U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-07-2017, 11:22 AM
 
Location: Jewel Lake (Sagle) Idaho
27,554 posts, read 17,637,711 times
Reputation: 15623

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
It should be obvious that there's a difference between banning and regulating.
What's the matter with you people? can't you read or do you deliberately distort?
What possible business is it to tell a private enterprise that they CANNOT have bullet proof glass-either by regulation or ban? The business has a responsibility (legal or moral) to provide a safe work environment for their employees. That is simply one way of doing so. To mandate that employees be less safe because some customers tender sensibilities MIGHT be offended is beyond moronic. The only people I could see being offended are the robbers, whose job just got a little more difficult.

The more we see, the more amazed how stupid some elected officials actually are.

In any rational world, if the government was doing anything, they would pass regulations to encourage businesses to put in bullet proof glass in high crime areas, in the interest of employee safety. Ultimately though-it's not their business.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-07-2017, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Arizona
13,090 posts, read 7,810,719 times
Reputation: 6971
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboteer View Post
Correct, there is a major difference. And in this case it is clearly a ban.

The linked article quotes the text of the bill:
“No establishment required to obtain a Large Establishment license … shall erect or maintain a physical barrier that requires the persons serving the food either to open a window or other aperture or to pass the food through a window or other aperture, in order to hand the food to a customer inside the establishment,” the bill states.


"No establishment... shall erect a physical barrier..." ...how is this not a ban?


The only one misreading or distorting is you. What's the matter with you?

Are you on some prescription medicines we should be aware of when reading your posts?
It say's it right there in your post. "No establishment required to obtain a Large Establishment license"

It doesn't say total ban on bulletproof glass but you amended the wording one paragraph later by leaving out No establishment required to obtain a Large Establishment license to read "No Establishment"

that's a distortion. This is all about keeping corner liquor stores from acting like restaurants and bars without the proper licenses. It's not at all about banning all bulletproof glass in Philadelphia from all stores.

Stop your personal attacks on me. It exposes your juvenile nature to everyone..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2017, 11:25 AM
 
406 posts, read 136,279 times
Reputation: 242
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
That's nearly as bad the calls to banning bullet proof vests...
Leave the bullet proof windows in place and deal with the drug problem first. Highly probable the residents there opposing the windows are just so strung out on dope, all the glass around is making them paranoid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2017, 11:29 AM
 
Location: Jewel Lake (Sagle) Idaho
27,554 posts, read 17,637,711 times
Reputation: 15623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboteer View Post
The linked article also quotes the person who wrote the bill (to no one's surprise, she's a Democrat):
Bass said the bulletproof glass and partitions at some of these businesses are a concern of the city’s health department -- if a customer is choking or having an allergic reaction, a barrier should not stand in the way of safety.

Where's her statement about "If a customer assaults the store clerk with a gun or other weapon, a barrier should not stand in the way of safety"?

I didn't notice that statement in the article. Maybe they exceeded their quota of words in an article, and so didn't have space to print it?

In, say, the last ten years in those neighborhoods, how many of each kind of hazard has occurred? How many customers choked? And how many threatened, injured, or killed the clerks?

I'd guess the latter is far more common in those neighborhoods.

It's clear to me what this legislative person really wants to prevent: People or companies taking their own initiative to defend themselves against thugs, robbers and crazed drug addicts.

And Democrats are virulently against any such personal initiative or self-defense. As usual.
Seems as if she's far more concerned with the safety of criminals than business owners or their employees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2017, 03:05 PM
 
39,472 posts, read 40,779,124 times
Reputation: 16284
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
It should be obvious that there's a difference between banning and regulating.
What's the matter with you people? can't you read or do you deliberately distort?
If you were going to regulate it you may have laws about it's clarity, effectiveness etc. This law is going to prevent the business from having it all. That's a ban.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2017, 03:06 PM
 
39,472 posts, read 40,779,124 times
Reputation: 16284
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBaldBlur View Post
Will philly also call for cops to be prohibited from wearing bulletproof vests?
There has been legislation like this proposed before, it was big deal after that LA bank heist in the 90's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2017, 03:13 PM
 
39,472 posts, read 40,779,124 times
Reputation: 16284
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeerGeek40 View Post
This has to be a liberal idea.
Really??
Yes, no kidding. I mentioned that LA heist in the 90's. It was when it first came up, I know I recently came across an instance in the last few years. It's the same falwed lagic they use with guns, it's to keep them out the hands of criminals. You can't make this stuff up. LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2017, 03:14 PM
 
21,520 posts, read 11,603,234 times
Reputation: 12279
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
It should be obvious that there's a difference between banning and regulating.
What's the matter with you people? can't you read or do you deliberately distort?
Yeah, usually more to the story.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2017, 03:45 PM
 
9,891 posts, read 8,172,704 times
Reputation: 13422
Maybe the elected officials are worried their voters will get killed by their own bullets bouncing off the glass
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-07-2017, 03:49 PM
 
Location: Gone
25,235 posts, read 14,048,156 times
Reputation: 5917
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
That's nearly as bad the calls to banning bullet proof vests...
WTF? Will door locks be next..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top