In this Democrat controlled city wit the strictest gun control in the nation. No gun stores, no shooting ranges in Chicago. All kinds of laws to take guns away from law abiding citizens, none to take guns away from criminals.
In this Democrat controlled city wit the strictest gun control in the nation. No gun stores, no shooting ranges in Chicago. All kinds of laws to take guns away from law abiding citizens, none to take guns away from criminals.
Now wait a minute. They have laws to take them away from criminals. Every time they arrest someone who is armed at the time of arrest, I'm pretty sure they don't let them keep that gun. They may return the firearm afterwards depending upon the crime and if they can prove legal ownership, but I bet more are kept than given back. Plus, taking guns away from law abiding citizens in a round about way deprives criminals of firearms as those firearms aren't there for them to steel.[sarcasm/off]
Over the course of 84 hours during the Independence Day holiday in Chicago, 82 people were shot and 14 were killed, prompting calls from Mayor Rahm Emanuel to put a stop to gun violence in the city..
The number of dead could rise because several of the injured are listed in critical condition. Many of the shootings, which began about 3:30 p.m. Thursday, took place in some of the most violent South Side neighborhoods. Five people were reportedly shot by Chicago police, including two who died.
by Michael Muskal
Speaking to an audience at the Miles Davis Magnet Academy on the city's South Side, Emanuel called for better policing, better education, stronger gun laws and “building a sense of community” to address the city’s gun violence.
"Emanuel called for better policing, better education, stronger gun laws"
WTF idiots elected him? The gangs who wanted unarmed victims? WTF folks they don't need stronger gun laws they need to enforce the ones they already have and take the guns away from the people who shouldn't have them to begin with. Not the people who legally own them and went threw all the stupid checks to get them not make even more stupid laws that they will never enforce anyway !
Steve
------------------ Technology is great when it works, and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't
Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
[This message has been edited by 84fiero123 (edited 07-07-2014).]
How many of those were shot by the Chicago Gestapo Police Department?
From Steve's post:
quote
Five people were reportedly shot by Chicago police, including two who died.
So, looks like the cops have a tremendous lead in the kill percentage department... 2 out of 5 is 40%. That leaves 77 people shot by non-cops and of those there would be 12 dead, so 15.6%. So, if we want to reduce gun related deaths, maybe we should take guns away from cops? [damnthatsarcasmisshowingupagain/off]
[This message has been edited by Khw (edited 07-07-2014).]
Here's one truth: An armed population is a polite population.
Another: When one is contemplating a homicidal action, if the target can shoot back, it adds a whole new dimension to the thought process.
------------------ Ron Count Down to A Better America: http://countingdownto.com/countdown/196044 Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, his upbringing, his environment, his culture, his mental state but … after a shooting, the problem is the gun?
My Uncle Frank was a staunch Conservative and voted straight Republican until the day he died in Chicago. Since then he has voted Democrat. Shrug
Here's one truth: An armed polite population is a polite population.
Disagreed. Guns are a poor substitute for education and decent behavior. If being armed is what it takes for a society to be polite then this doesn't reflect well on that society at all.
Regarding the thread topic: I think that local or regional gun control is useless in the US at this point. It's like trying to create a gun-free zone in a Baghdad neighborhood.
[This message has been edited by yellowstone (edited 07-08-2014).]
Disagreed. Guns are a poor substitute for education and decent behavior. If being armed is what it takes for a society to be polite than this doesn't reflect well on that society.
Regarding the thread topic: I think that local or regional gun control is useless in the US at this point. It's like trying to create a gun-free zone in a Baghdad neighborhood.
Realizing that everyone has a right to their own opinion, I can only assume you don't understand basic human nature. We learn to not reach into a fire because it hurts to get burned. In reference to gun control in the US, if you don't like our rules, go somewhere that has the rules you like, don't attempt to make this country into what you think you left.
------------------ Ron Count Down to A Better America: http://countingdownto.com/countdown/196044 Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, his upbringing, his environment, his culture, his mental state but … after a shooting, the problem is the gun?
My Uncle Frank was a staunch Conservative and voted straight Republican until the day he died in Chicago. Since then he has voted Democrat. Shrug
Guns are a poor substitute for education and decent behavior.
Agreed. They aren't a "substitute" but education and decent behavior alone aren't enough. If someone else is bent on doing harm, my education and decent behavior won't stop them.
Realizing that everyone has a right to their own opinion...
...if you don't like our rules, go somewhere that has the rules you like,
You seem inconsistent here.
Anyways, since you seem to be interested in why I'm still here given the gun laws: Firstly, they are (of course) not a sole determining factor for me, there are more important things in life. Secondly, while I think they are harmful to society, my daily reality living here is not affected by them. No-one I know carries a gun or even owns one for all I know. The one person we had in our business who felt like showing us the gun she carried in her purse, I (politely) asked not to bring it again and she didn't. The people I know here are very unlike to what I read in this forum.
It's a like the discussions about police brutality that abound here on this forum. While I'm appalled by the (seemingly) frequent abuses by the police in the US, my personal interactions with cops, few as they have been, have been nothing but decent and polite.
There's no place on earth that's perfect and one always has to put up with something or the other. But that doesn't mean you can't argue about it, right? Especially in a discussion forum on the Internet...
Originally posted by yellowstone: The people I know here are very unlike to what I read in this forum.
You keep think'n that way. Let the economy fall apart or other drastic changes and we'll see how people return to those basic human survival instincts.
------------------ Ron Count Down to A Better America: http://countingdownto.com/countdown/196044 Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, his upbringing, his environment, his culture, his mental state but … after a shooting, the problem is the gun?
My Uncle Frank was a staunch Conservative and voted straight Republican until the day he died in Chicago. Since then he has voted Democrat. Shrug
Here's another one. 2.72 million people in Chicago. 77 people shot by non-cops over that 4th weekend. Cops shot 5 and there are roughly 14,000 officers in Chicago. So since the % would be so minuscule for the population let's look more at ratio. Cops: 1 person shot for every 2,800 officers. General populace: 1 person shot for every 35,325 citizens. Again, the cops shoot more people per officer than the citizens do per citizen. Take guns away from cops. Obviously they don't know how to handle them properly.
Here's another one. 2.72 million people in Chicago. 77 people shot by non-cops over that 4th weekend. Cops shot 5 and there are roughly 14,000 officers in Chicago. So since the % would be so minuscule for the population let's look more at ratio. Cops: 1 person shot for every 2,800 officers. General populace: 1 person shot for every 35,325 citizens. Again, the cops shoot more people per officer than the citizens do per citizen. Take guns away from cops. Obviously they don't know how to handle them properly.
You fail to take into account that cops tend to go to places where there's an increased likelihood of being shot at while the general population usually does exactly the opposite.
Looks like many on here are already there... why is that?
We remember the past unlike some people who like to forget about it, how governments take rights away for the average person and make the few in charge, the elite. Who are above the law and don't have to follow the rules made by them for the average person they are ruling.
Looks like many on here are already there... why is that?
I really don't consider myself to be a rabid gun owner. I have some and I like to shoot but I distrust many of our politicians in this country who appear to think that "Feel Good" laws are the way to get what they want. There are a vast number of laws concerning the ownership of firearms which are already on the books. A number of them actually make sense, for example we really don't want a convicted murderer to be able to have access to a firearm. Additionally, we don't need for an abusive spouse to have access to one either, especially if there is a restraining order on the individual. Last but not least, do we want a person who has been held for psychological observation to have access? Each of these items is already sufficient to bar an individual from purchasing a firearm. However, that presumes the information is entered into the National datbase which is used for background checks. It also presumes the local law enforcement unit actually bothers to enter the information which doesn't always happen. The inidvidual who was responsible for the Virginia Tech shootings wouldn't have had his information in the files because HIPAA Laws would have prevented his medical records from being made accessible to law enforcement. The states are actually supposed to report this type of information but very few comply with the mandate. One last point and then I'll go, I would say that most shooters realize that making "Straw Purchases" is illegal. In fact if you answer yes to that question on the paperwork you are required to fill out when purchasing a firearm, you are disqualified from buying it. Even if you are purchasing the gun as a present for your spouse or another member of your family. In fact one person I work with made the mistake of doing this by accident and was not allowed to make his purchase. Does this mean that ex Mayor Bloomberg is guilty of a Federal crime of conspiracy to make illegal purchases of firearms in states other than that in which he resides?
Jim
[This message has been edited by J-Holland (edited 07-08-2014).]
City's in the USA all have gang areas that just don't care who is around when they start shooting,(N St.louis,E St.louis) Is the area I grew up around and Is the reason I have the right to carry.
I wonder how many of these people that were shot we should even care about?.
Sounds harsh but gang on gang crap?, no sympathy, criminal shot by citizen or police while doing criminal things?, again no sympathy. Innocent bystander?, all kinds of sympathy.
Disagreed. Guns are a poor substitute for education and decent behavior. If being armed is what it takes for a society to be polite then this doesn't reflect well on that society at all.
Regarding the thread topic: I think that local or regional gun control is useless in the US at this point. It's like trying to create a gun-free zone in a Baghdad neighborhood.
Then you fail at understanding basic human psychology. I wonder why all the nations on earth don't give up their nukes? Maybe, it has something to do with preventing violence? Maybe, armed otherwise victims, prevent violence? Society is fragile, spend some time around criminals and you will understand you can't rationalize, compromise, or do anything to change the way they think and act. That is the single biggest flaw in liberalism, the belief there are no bad people, just misunderstood people.
You fail to take into account that cops tend to go to places where there's an increased likelihood of being shot at while the general population usually does exactly the opposite.
Sorry, I figured with the previous posts being sarcastic and the smiley I used the sarcastic theme would be assumed to have been carried through.
Then you fail at understanding basic human psychology. I wonder why all the nations on earth don't give up their nukes? Maybe, it has something to do with preventing violence? Maybe, armed otherwise victims, prevent violence? Society is fragile, spend some time around criminals and you will understand you can't rationalize, compromise, or do anything to change the way they think and act. That is the single biggest flaw in liberalism, the belief there are no bad people, just misunderstood people.
i agree totally funny how noone wil make a commet about it cause the truth hurts !
