Title: 'We maybe have to give up a little bit of our privacy,' says ex-NYC police head after Vegas shooting (New York Values) Source:
CNBC URL Source:https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/02/how ... y-need-to-give-up-privacy.html Published:Oct 3, 2017 Author:Matthew J. Belvedere Post Date:2017-10-03 02:22:17 by Hondo68 Ping List:*Bang List*Subscribe to *Bang List* Keywords:civil right to be, free from harm, Bring in your weapon Views:588 Comments:9
"I believe the No. 1 civil right is to be free from harm," Howard Safir says.
In order to do that in a civilized society, "we maybe have to give up a little bit of our privacy," he says.
The Las Vegas concert massacre is the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.
Americans may need to give up some of their freedoms to protect against attacks such as Sunday night's Las Vegas concert massacre, said Howard Safir, former New York City police commissioner.
"Let me preface what I'm about to say, so the civil libertarians understand what I'm saying, I believe the No. 1 civil right is to be free from harm. And in order to do that in a civilized society ... we maybe have to give up a little bit of our privacy," Safir told CNBC's "Squawk on the Street" on Monday.
Authorities said the suspected shooter, 64-year-old Stephen Paddock of Nevada, appeared to have killed himself before police stormed his 32nd-floor Mandalay Bay hotel room, where they say he fired a high-capacity weapon on people below at a country music festival.
Acknowledging there's much still to be learned about Paddock, his state of mind, and his motivations, Safir said, "There should be a database for police departments and federal agencies of people who have been ... mentally disturbed where before you get a gun these people have to be cleared in order to process them."
It's not known whether Paddock obtained the weapons he had in that hotel room legally or illegally. Safir, however, said there should be more requirements of legal gun owners.
"We need to make people responsible for the guns they own. I'm not saying that we should do away with Second Amendment rights," he said. "What I'm saying is, for instance, we should have a required safety check every year of somebody who purchases a gun. Bring in your weapon."
Poster Comment:
I believe the No. 1 civil right is to be free from New York Values.
It's not known whether Paddock obtained the weapons he had in that hotel room legally or illegally. Safir, however, said there should be more requirements of legal gun owners.
What a strange line of thinking in the quote above.
I believe the No. 1 civil right is to be free from New York Values.
King George tried to take the guns, he lost.
HEAR,HEAR!
Well Stated!
I can already hear the second part of his argument,which will state "Well,why not? After all,it's not like you have that many freedoms left anyhow."
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
It's not known whether Paddock obtained the weapons he had in that hotel room legally or illegally. Safir, however, said there should be more requirements of legal gun owners.
What a strange line of thinking in the quote above.
It's what that drunken dweeb Billy Joel refers to as a "New York state of mind."
In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
"I believe the No. 1 civil right is to be free from harm," Howard Safir says. In order to do that in a civilized society, "we maybe have to give up a little bit of our privacy," he says.
Give up just a little bit of privacy to be free from harm? Really? He can guarantee that I'd be free from harm if I did that?
We all know it wouldn't -- -- -- and when it didn't -- he'd advocate for giving up just a little bit more of privacy with the same guarantee.
In order to do that in a civilized society, "we maybe have to give up a little bit of our privacy," he says.
But hadn't we *already* given up MUCH privacy as it was surrendered (WITHOUT OUR CONSENT) after the bogus 911 Black Op? (SEE THE 'PATRIOT ACT'.)
FACT: Because of MUSLIMS terrorism AND the lie that "Islam = Peace," why were/are the REST OF OUR privacy rights violated?? Thanks to Snowden, we're learned EVERY ONE OF US is monitored down to every keystroke and phone call (but NOT apparently the supposed "Lone Wolf" from Vegas. Nor ANY of the perps slaughtering Americans -- i.e. Newtown, Nashville, etal.)
FACT: This is ALL about the elites setting us up to remove our 2a.
FACT: Yes, it IS "The Elites" and so-called Legislative, Judicial, and Exec branches ENABLING THESE incidents as well as further undermining US security and our "civilized society" by:
1) Importing and encouraging hundreds of THOUSANDS of Jihadists into the USA SINCE 911.
2) Importing encouraging millions of Third Worlders into the USA, who do NOT share American values
3) Allowing and encouraging terrorists groups like BLM, Antifa, various Muzzie Cells, Drug Cartel Gangs etal to run free, WITH NEAR-IMPUNITY.
4) Grooming patsies to become Poster Boys for "Gun Control."
Geez -- if the certain elements within the 'Deep State' are so ready to sabotage a President, ignore the US Constitution, AND sacrifice American People in broad daylight, why presume they honor ANY moral code or loyalty oaths to the US Constitution??
(It's not known whether Paddock obtained the weapons he had in that hotel room legally or illegally. Safir, however, said there should be more requirements of legal gun owners.)
What a strange line of thinking in the quote above.
Yup. Strange. But NOT if we consider someone like Safir on the Globalists' payroll as one more propagandist-traitor.
President Trump said Tuesday that his administration will weigh new gun laws in the wake of the Las Vegas massacre, as he praised police for the “miracle” of their quick response to the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history.
Don't we already have way too many illegal (unconstitutional) "gun laws"?
(President Trump said Tuesday that his administration will weigh new gun laws in the wake of the Las Vegas massacre, as he praised police for the “miracle” of their quick response to the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history.)
Don't we already have way too many illegal (unconstitutional) "gun laws"?
Yes, we DO INDEED already have too many unconstitutionally restrictive gun laws. We (the sane and alert among us) all know that.
An thus we see why with every one of these "incidents" -- which many believe are orchestrated ops -- pressure grows on legislating MORE restrictions on Americans' RIGHT to protect themselves from either imminent and deadly treats, OR, FROM TYRANNY.
Notice DT praise LE for their "quick response"?? Wow. What BS. Vegas LE did NOTHING. They practically stood down. Only after the patsy killed himself or his accomplices ran out of ammo out did the murder and mayhem stop. THIS IS NOT THE END OF THIS KIND OF INCIDENT.
I hope Trump is merely saying what is expected to pacify the Leftists and Globalists and playing the political game here.
On a related note, I keep on reminding folks that the American Experiment is over.
we currently do NOT have a function Constitution as intended. NOR actual President (also as ntended.)
We have portions of USCON that are enforced ONLY when the SC and lower courts are subverted; OR when Left or Globalists Overlords and Puppets allow it. Same of Presidential "orders."
