Quoted from visitor

Or maybe police in UK are adding more guns because of teh increasing violent nature of crime.

Nope, they need the guns because they have become more violent and aggressive, thereby causing more aggressive resistance.

They are attempting to follow the failed US model of drug enforcement.

Quoted from leggs9966

  At Least The Rich Don't Control The Political AND Judicial System !! eVEN when Involving Land D/StEALS AND SUCH!!!

You forgot to make it clear this is sarcasm.

Quoted from JackBauer

It's only because they have priorities.

We are #1, but don't kid yourself - they are on the list too.  The only countries that are not are the ones that are already Islamist.

I think you are mistaken.

People don't want to kill people who let them co-exist in peace.

The US kills the innocent every day in Pakistan.

We aren't at war with Pakistan. We likely will be. Pakistan was created when the Muslims fled to that corner of India and declared themselves a new country.

It is illogical to assume that Muslims would seek to kill 4.5 billion non-believers.

There are extremists in every country.

It is the duty of the citizenry of each country to control there local Taliban type Tea Party freaks that want to kill and pillage the world.

You get peace through de-escalation.

Superior firepower hasn't worked since the forties.

It appears that the 'LAWLESS' are NOT afraid of law enforcement.....not in schenectady!!!

Ask some folks who are present at crime scenes in/on hamilton hill or mt pleasant. Those folks stand around smoking a joint, snorting/smoking crack right in front of the cops/emts/firefighters/ambulance drivers.................FACT!!!

Bottom line is that the city cops are inept at best. We still hear how folks wait HOURS for a cop to arrive. How folks are subject to an answering machine when calling the police station. And yet the cops are still on time with their hand out on payday....with their lucrative benefit package!!!

And the lawless get plea deals and they know that!!! The city judges are also inept at best!!!

No, I'm not wrong.  

The same extremist assholes that are blowing themselves up to kill women and babies are the same ones that want to see Sharia law and Islamic governments throughout the world, and that would include neutral countries.  (And realize no country is completely neutral:  http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Ho.....=4608828  )

These morons have priorities, and we clearly are number 1.  But eventually whether it is the desire to force their Sharia law on traditionally neutral nations or to punish them for being bankers to the west, they will be targeted by some fanatics.  Maybe not UBL, but some crazed lunatics will organize and blow something up.  

Yes I agree that de-escalation is the way to peace.

But I ask you - how did President Obama's overtures to Iran turn out?  How did it work out with North Korea?

OK, the Taliban and the Tea Party are analogous.  That's something I didn't know.

We entered Saudi Arabia as a response to Saddam Hussein invading Kuwait.  That is one of the main reasons Bin Laden used for justifying his attacks - Infidels on Holy Land.

Bauer

So, that would explain why Taliban murdered a group of people if Afghanistan.  No wait - it was because they were singing and dancing at a wedding.

Guess they viewed the wedding as a threat to Middle Eastern soverignty.

yeah bumble

everybody sucks except you

Quoted from visitor

OK, the Taliban and the Tea Party are analogous.  That's something I didn't know.

They think remarkably alike.

They believe in ideological purity.

View compromise as weakness.

Have a fundamentalist belief in scriptural literalism.

They are denying science.

Are unmoved by facts.

Are undeterred by new information.

Have a hostile fear of progress.

Beieve in the demonization of education.

Have a need to control women’s bodies.

Have severe xenophobia.

Have a tribal mentality.

They have an intolerance of dissent and a pathological hatred of the U.S. government.

It describes both groups to a tee.

Quoted from JackBauer

No, I'm not wrong.  

The same extremist assholes that are blowing themselves up to kill women and babies are the same ones that want to see Sharia law and Islamic governments throughout the world, and that would include neutral countries.  (And realize no country is completely neutral:  http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/Ho.....=4608828  )

These morons have priorities, and we clearly are number 1.  But eventually whether it is the desire to force their Sharia law on traditionally neutral nations or to punish them for being bankers to the west, they will be targeted by some fanatics.  Maybe not UBL, but some crazed lunatics will organize and blow something up.  

Yes I agree that de-escalation is the way to peace.

But I ask you - how did President Obama's overtures to Iran turn out?  How did it work out with North Korea?

Each nation must remove their own extremists from power.

We aren't bombing Iran Or Korea. They aren't bombing us. So I guess Obama did ok.

Quoted from visitor

OK, the Taliban and the Tea Party are analogous.  That's something I didn't know.

Extremists exist in every country.

Quoted from visitor

We entered Saudi Arabia as a response to Saddam Hussein invading Kuwait.  That is one of the main reasons Bin Laden used for justifying his attacks - Infidels on Holy Land.

Name one attack Bin Laden actually made.

Not attacks that he took credit for.

Plus, attacking the US for invasion of their lands isn't outrageous.

You can't keep invading countries and call them terrorists for fighting back.

Quoted from visitor

Bauer

So, that would explain why Taliban murdered a group of people if Afghanistan.  No wait - it was because they were singing and dancing at a wedding.

Guess they viewed the wedding as a threat to Middle Eastern soverignty.

The  US drones have killed more Pakistanis than the Taliban.

As I have been reading through this thread it occurred to me that the term "war zone" has in actuality been erroneously used as it pertains to the streets of Schenectady. And let us be honest, although our focus here is indeed Schenectady, the problem of street violence is not limited to our fair city.

Visitor is correct in the assertion that "war zone" is not the proper term to describe the lawless situation in our neighborhoods. Below is the dictionary definition of "war zone":

war zone
n.
1. An area in which military combat takes place.
2. An area at sea in which ships are prone to being attacked during a war.

or

Noun     1.     war zone - a combat zone where military operations are coordinated (especially a designated area in international waters where the rights of neutrals are not respected by nations at war)war zone - a combat zone where military operations are coordinated (especially a designated area in international waters where the rights of neutrals are not respected by nations at war)  

I am not aware of any Military operations being conducted in our city. So Visitor is correct. However, I find the following terms more descriptive and correct in describing the current situation in our city and many other urban areas.

Noun     1.     battlefield - a region where a battle is being (or has been) foughtbattlefield - a region where a battle is being (or has been) fought;

or

Noun     1.     combat zone - a city district known for its vice and high crime rate
2. An area in a city characterized by economic depression and criminal activity: "a combat zone rife with condemned buildings used by drunks, addicts, and prostitutes" (Edwin Chen).

I would submit, that the terms, battlefield, and combat zone are far better terms to describe the streets of Schenectady.

I am a bit surprised Visitor, that you would not have taken the time to debunk the "war zone" usage as I have done. So, you're welcome.

Now I must also confess that I take issue with the term "gay", as it is used today. Are we to assume that the "Gay Nineties", that period of time preceding the onset of the 20th century, was a decade rife with homosexuality? Food for thought wouldn't you agree?