Philadelphia: Nutter Proposes Crime Plan that stops sale,posession,carry of firearms!

[JoePSU]

Originally Posted by DeltaII5

I hope your kidding? A degree from Penn? So what? If you looked around the site we have article after article of anti-gun propoganda by people from Ivy League schools. It's propoganda right now, but this luney wants to make it a law. Big difference.....

What about targeting the straw buyers? Naw.....let's just keep the 100,000 other law abiding citizens from buying more than one gun per month. If the gun is evidenced it can be traced and if several lead back to the same man...hmmm...but lets not go after him.... let's change the whole system. I mean there are so many murders out there... lets just change the definition of murder, that way we'll have less...nice attempt at logic though....

troll alert....

The point is he CANT make it law... his proposition is ILLEGAL.

Anyway, I'm disappointed that because I disagree with you, you think I'm a troll. That's as sure a sign as anything you are too isolated from dissension for your own good. I've done nothing but shared my opinion in thoughtful and respectable manner.

And I didn't say a thing about changing the definition of murder... Murder is murder, if you commit it, you no longer belong in our society.

[ChamberedRound]

JoePSU,

We are a gun rights forum (and working to become an official gun rights organization), and as such we are obviously going to focus on issues which affect those rights first and foremost. In addition, Mr. Nutter's proposal represents a threat to gun rights in Philadelphia, and as such we informed our members about it via an email. I'm not sure why you're surprised/upset/etc. that a gun rights forum is notifying their members about threats to said rights.

Even if one were to set aside for a moment the potential harm that Nutter's proposal WILL do to gun rights in Philadelphia, one will see that other points in the plan, like:

- "Stop and frisk" tactics
- Not allowing people to publicly gather
- Curfews

amount to nothing short of imposing martial law on the city. These methods do nothing to solve the problem. Frisking people subjects everyone, even the innocent, to a violation of their rights protected by the 4th Amendment. Preventing those from gathering publicly is a violation of rights protected by the 1st Amendment, as is imposing curfews which limit people's ability to leave their homes.

Mr Nutter's proposal flies in the face of liberty. As I'm sure many have seen before in people's sigs on this site, Benjamin Franklin is credited with saying:

"Those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for the sake of security deserve neither liberty nor security."

This proposal imposes blanket laws which are clearly Unconstitutional and violate everyone's rights in the name of security. Instead, Mr. Nutter should be investigating how to better enforce existing laws on the books, and then keep those criminals off the streets instead of allowing plea bargains and sellout deals.

[MiniDevil]

Originally Posted by DeltaII5

I hope your kidding? A degree from Penn? So what? If you looked around the site we have article after article of anti-gun propoganda by people from Ivy League schools. It's propoganda right now, but this luney wants to make it a law. Big difference.....

What about targeting the straw buyers? Naw.....let's just keep the 100,000 other law abiding citizens from buying more than one gun per month. If the gun is evidenced it can be traced and if several lead back to the same man...hmmm...but lets not go after him.... let's change the whole system. I mean there are so many murders out there... lets just change the definition of murder, that way we'll have less...nice attempt at logic though....

troll alert....

Not nice to call someone a troll just because their view differs. We are doing what this forum and thread was designed to do. Simply debating the issues at hand with which we were presented.

[JoePSU]

Originally Posted by MiniDevil

They would either learn the traits or make good decoys. It's their choice in life.

That's one way of looking at it... Another is that I would sooner go fight myself than trust some thug fuck-up to defend me.

[JoePSU]

Originally Posted by ChamberedRound

JoePSU,

We are a gun rights forum (and working to become an official gun rights organization), and as such we are obviously going to focus on issues which affect those rights first and foremost. In addition, Mr. Nutter's proposal represents a threat to gun rights in Philadelphia, and as such we informed our members about it via an email. I'm not sure why you're surprised/upset/etc. that a gun rights forum is notifying their members about threats to said rights.

Even if one were to set aside for a moment the potential harm that Nutter's proposal WILL do to gun rights in Philadelphia, one will see that other points in the plan, like:

- "Stop and frisk" tactics
- Not allowing people to publicly gather
- Curfews

amount to nothing short of imposing martial law on the city. These methods do nothing to solve the problem. Frisking people subjects everyone, even the innocent, to a violation of their rights protected by the 4th Amendment. Preventing those from gathering publicly is a violation of rights protected by the 1st Amendment, as is imposing curfews which limit people's ability to leave their homes.

Mr Nutter's proposal flies in the face of liberty. As I'm sure many have seen before in people's sigs on this site, Benjamin Franklin is credited with saying:

"Those who are willing to sacrifice liberty for the sake of security deserve neither liberty nor security."

This proposal imposes blanket laws which are clearly Unconstitutional and violate everyone's rights. Instead, Mr. Nutter should be investigating how to better enforce existing laws on the books, and then keep those criminals off the streets instead of allowing plea bargains and sellout deals.

I agree with you on this. My overriding point is that the mayor of Philadelphia, no matter who he is, has not the authority, the support, or the strength to enforce what is in his proposal.

I am not surprised or offended at the response of the members of this forum, however, I think it is irresponsible to paint a single picture of the man based on this one ill conceived idea alone. There is more to the picture than that, and given the alternatives, I shudder at the thought of people making a decision to support Fattah instead of Nutter on this one issue alone.

[KeithPA]

Originally Posted by MiniDevil

Not nice to call someone a troll just because their view differs. We are doing what this forum and thread was designed to do. Simply debating the issues at hand with which we were presented.

His view does differ....look at what chamber said, thats where I'm coming from but am too lazy to type.... Come onto a site saying you don't mind people's civil / gun rights being violated then that is what your going to get......

[Tommel]

Great another chump anti-gun politician in Philly...

-Tom

[KeithPA]

Originally Posted by JoePSU

I agree with you on this. My overriding point is that the mayor of Philadelphia, no matter who he is, has not the authority, the support, or the strength to enforce what is in his proposal.

I am not surprised or offended at the response of the members of this forum, however, I think it is irresponsible to paint a single picture of the man based on this one ill conceived idea alone. There is more to the picture than that, and given the alternatives, I shudder at the thought of people making a decision to support Fattah instead of Nutter on this one issue alone.

It's not about an issue...it's about an thought process....

Look at Bush... first we heard about warrantless wiretaps..... so were we surprised when it came to warrantless searching of financial records... warrantless searches of mail.....no

It doesn't have to do with his issue, but his way of thinking.... it's ignorance of the laws/process

[MiniDevil]

Perhaps. The debate over what to do with the useless members of society is better saved for another day however.

I still disagree with any martial law or other means of taking the liberty away from law abiding citizens. There's nothing wrong with me going out tomorrow and buying a Barrett .50 BMG Sniper Rifle, purchasing some incendiary AP rounds for it, then also getting a revolver, a 1911, an AR-15, and/or maybe even an M16 all in one day. I'm not a criminal. Why should I be treated like one? I enjoy my freedoms, and I'm not just going to swallow someone stripping them away.

[MiniDevil]

Originally Posted by DeltaII5

His view does differ....look at what chamber said, thats where I'm coming from but am too lazy to type.... Come onto a site saying you don't mind people's civil / gun rights being violated then that is what your going to get......

I already said his view differs. So what. You should respect his belief just as much as you want him to respect yours. That IS why we are here, right?