This bill provides an open season on shopkeepers. Next, they will complain about ghetto food deserts.
” Milo is attacked because he creates an unsafe situation..!”
“Liquor stores attract bums and it’s their fault cuz they’re creating an unsafe situation..!”
you notice how popular that stupid thinking is becoming..?
They’ll say ANYTHING to explain away the pathology in ghettos.
What will they say after they drive away the liquor stores..? they’ll say it’s a “booze desert” or something.
This is so their favorite boys can just waltz right in and take what is “rightfully” theirs at the stores of plenty, from the “oppressors”.
Same reason why they are taking guns from non-violent people and deliberately leaving them in the hands of violent criminals.
> Prohibit bulletproof glass <
Why stop there? Alarm systems and security cameras should have to go as well. And door locks, too. All of these items are insults to the community!
Places that sells nothing but booze, smokes, and junk food are skirting licenseing laws. Basically convienence stores calling themselves restaurants. Probably accept EBT for the sale of such items, too. When I first read about this I was concerned, but this article makes more clear the intention of the ordinance.
Because they are scammers running illegal businesses. Have to root them out.
The long term result Bass’s moronic bill will be the shuttering of these inner city businesses. Then the same idiot will whine about the inner city being without essential stores.
Congratulations.
You found a 5 day old article that’s been beaten
to death on this Forum a half dozen times.
OCD much?
This idiot councilwoman doesn’t even live anywhere near these “war zones”. She lives in a relatively nice part of the city while dictating what shop keepers in basically war zones should do? Then they’ll blame racism when no one opens any stores in these areas.
I don’t live there, never would, but I hope they pass this bill. It’ll force them all to head into the nice, WHITE, liberal neighborhoods to get their stuff. It’ll be awesome to watch them try to integrate with the White, Compassionate, Liberals that care about them so much. Need to do some reality TV at the nearest Whole Foods. It’ll be great.
But, on a more serious note, it’d be interesting to see them worry about food stamp fraud or laundering/wiring money for their muslim brothers, back home.
Who wants to bet me that there are activists for BLM on that city council?
What a vunch of jerks!
There’s no such thing as “bullet. prof,. glass.” You may find bullet resistant, but not Bullet proof.
Thanks for posting this article.
“As I’ve said, my office is open to working with businesses to help address any safety concerns”
Oh, I get it. It’s a shake down.
Sure, just as soon as government officials stop hiding behind their security guards and bullet proof glass.
Stupid law. For selling liquor and cigarettes we deem them worthy of the death penalty. Where do they find such stupid leaders?
It is impossible now to read a report like this and not conclude it must be satire. Sadly, it does not appear to be the case. So, what is to be made of today’s loony people. I read another account where feminists had to stop producing a satire publication because feminists’ everyday behavior had subsumed the publication’s satire creating abilities.
Well, if this is the issue, isn't that what they have the police for? If those actions are illegal (and, from her description, most .. if not all .. of them are), sweep the streets with police.
What does bullet-resistant glass/plexiglass have to do with illegal activities outside of the business?
Because the government knows how to take care of our health better than we do, the government has taken responsibility for health care away from us.
Then, because it costs the government more to care for people who smoke, the government has raised the price of a pack of cigarettes to the point that many smokers are challenged to buy a full pack of cigarettes at a time.
Then, in order to stop people from buying just a single cigarette, a "loosie", the government has outlawed such sales.
Then, because the people dared to ignore such laws and flagrantly sell individual cigarettes outside of convenience stores, the government now wished to impose draconian measures against such stores in order to put them out of business.
Did I miss anything here?
I am reminded of a phrase from the Declaration of Independence which speaks of a "long train of abuses". How is this sequence not such a "long train"?
In response to such abuses by THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT, our Founders declared independence from such tyranny, knowing full well that the government response would eventually be to disarm them and then kill them until they obeyed.
Can somebody explain to me what is different now?