|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Aug 17, 2019 16:46:08 GMT -5
Why do gangs/cartel exists? What's this kind of question? Are you asking me for a brief answer? Or for some long, detailed answer that goes deep into the history of gangs and cartels in the Americas? Or should I just say “Because the monies!!!” and not explain why some of the richest place on earth don't have any gangs, how some very poor places don't have any gangs either, etc? |
|
|
|
Post by bobtheinquisitor on Aug 18, 2019 0:30:30 GMT -5
Fucking read The Godfather, Whem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Aug 18, 2019 6:29:58 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2019 9:06:59 GMT -5
What's this kind of question? Are you asking me for a brief answer? Or for some long, detailed answer that goes deep into the history of gangs and cartels in the Americas? Or should I just say “Because the monies!!!” and not explain why some of the richest place on earth don't have any gangs, how some very poor places don't have any gangs either, etc? Actually, they do, but they don't wield the kind of influence that they do in other areas.
The fact that the FBI data is, as admitted by the FBI, at best, incomplete. If not outright false. It depends on local police, who don't always report to them accurately, if at all. An example of this would be Heather Heyer, the victim in Charlottesville, was not initially counted among the hate crimes by the FBI, despite her killer pleading guilty to 29 counts of hate crimes. This was later corrected, but because of how the system of reporting works, it might never have even been noticed.
Sometimes the difference between reality and what turns up in the crime statistics is absurd. Youngstown Ohio, for example, under reported it's mob related crime for years, to the tune of over 4000 crimes.
|
|
dusa
Ye Olde King of OT
Posts: 555
|
Post by dusa on Aug 18, 2019 9:10:09 GMT -5
The official White House Policy Policy Speech featuring POTUS for Everyone Trump totally wasn’t a campaign rally funded by taxpayers...
|
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Aug 18, 2019 9:50:49 GMT -5
Actually, they do, but they don't wield the kind of influence that they do in other areas. What do you mean? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2019 10:48:52 GMT -5
That you can find Organized Crime in any country. What differs is the level of influence they wield, and sometimes, how they wield it. Compare the Yakuza to the Mafia. |
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Aug 18, 2019 11:21:12 GMT -5
This was not about organized crime in general, that was about gangs and cartels. There is some organized financial crime in Switzerland, butthat's not relevant here. There is also some money from organized crime stored there, but that's irrelevant too. There basically is not violence due to organized crime in Switzerland, which is what matters in context. There are no gangs and cartels shooting each other, committing extortion rackets, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Aug 18, 2019 14:55:38 GMT -5
The fact that the FBI data is, as admitted by the FBI, at best, incomplete. If not outright false. It depends on local police, who don't always report to them accurately, if at all. An example of this would be Heather Heyer, the victim in Charlottesville, was not initially counted among the hate crimes by the FBI, despite her killer pleading guilty to 29 counts of hate crimes. This was later corrected, but because of how the system of reporting works, it might never have even been noticed. Sometimes the difference between reality and what turns up in the crime statistics is absurd. Youngstown Ohio, for example, under reported it's mob related crime for years, to the tune of over 4000 crimes.
You understand you just admitted your own point is both potentially untrue, and still have yet to present the source of your claim, right? You also are deflecting from me pointing out that this source is using your supposed data source anyways I think! And that's on top of this not being about "organized crime" but "gangs/cartels" Baron, I feel you're not engaging in good faith here because you're so caught up in trying to pin the blame on cellphones or anything that isn't guns. |
|
|
|
Post by adurot on Aug 18, 2019 15:09:08 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2019 17:48:53 GMT -5
Baron, I feel you're not engaging in good faith here because you're so caught up in trying to pin the blame on cellphones or anything that isn't guns.
Let's just say that I've been given something of a gag order by my employer on the subject and we''ll leave it at that. |
|
|
|
Post by dabbler on Aug 18, 2019 17:58:06 GMT -5
There's the secret squirrel argument we were all waiting for
|
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Aug 18, 2019 19:05:21 GMT -5
Baron, I feel you're not engaging in good faith here because you're so caught up in trying to pin the blame on cellphones or anything that isn't guns. Let's just say that I've been given something of a gag order by my employer on the subject and we''ll leave it at that. I hate to assume the worst because normally you have a lot of good points, but it really does sound like a "secret squirrel defense/argument." It feels like a way to avoid confronting all the times you've been wrong or avoided really engaging, or when you used a couple of strawmen arguments to try and shift the focus (i.e. when you tried to use "organized crime" instead of "gangs/cartels") Basically, you've failed to convince me (and others I assume) that there's any direct connection between cellphones and violence/homicide, unlike the direct connection between guns and/or the right's rhetoric and violence/homicide. (and no, obviously not all mass shootings or killings are driven by rhetoric. Sometimes it's personal, or somewhat rarely mental health issues) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2019 21:19:55 GMT -5
I hate to assume the worst because normally you have a lot of good points, but it really does sound like a "secret squirrel defense/argument." It feels like a way to avoid confronting all the times you've been wrong or avoided really engaging, or when you used a couple of strawmen arguments to try and shift the focus (i.e. when you tried to use "organized crime" instead of "gangs/cartels") Basically, you've failed to convince me (and others I assume) that there's any direct connection between cellphones and violence/homicide, unlike the direct connection between guns and/or the right's rhetoric and violence/homicide. (and no, obviously not all mass shootings or killings are driven by rhetoric. Sometimes it's personal, or somewhat rarely mental health issues)
You guys are gonna get a lot of traction on this 'secret squirrel' business then. I'm now not allowed to talk about, among other things, Impeachment, Trump, the cell phone thing, the election, anything in congress, anything to do with the boarder, it's pretty extensive.
Effectively, I'm probably not going to be able to post in this thread for a while. AFGE will probably announce when they beat this in court, but in the mean time I'm not even allowed to 'like' tweets of a political nature.
|
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Aug 18, 2019 21:31:43 GMT -5
I hate to assume the worst because normally you have a lot of good points, but it really does sound like a "secret squirrel defense/argument." It feels like a way to avoid confronting all the times you've been wrong or avoided really engaging, or when you used a couple of strawmen arguments to try and shift the focus (i.e. when you tried to use "organized crime" instead of "gangs/cartels") Basically, you've failed to convince me (and others I assume) that there's any direct connection between cellphones and violence/homicide, unlike the direct connection between guns and/or the right's rhetoric and violence/homicide. (and no, obviously not all mass shootings or killings are driven by rhetoric. Sometimes it's personal, or somewhat rarely mental health issues) You guys are gonna get a lot of traction on this 'secret squirrel' business then. I'm now not allowed to talk about, among other things, Impeachment, Trump, the cell phone thing, the election, anything in congress, anything to do with the boarder, it's pretty extensive. Effectively, I'm probably not going to be able to post in this thread for a while. AFGE will probably announce when they beat this in court, but in the mean time I'm not even allowed to 'like' tweets of a political nature.
Then I'll await your response to everything I've brought up that you haven't properly addressed when you are allowed to then. |
|
