Eight shot in Brooklyn diner

CNN ^ | Jan 17, 2004 | AP

[Destro]

I made sense to those that understand what I mean and yes I do love pizza.

[Gigantor]

"I was born in Brooklyn, lived in the projects off of Navy Walk.'

My family owned a candy store on Navy Street [at the exact spot of the current foot bridge] - they were forced to move when Robert Moses used 'eminent domain' to tear down their neighborhood to build the Projects.

"Went to Brooklyn Tech."

So did I. Class of 1978. Your point?

"We have CCW and can buy a handgun and keep it in your glove compartment without any state or local license."

"NYC is a sewer, unless you are millioniare who doesn't care much about the cost of living."

"Defending NYC is absurd."

Maybe if the television network I work for relocates to Forida, I'll go with them. Until then, I'll enjoy living in Brooklyn. By the way, nice non sequitur at the end there.

[Gigantor]

Your logic dictates that it would have been worse, bot better, if two or three plain clothes cops were eating in that diner. Sure, that makes good sense.

The RKBA and 'free of crime' notion of yours has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

According to you, the Colonist would be against protecting their homes and families against attack from theives, savages, or wild animals because that is not fihting for political 'freedom.'

Your notion doesn't hold water, but I'd still enjoy you telling me how those diners were safer without cops.

[Destro]

nope. All I said is that to think guns do away with crime is not correct. In fact crime and the RKBA should not be mentioned in the same sentence since the RKBA was not designed to be an anti-crime measure. Do not seek to justify the RKBA as a crime issue. The RKBA is there to protect you from tyranny. If it stops crime that is a side benefit-a bonus. If it causes harm like allowing dueling or making suicide easier, etc it is unfortunate but the positives of keeping you free out weigh the negatives.

Don't use crime fighting as a justification for the RKBA.

[Gigantor]

"All I said is that to think guns do away with crime is not correct."

You should start your own topic on this point, which is unrelated to this topic. No one said guns would 'do away with crime" (except you)

This is the third time you fail to address the question of whether the people in a diner which is about to be robbed would be safer if there are two or three plain clothes cops inside (WITH their guns!)

I know why you hide from this question, you know why, so we'll have to leave it at that.

[Destro]

Cops yes-civilians? no.

[from occupied ga]

"Ever been to Brooklyn, New York? Those people do not seem to present the makings of "A well regulated militia". Two men had guns which they pulled and they started shooting hitting eight."

Long ago (Lindsey was mayor) I had the misfortune to live in the Bronx, and most of the people there didn't know which end of a gun the bullet comes out of and would have

1. pi$$ed themselves if they saw a firearm,and
2. ratted anyone they saw with one out to the cops

so Destro's comment isn't that far off the mark.

I happen to live in Brooklyn, NY and would appreciate being able to defend my life in a situation such as this.

I'm sure you would and you should be able to defend yourself, so why do you stay in the most communist city in the most communist state in America?

[Gigantor]

"Cops yes-civilians? no."

There it is. Thanks for the laugh.

[Gigantor]

"I'm sure you would and you should be able to defend yourself, so why do you stay in the most communist city in the most communist state in America?"

You've shown me the light - you're correct - I should cut and run like a coward...

Thanks for the advice!

[Destro]

In that setting cops yes.

[Gigantor]

Please explain - I mean, what is it bout the cops that would make a difference, thier badges? Their haircuts?

Oh, wait a minute - their guns!

So the people would be safer because of the presence of a GUN on one of the good guys.

The countdown to you telling me about the cops 'training' has now begun.


3...2...1...

[Destro]

You must be confused since you forget your own questions to me:

You asked me This is the third time you fail to address the question of whether the people in a diner which is about to be robbed would be safer if there are two or three plain clothes cops inside (WITH their guns!)

My reply was "Cops yes-civilians? no." in this case taken in isolation.

I think in such a small enclosure there would have been more casualties if nore civilians were armed due to cross fire. That was my position all along as well as stating that it does not matter that guns make you safe in some cases or may increase chance of injury in other cases. The reasons for us having the RKBA is to be free from tyranny. If that right makes us safer from crime it is a bonus if it makes us less safe due to accidents, criminals, even then the benefit is worth it. Sorry if you are not sophisticated enough to understand this concept or I am sorry I am not skilled enough with words to make this point clearer.

[Just another Joe]

I believe you are, at least, partially correct.

You said, "The reasons for us having the RKBA is to be free from tyranny.", and I agree with that.

ButI believe that our forefathers also had the idea to preserve the individual's right to keep and bear arms to protect their family from injury, in that day and age to supply food for their family, and to protect them from anyone that tried to take that right away. That includes criminals that would take their possessions, their family members, or their lives.

[Gigantor]

"Ever been to Brooklyn, New York? Those people do not seem to present the makings of "A well regulated militia"."

"Those people" eh? Which people would that be, precisely. Keep in mind you're talking to a Conservative Republican, gun owning, lifelong Brooklynite...

On the one hand you have all potential victims unarmed. On the other you have several good guys with guns. One is less safe, one is more safe. It's the guns (not the haircuts or badges) that make the potential difference.

You have admitted that the presence of guns in the hands of potential victims would make all safer. You don't mean to suggest that two or three UN-armed cops would still make everyone safer, do you?

Of course not.

Bottom line, your opinions on the 2nd Amendment are irrelevant in this situation. I've heard many a Liberal use the same line you do about 'crossfire.' Your position is exactly like theirs. Unless someone is a cop, they should not have the right to have a gun - especially 'those people."

[Destro]

Yes, those people-undisciplined rabble who would never raise gun against tyranny when the need arises.

[Gigantor]

"Yes, those people-undisciplined rabble who would never raise gun against tyranny when the need arises."

I think you better check in with Nurse Rachett, it might be way past med time. Good luck to you!

[MissAmericanPie]

ROFLOL

[Cindy]

NEW YORK...

http://nypost.com/news/regionalnews/16114.htm

"45 BULLETS FLY" (January 19, 2004)

By LARRY CELONA, MARK BULLIET and WILLIAM NEUMAN

ARTICLE SNIPPET: "Investigators found 45 shell casings after the rapid-fire shootout - which some witnesses said they at first mistook for firecrackers in the run-up to the Chinese New Year. Five of the shells came from a .38-caliber revolver which was found beside the dead man.

Police also found six shells from a .45-caliber handgun and 34 shells from an AK-47."

===

http://nypost.com/news/regionalnews/16120.htm

"SURVEILLANCE SHOTS EXPOSE FACES OF BRAZEN DINER GUNMEN"
By LARRY CELONA


ARTICLE SNIPPET: "January 19, 2004 -- These are the coldblooded gunmen who shot eight people during an early-morning robbery at a Brooklyn diner, cops said.

Cops yesterday released the grainy photos, taken from a security video camera at the Galaxy Diner in East New York, in a bid to hunt down the men responsible for the Saturday robbery."

[from occupied ga]

You've shown me the light - you're correct - I should cut and run like a coward... Thanks for the advice!

It wasn't advice, it was a question that you didn't answer. Of all of the places I lived, NYC is so far and away the absolute worst place to live that the next worse place (upstate NY) seems good (and it really sucked too).

[Gigantor]

"...why do you stay in the most communist city in the most communist state in America?"

The part of NYC where I live, Bensonhurst, Brooklyn, still has a conservative base. Until the 1990 Census and Democrat Gerrymandering, I lived in the only State Republican district of the city, and even had a Republican Congressman.

I'd still be in Vito Fosella's district if they didn't shift the border line by a block.

My family has been here since the early 1800's, on my mothers side. Brooklyn is still unique and it's my home.

I don't blame you for your views, with you having lived in The Bronx. Even I wouldn't live in The Bronx.