skyrider 0 #76 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI think you'll find that despite what is written in the Constitution, states' rights are pretty close to nill and have been for a while. As they should be. Yea, wasn't it nice when teh states legalized slavery? Wasn't it nice when the states legalized antimiscegenation (didn't allow diff races to marry)? Wasn't it noce when states legalized segregation esp with education? Now states are making illegal gay marriage; isn't that nice too? Seems like the states fuck things up; the fed does them right. FUCK STATE'S RIGHTS. QuoteSounds liek the beginning of a communist society! Communist/Socialist; all the same if you don't know the difference. QuoteYou may want bay sitted by the feds, I will prefer to remain free! English as a second language? When you have nothing of importance to say, go after their typo's and spelling.....Pretty Juvinile aproach! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrig 1 #77 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteIf Mexican troops were amassing that would sweep in and plant a flag then yes. It could go to war. I don't see that going on now. what about former Mexican military with special forces training in organized units on the other side of the border moving in vehicle convoys protecting cargo with automatic weapons fire as it moves across the border? (yes, I think it would be silly, but I'm pointing out the very slight, although important, semantic difference between my described situation and "Mexican troops") That HAS happened in Culberson County, Texas! Shots were exchanged. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #78 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteI think you'll find that despite what is written in the Constitution, states' rights are pretty close to nill and have been for a while. As they should be. so you would support repealing the 10th amendment? How about dissolving the state lines all together? become one large territory?? become a true democracy maybe? toss away this republic we have... let's go with majority rule eh? Limit the 10th greatly, esp on social issues. True democracy on some issues, esp social funding; you'd see a lot more people turning out to vote for social benefits. Keep state lines, limit the night/day desires of some. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #79 August 26, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote I think you'll find that despite what is written in the Constitution, states' rights are pretty close to nill and have been for a while. As they should be. Yea, wasn't it nice when teh states legalized slavery? Wasn't it nice when the states legalized antimiscegenation (didn't allow diff races to marry)? Wasn't it noce when states legalized segregation esp with education? Now states are making illegal gay marriage; isn't that nice too? Seems like the states fuck things up; the fed does them right. FUCK STATE'S RIGHTS. Quote Sounds liek the beginning of a communist society! Communist/Socialist; all the same if you don't know the difference. Quote You may want bay sitted by the feds, I will prefer to remain free! English as a second language? When you have nothing of importance to say, go after their typo's and spelling.....Pretty Juvinile aproach! I addressed your lack of understanding the diff between Communism and Soialism. Typos are mechanical errors, this: bay sitted is supposed to be babysat? I'm the last to knock spelling/grammar, but it was too funny to pass up Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhaig 0 #80 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI think you'll find that despite what is written in the Constitution, states' rights are pretty close to nill and have been for a while. As they should be. so you would support repealing the 10th amendment? How about dissolving the state lines all together? become one large territory?? become a true democracy maybe? toss away this republic we have... let's go with majority rule eh? Limit the 10th greatly, esp on social issues. True democracy on some issues, esp social funding; you'd see a lot more people turning out to vote for social benefits. Keep state lines, limit the night/day desires of some. as for limiting the 10th, I think we already have laws and amendments in place to cover most of that. of course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. I hate to use the bread and circuses quote, but social is the last place we should have a true democracy.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #81 August 26, 2010 Quote Yea, wasn't it nice when teh states legalized slavery? Wasn't it nice when the states legalized antimiscegenation (didn't allow diff races to marry)? Wasn't it noce when states legalized segregation esp with education? Now states are making illegal gay marriage; isn't that nice too? Seems like the states fuck things up; the fed does them right. FUCK STATE'S RIGHTS. More of your neo-com fantasies. Slavery predated the Union and was legitimized by the Constitution with the 3/5ths compromise. And it is the states, not the feds that are driving legal gay marriage. If the CA case goes to to the SC and ends it at a federal basis, it will be because of the battles in CA (and imo, the better moral leadership shown by other states). And let's not forget "Separate but Equal" or the Dread Scott decision. The SC is the final authority and they legalized these issues on a national scale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #82 August 26, 2010 >2009 isn't 2010. Agreed. So far it's down, but there could be a massive spike in, say, December; the year's not over yet. ======================= El Paso murders, crime rate overall fall By Daniel Borunda \ El Paso Times Posted: 08/03/2010 12:00:00 AM MDT EL PASO -- About 1,700 homicides have occurred in Juárez this year. El Paso has had one. Despite the rampant bloodshed in Mexico, the overall crime rate in El Paso has decreased slightly this year. The drop in murders comes as the El Paso City Council mulls raising taxes or furloughing police officers. Neighborhood Watch groups this evening will get together for block parties as part of the anti-crime National Night Out. ========================== >There's a lot more violence associated with the cartels over last year. That may well be true - but it's not affecting El Paso, apparently. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #83 August 26, 2010 Quoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #84 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI think you'll find that despite what is written in the Constitution, states' rights are pretty close to nill and have been for a while. As they should be. so you would support repealing the 10th amendment? How about dissolving the state lines all together? become one large territory?? become a true democracy maybe? toss away this republic we have... let's go with majority rule eh? Limit the 10th greatly, esp on social issues. True democracy on some issues, esp social funding; you'd see a lot more people turning out to vote for social benefits. Keep state lines, limit the night/day desires of some. Quoteas for limiting the 10th, I think we already have laws and amendments in place to cover most of that. Yep, like the 14th, enacted at least in part to tell southern states that the 13th and Emancipation Proclamation wasn't/weren't just a fed document(s). If we want to have the "same" country across the board, we need to limit variances between the states. Of course your beloved elitists can't expolit the poor as well when you have that pesky fed gov ensuring they don't. Quoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. And you have the elitist 5% exploit the poor; who's the sociopath and who's the egalitarian? QuoteI hate to use the bread and circuses quote, but social is the last place we should have a true democracy. Right, we should let the elite decide who doesn't get HC, welfare, etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #85 August 26, 2010 Quote Despite the high profile of polemicists such as Lou Dobbs and Michael Savage, America has been mostly welcoming to this latest immigration wave. You don't see "Latinos Need Not Apply" or "No Mexicans" signs posted on public buildings the way you did with the Italians and the Irish, two groups who actually were disproportionately likely to turn to crime. The implication makes sense: An immigrant group's propensity for criminality may be partly determined by how they're received in their new country. "Look at Arab-Americans in the Midwest, especially in the Detroit area," Levin says. "The U.S. and Canada have traditionally been very willing to welcome and integrate them. They're a success story, with high average incomes and very little crime. That's not the case in Europe. Countries like France and Germany are openly hostile to Arabs. They marginalize them. And they've seen waves of crime and rioting." This is a nice, touchy-feely thesis, but the problem is that we're hardly been welcoming to "wetbacks" for a few decades. Latino citizens are disparaged as illegal aliens, illegal aliens are blamed for every problem under the sun. We don't see 'Latinos Need Not Apply' because such overt discrimination is illegal. Doesn't mean it's still not in effect for some. Is it really worse in France? El Paso being a fairly small metropolis, with a large military base and isolation due to the border and White Sands, may not be the best case sample for the thesis. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #86 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuote Yea, wasn't it nice when teh states legalized slavery? Wasn't it nice when the states legalized antimiscegenation (didn't allow diff races to marry)? Wasn't it noce when states legalized segregation esp with education? Now states are making illegal gay marriage; isn't that nice too? Seems like the states fuck things up; the fed does them right. FUCK STATE'S RIGHTS. More of your neo-com fantasies. QuoteSlavery predated the Union and was legitimized by the Constitution with the 3/5ths compromise. More arguments why your philosophy is so wonderful. As well, anothr argument that the FF and their museum rag is worthless by today's standards. QuoteAnd it is the states, not the feds that are driving legal gay marriage. If the CA case goes to to the SC and ends it at a federal basis, it will be because of the battles in CA (and imo, the better moral leadership shown by other states). No, but the top executive is or will be. They still have to address the Defense of Marriage Act drawn up by the (not-so) moral right and signed by Clinton 96, this establishes a marriage betwween a man and woman only. So gay marriage is a state concept, abolition is already federal and needs to be overturned. QuoteAnd let's not forget "Separate but Equal" or the Dread Scott decision. The SC is the final authority and they legalized these issues on a national scale. Absolutely, states make staute; SCOTUS makes law. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #87 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. Hmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 3 #88 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSucks to be in El Paso. Do a Google search. It's currently ranked the second-safest city in the US. Then whoever ranked them is a fucking LIAR! That's the damned truth!!! Chuck Chuck, please read my conversation with Turtle following that post. He wasn't really able to give an answer as to what non-emotional, scientific metric one is supposed to use, if not the FBI crime statistics on which that ranking is based - just anecdotal evidence and his gut feeling. Do you have a better, objective scientific source you can point us to? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #89 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteIf Mexican troops were amassing that would sweep in and plant a flag then yes. It could go to war. I don't see that going on now. what about former Mexican military with special forces training in organized units on the other side of the border moving in vehicle convoys protecting cargo with automatic weapons fire as it moves across the border? (yes, I think it would be silly, but I'm pointing out the very slight, although important, semantic difference between my described situation and "Mexican troops") That's security. Not going to war. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #90 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. News flash - free stuff from politicians != equalization of wealth. No wonder you have so many problems understanding the economy stuff. QuoteHmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater. Your Amazing Kreskin act gets funnier and funnier - why don't you go ahead and show where I've said that.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #91 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. QuoteNews flash - free stuff from politicians != equalization of wealth. No wonder you have so many problems understanding the economy stuff. Back at ya - tax cuts have ruined this country, do I need to post all the data while you fail to show me a major fed tax cut that has done us good? QuoteHmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater. QuoteYour Amazing Kreskin act gets funnier and funnier - why don't you go ahead and show where I've said that. Oh, well you want tax cuts, every time we have a major one the spread gets greater; it' simple deduction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrig 1 #92 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSucks to be in El Paso. Do a Google search. It's currently ranked the second-safest city in the US. Then whoever ranked them is a fucking LIAR! That's the damned truth!!! Chuck Chuck, please read my conversation with Turtle following that post. He wasn't really able to give an answer as to what non-emotional, scientific metric one is supposed to use, if not the FBI crime statistics on which that ranking is based - just anecdotal evidence and his gut feeling. Do you have a better, objective scientific source you can point us to? I don't know how scientific my sources are but all I have to go by is the El Paso newspaper and law enforcement officers my wife and I know in El Paso. If I may, newspapers, radio stations and t.v. stations have been threatened by cartels all along the Texas border as to what they don't want printed. Newspaper offices have been blown-up and one reporter (if not more) from El Paso has been 'directly' threatened. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #93 August 26, 2010 QuoteDespite the rampant bloodshed in Mexico, the overall crime rate in El Paso has decreased slightly this year. The drop in murders comes as the El Paso City Council mulls raising taxes or furloughing police officers. Neighborhood Watch groups this evening will get together for block parties as part of the anti-crime National Night Out. All of that safety will be shattered if the bullets start hitting people and not buildings. The drug war in Mexico is effecting safety in El Paso. How long do they have to ignore bullets whizzing by before someone does something? Should they just wait until some little kid or college student takes one in the head walking to class before they try to do something about it?Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #94 August 26, 2010 >All of that safety will be shattered if the bullets start hitting people and not buildings. I definitely agree. Nevertheless, there are places (like Camden, New Jersey, the most dangerous place in the US) where the bullets ARE hitting people. There is one violent crime a year there for every fifty people who live there. They, too, are near a place with a lot of crime - Philadelphia. Someday El Paso may become like Camden. Until then, Camden would do well to heed the lessons of how to live near a high crime area while remaining fairly safe. >Should they just wait until some little kid or college student takes one in >the head walking to class before they try to do something about it? I'd suggest that if you want to concentrate your efforts on "doing something" that will actually make a difference, those efforts would be best concentrated on places where little kids ARE taking bullets in the head. It would surely be foolish to try to prevent crimes where they are not happening and ignore the places they are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #95 August 26, 2010 QuoteI'd suggest that if you want to concentrate your efforts on "doing something" that will actually make a difference, those efforts would be best concentrated on places where little kids ARE taking bullets in the head. It would surely be foolish to try to prevent crimes where they are not happening and ignore the places they are. I agree that a lot more needs to be done about crime in general here in the U.S. But we shouldnt sit by and not do anything about the violence that is crossing over.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #96 August 26, 2010 >But we shouldnt sit by and not do anything about the violence that is >crossing over. Again, I agree. And I also agree that there are definitely places it is crossing over. But by what we can see, that's not happening in El Paso much. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #97 August 26, 2010 They need to lock the border down from end to end. It is the only way to keep it from crossing over. It is madness to not do so. You live near the border dont you? Im sure it isnt bad where you live, but now that these guys are threatening LEO and even the news outlets. It is only a matter of time before they follow through on these threats. They get away with bribery, murder, kidnapping, intimidation and all sorts of stuff in Mexico. I think that makes them believe it will be just as easy here to do the same things. The longer we don't do something the bolder they will get.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #98 August 26, 2010 >They need to lock the border down from end to end. OK. How? >You live near the border dont you? Well, about 20 miles. But when I jumped at Brown we were about 500 yards from the border. No problems for us. Heck, they'd help _us_ across the fence when we landed over there. We had a lot more trouble with the Federales and the Border Patrol* than we ever had with the people on the other side of the border. >They get away with bribery, murder, kidnapping, intimidation and all sorts >of stuff in Mexico. Agreed; Mexico is a pretty nasty place at times. >Im sure it isnt bad where you live, but now that these guys are >threatening LEO and even the news outlets. They've been doing that for as long as I've lived here (about 20 years.) Threats are easy. (* - we never had trouble with the Border Patrol being ornery, but they'd get the Federales angry, which made at least one situation a lot more tense that it would have been otherwise. And their helicopters used to buzz the DZ until we talked to them about it.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #99 August 26, 2010 QuoteOK. How? Nobody likes the idea of a full on fence. Costs to much, not enough people to man it. Looks like East and West Germany. Whatever. We need a big old fence that shocks the ever loving shit out of you if you get within 10 feet of it. Stop spending money on these wars and build a fence. Armed Military of State Guards every few miles in guard houses and roaming patrols. Find a tunnel? You blow it up along with every and anything in it. Once the cartels realize that they will be killed for trying to cross they will stop. Or at least cut it way way back. They just dont cross on land either. More Coast Guard. Give em three chances to stop or blow they get blown out of the water.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #100 August 26, 2010 >We need a big old fence that shocks the ever loving shit out of you if you >get within 10 feet of it. Thank God we don't have one of those near Brown; I can think of two skydivers who would now be dead if we had them. But in any case, that's around 20 billion in construction costs every 20 years. (The most recent fence here cost $10 million a mile.) Call it another billion a year in ongoing costs (power, maintenance, training, patrolling etc) and around 10 billion in initial land purchases. >Find a tunnel? You blow it up along with every and anything in it. Uh, including the fence? San Diego has one of the densest concentration of border patrols, fences and sensors along the entire border. We still get around 25,000 illegal immigrants a year through the fence. >Once the cartels realize that they will be killed for trying to cross they will stop. Hundreds of immigrants are killed every year during their attempts to get across. (By the desert, not weapons, but same result.) Hasn't stopped them. Indeed, one result is that the coyotes (and cartels that help people across) make a lot more money. Indeed, instead of it stopping the cartels, it has encouraged them, since they have a lucrative new field. That's not to say a fence wouldn't work; it would indeed slow down illegal immigration. But as we've learned here, it would certainly not stop it. So the question becomes - is slowing illegal immigration down somewhat worth the money? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 4 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
masterrig 1 #77 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteIf Mexican troops were amassing that would sweep in and plant a flag then yes. It could go to war. I don't see that going on now. what about former Mexican military with special forces training in organized units on the other side of the border moving in vehicle convoys protecting cargo with automatic weapons fire as it moves across the border? (yes, I think it would be silly, but I'm pointing out the very slight, although important, semantic difference between my described situation and "Mexican troops") That HAS happened in Culberson County, Texas! Shots were exchanged. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #78 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteI think you'll find that despite what is written in the Constitution, states' rights are pretty close to nill and have been for a while. As they should be. so you would support repealing the 10th amendment? How about dissolving the state lines all together? become one large territory?? become a true democracy maybe? toss away this republic we have... let's go with majority rule eh? Limit the 10th greatly, esp on social issues. True democracy on some issues, esp social funding; you'd see a lot more people turning out to vote for social benefits. Keep state lines, limit the night/day desires of some. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #79 August 26, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote I think you'll find that despite what is written in the Constitution, states' rights are pretty close to nill and have been for a while. As they should be. Yea, wasn't it nice when teh states legalized slavery? Wasn't it nice when the states legalized antimiscegenation (didn't allow diff races to marry)? Wasn't it noce when states legalized segregation esp with education? Now states are making illegal gay marriage; isn't that nice too? Seems like the states fuck things up; the fed does them right. FUCK STATE'S RIGHTS. Quote Sounds liek the beginning of a communist society! Communist/Socialist; all the same if you don't know the difference. Quote You may want bay sitted by the feds, I will prefer to remain free! English as a second language? When you have nothing of importance to say, go after their typo's and spelling.....Pretty Juvinile aproach! I addressed your lack of understanding the diff between Communism and Soialism. Typos are mechanical errors, this: bay sitted is supposed to be babysat? I'm the last to knock spelling/grammar, but it was too funny to pass up Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #80 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI think you'll find that despite what is written in the Constitution, states' rights are pretty close to nill and have been for a while. As they should be. so you would support repealing the 10th amendment? How about dissolving the state lines all together? become one large territory?? become a true democracy maybe? toss away this republic we have... let's go with majority rule eh? Limit the 10th greatly, esp on social issues. True democracy on some issues, esp social funding; you'd see a lot more people turning out to vote for social benefits. Keep state lines, limit the night/day desires of some. as for limiting the 10th, I think we already have laws and amendments in place to cover most of that. of course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. I hate to use the bread and circuses quote, but social is the last place we should have a true democracy.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #81 August 26, 2010 Quote Yea, wasn't it nice when teh states legalized slavery? Wasn't it nice when the states legalized antimiscegenation (didn't allow diff races to marry)? Wasn't it noce when states legalized segregation esp with education? Now states are making illegal gay marriage; isn't that nice too? Seems like the states fuck things up; the fed does them right. FUCK STATE'S RIGHTS. More of your neo-com fantasies. Slavery predated the Union and was legitimized by the Constitution with the 3/5ths compromise. And it is the states, not the feds that are driving legal gay marriage. If the CA case goes to to the SC and ends it at a federal basis, it will be because of the battles in CA (and imo, the better moral leadership shown by other states). And let's not forget "Separate but Equal" or the Dread Scott decision. The SC is the final authority and they legalized these issues on a national scale. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #82 August 26, 2010 >2009 isn't 2010. Agreed. So far it's down, but there could be a massive spike in, say, December; the year's not over yet. ======================= El Paso murders, crime rate overall fall By Daniel Borunda \ El Paso Times Posted: 08/03/2010 12:00:00 AM MDT EL PASO -- About 1,700 homicides have occurred in Juárez this year. El Paso has had one. Despite the rampant bloodshed in Mexico, the overall crime rate in El Paso has decreased slightly this year. The drop in murders comes as the El Paso City Council mulls raising taxes or furloughing police officers. Neighborhood Watch groups this evening will get together for block parties as part of the anti-crime National Night Out. ========================== >There's a lot more violence associated with the cartels over last year. That may well be true - but it's not affecting El Paso, apparently. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #83 August 26, 2010 Quoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #84 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI think you'll find that despite what is written in the Constitution, states' rights are pretty close to nill and have been for a while. As they should be. so you would support repealing the 10th amendment? How about dissolving the state lines all together? become one large territory?? become a true democracy maybe? toss away this republic we have... let's go with majority rule eh? Limit the 10th greatly, esp on social issues. True democracy on some issues, esp social funding; you'd see a lot more people turning out to vote for social benefits. Keep state lines, limit the night/day desires of some. Quoteas for limiting the 10th, I think we already have laws and amendments in place to cover most of that. Yep, like the 14th, enacted at least in part to tell southern states that the 13th and Emancipation Proclamation wasn't/weren't just a fed document(s). If we want to have the "same" country across the board, we need to limit variances between the states. Of course your beloved elitists can't expolit the poor as well when you have that pesky fed gov ensuring they don't. Quoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. And you have the elitist 5% exploit the poor; who's the sociopath and who's the egalitarian? QuoteI hate to use the bread and circuses quote, but social is the last place we should have a true democracy. Right, we should let the elite decide who doesn't get HC, welfare, etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #85 August 26, 2010 Quote Despite the high profile of polemicists such as Lou Dobbs and Michael Savage, America has been mostly welcoming to this latest immigration wave. You don't see "Latinos Need Not Apply" or "No Mexicans" signs posted on public buildings the way you did with the Italians and the Irish, two groups who actually were disproportionately likely to turn to crime. The implication makes sense: An immigrant group's propensity for criminality may be partly determined by how they're received in their new country. "Look at Arab-Americans in the Midwest, especially in the Detroit area," Levin says. "The U.S. and Canada have traditionally been very willing to welcome and integrate them. They're a success story, with high average incomes and very little crime. That's not the case in Europe. Countries like France and Germany are openly hostile to Arabs. They marginalize them. And they've seen waves of crime and rioting." This is a nice, touchy-feely thesis, but the problem is that we're hardly been welcoming to "wetbacks" for a few decades. Latino citizens are disparaged as illegal aliens, illegal aliens are blamed for every problem under the sun. We don't see 'Latinos Need Not Apply' because such overt discrimination is illegal. Doesn't mean it's still not in effect for some. Is it really worse in France? El Paso being a fairly small metropolis, with a large military base and isolation due to the border and White Sands, may not be the best case sample for the thesis. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #86 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuote Yea, wasn't it nice when teh states legalized slavery? Wasn't it nice when the states legalized antimiscegenation (didn't allow diff races to marry)? Wasn't it noce when states legalized segregation esp with education? Now states are making illegal gay marriage; isn't that nice too? Seems like the states fuck things up; the fed does them right. FUCK STATE'S RIGHTS. More of your neo-com fantasies. QuoteSlavery predated the Union and was legitimized by the Constitution with the 3/5ths compromise. More arguments why your philosophy is so wonderful. As well, anothr argument that the FF and their museum rag is worthless by today's standards. QuoteAnd it is the states, not the feds that are driving legal gay marriage. If the CA case goes to to the SC and ends it at a federal basis, it will be because of the battles in CA (and imo, the better moral leadership shown by other states). No, but the top executive is or will be. They still have to address the Defense of Marriage Act drawn up by the (not-so) moral right and signed by Clinton 96, this establishes a marriage betwween a man and woman only. So gay marriage is a state concept, abolition is already federal and needs to be overturned. QuoteAnd let's not forget "Separate but Equal" or the Dread Scott decision. The SC is the final authority and they legalized these issues on a national scale. Absolutely, states make staute; SCOTUS makes law. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #87 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. Hmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 3 #88 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSucks to be in El Paso. Do a Google search. It's currently ranked the second-safest city in the US. Then whoever ranked them is a fucking LIAR! That's the damned truth!!! Chuck Chuck, please read my conversation with Turtle following that post. He wasn't really able to give an answer as to what non-emotional, scientific metric one is supposed to use, if not the FBI crime statistics on which that ranking is based - just anecdotal evidence and his gut feeling. Do you have a better, objective scientific source you can point us to? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #89 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteIf Mexican troops were amassing that would sweep in and plant a flag then yes. It could go to war. I don't see that going on now. what about former Mexican military with special forces training in organized units on the other side of the border moving in vehicle convoys protecting cargo with automatic weapons fire as it moves across the border? (yes, I think it would be silly, but I'm pointing out the very slight, although important, semantic difference between my described situation and "Mexican troops") That's security. Not going to war. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #90 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. News flash - free stuff from politicians != equalization of wealth. No wonder you have so many problems understanding the economy stuff. QuoteHmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater. Your Amazing Kreskin act gets funnier and funnier - why don't you go ahead and show where I've said that.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #91 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. QuoteNews flash - free stuff from politicians != equalization of wealth. No wonder you have so many problems understanding the economy stuff. Back at ya - tax cuts have ruined this country, do I need to post all the data while you fail to show me a major fed tax cut that has done us good? QuoteHmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater. QuoteYour Amazing Kreskin act gets funnier and funnier - why don't you go ahead and show where I've said that. Oh, well you want tax cuts, every time we have a major one the spread gets greater; it' simple deduction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrig 1 #92 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSucks to be in El Paso. Do a Google search. It's currently ranked the second-safest city in the US. Then whoever ranked them is a fucking LIAR! That's the damned truth!!! Chuck Chuck, please read my conversation with Turtle following that post. He wasn't really able to give an answer as to what non-emotional, scientific metric one is supposed to use, if not the FBI crime statistics on which that ranking is based - just anecdotal evidence and his gut feeling. Do you have a better, objective scientific source you can point us to? I don't know how scientific my sources are but all I have to go by is the El Paso newspaper and law enforcement officers my wife and I know in El Paso. If I may, newspapers, radio stations and t.v. stations have been threatened by cartels all along the Texas border as to what they don't want printed. Newspaper offices have been blown-up and one reporter (if not more) from El Paso has been 'directly' threatened. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #93 August 26, 2010 QuoteDespite the rampant bloodshed in Mexico, the overall crime rate in El Paso has decreased slightly this year. The drop in murders comes as the El Paso City Council mulls raising taxes or furloughing police officers. Neighborhood Watch groups this evening will get together for block parties as part of the anti-crime National Night Out. All of that safety will be shattered if the bullets start hitting people and not buildings. The drug war in Mexico is effecting safety in El Paso. How long do they have to ignore bullets whizzing by before someone does something? Should they just wait until some little kid or college student takes one in the head walking to class before they try to do something about it?Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #94 August 26, 2010 >All of that safety will be shattered if the bullets start hitting people and not buildings. I definitely agree. Nevertheless, there are places (like Camden, New Jersey, the most dangerous place in the US) where the bullets ARE hitting people. There is one violent crime a year there for every fifty people who live there. They, too, are near a place with a lot of crime - Philadelphia. Someday El Paso may become like Camden. Until then, Camden would do well to heed the lessons of how to live near a high crime area while remaining fairly safe. >Should they just wait until some little kid or college student takes one in >the head walking to class before they try to do something about it? I'd suggest that if you want to concentrate your efforts on "doing something" that will actually make a difference, those efforts would be best concentrated on places where little kids ARE taking bullets in the head. It would surely be foolish to try to prevent crimes where they are not happening and ignore the places they are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #95 August 26, 2010 QuoteI'd suggest that if you want to concentrate your efforts on "doing something" that will actually make a difference, those efforts would be best concentrated on places where little kids ARE taking bullets in the head. It would surely be foolish to try to prevent crimes where they are not happening and ignore the places they are. I agree that a lot more needs to be done about crime in general here in the U.S. But we shouldnt sit by and not do anything about the violence that is crossing over.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #96 August 26, 2010 >But we shouldnt sit by and not do anything about the violence that is >crossing over. Again, I agree. And I also agree that there are definitely places it is crossing over. But by what we can see, that's not happening in El Paso much. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #97 August 26, 2010 They need to lock the border down from end to end. It is the only way to keep it from crossing over. It is madness to not do so. You live near the border dont you? Im sure it isnt bad where you live, but now that these guys are threatening LEO and even the news outlets. It is only a matter of time before they follow through on these threats. They get away with bribery, murder, kidnapping, intimidation and all sorts of stuff in Mexico. I think that makes them believe it will be just as easy here to do the same things. The longer we don't do something the bolder they will get.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #98 August 26, 2010 >They need to lock the border down from end to end. OK. How? >You live near the border dont you? Well, about 20 miles. But when I jumped at Brown we were about 500 yards from the border. No problems for us. Heck, they'd help _us_ across the fence when we landed over there. We had a lot more trouble with the Federales and the Border Patrol* than we ever had with the people on the other side of the border. >They get away with bribery, murder, kidnapping, intimidation and all sorts >of stuff in Mexico. Agreed; Mexico is a pretty nasty place at times. >Im sure it isnt bad where you live, but now that these guys are >threatening LEO and even the news outlets. They've been doing that for as long as I've lived here (about 20 years.) Threats are easy. (* - we never had trouble with the Border Patrol being ornery, but they'd get the Federales angry, which made at least one situation a lot more tense that it would have been otherwise. And their helicopters used to buzz the DZ until we talked to them about it.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #99 August 26, 2010 QuoteOK. How? Nobody likes the idea of a full on fence. Costs to much, not enough people to man it. Looks like East and West Germany. Whatever. We need a big old fence that shocks the ever loving shit out of you if you get within 10 feet of it. Stop spending money on these wars and build a fence. Armed Military of State Guards every few miles in guard houses and roaming patrols. Find a tunnel? You blow it up along with every and anything in it. Once the cartels realize that they will be killed for trying to cross they will stop. Or at least cut it way way back. They just dont cross on land either. More Coast Guard. Give em three chances to stop or blow they get blown out of the water.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #100 August 26, 2010 >We need a big old fence that shocks the ever loving shit out of you if you >get within 10 feet of it. Thank God we don't have one of those near Brown; I can think of two skydivers who would now be dead if we had them. But in any case, that's around 20 billion in construction costs every 20 years. (The most recent fence here cost $10 million a mile.) Call it another billion a year in ongoing costs (power, maintenance, training, patrolling etc) and around 10 billion in initial land purchases. >Find a tunnel? You blow it up along with every and anything in it. Uh, including the fence? San Diego has one of the densest concentration of border patrols, fences and sensors along the entire border. We still get around 25,000 illegal immigrants a year through the fence. >Once the cartels realize that they will be killed for trying to cross they will stop. Hundreds of immigrants are killed every year during their attempts to get across. (By the desert, not weapons, but same result.) Hasn't stopped them. Indeed, one result is that the coyotes (and cartels that help people across) make a lot more money. Indeed, instead of it stopping the cartels, it has encouraged them, since they have a lucrative new field. That's not to say a fence wouldn't work; it would indeed slow down illegal immigration. But as we've learned here, it would certainly not stop it. So the question becomes - is slowing illegal immigration down somewhat worth the money? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 4 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
kelpdiver 2 #85 August 26, 2010 Quote Despite the high profile of polemicists such as Lou Dobbs and Michael Savage, America has been mostly welcoming to this latest immigration wave. You don't see "Latinos Need Not Apply" or "No Mexicans" signs posted on public buildings the way you did with the Italians and the Irish, two groups who actually were disproportionately likely to turn to crime. The implication makes sense: An immigrant group's propensity for criminality may be partly determined by how they're received in their new country. "Look at Arab-Americans in the Midwest, especially in the Detroit area," Levin says. "The U.S. and Canada have traditionally been very willing to welcome and integrate them. They're a success story, with high average incomes and very little crime. That's not the case in Europe. Countries like France and Germany are openly hostile to Arabs. They marginalize them. And they've seen waves of crime and rioting." This is a nice, touchy-feely thesis, but the problem is that we're hardly been welcoming to "wetbacks" for a few decades. Latino citizens are disparaged as illegal aliens, illegal aliens are blamed for every problem under the sun. We don't see 'Latinos Need Not Apply' because such overt discrimination is illegal. Doesn't mean it's still not in effect for some. Is it really worse in France? El Paso being a fairly small metropolis, with a large military base and isolation due to the border and White Sands, may not be the best case sample for the thesis. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #86 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuote Yea, wasn't it nice when teh states legalized slavery? Wasn't it nice when the states legalized antimiscegenation (didn't allow diff races to marry)? Wasn't it noce when states legalized segregation esp with education? Now states are making illegal gay marriage; isn't that nice too? Seems like the states fuck things up; the fed does them right. FUCK STATE'S RIGHTS. More of your neo-com fantasies. QuoteSlavery predated the Union and was legitimized by the Constitution with the 3/5ths compromise. More arguments why your philosophy is so wonderful. As well, anothr argument that the FF and their museum rag is worthless by today's standards. QuoteAnd it is the states, not the feds that are driving legal gay marriage. If the CA case goes to to the SC and ends it at a federal basis, it will be because of the battles in CA (and imo, the better moral leadership shown by other states). No, but the top executive is or will be. They still have to address the Defense of Marriage Act drawn up by the (not-so) moral right and signed by Clinton 96, this establishes a marriage betwween a man and woman only. So gay marriage is a state concept, abolition is already federal and needs to be overturned. QuoteAnd let's not forget "Separate but Equal" or the Dread Scott decision. The SC is the final authority and they legalized these issues on a national scale. Absolutely, states make staute; SCOTUS makes law. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #87 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. Hmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 3 #88 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSucks to be in El Paso. Do a Google search. It's currently ranked the second-safest city in the US. Then whoever ranked them is a fucking LIAR! That's the damned truth!!! Chuck Chuck, please read my conversation with Turtle following that post. He wasn't really able to give an answer as to what non-emotional, scientific metric one is supposed to use, if not the FBI crime statistics on which that ranking is based - just anecdotal evidence and his gut feeling. Do you have a better, objective scientific source you can point us to? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #89 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteIf Mexican troops were amassing that would sweep in and plant a flag then yes. It could go to war. I don't see that going on now. what about former Mexican military with special forces training in organized units on the other side of the border moving in vehicle convoys protecting cargo with automatic weapons fire as it moves across the border? (yes, I think it would be silly, but I'm pointing out the very slight, although important, semantic difference between my described situation and "Mexican troops") That's security. Not going to war. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #90 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. News flash - free stuff from politicians != equalization of wealth. No wonder you have so many problems understanding the economy stuff. QuoteHmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater. Your Amazing Kreskin act gets funnier and funnier - why don't you go ahead and show where I've said that.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #91 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. QuoteNews flash - free stuff from politicians != equalization of wealth. No wonder you have so many problems understanding the economy stuff. Back at ya - tax cuts have ruined this country, do I need to post all the data while you fail to show me a major fed tax cut that has done us good? QuoteHmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater. QuoteYour Amazing Kreskin act gets funnier and funnier - why don't you go ahead and show where I've said that. Oh, well you want tax cuts, every time we have a major one the spread gets greater; it' simple deduction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrig 1 #92 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSucks to be in El Paso. Do a Google search. It's currently ranked the second-safest city in the US. Then whoever ranked them is a fucking LIAR! That's the damned truth!!! Chuck Chuck, please read my conversation with Turtle following that post. He wasn't really able to give an answer as to what non-emotional, scientific metric one is supposed to use, if not the FBI crime statistics on which that ranking is based - just anecdotal evidence and his gut feeling. Do you have a better, objective scientific source you can point us to? I don't know how scientific my sources are but all I have to go by is the El Paso newspaper and law enforcement officers my wife and I know in El Paso. If I may, newspapers, radio stations and t.v. stations have been threatened by cartels all along the Texas border as to what they don't want printed. Newspaper offices have been blown-up and one reporter (if not more) from El Paso has been 'directly' threatened. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #93 August 26, 2010 QuoteDespite the rampant bloodshed in Mexico, the overall crime rate in El Paso has decreased slightly this year. The drop in murders comes as the El Paso City Council mulls raising taxes or furloughing police officers. Neighborhood Watch groups this evening will get together for block parties as part of the anti-crime National Night Out. All of that safety will be shattered if the bullets start hitting people and not buildings. The drug war in Mexico is effecting safety in El Paso. How long do they have to ignore bullets whizzing by before someone does something? Should they just wait until some little kid or college student takes one in the head walking to class before they try to do something about it?Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #94 August 26, 2010 >All of that safety will be shattered if the bullets start hitting people and not buildings. I definitely agree. Nevertheless, there are places (like Camden, New Jersey, the most dangerous place in the US) where the bullets ARE hitting people. There is one violent crime a year there for every fifty people who live there. They, too, are near a place with a lot of crime - Philadelphia. Someday El Paso may become like Camden. Until then, Camden would do well to heed the lessons of how to live near a high crime area while remaining fairly safe. >Should they just wait until some little kid or college student takes one in >the head walking to class before they try to do something about it? I'd suggest that if you want to concentrate your efforts on "doing something" that will actually make a difference, those efforts would be best concentrated on places where little kids ARE taking bullets in the head. It would surely be foolish to try to prevent crimes where they are not happening and ignore the places they are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #95 August 26, 2010 QuoteI'd suggest that if you want to concentrate your efforts on "doing something" that will actually make a difference, those efforts would be best concentrated on places where little kids ARE taking bullets in the head. It would surely be foolish to try to prevent crimes where they are not happening and ignore the places they are. I agree that a lot more needs to be done about crime in general here in the U.S. But we shouldnt sit by and not do anything about the violence that is crossing over.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #96 August 26, 2010 >But we shouldnt sit by and not do anything about the violence that is >crossing over. Again, I agree. And I also agree that there are definitely places it is crossing over. But by what we can see, that's not happening in El Paso much. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #97 August 26, 2010 They need to lock the border down from end to end. It is the only way to keep it from crossing over. It is madness to not do so. You live near the border dont you? Im sure it isnt bad where you live, but now that these guys are threatening LEO and even the news outlets. It is only a matter of time before they follow through on these threats. They get away with bribery, murder, kidnapping, intimidation and all sorts of stuff in Mexico. I think that makes them believe it will be just as easy here to do the same things. The longer we don't do something the bolder they will get.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #98 August 26, 2010 >They need to lock the border down from end to end. OK. How? >You live near the border dont you? Well, about 20 miles. But when I jumped at Brown we were about 500 yards from the border. No problems for us. Heck, they'd help _us_ across the fence when we landed over there. We had a lot more trouble with the Federales and the Border Patrol* than we ever had with the people on the other side of the border. >They get away with bribery, murder, kidnapping, intimidation and all sorts >of stuff in Mexico. Agreed; Mexico is a pretty nasty place at times. >Im sure it isnt bad where you live, but now that these guys are >threatening LEO and even the news outlets. They've been doing that for as long as I've lived here (about 20 years.) Threats are easy. (* - we never had trouble with the Border Patrol being ornery, but they'd get the Federales angry, which made at least one situation a lot more tense that it would have been otherwise. And their helicopters used to buzz the DZ until we talked to them about it.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #99 August 26, 2010 QuoteOK. How? Nobody likes the idea of a full on fence. Costs to much, not enough people to man it. Looks like East and West Germany. Whatever. We need a big old fence that shocks the ever loving shit out of you if you get within 10 feet of it. Stop spending money on these wars and build a fence. Armed Military of State Guards every few miles in guard houses and roaming patrols. Find a tunnel? You blow it up along with every and anything in it. Once the cartels realize that they will be killed for trying to cross they will stop. Or at least cut it way way back. They just dont cross on land either. More Coast Guard. Give em three chances to stop or blow they get blown out of the water.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #100 August 26, 2010 >We need a big old fence that shocks the ever loving shit out of you if you >get within 10 feet of it. Thank God we don't have one of those near Brown; I can think of two skydivers who would now be dead if we had them. But in any case, that's around 20 billion in construction costs every 20 years. (The most recent fence here cost $10 million a mile.) Call it another billion a year in ongoing costs (power, maintenance, training, patrolling etc) and around 10 billion in initial land purchases. >Find a tunnel? You blow it up along with every and anything in it. Uh, including the fence? San Diego has one of the densest concentration of border patrols, fences and sensors along the entire border. We still get around 25,000 illegal immigrants a year through the fence. >Once the cartels realize that they will be killed for trying to cross they will stop. Hundreds of immigrants are killed every year during their attempts to get across. (By the desert, not weapons, but same result.) Hasn't stopped them. Indeed, one result is that the coyotes (and cartels that help people across) make a lot more money. Indeed, instead of it stopping the cartels, it has encouraged them, since they have a lucrative new field. That's not to say a fence wouldn't work; it would indeed slow down illegal immigration. But as we've learned here, it would certainly not stop it. So the question becomes - is slowing illegal immigration down somewhat worth the money? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 4 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Lucky... 0 #87 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. Hmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 3 #88 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSucks to be in El Paso. Do a Google search. It's currently ranked the second-safest city in the US. Then whoever ranked them is a fucking LIAR! That's the damned truth!!! Chuck Chuck, please read my conversation with Turtle following that post. He wasn't really able to give an answer as to what non-emotional, scientific metric one is supposed to use, if not the FBI crime statistics on which that ranking is based - just anecdotal evidence and his gut feeling. Do you have a better, objective scientific source you can point us to? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #89 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteIf Mexican troops were amassing that would sweep in and plant a flag then yes. It could go to war. I don't see that going on now. what about former Mexican military with special forces training in organized units on the other side of the border moving in vehicle convoys protecting cargo with automatic weapons fire as it moves across the border? (yes, I think it would be silly, but I'm pointing out the very slight, although important, semantic difference between my described situation and "Mexican troops") That's security. Not going to war. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #90 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. News flash - free stuff from politicians != equalization of wealth. No wonder you have so many problems understanding the economy stuff. QuoteHmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater. Your Amazing Kreskin act gets funnier and funnier - why don't you go ahead and show where I've said that.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #91 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteof course you'd have the lowest 51% income earners turning out to vote for the guy to give them free shit. Hell, we've got that now - been that way for years and years. And yet we have runaway disparity in wealth. QuoteNews flash - free stuff from politicians != equalization of wealth. No wonder you have so many problems understanding the economy stuff. Back at ya - tax cuts have ruined this country, do I need to post all the data while you fail to show me a major fed tax cut that has done us good? QuoteHmmm, Mikeee says it s/b greater. QuoteYour Amazing Kreskin act gets funnier and funnier - why don't you go ahead and show where I've said that. Oh, well you want tax cuts, every time we have a major one the spread gets greater; it' simple deduction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterrig 1 #92 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSucks to be in El Paso. Do a Google search. It's currently ranked the second-safest city in the US. Then whoever ranked them is a fucking LIAR! That's the damned truth!!! Chuck Chuck, please read my conversation with Turtle following that post. He wasn't really able to give an answer as to what non-emotional, scientific metric one is supposed to use, if not the FBI crime statistics on which that ranking is based - just anecdotal evidence and his gut feeling. Do you have a better, objective scientific source you can point us to? I don't know how scientific my sources are but all I have to go by is the El Paso newspaper and law enforcement officers my wife and I know in El Paso. If I may, newspapers, radio stations and t.v. stations have been threatened by cartels all along the Texas border as to what they don't want printed. Newspaper offices have been blown-up and one reporter (if not more) from El Paso has been 'directly' threatened. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #93 August 26, 2010 QuoteDespite the rampant bloodshed in Mexico, the overall crime rate in El Paso has decreased slightly this year. The drop in murders comes as the El Paso City Council mulls raising taxes or furloughing police officers. Neighborhood Watch groups this evening will get together for block parties as part of the anti-crime National Night Out. All of that safety will be shattered if the bullets start hitting people and not buildings. The drug war in Mexico is effecting safety in El Paso. How long do they have to ignore bullets whizzing by before someone does something? Should they just wait until some little kid or college student takes one in the head walking to class before they try to do something about it?Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #94 August 26, 2010 >All of that safety will be shattered if the bullets start hitting people and not buildings. I definitely agree. Nevertheless, there are places (like Camden, New Jersey, the most dangerous place in the US) where the bullets ARE hitting people. There is one violent crime a year there for every fifty people who live there. They, too, are near a place with a lot of crime - Philadelphia. Someday El Paso may become like Camden. Until then, Camden would do well to heed the lessons of how to live near a high crime area while remaining fairly safe. >Should they just wait until some little kid or college student takes one in >the head walking to class before they try to do something about it? I'd suggest that if you want to concentrate your efforts on "doing something" that will actually make a difference, those efforts would be best concentrated on places where little kids ARE taking bullets in the head. It would surely be foolish to try to prevent crimes where they are not happening and ignore the places they are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #95 August 26, 2010 QuoteI'd suggest that if you want to concentrate your efforts on "doing something" that will actually make a difference, those efforts would be best concentrated on places where little kids ARE taking bullets in the head. It would surely be foolish to try to prevent crimes where they are not happening and ignore the places they are. I agree that a lot more needs to be done about crime in general here in the U.S. But we shouldnt sit by and not do anything about the violence that is crossing over.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #96 August 26, 2010 >But we shouldnt sit by and not do anything about the violence that is >crossing over. Again, I agree. And I also agree that there are definitely places it is crossing over. But by what we can see, that's not happening in El Paso much. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #97 August 26, 2010 They need to lock the border down from end to end. It is the only way to keep it from crossing over. It is madness to not do so. You live near the border dont you? Im sure it isnt bad where you live, but now that these guys are threatening LEO and even the news outlets. It is only a matter of time before they follow through on these threats. They get away with bribery, murder, kidnapping, intimidation and all sorts of stuff in Mexico. I think that makes them believe it will be just as easy here to do the same things. The longer we don't do something the bolder they will get.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #98 August 26, 2010 >They need to lock the border down from end to end. OK. How? >You live near the border dont you? Well, about 20 miles. But when I jumped at Brown we were about 500 yards from the border. No problems for us. Heck, they'd help _us_ across the fence when we landed over there. We had a lot more trouble with the Federales and the Border Patrol* than we ever had with the people on the other side of the border. >They get away with bribery, murder, kidnapping, intimidation and all sorts >of stuff in Mexico. Agreed; Mexico is a pretty nasty place at times. >Im sure it isnt bad where you live, but now that these guys are >threatening LEO and even the news outlets. They've been doing that for as long as I've lived here (about 20 years.) Threats are easy. (* - we never had trouble with the Border Patrol being ornery, but they'd get the Federales angry, which made at least one situation a lot more tense that it would have been otherwise. And their helicopters used to buzz the DZ until we talked to them about it.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dgskydive 0 #99 August 26, 2010 QuoteOK. How? Nobody likes the idea of a full on fence. Costs to much, not enough people to man it. Looks like East and West Germany. Whatever. We need a big old fence that shocks the ever loving shit out of you if you get within 10 feet of it. Stop spending money on these wars and build a fence. Armed Military of State Guards every few miles in guard houses and roaming patrols. Find a tunnel? You blow it up along with every and anything in it. Once the cartels realize that they will be killed for trying to cross they will stop. Or at least cut it way way back. They just dont cross on land either. More Coast Guard. Give em three chances to stop or blow they get blown out of the water.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 3,132 #100 August 26, 2010 >We need a big old fence that shocks the ever loving shit out of you if you >get within 10 feet of it. Thank God we don't have one of those near Brown; I can think of two skydivers who would now be dead if we had them. But in any case, that's around 20 billion in construction costs every 20 years. (The most recent fence here cost $10 million a mile.) Call it another billion a year in ongoing costs (power, maintenance, training, patrolling etc) and around 10 billion in initial land purchases. >Find a tunnel? You blow it up along with every and anything in it. Uh, including the fence? San Diego has one of the densest concentration of border patrols, fences and sensors along the entire border. We still get around 25,000 illegal immigrants a year through the fence. >Once the cartels realize that they will be killed for trying to cross they will stop. Hundreds of immigrants are killed every year during their attempts to get across. (By the desert, not weapons, but same result.) Hasn't stopped them. Indeed, one result is that the coyotes (and cartels that help people across) make a lot more money. Indeed, instead of it stopping the cartels, it has encouraged them, since they have a lucrative new field. That's not to say a fence wouldn't work; it would indeed slow down illegal immigration. But as we've learned here, it would certainly not stop it. So the question becomes - is slowing illegal immigration down somewhat worth the money? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 4 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
masterrig 1 #92 August 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteSucks to be in El Paso. Do a Google search. It's currently ranked the second-safest city in the US. Then whoever ranked them is a fucking LIAR! That's the damned truth!!! Chuck Chuck, please read my conversation with Turtle following that post. He wasn't really able to give an answer as to what non-emotional, scientific metric one is supposed to use, if not the FBI crime statistics on which that ranking is based - just anecdotal evidence and his gut feeling. Do you have a better, objective scientific source you can point us to? I don't know how scientific my sources are but all I have to go by is the El Paso newspaper and law enforcement officers my wife and I know in El Paso. If I may, newspapers, radio stations and t.v. stations have been threatened by cartels all along the Texas border as to what they don't want printed. Newspaper offices have been blown-up and one reporter (if not more) from El Paso has been 'directly' threatened. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dgskydive 0 #93 August 26, 2010 QuoteDespite the rampant bloodshed in Mexico, the overall crime rate in El Paso has decreased slightly this year. The drop in murders comes as the El Paso City Council mulls raising taxes or furloughing police officers. Neighborhood Watch groups this evening will get together for block parties as part of the anti-crime National Night Out. All of that safety will be shattered if the bullets start hitting people and not buildings. The drug war in Mexico is effecting safety in El Paso. How long do they have to ignore bullets whizzing by before someone does something? Should they just wait until some little kid or college student takes one in the head walking to class before they try to do something about it?Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #94 August 26, 2010 >All of that safety will be shattered if the bullets start hitting people and not buildings. I definitely agree. Nevertheless, there are places (like Camden, New Jersey, the most dangerous place in the US) where the bullets ARE hitting people. There is one violent crime a year there for every fifty people who live there. They, too, are near a place with a lot of crime - Philadelphia. Someday El Paso may become like Camden. Until then, Camden would do well to heed the lessons of how to live near a high crime area while remaining fairly safe. >Should they just wait until some little kid or college student takes one in >the head walking to class before they try to do something about it? I'd suggest that if you want to concentrate your efforts on "doing something" that will actually make a difference, those efforts would be best concentrated on places where little kids ARE taking bullets in the head. It would surely be foolish to try to prevent crimes where they are not happening and ignore the places they are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dgskydive 0 #95 August 26, 2010 QuoteI'd suggest that if you want to concentrate your efforts on "doing something" that will actually make a difference, those efforts would be best concentrated on places where little kids ARE taking bullets in the head. It would surely be foolish to try to prevent crimes where they are not happening and ignore the places they are. I agree that a lot more needs to be done about crime in general here in the U.S. But we shouldnt sit by and not do anything about the violence that is crossing over.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #96 August 26, 2010 >But we shouldnt sit by and not do anything about the violence that is >crossing over. Again, I agree. And I also agree that there are definitely places it is crossing over. But by what we can see, that's not happening in El Paso much. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dgskydive 0 #97 August 26, 2010 They need to lock the border down from end to end. It is the only way to keep it from crossing over. It is madness to not do so. You live near the border dont you? Im sure it isnt bad where you live, but now that these guys are threatening LEO and even the news outlets. It is only a matter of time before they follow through on these threats. They get away with bribery, murder, kidnapping, intimidation and all sorts of stuff in Mexico. I think that makes them believe it will be just as easy here to do the same things. The longer we don't do something the bolder they will get.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #98 August 26, 2010 >They need to lock the border down from end to end. OK. How? >You live near the border dont you? Well, about 20 miles. But when I jumped at Brown we were about 500 yards from the border. No problems for us. Heck, they'd help _us_ across the fence when we landed over there. We had a lot more trouble with the Federales and the Border Patrol* than we ever had with the people on the other side of the border. >They get away with bribery, murder, kidnapping, intimidation and all sorts >of stuff in Mexico. Agreed; Mexico is a pretty nasty place at times. >Im sure it isnt bad where you live, but now that these guys are >threatening LEO and even the news outlets. They've been doing that for as long as I've lived here (about 20 years.) Threats are easy. (* - we never had trouble with the Border Patrol being ornery, but they'd get the Federales angry, which made at least one situation a lot more tense that it would have been otherwise. And their helicopters used to buzz the DZ until we talked to them about it.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dgskydive 0 #99 August 26, 2010 QuoteOK. How? Nobody likes the idea of a full on fence. Costs to much, not enough people to man it. Looks like East and West Germany. Whatever. We need a big old fence that shocks the ever loving shit out of you if you get within 10 feet of it. Stop spending money on these wars and build a fence. Armed Military of State Guards every few miles in guard houses and roaming patrols. Find a tunnel? You blow it up along with every and anything in it. Once the cartels realize that they will be killed for trying to cross they will stop. Or at least cut it way way back. They just dont cross on land either. More Coast Guard. Give em three chances to stop or blow they get blown out of the water.Dom Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,132 #100 August 26, 2010 >We need a big old fence that shocks the ever loving shit out of you if you >get within 10 feet of it. Thank God we don't have one of those near Brown; I can think of two skydivers who would now be dead if we had them. But in any case, that's around 20 billion in construction costs every 20 years. (The most recent fence here cost $10 million a mile.) Call it another billion a year in ongoing costs (power, maintenance, training, patrolling etc) and around 10 billion in initial land purchases. >Find a tunnel? You blow it up along with every and anything in it. Uh, including the fence? San Diego has one of the densest concentration of border patrols, fences and sensors along the entire border. We still get around 25,000 illegal immigrants a year through the fence. >Once the cartels realize that they will be killed for trying to cross they will stop. Hundreds of immigrants are killed every year during their attempts to get across. (By the desert, not weapons, but same result.) Hasn't stopped them. Indeed, one result is that the coyotes (and cartels that help people across) make a lot more money. Indeed, instead of it stopping the cartels, it has encouraged them, since they have a lucrative new field. That's not to say a fence wouldn't work; it would indeed slow down illegal immigration. But as we've learned here, it would certainly not stop it. So the question becomes - is slowing illegal immigration down somewhat worth the money? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
