|
Post by theevan on Jul 8, 2014 7:16:22 GMT -5
There was another rash of shootings last night. TV news reported it. I can't find a link with the numbers. But I found a link to the Redeye paper that tracks shootings for the year. The vast majority are in black neighborhoods on the south and west side. Jesse Jackson wants a massive program to give jobs to everybody. He's got a point, except where do the jobs come from? homicides.redeyechicago.com/They already have jobs, Marshall. Looks like they've been busy. And if they ever learn how to shoot look out
|
|
|
Post by dickt on Jul 8, 2014 8:19:54 GMT -5
I think I'll stay here, way out in the middle of nowhere. Been in Yuppie Chicago (north side) for several days now. Only dangers are being hit by a bicycle or one of those jogging baby strollers.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Jul 8, 2014 8:55:13 GMT -5
I think I'll stay here, way out in the middle of nowhere. Been in Yuppie Chicago (north side) for several days now. Only dangers are being hit by a bicycle or one of those jogging baby strollers. So Chicago doesn't have a gun problem? Now I'm confused.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Jul 8, 2014 9:12:34 GMT -5
In very tight (bad) areas it has a massive gun problem. Or a massive problem that finds it's outlet in gun violence. Pretty much everywhere else it's ho-hum normal anywhere.
A friend has a security company doing background checks. He gives talks in various places. Sometimes he'll ask the question, "Who knows someone that's been robbed (or shot) at gun point?" In suburban areas hardly anyone ever raises their hand. In predominantly black urban areas EVERYONE raises their hand. . . . , everyone.
|
|
|
Post by theevan on Jul 8, 2014 10:16:29 GMT -5
Or a massive problem that finds it's outlet in gun violence. Right on, Marshall.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Jul 9, 2014 8:22:14 GMT -5
This morning's news, a black woman (mother of 5) was shot and killed last night driving on the Eisenhower Expressway in her mini-van. And to make matters worse, the interview with her father said that is the second child he;d lost to gun violence. His youngest son, and now his daughter his eldest child and mother of 5 kids herself.
Now you get an idea why guns are such a negative topic in Chicago. Yeah I know all the stuff about the Constitution and the good-guy bad-guy stuff. But for crying out loud, somehow it's got to stop.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Jul 9, 2014 8:29:15 GMT -5
That's not even about the Constitution. What do you suggest be done about it? It's the classic case of "only outlaws will have guns". Do we use the military for a raid on all of Chicago in an attempt to confiscate all the weapons? What practical solution is available?
|
|
|
Post by dradtke on Jul 9, 2014 10:52:28 GMT -5
That's not even about the Constitution. What do you suggest be done about it? It's the classic case of "only outlaws will have guns". Do we use the military for a raid on all of Chicago in an attempt to confiscate all the weapons? What practical solution is available? Arming everyone, of course. The more guns, the safer it is. If you even acknowledge there's a problem, you're trying to take my guns away.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Jul 9, 2014 10:53:57 GMT -5
That's not even about the Constitution. What do you suggest be done about it? It's the classic case of "only outlaws will have guns". Do we use the military for a raid on all of Chicago in an attempt to confiscate all the weapons? What practical solution is available? Arming everyone, of course. The more guns, the safer it is. If you even acknowledge there's a problem, you're trying to take my guns away. That's not an answer, but then, you knew that.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Jul 9, 2014 14:37:34 GMT -5
That's not even about the Constitution. What do you suggest be done about it? It's the classic case of "only outlaws will have guns". Do we use the military for a raid on all of Chicago in an attempt to confiscate all the weapons? What practical solution is available? Arming everyone, of course. The more guns, the safer it is. If you even acknowledge there's a problem, you're trying to take my guns away. And the standard liberal construct: You decide that we have a problem that I need to change my behavior to solve. Yep, Chicago has a problem. Take care of it.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Jul 9, 2014 15:25:36 GMT -5
I don't see where requiring background checks on arms sales restricts your behavior. I assume you're a law abiding citizen already. And, if you own a gun, you're legally qualified to have it; (no convictions and or mental conditions or addictions).
Sure, I know the argument that bad guys will get guns illegally anyway. But there are loopholes in the background laws that make it very easy (too easy) to proliferate guns on the streets. Will closing the loopholes change everything? Surely not. Might they reduce the total number of guns available on the streets? Yes it will.
Of course the real problem is the culture and lack of opportunity. And there's no easy answer there, except maybe some monumental investment program, and a complete new generation of people with a different attitude. But will that ever happen? Not likely in my lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by Doug on Jul 9, 2014 15:38:17 GMT -5
I don't see where requiring background checks on arms sales restricts your behavior. I assume you're a law abiding citizen already. And, if you own a gun, you're legally qualified to have it; (no convictions and or mental conditions or addictions). Sure, I know the argument that bad guys will get guns illegally anyway. But there are loopholes in the background laws that make it very easy (too easy) to proliferate guns on the streets. Will closing the loopholes change everything? Surely not. Might they reduce the total number of guns available on the streets? Yes it will. Of course the real problem is the culture and lack of opportunity. And there's no easy answer there, except maybe some monumental investment program, and a complete new generation of people with a different attitude. But will that ever happen? Not likely in my lifetime. Congress shall make no law............... All gun laws are unconstitutional so to vote for or enforce any such law is criminal. The Bill of Rights is absolute or the Constitution is invalid along with the entire federal government. BTW the same is true for the 1st-10th Amendments they are absolute, there is no provision for the entity the laws (Bill or Rights) are aimed at to modify the law. No different than the burglars dictating what kind of alarm you can have. So laws against criminals having guns aren't constitutional either. The highest law of the land. Trumps all other laws.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Jul 9, 2014 15:47:07 GMT -5
Sure, I know the argument that bad guys will get guns illegally anyway. that's not my argument. I'm not arguing. I'm asking. And the problem, as I see it, not being addressed, is not "will get". It's "have". How will one more redundant law aimed at the law-abiding make one bit of difference in the Chicago gun problem?
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Jul 9, 2014 15:47:25 GMT -5
I don't see where requiring background checks on arms sales restricts your behavior. I assume you're a law abiding citizen already. And, if you own a gun, you're legally qualified to have it; (no convictions and or mental conditions or addictions). Sure, I know the argument that bad guys will get guns illegally anyway. But there are loopholes in the background laws that make it very easy (too easy) to proliferate guns on the streets. Will closing the loopholes change everything? Surely not. Might they reduce the total number of guns available on the streets? Yes it will. Of course the real problem is the culture and lack of opportunity. And there's no easy answer there, except maybe some monumental investment program, and a complete new generation of people with a different attitude. But will that ever happen? Not likely in my lifetime. But I don't seem to have the problem and I'm perfectly happy with the way things are. Why do I need to change anything?
|
|
|
Post by Fingerplucked on Jul 9, 2014 17:16:15 GMT -5
It's a complicated issue. I don't think I've ever heard THE answer. I don't think there is a single solution.
I think it's a problem of income inequality, limited upward mobility, and economic and racial segregation. The west side of Chicago is bad. The south side is worse. The north side is like a different country where everything is upscale and quite nice. Meanwhile, problems fester in the west and south.
I just thought of this, but I think it's true: In a roundabout way, the gangbangers on the west and south sides are like gun owners in general. How does a pro-gun activist solve violence? With more guns. How does a gangbanger solve the violence that surrounds him? With more violence. He joins a gang for protection, and that gang will use violence to protect their turf.
It all sort of makes logical sense. Meanwhile, while acting in their own self interest everybody is just contributing to the overall problem of gun violence.
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Jul 9, 2014 23:08:37 GMT -5
Peter. I understand your position. I hate your attitude.
|
|