider the kind of "teachers" in Oakland, and places like it.  Not exactly the cream of the crop.  Many are not suited to teach, some not suited to be in general public, but the education system administration cant get anyone of quality.  Then considering the bad tax base in poverty stricken areas, even if they wanted to get an all-star teaching staff, they couldnt afford it.  Like so many things, the more you look @ the details, the more difficult it gets to find a solution.

I honestly wonder, what the solution will be, if any.  This could be what many other areas eventually become instead of being a isolated issue.

I know Im not saying anything that everyone doesnt already know, I am just throwing out the fact, nobody has the answer(s).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, just wow.

I literally cannot believe these people are getting away with half of what they seem to be getting away with? Perhaps I am just niave, but why are the police not coming back in numbers to arrest these people? I'm not stupid enough to think that the first incedint that the police should have attempted to do anything, but surely that is a get to safety, call in for additional support and then go back and teach these people how to behave?

I know there are discussions out there about whether Jail actually does anything these days in terms of rehibilitation, but right now surely the general public would be better off with them locked up then out doing this? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

Personally, I would arrive with a SWAT squad. Record EVERYTHING for no lawsuits from stupid families. Give them a 2 minute warning to stop, spread out, or cease. If they do not comply, shoot to kill. Simple as that.

Don't even arrest them if they do leave. Just ask them to stop or die. Plain and simple. I think they are smart enough to pay attention to that.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And some here wonder why ordinary people feel they need to carry firearms for protection. The cops can't/won't protect you, as evidenced in this video and others, and court decisions actually say THEY DON'T HAVE TO. That's right kiddies, THERE IS NO 'DUTY TO PROTECT'!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't even arrest them if they do leave. Just ask them to stop or die. Plain and simple. I think they are smart enough to pay attention to that.

You know they aren't...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They will still be poor in a place that has virtually no authority, with exactly the same level of access to (insert bad thing here - illegal guns, drugs, etc) . Simple, really. Chopping welfare will have zero effect. 

I would think that cutting the funding of mischievous individuals would have some effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Love the idea that its those darn "liberals" faults again.

This exists in many countries the world over. Heck even here in Scotland.

I live in Glasgow and this city is 2/3rd dilapidated, the entire East and North are almost no-man`s lands unless you want beaten, mugged and stabbed.

Part of the problem is that often in these area`s the social norm is to act out, seek attention, be violent and worse, which with time only worsen`s as the "norm" spreads.

I`m sure I read an article last year maybe in which researchers had mapped how these "norms" spread through a populace.

 


What you see in the videos above minus guns and with the addition of knifes and meat cleavers is invocative of a typical night in Glasgow.

Its disinformation, and repugnant believes going un-stemmed that create`s these beds of low brow uninformed stupidity.

Sadly there is no short term fix and it takes generations of educational reform and social guidance to right these wrongs.

Blaming it on Liberals or Right Wingers = Stupidity. This is a sociological problem that exists in almost every modern day society and government.

It is not special or intrinsic to any one place, city, county or nation.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you got that right.  It was the conservative that was fighting hard to bear arm.  Liberal are trying to get guns off the hands of criminals and those who should  not have the gun.  Conservatives do everything to destroy that.  Now you blame what you saw on the video on liberal?

Sorry but you're wrong about the issue. The liberals don't want the police to be aggressive, therefore they can't do ######. Criminals will always be able to get guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ precisely.

In Detroit the new (black) police chief is raising holy hell with the gangs via Operation Restore Order 300 man raids, and right away the city liberals/progressives were bemoaning military tactics, police overreach, etc. etc. Whatever large moves the cops made, they harp on it.

Disgusting.

Meanwhile, the neighborhood folks are on their porches loudly cheering the cops and making them sandwiches during the raids.

There is a huge disconnect between liberals/progressives and the really real world.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ precisely.

In Detroit the new (black) police chief is raising holy hell with the gangs via Operation Restore Order 300 man raids, and right away the city liberals/progressives were bemoaning military tactics, police overreach, etc. etc. Whatever large moves the cops made, they harp on it.

Disgusting.

Meanwhile, the neighborhood folks are on their porches loudly cheering the cops and making them sandwiches during the raids.

There is a huge disconnect between liberals/progressives and the really real world.

Honestly, why was it important to interject the race of the police chief here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because white police chiefs in a black majority city are usually the ones who get such treatment. This because their ethnicity makes them automatically "racist." They couldn't drop the race card on Chief Craig, he's black and started his career here, so they played every other card; militaristic, overreaching etc.

The point is any chief who actually hits the gangs etc. where it hurts is a target for the libs and progressives. Only the specific tactics change. Its enough to make one vomit.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont throw a blanket statement like that - tell us why cutting welfare is not the answer, tell us why this will exist, in your opinion, if there was no welfare.

Here is my opinion.

 

Those who are willing to treat law enforcement with such contempt, brandish guns, break laws and so forth...they will do it whether welfare is around or not.  You can't tell me these scumbags would suddenly have morals that will stop them from selling drugs, or robbing others for money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think you got that right.  It was the conservative that was fighting hard to bear arm.  Liberal are trying to get guns off the hands of criminals and those who should  not have the gun.  Conservatives do everything to destroy that.  Now you blame what you saw on the video on liberal?

I don't want to turn this into an ideological flame war but it is important to draw a distinction between gun control and actually controlling gun violence. By definition, law abiding citizens will comply with gun control laws, criminals will ignore all gun control laws. Criminals have no reverence for or fear of laws, otherwise they would not do what makes them criminals to begin with. Violent crime is not a conservative vs. liberal issue, it is an issue of 1) Understanding that no law that is passed will change the behavior of a criminal and 2) guns are not the cause of the problem, in a world without guns criminals would use the next weapon that strikes the most fear into people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is my opinion.

 

Those who are willing to treat law enforcement with such contempt, brandish guns, break laws and so forth...they will do it whether welfare is around or not.  You can't tell me these scumbags would suddenly have morals that will stop them from selling drugs, or robbing others for money.

You're right, they wouldn't 'suddenly' have morals, this problem has been growing for decades and any fix for it would obviously not happen overnight. You are exhibiting a trait held by many in your argument that is arguably one of the most deplorable traits that ever came out of the 20th century - you must have instant gratification (one of society's other major issues). Just because the suggested solution doesn't fix a problem right away, you assume it must be the wrong answer, therefore, like many others (including congress) will sit on your laurels waiting for the day that a magic wand solution comes by. Meanwhile the problem is getting worse by the day making any proposed solution that much more difficult to implement. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

>

Violent crime is not a conservative vs. liberal issue, it is an issue of 1) Understanding that no law that is passed will change the behavior of a criminal and 2) guns are not the cause of the problem, in a world without guns criminals would use the next weapon that strikes the most fear into people.

3) criminals will always be able to (a) obtain guns via the black market, or (b) make them, which is far easier than most people think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because white police chiefs in a black majority city are usually the ones who get such treatment. This because their ethnicity makes them automatically "racist." They couldn't drop the race card on Chief Craig, he's black and started his career here, so they played every other card; militaristic, overreaching etc.

The point is any chief who actually hits the gangs etc. where it hurts is a target for the libs and progressives. Only the specific tactics change. Its enough to make one vomit.

There are always groups who are unhappy with the police. Sometimes justified. Sometimes not. The only thing you have stated is seeing this constant.

Race was irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think that cutting the funding of mischievous individuals would have some effect.

How? It would just drive them to commit further crimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They don't need anything to drive them to crime. Most of them have been doing it habitually since elementary school.

Oh, I know, but the suggestion that taking money from people already living in poverty is going to somehow put them on a path to rehabilitation is outrageous and I just wanted to point that out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's relevant to the specific tactics used by the libs and progressives here. They adapt them in order to serve their protected classes, which often includes criminals.

I am not sure what you are attempting to say other than certain people complain about increased police tactics. This may be true, but it has nothing to do with race.

People complain about the actions of the police and police commissioner irrespective of race. So you could have stated your view of those latest without including the race of the chief.

It seems you are attempting to use race to justify the actions of the police chief. As if to say the tactics can't be excessive because he is of the same race that may be the people who typically are at the front lines of police tactics.

I would hope not. If a white person attacked another white person it wouldn't be OK because the attacker is white. Likewise, it wouldn't be OK if a police chief authorized excessive force against white people because he is white as well. I am not saying the tactics used here are excessive, but my point is simple. Interjection of race here was useless at least and race baiting at worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.