Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Threads like these give me cancer. So a random violent crime occurred and you blame liberals? Because violent crimes don't happen in conservative cities right?
Criminals don't care about social and political ideologies. They are criminals. They only care about causing havoc.
Sadly, I must agree with Obama on this, in part at least. It is my opinion that people should not be jailed for merely possessing a given substance, unless of course that substance has little if any peaceful use, or in the case of national security. Now, I have not reviewed each and every case here, nor will I, I have better things to do. My point is, why are we sentencing people to "life without possibility of parole", or effectively so, for drugs? It simply does not work, it plugs up the penal system, and does little to curb actual crime. I do not advocate the use of any mind altering drug, even alcohol, but to criminalize it? What's the point?Did I mention that the Criminal Cartel, the Democrat Party, is largely concerned with destroying western civilization?
A major strategy is in supporting every aspect of lawlessness.
"Obama Frees 111 More Drug Offenders
President Barack Obama has commuted the sentences of 111 more drug offenders — 16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences.
The White House announced another list of criminals who would receive reduced sentences or be set free...
Earlier this month, Obama commuted 214 sentences, making it the single largest number of commutations in a day by any president in history."
Obama Frees 111 More Drug Offenders - Breitbart
Sadly, I must agree with Obama on this, in part at least. It is my opinion that people should not be jailed for merely possessing a given substance, unless of course that substance has little if any peaceful use, or in the case of national security. Now, I have not reviewed each and every case here, nor will I, I have better things to do. My point is, why are we sentencing people to "life without possibility of parole", or effectively so, for drugs? It simply does not work, it plugs up the penal system, and does little to curb actual crime. I do not advocate the use of any mind altering drug, even alcohol, but to criminalize it? What's the point?Did I mention that the Criminal Cartel, the Democrat Party, is largely concerned with destroying western civilization?
A major strategy is in supporting every aspect of lawlessness.
"Obama Frees 111 More Drug Offenders
President Barack Obama has commuted the sentences of 111 more drug offenders — 16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences.
The White House announced another list of criminals who would receive reduced sentences or be set free...
Earlier this month, Obama commuted 214 sentences, making it the single largest number of commutations in a day by any president in history."
Obama Frees 111 More Drug Offenders - Breitbart
So?Sadly, I must agree with Obama on this, in part at least. It is my opinion that people should not be jailed for merely possessing a given substance, unless of course that substance has little if any peaceful use, or in the case of national security. Now, I have not reviewed each and every case here, nor will I, I have better things to do. My point is, why are we sentencing people to "life without possibility of parole", or effectively so, for drugs? It simply does not work, it plugs up the penal system, and does little to curb actual crime. I do not advocate the use of any mind altering drug, even alcohol, but to criminalize it? What's the point?Did I mention that the Criminal Cartel, the Democrat Party, is largely concerned with destroying western civilization?
A major strategy is in supporting every aspect of lawlessness.
"Obama Frees 111 More Drug Offenders
President Barack Obama has commuted the sentences of 111 more drug offenders — 16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences.
The White House announced another list of criminals who would receive reduced sentences or be set free...
Earlier this month, Obama commuted 214 sentences, making it the single largest number of commutations in a day by any president in history."
Obama Frees 111 More Drug Offenders - Breitbart
These are drug dealers....
...and did you note this: "...16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences."
What does that mean? They had a firearm when arrested? Again, so?...and did you note this: "...16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences."
So?Sadly, I must agree with Obama on this, in part at least. It is my opinion that people should not be jailed for merely possessing a given substance, unless of course that substance has little if any peaceful use, or in the case of national security. Now, I have not reviewed each and every case here, nor will I, I have better things to do. My point is, why are we sentencing people to "life without possibility of parole", or effectively so, for drugs? It simply does not work, it plugs up the penal system, and does little to curb actual crime. I do not advocate the use of any mind altering drug, even alcohol, but to criminalize it? What's the point?Did I mention that the Criminal Cartel, the Democrat Party, is largely concerned with destroying western civilization?
A major strategy is in supporting every aspect of lawlessness.
"Obama Frees 111 More Drug Offenders
President Barack Obama has commuted the sentences of 111 more drug offenders — 16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences.
The White House announced another list of criminals who would receive reduced sentences or be set free...
Earlier this month, Obama commuted 214 sentences, making it the single largest number of commutations in a day by any president in history."
Obama Frees 111 More Drug Offenders - Breitbart
These are drug dealers....
...and did you note this: "...16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences."
What does that mean? They had a firearm when arrested? Again, so?...and did you note this: "...16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences."
Ok. My thing here, though, is:So?Sadly, I must agree with Obama on this, in part at least. It is my opinion that people should not be jailed for merely possessing a given substance, unless of course that substance has little if any peaceful use, or in the case of national security. Now, I have not reviewed each and every case here, nor will I, I have better things to do. My point is, why are we sentencing people to "life without possibility of parole", or effectively so, for drugs? It simply does not work, it plugs up the penal system, and does little to curb actual crime. I do not advocate the use of any mind altering drug, even alcohol, but to criminalize it? What's the point?Did I mention that the Criminal Cartel, the Democrat Party, is largely concerned with destroying western civilization?
A major strategy is in supporting every aspect of lawlessness.
"Obama Frees 111 More Drug Offenders
President Barack Obama has commuted the sentences of 111 more drug offenders — 16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences.
The White House announced another list of criminals who would receive reduced sentences or be set free...
Earlier this month, Obama commuted 214 sentences, making it the single largest number of commutations in a day by any president in history."
Obama Frees 111 More Drug Offenders - Breitbart
These are drug dealers....
...and did you note this: "...16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences."
What does that mean? They had a firearm when arrested? Again, so?...and did you note this: "...16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences."
1. It means we're not speaking about drug users.
These are sellers of drugs with a propensity for violence.
2. The thesis in this thread is that the Democrat Party supports criminality...and Obama's action helps prove it.
Let's review: The Liberal Paradigm
1. San Francisco represents the ultimate in Liberal utopias. Yet....we see the results of of organizing a society based on the fallacious 'people are good' dictum
The horrible and undeserved beating of this one individual is representative of what happens when Leftist takes charge.
The women is one person, the 100 million slaughtered by Leftists in the last century, the conclusion.
2. Post #3 documents the ten most dangerous cities for folks like the victim in the OP...and all are under the guidance of Liberal.
3. Post #8 offers a comparison with cities taking a conservative view. The difference is dramatic.
4. Post #11 points out that Liberals facilitate this mindless violence against law abiding citizens, as their fondest dream is to disarm potential citizens. The greatest tribute to the insanity that is Liberalism is signs like 'Gun Free Zone," an invitation to sociopaths,, the Liberal demographic, and a prescription that will only be obeyed by the law-abiding.
5. Post #14 reminds us that Democrats/Liberals have the very best interests of felons at heart.
6. Lest there be any doubt....the Democrat/Liberal candidate for president is a well known congenital liar and criminal who has done her best to sell out the United States for monetary gain.
"The most corrupt, congenital liar is the candidate of the Criminal Party, with the aim of putting her and her 'KSP' (Known Sexual Predator) husband back in at the scene of the crime.....the crime where they stole silverware, dishes and furniture from the People's House as they were leaving last time.."
7. Post #43 has the head of the Criminal Party giving drug deals their 'get out of jail free' card......literally.
QED
Not when the voters depend on Santa Claus AKA the DEMs to keep handing them free shit.A random crime? Blame liberals!
PC must be running out of material, if she's stooping that low.
So.....I have to teach you English vocabulary, too???
par·a·digm
ˈperəˌdīm/
noun
San Francisco is unquestionably the Liberal paradigm
- 1.
technical
a typical example or pattern of something; a model.
"there is a new paradigm for public art in this country"
synonyms: model, pattern, example, exemplar, template, standard, prototype, archetype
"why should your sets of values be the paradigm for the rest of us?"
The comments by citizens of said Liberal paradigm attest to what a city becomes when Liberals are in charge.
Don't believe it?
The cities with populations over 200,000 ranked as the most dangerous are:
1. Detroit, MI - Mayor Mike Duggan - DEMOCRAT
2. Oakland, CA - Mayor Jean Quan - DEMOCRAT
3. Memphis, TN - Mayor A C Wharton - DEMOCRAT
4. St. Louis, MO - Mayor Francis G. Slay - DEMOCRAT
5. Cleveland, OH - Mayor Frank G. Jackson - DEMOCRAT
6. Baltimore, MD - Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake - DEMOCRAT
7. Milwaukee, WI - Mayor Tom Barrett - DEMOCRAT
8. Birmingham, AL - Mayor William A. Bell - DEMOCRAT
9. Newark, NJ - Mayor Ras Baraka - DEMOCRAT
Kansas City, MO - Mayor Sly James - Independent (but probably a DEMOCRAT) http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/democrats-run-highest-crime-cities-
And the republican party still can't win there? Jesus what a feckless sorry excuse for a political party.
Ok. My thing here, though, is:So?Sadly, I must agree with Obama on this, in part at least. It is my opinion that people should not be jailed for merely possessing a given substance, unless of course that substance has little if any peaceful use, or in the case of national security. Now, I have not reviewed each and every case here, nor will I, I have better things to do. My point is, why are we sentencing people to "life without possibility of parole", or effectively so, for drugs? It simply does not work, it plugs up the penal system, and does little to curb actual crime. I do not advocate the use of any mind altering drug, even alcohol, but to criminalize it? What's the point?Did I mention that the Criminal Cartel, the Democrat Party, is largely concerned with destroying western civilization?
A major strategy is in supporting every aspect of lawlessness.
"Obama Frees 111 More Drug Offenders
President Barack Obama has commuted the sentences of 111 more drug offenders — 16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences.
The White House announced another list of criminals who would receive reduced sentences or be set free...
Earlier this month, Obama commuted 214 sentences, making it the single largest number of commutations in a day by any president in history."
Obama Frees 111 More Drug Offenders - Breitbart
These are drug dealers....
...and did you note this: "...16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences."
What does that mean? They had a firearm when arrested? Again, so?...and did you note this: "...16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences."
1. It means we're not speaking about drug users.
These are sellers of drugs with a propensity for violence.
2. The thesis in this thread is that the Democrat Party supports criminality...and Obama's action helps prove it.
Let's review: The Liberal Paradigm
1. San Francisco represents the ultimate in Liberal utopias. Yet....we see the results of of organizing a society based on the fallacious 'people are good' dictum
The horrible and undeserved beating of this one individual is representative of what happens when Leftist takes charge.
The women is one person, the 100 million slaughtered by Leftists in the last century, the conclusion.
2. Post #3 documents the ten most dangerous cities for folks like the victim in the OP...and all are under the guidance of Liberal.
3. Post #8 offers a comparison with cities taking a conservative view. The difference is dramatic.
4. Post #11 points out that Liberals facilitate this mindless violence against law abiding citizens, as their fondest dream is to disarm potential citizens. The greatest tribute to the insanity that is Liberalism is signs like 'Gun Free Zone," an invitation to sociopaths,, the Liberal demographic, and a prescription that will only be obeyed by the law-abiding.
5. Post #14 reminds us that Democrats/Liberals have the very best interests of felons at heart.
6. Lest there be any doubt....the Democrat/Liberal candidate for president is a well known congenital liar and criminal who has done her best to sell out the United States for monetary gain.
"The most corrupt, congenital liar is the candidate of the Criminal Party, with the aim of putting her and her 'KSP' (Known Sexual Predator) husband back in at the scene of the crime.....the crime where they stole silverware, dishes and furniture from the People's House as they were leaving last time.."
7. Post #43 has the head of the Criminal Party giving drug deals their 'get out of jail free' card......literally.
QED
Why are some drugs (i.e. Pot) illegal, while others (i.e. alcohol) are not? What is the difference? Whether one is a "dealer" or a "user" is really not the issue here. The issue is: "Why are we plugging up the judicial system with people convicted of offences related to drugs that have been arbitrarily deemed to be "dangerous" and thus made illegal?" What is the point?
I agree that these people have committed a "crime", at least at the time of the act. Why is a crime, and should it be? Moreover, has the "war on drugs" been effective? If not, why are we continuing to pour resources into a failed "war"? How is it reasonable that a person convicted three times for drug related violations gets "life" without parole, while the average sentence for taking a life is 149 months (according to BJS as of April 1992, http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/PSATSFV.PDF), while the average time served for taking a life is only 71 months? Does this make sense to you? I sure does not to me.
I apologize if I misunderstand what you are presenting in the thread, but are you making any suggestion in lieu of a problem?
I apologize if I misunderstand what you are presenting in the thread, but are you making any suggestion in lieu of a problem?
Absolutely.
Never vote for a Democrat.
To me, then, the article you cited does nothing to further your argument.Ok. My thing here, though, is:So?Sadly, I must agree with Obama on this, in part at least. It is my opinion that people should not be jailed for merely possessing a given substance, unless of course that substance has little if any peaceful use, or in the case of national security. Now, I have not reviewed each and every case here, nor will I, I have better things to do. My point is, why are we sentencing people to "life without possibility of parole", or effectively so, for drugs? It simply does not work, it plugs up the penal system, and does little to curb actual crime. I do not advocate the use of any mind altering drug, even alcohol, but to criminalize it? What's the point?
These are drug dealers....
...and did you note this: "...16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences."
What does that mean? They had a firearm when arrested? Again, so?...and did you note this: "...16 of which had firearms-related crimes added to their sentences."
1. It means we're not speaking about drug users.
These are sellers of drugs with a propensity for violence.
2. The thesis in this thread is that the Democrat Party supports criminality...and Obama's action helps prove it.
Let's review: The Liberal Paradigm
1. San Francisco represents the ultimate in Liberal utopias. Yet....we see the results of of organizing a society based on the fallacious 'people are good' dictum
The horrible and undeserved beating of this one individual is representative of what happens when Leftist takes charge.
The women is one person, the 100 million slaughtered by Leftists in the last century, the conclusion.
2. Post #3 documents the ten most dangerous cities for folks like the victim in the OP...and all are under the guidance of Liberal.
3. Post #8 offers a comparison with cities taking a conservative view. The difference is dramatic.
4. Post #11 points out that Liberals facilitate this mindless violence against law abiding citizens, as their fondest dream is to disarm potential citizens. The greatest tribute to the insanity that is Liberalism is signs like 'Gun Free Zone," an invitation to sociopaths,, the Liberal demographic, and a prescription that will only be obeyed by the law-abiding.
5. Post #14 reminds us that Democrats/Liberals have the very best interests of felons at heart.
6. Lest there be any doubt....the Democrat/Liberal candidate for president is a well known congenital liar and criminal who has done her best to sell out the United States for monetary gain.
"The most corrupt, congenital liar is the candidate of the Criminal Party, with the aim of putting her and her 'KSP' (Known Sexual Predator) husband back in at the scene of the crime.....the crime where they stole silverware, dishes and furniture from the People's House as they were leaving last time.."
7. Post #43 has the head of the Criminal Party giving drug deals their 'get out of jail free' card......literally.
QED
Why are some drugs (i.e. Pot) illegal, while others (i.e. alcohol) are not? What is the difference? Whether one is a "dealer" or a "user" is really not the issue here. The issue is: "Why are we plugging up the judicial system with people convicted of offences related to drugs that have been arbitrarily deemed to be "dangerous" and thus made illegal?" What is the point?
I agree that these people have committed a "crime", at least at the time of the act. Why is a crime, and should it be? Moreover, has the "war on drugs" been effective? If not, why are we continuing to pour resources into a failed "war"? How is it reasonable that a person convicted three times for drug related violations gets "life" without parole, while the average sentence for taking a life is 149 months (according to BJS as of April 1992, http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/PSATSFV.PDF), while the average time served for taking a life is only 71 months? Does this make sense to you? I sure does not to me.
"I agree that these people have committed a "crime",
I appreciate your post, your thoughts vis-a-vis certain criminals.
But:
The thread is meant to indict a party that facilitates and represents criminality.
It is not about drugs or even about violent drug dealers.
People who rely on blog sites for data are losers and fear the truth lest it wrest them from their bubble.
Still nothing?
Could it be because you are nothing?
Everyone tells you that?
OK, here's some interesting info from several reliable sources (not blogs) corroborating my take on your insipid, desperate partisan hackery.
Crime dropped like a rock, by 1/3 during the 1990s.
Who was POTUS from 1993 to 2001?
Three guesses.
So you see, you can juggle the data any way you want. And I don't give Bill Clinton the credit for this drop.
https://faculty.washington.edu/matsueda/courses/371/Readings/Rosenfeld Crime Decline.pdf
10 (Not Entirely Crazy) Theories Explaining the Great Crime Decline
The Crime Decline | Department of Government and Justice Studies | Appalachian State University
http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/LevittUnderstandingWhyCrime2004.pdf
http://www.prisonpolicy.org/scans/sp/DimRet.pdf
Now climb back into your dark hole and try to brew your racism and hatred somewhere else.
Are you suggesting, then, that the fact that more cities that have been run for decades by liberal democrats have higher crime (and violent crime) rates than those run by conservatives is a "generalization fallacy"?"The Liberal Paradigm"
The conservative hasty generalization fallacy.
"The Liberal Paradigm"
The conservative hasty generalization fallacy.
Threads like these give me cancer. So a random violent crime occurred and you blame liberals? Because violent crimes don't happen in conservative cities right?
Criminals don't care about social and political ideologies. They are criminals. They only care about causing havoc.
