Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,292,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

NWO deploys foot soldiers to New Orleans

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 76 to 97 of 97
  1. #76
    Okay now... you guys are reading into this a bit much. I never said people will stop killing people if they don't have guns. Of course there will always be the Jeffrey Dahmer & Ted Bundy sickos who prefer to bash 'em up, cut 'em up, eat 'em up, but that should go without saying.

    But the plain simple fact is...
    If guns weren't readily available to citizens then gundeaths would be greatly reduced! Kids wouldn't get their dads' guns & accidently shoot their buddy while loading up the bong, etc, etc. (Okay a lil sarcasm there based on that stupid commercial but you get the point.)

    Of course outlaws will still find ways to get guns, they already find ways to get guns even after it's been decided that they aren't allowed to legally own one, but the less guns around, the tougher it is to get one.

    Finally I don't know where all you guys live, but I don't feel threatened on a daily basis where I feel the need to own a gun to protect my family. If that's the case where you live, then for cryin' our loud, MOVE!
  2. #77
    a500lbgorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    28,082
    Location
    himself fucker.
    Quote Originally Posted by HepCat
    If guns weren't readily available to citizens then gundeaths would be greatly reduced!
    wow. So all you want is to reduce gundeaths in the country. You don't care about the total number of deaths (Which probably won't change). You just want to make sure that if someone dies, it's becuase he was beaten mercilessly or stabbed furiously, not this gunplay shit.

    Finally I don't know where all you guys live, but I don't feel threatened on a daily basis where I feel the need to own a gun to protect my family. If that's the case where you live, then for cryin' our loud, MOVE!
    And once again, THIS IS NOT THE REASON WHY PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED GUNS IN OUR COUNTRY

    -'rilla
    <a href=http://i.imgur.com/kWiMIMW.png target=_blank>http://i.imgur.com/kWiMIMW.png</a>
  3. #78
    LMAO! Dayum Rilla!

    I understand the point about giving the people the right to overthrow the gov't,but c'mon... let's be realistic now!

    I don't see that ever becoming a need or an option.

    And also please don't twist my words as if all I care about are gundeaths... that's a load of crap. I'd prefer to see all deaths (particularly homicides) reduced regardless of how they happen.
  4. #79
    a500lbgorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    28,082
    Location
    himself fucker.
    Quote Originally Posted by HepCat
    LMAO! Dayum Rilla!

    I understand the point about giving the people the right to overthrow the gov't,but c'mon... let's be realistic now!

    I don't see that ever becoming a need or an option.

    And also please don't twist my words as if all I care about are gundeaths... that's a load of crap. I'd prefer to see all deaths (particularly homicides) reduced regardless of how they happen.
    But you won't reduce deaths by outlawing guns, just gun deaths.

    And though you may feel it is unrealistic but it's the only reason we need.

    -'rilla
    <a href=http://i.imgur.com/kWiMIMW.png target=_blank>http://i.imgur.com/kWiMIMW.png</a>
  5. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by DavSimon
    The outpouring of international support for the hurricane victims is heartwarming.....Hmm, wait a minute there has been no outpouring of international support for starving and thirsty people....only more criticim that the US government has not done enough....quickly enough.
    It just seems that when given the chance to do something useful and compassionate there are those around the world that would rather twist it into an opportunity to push a political agenda....grabbbing the spotlight and trying to focus it on what they feel is "the problem with America"
    Actually:

    "
    By Elizabeth Williamson
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Wednesday, September 7, 2005; Page A01

    Offers of foreign aid worth tens of millions of dollars -- including a Swedish water purification system, a German cellular telephone network and two Canadian rescue ships -- have been delayed for days awaiting review by backlogged federal agencies, according to European diplomats and information collected by the State Department.

    Since Hurricane Katrina, more than 90 countries and international organizations offered to assist in recovery efforts for the flood-stricken region, but nearly all endeavors remained mired yesterday in bureaucratic entanglements, in most cases, at the Federal Emergency Management Agency..."
    link


    Of course nobody comes near to matching what we give to the world but at least there's been efforts. Read the entire article, its pretty frustrating.

    However, I do agree with you that it is sickening how fast the political finger pointing and bush bashing from here and abroad began.

    One other thing that makes me sick was yesterday on the radio, one woman called in and said that the hurricane was natural selection in work and she didn't feel bad. Another woman called in and agreed but said that it was meant to be and that God wanted "maybe some people to get killed or injured because like...it would bring people together.." I am not shitting you. I don't want to start another God debate, but it pisses me off when people say ignorant things like this and make all religous people sound like inbred bible-thumping morons.
    He who drinks beer sleeps well.
    He who sleeps well cannot sin.
    He who does not sin goes to Heaven.
  6. #81
    In 2001, the year in which the most recent comprehensive data are available, the FBI reported a total of 15,980 murders or nonnegligent homicides. The total represents a 1.3% increase from the 15,586 murders recorded in 2000. The FBI defines murder in its annual Crime in the United States as the willful (nonnegligent) killing of one human
    being by another.

    * Firearms were used in the majority of murders (63%).
    * Arguments were the most often cited circumstance
    leading to murder (28%).
    * Homicides occurred in connection with another felony
    (such as robbery or narcotics) in 17% of incidents.

    Thus... if citizens weren't allowed guns, the number of homicides would be greatly reduced!

    1. The negligent homicides would nearly cease. This one should be easy to get. While it's easy for a kid to accidentally shoot his friend while showing off his dad's gun collection, it's pretty hard to accidentally stab him to death or accidentally beat him to a pulp with a baseball bat. Not too mention that if guns aren't in the house, then the lil psycho 13 year olds can't take it to their local school for show & tell to blow off someone's head!
    2. The lack of guns reduces the convenience to kill someone. It takes a lil more desire & premeditation to use something other than a gun. Not saying that it would stop all togther, just it would greatly be reduced.

    In case you're wondering why I'm so adamant about this subject...

    A close friend of mine in high school was shot in the face with a shot gun. The shooter was a 16 year old high school kid suffering from manic-depressive disorder who was taking Lithium and happened to be on Acid among other things that night. Who's shot gun did he use? His dad's.

    Now... had he been in a right frame of mind, maybe he wouldn't have gone to get a gun to settle the arguement between the two of them. More importantly though, no matter what frame of mind he was in, if his dad didn't have a gun,then my friend would most likely still be alive.
  7. #82
    a500lbgorilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    28,082
    Location
    himself fucker.
    I can understand why someone like you would be adamant about this.

    But you have to understand that if someone willingly kills someone else, they're going to do it. They're probably determined to do it. Right now they use guns becuase they're the easiest. But post-gunban, they'll use scissors, knives, bats, cars, tall buildins etc. It doesn't matter what weapon they use, they will still kill the people they want to kill. You arn't going to save lives by banning guns.

    This is my last comment on the matter.

    -'rilla
    <a href=http://i.imgur.com/kWiMIMW.png target=_blank>http://i.imgur.com/kWiMIMW.png</a>
  8. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by a500lbgorilla
    If we remove guns than all we do is create more baseball bat related homocides or knife related homocides.
    I am behind private ownership of guns and I plan to buy a gun as soon as I can so that any sicko who decides to break into my house and rape my kid's pet turtle can get a fatass load of buckshot to the face.

    BUT....I don't believe that quoted statement for a second, rilla. In fact, I believe that if we take away all guns (not possible) then the rate of chainsaw murders and dilbo-beatings would take over the slack left by guns. I'm just kidding, but I still don't believe that statement - doesn't japan have knives?

    With the whole alcoholic car crashes vs gun deaths - I wonder how many gun deaths involved alcohol (or other drugs)? That would be interesting. Maybe we should ban alcohol? No...prohibition didn't work. Plus I like alcohol too much. I'm just thinking out loud here, not trying to make a point now. I really do think that drugs and alcohol have a lot to do with it - if someone wants to kill someone they are NOT going to do it no matter what. But they might do it while totally fucked up off their minds.

    America is a great country, but we definitely do have some problems. I think our culture is naturally aggressive and self-centered and that our murder rate will always be higher considering the amount of drugs, gangs, alcohol, and the negative sides of that culture. Plus the war on drugs in a hopeless cause.

    I'm sure any of you that work with the general public see how incredibly stupid most people are. It's amazing some of these people have driver's liscenses let alone the right to carry guns. One thing I know for sure though, is that regardless of the gun laws, criminals will have guns in this country.

    These are my inflection points, but it really comes to no point for one side or the other.
    He who drinks beer sleeps well.
    He who sleeps well cannot sin.
    He who does not sin goes to Heaven.
  9. #84
    You know what Rilla... you're right!

    How could I be so silly to think that homicide would stop if only we got rid of guns... how stupid of me to think that banning firearms would create Utopia!

    When you're ready to pick up your guns & try to overthrow this horrible government, let me know cuz I wanna watch! And I'll do so from the protection of my home watching FOX NEWS, cuz you know they'll cover it! THAT'S GOOD TV!
  10. #85
    Please stop with comparing the US to Japan, Canada, Germany, or even England which has strict regulation of guns. Even if you compared per capita it doesn’t mean much. It would mean more but still be wrong. The US is way different than Japan or any other country. We have way more per capita deaths period. Take out the gun figures and just compare homicides by other methods and we would have way more per capita homicides. The point being that any comparisons are meaningless and only serve to skew the facts.

    I totally believe that the total number of homicides would go down if we banned all guns (by a small amount). It would go down by the number of killers that are willing to kill but only with an easy weapon like a gun. Figure the abused wife that certainly would not think of taking a knife to her husband but finds a gun a nice solution. But that is certainly NOT enough reason to give up our right to guns. Building a strong nation is NOT easy. Never has been. The freedoms we have are not to be taken lightly. The US is not perfect but I will not lightly give up what others have fought so hard for. Besides, I very much like to hunt and shoot. Its damn good fun.

    [Those that are willing to sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither.]
    Stakes: Playing $0.10/$0.25 NL
  11. #86
    Just to screw with your heads a little bit...

    I don't want to give up my right to own a gun either! I love my gun & I love hunting deer with it, which I do every season! I just really like a good debate and saw a great opening for one! It's been fun!
  12. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by HepCat
    Just to screw with your heads a little bit...

    I don't want to give up my right to own a gun either! I love my gun & I love hunting deer with it, which I do every season! I just really like a good debate and saw a great opening for one! It's been fun!

    Hahaha. I have a guy at work like you. He will argue anything just for the sake of arguing…even if he doesn’t believe in it.
    Me…I am just the opposite. I will rarely argue anything since it is so pointless. But there is one thing that can get me into a debate. That is gun rights.

    Its all good.
    Stakes: Playing $0.10/$0.25 NL
  13. #88
    How about this:

    I DONT WANT A BUNCH OF POOR CRIMINALS STAYING FOR GOOD IN MY CITY SHOOTING AT MY AMBULANCES.
    He who drinks beer sleeps well.
    He who sleeps well cannot sin.
    He who does not sin goes to Heaven.
  14. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by HepCat
    A close friend of mine in high school was shot in the face with a shot gun. The shooter was a 16 year old high school kid suffering from manic-depressive disorder who was taking Lithium and happened to be on Acid among other things that night. Who's shot gun did he use? His dad's.

    Now... had he been in a right frame of mind, maybe he wouldn't have gone to get a gun to settle the arguement between the two of them. More importantly though, no matter what frame of mind he was in, if his dad didn't have a gun,then my friend would most likely still be alive.
    Tragic story. Really sick stuff happens and it's too easy to let freak events put things out of perspective when making policy impacting 100s of millions of people.

    At this point we're not even talking about handguns or assault weapons. Are you suggesting that it's practical to remove shotguns from the US? That this could be done without tearing up the rest of the bill of rights?

    Finally, this isn't a one sided equation. Firearms in the right hands save lives and prevent/discourage crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by SmackinYaUp
    Maybe we should ban alcohol? No...prohibition didn't work.
    Banning drugs has been a disaster too. Supply side attacks don't work.

    Fair disclosure: I drink socially, don't smoke, tried pot once and wasn't impressed and regularly use caffene. Never tried harder drugs nor care to, although MDMA sounds interesting.
  15. #90
    FACT:In 2002, there were 30,242 gun deaths in the U.S:

    17,108 suicides (56% of all U.S gun deaths),
    11,829 homicides (39% of all U.S gun deaths),
    762 unintentional shootings (3% of all U.S gun deaths),
    and 300 from legal intervention and 243 from undetermined intent (2% of all U.S gun deaths combined).
    17,108 suicides (56% of all U.S gun deaths)
    17,108 people who could have and would have killed themselves in other ways had they not had guns. If i was going to do the deed I sure as hell would like to have a gun which would ease my pain in a fast and effortless manner. If the argument is GUN CONTROL, toss this stat - people who want to kill themselves always find a way to do it, and the ones who DONT REALLY want to kill themselves always find a way to put on a good show but not go all the way (i.e. cutting their wrists horizontally, taking too many pills, etc.). This is irrelevant for the context of your post. That truly is the most retarded way to support your opinion. By that logic you are insinuating that outlawing cars would stop the number of people who drive themselves off cliffs to commit suicide - after all, they wouldnt ride their BIKE off a cliff or jump off of it, WOULD THEY?! Yet them not having a gun somehow will miraculously turn their lives around. Suddenly their financial worries will go away, they will be able to cope with the fact that their wife left them, or that the job they were fired from after 15 years just wasnt that important; in essence, not having a gun will turn a suicidal person into non-suicidal one, right? WOW, didnt know guns were that powerful!

    11,829 homicides (39% of all U.S gun deaths)
    11,829 reasons for me to own a gun and want to protect my family. I have a great idea for you, find the facts that show the exact number of these homicides that were committed by legal, registered gun owners using their legal registered guns. You wont find many. That should open your eyes to something - a) people who are not legally allowed to have guns are illegally obtaining them - thus committing a crime. b) they dont intend to use these guns to accidentally shoot their friends in the face, bring to show and tell, or hunt deer - they procure the weapons bent on using them in an unlawful manner usually to further their criminal activities. In my book, that makes my right to own and bear a gun more important and gives me more reason to do so. But wait, lets see...I know what you are thinking - "but they get guns that are legal from people who have legally obtained them." Well, how do they do that? I dont go down and donate my 12-guage to the neighborhood gang members. I dont see many "loan-a-pistol" programs around, so you will find that they mainly get them from breaking into peoples houses and robbing them, RIGHT? Of course, and being the big stat guy you are, you probably know that someone committing a crime like burglary has a HUGE risk of elevating the crime to assualt, rape and murder if they accidentally break in and happen upon the residents still in the home (even if the person at home is complying fully and poses no physical threat to the burglar). This is, yet AGAIN, the reason that i put great value on my personal right to bear arms.



    In closing, I appreciate your blind stupidity and disingenuous arguments but perhaps you should just stick to something that comes naturally to people like you, like blaming George Bush for allowing that Racist Hurricane Katrina to strike New Orleans.

    Man I love poker...
  16. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by Fnord
    MDMA sounds interesting.
    That stuff gave me a seizure when I was about 16 and supposed to be babysitting my litte brother at the time. He tried to call 911, the line was busy, and went around banging on neighbor's doors cuz he didn't know what was wrong with his big brother. I actually died for a bit they say but I don't remember shit.
    He who drinks beer sleeps well.
    He who sleeps well cannot sin.
    He who does not sin goes to Heaven.
  17. #92
    CCIE...

    At what point was I using the number of suicides to support my reasoning behind banning guns? I'm pretty sure that I was speaking mostly in regards to homicides. The only reason that I posted the 56%/17K number was to include the entire 100% of gun related deaths, otherwise my posting would definitely appear skewed when I present numbers that don't total 100.

    I looked around some to find the numbers related to gundeaths related to legal vs. illegal gun owners, but am having some difficulty. However, I believe strongly that the negligent numbers will be nearly 100% legal gun owners (i.e. ther accidental shooting while showing off dad's guns, the accidental shooting because Jethro had one too many Milwaukee's Best while hunting squirrel, the bipolar lunatic who used his dad's shotgun to shoot my friend in the face!) I would lay money and even give you odds if that number was below 90%.

    And finally... why do you assume that I am the type of person to point my finger at Bush due the Katrina Disaster? Because I think that banning guns would decrease gundeaths?

    The only thing Bush is guilty of besides bad timing, is letting an unqualified person become the head of FEMA. In regards to bad timing I mean that any Pesident holding an office during a national tragedy is likely to have fingers pointed at him because no one likes to take the blame for himself. The President is ALWAYS the easiest scapegoat!

    Now I'm not a huge fan of Bush, but I think the blame needs to falls in a few places...
    1. The Louisiana State Gov't for not being prepared.
    2. Michael Brown ex-head of FEMA for not knowing how to poor piss out of a boot without instructions.
    3. The 20% of the people of New Orleans who ignored evacuation when they had time!
  18. #93
    A few truths, for those who have ears and eyes and care to know the truth:
    1.) The hurricane that hit New Orleans and Mississippi and Alabama was an
    astonishing tragedy. The suffering and loss of life and peace of mind of the
    residents of those areas is acutely horrifying.

    2.) George Bush did not cause the hurricane. Hurricanes have been happening
    for eons. George Bush did not create them or unleash this one.

    3.) George Bush did not make this one worse than others. There have been far
    worse hurricanes than this before George Bush was born.

    4.) There is no overwhelming evidence that global warming exists as a
    man-made phenomenon. There is no clear-cut evidence that global warming even exists. There is no clear evidence that if it does exist
    it makes hurricanes more powerful or makes them aim at cities with large
    numbers of poor people. If global warming is a real phenomenon, which it may
    well be, it started long before George Bush was inaugurated, and would not
    have been affected at all by the Kyoto treaty, considering that Kyoto does
    not cover the world's worst polluters -- China, India, and Brazil. In a
    word, George Bush had zero to do with causing this hurricane. To speculate
    otherwise is belief in sorcery.

    5.) George Bush had nothing to do with the hurricane contingency plans for
    New Orleans. Those are drawn up by New Orleans and Louisiana. In any event,
    the plans were perfectly good: mandatory evacuation. It is in no way at all
    George Bush's fault that about 20 percent of New Orleans neglected to follow
    the plan. It is not his fault that many persons in New Orleans were too
    confused to realize how dangerous the hurricane would be. They were
    certainly warned. It's not George Bush's fault that there were sick people
    and old people and people without cars in New Orleans. His job description
    does not include making sure every adult in America has a car, is in good
    health, has good sense, and is mobile.

    6.) George Bush did not cause gangsters to shoot at rescue helicopters
    taking people from rooftops, did not make gang bangers rape young girls in
    the Superdome, did not make looters steal hundreds of weapons, in short make
    New Orleans into a living hell.

    7.) George Bush is the least racist President in mind and soul there has
    ever been and this is shown in his appointments over and over. To say
    otherwise is scandalously untrue.

    8.) George Bush is rushing every bit of help he can to New Orleans and
    Mississippi and Alabama as soon as he can. He is not a magician. It takes
    time to organize huge convoys of food and now they are starting to arrive.
    That they get in at all considering the lawlessness of the city is a miracle
    of bravery and organization.

    9.) There is not the slightest evidence at all that the war in Iraq has
    diminished the response of the government to the emergency. To say otherwise
    is pure slander.

    10.) If the energy the news media puts into blaming Bush for an Act of God
    worsened by stupendous incompetence by the New Orleans city authorities and
    the malevolence of the criminals of the city were directed to helping the
    morale of the nation, we would all be a lot better off.

    11.) New Orleans is a great city with many great people. It will recover and
    be greater than ever. Sticking pins into an effigy of George Bush that does
    not resemble him in the slightest will not speed the process by one day.

    12.) The entire episode is a dramatic lesson in the breathtaking callousness
    of government officials at the ground level. Imagine if Hillary Clinton had
    gotten her way and they were in charge of your health care.
  19. #94
    It took four long days for state and federal officials to figure out how to deal with the disaster in New Orleans. I can't blame them, because it also took me four long days to figure out what was going on there. The reason is that the events there make no sense if you think that we are confronting a natural disaster.

    If this is just a natural disaster, the response for public officials is obvious: you bring in food, water, and doctors; you send transportation to evacuate refugees to temporary shelters; you send engineers to stop the flooding and rebuild the city's infrastructure. For journalists, natural disasters also have a familiar pattern: the heroism of ordinary people pulling together to survive; the hard work and dedication of doctors, nurses, and rescue workers; the steps being taken to clean up and rebuild.

    Public officials did not expect that the first thing they would have to do is to send thousands of armed troops in armored vehicle, as if they are suppressing an enemy insurgency. And journalists—myself included—did not expect that the story would not be about rain, wind, and flooding, but about rape, murder, and looting.

    But this is not a natural disaster. It is a man-made disaster.

    The man-made disaster is not an inadequate or incompetent response by federal relief agencies, and it was not directly caused by Hurricane Katrina. This is where just about every newspaper and television channel has gotten the story wrong.

    The man-made disaster we are now witnessing in New Orleans did not happen over four days last week. It happened over the past four decades. Hurricane Katrina merely exposed it to public view.

    The man-made disaster is the welfare state.

    For the past few days, I have found the news from New Orleans to be confusing. People were not behaving as you would expect them to behave in an emergency—indeed, they were not behaving as they have behaved in other emergencies. That is what has shocked so many people: they have been saying that this is not what we expect from America. In fact, it is not even what we expect from a Third World country.

    When confronted with a disaster, people usually rise to the occasion. They work together to rescue people in danger, and they spontaneously organize to keep order and solve problems. This is especially true in America. We are an enterprising people, used to relying on our own initiative rather than waiting around for the government to take care of us. I have seen this a hundred times, in small examples (a small town whose main traffic light had gone out, causing ordinary citizens to get out of their cars and serve as impromptu traffic cops, directing cars through the intersection) and large ones (the spontaneous response of New Yorkers to September 11).

    So what explains the chaos in New Orleans?

    To give you an idea of the magnitude of what is going on, here is a description from a Washington Times story:

    "Storm victims are raped and beaten; fights erupt with flying fists, knives and guns; fires are breaking out; corpses litter the streets; and police and rescue helicopters are repeatedly fired on.

    "The plea from Mayor C. Ray Nagin came even as National Guardsmen poured in to restore order and stop the looting, carjackings and gunfire....

    "Last night, Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco said 300 Iraq-hardened Arkansas National Guard members were inside New Orleans with shoot-to-kill orders.

    "'These troops are...under my orders to restore order in the streets,' she said. 'They have M-16s, and they are locked and loaded. These troops know how to shoot and kill and they are more than willing to do so if necessary and I expect they will.'"

    The reference to Iraq is eerie. The photo that accompanies this article shows a SWAT team with rifles and armored vests riding on an armored vehicle through trash-strewn streets lined by a rabble of squalid, listless people, one of whom appears to be yelling at them. It looks exactly like a scene from Sadr City in Baghdad.

    What explains bands of thugs using a natural disaster as an excuse for an orgy of looting, armed robbery, and rape? What causes unruly mobs to storm the very buses that have arrived to evacuate them, causing the drivers to speed away, frightened for their lives? What causes people to attack the doctors trying to treat patients at the Superdome?

    Why are people responding to natural destruction by causing further destruction? Why are they attacking the people who are trying to help them?

    My wife, Sherri, figured it out first, and she figured it out on a sense-of-life level. While watching the coverage one night on Fox News Channel, she told me that she was getting a familiar feeling. She studied architecture at the Illinois Institute of Chicago, which is located in the South Side of Chicago just blocks away from the Robert Taylor Homes, one of the largest high-rise public housing projects in America. "The projects," as they were known, were infamous for uncontrollable crime and irremediable squalor. (They have since, mercifully, been demolished.)

    What Sherri was getting from last night's television coverage was a whiff of the sense of life of "the projects." Then the "crawl"—the informational phrases flashed at the bottom of the screen on most news channels—gave some vital statistics to confirm this sense: 75% of the residents of New Orleans had already evacuated before the hurricane, and of those who remained, a large number were from the city's public housing projects. Jack Wakeland then told me that early reports from CNN and Fox indicated that the city had no plan for evacuating all of the prisoners in the city's jails—so they just let many of them loose. [Update: I have been searching for news reports on this last story, but I have not been able to confirm it. Instead, I have found numerous reports about the collapse of the corrupt and incompetent New Orleans Police Department; see here and here.]

    There is no doubt a significant overlap between these two populations--that is, a large number of people in the jails used to live in the housing projects, and vice versa.

    There were many decent, innocent people trapped in New Orleans when the deluge hit—but they were trapped alongside large numbers of people from two groups: criminals—and wards of the welfare state, people selected, over decades, for their lack of initiative and self-induced helplessness. The welfare wards were a mass of sheep—on whom the incompetent administration of New Orleans unleashed a pack of wolves.

    All of this is related, incidentally, to the incompetence of the city government, which failed to plan for a total evacuation of the city, despite the knowledge that this might be necessary. In a city corrupted by the welfare state, the job of city officials is to ensure the flow of handouts to welfare recipients and patronage to political supporters—not to ensure a lawful, orderly evacuation in case of emergency.

    No one has really reported this story, as far as I can tell. In fact, some are already actively distorting it, blaming President Bush, for example, for failing to personally ensure that the Mayor of New Orleans had drafted an adequate evacuation plan. The worst example is an execrable piece from the Toronto Globe and Mail, by a supercilious Canadian who blames the chaos on American "individualism." But the truth is precisely the opposite: the chaos was caused by a system that was the exact opposite of individualism.

    What Hurricane Katrina exposed was the psychological consequences of the welfare state. What we consider "normal" behavior in an emergency is behavior that is normal for people who have values and take the responsibility to pursue and protect them. People with values respond to a disaster by fighting against it and doing whatever it takes to overcome the difficulties they face. They don't sit around and complain that the government hasn't taken care of them. And they don't use the chaos of a disaster as an opportunity to prey on their fellow men.

    But what about criminals and welfare parasites? Do they worry about saving their houses and property? They don't, because they don't own anything. Do they worry about what is going to happen to their businesses or how they are going to make a living? They never worried about those things before. Do they worry about crime and looting? But living off of stolen wealth is a way of life for them.

    People living in piles of their own trash, while petulantly complaining that other people aren't doing enough to take care of them and then shooting at those who come to rescue them—this is not just a description of the chaos at the Superdome. It is a perfect summary of the 40-year history of the welfare state and its public housing projects.

    The welfare state—and the brutish, uncivilized mentality it sustains and encourages—is the man-made disaster that explains the moral ugliness that has swamped New Orleans. And that is the story that no one is reporting.
  20. #95
    According to the law on the books in 1998, Mitchell Johnson had to be released from prison in Memphis, Tenn., when he turned 21, which was in August. Johnson was the boy who, with a classmate, shot up their school in Jonesboro, Ark., that year, killing four girls and a teacher and wounding 10. According to the law, Johnson will have no criminal record and will presumably be free, for example, to buy a gun. (Several news organizations reported on Johnson's imminent release, but at press time, prison officials had not made a formal announcement.) [Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 8-12-05]

    Lena Driskell, 78, who was indicted for the June jealous-rage fatal shooting her former boyfriend, age 85, in an Atlanta senior citizens' home and who told police upon her arrest, "I did it, and I'd do it again!" [San Francisco Chronicle-AP, 7-11-05] [Newsday-AP, 6-24-05]

    Erik K. Low, 37, was convicted of manslaughter in Salt Lake City in June for fatally shooting a friend who had just moments before given him a "wedgie."
  21. #96
    Freakish events happen. Injustice happens. Neither is a sound basis for creating policy. Citing the exception is a popular way to argue for bad policy which fails horribly in the majority case.

    Quote Originally Posted by HepCat
    The welfare state—and the brutish, uncivilized mentality it sustains and encourages—is the man-made disaster that explains the moral ugliness that has swamped New Orleans. And that is the story that no one is reporting.
    Wow! Nice post.
  22. #97
    I agree about the freakish events. Just figured that since we're talkin about gundeaths, I'd post a few interesting ones.

    Glad youliked the "Welfare State" post.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •