• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pregnant Popeyes worker fired after armed robbery

Goshin said:
Well you learn something new every day. Surprised you found that all the way from Seattle... your Google-fu must be strong. :)
I'd hazard a guess that robbery was before their current highly armed setup, and probably the cause of it. ;)
I'll ask the next time I'm in there...
Click to expand...
Anytime someone mentions the South and not being robbed for quite some time, the 70's always pops into my head as that was a pretty major decade for robberies. Firearms were so much easier to acquire back then, for everyone, which lead to a lot of daring robberies.

I'd also like to know if the shotgun squad is even still around, that'd be fascinating.
 
Last edited:
Nicci said:
Anytime someone mentions the South and not being robbed for quite some time, the 70's always pops into my head as that was a pretty major decade for robberies. Firearms were so much easier to acquire back then, for everyone, which lead to a lot of daring robberies.

I'd also like to know if the shotgun squad is even still around, that'd be fascinating.
Click to expand...



It's true, the 70s were flat out crazy. I was a teenager and remember it well... seemed like the world was a battle zone and everyone ready to fight at the drop of a hat.

I'd debate whether ease of firearm acquisition really had much if anything to do with it... it's not like that's changed much for those willing to break the law to obtain same.

It just seemed like almost everyone was freaking crazy for a while. Possibly had to do with what a "dark" time that was, between the "energy crisis", the "misery index", Three Mile Island, the USSR attempting to expand again and rattling sabers like mad, the Iran Hostage Crisis, gas lines... it was a nutty time to grow up.
 
Nicci said:
Probably that whole BS about having to pay back money that was robbed...
Click to expand...

Yeah, that was the part that shouldn't have been said and what led to the backlash. Since this wasn't her first offense for not doing her job right, and this time it cost the company additional money, I think they could have justly fired her. But the whole "pay back this money or you're fired" ultimatum was unnecessary.
 
Goshin said:
It's true, the 70s were flat out crazy. I was a teenager and remember it well... seemed like the world was a battle zone and everyone ready to fight at the drop of a hat.

I'd debate whether ease of firearm acquisition really had much if anything to do with it... it's not like that's changed much for those willing to break the law to obtain same.

It just seemed like almost everyone was freaking crazy for a while. Possibly had to do with what a "dark" time that was, between the "energy crisis", the "misery index", Three Mile Island, the USSR attempting to expand again and rattling sabers like mad, the Iran Hostage Crisis, gas lines... it was a nutty time to grow up.
Click to expand...

I'm going to pull a few things from Wiki, but I agree the 70's were just crazy as all hell.

This is the kind of stuff that showed up in the 80s:

Firearm Owners Protection Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are several more and while I don't agree with all of the, they really limited the potential randomness of the ability to acquire them.
 
Nicci said:
I'm going to pull a few things from Wiki, but I agree the 70's were just crazy as all hell.

This is the kind of stuff that showed up in the 80s:

Firearm Owners Protection Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Federal Assault Weapons Ban - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are several more and while I don't agree with all of the, they really limited the potential randomness of the ability to acquire them.
Click to expand...



Well, the "assault weapons ban" is gone and done, history.
The Brady Act is all very well but as an ex-cop I can tell you has had little impact on felons getting firearms.
Meanwhile the number of firearms in circulation has actually increased dramatically, while around 40 states adopted shall-issue CWP, and yet violent crime continues to trend downward as it has ever since the early 80s.

Not wanting to derail the thread but I see little evidence of a causal link.
 
Goshin said:
Well, the "assault weapons ban" is gone and done, history.
The Brady Act is all very well but as an ex-cop I can tell you has had little impact on felons getting firearms.
Meanwhile the number of firearms in circulation has actually increased dramatically, while around 40 states adopted shall-issue CWP, and yet violent crime continues to trend downward as it has ever since the early 80s.

Not wanting to derail the thread but I see little evidence of a causal link.
Click to expand...

We should start a new topic, but here is a small rebuttal from 2013, showing ownership is actually down not up from the 1970s.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us/rate-of-gun-ownership-is-down-survey-shows.html?_r=0
 
Nicci said:
We should start a new topic, but here is a small rebuttal from 2013, showing ownership is actually down not up from the 1970s.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us/rate-of-gun-ownership-is-down-survey-shows.html?_r=0
Click to expand...


:shrug: Correlation does not imply causality. There are studies showing the decline is due to "three strikes" laws and longer sentences in general, and there are studies implying that abortion is a major cause of reduced crime. Unraveling the whys would be quite an undertaking, and in all likelihood there would be many causal factors.

As you say, that's a different topic.
 
Goshin said:
:shrug: Correlation does not imply causality. There are studies showing the decline is due to "three strikes" laws and longer sentences in general, and there are studies implying that abortion is a major cause of reduced crime. Unraveling the whys would be quite an undertaking, and in all likelihood there would be many causal factors.

As you say, that's a different topic.
Click to expand...
I've always believed crime rate is tied to poverty myself, and as the poor get richer (ie technology) it seems to me to go down. :duel
 
Nicci said:
I've always believed crime rate is tied to poverty myself, and as the poor get richer (ie technology) it seems to me to go down. :duel
Click to expand...


Good point. I did some study into the violent crime rates of various nations, and came to the conclusion that it was driven by four primary causal agents:

1. Poverty/wealth inequality
2. Corrupt or inefficient gov't/law
3. Factionalism/tribalism/gangs
4. Illegal drug trade

... not necessarily in that order.


Culture is also a factor of course, in how accepting it is of using violence to solve problems.
 
Goshin said:
Good point. I did some study into the violent crime rates of various nations, and came to the conclusion that it was driven by four primary causal agents:

1. Poverty/wealth inequality
2. Corrupt or inefficient gov't/law
3. Factionalism/tribalism/gangs (access to firearms)
4. Illegal drug trade

... not necessarily in that order.


Culture is also a factor of course, in how accepting it is of using violence to solve problems.
Click to expand...

I've bolded that 3rd one as I think that is a major issue when dealing with those ideals.
 
Nicci said:
I've bolded that 3rd one as I think that is a major issue when dealing with those ideals.
Click to expand...



I'd have to disagree with you again, I'm afraid.

There seems to be virtually zero correlations between rates of private firearm ownership and murder rates in comparing various nations, for instance.


I did a side-by-side comparison once, which I think I still have on file... yes there it is:

I will list the top nations in order of rates of intentional homicide, also showing their rates of private gun ownership, then show the USA by contrast.

Name.... homicide rate per 100,000.... gun ownership rate per 100.

Honduras... 91.6... 6.2
El Salvador... 69.2 ... 5.8
Cote d'Ivoire... 56.9 ... not listed
Jamaica... 52.2 ... 8.1
Venezuela ... 45.1 ... 10.7
Belize ... 41.1 ... 10
Virgin Islands ... 39.2 ... not listed
Guatemala ... 38.5 ... 13.1
skipping down a bit...
Columbia ... 33.4 ... 5.9
South Africa... 31.8 ... 12.7
skipping down some more...
Greenland ... 19.2 ... not listed
Russia ... 10.2 ... 8.9
skipping down some more...
Ukraine.... 5.2 ... 6.6
Cuba... 5.0 ... 4.8

And finally, well over halfway down the list...

USA... 4.2 ... 88.8

Number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


As it turns out, the United States does not have that high of a homicide rate compared to most other countries, and given the amount of privately owned arms we are FAR more peaceable than most on a per-gun-owned basis.

OBVIOUSLY, gun ownership is NOT directly linked to murder rates.
 
Goshin said:
I'd have to disagree with you again, I'm afraid.

There seems to be virtually zero correlations between rates of private firearm ownership and murder rates in comparing various nations, for instance.


I did a side-by-side comparison once, which I think I still have on file... yes there it is:

I will list the top nations in order of rates of intentional homicide, also showing their rates of private gun ownership, then show the USA by contrast.

Name.... homicide rate per 100,000.... gun ownership rate per 100.

Honduras... 91.6... 6.2
El Salvador... 69.2 ... 5.8
Cote d'Ivoire... 56.9 ... not listed
Jamaica... 52.2 ... 8.1
Venezuela ... 45.1 ... 10.7
Belize ... 41.1 ... 10
Virgin Islands ... 39.2 ... not listed
Guatemala ... 38.5 ... 13.1
skipping down a bit...
Columbia ... 33.4 ... 5.9
South Africa... 31.8 ... 12.7
skipping down some more...
Greenland ... 19.2 ... not listed
Russia ... 10.2 ... 8.9
skipping down some more...
Ukraine.... 5.2 ... 6.6
Cuba... 5.0 ... 4.8

And finally, well over halfway down the list...

USA... 4.2 ... 88.8

Number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


As it turns out, the United States does not have that high of a homicide rate compared to most other countries, and given the amount of privately owned arms we are FAR more peaceable than most on a per-gun-owned basis.

OBVIOUSLY, gun ownership is NOT directly linked to murder rates.
Click to expand...
All of those countries have more issues with the poor/destitute, I'd love to see something along the lines of developed nations with fire arm rates near ours, but we are the highest of any developed nation.

That is the problem with that comparison, you'll have to show me something similar among a developed nation with similar firearm ownership, but there isn't one and we are at the top of the list for developed nations.
 
Nicci said:
All of those countries have more issues with the poor/destitute, I'd love to see something along the lines of developed nations with fire arm rates near ours, but we are the highest of any developed nation.

That is the problem with that comparison, you'll have to show me something similar among a developed nation with similar firearm ownership, but there isn't one and we are at the top of the list for developed nations.
Click to expand...



Ok. Leaving aside America for the moment, let's contrast Canada and Britain, for a comparable first-world Western democracy example.


I did a little checking. It is believed that there are between 7 million and 11 million guns, privately owned, in Canada, among a population of about 35 million... and there are also reports that there may be millions more guns that were never registered or "went missing".

So, Canada is not exactly short of firearms. It have far more per-capita than most European nations, five times as many per-capita as England and Wales, and comes in 13th in the world in per-capita gun ownership.

Sources:
HOW MANY GUNS ARE THERE IN CANADA
Number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Canada has five times as many guns per capita as the UK, but it's murder rate is barely any higher.... 1.6 compared to 1.2, so murder rate is clearly not proportional to gun ownership rates.
 
Top Cat said:
Pregnant Popeyes worker fired after armed robbery

Gotta wonder if the $400 was worth the publicity? I like their chicken, but mercy me, not the brightest move on their part.
Click to expand...

Based on the following from the link, it looks like Popeyes is stepping up to the plate:

"We recently became aware of a story in Houston involving a Popeyes restaurant and employee. The restaurant is operated by an independent franchisee of the Popeyes brand. We have spoken to the local franchise owner of the restaurant, and he has taken immediate action to reach out to the employee to apologize and rectify the situation. While the facts are gathered, we will closely monitor this until it is appropriately resolved. We deeply regret the distress this situation has caused."
 
Goshin said:
Ok. Leaving aside America for the moment, let's contrast Canada and Britain, for a comparable first-world Western democracy example.


I did a little checking. It is believed that there are between 7 million and 11 million guns, privately owned, in Canada, among a population of about 35 million... and there are also reports that there may be millions more guns that were never registered or "went missing".

So, Canada is not exactly short of firearms. It have far more per-capita than most European nations, five times as many per-capita as England and Wales, and comes in 13th in the world in per-capita gun ownership.

Sources:
HOW MANY GUNS ARE THERE IN CANADA
Number of guns per capita by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Canada has five times as many guns per capita as the UK, but it's murder rate is barely any higher.... 1.6 compared to 1.2, so murder rate is clearly not proportional to gun ownership rates.
Click to expand...
Sure that is a good comparison, but like the UK they also have a national gun registry, which we don't have.

Since we are using wiki and its pretty well sourced in this case: Gun politics in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Nicci said:
Sure that is a good comparison, but like the UK they also have a national gun registry, which we don't have.

Since we are using wiki and its pretty well sourced in this case: Gun politics in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...



In reality the national gun registry was overturned in 2012.

The national gun registry was a relatively recent, and according to most Canadians I've talked to was highly controversial and much ignored. It was enacted in 1993 and overturned in 2012.

Canadian Firearms Registry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Canadian homicide rates by firearm by year:

1975: 1.262
1985: 0.859
1990: 0.708
Notice the downward trend? Registry enacted in 1993...
1995: 0.601
2000: 0.600
Notice the decline slowed?
2005: 0.692
then went up in 2005? During the registry?
2010: 0.501
Down again that year... but the registry seems to have had no real effect on what was already a downward trend..


What later stats I can find are as follows:

Homicides per year:

2011: 598
2012: 543
2013: 505

Continuing the downward trend you see, even after the registry was overturned.


So there is no evidence to indicate that the registry had any positive effect.


http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2012001/article/11738/c-g/desc/desc03-eng.htm

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/legal12a-eng.htm
 
Goshin said:
In reality the national gun registry was overturned in 2012.

The national gun registry was a relatively recent, and according to most Canadians I've talked to was highly controversial and much ignored. It was enacted in 1993 and overturned in 2012.

Canadian Firearms Registry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Canadian homicide rates by firearm by year:

1975: 1.262
1985: 0.859
1990: 0.708
Notice the downward trend? Registry enacted in 1993...
1995: 0.601
2000: 0.600
Notice the decline slowed?
2005: 0.692
then went up in 2005? During the registry?
2010: 0.501
Down again that year... but the registry seems to have had no real effect on what was already a downward trend..


What later stats I can find are as follows:

Homicides per year:

2011: 598
2012: 543
2013: 505

Continuing the downward trend you see, even after the registry was overturned.


So there is no evidence to indicate that the registry had any positive effect.


Description for chart 3

Homicide offences, number and rate, by province and territory (Number of homicides)
Click to expand...
Ha!

We are going so far off topic... can we split the topic for a new one? I don't know how that works, I've only recently become active on here.
 
Nicci said:
Ha!

We are going so far off topic... can we split the topic for a new one? I don't know how that works, I've only recently become active on here.
Click to expand...


You can start a new thread in the Gun Control subforum if you like.
 
Nicci said:
All of those countries have more issues with the poor/destitute, I'd love to see something along the lines of developed nations with fire arm rates near ours, but we are the highest of any developed nation.

That is the problem with that comparison, you'll have to show me something similar among a developed nation with similar firearm ownership, but there isn't one and we are at the top of the list for developed nations.
Click to expand...

The problem is that most sources calculate gun ownership based on estimated guns per capita.

That gives the US a rate of one, but many owners own more then one , I own 5 for example, and will be acquiring number six when the IRS gives me my money back.

In many other countries owners are limited in the number they can own, either legally culturally or economically. But one can only use one at a time. If we use the rate of population who has access to a gun, we begin to see consistently across most of the developed world that were seeing between 25 and 33%

The US rate is probably 33, but hard to calculate
 
EMNofSeattle said:
The problem is that most sources calculate gun ownership based on estimated guns per capita.

That gives the US a rate of one, but many owners own more then one , I own 5 for example, and will be acquiring number six when the IRS gives me my money back.

In many other countries owners are limited in the number they can own, either legally culturally or economically. But one can only use one at a time. If we use the rate of population who has access to a gun, we begin to see consistently across most of the developed world that were seeing between 25 and 33%

The US rate is probably 33, but hard to calculate
Click to expand...

I've seen John Wayne pull a gun off each hip and fire them simultaneously.
 
Montecresto said:
I've seen John Wayne pull a gun off each hip and fire them simultaneously.
Click to expand...

The double six shooter is an invention of Hollywood, most cowboys couldn't afford two pistols those who could used the second pistol after the first one was out of ammo.

I consider myself handy with a pistol and I couldn't do the akimbo revolvers with any level of accuracy, or shooting from the hip
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom