Defensive Carry banner

Our neighborhoods, who gets them?

4K views 54 replies 33 participants last post by  LongRider 
#1 ·
In a recent post started by Rifter he talked about some kids in a park near his house doing some weed and calling the cops. I think he did the right thing. There was a lot of input that, pardon my generalization, said, "just don't go there anymore". I am not attacking anyone. I respect everyone's opinions, but I would like to look into this idea more and get some more thoughts on the subject.

My question is; Are we just going to abandon our neighborhoods to the bad influences and stay safely in our homes, hoping the bad influences are happy with the streets and parks and don't come into our homes after us?

I am often amazed at the attitude displayed by some of our forum members. It seems they are more than willing to give in to the evil elements in an effort to ensure there is no risk or confrontation. I have read people saying to just give a robber your wallet, to just avoid areas of your own neighborhood, move somewhere else and other passive and defeatist ideas. I am really suprised considering what this forum is about. I am no cop, and I don't want to be one. I don't think I am Rambo or 007 and I am no vigilante. I do have personal rights, and civic responsibilities. This quote has always spoken to me an our abdication of responsibility to our neighbors and our society.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."- Edmund Burke

That really seems like what is being advocated. I understand that the best fight, no matter which kind, is the one you aren't in. I understand avoidance and de-escalation. I do not understand apathy toward another, avoidance of responsibility or the abdication of our neighborhoods to illegal and unlawful influences. When we run away, or move, or stop doing what we want to do for fear of some evil influence, they win.
 
See less See more
#30 ·
Don't know what you mean here. I know I am too old to be up on the current slang. Hope that is what you mean.

As far as the smoking of marijiuana being illegal; it really wasn't what those kids were doing as much as the responses. To go from kids doing illegal drugs in the park to others advocating changing communities or abstaining from walking in your own neighborhood was what I was really wanting to talk about.

If there is no harm in abusing yourself why are laws against it almost universal? In my opinion it is because the society passes laws ( or tries to, we don't do very well here in the USA anymore ) to protect the society more than the individual. Drug addiction was used as a tool by the British against the Chinese in the 19th century. This victimless crime cost the Chinese Hong Kong and a lot more. All this victimless crime stuff is gibberish. Unless you expect our government to steal more money from the pockets of those foolish enough to actually work for thier money to pay all the expenses of our drug addicts. Legalizing addictive drugs still won't solve the crime problem associated with them. No matter how cheap they are, when you do nothing but lay around all day high on something you have no money of your own and must take someone else's. Yes if they were legal you wouldn't have to steal as many stereos or mug as many people at knifepoint.
 
#29 ·
I believe that the origins of the laws regarding "victimless crimes" was that they felt the victim was the person committing that act and the law was to protect them from themselves.

in these cases I prefer to let natural selection take its course.

less laws, more common sense. sadly common sense isn't common anymore, people are told what they can or can't do so much they can't think for themselves anymore.
 
#32 ·
people on this forum have told me i need to stop taking walks in my neighborhood...hell no. it's my neighborhood too.

We have a main park in our development and there are drugs there, i know what weed smells like. We started a neighborhood watch a few months back and it has improved 10 fold.

I pay good $ for my house and pay my HOA $75/month for the upkeep of parks, etc, etc...i'll be damned if i left the dredge of society take it over.
 
#35 ·
I haven't seen this menitoned yet... but today is "National Night Out". Check if there is an event in your area. Typically its a rather informal "block party" with local police officers and neighbors attending. They tend to pick a rough spot in a particular area, sometimes a success story.
 
#39 ·
JimThomas:

I agree you're missing my point. My point is that you err in questioning the propriety of a citizen reporting criminal behavior. While I don't concede your claim that we have no obligation to report a crime, I do acknowledge your right to make that decision for yourself. The poster exercised that same right, and chose to report it. If you witness someone engaging in a criminal act, it doesn't necessarily follow that they will commit others. It doesn't mean they won't, either. If they do, will it be "victimless" as well?
 
#42 ·
I blame the general apathy of the common citizen, corrupt politics, and the staggering willingness to have the Government raise the children and tell us how to live.

How long has it been since we were allowed to spank our children when they did wrong? I am sorry, but pain reinforced discipline works sooooo much better than a "time out".

Your drug culture in the '60s certainly did not have the problems we have today. I have never seen a mob of hippies trash a neighborhood, riot in a mall, or jump someone in a parking lot. Barring some disgusting behavior towards returning war vets from Vietnam, they were pretty mellow.
 
#41 ·
Great thread. I think the "harmless" smoking of pot in a neighborhood might go to the broken windows theory that Juliani subscribed to when cleaning up the cesspool that was NY city.

Fixing Broken Windows - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Like the OP, I believe it is the civic duty of the citizenry to let criminals and miscreants know that we are not afraid of them and that we will not tolerate illegal or socially-improper rude behavior at any level.

Let me first say that I am no saint. I spent 6yrs in the Corps and worked construction for many years and have heard it all, but there is a time and place for everything.

Two days ago I was in a local store and a lady had her little kid with her. One isle over some (very large and muscular) skinhead was speaking with his derilict buddy and every other word that came out of his mouth started with F.

I saw the lady look over at him and then try to cover her kids ears as she exited the isle quickly. I of course saw it as my civic duty to politely remind this scumbag that the language he was using was inappropriate for the environment we were in.

He looked shocked at first and then when he saw the kid being walked away he apologized and seemed to feel ashamed, as he should.

I think sometimes, all people need is a reminder that their behavior is not what it should be.

Afterwords, I said a quick thank you to the lord above that this guy and his buddy didn't decide to have another reaction to my sentiments, and believe me it crossed my mind before I spoke up, but I don't think I could have made peace with myself had I not said something.

If decent people don't take a stand when they need to, then we might as well just flush the whole thing down the toilet and be done with it.

And another thing, Hotguns was dead on. We are raising a society of people who are scared of their own shadow, who cower in the face of threats (even if only perceived threats) and expect LEOs and the government to always be around to deal with the problem when it could be dealt with by the citizenry if they had the intestinal fortitude to stand up to people whose behavior is intolerable.

Just my 2 cents.
 
#44 ·
Excellent and I agree whole-heartedly! People turned the other way years ago and the Nazis took over an entire country. We should learn from that mistake.
 
#45 ·
My question is; Are we just going to abandon our neighborhoods to the bad influences and stay safely in our homes, hoping the bad influences are happy with the streets and parks and don't come into our homes after us?

I am often amazed at the attitude displayed by some of our forum members. It seems they are more than willing to give in to the evil elements in an effort to ensure there is no risk or confrontation.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."- Edmund Burke
To answer your question. No. I agree with you and your well state sentiment. Personally I go where I want when I want and could care less who does not like. Whenever I have lived in an off neighborhood I have not tolerated illegal conduct. Nor do I turn a blind eye to it when I see it. I do not look for trouble but if it crosses my path there must be a reason and it is not for me to ignore it and help perpetuate it. I have always felt if I am not part of the solution I am part of the problem.
 
#54 ·
You are right titleist. We went to a citizen complaining about illegal activity in their neighborhood to the philosophical implications of deadbeats being allowed to ruin their lives in any manner of thier choosing with society's blessing.

Back on track. It looks like as long as it is illegal we should not put up with it. Call the police, every time. When they cannot get away with it in your park or your neighborhood they will go somewhere else and the decent, God fearing folks can walk about their neighborhoods as they please. (still armed of course, cars can bring in criminals from great distances)
 
#53 ·
Okay, one of the things I like about respectful dialogues is the opportunity to learn something.

One of the things that Thomas still has not addressed is the view point of other countries that are not market driven, but none the less there is a good lesson in what he says. I looked at the delima from a limited standpoint too. In an ideal society those who wished to while away their lives in an unproductive stupor would languish and come to the end they worked for. Since we live in a society where those who cannot or will not work for their own good are "helped" by those who would steal from me to give to them in the name of the good of society, I don't want to allow it.

The real question would be which of the ends would waste more money. I think the drug interdiction is unsuccessful because it is a limited war administered by people who don't want to hurt the users of the drugs. If the users are not going to be made to pay, the demand will never go away. I think of the paraquat (sp?) debacle from when I was young. Spraying an illegal drug with a substance that will make criminal users sick was too dangerous. I thought it was stupid to stop spraying pot when I was in high school and I still do.

As far as your condesending attempt to equate firearm use and addictive psychoactive drugs. Yes, I would differentiate between trusting people differently with the two items. Very few people have been fundamentally changed psychologically by the discharge of a firearm. Take a person to the gun range and let them shoot a gun once. They may or may not become addicted to shooting. Take them in a room and let them shoot up with crack cocaine or a number of other substances that are highly and immediately addictive and they will become painfully addicted, whether they like it or not.
 
#55 ·
Take a person to the gun range and let them shoot a gun once. They may or may not become addicted to shooting. Take them in a room and let them shoot up with crack cocaine or a number of other substances that are highly and immediately addictive and they will become painfully addicted, whether they like it or not.
According to a recent follow up study I read that is not wholly accurate. In the past doctors have been reluctant to prescribe pain medication even when there is a legitimate need for it, out of concern that that the patient would become an addict. Due to the belief that prolonged use of opiates i.e. pain meds would lead to addiction.
Apparently that is not the case the average person taking pain meds as prescribed for say a broken arm will not even progress to the point of dependancy much less addiction and will experience little if any adverse affects when the pain meds are no longer needed.
A portion of the population will not only develop dependancy but will in fact become full blown addicts. An addict will have sever withdraw symptoms and detox. As well as long tern cravings

The same is true for long term users of pain killers. Say some one dealing with a long term illness like cancer taking large doses of pain killers like morphine will develop dependancy over time. Meaning they will become sick due to a lack of opiates in their system when the opiate intake stops. But they do not experience withdrawal or detoxic in the way an addict does. An addict taking the same among over the same time period will suffer sever mental, emotional, and physical cravings. A NEED for the drug that overwhelms every other priority in life that may remain with them for the remainder of their lives even if they become clean.

The point being that if you lock and average person up in a room with unlimited quantities of a drug. Chances are a week or month later you will find an average functioning human being. While placing a addict in the same room may very well result in their death or a raving lunatic suffering from all the effects of drug abuse.
The difference being is even if the average person tries the drug in the first place. There is no guarantee that they will even do that. But assuming they do try it, and that they do enjoy the high. They will have a good time with the euphoria etc but when it begins to negatively impact them via lost sleep, appetite, prolonged cognitive impairment or whatever they stop doing it. While an addict that euphoria becomes their all consuming obsession.

Long story short not everyone trapped in a bar for a month becomes an alcoholic. Which does imply that decriminalizing drugs would NOT cause a dramatic increase in drug addiction in this country BUT I do not think that should be done in one fell swoop or across the board. There are exceptions. There is evidence that methamphetamine, PCP, cocaine and others have the potential to turn a one time non addictive personality type into an addict immediately. Surprisingly opiates i.e. heroin is not one of those. So we are kind of stuck because even if the so called less harmful drugs are decriminalized the drug dealers, manufactures, growers will simply use the existing pipeline to produce and distribute the more deadly addictive drugs
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top