Meanwhile in Chicago

[Anti Federalist]

The Bolsheviks and Jacobins really don't want to go down the road of assigning ethnicity to who the killers are.

They are gonna lose that fight.



Many El Pasos and Daytons in Chicago Every Weekend: More than 50 Shot, 6 Killed in Windy City

https://www.breitbart.com/crime/2019...ed-windy-city/

WARNER TODD HUSTON 5 Aug 2019

In Chicago this past weekend, more than 50 people were shot and six killed in a three-day period. With the media focus on the shootings in El Paso and Dayton, bloody Chicago continues to add up the bodies.

As the media reports about the investigations into the shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, the carnage in Chicago continues unabated, and goes nearly unreported by the national press.

As each hour ticked down over the first weekend in August, the shooting and death toll steadily rose until Chicago’s ABC 7 reported on Monday morning that 51 people were shot and seven killed in the previous 72 hours. That number was later upped to 68 shot as the Chicago Police Department delivered its full report.

Chicago Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi insisted that the city needs some reform.

“Below is the sound that Chicago needs to change its ways on how we handle gun offenders,” he tweeted. “Audio from the tragic shooting at 18th & Kildare yesterday shows that criminals have no deterrent to carrying illegal guns in our city and this is what residents and police are up against”:

One of the weekend’s shootings found seven wounded at once when gang bangers drove by a city park and opened fire.

So, as the media continues to cover El Paso and Dayton, the carnage in Chicago continues to climb. This weekend’s bloodletting brings the city’s total to 1,642 people shot with 278 of them dead from their wounds. The shootings added to the homicides of other means reveals that 305 people have been murdered in Chicago thus far this year.

[Cap]

Wedge issues aside. Is the implication that we should pass stricter gun laws? Aren't you just pouring gas on the fire?

ETA: Or justify a bigger police state? This argument I presume you are using is not helping to preserve our 2nd amendment.

[Anti Globalist]

Yep and the media didn't talk about it all. All eyes were on El Paso and Dayton.

[Anti Federalist]

Wedge issues aside. Is the implication that we should pass stricter gun laws? Aren't you just pouring gas on the fire?

My point is simple: contrary to the overheated and out of control media spin and shrieking, white men with guns are not the significant risk nor causation of criminal mayhem and murder in the United States.

[Anti Globalist]

Wedge issues aside. Is the implication that we should pass stricter gun laws? Aren't you just pouring gas on the fire?

We already have 20,000 federal gun laws on the books already. Anyone who thinks more gun laws will solve the problem is clueless.

[Cap]

We already have 20,000 federal gun laws on the books already. Anyone who thinks more gun laws will solve the problem is clueless.

Then what are you saying? How is bringing this up helping the second amendment? It's not. It's a wedge issue.

[Anti Federalist]

Aren't you just pouring gas on the fire?

That's a good question...am I?

I suppose maybe I am, in way.

I suppose I am a collapsatarian of a different stripe.

This current situation is untenable...it cannot stand. So my way of thinking is that a separation is required, now, before we kill each other.

By stoking the flames, maybe that can be made more clear.

ETA: Or justify a bigger police state? This argument I presume you are using is not helping to preserve our 2nd amendment.

Looks like El Jefe Naranja is going to attack the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments to attack the 2nd.

If you wanted to decrease crime in Chicago and elsewhere, the answer is, of course, more armed citizens able to defend themselves.

[CCTelander]

That's a good question...am I?

I suppose maybe I am, in way.

I suppose I am a collapsatarian of a different stripe.

This current situation is untenable...it cannot stand. So my way of thinking is that a separation is required, now, before we kill each other.

By stoking the flames, maybe that can be made more clear.



Looks like El Jefe Naranja is going to attack the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments to attack the 2nd.

If you wanted to decrease crime in Chicago and elsewhere, the answer is, of course, more armed citizens able to defend themselves.

Exactly.

Chicago already has some of the strictest, most draconian "gun control" (victim disarmament) laws in the country, and, as is almost always the case, some of the highest violent crime rates to go right along with it. While it is true that correlation does not always equal causation, in this case there is abundant empirical evidence to prove a cause and effect relationship.

Gun grabbers are well aware of that fact. Their agenda is most definitely NOT about reducing violent crime.

[AngryCanadian]

I am sure video games must be blamed for whats happening in Chicago.

[dannno]

Then what are you saying? How is bringing this up helping the second amendment? It's not. It's a wedge issue.

The left is convinced that every mass shooter is a white supremacist, or, at minimum, white, and that we need to pass gun laws to stop the tide of white supremacy and white gun violence that puts everybody in danger. Because the media told them so. The truth is whites are slightly under-represented in mass shootings.. and practically non-existent when it comes to overall gun violence.

First you have to tackle the dominant hoax. Then that subtracts credibility from the perpetrators of the dominant hoax. Then you can tell the real story, and what the real solutions are. For example, Chicago already has very strict gun laws, and they don't work. Places that have less strict gun laws are much safer.

[Cap]

Yeah, I don't think incorporating the left/right paradigm into this, by showing the average Joe "even more gun related deaths", to be a solid strategy. But then again, what is it they say divide and conquer? But that seems so passe, so yeah maybe, but again, I have doubts.

[specsaregood]

If you wanted to decrease crime in Chicago and elsewhere, the answer is, of course, more armed citizens able to defend themselves.

More armed citizens alone will not do it. You also need more pro-defense laws (or elimination of restrictive laws) so that an armed citizen defending his life, others or their property are not charged with crimes. similar to the stand your ground laws.

[TheCount]

Terrorism is political violence.

Gang warfare is not.


That's why the reactions are different.

[Superfluous Man]

I am sure video games must be blamed for whats happening in Chicago.

That would be like blaming porn for genocide via miscegenation.

[dannno]

Terrorism is political violence.

Gang warfare is not.


That's why the reactions are different.

Which is a bigger problem, by the numbers, and which gets more media attention, by the numbers?

[TheCount]

Which is a bigger problem, by the numbers, and which gets more media attention, by the numbers?

Congratulations, you've discovered that nobody cares about the lives of poor blacks who live in slums. You are now an SJW.

[dannno]

Congratulations, you've discovered that nobody cares about the lives of poor blacks who live in slums. You are now an SJW.

I care.

[jmdrake]

My point is simple: contrary to the overheated and out of control media spin and shrieking, white men with guns are not the significant risk nor causation of criminal mayhem and murder in the United States.

It's easy to avoid gun violence in the dangerous parts of Chicago. Stay out of the dangerous parts of Chicago. What makes a newsworthy "mass shooting" is when it happens places where you don't expect it such as a Walmart or a ball park or whatever. A better argument to make, IMO, is that while the Texas shooter was a Trump supporter, the Ohio shooter was a liberal democrat. That and all of these shooters are on psychotropic drugs. What's happening in Chicago is a crime problem. These other shootings are a legal drug problem. It just so happens that white people are more likely to have health plans that will let them buy suicide/homicide pills. Something else I wonder. Why are these mass shooters taken alive? The cop thinks Michael Brown is dangerous so he guns him down, but some white guy shoots up a Waffle House and the cops buy him a burger before taking him to jail. I don't get that.

[Brian4Liberty]

Terrorism is political violence.

Gang warfare is not.

That's why the reactions are different.

How many mass shooters have a coherent political goal, and how many are suicidal lunatics (who have probably taken pharmaceutical drugs)?

Gang warfare is political, usually at an extremely local level. MS-13 is international. And that reminds me to start a new thread...

[TheCount]

I care.

Cool.

[Cap]

It's easy to avoid gun violence in the dangerous parts of Chicago. Stay out of the dangerous parts of Chicago. What makes a newsworthy "mass shooting" is when it happens places where you don't expect it such as a Walmart or a ball park or whatever. A better argument to make, IMO, is that while the Texas shooter was a Trump supporter, the Ohio shooter was a liberal democrat. That and all of these shooters are on psychotropic drugs. What's happening in Chicago is a crime problem. These other shootings are a legal drug problem. It just so happens that white people are more likely to have health plans that will let them buy suicide/homicide pills. Something else I wonder. Why are these mass shooters taken alive? The cop think Michael Brown is dangerous so he guns him down, but some white guy shoots up a Waffle House and they the cops buy him a burger before taking him to jail. I don't get that.

I have hope, common sense is not dead.

[TheCount]

Gang warfare is political, usually at an extremely local level. MS-13 is international. And that reminds me to start a new thread...

Oh yes, please tell us more about the politics of MS-13 in South Chicago.

[Brian4Liberty]

Oh yes, please tell us more about the politics of MS-13 in South Chicago.

I didn’t say or imply that MS-13 is involved in Chicago. That was meant to acknowledge that not all gangs are purely local.

[Anti Federalist]

Terrorism is political violence.

Gang warfare is not.


That's why the reactions are different.

You don't think that the people suffering under gang warfare are not terrorized?

Is not violence directed at a political end? (snitches get stitches)

[Anti Federalist]

It's easy to avoid gun violence in the dangerous parts of Chicago. Stay out of the dangerous parts of Chicago. What makes a newsworthy "mass shooting" is when it happens places where you don't expect it such as a Walmart or a ball park or whatever. A better argument to make, IMO, is that while the Texas shooter was a Trump supporter, the Ohio shooter was a liberal democrat. That and all of these shooters are on psychotropic drugs. What's happening in Chicago is a crime problem. These other shootings are a legal drug problem. It just so happens that white people are more likely to have health plans that will let them buy suicide/homicide pills. Something else I wonder. Why are these mass shooters taken alive? The cop thinks Michael Brown is dangerous so he guns him down, but some white guy shoots up a Waffle House and the cops buy him a burger before taking him to jail. I don't get that.

That is a good argument, I won't deny that.

[Brian4Liberty]

You don't think that the people suffering under gang warfare are not terrorized?

Is not violence directed at a political end? (snitches get stitches)

A lot of gangs use killing an innocent random person as an initiation before becoming a member. That would certainly count as terror on the public, without much of a goal.

Killing snitches and shutting up the neighborhood would be a “political” goal, in a raw sense.

[Anti Federalist]

A lot of gangs use killing an innocent random person as an initiation before becoming a member. That would certainly count as terror on the public, without much of a goal.

Killing snitches and shutting up the neighborhood would be a “political” goal, in a raw sense.

That's the way I see it.

[Origanalist]

[CoastieInColorado]

Now wait a damn minute, the MSM and Omar tell me this is a white man terrorism problem, and I see a whole lot of mostly non white men there...

[Swordsmyth]

Congratulations, you've discovered that nobody cares about the lives of poor blacks who live in slums. You are now an SJW.

Conservatives have always cared about all murders, it is the leftists like yourself who only care if they can advance their goals with it.