[Number 10 GI]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

Easy, just drive outside the city and buy your gun. Google is your friend.....

What does going outside of the city have to do with purchasing a firearm? In Illinois, not just Chicago, you must have a FOID card (Firearm Owner Identification Card) issued by the state after a background check has been performed. This process is supposed to be completed in 10 days but can stretch to 4 months. When a person purchases a firearm the dealer is required to perform another background type check called a Firearm Transfer Inquiry and you cannot take possession until this check has been completed. Then after all this background checking you have to wait 72 hours before you can take the firearm home. In Chicago a resident must in addition to all this attend a 5 hour firearm safety instruction course. A Chicago resident must apply for a Chicago firearm permit. When the Chicago resident goes to buy a firearm he HAS TO GO outside the city as gun sales are prohibited in the city. This does not mean the gun buyer is prohibited from owning a gun in the city of Chicago. Then the gun must be registered with the city government.
Now the criminal element doesn't comply with these laws at all, they just buy the gun illegally from other criminals that supply guns or steal them. Maybe you need a better search engine than google.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

How do you account for all the minority groups that came here within the last 100 years were discriminated against and have managed to be successful?

Not much understanding about the POINT of my post. Which was like the expression, "the shoe on the other foot". I tried to point out that a person needs to look at today from the view of the History of the other person - in this case, our Black and brown citizens. They basically got "seriously mistreated" for 200 years.

As to immigrant groups for the last 75 years - rich people always want slaves, whether they pay them only room and board and whip them - or they pay them minimum wages to maintain their profits and just put them in hard labor or use them to clean hotels and casinos - it is all the same / same!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by John41

By your own words whites are technologically superior, not LUCKY

They were lucky that they were technologically superior. BUT, they did NOT have to take advantage of it. They could have been REAL Christians and NOT taken advantage of their fellow human beings. They could have co-existed and held out a hand to help them up. Survival of the fittest may work best for humans when they form co-operative groups. And to this very day, that can be seen.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by AJ32162

Contrary to your "theory", South Africa which has been ruled by the black majority since the end of apartheid 30 years ago has been in steady decline with rampant corruption and poverty. Name just one black governed country where you would like to live...even as a black person.

The US experience and experiment has much to be justifiably proud of. But, much of its accomplishment is owed to the fortunate luck in GEOGRAPHY of having, probably, the world's greatest amount of navigatable rivers and lakes in addition to almost unlimited natural resources. So corruption would naturally be less. Also, 2 large oceans kept enemies and wars away for part of US History. More of the pie - so less need to fight over it compared with countries with less natural resources.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by AJ32162

So, what you seem to be confirming is that gun control laws are nearly worthless and people find ways of getting around them.

The opposite point, more states should have laws keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. We are NOT the wild West anymore.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Justus

It occurs that, in openly sharing your low opinion of Law Enforcement and Whites in general, it seems you assume all LEOs are white. Do you have the same opinion of Law Enforcement Officers who are Black, Latino, and of other ethnicities, many of whom have had to kill felons in the line of duty? Just asking...

No such LOW opinion of anyone. It was just a thought experiment to INCREASE the opinions of people on this forum toward Black and Brown people! That seemed to me to be needed very much.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

The US experience and experiment has much to be justifiably proud of. But, much of its accomplishment is owed to the fortunate luck in GEOGRAPHY of having, probably, the world's greatest amount of navigatable rivers and lakes in addition to almost unlimited natural resources. So corruption would naturally be less. Also, 2 large oceans kept enemies and wars away for part of US History. More of the pie - so less need to fight over it compared with countries with less natural resources.

Sounds like some folks like to make a lot of excuses for plain old bad behavior.
I get it. You are saying they don't have the ability to think for themselves and discern the difference between right and wrong. I don't agree. I do not believe that the history of my predecessors should influence how I conduct myself. I believe that we are all taught right from wrong, either by the easy way of parental training, or by our education system or just by experience of finding out what the repercussions are when you break the rules. A person's color has not been an excuse for bad behavior for decades. Every charity imagined has been offered to minorities, to include job preference (front of the line privilege) or affirmative action, welfare, housing, etc. Being from a multi-ethnicity family, we do not allow bad behavior based on perception of not being treated fairly. Most Americans are color blind UNTIL one draws attention to their ethnicity in an effort to manipulate the system.

[Kenswing]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

The opposite point, more states should have laws keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. We are NOT the wild West anymore.

ALL states ALREADY have laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. The problem is by definition criminals are criminals because they don't follow the laws.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

The opposite point, more states should have laws keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. We are NOT the wild West anymore.

I do not know of any states that allow criminals to own firearms. Just because the law prohibits them from possessing firearms does not mean that a criminal will honor that law. That is why they are called "criminals."

Edited: Must have been posting at the same time as Kenswing. Like minds, like thoughts.

[Justus]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

No such LOW opinion of anyone. It was just a thought experiment to INCREASE the opinions of people on this forum toward Black and Brown people! That seemed to me to be needed very much.

Since you strongly imply that the TOTV posters herein are essentially bigoted and unenlightened, please tell me...As an apparent recent student of American History, whose intent is only to educate those of us less knowledgeable, you truly must know what NINA was to Irish immigrants, and WOP was to Italians at the turn of the 20th century for decades. But to paraphrase the celebrated Toni Morrison, "And Still, They Rise"...

My original question, to which you have not responded, still stands...your opinion would be appreciated in light, especially, of the recent conviction of a Black police officer in Minneapolis, in the cold-blooded murder of an unarmed white woman who had called 911 asking for help.

[amexsbow]

Originally Posted by 8notes

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.

As far as the above suggestion let us be practical. A police officer carries, a gun&holster/ extra clips of ammo&holster, handcuffs&holster, radio&holster, and in addition you want him to carry a taser&holster and pepperspray&holster.

Do people really believe any person is capable of carrying all of this equipment on his person and being able to function? In addition at night he has to carry a flashlight.

In addition to being required to carry a specific amount of equipment the law enforcement agencies today have been inundated with lawsuits to be "inclusive" as a result physical standards have been reduced to a point of ridiculousness. You now have officers who are not physically able to restrain an average criminal. Add to this the lack of personnel and the rise of "one-person" cars responding to calls has shown an increase in officer injuries and officer shootings.

Speaking from experience as a retired L.E.O. commander I can attest to the fact that physically incapable officers who get into dangerous situations are more likely to use their weapon or have their weapon taken away from them and injured or killed with their own weapon.

Just as in sports, it is always easier to play the game from the sidelines and second guess the actions by others after the fact.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Byte1

Sounds like some folks like to make a lot of excuses for plain old bad behavior.
I get it. You are saying they don't have the ability to think for themselves and discern the difference between right and wrong. I don't agree. I do not believe that the history of my predecessors should influence how I conduct myself. I believe that we are all taught right from wrong, either by the easy way of parental training, or by our education system or just by experience of finding out what the repercussions are when you break the rules. A person's color has not been an excuse for bad behavior for decades. Every charity imagined has been offered to minorities, to include job preference (front of the line privilege) or affirmative action, welfare, housing, etc. Being from a multi-ethnicity family, we do not allow bad behavior based on perception of not being treated fairly. Most Americans are color blind UNTIL one draws attention to their ethnicity in an effort to manipulate the system.

I appreciate your comments on this matter. You are giving voice to, probably, the majority opinion here in TV Land. It is basically a law and order platform, while also noting White grievances about affirmative action and Welfare (which has long stirred too much emotions). I find the Welfare issue a little strange because many whites end up needing welfare and it has had many success stories of lifting up people by their "bootstraps". Of course, there are abuses. But, the abuses of one upper-level con-man like Bernie Madoff are MUCH greater than the Welfare abuses of hundreds of people lower on the economic ladder. And the IRS does NOT catch every Bernie Madoff type. They probably miss 10 for each one they catch. The so-called "Welfare Queens" are a propaganda ploy by the rich to direct attention away from themselves. Also, it gets used to sway voters.

Also, you may consider History to be inconsequential. People do tend to think that History begins with their particular era - but I think otherwise. It is especially important in this discussion about race and Police action. That is why I wrote a scenario where Blacks and Whites switched their Historic role as to who was on top. You can also look at the plight of the Native Americans, which are much worse off than Blacks or Browns - and again you MUST talk History to understand that. A problem will never get a solution until it is 1st admitted to be a problem. A Police Force is at the intersection of it all - crime, punishment, tax system, the prison system, wealth disparity, global warming, and health care. I believe that the US makes MANY mistakes and WILL NOT take the time to look to other counties that better solve these problems. Part of the problem goes back to the HISTORY of the US frontier and frontier philosophies.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Kenswing

ALL states ALREADY have laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. The problem is by definition criminals are criminals because they don't follow the laws.

True, but where are your solutions?

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Justus

Since you strongly imply that the TOTV posters herein are essentially bigoted and unenlightened, please tell me...As an apparent recent student of American History, whose intent is only to educate those of us less knowledgeable, you truly must know what NINA was to Irish immigrants, and WOP was to Italians at the turn of the 20th century for decades. But to paraphrase the celebrated Toni Morrison, "And Still, They Rise"...

My original question, to which you have not responded, still stands...your opinion would be appreciated in light, especially, of the recent conviction of a Black police officer in Minneapolis, in the cold-blooded murder of an unarmed white woman who had called 911 asking for help.

The statistic exception proves the rule.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by Number 10 GI

What does going outside of the city have to do with purchasing a firearm? In Illinois, not just Chicago, you must have a FOID card (Firearm Owner Identification Card) issued by the state after a background check has been performed. This process is supposed to be completed in 10 days but can stretch to 4 months. When a person purchases a firearm the dealer is required to perform another background type check called a Firearm Transfer Inquiry and you cannot take possession until this check has been completed. Then after all this background checking you have to wait 72 hours before you can take the firearm home. In Chicago a resident must in addition to all this attend a 5 hour firearm safety instruction course. A Chicago resident must apply for a Chicago firearm permit. When the Chicago resident goes to buy a firearm he HAS TO GO outside the city as gun sales are prohibited in the city. This does not mean the gun buyer is prohibited from owning a gun in the city of Chicago. Then the gun must be registered with the city government.
Now the criminal element doesn't comply with these laws at all, they just buy the gun illegally from other criminals that supply guns or steal them. Maybe you need a better search engine than google.

///