• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

99 shot in one week, 24 dead

SouthernDemocrat said:
Just for some historical perspective:

600px-Chicago_Murder_Rates.png


Murder rates in Chicago are high still, but lower than they used to be. The problem is that they are still considerably higher than most cites by quite a margin. Moreover, the appearance that Chicago is so dangerous is just bad for the city.
Click to expand...

Kindly provide internet link to this graphic. Otherwise for all I know you could have made it up.
 
dimensionallava said:
by "democrat run areas" you just mean major cities right?
Click to expand...

Democrat run areas.

BTW what that chart of the most dangerous cities prove is that gun control laws really aren't very relevant in determining whether areas are safe. In other words, gun control has very little to do with controlling violent crime
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
1. After any mass shooting its a given the president is going to speak no matter who they are.

2. Democrats run practically ever major city in the country and always have. Cities that are safe are ran by Democrats. Cities with high crime rates again are ran by Democrats. Successful cities are ran by Democrats and failing cities are ran by Democrats. Oklahoma City is the only city in the country I can think of that isn't ran by Democrats.
Click to expand...

Sure the President will speak and it is good. But they should also say something true and intelligent. Don't you think?
 
TurtleDude said:
Democrat run areas.

BTW what that chart of the most dangerous cities prove is that gun control laws really aren't very relevant in determining whether areas are safe. In other words, gun control has very little to do with controlling violent crime
Click to expand...

so you mean major cities... but you just want to use the violence in americas inner cities as a political talking point, and you would actually prefer crime to go up there
 
joG said:
Sure the President will speak and it is good. But they should also say something true and intelligent. Don't you think?
Click to expand...

Bush hasn't been the president in 8 years so why keep bringing him up? ;)
 
dimensionallava said:
so you mean major cities... but you just want to use the violence in americas inner cities as a political talking point, and you would actually prefer crime to go up there
Click to expand...

Merely noting that gun control is not effective crime control and those who push it know its not
 
This is cyclical. If it is indeed primarily due to gang wars, then approach it like a war of attrition. Let the thugs weed themselves out to where their numbers are manageable once again. Worked for the mafia in the 30's and 40's and with the violent biker gangs of the 70's as well. Attrition takes its toll and the law abiding elements of society need not devote as much time and resources to combat it.. :shrug:
 
TurtleDude said:
Merely noting that gun control is not effective crime control and those who push it know its not
Click to expand...

yeah but you dont care about crime in the inner city, you live in a gated community, and you would probably be too afraid to even visit one of these neighborhoods, you just want to cry about your guns.

You could also say a lack of church attendance is the reason crime is so high.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Bush hasn't been the president in 8 years so why keep bringing him up? ;)
Click to expand...

Now you have really surprised me! I would never have suspected you to have recognized he said true and intelligent things. ;)
 
PeteEU said:
And yet it is only the 30th in the top 100 cities when it comes to murders......
Click to expand...

I guess the should work on that....
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Actually, he talks about gun deaths in general all the time. Even when he gives a speech in the aftermath of a mass shooting, he always points out that most gun deaths are in the inner cities. For example, in January he made this statement:

" Every single year, more than 30,000 Americans have their lives cut short by guns -- 30,000. Suicides. Domestic violence. Gang shootouts. Accidents. Hundreds of thousands of Americans have lost brothers and sisters, or buried their own children. Many have had to learn to live with a disability, or learned to live without the love of their life. "

Here is another quote:

"“Our unalienable right to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness were stripped from college kids in Blacksburg and Santa Barbara, and from high schoolers in Columbine, and from first-graders in Newtown. First-graders. And from every family who never imagined that their loved one would be taken from their lives by a bullet of a gun,” Obama said, pausing to wipe away tears. “Every time I think about those kids, it gets me mad. And by the way, it happens on the streets of Chicago everyday.”

So whether one agrees with Obama on guns or not, its simply not correct at all that he doesn't talk about inner city violence or what happens in Chicago.
Click to expand...

You prove TD's point. This high murder rate serves Obama's agenda. He uses the high murder rate to tout reasons to call for more laws while ignoring the fact that Chicago is totally run by Democrats and has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. He was a senator for Illinois so he should be familiar with the problems in Chicago.
 
NonoBadDog said:
You prove TD's point. This high murder rate serves Obama's agenda. He uses the high murder rate to tout reasons to call for more laws while ignoring the fact that Chicago is totally run by Democrats and has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. He was a senator for Illinois so he should be familiar with the problems in Chicago.
Click to expand...

they also have some of lowest of church attendance, since we all know democrats hate christians that must be apart of his "agenda" too right?
 
dimensionallava said:
yeah but you dont care about crime in the inner city, you live in a gated community, and you would probably be too afraid to even visit one of these neighborhoods, you just want to cry about your guns.

You could also say a lack of church attendance is the reason crime is so high.
Click to expand...

You are making stuff up-I live on a small farm. the gates we have are to keep the horses out of the cornfields.

you just want to whine about gun owners when its leftwing policies that are mainly responsible for high crime rates
 
dimensionallava said:
they also have some of lowest of church attendance, since we all know democrats hate christians that must be apart of his "agenda" too right?
Click to expand...

You go from shootings to churches. Nice deflection......not really.
 
TurtleDude said:
You are making stuff up-I live on a small farm. the gates we have are to keep the horses out of the cornfields.

you just want to whine about gun owners when its leftwing policies that are mainly responsible for high crime rates
Click to expand...

So your saying if hypothetically restrictive gun laws were proven beynd the shadow of a doubt to reduce crime you would be all for them? right?
 
dimensionallava said:
its the same logic your using... who is behind this secret agenda anyway? is it the gays?
Click to expand...

Now you went from shootings to churches to gays. What is next, racist ice cream? Focus grasshopper.
 
Patrickt said:
"Nearly 100 people have been shot in Chicago in less than a week, pushing the number of shooting victims so far this year to more than 2,500 — about 800 more than this time last year, according to data kept by the Tribune.

"Between last Friday afternoon and early Thursday, at least 99 people were shot in the city, 24 of them fatally. At least nine people were killed on Monday alone, the deadliest day in Chicago in 13 years, according to Tribune data. Among the wounded that day was a 10-year-old boy shot in the back as he played on his front porch in Lawndale.


"The number of shooting victims in Chicago stood at 2,514 Thursday morning. At this time last year, 1,725 people had been shot. The city has not seen this level of gun violence since the 1990s, a trend the Police Department has blamed on lax gun laws and feuding gang factions."
Nearly 100 people shot in Chicago in less than a week - Chicago Tribune

I realize this is just a local story. It doesn't merit national attention as do some that get the president's attention. Of course, Chicago is noted for it's lax gun laws. Chicago is a rolling tragedy and no seems particularly concerned.
Click to expand...

Chicago has lax gun laws? What?


Sent from my grapefruit using smoke signals.
 
NonoBadDog said:
Tell you what, racist ice cream? Neapolitan.
Click to expand...

you said high murder rates serve obamas agenda, who is behind this agenda you speak of, is it just him is hillary clinton involved too? what about king of norway is he in on it?
 
dimensionallava said:
So your saying if hypothetically restrictive gun laws were proven beynd the shadow of a doubt to reduce crime you would be all for them? right?
Click to expand...

no-just like I would not support getting rid of the fourth amendment or fifth amendment even though doing so would clearly decrease crime. see that is the problem the bannerrhoid movement has. They have only ONE argument that has any validity. and that is the allegation that restricting the rights of HONEST people will objectively and substantially decrease crime. but that does not win the argument because we have equally valid arguments that are not eliminated EVEN if you CAN prove that the laws you want would decrease crime substantially. Those include constitutional rights.

but we need not get to that stage. The bannerrhoid movement has never been able to establish the schemes it wants reduce crime. Ten years of the Clinton gun ban and no proof it decreased violent crime. 23 years of the brady bill and no proof it decreased violent crime. Gun bans in big cities-no proof they decreased crime.

so the Bannerrhoids lose
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom