All Chicago needs are more restrictive gun laws. Maybe they could execute anybody who thinks about buying a gun. That's one of the few gun control measures that they haven't tried yet.
The war zone that is Chicago wouldn't be as bad if we had some accountability on who buys guns. Oh, but there's that pesky 2nd Amendment. Never mind. The war zone that is Chicago is the price we pay for said amendment. I can live with it; I want my guns, no matter how many have to die so I may keep them.
On the same weekend in Miami:
+ a beautiful 8 y/o girl shot in the head and dies after thugs are aiming for her father who got hit multiple times but survived:
[view link]
+ an 18 y/o girl shot in the head and dies while standing outside her house w/ her 17 y/o cousin whom was also shot but survived:
[view link]
Per the current dialogue I can only assume it was racist cops doing drivebies and killing teenagers and 8 y/o girls indiscriminantly
Due to BLM and the firing of Chicago's Chief of Police, the rank and file street cops are afraid to act as cops for fear that they will be the next sacrificial lamb. The bad guys know it and it has degenerated into the wild, wild west on the south and west sides.
Once again, the law of unintended consequences.
I haven't been to Chicago in 6 months or so but I wonder if they still have 2 or 3 cops standing on every corner of Michigan Avenue making the tourists feel safe.
You got to love how the national media does not cover all of the senseless black on black violence in Chicago, but God forbid a cop shoots a black criminal, it becomes a national tragedy/story worth looting and burning entire neighborhoods.
Every year for 20+ years, some heinous accidental murder of a child or a minor celebrity or relative of a celebrity occurs in Chicago. There is much hand wringing. "Oh when will this end? -- surely we will rise up and end violence!," they say. Father PFuckup marches and gives speeches. There are peace marches by mothers and other ministers. Then the cameras go away and the shooting resumes.
As long as the bad guys can make a better living doing illegal shit (and feel the need to drive-by shoot to protect their turfs), if will not change. It can only be contained. At least, back in the day, the cops would crack heads if the bad guys tried to expand their territory. Now, Chiraq is lawlessness.
Somebody needs to explain to me why the electorate in Chiraq keeps the Democrats in power for 40+ years -- it is never getting better under their leadership -- why the fear to try something new? Is there a chance Trump is correct on this point???
Sorry to hear that things are so bad in Chicago. But this has absolutely nothing to do with Kaepernick, speaking his mind about a very important issue.
SJG
Go back and reread the statistics cited by @Che. If remotely close to accurate, one could argue that the SF QB is focusing on the wrong issue. I would think the more prevalent issue would be to protest black on black crime without effective police intervention/prevention.
Instead, when a white cop shoots a black gangbanger, the media demands an investigation into whether the shooting was justified. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. I agree, investigate! My point is, where is the media outrage over the lack of a solution when 13 are killed in a Chicago weekend (0 by cops).
Try to walk a mile in a cop's shoes where everyone is armed and it is exceedingly difficult to tell the bad guys from the good guys with only a split second to decide between life or death. After you're done overthrowing receivers, put on a badge and show us you can do better, punky QB.
When a cop shoots someone there is always an investigation.
And it is good to try and look at this from all sides, and get discussion from all sides.
But Kaepernick is still entitled to take his own position, whether or not you or I agree. He id not doing anything wrong, he is not doing anything to make the matter worse. No one has ever said that it is easy to be a police officer.
And I do agree with Nemesisk7. I want to be spending more time in Mexico. The people there are just different.
SJG
"... Somebody needs to explain to me why the electorate in Chiraq keeps the Democrats in power for 40+ years ..."
You don't bite the hand that feeds you
Papi's sarcastic humor is almost too subtle. At first, I wasn't sure which side of the record he was playing.
Chicago, like any other city, the crime is mostly black on black and occurring in black neighborhoods; however, also like most cities it has been spreading to formerly safe neighborhoods and events. For example: Shootings in New Orleans FQ, mother's day parades, and Mardi Gras events.
Outlawing guns will do nothing, NOTHING, to quell the bloodshed. Illinois as a whole and Chicago in particular have the most restrictive gun laws in the nation and the most gun violence. Texas, Louisiana, AZ are all much freer and much safer.
Papa hit the nail on the head. Too many people rely in the corrupt democrat machine in Illinois to ever vote them out of power.
I was born and raised in Chicago. I love to visit Chicago. Chicago has so much going for it. I would never move back there.
For an industrialized nation, the US has an unbelievably high crime rate. Cops and prisons are not going to solve it. Gun controls might help. but Michael Moore shows how in Canada they have lots of guns, but still a much lower crime rate.
It seems to simply be the product of our economic system and the fact that so many people are delegitimated and shut out. And this in turn is just another manifestation of our horrible history of race relations.
The democratic political machine in Illinois is corrupt. But I can't see that this has anything to do with the high crime rate.
SJG
Smith's gun control might work after enough people die. All legal law abiding people trying to buy a gun get shot and die. The criminals just steal them and kill anyone trying to buy a gun. Soon only criminals will be left, then it will be a big gang war shootout. No more laws at all.
We had a chance to go the other way, in 1968. Hubert Humphrey and Walter Mondale of Minnesota, and George McGovern of South Dakota, all great guys. But Richard Nixon unveiled his Southern Strategy, a covert play on racism, and from then on we've been going the wrong way.
SJG
I thing I want to turn back to my engineering background: what are we measuring and what does (the data or the conclusions) mean.
The U.S. is a very young country and perhaps comparing the U.S. to other, young countries (like South America) makes more sense that comparing the U.S. to established countries like most of Europe.
+ In Nina's example, many (or at least some) of those incarcerated are due to drug offenses; some are minor; some are non-violent.
+ The U.S. is accused of running a large scale for-profit prison system, which if true, or open to corruption. In that violent or repeat offenders may be compelled to be released because the corrupt system damn well knows these individuals will just be re-incarcerated at a later date. Whereas some non-violent offenders, why release them, if they will not relapse. More bodies is more funding and more funding is more money (dollars) which could feed the corruption should it exist. Too many people in the system are making too much money off of the status quo.
+ The U.S. appears to fetishize violence. It appears to especially fetishize violence as a means to solve problems.
+ The U.S. is a very competitive society. It is society that is competitive, fetishizes violence as a solution to problems, and one that also has ready access to weapons --?> some of that misplaced frustration due to competition could play out as violence (black on black crime, white on white crime -- both are really poor-on-poor crime, or crime within a class or caste). I know I am guilty of these thoughts as I am very frustrated with competition and the status quo. So I can see others succumbing to this with very little encouragement, little guidance, a seeming lack of constructive ways of expressing frustration, or good examples mentors or role models to follow. The current climate is fuck 'em; incarcerate 'em.
+ I suspect U.S.'s violence and violent crime rate should be compared and analyzed against really comparative young societies, like South America.
+ Federal government entitlements may have helped destroy families, especially inner city black families. But white families and other races are also affected. But this is not just an inner city problem. It affects rural and suburban families as well.
+ One problem is the black impoverished are still obsessed with the history slavery, which ended 150 years ago, and also with discrimination, which has gone down tremendously. This does not mean that we do not have a poor underclass. San_Jose_Guy might call this our under-caste.
+ Part of the problem of the point above, in my conjecture, is this poor underclass sees no way out of poverty other than two paths (1) crime or (2) government programs. The government programs lock them into poverty as if they took a job they would lose some of these benefits, or in some cases, all of the benefits.
+ Many of the programs could be replaced with Universal Base Income (UBI). It could address some problems (1) how to address how benefits are phased out as you work (they wouldn't be). (2) corruption -- it should lessen as the benefit is just cash oversight that funds are being misspent could be eliminated as there would be no oversight, enforcement, or associated overhead. Supposedly some of the programs have ~50% of the funded allocated for oversight, enforcement, and the like. E.g. eliminate SNAP, Medicaid, WIC, government cheese, social security benefits other than retirement, disability, childcare benefits, housing assistance, etc. and just give out cash. End the nanny state. This is controversial, but in a modern capitalist system with the current levels of automation, UBI may start to make more and more sense than the current crop of government programs. It makes sense on some levels and maybe not on others. We should talk about it. Another option would be to take the Libertarian stance and end all government programs and rely on Social Darwinism. Though some people are already starting to earnestly talk about UBI as a possible solution to a post-capitalist society where for example only 1 in 10 persons needs to work. We should really start to talk about this. How do we sell UBI as a solution to modify or moderanize capitalism? How do we convince people that UBI is not socialism or communism? Or how to we convince UBI supporters that UBI is socialism? Socialism in believes in the U.S. to be the wrong alternative to capitalist free markets (and I agree).
+ If government programs and entitlements are really destroying families we need to talk about alternatives to these programs.
+ Education is rarely talked about (among the frustrated and poorly performing classes) as a cornerstone to improve one's situation in life. Rationality is also little talked about. Literacy (especially financial literacy) needs to be talked about. Many consciously choose violence and/or illegal activities instead.
+ The prison systems are filling with criminals who did activities to get arrested. A lot of these prisons are full of minorities because that is where the crime is. It is in those communities. Much is black on black. Some of it is black on white or other variations. That is just where the crime is.
+ Maybe some are looking at the facts wrong. The U.S. is a competitive society. Instead of seeing violence or being poor as a PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED perhaps it should be thought of as A CONTEST TO BE WON. When it becomes cheaper to buy something instead of stealing it, we have really done something. People need work and people need money. So how do we improve outcomes?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ troll and/or spam my brothers Do not listen to this libertarian, RINO, liberal, or pinko commie, my brothers. (to beat san jose gay, to the punch). [view link]
30 comments