City of Chicago asks on twitter "HOW DO WE GET ILLEGAL GUNS OFF CHICAGO STREETS?"


PDA






Lucifer_Sam
October 4, 2012, 01:26 AM
Not sure if here is better or activism. Feel free to move, etc.

Anyway, as the title says, "WhatifChicago", an anti gun organization affiliated with the Chicago's mayors office, is asking on twitter how they should go about getting rid of all the illegal guns which, apparently, are running around the streets independently, out of control, and causing crime. So if you actually happen to have a twitter account for some reason, you might want to tell them what you think. Or sign up for one, if you really have a hankering to give a piece of your mind. I would if I was in Illinois.

https://twitter.com/WhatIfChicago

Likely this is will be framed in the media as a desperate cry by a city under siege to gun violence. Or at least that's what the individuals responsible for this are hoping for.

Of course, its unlikely that you would change the minds of the people responsible for the page, but I'm sure others will be paying attention.

If you enjoyed reading about "City of Chicago asks on twitter "HOW DO WE GET ILLEGAL GUNS OFF CHICAGO STREETS?"" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
FIVETWOSEVEN
October 4, 2012, 01:30 AM
Make them legal. No more illegal guns on the streets and the crime rate will drop when citizens will start carrying and fighting back.

gojuice101
October 4, 2012, 01:38 AM
Make them legal. No more illegal guns on the streets and the crime rate will drop when citizens will start carrying and fighting back.

You would think that they would pay attention to statistics and notice a trend. Guns outlawed, crime rates rise. Guns legalized, crime rates fall. I wrote a term paper on the subject of gun control last year, and spent weeks researching and compiling statistics and facts. They are blatantly obvious, to anybody but the lawmakers up there apparently. It should be obvious by now that their approach is not working. :banghead:

gunnutery
October 4, 2012, 03:51 AM
Make them legal

At first I thought you meant an amnesty measure :) Some legislators want to enact amnesty for certain people groups, so why not guns...oh yeah, guns can't vote.

I avoid Chicago like the plague. Fortunately when I go east, it's southeast to Florida!

Warp
October 4, 2012, 04:12 AM
You would think that they would pay attention to statistics and notice a trend. Guns outlawed, crime rates rise. Guns legalized, crime rates fall. I wrote a term paper on the subject of gun control last year, and spent weeks researching and compiling statistics and facts. They are blatantly obvious, to anybody but the lawmakers up there apparently. It should be obvious by now that their approach is not working. :banghead:

It isn't about guns. It isn't about crime. It's about control.

powell&hyde
October 4, 2012, 04:23 AM
If I lived in Chicago I would tweet Rahm Emanuel one word "RESIGN".

Deanimator
October 4, 2012, 06:45 AM
If I lived in Chicago I would tweet Rahm Emanuel one word "RESIGN".
It wouldn't make one iota of difference.

He's just one avaricious thug. There'd be a whole city council of them left.

And get rid of them, and there'd be no change because Chicagoans would just vote in more avaricious thugs as replacements for them.

Chicago isn't Syria. They're voting for what they WANT.

Chicago is the way it is because Chicagoans LIKE it that way.

Trent
October 4, 2012, 07:47 AM
Start selling hi-points in blister pack at the check out lanes of WalMart. Gun, mag, 10 rounds, $99 rollback special!

Oh, and make them legal for people to carry...

... And use for self defense.

Crime will drop.

Reloadron
October 4, 2012, 08:12 AM
The problems Chicago is facing run much deeper than one's right to carry or their ineffectual gun control laws.

Cleveland, Ohio till recently (a few years ago) had gun control laws that paralleled those of Chicago and for that matter NYC. When Ohio finally adopted CCW laws the City of Cleveland maintained their own laws until finally the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that state law trumped city laws and that home rule did not apply. Nothing changed and I mean nothing as gun related crimes continued to escalate along with the homicide rate. What this demonstrates is that strict gun laws were doing nothing and that allowing guns changed nothing.

Chicago, much like Cleveland gets exactly what they deserve. Unfortunately for a few the people of Chicago much like those of Cleveland choose election after election to send inept leadership to office to run and manage their city. People who choose to ignore the root cause of the problems they need to fix as they promote what amounts to feel good, do nothing legislation. On a grand scale what did President Clinton's crime bill legislation accomplish? Absolutely nothing, it was feel good do nothing legislation sold to the fools who promoted it.

You have a coarsening of city culture combined with a judicial system more enmeshed with the rights of the criminal than the victim. Since legislators choose to not fix that problem they place the blame for their problems and crime on the gun.

Case in point. A few years ago here in Cleveland:

A man who has a permit to carry a concealed gun shot and killed one of two teenage robbery suspects he encountered on his front porch, police said.

City prosecutors decided yesterday that the 25-year-old Cleveland man was justified and would not be charged in the shooting Saturday night of 15-year-old Arthur Buford, a freshman at John F. Kennedy High School.

Buford and another teen approached the man on his porch and one of the youths pulled a gun, prompting the resident to pull his gun and shoot Buford several times in the chest, police said.

Initially they looked to prosecute the shooter but finally backed off. Next, the shooter and his family began receiving death threats. His home was vandalized multiple times and finally the poor innocent victim moved. While this persisted shrines to the dead thug were erected in front of the shooter's home. Eulogizing a thug! Go figure that one out. What does this tell you about the mentality of these citizens who continuously vote inept leadership?

The only differences between Cleveland and Chicago is a few hundred miles and Chicago is larger. Chicago, much like Cleveland gets what they deserve and again I feel for those who are out numbered at the poles.

Just My Take
Ron

303tom
October 4, 2012, 11:20 AM
Shoot thugs & stop putting them back on the street................

Sharps-shooter
October 4, 2012, 11:57 AM
Mindset. Culture shift. That my answer to the urban gun problem.

I, Like many of you and unlike some of you, grew up in a setting where guns were NORMAL. People carried 12 gauge shotguns and 30-06 rifles in plain sight in their trucks, had .45 1911's on their hip, and/or .25 raven pistols in their jacket pockets (which as it turns out was not technically legal, but was common and socially accepted). Consequently, guns do not, under most circumstances, have any more shock value for me than, say, trucks. or matches.

For someone who grows up in an environment where guns are less normal, Television becomes the main reference. Always plenty of guns in movies and TV shows. and who has them? Cops, criminals, and the occasional vigilante. So people from that sort of setting often seek out guns because they want to be a tuff outlaw type, or because they want to be a vigilante. And maybe they don't train with them much or have much of a sense of personal responsibility as a result of having them.

MtnSpur
October 4, 2012, 12:42 PM
I was born and raised in Chicago and if one would do their due diligence and educate themselves on the politics that has reigned supreme in that city since before the Great Chicago Fire one would see a picture of corruption from the mayors office downward or the ward upward, take your pick. The Chicago Democratic Machine has held the citizens hostage for so long they are oblivious to the who, what and why of how the city and therefore the state has been run since before WWI. Gun control is merely one piece of the servitude that Chicagoans must endure. Sad that such a multitude of truly wonderful people are controlled by the elitist political few that continue to pull the strings. But hey, Go Bears :)

hso
October 4, 2012, 12:45 PM
Simple response to a complex problem is to remove the socioeconomic drivers for violent crime and you'll reduce the number of violent crimes, violent crimes involving guns and "illegal" guns on the street. Of course, looking for a "sound bite" solution is easier than addressing the root cause.

ZXD9
October 4, 2012, 12:51 PM
How about a Hunger Games type event for the Gangs. First run a game for each individual gang. The winners from each gang go to the Gang Fest where one person gets top honors and then a trip to jail.

Ryanxia
October 4, 2012, 01:04 PM
How about a Hunger Games type event for the Gangs. First run a game for each individual gang. The winners from each gang go to the Gang Fest where one person gets top honors and then a trip to jail.

I like it. Except pretty soon the Gov'mint will classify gun owners as a 'gang'. :D

Owen Sparks
October 4, 2012, 01:25 PM
The focus should not be on the tool but the act.

The problem with gun laws is that they are collectivist in nature. They treat everyone with a gun, including you, as the lowest common denominator based on the potential for violent crime, even if you are minding your own business and are not threatening anyone. Just the fact that you MIGHT do something because you have the means becomes the crime.

This is fundamentally no different than arresting someone for being Black because of what they might do. There used to be 'Sundown towns’ *in Illinois with the goal of reducing crime by keeping Blacks off the streets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sundown_town

These unjust laws operated on the premise that any Black man who was out after dark was presumed to be up to no good. It did not matter if he actually did something wrong or not. The potential for crime became the crime. People who own guns are treated no differently now days.

*Ever heard of Anna Illinois?
Find out what A.N.N.A. really stands for below. You might be shocked:

http://sundown.afro.illinois.edu/content/sundown-introduction.pdf

Vern Humphrey
October 4, 2012, 01:27 PM
Make them legal. No more illegal guns on the streets and the crime rate will drop when citizens will start carrying and fighting back.
Couldn't have said it better myself.

But -- this is Chicago, the heart of the Democrat Party. They don't care about what works, they care about controling the lives of the people.:barf:

Deanimator
October 4, 2012, 02:35 PM
Initially they looked to prosecute the shooter but finally backed off. Next, the shooter and his family began receiving death threats. His home was vandalized multiple times and finally the poor innocent victim moved. While this persisted shrines to the dead thug were erected in front of the shooter's home. Eulogizing a thug! Go figure that one out. What does this tell you about the mentality of these citizens who continuously vote inept leadership?
What you've omitted was members of the Cleveland PD AND the Cleveland chapter of the NAACP volunteering to GUARD the victim's home from little Artie's mutant family and "posse". The OVERWHELMING reaction in Cleveland was, "If you don't want to get shot, don't try to rob people."

The only differences between Cleveland and Chicago is a few hundred miles and Chicago is larger. Chicago, much like Cleveland gets what they deserve and again I feel for those who are out numbered at the poles.
I lived in Chicago for twenty one years. I've lived in the Cleveland area since 1986. Chicago and Cleveland aren't even in the same UNIVERSE. Cleveland HAD an AWB. It NEVER had a handgun ban or anything like it. The Ohio legislature never had to pass a law SPECIFICALLY to bar Cleveland from prosecuting people who shoot wouldbe rapists, child molesters and murderers to defend their families in their own homes.

Cleveland is certainly corrupt, but equating Cleveland with Chicago is like equating a turnstyle jumper with Jeffrey Dahmer.

Deanimator
October 4, 2012, 02:37 PM
But -- this is Chicago, the heart of the Democrat Party. They don't care about what works, they care about controling the lives of the people.
It's just as likely that given the number of members of the Chicago City Council who have been in prison or who are in prison, they're looking to defend themselves from their potential victims.

Owen Sparks
October 4, 2012, 03:30 PM
The question is: "HOW DO WE GET ILLEGAL GUNS OFF CHICAGO STREETS?"

Since there is no way for a commoner to legally carry a gun in Illinois, then by logical extension, doesn't that make ALL guns 'on the streets' illegal since there is no legal way to carry one?

JERRY
October 4, 2012, 03:44 PM
they might start with getting violent criminals off the street first.

Vern Humphrey
October 4, 2012, 03:46 PM
they might start with getting violent criminals off the street first.
And experience has shown in state after state that allowing the honest citizens to carry guns goes a long way toward doing just that.

Skribs
October 4, 2012, 03:47 PM
The question is: "HOW DO WE GET ILLEGAL GUNS OFF CHICAGO STREETS?"

Since there is no way for a commoner to legally carry a gun in Illinois, then by logical extension, doesn't that make ALL guns 'on the streets' illegal since there is no legal way to carry one?

So we make it illegal to...uh...hm...kinda stumped here. Guess gun control ain't working. Now give back the guns to the Chicagoans who want to be responsible for their own safety and work on the true problem - the criminals.

rodinal220
October 4, 2012, 03:50 PM
Whats an illegal gun???

oneounceload
October 4, 2012, 04:40 PM
Very simple - stop letting criminals back out to continue doing more criminal acts. The recidivism rate is something like 87% - keep them off the street, crime rate will drop by at least half overnight. Then you would have to get rid of the corruption so you could actually keep the criminals from starting up again

Owen Sparks
October 4, 2012, 05:06 PM
Whats an illegal gun???

Evidently in Chicago it is any gun that is not in government hands.

gfanikf
October 4, 2012, 05:29 PM
Are they getting trolled yet? Any gems? lol

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

rugerman07
October 4, 2012, 07:06 PM
Chicago doesn't have a gun problem, they have a gang problem and that's the issue that needs to be addressed.

Nanook
October 4, 2012, 07:27 PM
On the recidivism thing, are you willing to pay 10x as much in tax money to keep them locked up? Are you willing to see 100x as many cops shot, and incidental injuries to civilians, because the crooks have nothing to lose by trying to shoot their way out of an arrest (vs life in prison)? Cause that is what you'll get.

If the gloves came off, and criminals ceased being coddled, they would get the message. If they got shot for their crimes, by citizens defending themselves, they would get the message.

Nobody wants indiscriminate gunfire on the streets, but in Chicago that's about what you have right now. It's hard to see how arming normal citizens could make it worse.

In Chicago right now, in 2012, the only people who can carry guns are cops, criminals, and of course Chicago city aldermen. In many cases, the last two lines are blurred. In some cases, all three lines are blurred in Chicago.

The "city that works" isn't working very well these last few years.

Reloadron
October 4, 2012, 07:54 PM
What you've omitted was members of the Cleveland PD AND the Cleveland chapter of the NAACP volunteering to GUARD the victim's home from little Artie's mutant family and "posse". The OVERWHELMING reaction in Cleveland was, "If you don't want to get shot, don't try to rob people."


I lived in Chicago for twenty one years. I've lived in the Cleveland area since 1986. Chicago and Cleveland aren't even in the same UNIVERSE. Cleveland HAD an AWB. It NEVER had a handgun ban or anything like it. The Ohio legislature never had to pass a law SPECIFICALLY to bar Cleveland from prosecuting people who shoot wouldbe rapists, child molesters and murderers to defend their families in their own homes.

Cleveland is certainly corrupt, but equating Cleveland with Chicago is like equating a turnstyle jumper with Jeffrey Dahmer.
Cleveland not only had an assault weapons ban but any and all handguns in the Cleveland City Limits had to be registered.

Chicago has always been corrupt and lately I am not sure they had much on Cuyahoga County but corruption isn't the point. Cleveland's strict gun laws did nothing to curb crime. Apparently the inept leadership never realized that the bad guys fail to follow the laws. Chicago is not going to legislate morality with gun laws any better than Cleveland did. With inept leadership neither city can manage crime so crime is conveniently made the fault of guns. The only thing strict gun laws do is effect the honest citizen. They have no effect on the criminal element. That was my point. Discounting corruption you still have inept leadership.

That would be my take anyway....
Ron

Deanimator
October 4, 2012, 08:48 PM
Cleveland not only had an assault weapons ban but any and all handguns in the Cleveland City Limits had to be registered.
Chicago had registration... before they stopped LETTING people register... unless you were a cop or a member of the City Counsel.

I'm not defending Cleveland's gun control. I'm saying that compared to Chicago under Daley, Cleveland is the Soldier of Fortune Convention.

rc109a
October 4, 2012, 08:58 PM
The only way to really get rid of the problem is to erase it all and start over from scratch. I know that is not an answer people want to hear, but the problem is beyond help. Thank god I am never going back.

bushmaster1313
October 4, 2012, 09:02 PM
How about locking up the criminals?

Badlander
October 4, 2012, 09:15 PM
Mrs Olearys cow had the right idea.

doc2rn
October 4, 2012, 09:37 PM
But people dont shoot people in Gun Free Zones!

Better put up more signs, (sarcasm off).:neener:

SaxonPig
October 4, 2012, 09:48 PM
How about making them legal and focusing on getting the CRIMINALS off the streets? (Idiots.)

Warp
October 4, 2012, 10:05 PM
How about locking up the criminals?

Yes, the criminals...like those damn citizens who think they have the right to arm themselves for self protection. Lock them up.

ares338
October 5, 2012, 12:03 AM
Immediately shoot all criminals....give their weapons to legal citizens and you're good to go.....tongue in cheek?....maybe! This city is in trouble because it is liberal and this in its self is asking for trouble and chaos. What they need is a good "Community Organizer".

Reloadron
October 5, 2012, 05:40 AM
Chicago had registration... before they stopped LETTING people register... unless you were a cop or a member of the City Counsel.

I'm not defending Cleveland's gun control. I'm saying that compared to Chicago under Daley, Cleveland is the Soldier of Fortune Convention.
Yeah, given a choice we are better off here than there. Looked at some of Chicago's crime stats and I guess those gun control policies aren't working out for them. :)

Came to Cleveland in '75 after Nam the Marine Corps sent me here as a recruiter. Kept leaving and ending up back here. Back in '75 I actually recruited in Rocky River and lived on the West Side. Chicago? They deserve what they get for the most part. Maybe they could use an FBI investigation like we had? :)

Ron

Deanimator
October 5, 2012, 06:33 AM
Chicago? They deserve what they get for the most part.
They LIKE things the way they are. Why WOULD they change things?

Maybe they could use an FBI investigation like we had?
What they need is a full blown Stalin style purge. The problem is, two weeks later it'd be as though nothing had ever happened.

friscolatchi
October 5, 2012, 09:22 AM
What Rhambo is looking for is a consensus of antigun opinion, and justification for, similar to Mike Bloomberg's agenda, more federal gun control, registration and confiscation of the offending agents, ie handguns. NYC is safer than it was in the 70's when I lived there and it's not due to gun control. There is a better economy due to the hardnosed anticrime policies of the previous mayor. The neighborhoods where you wore sneakers or steel toed boots and didn't go into at night are now teaming with tourists 24/7 and college girls wearing flip-flops. Just my observation.

gfanikf
October 5, 2012, 10:37 AM
What Rhambo is looking for is a consensus of antigun opinion, and justification for, similar to Mike Bloomberg's agenda, more federal gun control, registration and confiscation of the offending agents, ie handguns. NYC is safer than it was in the 70's when I lived there and it's not due to gun control. There is a better economy due to the hardnosed anticrime policies of the previous mayor. The neighborhoods where you wore sneakers or steel toed boots and didn't go into at night are now teaming with tourists 24/7 and college girls wearing flip-flops. Just my observation.
The other thing is crime has just been on a downward trend in general. As I said to others I dont ultimately subscribe to more guns less crimes, but even the harshest critic's of John Lott have said that carry laws have not lead to an increase in crime or feared bloodbaths on the street. They even said that alone is an important discovery and that people cannot offer that as an opposing reason again. They of course say there us not proof of crime being lowered...but that matters to John Lott, not me. It shows that guns and carry are not the reason...other things are.

I think an earlier post about Chicago having a gang problem is the real issue. Guns are a symptom, but not the real cause. Until the real cause is addressed the problem will continue. I don't even mean just arresting/zero tolerance, but a multi front campaign.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

Reloadron
October 5, 2012, 10:41 AM
What they need is a full blown Stalin style purge. The problem is, two weeks later it'd be as though nothing had ever happened.

Thanks, coffee through the nose! :)

You lived there so I have to take what you say as true.

Ron

Ken C
October 5, 2012, 11:35 AM
Another way to look at this is why are people shooting each other. One of the main reasons is the illegal drug business. I have come to believe there is no way to stop illegal drugs. Very simplified, the laws of supply and demand are that, laws, not theory. We are unsuccessful in stopping either. Crank up interdiction, the price of dope goes up and the bg's make even more money. And drug intervention programs only help a very small percentage.

So, all of this brings us to a scary conclusion, legalize ALL drugs. Just look at Prohibition as a case study.

So, would the killing slow down ?

Not sure if the ability to go to the local Walgreens to buy a heroin fix is a good thing, but what we're doing now is definitely not working.

tomrkba
October 5, 2012, 01:16 PM
Kevin Baker at "The Smallest Minority" blog talked about the actual demographics of murders in America. The conclusion was that inner city criminals are killing each other and those around them. The rates drop significantly as distance increases.


http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2006/02/culture.html

Followed by:

http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2006/02/hubris.html

Pay attention to this one:
http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2006/02/weltanschauung.html

Not sure if the ability to go to the local Walgreens to buy a heroin fix is a good thing, but what we're doing now is definitely not working.

It is if the goal is to increase government power by means of any excuse.

Captaingyro
October 5, 2012, 01:52 PM
Electric Chair. No, wait...Electric Bleachers.

TNboy
October 5, 2012, 08:32 PM
Well they could start by disarming all of the politicians that think that they are above the law.

Vern Humphrey
October 5, 2012, 08:44 PM
Chicago doesn't have a gun problem, they have a gang problem and that's the issue that needs to be addressed.
Actually, they do have a gun problem.

The people the gangs prey on are not allowed to have guns to defend themselves with, and that's a problem.

Kbaker
October 5, 2012, 11:17 PM
Kevin Baker at "The Smallest Minority" blog talked about the actual demographics of murders in America. The conclusion was that inner city criminals are killing each other and those around them. The rates drop significantly as distance increases.


http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2006/02/culture.html

Followed by:

http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2006/02/hubris.html

Pay attention to this one:
http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/2006/02/weltanschauung.html



It is if the goal is to increase government power by means of any excuse.
Thanks for the links! Those were pretty good essays if I do say so myself.

leadcounsel
October 5, 2012, 11:23 PM
I read through many of those Tweets - all feel good baloney.

Blue .45
October 5, 2012, 11:52 PM
This is a story which ran in August. It might help explain the increase in gang violence Chicago is seeing this year.

Mexican drug cartels fight turf battles in Chicago

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57499523/mexican-drug-cartels-fight-turf-battles-in-chicago/

Riley is special agent in charge of the Drug Enforcement Administration Office in Chicago and in four neighboring states.

"One of the hardest jobs I've had in the past couple of years is to convince our law enforcement partners that we need an enforcement mentality as if we're on the border," Riley said.

Miles away, Riley says, Mexican cartels have a significant influence in Chicago's gang violence problem.

Neverwinter
October 6, 2012, 04:43 AM
Addressing the causes of crime are not as simple as gun laws, and the people who continue to claim that as true should be ashamed of themselves. They should also be supporting those other laws which actually affect the factors contributing to crime, if they actually believe in lowering crime rather than controlling and punishing people.

jim goose
October 6, 2012, 11:26 AM
Chicago's problems run deep. Its an intensely corrupt city. It the only city outside of the 3rd world, where Ive witnessed someone buy there way out of a traffic ticket. No amount of laws will be effective when the city is rotten at the core.

I woke up to a home invader entering my bedroom once, went for my dinky buckmark in my closet and he fled. There were huge hand prints on the window which he entered through, and they refused to even print them. There was also a serial rapist in the neighborhood back then. Probably him. Anyway, the cop suspected i kept a gun, i admitted it, and he told me to get rid of it. I guess both the serial rapist and I should both thank him. No way I ever live in cook county again.

Vern Humphrey
October 6, 2012, 11:34 AM
Did you think that maybe the cop was the serial rapist?

Why else would they not take prints?

phil dirt
October 6, 2012, 12:37 PM
hso says, "Simple response to a complex problem is to remove the socioeconomic drivers for violent crime." I would prefer the way they probably do it in Saudi Arabia, remove the gangbanger's trigger finger on both hands!

CZguy
October 6, 2012, 12:50 PM
It's a interesting social experiment. Let it continue, it'll be interesting to see how it turns out.

jbrown50
October 6, 2012, 09:29 PM
Chicago doesn't have a gun problem, they have a gang problem and that's the issue that needs to be addressed.
And...the gangs run drugs for the drug trafficers who then pay the necessary percentage to the mob who then kick back money through various "fronts" to the politicians who then disarm the non-criminal citizenry to protect their interests.

The problem isn't guns or so called "illegal guns". The problem is the corrupt government officials.

Onward Allusion
October 7, 2012, 12:18 AM
TNboy
Well they could start by disarming all of the politicians that think that they are above the law.

For those who may not be aware of this, in Illinois, aldermen, mayors, and even park district commissioner are considered conservators of the peace and therefore are allowed to carry (i.e. everyone on the Chicago City Council, including the Mayor Rahm can and do carry). Can you say - sanctimonious hypocrites?

hang fire
October 7, 2012, 01:19 AM
Chicago like all inner cities controled for decades by a certain political party has resulted in packs of feral human animals roaming the streets and taking over. The powers that be know what the problem is, but refuse to address said problem.

Neverwinter
October 7, 2012, 03:07 AM
Chicago like all inner cities controled for decades by a certain political party has resulted in packs of feral human animals roaming the streets and taking over. The powers that be know what the problem is, but refuse to address said problem.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/posthocf.html)

Shadow 7D
October 7, 2012, 04:14 AM
Post hoc ergo propter hoc (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/posthocf.html)
Yeah, kinda
but that in and of itself is an attack of gross oversimplification

Neverwinter
October 7, 2012, 04:26 AM
Yeah, kinda
but that in and of itself is an attack of gross oversimplification
That is up to hang fire to clarify. He may have just been making a correlative observation, and not have inferred any causation.

Sent using Tapatalk 2

Shadow 7D
October 7, 2012, 04:40 AM
If, you wanted to have fun with it, you could look into the origin of the bans, and into the first Daley and his known views and those...
but lets not go there, cause the usually ends with people getting called racist.

Unfortunately the dependent class is the laboratory of social policy.

Specs
October 7, 2012, 10:32 AM
Illegal??? Deport 'em. (guns to KY that is.

Fatelvis
October 7, 2012, 12:03 PM
Wow Chicago, do you really have to ask? What did the other 49 states do that eliminated that problem? Hmmmmmm.

hang fire
October 7, 2012, 01:13 PM
Post hoc ergo propter hoc (http://www.fallacyfiles.org/posthocf.html)
Giving valid examples would be akin to saying one does not like Obama, and then being labled a racist.

Neverwinter
October 7, 2012, 02:40 PM
Giving valid examples would be akin to saying one does not like Obama, and then being labled a racist.
That doesn't clarify anything about your earlier post. What did you mean?

hang fire
October 8, 2012, 02:26 AM
If you have to ask the question, doubtful you would understand the answer.

Neverwinter
October 8, 2012, 02:57 AM
If you have to ask the question, doubtful you would understand the answer.
No one had to ask the question, it just seemed fair to give you a chance to backtrack on your post hoc ergo proper hoc fallacy.

Sent using Tapatalk 2

vito
October 8, 2012, 09:32 AM
One factor not yet mentioned is that despite the fact that IL law makes no provision for anyone to carry a concealed weapon, members of the Chicago City Council are permitted to do so. The city leaders, such as the mayor, have armed bodyguards. The councilmen and councilwomen can carry, and in some cases have been provided round-the-clock police bodyguards. So those who have the power to make changes are already protected and they obviously don't give a damn for the rest of the citizenry. Living in IL is barely tolerable for me; living in Chicago would be unthinkable.

Trent
October 9, 2012, 09:50 AM
I'm with Vito here.

My Sheriff put his thoughts on Chicago very bluntly when I spoke to him. He'd testified before the state government committee as a proponent of concealed carry. We won the committee. We failed the legislature vote. Every Chicago politician voted it down, and they collectively have enough clout to stop any home-rule laws from being passed state-wide.

As long as we have Chicago politicians acting in unison, we won't get concealed carry. It's worth mentioning the rest of the state outside of Cook County *unanimously* voted for concealed carry (to the best of my recollection). But we can't get it to go through.

Because of Chicago.

I'm with my Sheriff. Sell the damn city off to Canada.

Vern Humphrey
October 9, 2012, 12:04 PM
I'm with my Sheriff. Sell the damn city off to Canada.
I propose we give Chicago, Detroit and San Francisco to China, to pay off our debt -- provided they dig those cities up and take them home with them.

Deanimator
October 9, 2012, 04:54 PM
One factor not yet mentioned is that despite the fact that IL law makes no provision for anyone to carry a concealed weapon, members of the Chicago City Council are permitted to do so. The city leaders, such as the mayor, have armed bodyguards.
What part of "THEIR lives are IMPORTANT, yours ISN'T." don't you understand?

You exist SOLELY as a revenue producer and as such are COMPLETELY expendable. Actual tax PAYERS are a consumable resource.

Trent
October 10, 2012, 12:30 PM
Threads linking this article have been closed, so I'll continue the discussion here. (If I missed this somewhere else, lemme know):

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/15644719-418/cook-county-mulling-violence-tax-on-guns-and-ammunition.html

"Cook county mulling violence tax on guns and ammunition"

Drawing the ire of the gun lobby, Cook County Board President Preckwinkle is eyeing a violence tax on guns and ammunition sold in the city and suburbs, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned.

Such a tax alone wouldn’t close a $115 million budget gap in 2013, but it could at least funnel money into the county’s $3 billion operation — where roughly two-thirds of the budget pays for both the county’s public health clinics and two hospitals along with the criminal justice system that includes the courts and jail.


In related news, there are two bills sitting in the state legislature proposing an ammunition tax state wide.

Trent
October 10, 2012, 01:21 PM
Disregard the above, I ended up finding an open thread I was looking for about the Chicago ammunition tax. :)

My apologies.

If you enjoyed reading about "City of Chicago asks on twitter "HOW DO WE GET ILLEGAL GUNS OFF CHICAGO STREETS?"" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!