forum Let's talk about the most controversial shit

Started February 11, 2019 by @SaltyLasagna

tune

So would you support forcing someone working as a DJ at a KKK party?

Doesn't the KKK commit hate crimes?

But what if they were just having a party?

I was talking mostly to Salty. But yeah, it's dumb for business to be like that. But (obviously) I get the people who do it for religious reasons. But I think it's a choice that all business owners should be allowed to make. Without interference by the gov.

The government has to interfere with some things. I understand that we can't have our government controlling us 24/7, but without it, this country would be utter chaos

They should only control things about morality that we all agree on. They cannot be the holders of morality or Big Brother is telling us what is right and wrong.

I was talking mostly to Salty. But yeah, it's dumb for business to be like that. But (obviously) I get the people who do it for religious reasons. But I think it's a choice that all business owners should be allowed to make. Without interference by the gov.

The government has to interfere with some things. I understand that we can't have our government controlling us 24/7, but without it, this country would be utter chaos

They should only control things about morality that we all agree on. They cannot be the holders of morality or Big Brother is telling us what is right and wrong.

There has to be moral laws that the majority of people agree on so that there's order and structure in our country.

I have a debate topic for when you guys are done with this one…
What about "If cities should use surveillance cameras or not."

Absolutely, yes. I think there should be signs up saying there are cameras though, since they're not always super noticeable.

I don't think so. I'm taking this directly from a source: "Of the 75 cameras installed in Washington D.C. since 2006, none have provided footage that has helped crimes." Plus, it's just a waste of money.

I was talking mostly to Salty. But yeah, it's dumb for business to be like that. But (obviously) I get the people who do it for religious reasons. But I think it's a choice that all business owners should be allowed to make. Without interference by the gov.

The government has to interfere with some things. I understand that we can't have our government controlling us 24/7, but without it, this country would be utter chaos

They should only control things about morality that we all agree on. They cannot be the holders of morality or Big Brother is telling us what is right and wrong.

There has to be moral laws that the majority of people agree on so that there's order and structure in our country.

Well of course. But like I said, only the ones we all agree on. Murder etc.

I don't think so. I'm taking this directly from a source: "Of the 75 cameras installed in Washington D.C. since 2006, none have provided footage that has helped crimes." Plus, it's just a waste of money.

That's only one city, though. There was actually a murder crime that was solved with the help of surveillance footage and some math equations.

I don't think so. I'm taking this directly from a source: "Of the 75 cameras installed in Washington D.C. since 2006, none have provided footage that has helped crimes." Plus, it's just a waste of money.

That's only one city, though. There was actually a murder crime that was solved with the help of surveillance footage and some math equations.

Ah, but the federal government and state govs. have poured millions into having these cameras and ones for the police, yet The Home Office Study revealed that they were not integrated into the system at all.

I don't think so. I'm taking this directly from a source: "Of the 75 cameras installed in Washington D.C. since 2006, none have provided footage that has helped crimes." Plus, it's just a waste of money.

That's only one city, though. There was actually a murder crime that was solved with the help of surveillance footage and some math equations.

Ah, but the federal government and state govs. have poured millions into having these cameras and ones for the police, yet The Home Office Study revealed that they were not integrated into the system at all.

What do you mean, not integrated into the system?

I don't think so. I'm taking this directly from a source: "Of the 75 cameras installed in Washington D.C. since 2006, none have provided footage that has helped crimes." Plus, it's just a waste of money.

That's only one city, though. There was actually a murder crime that was solved with the help of surveillance footage and some math equations.

Ah, but the federal government and state govs. have poured millions into having these cameras and ones for the police, yet The Home Office Study revealed that they were not integrated into the system at all.

What do you mean, not integrated into the system?

Ah sorry, the police system. The federal gov. gave the police money to get body cameras and after about a year I think, the police were still not using them.

That is not to say that cameras wouldn't be usefull, I just think the cons out weigh the pros at the moment.

You and I are told increasingly that we have to choose between a left or right, but I would like to suggest that there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down–up to a man's age-old dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism, and regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.

Ronald Reagan 10/27/64

I liked him.

…bump I guess

I would just like to point out that 75 cameras for the entire city of Washington DC is not enough. No wonder they didn't catch any crimes.
Also, regarding the body cams, not all police precincts are 1) required to wear them. 2) have enough to purchase them.
Precincts within big cities have rolled out the program and it has helped immensely with both the good and bad acts of the police system.

Cameras if used the right way would be enormously helpful against crime.

Yeah, probably, I only suggested the topic because I have a few sources on it.

…Ah

Yeah, it was school assigned.

sadly now Reagan’s words are more prophetic than they ever have been

in the Democratic Party, the minority who are radical socialist’s that think our country is evil and should be destroyed have the loudest voices as if they are majority

in the Democratic Party, the minority who are radical socialist’s that think our country is evil and should be destroyed have the loudest voices as if they are the majority

That's what happens with everything these days. The majority of people on this planet have mostly happy lives, yet all you hear is the stories from those who don't. More good things happen on this earth than bad, yet all the news/internet/media tells you is the planet's going to die because all humans are terrible. More happy moments happen across this planet than we think, yet no one talks about it. People like to push bad things out of proportion, and I'm pretty sick of it.

Not everyone on the planet is evil, simple as that. Not all art majors end up unemployed, not all political opinions involve slaughtering half the country, not all religious people want to kill atheists, not all straight people are out to kill gays, and most importantly: NOT EVERY HUMAN TO WALK THIS PLANET IS A FREAKING PSYCHOPATH

Negativity always has the loudest voice, and I may never be able to understand why.

And here is our impassioned speech! clapping

The question about the cams is do people deserve privacy in public places.

Isn't public the exact opposite of private?

Yeah. If they're doing something in a public place, then they shouldn't be concerned if people see it.