"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that works?"
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it." >>>
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that >>> works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child, predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it." >>>>
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that >>>> works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods >>
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child, >> predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull:
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it." >>>>>
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that >>>>> works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods >>>
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child, >>> predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull:
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
crime.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it." >>>>>>
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that >>>>>> works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull:
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right? >>
crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
And complete failure to even try here.
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser.
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull:
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
And complete failure to even try here.
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser.
Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull:
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another >>>> crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
And complete failure to even try here.
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser.
Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS? >>>>>>>>
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull:
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another >>>>>> crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
And complete failure to even try here.
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser.
Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which
people refer when they talk about crime being up or down.
Those reports don't depend on whether or not anyone is arrested for
those crimes.
Crime gets reported to the police by the victims and then those reports
are collated for the region.
So James Woods's bullshit about not arresting criminals has NO BEARING
on statistics about how much crime is OCCURRING.
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS? >>>>>>>>>
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull: >>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another >>>>>>> crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
And complete failure to even try here.
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser.
Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which
people refer when they talk about crime being up or down.
By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule
that no crime was committed.
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS? >>>>>>>
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull:
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another >>>>> crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
And complete failure to even try here.
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser.
Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS? >>>>>>>>>
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull: >>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another >>>>>>> crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
And complete failure to even try here.
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser.
Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which
people refer when they talk about crime being up or down.
By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule
that no crime was committed.
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:40:29 -0400, Blue Lives Matter <Iron_White@Systemic_Patrriotism.KMA> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS? >>>>>>>>>>
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull: >>>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another >>>>>>>> crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
And complete failure to even try here.
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser.
Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which
people refer when they talk about crime being up or down.
By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule
that no crime was committed.
...or even if the police decide no crime was committed.
On 2024-03-28 15:42, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:40:29 -0400, Blue Lives Matter
<Iron_White@Systemic_Patrriotism.KMA> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS? >>>>>>>>>>>
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull: >>>>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
And complete failure to even try here.
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser.
Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which
people refer when they talk about crime being up or down.
By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule
that no crime was committed.
...or even if the police decide no crime was committed.
That's a technical detail, pedant.
The point is that Woods's ridiculous claim that national crime statistic
go down if fewer people get arrested is just pure bullshit.
On 2024-03-29 01:08, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:14:03 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 15:42, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:40:29 -0400, Blue Lives Matter
<Iron_White@Systemic_Patrriotism.KMA> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull: >>>>>>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
And complete failure to even try here.
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser. >>>>>>>>>Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which >>>>>> people refer when they talk about crime being up or down.
By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule >>>>> that no crime was committed.
...or even if the police decide no crime was committed.
That's a technical detail, pedant.
The point is that Woods's ridiculous claim that national crime statistic >>> go down if fewer people get arrested is just pure bullshit.
Some places the police won't even respond to some reports.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/henrico-police-will-no-longer-respond-to-certain-calls-including-shoplifting-marijuana-use/ar-BB1k7oHg
Which is irrelevant to the fact that the report was made.
But I can see why you so desperately want to deflect from the fact that
this:
'"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get
prosecuted and found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that
works?" - James Woods'
...is simply wrong.
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:14:03 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 15:42, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:40:29 -0400, Blue Lives Matter
<Iron_White@Systemic_Patrriotism.KMA> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS? >>>>>>>>>>>>
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull: >>>>>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
And complete failure to even try here.
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser. >>>>>>>>Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which
people refer when they talk about crime being up or down.
By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule
that no crime was committed.
...or even if the police decide no crime was committed.
That's a technical detail, pedant.
The point is that Woods's ridiculous claim that national crime statistic
go down if fewer people get arrested is just pure bullshit.
Some places the police won't even respond to some reports.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/henrico-police-will-no-longer-respond-to-certain-calls-including-shoplifting-marijuana-use/ar-BB1k7oHg
On 2024-03-29 11:55, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:49:57 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-29 01:08, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:14:03 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 15:42, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:40:29 -0400, Blue Lives Matter
<Iron_White@Systemic_Patrriotism.KMA> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
And complete failure to even try here.So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right? >>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser. >>>>>>>>>>>Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which >>>>>>>> people refer when they talk about crime being up or down.
By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule >>>>>>> that no crime was committed.
...or even if the police decide no crime was committed.
That's a technical detail, pedant.
The point is that Woods's ridiculous claim that national crime statistic >>>>> go down if fewer people get arrested is just pure bullshit.
Some places the police won't even respond to some reports.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/henrico-police-will-no-longer-respond-to-certain-calls-including-shoplifting-marijuana-use/ar-BB1k7oHg
Which is irrelevant to the fact that the report was made.
<LOL> So you want to count every 911 call as a crime?
The important point that you (quite deliberately) keep missing is that
crime statistics are collated from REPORTS of crime, and have nothing to
do with whether or not anyone is arrested.
But I can see why you so desperately want to deflect from the fact that
this:
'"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get
prosecuted and found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that
works?" - James Woods'
...is simply wrong.
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:49:57 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-29 01:08, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:14:03 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 15:42, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:40:29 -0400, Blue Lives Matter
<Iron_White@Systemic_Patrriotism.KMA> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says...
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding?
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right?
And complete failure to even try here.
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser. >>>>>>>>>>Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which >>>>>>> people refer when they talk about crime being up or down.
By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule >>>>>> that no crime was committed.
...or even if the police decide no crime was committed.
That's a technical detail, pedant.
The point is that Woods's ridiculous claim that national crime statistic >>>> go down if fewer people get arrested is just pure bullshit.
Some places the police won't even respond to some reports.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/henrico-police-will-no-longer-respond-to-certain-calls-including-shoplifting-marijuana-use/ar-BB1k7oHg
Which is irrelevant to the fact that the report was made.
<LOL> So you want to count every 911 call as a crime?
But I can see why you so desperately want to deflect from the fact that
this:
'"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get
prosecuted and found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that
works?" - James Woods'
...is simply wrong.
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 12:02:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-29 11:55, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:49:57 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-29 01:08, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:14:03 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 15:42, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:40:29 -0400, Blue Lives Matter
<Iron_White@Systemic_Patrriotism.KMA> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
And complete failure to even try here.So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser. >>>>>>>>>>>>Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which >>>>>>>>> people refer when they talk about crime being up or down.
By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule >>>>>>>> that no crime was committed.
...or even if the police decide no crime was committed.
That's a technical detail, pedant.
The point is that Woods's ridiculous claim that national crime statistic >>>>>> go down if fewer people get arrested is just pure bullshit.
Some places the police won't even respond to some reports.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/henrico-police-will-no-longer-respond-to-certain-calls-including-shoplifting-marijuana-use/ar-BB1k7oHg
Which is irrelevant to the fact that the report was made.
<LOL> So you want to count every 911 call as a crime?
The important point that you (quite deliberately) keep missing is that
crime statistics are collated from REPORTS of crime, and have nothing to
do with whether or not anyone is arrested.
There are false reports of crime and there are crimes that don't get reported, so if that's their only source, the stats are inaccurate.
On 2024-03-29 12:06, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 12:02:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-29 11:55, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:49:57 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-29 01:08, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:14:03 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 15:42, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:40:29 -0400, Blue Lives Matter
<Iron_White@Systemic_Patrriotism.KMA> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
And complete failure to even try here.So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser. >>>>>>>>>>>>>Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which >>>>>>>>>> people refer when they talk about crime being up or down.
By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule >>>>>>>>> that no crime was committed.
...or even if the police decide no crime was committed.
That's a technical detail, pedant.
The point is that Woods's ridiculous claim that national crime statistic
go down if fewer people get arrested is just pure bullshit.
Some places the police won't even respond to some reports.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/henrico-police-will-no-longer-respond-to-certain-calls-including-shoplifting-marijuana-use/ar-BB1k7oHg
Which is irrelevant to the fact that the report was made.
<LOL> So you want to count every 911 call as a crime?
The important point that you (quite deliberately) keep missing is that
crime statistics are collated from REPORTS of crime, and have nothing to >>> do with whether or not anyone is arrested.
There are false reports of crime and there are crimes that don't get
reported, so if that's their only source, the stats are inaccurate.
But those basically even out... ...it doesn't matter when you're looking
at the TREND.
And it doesn't make the claim by James Woods that you can make crime
stats APPEAR to go down by arresting fewer people any more true.
By the way, I've been meaning to ask:
How do you feel about the "blue lives" of the Capitol Police on Jan 6?
On 2024-03-29 12:06, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 12:02:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-29 11:55, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:49:57 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-29 01:08, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:14:03 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28 15:42, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:40:29 -0400, Blue Lives Matter
<Iron_White@Systemic_Patrriotism.KMA> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
And complete failure to even try here.So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser. >>>>>>>>>>>>>Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which >>>>>>>>>> people refer when they talk about crime being up or down.
By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule >>>>>>>>> that no crime was committed.
...or even if the police decide no crime was committed.
That's a technical detail, pedant.
The point is that Woods's ridiculous claim that national crime statistic
go down if fewer people get arrested is just pure bullshit.
Some places the police won't even respond to some reports.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/henrico-police-will-no-longer-respond-to-certain-calls-including-shoplifting-marijuana-use/ar-BB1k7oHg
Which is irrelevant to the fact that the report was made.
<LOL> So you want to count every 911 call as a crime?
The important point that you (quite deliberately) keep missing is that
crime statistics are collated from REPORTS of crime, and have nothing to >>> do with whether or not anyone is arrested.
There are false reports of crime and there are crimes that don't get
reported, so if that's their only source, the stats are inaccurate.
But those basically even out... ...it doesn't matter when you're
looking at the TREND.
And it doesn't make the claim by James Woods that you can make crime
stats APPEAR to go down by arresting fewer people any more true.
By the way, I've been meaning to ask:
How do you feel about the "blue lives" of the Capitol Police on Jan 6?
On 2024-03-29 19:28:15 +0000, Alan said:
On 2024-03-29 12:06, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 12:02:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-29 11:55, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:49:57 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-29 01:08, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:14:03 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 15:42, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:40:29 -0400, Blue Lives Matter
<Iron_White@Systemic_Patrriotism.KMA> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule >>>>>>>>>> that no crime was committed.
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote:
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser.
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
And complete failure to even try here.So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to?
REPORTS of crimes.
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which >>>>>>>>>>> people refer when they talk about crime being up or down. >>>>>>>>>>
...or even if the police decide no crime was committed.
That's a technical detail, pedant.
The point is that Woods's ridiculous claim that national crime statistic
go down if fewer people get arrested is just pure bullshit.
Some places the police won't even respond to some reports.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/henrico-police-will-no-longer-respond-to-certain-calls-including-shoplifting-marijuana-use/ar-BB1k7oHg
Which is irrelevant to the fact that the report was made.
<LOL> So you want to count every 911 call as a crime?
The important point that you (quite deliberately) keep missing is that >>>> crime statistics are collated from REPORTS of crime, and have nothing to >>>> do with whether or not anyone is arrested.
There are false reports of crime and there are crimes that don't get
reported, so if that's their only source, the stats are inaccurate.
But those basically even out... ...it doesn't matter when you're
looking at the TREND.
And it doesn't make the claim by James Woods that you can make crime
stats APPEAR to go down by arresting fewer people any more true.
By the way, I've been meaning to ask:
How do you feel about the "blue lives" of the Capitol Police on Jan 6?
I asked him a couple of weeks ago, he said I "didn't know what Blue
Lives Matter meant."
When I asked him to define it for us then he said
"look it up."
Now he tells you "none of your business."
So he obviously deflects and can't reconcile calling himself Blue Lives >Matter and defending the violent Jan. 6 mob that attacked Capitol
Police at the same time.
Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Sat, 30 Mar 2024 00:15:02 -0500, super70s
<super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote:
On 2024-03-29 19:28:15 +0000, Alan said:
On 2024-03-29 12:06, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 12:02:06 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-29 11:55, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Fri, 29 Mar 2024 11:49:57 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2024-03-29 01:08, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:14:03 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 15:42, Blue Lives Matter wrote:Some places the police won't even respond to some reports.
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 18:40:29 -0400, Blue Lives Matter
<Iron_White@Systemic_Patrriotism.KMA> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 15:32:44 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-28 08:56, Blue Lives Matter wrote:By your standards, it's a crime even though a judge and/or jury rule
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 08:06:10 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:REPORTS of crimes.
On 2024-03-28 00:05, Blue Lives Matter wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:16:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 16:14, Blue Lives Matter wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:46 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-27 14:40, AlleyCat wrote:
Let's see if this gets through your obviously very thick skull:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 11:30:29 -0700, Alan says... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2024-03-23 20:34, AlleyCat wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that
works?"
Show that that IS how it works, loser. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Do you think that they gather crime stats by looking at ARRESTS?
Bullshit liberal semantics aside, fucktard... let's see if this satisfies you
bullshit pedanticism.
"When you don't arrest criminals, (and those criminals don't get prosecuted and
found guilty), crime appears to be down. See how that works?" - James Woods
There... pedanticism quenched.
No arrests, stupid, no chance TO become a statistic. Pedantic little child,
predantics again.
Anything else you need help with understanding? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Crimes exist regardless of whether or not the perpetrator is caught, right?
It certainly does if the perpetrator is turned loose to commit another
crime.
Failure to answer the actual question.
What I gave is all you're going to get.
And complete failure to even try here.So crime statistics needn't depend on arrests, right? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not obligated to answer your questions...
Crime statistics aren't compiled by looking at arrests, loser.
Actually, arrests are crime statistics, Dummy.
Now who's being a pedant?
OK, so what crime statistics were you referring to? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Reports of crimes are what are used to produce that stats to which
people refer when they talk about crime being up or down. >>>>>>>>>>>>
that no crime was committed.
...or even if the police decide no crime was committed.
That's a technical detail, pedant.
The point is that Woods's ridiculous claim that national crime statistic
go down if fewer people get arrested is just pure bullshit. >>>>>>>>>
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/henrico-police-will-no-longer-respond-to-certain-calls-including-shoplifting-marijuana-use/ar-BB1k7oHg
Which is irrelevant to the fact that the report was made.
<LOL> So you want to count every 911 call as a crime?
The important point that you (quite deliberately) keep missing is that >>>>>> crime statistics are collated from REPORTS of crime, and have nothing to >>>>>> do with whether or not anyone is arrested.
There are false reports of crime and there are crimes that don't get >>>>> reported, so if that's their only source, the stats are inaccurate.
But those basically even out... ...it doesn't matter when you're
looking at the TREND.
And it doesn't make the claim by James Woods that you can make crime
stats APPEAR to go down by arresting fewer people any more true.
By the way, I've been meaning to ask:
How do you feel about the "blue lives" of the Capitol Police on Jan 6?
I asked him a couple of weeks ago, he said I "didn't know what Blue
Lives Matter meant."
Assumes facts not in evidense
When I asked him to define it for us then he said
"look it up."
More nonsense
Now he tells you "none of your business."
Leftists like to demand answers from their opponents instead of
defending their own positions.
So he obviously deflects and can't reconcile calling himself Blue Lives
Matter and defending the violent Jan. 6 mob that attacked Capitol
Police at the same time.
Reconcile?
????
"US crime is down, but Republicans, and Fox News, refuse to believe it."
"When you don't arrest criminals, crime appears to be down. See how that works?"
Stupid.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 109:46:41 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,335,727 |