If more guns makes a country safer

[NotYourBody]

So many mistakes your friend made in the situation you describe.

So should he have stayed home; check between all the parked cars? I that what you do going back to your automobile in a public parking lot?

It can happen to anybody, anywhere, at any time. Criminals do target places where the least suspecting victims are to be found.

Yes, actually, women (especially women alone) do check the parking lot, especially on the way to, and around her own car.

I know who is in the lot, where they are, if they are coming or going, if they are male or female, if they have bags in their hands, if they look like they belong, if they are wondering around lost, if they are walking too close to me and on and on.

You have to be hyper-aware in parking lots.

And you call us paranoid for carrying our guns?

You call it paranoid, I call it second nature.

The difference between us is, I don't require a gun to leave my house.

For the record - I've never been blindsided in a parking lot and had my crotch bashed in.

Neither have I, but because that never happened doesn't mean I shouldn't be prepared in case it does, unlike my former coworker.

The links I provided earlier were only stories of CCW holders who protected others. There are thousands of stories of CCW holders protecting themselves, or otherwise stopping a crime about to happen simply by brandishing their firearm.

Now let's compare our strategies to avoid being a victim of a crime. We are both in a store, and we both notice a suspicious looking character in the parking lot. He's not doing anything wrong or illegal to get the police involved, just a little concerning.

With your method, you just stand at that store window waiting for this individual to leave. Because I am armed, I leave the store when I want to. Now, if you did not take notice of me walking safely to my car without altercations, you might be there for hours, or perhaps call a friend to drive over to escort you to your car. Me? I'm home in about 20 minutes proceeding to my next project of the day.

A different scenario: Because I don't have time to wait for this person to leave, I exit the store anyway, and if trouble arises, I use deadly force to stop an attack. If you have somewhere important to go, and get attacked in that parking lot, you may lose your purse, get raped, or perhaps murdered.

So tell me: in that situation, who's ahead of the game, you or I?

You think I have to stand in the store and wait? Bullshit. I go to the store manager and say 'there's a weirdo creep in your parking lot and I need to get to my car. Get somebody out here who can address the situation and help me get to my car safely.'

I've done it before. Works every time.

I'm always prepared. I don't need a gun to help me feel safe.

 

[2aguy]

So Mr smart why the US is one of the worst countries when it comes to gun homicides, mass shootings ? There are millions of guns. Why the US is the most fucked up? There is not a day when I don't turn local news and there isn't someone who killed someone....lately is more family violence than gang violence or work violence . The last country I visited the worst crime they had on TV was a shooting in a work place in the US. The irony !!!!

So homicides and violent crimes don't count in your world. How convenient for you!

You know where else your "method" would help? London, England! They can quit counting all the murders committed with knives and machetes!

I do appreciate your efforts in helping me get great exposure for these facts as often as possible!

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S.
By James Slack
UPDATED:18:14 EST, 2 July 2009

Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it has been revealed.

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries.

The figures comes on the day new Home Secretary Alan Johnson makes his first major speech on crime, promising to be tough on loutish behaviour.

The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 920 and South Africa 1,609.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: 'This is a damning indictment of this government's comprehensive failure over more than a decade to tackle the deep rooted social problems in our society, and the knock on effect on crime and anti-social behaviour.

Read more: The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S. | Daily Mail Online

UK is violent crime capital of Europe

That only stands to reason.....at least with those of us on the right. Helpless people in Europe have no way to defend themselves. They are targets of crime just like elderly people are in the US.

The difference is that most people here have the ability to defend themselves if they desire. At least in my state, if a helpless 90 pound female is being followed by an aggressive male, and she's prepared for an attack, that 200 pound muscle bound gorilla may be going home on a gurney with the sheet draped over his head. That doesn't happen in Europe.

Stupidest excuses as usual. School shootings? Rosd rage shootings? Work shootings? Concert shootings? Work ppace shootings ? Domestic shootings? Kids accidentally shooting their family members? And so much more....

Mass shootings account for less than 1% of all murders.

70% of all murders occur in inner city urban areas and usually involve young minorities most of which have some sort of criminal history

So.....

Mass public shootings in 2018..... 12, total killed 93 people.

Total gun murders in 2018.... 10,265.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So should he have stayed home; check between all the parked cars? I that what you do going back to your automobile in a public parking lot?

It can happen to anybody, anywhere, at any time. Criminals do target places where the least suspecting victims are to be found.

Yes, actually, women (especially women alone) do check the parking lot, especially on the way to, and around her own car.

I know who is in the lot, where they are, if they are coming or going, if they are male or female, if they have bags in their hands, if they look like they belong, if they are wondering around lost, if they are walking too close to me and on and on.

You have to be hyper-aware in parking lots.

And you call us paranoid for carrying our guns?

You call it paranoid, I call it second nature.

The difference between us is, I don't require a gun to leave my house.

For the record - I've never been blindsided in a parking lot and had my crotch bashed in.

Neither have I, but because that never happened doesn't mean I shouldn't be prepared in case it does, unlike my former coworker.

The links I provided earlier were only stories of CCW holders who protected others. There are thousands of stories of CCW holders protecting themselves, or otherwise stopping a crime about to happen simply by brandishing their firearm.

Now let's compare our strategies to avoid being a victim of a crime. We are both in a store, and we both notice a suspicious looking character in the parking lot. He's not doing anything wrong or illegal to get the police involved, just a little concerning.

With your method, you just stand at that store window waiting for this individual to leave. Because I am armed, I leave the store when I want to. Now, if you did not take notice of me walking safely to my car without altercations, you might be there for hours, or perhaps call a friend to drive over to escort you to your car. Me? I'm home in about 20 minutes proceeding to my next project of the day.

A different scenario: Because I don't have time to wait for this person to leave, I exit the store anyway, and if trouble arises, I use deadly force to stop an attack. If you have somewhere important to go, and get attacked in that parking lot, you may lose your purse, get raped, or perhaps murdered.

So tell me: in that situation, who's ahead of the game, you or I?

You think I have to stand in the store and wait? Bullshit. I go to the store manager and say 'there's a weirdo creep in your parking lot and I need to get to my car. Get somebody out here who can address the situation and help me get to my car safely.'

I've done it before. Works every time.

I'm always prepared. I don't need a gun to help me feel safe.

Well maybe you can do that, but men don't' ask other men to protect them, unless it's one of those men in dresses. And what if this guy is a trouble maker? You and the manager (or whoever) go out there, and the guy shoots both of you. How would you feel if you survived and he lost his life because of you?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't know if he was serious about it or just went through the process only to make a point and story. Either way, it took months of work and waiting before he got the final decision. If people really reject their leadership, they can get a little smarter and start voting Republican again. Rudy straightened that city up real quick when he was in charge. With this commie they elected for Mayor, this is what police officers have to go through now.

What you saw in that vid has nothing to do with the Mayor. That has to do with the Cops not doing their jobs and some people taking advantage of it. Obviously, these were stage ahead of time without the Cops knowledge. The Cops should have reacted stronger in both incidents.


One huge problem. Mayor Dinkus (dig that name) started the spiral down on the Crime Rate before Rudy took office. Many of the programs that Rudy took credit for were already in place. And the bulk of the drop was done byy the policies off the Police Chief that Rudy forced out later. The only real thing Rudy did was approve some programs that were clear violations of citizens rights like stop and search which the courts said it was unconstitutional. If they were going to try that around here, chances are, there is going to be an ass beating to go along with it. And it might be the cop that gets to give the ass beating. If a Cop does not have a reasonable reason and elects to do it then he just threw away his authority as a police officer.

You are doing another, "Hey, look over there" routine. And more guns would not have done anything in the case of your latest deflection other than got a few cops killed.

Well......I can already tell you're talking out of your ass since Rudy didn't create Stop and Frisk. That was after he left office as Mayor.

Secondly, the NYC police are at odds with Commie De-Blah-Zio and their reluctance to show authority was led by him. Rudy chimed in on this embarrassing situation. Pay attention to the hyperlink in the article.

Giuliani calls de Blasio a "disgrace" after NYPD attacked with water on streets of New York City

The Giuliani we see today isn't the same on that once was. AT one time, you would have called him a Commie as well. At one time, he as extremely left at about the same as Bernie. Rudy really isn't left nor right. He is an opportunist. He will do and say anything he thinks that will get him ahead. I have no idea why either party would have anything to do with him.

So at what time would I have called him a commie? As far as I can remember, he's been a pretty conservative guy. No, he isn't the same guy as he once was, but neither am I, and neither are you. We all lose our edge as time progresses.

But NYC was plagued with homeless people washing windows for money, and motorists who didn't pay them faced a violent confrontation. He kicked those people out of the city, and sent the mob to New Jersey. The park was a dangerous place to visit. Under his leadership, crime, assaults and murders decreased. You couldn't have had a better leader during the 911 attacks. And he always supported the NYC police department at every turn.

Business people and the wealthy are leaving the city because of taxes. Violent and gun crime is on the increase. This Mayor is more concerned about getting horse and carriage off the street than he is bums. He never once challenged Kelly Bundy Cortez from chasing businesses out of the city thinking that tax abatements were taxpayers giving businesses money to come there.

What a mess.

Okay, let's take a good hard look at the Amazon Distibution Center. So you got 30,000 jobs for 5 years and you sold the baby for taxes to get it. Are you aware that within 5 years, Amazon will totally automate their distrubution centers and those 30K jobs are gone but you still sold the baby. Within 1 years time, doing a 30K layoff isn't pretty and completely wrecks a cities population financially. Those dollars that were supposed to be recouped from taxes from the workers are gone. Yes, Amazon has a fully automated Distribution center ready and able in the wings that it can put into play in the very near future. Amazon is NOT a company you can depend on in a long range. The Delivery Drones are many years away but the Automated Distrubution Centers are already being slowly worked in. Right now, Amazon doesn't need to those 30K workers for one Distribution Center anymore. They can do it with less than 5000. But the deal they cut was for 30K. In the end, it was a bad deal for NYC since the Tax Breaks and outright gifts would NEVER be paid back.

This would have been another Corporate Welfare deal. And for a company that does not pay a single dime in Taxes to begin with but makes billions in profits. Is that your idea of a fair deal for America?

I have bad news for you, and that is the new facilities are about as automated as they're going to get. They recently opened up two here in the Cleveland area, and got that tax abatement they were looking for. Both were closed down malls that were an eyesore to the public, and a place where rodents and animals called home.

I had a delivery to the one in Euclid about a month and a half ago, which is a connecting suburb east of Cleveland. While they didn't open up yet, the shipper explained to me what those robots and automation will do once they did open up. It was six floors of automation that was going to happen. It was really something to see. Plus the place is huge. They have well over 100 docks, and they had four mules (a tractor that switches the trailers in and out of dock doors). In all my years of driving a truck and seeing all kinds of things, this place was the most impressive. From what other drivers have told me, the one in North Randall (another Cleveland suburb) was just as impressive. I still haven't been to that one yet. But it is about five miles from where I live. Amazon is still looking for help even though they've been open for a month now.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

What you saw in that vid has nothing to do with the Mayor. That has to do with the Cops not doing their jobs and some people taking advantage of it. Obviously, these were stage ahead of time without the Cops knowledge. The Cops should have reacted stronger in both incidents.


One huge problem. Mayor Dinkus (dig that name) started the spiral down on the Crime Rate before Rudy took office. Many of the programs that Rudy took credit for were already in place. And the bulk of the drop was done byy the policies off the Police Chief that Rudy forced out later. The only real thing Rudy did was approve some programs that were clear violations of citizens rights like stop and search which the courts said it was unconstitutional. If they were going to try that around here, chances are, there is going to be an ass beating to go along with it. And it might be the cop that gets to give the ass beating. If a Cop does not have a reasonable reason and elects to do it then he just threw away his authority as a police officer.

You are doing another, "Hey, look over there" routine. And more guns would not have done anything in the case of your latest deflection other than got a few cops killed.

Well......I can already tell you're talking out of your ass since Rudy didn't create Stop and Frisk. That was after he left office as Mayor.

Secondly, the NYC police are at odds with Commie De-Blah-Zio and their reluctance to show authority was led by him. Rudy chimed in on this embarrassing situation. Pay attention to the hyperlink in the article.

Giuliani calls de Blasio a "disgrace" after NYPD attacked with water on streets of New York City

The Giuliani we see today isn't the same on that once was. AT one time, you would have called him a Commie as well. At one time, he as extremely left at about the same as Bernie. Rudy really isn't left nor right. He is an opportunist. He will do and say anything he thinks that will get him ahead. I have no idea why either party would have anything to do with him.

So at what time would I have called him a commie? As far as I can remember, he's been a pretty conservative guy. No, he isn't the same guy as he once was, but neither am I, and neither are you. We all lose our edge as time progresses.

But NYC was plagued with homeless people washing windows for money, and motorists who didn't pay them faced a violent confrontation. He kicked those people out of the city, and sent the mob to New Jersey. The park was a dangerous place to visit. Under his leadership, crime, assaults and murders decreased. You couldn't have had a better leader during the 911 attacks. And he always supported the NYC police department at every turn.

Business people and the wealthy are leaving the city because of taxes. Violent and gun crime is on the increase. This Mayor is more concerned about getting horse and carriage off the street than he is bums. He never once challenged Kelly Bundy Cortez from chasing businesses out of the city thinking that tax abatements were taxpayers giving businesses money to come there.

What a mess.

Okay, let's take a good hard look at the Amazon Distibution Center. So you got 30,000 jobs for 5 years and you sold the baby for taxes to get it. Are you aware that within 5 years, Amazon will totally automate their distrubution centers and those 30K jobs are gone but you still sold the baby. Within 1 years time, doing a 30K layoff isn't pretty and completely wrecks a cities population financially. Those dollars that were supposed to be recouped from taxes from the workers are gone. Yes, Amazon has a fully automated Distribution center ready and able in the wings that it can put into play in the very near future. Amazon is NOT a company you can depend on in a long range. The Delivery Drones are many years away but the Automated Distrubution Centers are already being slowly worked in. Right now, Amazon doesn't need to those 30K workers for one Distribution Center anymore. They can do it with less than 5000. But the deal they cut was for 30K. In the end, it was a bad deal for NYC since the Tax Breaks and outright gifts would NEVER be paid back.

This would have been another Corporate Welfare deal. And for a company that does not pay a single dime in Taxes to begin with but makes billions in profits. Is that your idea of a fair deal for America?

I have bad news for you, and that is the new facilities are about as automated as they're going to get. They recently opened up two here in the Cleveland area, and got that tax abatement they were looking for. Both were closed down malls that were an eyesore to the public, and a place where rodents and animals called home.

I had a delivery to the one in Euclid about a month and a half ago, which is a connecting suburb east of Cleveland. While they didn't open up yet, the shipper explained to me what those robots and automation will do once they did open up. It was six floors of automation that was going to happen. It was really something to see. Plus the place is huge. They have well over 100 docks, and they had four mules (a tractor that switches the trailers in and out of dock doors). In all my years of driving a truck and seeing all kinds of things, this place was the most impressive. From what other drivers have told me, the one in North Randall (another Cleveland suburb) was just as impressive. I still haven't been to that one yet. But it is about five miles from where I live. Amazon is still looking for help even though they've been open for a month now.

And the automation puts workers out of work that you can't see therefore they don't and never existed, right? Right now, Amazon has done away with the humans running the fork lifts. Humans still reach into the bins and take out the product and transfer them into a outgoing bin and the storage is returned by automation to the storage. Automation still hasn't reached the point of replacing all of the humans in the line. But if you look at a 5 acre Amazon distribution Center, you will see very few humans but a lot of activity by robots that was once done by human forklift drivers.

So you think your job is safe. Not in Arizona. While most of the other states won't allow automated driving vehicles, Arizona does in many areas. That means that automated trucks are right around the corner. The Trucks will be used on the Interstate System, drive to a distribution center where a human will back them into the docks. But an automated driver will pull it out of the dock when it's unloaded and park it in the storage area. That means your job is gone. As more states allow this, the fewer long haul jobs will be available. The Automated Driver just isn't ready for urban driving yet and it may be years before it is. But long haul trucking can be done today. So you don't see anything wrong with automation replacing other peoples jobs because it hasn't replaced yours yet. You had better be within 5 years of retirement with a rock solid retirement plan because your job is next.

Amazon will be one of the first to do away with their long haul trucking. Oh, short haul will still be humans but no more than already exists. And at a lower pay scale. Are you going to take one of those jobs? The reason Amazon is constantly hiring is they are also known to be hard on their workers. They claim to pay above the min wage. They do. But so does McDonalds and I can tell you, there are a lot of jobs that are easier for the same money to work at than McDonalds. Fast Food in a high volume store ain't easy. At least Dry Walling, while being harder, pays much better making it worth it. One of the things that keeps the Amazon workers in line is the fear of more automation. They know that at any time a machine can learn to pick an item from a storage bin and transfer it to an outgoing bin correctly. And that is the bulk of the Amazon workers jobs. Give it 5 years and even those jobs will be gone. What was 30,000 jobs at an Amazon Distribution Center 2 years ago is now only 5000 jobs today. But the tax breaks and outright gifts by the communities were for the Taxes that a workforce of 30,000 would bring in. NYC wanted to renegotiate the deal for the lower employment numbers. Amazon wanted to keep the same deal at 30K even though it was really only 5K. NYC was justified in walking away from the deal. No, Amazon did not walk away from the deal. NYC decided they didn't want to sell the baby.

 

[NotYourBody]

Yes, actually, women (especially women alone) do check the parking lot, especially on the way to, and around her own car.

I know who is in the lot, where they are, if they are coming or going, if they are male or female, if they have bags in their hands, if they look like they belong, if they are wondering around lost, if they are walking too close to me and on and on.

You have to be hyper-aware in parking lots.

And you call us paranoid for carrying our guns?

You call it paranoid, I call it second nature.

The difference between us is, I don't require a gun to leave my house.

For the record - I've never been blindsided in a parking lot and had my crotch bashed in.

Neither have I, but because that never happened doesn't mean I shouldn't be prepared in case it does, unlike my former coworker.

The links I provided earlier were only stories of CCW holders who protected others. There are thousands of stories of CCW holders protecting themselves, or otherwise stopping a crime about to happen simply by brandishing their firearm.

Now let's compare our strategies to avoid being a victim of a crime. We are both in a store, and we both notice a suspicious looking character in the parking lot. He's not doing anything wrong or illegal to get the police involved, just a little concerning.

With your method, you just stand at that store window waiting for this individual to leave. Because I am armed, I leave the store when I want to. Now, if you did not take notice of me walking safely to my car without altercations, you might be there for hours, or perhaps call a friend to drive over to escort you to your car. Me? I'm home in about 20 minutes proceeding to my next project of the day.

A different scenario: Because I don't have time to wait for this person to leave, I exit the store anyway, and if trouble arises, I use deadly force to stop an attack. If you have somewhere important to go, and get attacked in that parking lot, you may lose your purse, get raped, or perhaps murdered.

So tell me: in that situation, who's ahead of the game, you or I?

You think I have to stand in the store and wait? Bullshit. I go to the store manager and say 'there's a weirdo creep in your parking lot and I need to get to my car. Get somebody out here who can address the situation and help me get to my car safely.'

I've done it before. Works every time.

I'm always prepared. I don't need a gun to help me feel safe.

Well maybe you can do that, but men don't' ask other men to protect them, unless it's one of those men in dresses. And what if this guy is a trouble maker? You and the manager (or whoever) go out there, and the guy shoots both of you. How would you feel if you survived and he lost his life because of you?

So you're saying, instead of working together to solve a common problem, you'd rather take your chances on your own knowing that you might have to shoot someone to death. All because your ego is so fragile you can't ask someone for help. Maybe you could think of it as rounding up a posse (the kind without guns) to confront a common threat. That might not be so injurious to your delicate ego.

Now this is just a guess, but your kind of thinking just MIGHT be why some folks don't want people like you to have guns.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Well......I can already tell you're talking out of your ass since Rudy didn't create Stop and Frisk. That was after he left office as Mayor.

Secondly, the NYC police are at odds with Commie De-Blah-Zio and their reluctance to show authority was led by him. Rudy chimed in on this embarrassing situation. Pay attention to the hyperlink in the article.

Giuliani calls de Blasio a "disgrace" after NYPD attacked with water on streets of New York City

The Giuliani we see today isn't the same on that once was. AT one time, you would have called him a Commie as well. At one time, he as extremely left at about the same as Bernie. Rudy really isn't left nor right. He is an opportunist. He will do and say anything he thinks that will get him ahead. I have no idea why either party would have anything to do with him.

So at what time would I have called him a commie? As far as I can remember, he's been a pretty conservative guy. No, he isn't the same guy as he once was, but neither am I, and neither are you. We all lose our edge as time progresses.

But NYC was plagued with homeless people washing windows for money, and motorists who didn't pay them faced a violent confrontation. He kicked those people out of the city, and sent the mob to New Jersey. The park was a dangerous place to visit. Under his leadership, crime, assaults and murders decreased. You couldn't have had a better leader during the 911 attacks. And he always supported the NYC police department at every turn.

Business people and the wealthy are leaving the city because of taxes. Violent and gun crime is on the increase. This Mayor is more concerned about getting horse and carriage off the street than he is bums. He never once challenged Kelly Bundy Cortez from chasing businesses out of the city thinking that tax abatements were taxpayers giving businesses money to come there.

What a mess.

Okay, let's take a good hard look at the Amazon Distibution Center. So you got 30,000 jobs for 5 years and you sold the baby for taxes to get it. Are you aware that within 5 years, Amazon will totally automate their distrubution centers and those 30K jobs are gone but you still sold the baby. Within 1 years time, doing a 30K layoff isn't pretty and completely wrecks a cities population financially. Those dollars that were supposed to be recouped from taxes from the workers are gone. Yes, Amazon has a fully automated Distribution center ready and able in the wings that it can put into play in the very near future. Amazon is NOT a company you can depend on in a long range. The Delivery Drones are many years away but the Automated Distrubution Centers are already being slowly worked in. Right now, Amazon doesn't need to those 30K workers for one Distribution Center anymore. They can do it with less than 5000. But the deal they cut was for 30K. In the end, it was a bad deal for NYC since the Tax Breaks and outright gifts would NEVER be paid back.

This would have been another Corporate Welfare deal. And for a company that does not pay a single dime in Taxes to begin with but makes billions in profits. Is that your idea of a fair deal for America?

I have bad news for you, and that is the new facilities are about as automated as they're going to get. They recently opened up two here in the Cleveland area, and got that tax abatement they were looking for. Both were closed down malls that were an eyesore to the public, and a place where rodents and animals called home.

I had a delivery to the one in Euclid about a month and a half ago, which is a connecting suburb east of Cleveland. While they didn't open up yet, the shipper explained to me what those robots and automation will do once they did open up. It was six floors of automation that was going to happen. It was really something to see. Plus the place is huge. They have well over 100 docks, and they had four mules (a tractor that switches the trailers in and out of dock doors). In all my years of driving a truck and seeing all kinds of things, this place was the most impressive. From what other drivers have told me, the one in North Randall (another Cleveland suburb) was just as impressive. I still haven't been to that one yet. But it is about five miles from where I live. Amazon is still looking for help even though they've been open for a month now.

And the automation puts workers out of work that you can't see therefore they don't and never existed, right? Right now, Amazon has done away with the humans running the fork lifts. Humans still reach into the bins and take out the product and transfer them into a outgoing bin and the storage is returned by automation to the storage. Automation still hasn't reached the point of replacing all of the humans in the line. But if you look at a 5 acre Amazon distribution Center, you will see very few humans but a lot of activity by robots that was once done by human forklift drivers.

So you think your job is safe. Not in Arizona. While most of the other states won't allow automated driving vehicles, Arizona does in many areas. That means that automated trucks are right around the corner. The Trucks will be used on the Interstate System, drive to a distribution center where a human will back them into the docks. But an automated driver will pull it out of the dock when it's unloaded and park it in the storage area. That means your job is gone. As more states allow this, the fewer long haul jobs will be available. The Automated Driver just isn't ready for urban driving yet and it may be years before it is. But long haul trucking can be done today. So you don't see anything wrong with automation replacing other peoples jobs because it hasn't replaced yours yet. You had better be within 5 years of retirement with a rock solid retirement plan because your job is next.

Amazon will be one of the first to do away with their long haul trucking. Oh, short haul will still be humans but no more than already exists. And at a lower pay scale. Are you going to take one of those jobs? The reason Amazon is constantly hiring is they are also known to be hard on their workers. They claim to pay above the min wage. They do. But so does McDonalds and I can tell you, there are a lot of jobs that are easier for the same money to work at than McDonalds. Fast Food in a high volume store ain't easy. At least Dry Walling, while being harder, pays much better making it worth it. One of the things that keeps the Amazon workers in line is the fear of more automation. They know that at any time a machine can learn to pick an item from a storage bin and transfer it to an outgoing bin correctly. And that is the bulk of the Amazon workers jobs. Give it 5 years and even those jobs will be gone. What was 30,000 jobs at an Amazon Distribution Center 2 years ago is now only 5000 jobs today. But the tax breaks and outright gifts by the communities were for the Taxes that a workforce of 30,000 would bring in. NYC wanted to renegotiate the deal for the lower employment numbers. Amazon wanted to keep the same deal at 30K even though it was really only 5K. NYC was justified in walking away from the deal. No, Amazon did not walk away from the deal. NYC decided they didn't want to sell the baby.

So where did you get this idea I love automation? The point I made was that Amazon has the highest technology for their new distribution centers, and there is little more they can actually do. Automation works for a company when it's cheaper to purchase equipment than it is to pay a worker.

What are blue collar people going to do in the future? I don't really know, and I'll be long off this planet when it happens. Autonomous trucks? Please. Uber is trying to settle lawsuits for their autonomous cars that killed people. The difference though is if an Uber car stops, the customer can take over and finish the trip. If a tractor-trailer stops, who will take over? Well, they have those trucks now, and every one has to have a licensed driver in it. I don't see that changing anytime soon.

City driving? Many, many years away. It takes too much human calculation to drive city that a computer could never figure out. Many of the streets are not designed for a truck to easily turn. You have to figure out how exactly to accomplish that. You have to either go to the lane left of you, start turning on a red light when you know it's about to change to stop the cross traffic to turn, and some of these geniuses that design those roads also allow utility companies to put utility polls right on that corner you need to turn. But, with some luck, I'm retiring in a little over two years, so that won't be my problem. Even if I have to work to 67, it's still not a threat to me.

Amazon here pays between 14 and 16 dollars an hour for non-skilled labor. But the benefits are pretty good; much better than McDonald's. They even have a college program where they pay for part of your education. While it's still not living high on the hog, it's better to have those jobs here than not have them at all.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

And you call us paranoid for carrying our guns?

You call it paranoid, I call it second nature.

The difference between us is, I don't require a gun to leave my house.

For the record - I've never been blindsided in a parking lot and had my crotch bashed in.

Neither have I, but because that never happened doesn't mean I shouldn't be prepared in case it does, unlike my former coworker.

The links I provided earlier were only stories of CCW holders who protected others. There are thousands of stories of CCW holders protecting themselves, or otherwise stopping a crime about to happen simply by brandishing their firearm.

Now let's compare our strategies to avoid being a victim of a crime. We are both in a store, and we both notice a suspicious looking character in the parking lot. He's not doing anything wrong or illegal to get the police involved, just a little concerning.

With your method, you just stand at that store window waiting for this individual to leave. Because I am armed, I leave the store when I want to. Now, if you did not take notice of me walking safely to my car without altercations, you might be there for hours, or perhaps call a friend to drive over to escort you to your car. Me? I'm home in about 20 minutes proceeding to my next project of the day.

A different scenario: Because I don't have time to wait for this person to leave, I exit the store anyway, and if trouble arises, I use deadly force to stop an attack. If you have somewhere important to go, and get attacked in that parking lot, you may lose your purse, get raped, or perhaps murdered.

So tell me: in that situation, who's ahead of the game, you or I?

You think I have to stand in the store and wait? Bullshit. I go to the store manager and say 'there's a weirdo creep in your parking lot and I need to get to my car. Get somebody out here who can address the situation and help me get to my car safely.'

I've done it before. Works every time.

I'm always prepared. I don't need a gun to help me feel safe.

Well maybe you can do that, but men don't' ask other men to protect them, unless it's one of those men in dresses. And what if this guy is a trouble maker? You and the manager (or whoever) go out there, and the guy shoots both of you. How would you feel if you survived and he lost his life because of you?

So you're saying, instead of working together to solve a common problem, you'd rather take your chances on your own knowing that you might have to shoot someone to death. All because your ego is so fragile you can't ask someone for help. Maybe you could think of it as rounding up a posse (the kind without guns) to confront a common threat. That might not be so injurious to your delicate ego.

Now this is just a guess, but your kind of thinking just MIGHT be why some folks don't want people like you to have guns.

My kind of thinking? You mean thinking to be properly prepared in case self-defense is needed? My, what a ridiculous thought.

You can't be asking people for help every time you suspect something isn't on the up and up. In well over 90% of the cases, it's pure caution and nothing bad would happen anyway. But carrying a firearm is about that tiny percentage of something actually happening.

Up north, we drive to work in snow storms. Accidents all over the place, but of course, you take that chance to get to work and keep your job. After all, life can't stop because you are scared of something. You just make the assumption that everything is going to be okay, and you will not be one of those people in a wreck. But because you have that confidence, you don't leave your cell phone at home, take out the spare tire for less weight, drive with no insurance. You take precautions IN CASE you need those things.

As has been stated and posted repeatedly in this topic, CCW holders are the most law abiding people. And you won't find many....if any stories about innocents getting shot or killed amid a licensed carrier using deadly force to stop an attacker.

That's why people like me should be armed.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The Giuliani we see today isn't the same on that once was. AT one time, you would have called him a Commie as well. At one time, he as extremely left at about the same as Bernie. Rudy really isn't left nor right. He is an opportunist. He will do and say anything he thinks that will get him ahead. I have no idea why either party would have anything to do with him.

So at what time would I have called him a commie? As far as I can remember, he's been a pretty conservative guy. No, he isn't the same guy as he once was, but neither am I, and neither are you. We all lose our edge as time progresses.

But NYC was plagued with homeless people washing windows for money, and motorists who didn't pay them faced a violent confrontation. He kicked those people out of the city, and sent the mob to New Jersey. The park was a dangerous place to visit. Under his leadership, crime, assaults and murders decreased. You couldn't have had a better leader during the 911 attacks. And he always supported the NYC police department at every turn.

Business people and the wealthy are leaving the city because of taxes. Violent and gun crime is on the increase. This Mayor is more concerned about getting horse and carriage off the street than he is bums. He never once challenged Kelly Bundy Cortez from chasing businesses out of the city thinking that tax abatements were taxpayers giving businesses money to come there.

What a mess.

Okay, let's take a good hard look at the Amazon Distibution Center. So you got 30,000 jobs for 5 years and you sold the baby for taxes to get it. Are you aware that within 5 years, Amazon will totally automate their distrubution centers and those 30K jobs are gone but you still sold the baby. Within 1 years time, doing a 30K layoff isn't pretty and completely wrecks a cities population financially. Those dollars that were supposed to be recouped from taxes from the workers are gone. Yes, Amazon has a fully automated Distribution center ready and able in the wings that it can put into play in the very near future. Amazon is NOT a company you can depend on in a long range. The Delivery Drones are many years away but the Automated Distrubution Centers are already being slowly worked in. Right now, Amazon doesn't need to those 30K workers for one Distribution Center anymore. They can do it with less than 5000. But the deal they cut was for 30K. In the end, it was a bad deal for NYC since the Tax Breaks and outright gifts would NEVER be paid back.

This would have been another Corporate Welfare deal. And for a company that does not pay a single dime in Taxes to begin with but makes billions in profits. Is that your idea of a fair deal for America?

I have bad news for you, and that is the new facilities are about as automated as they're going to get. They recently opened up two here in the Cleveland area, and got that tax abatement they were looking for. Both were closed down malls that were an eyesore to the public, and a place where rodents and animals called home.

I had a delivery to the one in Euclid about a month and a half ago, which is a connecting suburb east of Cleveland. While they didn't open up yet, the shipper explained to me what those robots and automation will do once they did open up. It was six floors of automation that was going to happen. It was really something to see. Plus the place is huge. They have well over 100 docks, and they had four mules (a tractor that switches the trailers in and out of dock doors). In all my years of driving a truck and seeing all kinds of things, this place was the most impressive. From what other drivers have told me, the one in North Randall (another Cleveland suburb) was just as impressive. I still haven't been to that one yet. But it is about five miles from where I live. Amazon is still looking for help even though they've been open for a month now.

And the automation puts workers out of work that you can't see therefore they don't and never existed, right? Right now, Amazon has done away with the humans running the fork lifts. Humans still reach into the bins and take out the product and transfer them into a outgoing bin and the storage is returned by automation to the storage. Automation still hasn't reached the point of replacing all of the humans in the line. But if you look at a 5 acre Amazon distribution Center, you will see very few humans but a lot of activity by robots that was once done by human forklift drivers.

So you think your job is safe. Not in Arizona. While most of the other states won't allow automated driving vehicles, Arizona does in many areas. That means that automated trucks are right around the corner. The Trucks will be used on the Interstate System, drive to a distribution center where a human will back them into the docks. But an automated driver will pull it out of the dock when it's unloaded and park it in the storage area. That means your job is gone. As more states allow this, the fewer long haul jobs will be available. The Automated Driver just isn't ready for urban driving yet and it may be years before it is. But long haul trucking can be done today. So you don't see anything wrong with automation replacing other peoples jobs because it hasn't replaced yours yet. You had better be within 5 years of retirement with a rock solid retirement plan because your job is next.

Amazon will be one of the first to do away with their long haul trucking. Oh, short haul will still be humans but no more than already exists. And at a lower pay scale. Are you going to take one of those jobs? The reason Amazon is constantly hiring is they are also known to be hard on their workers. They claim to pay above the min wage. They do. But so does McDonalds and I can tell you, there are a lot of jobs that are easier for the same money to work at than McDonalds. Fast Food in a high volume store ain't easy. At least Dry Walling, while being harder, pays much better making it worth it. One of the things that keeps the Amazon workers in line is the fear of more automation. They know that at any time a machine can learn to pick an item from a storage bin and transfer it to an outgoing bin correctly. And that is the bulk of the Amazon workers jobs. Give it 5 years and even those jobs will be gone. What was 30,000 jobs at an Amazon Distribution Center 2 years ago is now only 5000 jobs today. But the tax breaks and outright gifts by the communities were for the Taxes that a workforce of 30,000 would bring in. NYC wanted to renegotiate the deal for the lower employment numbers. Amazon wanted to keep the same deal at 30K even though it was really only 5K. NYC was justified in walking away from the deal. No, Amazon did not walk away from the deal. NYC decided they didn't want to sell the baby.

So where did you get this idea I love automation? The point I made was that Amazon has the highest technology for their new distribution centers, and there is little more they can actually do. Automation works for a company when it's cheaper to purchase equipment than it is to pay a worker.

What are blue collar people going to do in the future? I don't really know, and I'll be long off this planet when it happens. Autonomous trucks? Please. Uber is trying to settle lawsuits for their autonomous cars that killed people. The difference though is if an Uber car stops, the customer can take over and finish the trip. If a tractor-trailer stops, who will take over? Well, they have those trucks now, and every one has to have a licensed driver in it. I don't see that changing anytime soon.

City driving? Many, many years away. It takes too much human calculation to drive city that a computer could never figure out. Many of the streets are not designed for a truck to easily turn. You have to figure out how exactly to accomplish that. You have to either go to the lane left of you, start turning on a red light when you know it's about to change to stop the cross traffic to turn, and some of these geniuses that design those roads also allow utility companies to put utility polls right on that corner you need to turn. But, with some luck, I'm retiring in a little over two years, so that won't be my problem. Even if I have to work to 67, it's still not a threat to me.

Amazon here pays between 14 and 16 dollars an hour for non-skilled labor. But the benefits are pretty good; much better than McDonald's. They even have a college program where they pay for part of your education. While it's still not living high on the hog, it's better to have those jobs here than not have them at all.

When as company is enticed to come into a community, certain tax breaks and outright gifts are done by the tax payers and other businesses. Here is a small list of some of those.

1. The Land they are to build their factory on is donated
2. There is a sizable donation to the building of the facility
3. The Local and State Taxes are either drastically lowered or exempted
4. Utilities are heavily discounted

The way the community gets paid back is the Company promises X number of jobs for X number of years. When the deal was agreed on, Amazon had yet to start introducing their automated supply bots to retrieve the bins from the warehouse. That meant that there were thousands of humans that were involved in just that. In a normal distribution center, we are talking forklift drivers and people with Telzons at the Warehouse along with workers to pull the items. Amazon automated those jobs. When the original agreement is for 30K workers but it ends up being 5K, the community has the right to renegotiate the deal. If they don't then they have just given some nice fat gifts to the company with no return on the investments. When the original deal was cut, Amazon didn't have the automation at the level they have today. And like any other Corporation, they are going to go where they can get the most free "Gifts" to setup their business. NYC would have been insane if they had gone with the original deal. Amazon changed the parameters, not NYC.

As for long haul trucking, I said within 5 years. You said today. I said long haul interstate and you say urban. We are right back to the old Rumpster reasoning of "Everything is a Wall".

 

[toobfreak]

If more guns makes a country safer

They do. Americans are the safest people in the world.

• During the establishment of the colonies, guns made us safe from England.
• During the expansion of the nation, guns kept us safe from the Indians.
• During the settlement of the West, guns kept us safe as Sheriffs and Marshalls were far and few between.
• During the 20th Century, guns prevented Japan from trying to attack our Homeland.
• Today, guns keep us safe and protect us from you radical Leftists and your out of control government.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Yes, actually, women (especially women alone) do check the parking lot, especially on the way to, and around her own car.

I know who is in the lot, where they are, if they are coming or going, if they are male or female, if they have bags in their hands, if they look like they belong, if they are wondering around lost, if they are walking too close to me and on and on.

You have to be hyper-aware in parking lots.

And you call us paranoid for carrying our guns?

You call it paranoid, I call it second nature.

The difference between us is, I don't require a gun to leave my house.

For the record - I've never been blindsided in a parking lot and had my crotch bashed in.

Neither have I, but because that never happened doesn't mean I shouldn't be prepared in case it does, unlike my former coworker.

The links I provided earlier were only stories of CCW holders who protected others. There are thousands of stories of CCW holders protecting themselves, or otherwise stopping a crime about to happen simply by brandishing their firearm.

Now let's compare our strategies to avoid being a victim of a crime. We are both in a store, and we both notice a suspicious looking character in the parking lot. He's not doing anything wrong or illegal to get the police involved, just a little concerning.

With your method, you just stand at that store window waiting for this individual to leave. Because I am armed, I leave the store when I want to. Now, if you did not take notice of me walking safely to my car without altercations, you might be there for hours, or perhaps call a friend to drive over to escort you to your car. Me? I'm home in about 20 minutes proceeding to my next project of the day.

A different scenario: Because I don't have time to wait for this person to leave, I exit the store anyway, and if trouble arises, I use deadly force to stop an attack. If you have somewhere important to go, and get attacked in that parking lot, you may lose your purse, get raped, or perhaps murdered.

So tell me: in that situation, who's ahead of the game, you or I?

You think I have to stand in the store and wait? Bullshit. I go to the store manager and say 'there's a weirdo creep in your parking lot and I need to get to my car. Get somebody out here who can address the situation and help me get to my car safely.'

I've done it before. Works every time.

I'm always prepared. I don't need a gun to help me feel safe.

Well maybe you can do that, but men don't' ask other men to protect them, unless it's one of those men in dresses. And what if this guy is a trouble maker? You and the manager (or whoever) go out there, and the guy shoots both of you. How would you feel if you survived and he lost his life because of you?

This is truly an inane ‘what if’ argument.

You and others on the right come off as ridiculous and desperate in your failed attempts to ‘justify’ carrying a concealed firearm where no such ‘justification’ is needed.

Citizens have the right to carry concealed firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense; one is not required to ‘validate’ a right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed exercise that right – including the Second Amendment right.

Most Americans don’t want to carry concealed firearms and their reasons for not doing so are as valid as your reasons to carry a concealed firearm.

Conservatives need to stop with the confirmation bias fallacies, the slippery slope fallacies, the false comparison fallacies, the post hoc fallacies, the ‘what if’ speculation fallacies, and all other manifestations of rightwing sophistry typical of gun ‘debates.’

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

And you call us paranoid for carrying our guns?

You call it paranoid, I call it second nature.

The difference between us is, I don't require a gun to leave my house.

For the record - I've never been blindsided in a parking lot and had my crotch bashed in.

Neither have I, but because that never happened doesn't mean I shouldn't be prepared in case it does, unlike my former coworker.

The links I provided earlier were only stories of CCW holders who protected others. There are thousands of stories of CCW holders protecting themselves, or otherwise stopping a crime about to happen simply by brandishing their firearm.

Now let's compare our strategies to avoid being a victim of a crime. We are both in a store, and we both notice a suspicious looking character in the parking lot. He's not doing anything wrong or illegal to get the police involved, just a little concerning.

With your method, you just stand at that store window waiting for this individual to leave. Because I am armed, I leave the store when I want to. Now, if you did not take notice of me walking safely to my car without altercations, you might be there for hours, or perhaps call a friend to drive over to escort you to your car. Me? I'm home in about 20 minutes proceeding to my next project of the day.

A different scenario: Because I don't have time to wait for this person to leave, I exit the store anyway, and if trouble arises, I use deadly force to stop an attack. If you have somewhere important to go, and get attacked in that parking lot, you may lose your purse, get raped, or perhaps murdered.

So tell me: in that situation, who's ahead of the game, you or I?

You think I have to stand in the store and wait? Bullshit. I go to the store manager and say 'there's a weirdo creep in your parking lot and I need to get to my car. Get somebody out here who can address the situation and help me get to my car safely.'

I've done it before. Works every time.

I'm always prepared. I don't need a gun to help me feel safe.

Well maybe you can do that, but men don't' ask other men to protect them, unless it's one of those men in dresses. And what if this guy is a trouble maker? You and the manager (or whoever) go out there, and the guy shoots both of you. How would you feel if you survived and he lost his life because of you?

This is truly an inane ‘what if’ argument.

You and others on the right come off as ridiculous and desperate in your failed attempts to ‘justify’ carrying a concealed firearm where no such ‘justification’ is needed.

Citizens have the right to carry concealed firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense; one is not required to ‘validate’ a right as a ‘prerequisite’ to indeed exercise that right – including the Second Amendment right.

Most Americans don’t want to carry concealed firearms and their reasons for not doing so are as valid as your reasons to carry a concealed firearm.

Conservatives need to stop with the confirmation bias fallacies, the slippery slope fallacies, the false comparison fallacies, the post hoc fallacies, the ‘what if’ speculation fallacies, and all other manifestations of rightwing sophistry typical of gun ‘debates.’

To some point we can agree. But we don't bitch about people who don't want to carry a firearm. They bitch about us having that right.

As far as I'm concerned, nobody has to have a gun if they don't want one, but don't expect me to follow you off a cliff. If I want to carry a firearm, I will. If you don't want to carry one, then don't. What are the chances that I'll ever need a firearm for self-defense? Slim, but not as slim as being a victim of a mass shooting, something that plagues the minds of anti-gun leftists.

In 2018, there were over 100,000 armed robberies in the US, and that's just robberies. Forget about the rapes, attempted rapes, and assaults. So how is that for your so-called fallacies? Crime can happen anywhere. Most if not all of the school shootings took place in virtual crime-free nice areas. Many of the other mass shootings the same.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So at what time would I have called him a commie? As far as I can remember, he's been a pretty conservative guy. No, he isn't the same guy as he once was, but neither am I, and neither are you. We all lose our edge as time progresses.

But NYC was plagued with homeless people washing windows for money, and motorists who didn't pay them faced a violent confrontation. He kicked those people out of the city, and sent the mob to New Jersey. The park was a dangerous place to visit. Under his leadership, crime, assaults and murders decreased. You couldn't have had a better leader during the 911 attacks. And he always supported the NYC police department at every turn.

Business people and the wealthy are leaving the city because of taxes. Violent and gun crime is on the increase. This Mayor is more concerned about getting horse and carriage off the street than he is bums. He never once challenged Kelly Bundy Cortez from chasing businesses out of the city thinking that tax abatements were taxpayers giving businesses money to come there.

What a mess.

Okay, let's take a good hard look at the Amazon Distibution Center. So you got 30,000 jobs for 5 years and you sold the baby for taxes to get it. Are you aware that within 5 years, Amazon will totally automate their distrubution centers and those 30K jobs are gone but you still sold the baby. Within 1 years time, doing a 30K layoff isn't pretty and completely wrecks a cities population financially. Those dollars that were supposed to be recouped from taxes from the workers are gone. Yes, Amazon has a fully automated Distribution center ready and able in the wings that it can put into play in the very near future. Amazon is NOT a company you can depend on in a long range. The Delivery Drones are many years away but the Automated Distrubution Centers are already being slowly worked in. Right now, Amazon doesn't need to those 30K workers for one Distribution Center anymore. They can do it with less than 5000. But the deal they cut was for 30K. In the end, it was a bad deal for NYC since the Tax Breaks and outright gifts would NEVER be paid back.

This would have been another Corporate Welfare deal. And for a company that does not pay a single dime in Taxes to begin with but makes billions in profits. Is that your idea of a fair deal for America?

I have bad news for you, and that is the new facilities are about as automated as they're going to get. They recently opened up two here in the Cleveland area, and got that tax abatement they were looking for. Both were closed down malls that were an eyesore to the public, and a place where rodents and animals called home.

I had a delivery to the one in Euclid about a month and a half ago, which is a connecting suburb east of Cleveland. While they didn't open up yet, the shipper explained to me what those robots and automation will do once they did open up. It was six floors of automation that was going to happen. It was really something to see. Plus the place is huge. They have well over 100 docks, and they had four mules (a tractor that switches the trailers in and out of dock doors). In all my years of driving a truck and seeing all kinds of things, this place was the most impressive. From what other drivers have told me, the one in North Randall (another Cleveland suburb) was just as impressive. I still haven't been to that one yet. But it is about five miles from where I live. Amazon is still looking for help even though they've been open for a month now.

And the automation puts workers out of work that you can't see therefore they don't and never existed, right? Right now, Amazon has done away with the humans running the fork lifts. Humans still reach into the bins and take out the product and transfer them into a outgoing bin and the storage is returned by automation to the storage. Automation still hasn't reached the point of replacing all of the humans in the line. But if you look at a 5 acre Amazon distribution Center, you will see very few humans but a lot of activity by robots that was once done by human forklift drivers.

So you think your job is safe. Not in Arizona. While most of the other states won't allow automated driving vehicles, Arizona does in many areas. That means that automated trucks are right around the corner. The Trucks will be used on the Interstate System, drive to a distribution center where a human will back them into the docks. But an automated driver will pull it out of the dock when it's unloaded and park it in the storage area. That means your job is gone. As more states allow this, the fewer long haul jobs will be available. The Automated Driver just isn't ready for urban driving yet and it may be years before it is. But long haul trucking can be done today. So you don't see anything wrong with automation replacing other peoples jobs because it hasn't replaced yours yet. You had better be within 5 years of retirement with a rock solid retirement plan because your job is next.

Amazon will be one of the first to do away with their long haul trucking. Oh, short haul will still be humans but no more than already exists. And at a lower pay scale. Are you going to take one of those jobs? The reason Amazon is constantly hiring is they are also known to be hard on their workers. They claim to pay above the min wage. They do. But so does McDonalds and I can tell you, there are a lot of jobs that are easier for the same money to work at than McDonalds. Fast Food in a high volume store ain't easy. At least Dry Walling, while being harder, pays much better making it worth it. One of the things that keeps the Amazon workers in line is the fear of more automation. They know that at any time a machine can learn to pick an item from a storage bin and transfer it to an outgoing bin correctly. And that is the bulk of the Amazon workers jobs. Give it 5 years and even those jobs will be gone. What was 30,000 jobs at an Amazon Distribution Center 2 years ago is now only 5000 jobs today. But the tax breaks and outright gifts by the communities were for the Taxes that a workforce of 30,000 would bring in. NYC wanted to renegotiate the deal for the lower employment numbers. Amazon wanted to keep the same deal at 30K even though it was really only 5K. NYC was justified in walking away from the deal. No, Amazon did not walk away from the deal. NYC decided they didn't want to sell the baby.

So where did you get this idea I love automation? The point I made was that Amazon has the highest technology for their new distribution centers, and there is little more they can actually do. Automation works for a company when it's cheaper to purchase equipment than it is to pay a worker.

What are blue collar people going to do in the future? I don't really know, and I'll be long off this planet when it happens. Autonomous trucks? Please. Uber is trying to settle lawsuits for their autonomous cars that killed people. The difference though is if an Uber car stops, the customer can take over and finish the trip. If a tractor-trailer stops, who will take over? Well, they have those trucks now, and every one has to have a licensed driver in it. I don't see that changing anytime soon.

City driving? Many, many years away. It takes too much human calculation to drive city that a computer could never figure out. Many of the streets are not designed for a truck to easily turn. You have to figure out how exactly to accomplish that. You have to either go to the lane left of you, start turning on a red light when you know it's about to change to stop the cross traffic to turn, and some of these geniuses that design those roads also allow utility companies to put utility polls right on that corner you need to turn. But, with some luck, I'm retiring in a little over two years, so that won't be my problem. Even if I have to work to 67, it's still not a threat to me.

Amazon here pays between 14 and 16 dollars an hour for non-skilled labor. But the benefits are pretty good; much better than McDonald's. They even have a college program where they pay for part of your education. While it's still not living high on the hog, it's better to have those jobs here than not have them at all.

When as company is enticed to come into a community, certain tax breaks and outright gifts are done by the tax payers and other businesses. Here is a small list of some of those.

1. The Land they are to build their factory on is donated
2. There is a sizable donation to the building of the facility
3. The Local and State Taxes are either drastically lowered or exempted
4. Utilities are heavily discounted

The way the community gets paid back is the Company promises X number of jobs for X number of years. When the deal was agreed on, Amazon had yet to start introducing their automated supply bots to retrieve the bins from the warehouse. That meant that there were thousands of humans that were involved in just that. In a normal distribution center, we are talking forklift drivers and people with Telzons at the Warehouse along with workers to pull the items. Amazon automated those jobs. When the original agreement is for 30K workers but it ends up being 5K, the community has the right to renegotiate the deal. If they don't then they have just given some nice fat gifts to the company with no return on the investments. When the original deal was cut, Amazon didn't have the automation at the level they have today. And like any other Corporation, they are going to go where they can get the most free "Gifts" to setup their business. NYC would have been insane if they had gone with the original deal. Amazon changed the parameters, not NYC.

As for long haul trucking, I said within 5 years. You said today. I said long haul interstate and you say urban. We are right back to the old Rumpster reasoning of "Everything is a Wall".

I'm just telling you what I know about the industry since I'm part of it. Yes, I said today because some companies are experimenting with it today. A FB friend of mine sent me an article on the disruption it caused at UPS in Texas. where he lives.

Doesn't it strike you curious as to why Amazon works in other places, but couldn't in NYC? As I stated, we had two malls that have been closed for many years; just a total waste of land. Even with the abatements, the cities still made out quite well. But NYC can't?

Will Amazon automate even further? They might, but so will every other industry. We can't keep those industries out of our backyard because of it. We might as well take advantage of it while things are going our way. A city or state doesn't pay a company to move there. They reduce their taxes to move there. AOC just isn't all that smart. I'm sure Boston University shrieks every time she opens her mouth.

 

[NotYourBody]

You call it paranoid, I call it second nature.

The difference between us is, I don't require a gun to leave my house.

For the record - I've never been blindsided in a parking lot and had my crotch bashed in.

Neither have I, but because that never happened doesn't mean I shouldn't be prepared in case it does, unlike my former coworker.

The links I provided earlier were only stories of CCW holders who protected others. There are thousands of stories of CCW holders protecting themselves, or otherwise stopping a crime about to happen simply by brandishing their firearm.

Now let's compare our strategies to avoid being a victim of a crime. We are both in a store, and we both notice a suspicious looking character in the parking lot. He's not doing anything wrong or illegal to get the police involved, just a little concerning.

With your method, you just stand at that store window waiting for this individual to leave. Because I am armed, I leave the store when I want to. Now, if you did not take notice of me walking safely to my car without altercations, you might be there for hours, or perhaps call a friend to drive over to escort you to your car. Me? I'm home in about 20 minutes proceeding to my next project of the day.

A different scenario: Because I don't have time to wait for this person to leave, I exit the store anyway, and if trouble arises, I use deadly force to stop an attack. If you have somewhere important to go, and get attacked in that parking lot, you may lose your purse, get raped, or perhaps murdered.

So tell me: in that situation, who's ahead of the game, you or I?

You think I have to stand in the store and wait? Bullshit. I go to the store manager and say 'there's a weirdo creep in your parking lot and I need to get to my car. Get somebody out here who can address the situation and help me get to my car safely.'

I've done it before. Works every time.

I'm always prepared. I don't need a gun to help me feel safe.

Well maybe you can do that, but men don't' ask other men to protect them, unless it's one of those men in dresses. And what if this guy is a trouble maker? You and the manager (or whoever) go out there, and the guy shoots both of you. How would you feel if you survived and he lost his life because of you?

So you're saying, instead of working together to solve a common problem, you'd rather take your chances on your own knowing that you might have to shoot someone to death. All because your ego is so fragile you can't ask someone for help. Maybe you could think of it as rounding up a posse (the kind without guns) to confront a common threat. That might not be so injurious to your delicate ego.

Now this is just a guess, but your kind of thinking just MIGHT be why some folks don't want people like you to have guns.

My kind of thinking? You mean thinking to be properly prepared in case self-defense is needed? My, what a ridiculous thought.

You can't be asking people for help every time you suspect something isn't on the up and up. In well over 90% of the cases, it's pure caution and nothing bad would happen anyway. But carrying a firearm is about that tiny percentage of something actually happening.

Up north, we drive to work in snow storms. Accidents all over the place, but of course, you take that chance to get to work and keep your job. After all, life can't stop because you are scared of something. You just make the assumption that everything is going to be okay, and you will not be one of those people in a wreck. But because you have that confidence, you don't leave your cell phone at home, take out the spare tire for less weight, drive with no insurance. You take precautions IN CASE you need those things.

As has been stated and posted repeatedly in this topic, CCW holders are the most law abiding people. And you won't find many....if any stories about innocents getting shot or killed amid a licensed carrier using deadly force to stop an attacker.

That's why people like me should be armed.

I am always prepared when I leave my house. I just don't require a gun.

Another one for the record, as an adult, I have not been the victim of a violent crime. And I have traveled the world, without a gun. It truly is not nearly as scary as you think. Everyone is not out to rape you, kill you, or steal all your shit. Only the paranoid gun nutters think that way.

AND your CCW statistics don't mean shit. Immigrants commit less crime than citizens born in this country. Yet GOP nutters still claim they are deadly, murdering raping hordes. Sorry, your side has lost all cred when it comes to facts. Save it for someone who still believes any of your gun nutter talking points.

And I don't need or want your gun 'protection'. Pretty sure this genius isn't saving anyone. Big ol Bubba needs two guns to feel safe in the near empty Jersey Mike's. Whoever is taking the picture could have that gun pulled out in a fraction of a second. No guarantees how clean it will be.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Okay, let's take a good hard look at the Amazon Distibution Center. So you got 30,000 jobs for 5 years and you sold the baby for taxes to get it. Are you aware that within 5 years, Amazon will totally automate their distrubution centers and those 30K jobs are gone but you still sold the baby. Within 1 years time, doing a 30K layoff isn't pretty and completely wrecks a cities population financially. Those dollars that were supposed to be recouped from taxes from the workers are gone. Yes, Amazon has a fully automated Distribution center ready and able in the wings that it can put into play in the very near future. Amazon is NOT a company you can depend on in a long range. The Delivery Drones are many years away but the Automated Distrubution Centers are already being slowly worked in. Right now, Amazon doesn't need to those 30K workers for one Distribution Center anymore. They can do it with less than 5000. But the deal they cut was for 30K. In the end, it was a bad deal for NYC since the Tax Breaks and outright gifts would NEVER be paid back.

This would have been another Corporate Welfare deal. And for a company that does not pay a single dime in Taxes to begin with but makes billions in profits. Is that your idea of a fair deal for America?

I have bad news for you, and that is the new facilities are about as automated as they're going to get. They recently opened up two here in the Cleveland area, and got that tax abatement they were looking for. Both were closed down malls that were an eyesore to the public, and a place where rodents and animals called home.

I had a delivery to the one in Euclid about a month and a half ago, which is a connecting suburb east of Cleveland. While they didn't open up yet, the shipper explained to me what those robots and automation will do once they did open up. It was six floors of automation that was going to happen. It was really something to see. Plus the place is huge. They have well over 100 docks, and they had four mules (a tractor that switches the trailers in and out of dock doors). In all my years of driving a truck and seeing all kinds of things, this place was the most impressive. From what other drivers have told me, the one in North Randall (another Cleveland suburb) was just as impressive. I still haven't been to that one yet. But it is about five miles from where I live. Amazon is still looking for help even though they've been open for a month now.

And the automation puts workers out of work that you can't see therefore they don't and never existed, right? Right now, Amazon has done away with the humans running the fork lifts. Humans still reach into the bins and take out the product and transfer them into a outgoing bin and the storage is returned by automation to the storage. Automation still hasn't reached the point of replacing all of the humans in the line. But if you look at a 5 acre Amazon distribution Center, you will see very few humans but a lot of activity by robots that was once done by human forklift drivers.

So you think your job is safe. Not in Arizona. While most of the other states won't allow automated driving vehicles, Arizona does in many areas. That means that automated trucks are right around the corner. The Trucks will be used on the Interstate System, drive to a distribution center where a human will back them into the docks. But an automated driver will pull it out of the dock when it's unloaded and park it in the storage area. That means your job is gone. As more states allow this, the fewer long haul jobs will be available. The Automated Driver just isn't ready for urban driving yet and it may be years before it is. But long haul trucking can be done today. So you don't see anything wrong with automation replacing other peoples jobs because it hasn't replaced yours yet. You had better be within 5 years of retirement with a rock solid retirement plan because your job is next.

Amazon will be one of the first to do away with their long haul trucking. Oh, short haul will still be humans but no more than already exists. And at a lower pay scale. Are you going to take one of those jobs? The reason Amazon is constantly hiring is they are also known to be hard on their workers. They claim to pay above the min wage. They do. But so does McDonalds and I can tell you, there are a lot of jobs that are easier for the same money to work at than McDonalds. Fast Food in a high volume store ain't easy. At least Dry Walling, while being harder, pays much better making it worth it. One of the things that keeps the Amazon workers in line is the fear of more automation. They know that at any time a machine can learn to pick an item from a storage bin and transfer it to an outgoing bin correctly. And that is the bulk of the Amazon workers jobs. Give it 5 years and even those jobs will be gone. What was 30,000 jobs at an Amazon Distribution Center 2 years ago is now only 5000 jobs today. But the tax breaks and outright gifts by the communities were for the Taxes that a workforce of 30,000 would bring in. NYC wanted to renegotiate the deal for the lower employment numbers. Amazon wanted to keep the same deal at 30K even though it was really only 5K. NYC was justified in walking away from the deal. No, Amazon did not walk away from the deal. NYC decided they didn't want to sell the baby.

So where did you get this idea I love automation? The point I made was that Amazon has the highest technology for their new distribution centers, and there is little more they can actually do. Automation works for a company when it's cheaper to purchase equipment than it is to pay a worker.

What are blue collar people going to do in the future? I don't really know, and I'll be long off this planet when it happens. Autonomous trucks? Please. Uber is trying to settle lawsuits for their autonomous cars that killed people. The difference though is if an Uber car stops, the customer can take over and finish the trip. If a tractor-trailer stops, who will take over? Well, they have those trucks now, and every one has to have a licensed driver in it. I don't see that changing anytime soon.

City driving? Many, many years away. It takes too much human calculation to drive city that a computer could never figure out. Many of the streets are not designed for a truck to easily turn. You have to figure out how exactly to accomplish that. You have to either go to the lane left of you, start turning on a red light when you know it's about to change to stop the cross traffic to turn, and some of these geniuses that design those roads also allow utility companies to put utility polls right on that corner you need to turn. But, with some luck, I'm retiring in a little over two years, so that won't be my problem. Even if I have to work to 67, it's still not a threat to me.

Amazon here pays between 14 and 16 dollars an hour for non-skilled labor. But the benefits are pretty good; much better than McDonald's. They even have a college program where they pay for part of your education. While it's still not living high on the hog, it's better to have those jobs here than not have them at all.

When as company is enticed to come into a community, certain tax breaks and outright gifts are done by the tax payers and other businesses. Here is a small list of some of those.

1. The Land they are to build their factory on is donated
2. There is a sizable donation to the building of the facility
3. The Local and State Taxes are either drastically lowered or exempted
4. Utilities are heavily discounted

The way the community gets paid back is the Company promises X number of jobs for X number of years. When the deal was agreed on, Amazon had yet to start introducing their automated supply bots to retrieve the bins from the warehouse. That meant that there were thousands of humans that were involved in just that. In a normal distribution center, we are talking forklift drivers and people with Telzons at the Warehouse along with workers to pull the items. Amazon automated those jobs. When the original agreement is for 30K workers but it ends up being 5K, the community has the right to renegotiate the deal. If they don't then they have just given some nice fat gifts to the company with no return on the investments. When the original deal was cut, Amazon didn't have the automation at the level they have today. And like any other Corporation, they are going to go where they can get the most free "Gifts" to setup their business. NYC would have been insane if they had gone with the original deal. Amazon changed the parameters, not NYC.

As for long haul trucking, I said within 5 years. You said today. I said long haul interstate and you say urban. We are right back to the old Rumpster reasoning of "Everything is a Wall".

I'm just telling you what I know about the industry since I'm part of it. Yes, I said today because some companies are experimenting with it today. A FB friend of mine sent me an article on the disruption it caused at UPS in Texas. where he lives.

Doesn't it strike you curious as to why Amazon works in other places, but couldn't in NYC? As I stated, we had two malls that have been closed for many years; just a total waste of land. Even with the abatements, the cities still made out quite well. But NYC can't?

Will Amazon automate even further? They might, but so will every other industry. We can't keep those industries out of our backyard because of it. We might as well take advantage of it while things are going our way. A city or state doesn't pay a company to move there. They reduce their taxes to move there. AOC just isn't all that smart. I'm sure Boston University shrieks every time she opens her mouth.

We had two companies come here and got some real sweet heart deals. They had to promise to stay at least 5 years and hire at least 60% local. I can't speak of both but I can for one.

One Company was given lucrative tax breaks, reduced utiliities and a 3.1 million dollar building (they weren't given it but the money to build it was provided by the City and County who retained ownership). Thier idea of local 60% employment was utilizing employment agencies for part time workers, none of whom would be retained for longer than 18 months and be offered full time employment. They lasted only 5 years to the day. The lucritive tax breaks were gone, the utility breaks were gone and the State started asking questions on their hiring and employment practices (Colorado mirrors the Federal Laws). They moved on to new gravy train inn New Mexico.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I have bad news for you, and that is the new facilities are about as automated as they're going to get. They recently opened up two here in the Cleveland area, and got that tax abatement they were looking for. Both were closed down malls that were an eyesore to the public, and a place where rodents and animals called home.

I had a delivery to the one in Euclid about a month and a half ago, which is a connecting suburb east of Cleveland. While they didn't open up yet, the shipper explained to me what those robots and automation will do once they did open up. It was six floors of automation that was going to happen. It was really something to see. Plus the place is huge. They have well over 100 docks, and they had four mules (a tractor that switches the trailers in and out of dock doors). In all my years of driving a truck and seeing all kinds of things, this place was the most impressive. From what other drivers have told me, the one in North Randall (another Cleveland suburb) was just as impressive. I still haven't been to that one yet. But it is about five miles from where I live. Amazon is still looking for help even though they've been open for a month now.

And the automation puts workers out of work that you can't see therefore they don't and never existed, right? Right now, Amazon has done away with the humans running the fork lifts. Humans still reach into the bins and take out the product and transfer them into a outgoing bin and the storage is returned by automation to the storage. Automation still hasn't reached the point of replacing all of the humans in the line. But if you look at a 5 acre Amazon distribution Center, you will see very few humans but a lot of activity by robots that was once done by human forklift drivers.

So you think your job is safe. Not in Arizona. While most of the other states won't allow automated driving vehicles, Arizona does in many areas. That means that automated trucks are right around the corner. The Trucks will be used on the Interstate System, drive to a distribution center where a human will back them into the docks. But an automated driver will pull it out of the dock when it's unloaded and park it in the storage area. That means your job is gone. As more states allow this, the fewer long haul jobs will be available. The Automated Driver just isn't ready for urban driving yet and it may be years before it is. But long haul trucking can be done today. So you don't see anything wrong with automation replacing other peoples jobs because it hasn't replaced yours yet. You had better be within 5 years of retirement with a rock solid retirement plan because your job is next.

Amazon will be one of the first to do away with their long haul trucking. Oh, short haul will still be humans but no more than already exists. And at a lower pay scale. Are you going to take one of those jobs? The reason Amazon is constantly hiring is they are also known to be hard on their workers. They claim to pay above the min wage. They do. But so does McDonalds and I can tell you, there are a lot of jobs that are easier for the same money to work at than McDonalds. Fast Food in a high volume store ain't easy. At least Dry Walling, while being harder, pays much better making it worth it. One of the things that keeps the Amazon workers in line is the fear of more automation. They know that at any time a machine can learn to pick an item from a storage bin and transfer it to an outgoing bin correctly. And that is the bulk of the Amazon workers jobs. Give it 5 years and even those jobs will be gone. What was 30,000 jobs at an Amazon Distribution Center 2 years ago is now only 5000 jobs today. But the tax breaks and outright gifts by the communities were for the Taxes that a workforce of 30,000 would bring in. NYC wanted to renegotiate the deal for the lower employment numbers. Amazon wanted to keep the same deal at 30K even though it was really only 5K. NYC was justified in walking away from the deal. No, Amazon did not walk away from the deal. NYC decided they didn't want to sell the baby.

So where did you get this idea I love automation? The point I made was that Amazon has the highest technology for their new distribution centers, and there is little more they can actually do. Automation works for a company when it's cheaper to purchase equipment than it is to pay a worker.

What are blue collar people going to do in the future? I don't really know, and I'll be long off this planet when it happens. Autonomous trucks? Please. Uber is trying to settle lawsuits for their autonomous cars that killed people. The difference though is if an Uber car stops, the customer can take over and finish the trip. If a tractor-trailer stops, who will take over? Well, they have those trucks now, and every one has to have a licensed driver in it. I don't see that changing anytime soon.

City driving? Many, many years away. It takes too much human calculation to drive city that a computer could never figure out. Many of the streets are not designed for a truck to easily turn. You have to figure out how exactly to accomplish that. You have to either go to the lane left of you, start turning on a red light when you know it's about to change to stop the cross traffic to turn, and some of these geniuses that design those roads also allow utility companies to put utility polls right on that corner you need to turn. But, with some luck, I'm retiring in a little over two years, so that won't be my problem. Even if I have to work to 67, it's still not a threat to me.

Amazon here pays between 14 and 16 dollars an hour for non-skilled labor. But the benefits are pretty good; much better than McDonald's. They even have a college program where they pay for part of your education. While it's still not living high on the hog, it's better to have those jobs here than not have them at all.

When as company is enticed to come into a community, certain tax breaks and outright gifts are done by the tax payers and other businesses. Here is a small list of some of those.

1. The Land they are to build their factory on is donated
2. There is a sizable donation to the building of the facility
3. The Local and State Taxes are either drastically lowered or exempted
4. Utilities are heavily discounted

The way the community gets paid back is the Company promises X number of jobs for X number of years. When the deal was agreed on, Amazon had yet to start introducing their automated supply bots to retrieve the bins from the warehouse. That meant that there were thousands of humans that were involved in just that. In a normal distribution center, we are talking forklift drivers and people with Telzons at the Warehouse along with workers to pull the items. Amazon automated those jobs. When the original agreement is for 30K workers but it ends up being 5K, the community has the right to renegotiate the deal. If they don't then they have just given some nice fat gifts to the company with no return on the investments. When the original deal was cut, Amazon didn't have the automation at the level they have today. And like any other Corporation, they are going to go where they can get the most free "Gifts" to setup their business. NYC would have been insane if they had gone with the original deal. Amazon changed the parameters, not NYC.

As for long haul trucking, I said within 5 years. You said today. I said long haul interstate and you say urban. We are right back to the old Rumpster reasoning of "Everything is a Wall".

I'm just telling you what I know about the industry since I'm part of it. Yes, I said today because some companies are experimenting with it today. A FB friend of mine sent me an article on the disruption it caused at UPS in Texas. where he lives.

Doesn't it strike you curious as to why Amazon works in other places, but couldn't in NYC? As I stated, we had two malls that have been closed for many years; just a total waste of land. Even with the abatements, the cities still made out quite well. But NYC can't?

Will Amazon automate even further? They might, but so will every other industry. We can't keep those industries out of our backyard because of it. We might as well take advantage of it while things are going our way. A city or state doesn't pay a company to move there. They reduce their taxes to move there. AOC just isn't all that smart. I'm sure Boston University shrieks every time she opens her mouth.

We had two companies come here and got some real sweet heart deals. They had to promise to stay at least 5 years and hire at least 60% local. I can't speak of both but I can for one.

One Company was given lucrative tax breaks, reduced utiliities and a 3.1 million dollar building (they weren't given it but the money to build it was provided by the City and County who retained ownership). Thier idea of local 60% employment was utilizing employment agencies for part time workers, none of whom would be retained for longer than 18 months and be offered full time employment. They lasted only 5 years to the day. The lucritive tax breaks were gone, the utility breaks were gone and the State started asking questions on their hiring and employment practices (Colorado mirrors the Federal Laws). They moved on to new gravy train inn New Mexico.

Sounds like they made a not so great deal. For most places though, city and state workers have it planned out so nobody really loses. If the plan was for five years, then it's up to them to see if they can retain those companies beyond. It also costs a lot to move operations, so usually when a place buys land, develops it, they stay for a longer period of time.

About ten years ago we got a raw deal here. For whatever reason, the Mayor of the suburb decided to build a mall on an old landfill. The main driver was Walmart. Digging up all that garbage, removing it, dealign with the methane gas was an expensive project. It smelled like all hell too, and that was another issue.

The mall got built, the Mayor decided to retire, and Walmart later decided they wanted a super Walmart in the area. So after they got one too many methane gas alerts, they were able to break their contract with the mall. Walmart was the anchor store, so since they moved, all the other stores in their contract had a clause that got them out of it if the anchor store closed. Now it's virtually abandoned.

It was a bad idea right from the beginning. In fact, during dead time, one of our drivers went there to hang out. He parked by the old Walmart, and stated that the ground moved and the docks were destroyed. So bad deals do happen unfortunately.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Neither have I, but because that never happened doesn't mean I shouldn't be prepared in case it does, unlike my former coworker.

The links I provided earlier were only stories of CCW holders who protected others. There are thousands of stories of CCW holders protecting themselves, or otherwise stopping a crime about to happen simply by brandishing their firearm.

Now let's compare our strategies to avoid being a victim of a crime. We are both in a store, and we both notice a suspicious looking character in the parking lot. He's not doing anything wrong or illegal to get the police involved, just a little concerning.

With your method, you just stand at that store window waiting for this individual to leave. Because I am armed, I leave the store when I want to. Now, if you did not take notice of me walking safely to my car without altercations, you might be there for hours, or perhaps call a friend to drive over to escort you to your car. Me? I'm home in about 20 minutes proceeding to my next project of the day.

A different scenario: Because I don't have time to wait for this person to leave, I exit the store anyway, and if trouble arises, I use deadly force to stop an attack. If you have somewhere important to go, and get attacked in that parking lot, you may lose your purse, get raped, or perhaps murdered.

So tell me: in that situation, who's ahead of the game, you or I?

You think I have to stand in the store and wait? Bullshit. I go to the store manager and say 'there's a weirdo creep in your parking lot and I need to get to my car. Get somebody out here who can address the situation and help me get to my car safely.'

I've done it before. Works every time.

I'm always prepared. I don't need a gun to help me feel safe.

Well maybe you can do that, but men don't' ask other men to protect them, unless it's one of those men in dresses. And what if this guy is a trouble maker? You and the manager (or whoever) go out there, and the guy shoots both of you. How would you feel if you survived and he lost his life because of you?

So you're saying, instead of working together to solve a common problem, you'd rather take your chances on your own knowing that you might have to shoot someone to death. All because your ego is so fragile you can't ask someone for help. Maybe you could think of it as rounding up a posse (the kind without guns) to confront a common threat. That might not be so injurious to your delicate ego.

Now this is just a guess, but your kind of thinking just MIGHT be why some folks don't want people like you to have guns.

My kind of thinking? You mean thinking to be properly prepared in case self-defense is needed? My, what a ridiculous thought.

You can't be asking people for help every time you suspect something isn't on the up and up. In well over 90% of the cases, it's pure caution and nothing bad would happen anyway. But carrying a firearm is about that tiny percentage of something actually happening.

Up north, we drive to work in snow storms. Accidents all over the place, but of course, you take that chance to get to work and keep your job. After all, life can't stop because you are scared of something. You just make the assumption that everything is going to be okay, and you will not be one of those people in a wreck. But because you have that confidence, you don't leave your cell phone at home, take out the spare tire for less weight, drive with no insurance. You take precautions IN CASE you need those things.

As has been stated and posted repeatedly in this topic, CCW holders are the most law abiding people. And you won't find many....if any stories about innocents getting shot or killed amid a licensed carrier using deadly force to stop an attacker.

That's why people like me should be armed.

I am always prepared when I leave my house. I just don't require a gun.

Another one for the record, as an adult, I have not been the victim of a violent crime. And I have traveled the world, without a gun. It truly is not nearly as scary as you think. Everyone is not out to rape you, kill you, or steal all your shit. Only the paranoid gun nutters think that way.

AND your CCW statistics don't mean shit. Immigrants commit less crime than citizens born in this country. Yet GOP nutters still claim they are deadly, murdering raping hordes. Sorry, your side has lost all cred when it comes to facts. Save it for someone who still believes any of your gun nutter talking points.

And I don't need or want your gun 'protection'. Pretty sure this genius isn't saving anyone. Big ol Bubba needs two guns to feel safe in the near empty Jersey Mike's. Whoever is taking the picture could have that gun pulled out in a fraction of a second. No guarantees how clean it will be.

In any country, nobody can predict or stop a murder from happening in most cases. I can't tell you who the next murderer will be here, and I can't tell you who the next mass shooter will be, so I can't prevent the next tragic event. However.....you can do that will illegals by simply keeping them out in the first place. All those incidents of illegals harming, raping, or killing Americans could have all been prevented. There should be no such category of Angle moms, because all their children should be alive today had we acted stronger and much faster than we did.

But even today, tragedies take place, and the blood is on the Democrat parties hands, along with their cohorts who operate those sanctuary cities. They are keeping those robberies, rapes, and murders alive in the US. Because of power, they could care less how many Americans suffer the consequences.

 

[sealybobo]

So Mr smart why the US is one of the worst countries when it comes to gun homicides, mass shootings ? There are millions of guns. Why the US is the most fucked up? There is not a day when I don't turn local news and there isn't someone who killed someone....lately is more family violence than gang violence or work violence . The last country I visited the worst crime they had on TV was a shooting in a work place in the US. The irony !!!!

So homicides and violent crimes don't count in your world. How convenient for you!

You know where else your "method" would help? London, England! They can quit counting all the murders committed with knives and machetes!

I do appreciate your efforts in helping me get great exposure for these facts as often as possible!

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S.
By James Slack
UPDATED:18:14 EST, 2 July 2009

Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it has been revealed.

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries.

The figures comes on the day new Home Secretary Alan Johnson makes his first major speech on crime, promising to be tough on loutish behaviour.

The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 920 and South Africa 1,609.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: 'This is a damning indictment of this government's comprehensive failure over more than a decade to tackle the deep rooted social problems in our society, and the knock on effect on crime and anti-social behaviour.

Read more: The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S. | Daily Mail Online

UK is violent crime capital of Europe

That only stands to reason.....at least with those of us on the right. Helpless people in Europe have no way to defend themselves. They are targets of crime just like elderly people are in the US.

The difference is that most people here have the ability to defend themselves if they desire. At least in my state, if a helpless 90 pound female is being followed by an aggressive male, and she's prepared for an attack, that 200 pound muscle bound gorilla may be going home on a gurney with the sheet draped over his head. That doesn't happen in Europe.

Stupidest excuses as usual. School shootings? Rosd rage shootings? Work shootings? Concert shootings? Work ppace shootings ? Domestic shootings? Kids accidentally shooting their family members? And so much more....

So what? That's part of living in a free society where self-defense is permissible. Hundreds of people drown every summer, but we don't outlaw swimming pools and forbid people from swimming in the lake.

Point is, other violent crime is higher in many countries that outlawed firearms. In England, they are having a huge problem with knives. Women there have absolutely no way of protecting themselves from an aggressive male attacker.

Democrats don't care about women being raped....for a democrat male that is a perk.....just look at their party members....

Then you vote for kavanaugh and all those other abusive men.

Who was the guy who was abusing that woman who worked for trump? Hope hicks?

Trumps buddy was using her for a punching bag

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So homicides and violent crimes don't count in your world. How convenient for you!

You know where else your "method" would help? London, England! They can quit counting all the murders committed with knives and machetes!

I do appreciate your efforts in helping me get great exposure for these facts as often as possible!

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S.
By James Slack
UPDATED:18:14 EST, 2 July 2009

Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it has been revealed.

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries.

The figures comes on the day new Home Secretary Alan Johnson makes his first major speech on crime, promising to be tough on loutish behaviour.

The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 920 and South Africa 1,609.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: 'This is a damning indictment of this government's comprehensive failure over more than a decade to tackle the deep rooted social problems in our society, and the knock on effect on crime and anti-social behaviour.

Read more: The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S. | Daily Mail Online

UK is violent crime capital of Europe

That only stands to reason.....at least with those of us on the right. Helpless people in Europe have no way to defend themselves. They are targets of crime just like elderly people are in the US.

The difference is that most people here have the ability to defend themselves if they desire. At least in my state, if a helpless 90 pound female is being followed by an aggressive male, and she's prepared for an attack, that 200 pound muscle bound gorilla may be going home on a gurney with the sheet draped over his head. That doesn't happen in Europe.

Stupidest excuses as usual. School shootings? Rosd rage shootings? Work shootings? Concert shootings? Work ppace shootings ? Domestic shootings? Kids accidentally shooting their family members? And so much more....

So what? That's part of living in a free society where self-defense is permissible. Hundreds of people drown every summer, but we don't outlaw swimming pools and forbid people from swimming in the lake.

Point is, other violent crime is higher in many countries that outlawed firearms. In England, they are having a huge problem with knives. Women there have absolutely no way of protecting themselves from an aggressive male attacker.

Democrats don't care about women being raped....for a democrat male that is a perk.....just look at their party members....

Then you vote for kavanaugh and all those other abusive men.

Who was the guy who was abusing that woman who worked for trump? Hope hicks?

Trumps buddy was using her for a punching bag

Kavanaugh never abused anybody. It was all a lie and everybody knows it. Do we get to vote on Supreme Court justices now? When did that start because I must have missed the last one.

 

[Blues Man]

So homicides and violent crimes don't count in your world. How convenient for you!

You know where else your "method" would help? London, England! They can quit counting all the murders committed with knives and machetes!

I do appreciate your efforts in helping me get great exposure for these facts as often as possible!

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S.
By James Slack
UPDATED:18:14 EST, 2 July 2009

Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it has been revealed.

Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries.

The figures comes on the day new Home Secretary Alan Johnson makes his first major speech on crime, promising to be tough on loutish behaviour.

The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 920 and South Africa 1,609.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: 'This is a damning indictment of this government's comprehensive failure over more than a decade to tackle the deep rooted social problems in our society, and the knock on effect on crime and anti-social behaviour.

Read more: The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S. | Daily Mail Online

UK is violent crime capital of Europe

That only stands to reason.....at least with those of us on the right. Helpless people in Europe have no way to defend themselves. They are targets of crime just like elderly people are in the US.

The difference is that most people here have the ability to defend themselves if they desire. At least in my state, if a helpless 90 pound female is being followed by an aggressive male, and she's prepared for an attack, that 200 pound muscle bound gorilla may be going home on a gurney with the sheet draped over his head. That doesn't happen in Europe.

Stupidest excuses as usual. School shootings? Rosd rage shootings? Work shootings? Concert shootings? Work ppace shootings ? Domestic shootings? Kids accidentally shooting their family members? And so much more....

So what? That's part of living in a free society where self-defense is permissible. Hundreds of people drown every summer, but we don't outlaw swimming pools and forbid people from swimming in the lake.

Point is, other violent crime is higher in many countries that outlawed firearms. In England, they are having a huge problem with knives. Women there have absolutely no way of protecting themselves from an aggressive male attacker.

Democrats don't care about women being raped....for a democrat male that is a perk.....just look at their party members....

Then you vote for kavanaugh and all those other abusive men.

Who was the guy who was abusing that woman who worked for trump? Hope hicks?

Trumps buddy was using her for a punching bag

Civilians don't vote for Supreme Court judges

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk