My self defense is someone else's responsibility...
Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
231–240 of 262 posts
Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s no political group supporting these robbers Sure there are. I know how to easily identify them, too. If, perchance, one of the robbers is shot and killed while committing an armed robbery, look to see which groups are more concerned about punishing the shooter than blaming the criminal. Insofar as this is California, it will be a substantial list.
So you say there are some, you can identify them, and then fail to name a single one. Can you name them?
BLM
Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
"If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns."
And yet the countries that make obtaining guns more difficult are still much safer. It’s almost like if you rigorously regulate guns and have strict background checks, you can dramatically reduce gun violence... see Japan or Switzerland as proof where you can still own a gun but they don’t have mass shootings like we do here. And no, mental illness isn’t the issue. We have roughly the same amount of mentally ill as o…
That doesn’t prove anything because those countries were also much safer than the US before they had gun control. https://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/doc... (page 2).
Until 1978, you could buy handguns and automatic weapons in Canada without a license. You could buy rifles without a license until the 1990s. But the gap in US-Canadian homicide rates was the lowest in 1960. And the gap was largest during the first 40 years of the 20th century, before Canada required licensing and background checks.
Australia shows the same pattern. It introduced major gun control in the 1990s. But the gap in US-Australian homicide rates actually shrank after that time: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c6/Gu...
Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Just no. What you’re going to have is a shit load of people with guns firing in close quarters. When the police get there they’ll have no idea who the bad guy is. How about we just make the damn trains more safe instead of advocating for Mad Max Thunderdome?
Among the millions (or hundreds of thousands) of uses of a gun in self defense each year in America, most don't involve shootings.
That has nothing to do with what I was commenting upon. There are no deer or elk to hunt on the BART that I am aware of.
Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. I try not to think about it. Or what I could do for myself and the community with my tax dollars. Instead of sending them 5000 miles away to DC. What a joke. Also not to mention, if you were jailed for some reason, you'd get fired and probably fined $10,000. If you don't have the money: Well, Welcome to the streets! People are so ego-invested in this absurd and hysterical reality. I don't get it. I will say…
It seems to be a similar sort of addiction as Candy Crush. Hysteria is a kind of entertainment, always easily accessible.
I haven't thought of it that way. That's a good one. It seems to tie into fear porn.
Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
This implies it's rational to fear for your freedom as a law-abiding person on the basis that a true criminal was convicted. That makes no sense. By that logic we should be against letting police arrest these robbers anyway, because if they did, all of the non-criminal commuters would refuse to enter BART for fear of being charged with robbery.
No, it does not imply that.
This statement
> The BART police are afraid of being falsely accused even when they are in the right, because of the legacy of the Oscar Grant case
is not accurately summarized by this statement?
> Law-abiding people are afraid of being falsely accused, because of the fact that a true criminal was convicted
What part is incorrect?
Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
#237Yeah, BART police is a joke. I don’t remember ever seeing a BART police officer riding a train with me. I rarely see them in stations. Getting in and out without paying almost seems easier than paying. SF and Oakland officers never stroll through stations, which is so obviously wrong from a public safety standpoint, yet it seems to be policy. Then again I rarely see SF police officers walking the streets as it is. Ye…
Wonder how it compares with other systems like these in Europe or say Japan. Do police patrol there. Wonder if there is another way to fix this. Say figure out why does crime even become an option at all. Lack of jobs, opportunities, etc.
The UK has the British Transport Police. They are a branch of the police force dedicated to policing the railways. You won't normally see them on trains, but they have offices in most big stations and if there's trouble then it'll get sorted out on the next stop.
Normally you only see the police visibly present when there's a football match or other big event on, and the regular police are also there to deal with the crowds.
Seeing trouble is a rarity though. Nowadays most stations have ticket barriers so it reduces the type of person who might dodge the fare. And most people know how to behave.
Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are lots of BART security job vacancies, probably because no matter how high the salary it would be a very dangerous job. This is similar to the social situation in NYC when the Guardian Angels were formed, but what is extraordinary is how wealthy the bay area is today compared to 1980's New York area... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_Angels
Law enforcement is not even on the top 10 list for most dangerous jobs. I suspect there must be other reasons for the high vacancy rate. http://time.com/5074471/most-dangerous-jobs/
This statistic might be completely different on BART officers only.
Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a country, take care of your disadvantaged people, the jobless, the homeless, the troubled. Enforce a proper minimum wage, scaled as a proper living wage for a given area. Enact single payer healthcare. Stop persecuting minorities, and end the ridiculous war on drugs. Enact gun control. In the longer run, abolish (crony) capitalism, abolish lobbying and "campaign donations" (bribes) and break the military-industri…
> make the wealthy actually pay their taxes Sounds like you need to get your facts straight. > A Pew Research Center analysis of IRS data from 2015, the most recent available, shows that taxpayers with incomes of $200,000 or more paid well over half (58.8%) of federal income taxes https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjK...
And yet their share of wealth increased.
Percentage of a lowering tax base (Trump's tax cuts) is irrelevant. They need to pay more tax in absolute terms.
Re: Lawyer: ‘It’s a Free for All’ for Criminals on BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fixing it is easy. Arrest and prosecute criminal behavior. California won't do it though. It's only a matter of time till some of the larger tech companies decide that the Bay Area is too far gone and start leaving.
What makes you think the people who make these sorts of decisions are exposed to any of this?
Exactly this. The big tech companies use their own buses. Most of their employees are affluent enough to own a car or Uber for other destinations.