Comments

1
Those damn white NRA gun owners in Chicago need to stop shooting everyone.
2
"While the city continues to see reductions in crime and violence, there's obviously much more to be done, and we continue to be challenged by lax state and federal gun laws," Chicago police spokesman Adam Collins tells the paper.

Doesn't Seattle operate under those same federal gun laws?
3
I was curious how many comments it would take before the inevitable race card was played, and to my non-surprise Lucifer's spawn took it with comment #1.
4
That's absolutely bloody sad. I just saw a piece in Chicago Magazine about how remarkable it is that the crime rate has plunged. Alas, this comes along.

509 murders in 12', 421 in 13' and 58 so far in 14'. Senseless. Every shooting/killing is a tragedy.
5
Remind us again who the mayor is in this peaceful city...and whose Chief of Staff he was.

When was the last time the "hometown" of a sitting president became worse and more violent during his term in office?

Maybe, it's time for Obama to admit that like an old girlfriend he just used Chicago to get what he wanted and now that he's got what he wanted he's never, ever coming back again. ...and even worse, he's forced her into a bad relationship with his buddy, Rahm.

Study Chicago, America.

Pray Obama leaves you more like Hawaii (mom & grandma) than Chicago (friends from freshman year).
6
Meanwhile, Vermont, with its lax as hell gun laws has some of the lowest gun crime rates in America while Chicago with its Draconian gun laws has horrible gun violence.
Not to mention that Russia, with its ABUSRDLY STRICT gun laws, even by European standards, has an order of magnitude more gun murders than the US.
And the fact is gun crime is actually down around America. It peaked in 1993 and has been declining since. Source: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/0…
And gun control laws have racist origins. Source: https://www.firearmsandliberty.com/crame…
And to all anti-gun people I ask this: would you have taken THIS MAN'S gun away? http://31.media.tumblr.com/856a27deb76d7…
7
closest weekend to a full moon.
8
@1: I doubt that a majority, or even a significant percentage, of the participants in Chicago's ongoing gang war are members of the NRA.
9
@5 - Like most major US cities, crime (including gun-related murder) rates in Chicago have been steadily declining since the early 90s.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/09/26/c…
10
Race card? Oh I see! So if the police had pulled over 36 black males for say, speeding on Lake Shore Drive, in a 36 hour time slot, could we also say correlation not causation?
11
"Like most major US cities, crime (including gun-related murder) rates in Chicago have been steadily declining since the early 90s."

I guess incarceration works.
12
@6 from your link, the things thought to contribute to lower gun crimes are a shrinking market for crack cocaine, a larger number of incarcerations, greater access to abortion and less use of lead in gasoline. In fact, the link you posted shows that ALL crime is down, even non-gun related. So you are presenting kind of a straw-man here. I guess you mean to say that crime is down because we have more guns now than in 1993. Or that since crime is in decline since 1993, we should be allowed unfettered access to firearms. But neither of these viewpoints are supported by the Pew Research Poll you referenced.
13

Sounds like Rahm Emanuel is not enough of a strong man to quell the warring families.

And how come almost no one mentions that?

14
@6: GORSH! A small state with relatively low rates of poverty and population density has lower murder rates than a massive city with a serious urban poverty problem? Say it ain't so!
Maybe Chicago's gun laws would be "Draconian" if they actually empowered police to search incoming cars for illegal guns. At present they're actually just "strict in theory".
15
Culture had nothing to do with it because the ghetto, like the Stranger, doesn't hold itself accountable for its own actions.
16

#14

Moscow density:

Density 11,865.4 /sq mi

Chicago density:

Density 11,864.4/sq mi

17
Probably just a statistical anomaly. They happen all the time.
18
Sadly, everyone here was expecting this to make up for the winter lull in violent crime. 80+ inches of snow and -15 wind chills for a few months does a lot to keep people indoors. Last weekend was the first time in ages that it's been 70 degrees and sunny. Some cynics here were placing bets on the shooting numbers for the first warm days of spring.

That being said, our police force has implemented some perhaps promising new tactics to combat gang violence in the neighborhoods, such as "custom notifications." When a gang related crime happens the police now canvass the addresses of gang members and their families who might be involved and warn them about what's up. It does seem to have a positive effect on retaliation and keeping people off the streets when there's a known danger to them. I'd imagine they are making a lot of house calls this week.
19
If any one is interested to know more about the dynamics of Chicago's gang violence and drug trade economy, this is a really good article: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-17…
20
@12
Where did I say gun crime is down because more guns are available? I didn't. What I was obviously alluding to is that guns are not the problem but rather socio-economic factors. If all we had to do was create more gun laws to reduce gun crime, Russia would have less gun violence, but we see the opposite. Never in history have gun laws been proven to actually reduce gun crime. Source: http://www.mediaite.com/online/new-study…
21
@16
Exactly. If gun laws did anything Russia would be a gun violence free heaven on Earth while Switzerland, , would be the drive-by capital of Europe...and yet we see the opposite. Sources: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-2137991…
http://www.pri.org/stories/2013-01-16/gu…
22
"80+ inches of snow and -15 wind chills for a few months does a lot to keep people indoors. "

Plus gangbangers can't snowboard.
23
@21: are the gun laws strict de jure or de facto? If a corrupt state has extremely strict gun laws but no enforcement, I'm not sure that helps your point.
24
@21: As I've said before, if you don't plan to analyze it systematically (accounting for laws, culture, poverty, effective government, etc.), you are just mentally masturbating. Throwing out a cherry-picked data point helps nobody, especially when the other side can counter with their own cherry-picked data point. In the end, your argument will be about whether your cherry-picked data point is more valid than theirs.

You are wasting everyone's time. Think about the methods of gun violence. Ask 'how' and 'why' gun laws would help or hurt. Use your fucking brain.

I grade your arguments so far: D- (will only convince morons).
25
@8: A surprising number see themselves as Libertarians. I shit you not.
26
@16: If you actually read what I wrote it would be trivially obvious that I was speaking of the comparison between Vermont and Chicago. JBITSMFOTP.

@24: Exactly. collectivism_sucks, I put this example to you.
Winter in Phoenix, AZ, is warmer than summer in Sitka, AK. Therefore, by your logic, winter causes warmer weather than summer.
I will explain your fatal error in large unfriendly letters so there can be no misunderstanding. THE MISTAKE YOU ARE MAKING IS ASSUMING THAT ALL VARIABLES BESIDES THE ONE YOU CARE ABOUT CAN BE SAFELY IGNORED. This is what passes for reasoning among many of the uneducated, sadly.
27
@24 & 26
The whole "will only convince morons" ad hominem is proof that you are losing this argument...or, better yet, the opinions of the American people is proof that you are losing this argument. The people don't want stronger gun control laws. Source: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/201…

The fact is, there is not a single shred of evidence that tougher gun control laws result in less gun violence. Some places with lax gun laws (Switzerland, Vermont, Seattle) have less gun violence while some places with strict gun laws (Russia, Brazil, Chicago) have more.

Things like socio-economics have a much greater impact on violent crime, including gun crime, than the accessibility of legal guns.

These are facts...I understand people like you have a hard time understanding facts, but that's fine because people like you are in the minority (as the link I provided proves)

So, you're arguments can be rated a F at best in that they will only convince those who have already drunk the statist Kool-aid. But by all means, continue your childish rants. I find them endlessly amusing.
28
@27: HAH! You did it again!
YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM MEANS.
It translates literally to "argument to the man" and refers to a line of argument focusing not on the point it intends to rebut but rather on the person delivering the point. Saying that an argument "will only convince morons" is NOT IN ANY WAY OR UNDER ANY INTERPRETATION an example of argumentum ad hominem. You are wrong. You have been wrong many times on the use of this term, and you obstinately continue to be wrong. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. "Wrong" meaning "not correct". W-R-O-N-G. That spells wrong!

Now that the word "wrong" as written has lost any meaning to the eye of the reader, and speaking of things that are wrong, I shall move on to your actual argument (as it were).

"there is not a single shred of evidence that tougher gun control laws result in less gun violence"
In fact, a study done in the wake of Boston's enactment of gun-control legislation in 1975 found that the law was followed by a significant decrease in some categories of violent crime and that the law was likely the cause of this decrease (source). Want more? You got more.
A 2010 study found that handgun control laws significantly reduced firearms suicides but not homicides, and that restricting sale rather than possession of handguns had a stronger effect. A 2007 study found that stricter gun control and disarmament campaigns significantly reduced injury and death by firearm in Brazil.

"The people don't want stronger gun control laws."
Actually, the picture is more complex than you claim it to be. According to a Gallup poll, a strong plurality of Americans are okay with gun laws as they are now, and of the remainder about twice as many want the laws tightened as want them loosened. A CBS poll finds support for tougher gun laws to be much higher, reaching 49%, as opposed to the only 12% who want weaker gun laws. Additionally, the CBS poll confirmed that an overwhelming majority of Americans still support universal background checks.

Finally, you're not going to convince anyone if you're incapable of correctly using "your" and "you're" in sentences. Fuck sake, that's even worse than your habitual offenses against the phrase "ad hominem".
29
@27: Again, you failed to provide a systematic response. Have fun mentally masturbating. I'm not a politician. I've owned guns. I was trained and qualified (in the Navy) to use guns in a safe manner. But I am not stupid enough to believe your bullshit. If you want to give a systematic and comprehensive explanation of gun violence, then do so. I'm not going to fall for any bullshit.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.