Articles
   
       
Pics/Video
       
Wake 101
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Non-Wakeboarding Discussion

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-20-2017, 1:32 PM Reply   
BART stand's for Bay, Aera, Rapid, Transit. it's our local rail that links the bay area. B.A.R.T passengers have been experiencing a rise in MOB STYLE robberies. What's going on is large groups of black youths (40 to 60 deep) are waiting on the platform. As soon as a train arrives the "Thugs rush the train and snatch as many phones and wallets as they can get. They jump off the train b4 the doors can close and the train leaves the station with all the victims.

Bart has been NOT reporting these for these reasons. I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP!

#1 BART police say they are YOUTHS so they can't and will not show the public the video.

#2 BART police say They don't want to offend black riders for fear that the story will trigger an already afraid of blacks community I will find and post a video of his exact words.


In one case a victim was robbed of her cell phone. A bystander jumped in and the victim got her phone back but not before they guy that jumped in received stitches to the face in the scuffle. Bart didn't report this as a Robbery because BART say's the (VICTIM GOT THE PHONE BACK)

http://www.ktvu.com/news/2-investigates/258362170-story

http://www.ktvu.com/news/268739706-story
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-20-2017, 1:42 PM Reply   
40-60 Storm and rob train
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M09kMxg6TFQ


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIRdN-vxhXo

I don't care if they are YOUTH or not. How does that matter? or WHY should that matter. Why should they receive special protection when they are the ones committing the crime.
Old    deltahoosier            07-20-2017, 1:44 PM Reply   
Yep. Liberalism at it's finest. Hundreds of teens with many of them fighting each day at one of the stations and bus zones. Gun fights break out in the parking area where one guy sitting on the bench outside in the parking are was shot right through the heart with a .22 because one kid disrespected his girl friend. All sorts of stuff going on over there. Many, many stories. You don't want to even know about the weeny wavers and other sexual pervert actions that happen to patrons.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-20-2017, 2:03 PM Reply   
I can't even begin to understand the train of thought by liberalsmore specifically liberals in California. It's psychotic. Chicago isn't too far off as the media no longer uses race to describe wanted violent criminals and community alerts. It's deeply disturbing .........what happen to putting the rights of everyday Americans first?



They seem to think if they don't mention race , nobody will notice it's the same demographic for a majority of these types of crime. It's a sad state of affairs.

Last edited by xstarrider; 07-20-2017 at 2:10 PM.
Old    deltahoosier            07-20-2017, 2:33 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by xstarrider View Post
I can't even begin to understand the train of thought by liberalsmore specifically liberals in California. It's psychotic. Chicago isn't too far off as the media no longer uses race to describe wanted violent criminals and community alerts. It's deeply disturbing .........what happen to putting the rights of everyday Americans first?



They seem to think if they don't mention race , nobody will notice it's the same demographic for a majority of these types of crime. It's a sad state of affairs.
It is just like California not wanting to count illegals on the dole. If you can take away the statistic, you can not use it to target the real issues.
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-20-2017, 7:15 PM Reply   
Blacks make up 13% of the population. Keeping crimes secret and placing innocent people's lives at risk because you don't want to offend Anyone is pure Libral madness. Let's protect the criminals. IMO if your doing crimes you should not be granted any kind of minor's privacy rights and ESPECIALLY your description. I notice that new outlets like CBS hide or don't publish the Race or Description of the person committing crimes 90% of the time only exception is if the person is white.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-20-2017, 11:17 PM Reply   
Here's something the Linersls of New Jersey have classified.

They have taken the stance the following crimes are "Non Violent Felonies " and offenders charged with these crimes should not be held until trial. So people accused of these crimes will be free to roam the streets.






WTF. Assault with a deadly weapon to police is not considered a violent felony. Rape , detonating a bomb.

Name:  IMG_0319.jpg
Views: 492
Size:  123.4 KB
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-21-2017, 6:41 AM Reply   
Did Tony Soprano write these policy's?
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       07-21-2017, 7:29 AM Reply   
Wtf?
Old    deltahoosier            07-21-2017, 9:21 AM Reply   
That is a very similar list in California. I think it even goes up in some cases with assault of a Police Officer is non violent and in some cases rape.


Political
California Votes To Label Violent Crimes As ‘Non-Violent’ So They Can Release Felons
By Donut Operator On November 10, 2016 17 Comments
Proposition 57
California Votes To Label Violent Crimes As ‘Non-Violent’ So They Can Release Felons

Proposition 57 was voted into effect Tuesday in California. Meant to save tax payers money, it may have just made life much more dangerous for the people of California.

Proposition 57 was created to save the people of California millions of dollars on prison costs every year. It was created to change state law in two different ways:

Make judges the only people who can say whether a Juvenile is tried as an adult. Since 2000, prosecutors have been able to make that decision.
Modify the way that prisoners can apply for release from prison. There are many different aspects to this, with the primary one being that it allows non-violent felonious prisoners who have completed the “base” sentence for their crime to apply for parole. This means that the extra time added for being a gang member, for previous crimes, etc.. is wiped away.



The problem is, Proposition 57 didn’t tell voters what is considered a “non-violent” crime. According to a fact check put out by the Association of Deputy District Attorneys, non-violent in California can mean:

Assault with a deadly weapon on a peace officer
Battery with serious bodily injury
Solicitation to commit murder
Inflicting corporal injury on a child
First degree burglary
Raping an unconscious person
Human trafficking involving a minor
Participation in a street gang
Exploding a destructive device w/ intent to cause injury (yes, setting off a bomb in a public place)
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-21-2017, 10:58 PM Reply   
Geeeeeeezus F'n Christ. How rid the focus shift so fast from protecting the rights of law abiding citizens to protecting criminals charged with violent crimes? ( semi rhetorical). Anyone who says that previous guy in the White House wasn't a terrorist needs their head examined. His doj and agenda pushed this stuff forward. SICKENING.
Old     (pesos)      Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Texas       07-21-2017, 11:19 PM Reply   
Prop 57 did not designate what crimes are and aren't consider violent. It has to do with early parole and reducing prison costs (and Brown explicitly excluded all sex offenders from having that option):

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-p...127-story.html

As you can see the list of "violent" crimes is not and has never been expansive enough. This is not some liberal movement as much as you want it to be in your strange wet dreams. There are bipartisan bills moving through to expand the list to include rape, assault of an officer, and more.

The list has been incomplete since its inception in the 70s. Prop 57 is actually a good thing because it has highlighted the fact that the list is incomplete and spurred legislation to fix that fact. You have your history out of order.


"The violent felony penal code dates to 1976 and has been expanded over the years through piecemeal legislation and voter initiatives. It includes obvious violent crimes like murder and sexual abuse of a child. But it excludes others, such as some rape crimes and domestic violence.

Debate over the offenses on the list has occurred since its inception. Lawmakers “didn’t want to add everything conceivable,” said San Mateo Dist. Atty. Steve Wagstaffe, who helped negotiate the penal code 40 years ago. “There was lot of give and take in Sacramento.”

The latest major changes came in 2000, when a juvenile punishment ballot measure backed by district attorneys revised the list of crimes and made them count as “strikes” under the state’s three strikes law, subjecting defendants with previous violent or serious offenses to longer prison sentences.

That ballot measure, Proposition 21, also made it harder to change the violent felony penal code by requiring any bill seeking to do so to receive a two-thirds majority vote in each house.

But in recent years, bills seeking to add more crimes to the code have died at the Capitol, as California has grappled with prison overcrowding and with finding a permanent solution to a federal court-ordered cap on its inmate population.

That might change this legislative session, as the list “has taken on a whole new meaning under Prop. 57,” said Wagstaffe, president of the California District Attorneys Assn.

“It has a whole new purpose,” he said. “Now it will help determine whether you are eligible for early release, and that’s what is causing this new discussion.”"
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       07-22-2017, 6:56 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesos View Post
Prop 57 did not designate what crimes are and aren't consider violent. It has to do with early parole and reducing prison costs (and Brown explicitly excluded all sex offenders from having that option):

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-p...127-story.html

As you can see the list of "violent" crimes is not and has never been expansive enough. This is not some liberal movement as much as you want it to be in your strange wet dreams. There are bipartisan bills moving through to expand the list to include rape, assault of an officer, and more.

The list has been incomplete since its inception in the 70s. Prop 57 is actually a good thing because it has highlighted the fact that the list is incomplete and spurred legislation to fix that fact. You have your history out of order.


"The violent felony penal code dates to 1976 and has been expanded over the years through piecemeal legislation and voter initiatives. It includes obvious violent crimes like murder and sexual abuse of a child. But it excludes others, such as some rape crimes and domestic violence.

Debate over the offenses on the list has occurred since its inception. Lawmakers “didn’t want to add everything conceivable,” said San Mateo Dist. Atty. Steve Wagstaffe, who helped negotiate the penal code 40 years ago. “There was lot of give and take in Sacramento.”

The latest major changes came in 2000, when a juvenile punishment ballot measure backed by district attorneys revised the list of crimes and made them count as “strikes” under the state’s three strikes law, subjecting defendants with previous violent or serious offenses to longer prison sentences.

That ballot measure, Proposition 21, also made it harder to change the violent felony penal code by requiring any bill seeking to do so to receive a two-thirds majority vote in each house.

But in recent years, bills seeking to add more crimes to the code have died at the Capitol, as California has grappled with prison overcrowding and with finding a permanent solution to a federal court-ordered cap on its inmate population.

That might change this legislative session, as the list “has taken on a whole new meaning under Prop. 57,” said Wagstaffe, president of the California District Attorneys Assn.

“It has a whole new purpose,” he said. “Now it will help determine whether you are eligible for early release, and that’s what is causing this new discussion.”"
Crickets...
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-22-2017, 8:17 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesos View Post
Prop 57 did not designate what crimes are and aren't consider violent. It has to do with early parole and reducing prison costs (and Brown explicitly excluded all sex offenders from having that option):

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-p...127-story.html

As you can see the list of "violent" crimes is not and has never been expansive enough. This is not some liberal movement as much as you want it to be in your strange wet dreams. There are bipartisan bills moving through to expand the list to include rape, assault of an officer, and more.

The list has been incomplete since its inception in the 70s. Prop 57 is actually a good thing because it has highlighted the fact that the list is incomplete and spurred legislation to fix that fact. You have your history out of order.


"The violent felony penal code dates to 1976 and has been expanded over the years through piecemeal legislation and voter initiatives. It includes obvious violent crimes like murder and sexual abuse of a child. But it excludes others, such as some rape crimes and domestic violence.

Debate over the offenses on the list has occurred since its inception. Lawmakers “didn’t want to add everything conceivable,” said San Mateo Dist. Atty. Steve Wagstaffe, who helped negotiate the penal code 40 years ago. “There was lot of give and take in Sacramento.”

The latest major changes came in 2000, when a juvenile punishment ballot measure backed by district attorneys revised the list of crimes and made them count as “strikes” under the state’s three strikes law, subjecting defendants with previous violent or serious offenses to longer prison sentences.

That ballot measure, Proposition 21, also made it harder to change the violent felony penal code by requiring any bill seeking to do so to receive a two-thirds majority vote in each house.

But in recent years, bills seeking to add more crimes to the code have died at the Capitol, as California has grappled with prison overcrowding and with finding a permanent solution to a federal court-ordered cap on its inmate population.

That might change this legislative session, as the list “has taken on a whole new meaning under Prop. 57,” said Wagstaffe, president of the California District Attorneys Assn.

“It has a whole new purpose,” he said. “Now it will help determine whether you are eligible for early release, and that’s what is causing this new discussion.”"
I wouldn't expect anything less from you or Jeremey. The list does designate these crimes as "non violent " crimes for the purposes of bail as well as early release. To say anything besides that is simply untrue . The list is labeled as such to boot . You can't be that retarded tontry and claim they're not reducing the penalty for the crimes listed on that list.

Bi partisan my ass , show me the numbers and provide the facts along with the vote tallies that shows this was a bibpartisan deal. The two areas mentioned in this thread alone are democratic monopolies in nature with Democratic Party in charge politically as the majority. You should really fact check your statements.



So your comfortable with a an offender who rapes your daughter after slipping her some date rape drugs being released early because some liberal warped mind decided that his sentence was too long and the crime wasn't deemed violent enough to fall under serving the time he was sentenced too.


I'd love to see your face after the guy who detonates a bomb in a public place where your wife hangs out , walks out of the courtroom on a significantly low bail and disappears never to stand trial or better yet is released after serving a 1/4 of his original sentence.



You wanna know what solves prison overcrowding. THE DEATH PENALTY .If they were really serious about reducing costs and prison populations they would be voting yes to this . Instead they're focused on how to disguise releasing violent criminals that belong in prison back to society.

Last edited by xstarrider; 07-22-2017 at 8:26 PM.
Old     (pesos)      Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Texas       07-22-2017, 8:29 PM Reply   
You really are a combative idiotic ass. If I said the sky was blue you'd have a ****ing fit claiming it's grey because of that perpetual ****ing cloud over your head.
Just read the article that was listed if you're interested in seeing more about the bipartisan bills being worked on to expand the list of what's considered "violent."

Again, to put it simply for you: prop 57 has to do with early release for what the state already considers non-violent crimes - and that fact has spurred bipartisan legislation to expand the admittedly incomplete list of what is considered a "violent crime" based on a list that dates back to the 70s. The governor also explicitly exempted sex offenders from being considered. Clear enough? You can stop with your whiny FUD and stick to facts.

It's clear that legislators on both sides of the aisle are working to expand/correct the list of violent crimes before prop 57 kicks in. I can't speak to Jersey as I couldn't care less about Jersey and you didn't actually post any real info except some screenshot from a cell phone with no attribution.

Does your strange brain actually think people are working to release violent criminals back into society, or is it just all hyperbole with you? Strange little man.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-22-2017, 8:49 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesos View Post
You really are a combative idiotic ass. If I said the sky was blue you'd have a ****ing fit claiming it's grey because of that perpetual ****ing cloud over your head.
Just read the article that was listed if you're interested in seeing more about the bipartisan bills being worked on to expand the list of what's considered "violent."

Again, to put it simply for you: prop 57 has to do with early release for what the state already considers non-violent crimes - and that fact has spurred bipartisan legislation to expand the admittedly incomplete list of what is considered a "violent crime" based on a list that dates back to the 70s. The governor also explicitly exempted sex offenders from being considered. Clear enough? You can stop with your whiny FUD and stick to facts.

It's clear that legislators on both sides of the aisle are working to expand/correct the list of violent crimes before prop 57 kicks in. I can't speak to Jersey as I couldn't care less about Jersey and you didn't actually post any real info except some screenshot from a cell phone with no attribution.

Does your strange brain actually think people are working to release violent criminals back into society, or is it just all hyperbole with you? Strange little man.
Ummmmmm. The fact you don't think there are people working daily to put violent criminals back to the streets as early as possible says it all. You're completey oblivious to what's transpired over the last few years regarding that. The article you posted attempts to put a positive spin on this moving it to the forefront . It's completely dismisses what is already happening and doesn't touch on the fact violent criminals are being released early and in more and more cases getting low bonds for their violent actions. The fact you glance over the people behind the scenes pushing to have these people released , pushing to lower bail amounts , pushing to eliminate prison time for violent felonies is deeply disturbing. Its also clear you have no clue about the justice system and what has been going on across the country regarding charging criminals and attempting to reduce sentencing.

Under Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, the Department of Justice pushed the states to pass new laws. The goal was to make it impossible to hold repeat offenders in jail before trial. Why? Because so many repeat offenders are black.

The first step was to reclassify violent felonies as nonviolent misdemeanors. Look at California. Assault with a deadly weapon, harming a crime victim or witness, resisting arrest that injures a police officer...Violent elder or child abuse, arson with injury, and manslaughter are now nonviolent felonies. Proposition 47--passed in 2014--reclassified certain "nonviolent felonies" as misdemeanors. Therefore prisoners convicted of violent elder abuse were released because now their former violent felony was a misdemeanor.

So the Democrats first changed violent felonies to misdemeanors. Then they changed the laws for bail. Washington DC Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier resigned because criminals were being arrested, released, and arrested again the same day. Federal authorities decide who stays in jail in DC. Under pressure from Holder and Lynch, they were releasing everyone.


The crime rate spiked dramatically. The Democrats are pushing for "community rehabilitation programs" instead of prison. The most repulsive member of congress--@tedlieu, the guy who trolls Trump--has introduced a doozy of a bill. Lieu wants to ELIMINATE bail in the entire country. They point to the "success" of New Jersey, which eliminated bail earlier this year. In New Jersey, a person is evaluated with an eight-question form. Prior offenses are not taken into consideration. As a result almost nobody is held over until trial. Almost everyone is released. The state had to hire new staff and create new computer systems to manage the new system. Releasing everybody has so far cost New Jersey $400 million, and the crime rate is skyrocketing.

Washington DC eliminated bail, and now the city pays $50 million a year to oversee almost no prisoners. Duane and Beth Chapman--He's better known as Dog the Bounty Hunter--testified in Sacramento about the new laws coming. The Chapmans pointed out every loophole they could: a guy who never shows up for trial, for example. They said that the Democrats then TWEAKED the laws to EXCLUDE any possible offender. The DC Police arrested a total of 219 violent protestors on Inauguration Day. Only 17 showed up for their trials. The Chapmans said that the Democratic party has made it a priority in 2017 to pass laws that make holding anyone in jail impossible.



Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-22-2017, 9:58 PM Reply   
No need to worry only 2 people got robbed on Thursday and only 1 person got robbed on Friday. Nothing to see here Folks. "Bart police say BART is safe to ride" what a fuking joke! Oakland another Libral hell hole. Wes why don't you move back to Berkeley and ride BART. Hopefully you can get jacked up by the Roaches you so often defend did I spell everything ok ? LOL lol lol
Old     (pesos)      Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Texas       07-23-2017, 2:19 AM Reply   
Ugh looks like WW ate my response. In sum: your characterization of Prop 47 is unsurprisingly incorrect. Not only is "violent elder abuse" not being changed (nonviolent theft from an elder was) but if you have a prior for elder abuse you aren't eligible to have your current sentence reduced (there are a number of other priors that also disqualify you). Plus any application can be challenged by the DA for a hearing in front of a judge to determine whether or not a particular felon is at risk but doesn't meet the predefined exclusions.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       07-23-2017, 5:41 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by xstarrider View Post
Ummmmmm. The fact you don't think there are people working daily to put violent criminals back to the streets as early as possible says it all. You're completey oblivious to what's transpired over the last few years regarding that. The article you posted attempts to put a positive spin on this moving it to the forefront . It's completely dismisses what is already happening and doesn't touch on the fact violent criminals are being released early and in more and more cases getting low bonds for their violent actions. The fact you glance over the people behind the scenes pushing to have these people released , pushing to lower bail amounts , pushing to eliminate prison time for violent felonies is deeply disturbing. Its also clear you have no clue about the justice system and what has been going on across the country regarding charging criminals and attempting to reduce sentencing.

Under Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, the Department of Justice pushed the states to pass new laws. The goal was to make it impossible to hold repeat offenders in jail before trial. Why? Because so many repeat offenders are black.

The first step was to reclassify violent felonies as nonviolent misdemeanors. Look at California. Assault with a deadly weapon, harming a crime victim or witness, resisting arrest that injures a police officer...Violent elder or child abuse, arson with injury, and manslaughter are now nonviolent felonies. Proposition 47--passed in 2014--reclassified certain "nonviolent felonies" as misdemeanors. Therefore prisoners convicted of violent elder abuse were released because now their former violent felony was a misdemeanor.

So the Democrats first changed violent felonies to misdemeanors. Then they changed the laws for bail. Washington DC Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier resigned because criminals were being arrested, released, and arrested again the same day. Federal authorities decide who stays in jail in DC. Under pressure from Holder and Lynch, they were releasing everyone.


The crime rate spiked dramatically. The Democrats are pushing for "community rehabilitation programs" instead of prison. The most repulsive member of congress--@tedlieu, the guy who trolls Trump--has introduced a doozy of a bill. Lieu wants to ELIMINATE bail in the entire country. They point to the "success" of New Jersey, which eliminated bail earlier this year. In New Jersey, a person is evaluated with an eight-question form. Prior offenses are not taken into consideration. As a result almost nobody is held over until trial. Almost everyone is released. The state had to hire new staff and create new computer systems to manage the new system. Releasing everybody has so far cost New Jersey $400 million, and the crime rate is skyrocketing.

Washington DC eliminated bail, and now the city pays $50 million a year to oversee almost no prisoners. Duane and Beth Chapman--He's better known as Dog the Bounty Hunter--testified in Sacramento about the new laws coming. The Chapmans pointed out every loophole they could: a guy who never shows up for trial, for example. They said that the Democrats then TWEAKED the laws to EXCLUDE any possible offender. The DC Police arrested a total of 219 violent protestors on Inauguration Day. Only 17 showed up for their trials. The Chapmans said that the Democratic party has made it a priority in 2017 to pass laws that make holding anyone in jail impossible.
What's up with you guys thinking stars of reality TV shows are experts at everything? Dog the Bounty Hunter? Give me an effing break.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-23-2017, 9:02 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
What's up with you guys thinking stars of reality TV shows are experts at everything? Dog the Bounty Hunter? Give me an effing break.
Oh you mean an expert in his particular profession. How dare anyone ask someone who knows every loophole and scam about bail and court system regarding people on bail due to actual years experience chasing them across the country. He's suddenly not credible because he made millions on the side running a cheesy tv program? Please...........Give me your expertise and vast knowledge on the subject

Last edited by xstarrider; 07-23-2017 at 9:05 PM.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-24-2017, 12:28 AM Reply   
Wait what???????? All the dems in Milwaukee screamed for years to stop chasing bad guys , begged for stricter pursuit polices................now they want change again.

Only this time they want more pursuits,,,,,,,,,,,,,say whaaaaaaaaaaaat? Gee who could've told them when you restrict police it emboldens criminals??? Wow. Geniuses. Only took em 5 yrs to figure that out. Ha.
http://fox6now.com/2017/07/20/milwau...pursuit-policy

Maybe when they catch em they can go into a peace circle and hash it out ???????

[A new Cook County court in the North Lawndale neighborhood on Chicago's West Side aims to bring victims of nonviolent crime face-to-face with the offenders to hash out a resolution, officials said Thursday.

The Restorative Justice Community Court, the first of its kind in the state, is slated to begin operations next month. Under the guidance of community members and a judge, defendants, victims and their neighbors will agree on solutions to hold defendants accountable for their crimes.

"This is truly the people's court," Judge Colleen Sheehan, who will preside over the new court, said at a news conference. "It is the community that has the wisdom and the humanity to do this."

The approval of victims is required, and defendants must then agree to accept responsibility for the crime.

Restitution agreements will be hashed out in a confidential "peace circle" in which the victim, the defendant and community members will participate. If the defendant follows through on the agreement, the charges can be dropped and the arrest expunged.




You can't make this stuff up.

Last edited by xstarrider; 07-24-2017 at 12:31 AM.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       07-24-2017, 5:05 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by xstarrider View Post
Oh you mean an expert in his particular profession. How dare anyone ask someone who knows every loophole and scam about bail and court system regarding people on bail due to actual years experience chasing them across the country. He's suddenly not credible because he made millions on the side running a cheesy tv program? Please...........Give me your expertise and vast knowledge on the subject
Dog is also an ex-felon that was given a second chance; something you seem to be totally against. Dog "chases them around the country" because he has a financial stake in them showing up to court. I never knew he was that political.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-24-2017, 9:56 AM Reply   
I am not against second chances. I am against 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th chances with ahistory of violent crime . I am for the punishment fitting the crime , and the enforcement of it to the fullest.

Second do you know the details of how he was arrested? He was in a vehicle with his friend. His friend shot the guy they were buying weed from. He served his time for running away and not reporting it. Hardly the hardcore criminal with a long rap sheet that has proven they do nothing to contribute to society that gets released daily.
Old     (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       07-25-2017, 5:19 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by xstarrider View Post
I am not against second chances. I am against 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th chances with ahistory of violent crime . I am for the punishment fitting the crime , and the enforcement of it to the fullest.

Second do you know the details of how he was arrested? He was in a vehicle with his friend. His friend shot the guy they were buying weed from. He served his time for running away and not reporting it. Hardly the hardcore criminal with a long rap sheet that has proven they do nothing to contribute to society that gets released daily.
I said he was an "ex-felon", I never said he was a "hardcore criminal w/ a long rap sheet".
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-25-2017, 7:15 AM Reply   
My frustration and the reason for my Orignal post was Not that crimes are being committed that's academic. It's the fact that Oaklands police chief decided to hold back information about these crimes NOT to protect the integrity of the case! but as not to offend "Black Riders". Talk about when Animals run the Zoo. When criminals dictate how you can report the facts to the community, I don't see a positive outcome. Where is the transparency the left keeps yelling about. Where is the equality if someone is a victim of these hood rats because they were unaware of how they operate because Oakland PD decided to protect "Minors" and "Not offend" they should be held responsible.
Old     (jonblarc7)      Join Date: Jul 2006       07-25-2017, 7:34 AM Reply   
I guess nobody has a CCP that rides the train. This is the exact reason why I carry.

If I'm sitting on the train and we pull up to a station and see 40 to 50 young adults getting ready to board a train. I'm going to put my wife and kid behind me and have my hand ready to take action. I'm going to pray that there just all good kids going to a concert or something, but I'll be ready if there not.
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-25-2017, 8:30 AM Reply   
^^^^ Great way to end your life. Sorry but yes you would and your family most likely would make it off the train. But the Libral media circus, and the social media dumb ass's that seek destroy you and your family would not be worth it. When white shoots black, you would become the criminal, even if you were in the right. you and your family would be the one who would suffer. The safer bet is to stay the F out of the ghetto. Let Libral hell holes like Oakland implode. I swear we should pull our troops out of the M.E and invade Oakland. When the news reports that Oakland wants to create "Safe Injection sites" these are places where drug addicted people can come and inject so they don't OD and die on the street. And Homeless advocates block the police from cracking down on Homless bicycle chop shops. Ya know places your bicycle ends up when it gets gets stolen and then they use the money to buy the drugs they later inject. The want to block it because they say" it unfairly targets the Homeless" LOL im so glad I don't give a F about Roaches. I just laugh. The city needs to buy a industrial strength wood chipper and drive around and scoop up the Roaches and feed them to the wood chipper
Old     (markj)      Join Date: Apr 2005       07-25-2017, 9:21 AM Reply   
Someone's been watching Fargo..... LOL
Old     (jonblarc7)      Join Date: Jul 2006       07-25-2017, 10:53 AM Reply   
So your saying if you where carrying and they ran up on you and you family you would just let them rob you.

If I shoot one person I guarantee everybody else starts running. I'm not pulling my gun unless my life or my families life is in danger. And if I pull my gun I'm shooting. It's not a warning.
Old     (grant_west)      Join Date: Jun 2005       07-25-2017, 12:22 PM Reply   
Blair
Tip#1 Never say or post or advertise your gonna blast anyone or that you have the ability to Cary.
Tip #2 Never take you family to the Ghetto
Tip #3 Take Uber
Tip #4 if you ignore tip #2 or #3 and your find yourself in Oakland and 40-60 Black youth are waiting to get on the Train in Oakland Switch cars or get off the train.

And yes I say give up your I phone's its the cost of doing business when going threw the ghetto. Blasting some fool or fools will make a mess of your life. I can 100% gaurentee you would become the criminal and you would be the one on trial. Death threats to your and your family the whole 9 yards, that of corse it is if you were Black and you blasted another black person then you can just forget everything I just said you would be fine.
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       07-25-2017, 12:35 PM Reply   
Im thinking blasting into a crowd of 30-40 people in Oakland will only result in return fire and a dead family.
Old     (xstarrider)      Join Date: Jun 2007       07-25-2017, 9:31 PM Reply   
Not 100% sure on Cali's CCW laws but here in ****congo you can't carry on public transportation .
Old     (tweeder)      Join Date: Aug 2015       07-26-2017, 6:29 AM Reply   
Its almost impossible to get a CCW in California. Its up to your local sheriffs discretion on if you have a good enough reason (i.e you transport expensive jewelry for a living), having one for personal protection is not good enough reason in California.
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       07-27-2017, 7:43 AM Reply   
I am sure the law abiding citizens in Oakland care a great deal about getting a CCW permit.

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:39 AM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2019 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us