83 Responses to ** Gunpoint robbery 110 Park **

• 81. 0h7b0k3n0 April 18th 2009 - 14:43:28 |

  ricky roma wrote:

  i believe people should be allowed to smoke on any private property – if the property owner has decided to allow it. If Target decided it was okay to smoke indoors as a corporate rule, then why should the gov’t step in to regulate it? let the market dictate what happens. target is not a necessity – go shop in a non-smoking store. if non-smoking environments are as coveted as people suggest, then target will lose business to non-smoking competitors. conversely, there may be a section of society that gos out of their way to patronize target because they can smoke while they shop. the “workplace” argument is complete bullshit – because workers have the ability to choose their employment – so a smoking vs. non-smoking environment is just one more decision to make in accepting a job. also – the majority of employers and building owners would not allow smoking regardless of gov’t intervention because of insurance, public perception, customers, etc.

  however, as applied to bars, the workplace argument is total bullshit. some bars have less than 10 employees – some bars in queens where i used to live have like 3 employees – with the owner behind the bar half the time. regulating a private property owner and telling him he can’t smoke in a bar he owns? bullshit. bars have lot a ton of money due to the ban – and as i said earlier – if you rescinded the ban right now – half the bars would remain smoke-free. business would be booming with non-smokers at those bars, and smokers would come out of the wood work to patronize the smoking establishments.

  i am a non-smoker – i just think that a response to a situation that includes “ban it” is nonsensical

  +1

  
  

  Login or Register to reply

• 82. OldNewComer April 18th 2009 - 20:03:08 |

  It’s a federal republic. States like VA or GA or where ever are not going to vote locally to ‘ban guns’. It may not be constitutional anyway. And it’s almost surely not constitutional for the federal govt to ‘ban guns’, besides there also being nowhere near the votes to do it in Congress; a lot the new majority the Democrats have is from states and districts where moderate Dems had to convince pro-gun voters to vote for them. So banning guns is just not a practical proposal. There are 10’s mils guns in the US and will be for as long as we all live: that’s reality.

  The only semi-realistic argument is whether *NJ* should have *looser* gun laws in the sense of making it easier for people walking on 1st st at 3:00AM to be packing pack heat, that *could* be done, though also unlikely in the politics of NJ. I used to live near there and work long hours, 20 years ago, never had a problem. Now I live uptown and don’t work long hours, and getting mugged is pretty far down the list of my worries, in general or as to what’s wrong with Hoboken. And I doubt many of the people who do walk late at night would want to carry a gun. But FWIW I’d support reasonably easy to get carry permits with the right screening, but again that’s going to happen in NJ?, I don’t think so. You can move to Texas if you really want to…

  But it is fun to argue gun control and have *nobody*, *ever* change their mind. An internet debate about gun control where somebody seriously says: ‘OK you convinced me, I’ve changed my mind about guns’. That would be sometime to see.

  
  

  Login or Register to reply

• 83. broken April 20th 2009 - 08:06:49 |

  nacholibre wrote:

  It’s interesting how many “liberal” anti-gun people in NYC have gun permits, including (if memory serves correct) Rosie O’Donnell’s bodyguard.

  I also don’t understand the ban mentality on anything. It is a fantasy to think any ban on anything really works.

  I am far more fearful of a moron driving a car than I am of any criminal or gun-owning citizen.

  Statistics (aka lies) vary, but police-involved shootings have accuracy rates as low as 17% and these are people who receive ongoing firearms training. Like any skill, it is only as good as your training.

  Even more interesting is that police make more than twice as many “errors” as private citizens in shooting people (as definied by shooting wrong person, or person not a criminal.) Maybe a) all that training isn’t working or b) makes the cops trigger happy. Or maybe a private citizen proactively managing their own security isn’t really the “danger to society at large” that some people seem to think it is.

  About the “assault weapon” ban – this is complete nonsense. The assault weapon ban made “scary looking” guns illegal for no particular reason. Machine guns were already illegal – the guns that were banned were just similar looking gas operated semi auto’s. In reality, they are no more dangerous than common hunting rifles – many of which are also semi-auto (though I prefer the accuracy of a bolt action).

  
  

  Login or Register to reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.