Barfmaker: On Sunday, almost 200 people took to the streets of Chicago in an anti-violence rallyImpressive.
dittybopper: It's got nothing to do with melanin content, and everything to do with how cultural values are transmitted.
kg2095: You have the highest rate of firearm related deaths and injuries in the developed world. And not just by a little bit but by a truly shocking amount. Just look up some statistics for rates of gun related deaths in the US compared to Canada just over the border.
Silly Jesus: kg2095: DaCaptain19: wee: Darn good thing guns are so hard to get in Illinois...THIS. When I moved to IL (Chicago) it was a culture shock. Having lived in Kansas for 8 years prior, I had multiple firearms and had a conceal-carry card.Which means nothing in IL, the ONLY state with no way to conceal-carry, you need a FOID card to even get a shotgun shell at Walmart...and yet hghest murder rate in the U.S.Sh*t...at the very least allow the law-abiding citizens to carry. An armed society is a polite society.You have the highest rate of firearm related deaths and injuries in the developed world. And not just by a little bit but by a truly shocking amount. Just look up some statistics for rates of gun related deaths in the US compared to Canada just over the border.I think there must be something wrong with people who love guns so much. They are nothing more than tools designed to kill. If you need such a tool then what or who are you planning to kill?As far as carrying them for protection, that is the biggest load of codswallop I have heard in my life. When was the last time any of you gun advocates ever needed to protect yourself with a gun? If the answer is anything other than never then where you live is truly farked up.Approximately 70% of the murders in the U.S. are committed by members of approximately 6% of the population. Perhaps that group is the difference.
natas6.0: why can't we do that here?
Huck Chaser: fluffy2097: And in reality it'sA guy walks into a convenience store, points a gun at the cashier, and begins screaming about needing meth money.A bystander with a concealed carry shoots and kills the meth addict.Alternately, the cashier reaches under the counter and pulls out a shotgun and kills the meth head.We've been talking about murders. You described a robbery. The vast majority of murders in Chicago are gang-related, and thus don't fit your description of "reality."But I'll ignore that for a moment and respond to you anyway. If people who would otherwise would use intimidation to commit a robbery (e.g. the meth addict from your scenario) start fearing that a bystander or the cashier might kill them, they may start killing those bystanders and cashiers preemptively, before they have a time to react, let alone fight back.Beyond that, I would rather hand over my wallet and phone than take a human life, so I don't support responding to robberies with deadly force anyway.
MrEricSir: hundreddollarman: /Criminals really don't care about gun control laws. And if they have a gun, I damn sure want a means to be able to shoot back.Funny how many people say this, yet how often do you hear about some lone hero taking out the bad guys?Oh... never? Hmm. And yet how often do you hear about some dumbass wannabe hero shooting himself, his spouse, etc? All the time? Yeah.Maybe it's time to find a better excuse why guns should still be legal.
redmid17: Huck Chaser: MoronLessOff: Pass concealed carry in IL.Honest question: how would that help? The gang members have proven without a shadow of a doubt that they have no problem attacking, shooting, and killing other armed people (e.g. other gang members), so how would lawful citizens carrying guns change that?It probably wouldn't solve much. Most of the people who applied for and were granted a CCW probably wouldn't live in the areas affected. That said, I'd at least like to have the option to carry in IL, if not Chicago, and I don't even own a handgun. There's a reason 49 states have CCW laws on the books.
DaCaptain19: Vectron: Tough one! How will white people solve this?We're thinking about putting up a wall around the South Side. Kind of like the Berlin Wall. Shut out the blacks - they are the problem, not the solution.
jonny99: I suppose it doesn't matter that this spike in gun violence comes *2 years after* Chicago's handgun ban was struck down by the supreme court?
Fark It: "PROBLEM: HOW DO WE GET ILLEGAL GUNS OFF CHICAGO STREETS?"They're framing it as a gun control question.
Fark It: "PROBLEM: HOW DO WE GET ILLEGAL GUNS OFF CHICAGO STREETS?"
Timmy the Tumor: Yeah, because all of the 400 homicides so far this year involved guns--guns owned by registered owners."Wanting to reduce homicides" does not equal "gun control ideas" subs.
LaughingRadish: What you don't know is that you're referring to the infamous Kellerman Paper. That was proven to be a fraud See Link
MrEricSir: clyph: MrEricSir: I'm not the one who thinks he's Bruce Willis.Nope. Just another gun-grabbing utopian idealist who blames inanimate objects for social problems.No, all I'm saying is that this "guns are how I defend myself" argument is hilariously stupid. Take your head out of your ass and look around -- you are not a lone hero in an action movie. Statistically, you're more likely to injure yourself than save anyone.
ProfessorOhki: You walk in and, seeing your lover with someone else (let's say not at your home for the sake of argument), go into a murderous rage.
Dimensio: redmid17: Suicides are almost a non-starter. Gun suicides are less than 5% of the attempts but are 95% effective, whereas drugs ODs are something like 75 or 80% but are much, much less effective (Nonetheless, substantially reducing the rate of firearm ownership may prove effective in reducing the suicide rate of the United States to levels observed in France, Belgium or even Japan. Is such an outcome not worth the effort?
jonny99: You're getting closer... clearly you would like to keep drawing the line at correlations, like the rates of single parenthood or poverty in black communities, and say "I don't think it's because their black, but it is a trait of their community" - without answering the question "why is this the case?" The answer is pervasive, systemic racial inequality. But that's much more threatening to your sense of propriety than "cultural traits", so you'll keep finding reasons to deny it or project racism onto others.
jonny99: Step 1: display a chart and imply that because a community is a majority white it has less crimeStep 2: when the relative poverty levels are pointed out, "politely" suggest that it is race and poverty that are linked, not poverty and crimeStep 3: suggest that "culture" is the factor that mediates between race and poverty (ie: a particular race suffers poverty, their culture is therefore inferior)I suppose you think that the ability to talk "around" what you are trying to say is a component of cultural superiority.How does it feel to be an apologist for racism?
umad: Huck Chaser: Fark It: That's your choice, you don't get to make that for other people.You're right, but I do get to vote for people who do get to make that choice.Then enjoy strengthening the Republican party by making their one true wedge issue relevant. People keep voting for them because they don't trust people like you. Want the Republicans to go away? Then STFU about guns.
jonny99: bim1154: jonny99: I suppose it doesn't matter that this spike in gun violence comes *2 years after* Chicago's handgun ban was struck down by the supreme court?/Chicagoan//who doesn't own or want to own a gunFor a "Chicagoan" you don't keep up do you? That's o.k., you can go walk the walk with Father Pfleger and his crowd.Thanks for your permission to have an opinion - I have no desire to live in an armed society - just as in global politics, the answer can only be found in de-escalation. Gun people love to ask how banning guns is working out for Chicago, but the truth is no one can answer that question because they're not really banned, can be trafficked in from other places that hold the distribution of firearms sacrosanct. I don't have to walk with anyone - I just choose to walk without a deadly weapon on me, and I would prefer that as few people as possible in my immediate vicinity have one.If you think that is because I am too naive and trusting of people you would be incorrect - I have no faith that anyone who feels the need to carry deadly force with them at all times is well adjusted enough to use it responsibly. So many Fark threads read like Penthouse forum fantasies that replace farking with a barely-contained vigilante rage, just waiting for the opportunity to be in the right place at the right time to visit violence on someone (usually of a different race than themselves) "justifiably". Not my deal.
jonny99: Silly Jesus: jonny99: smitty04: Secret Master of All Flatulence: DaCaptain19: You don't live in Chicago, do you? Nope, if you did you'd be thinking the same thing all us Chicagoans think but don't say.Nope, I don't live in Chicago. That being said: I've dealt with a LOT of scumbags over the years. Not just gangmembers, but baby rapers, wife beaters, and just about every other kind of criminal out there. The color of the skin of the perpetrator is meaningless...it's what they, as an individual, have done. And I can say, with some certainty, that douchebaggery is not the province of any one skin color, socioeconomic status, religious belief, or geographic locale.[www.chicagonow.com image 583x302]Then why is homicide rate so low in Edison Park?Since you think this chart tells the whole story - you might want to consider the poverty level in Edison Park - that's the killer, not "race".Race and poverty, among other factors, are quite strongly connected.Yeah, I wonder why that could possibly be? Don't forget about poverty and criminality, or poverty and violence.
smitty04: Then why is homicide rate so low in Edison Park?
DaCaptain19: You don't live in Chicago, do you? Nope, if you did you'd be thinking the same thing all us Chicagoans think but don't say.
ProfessorOhki: Dimensio: I am certain, then, that you will be able to demonstrate that suicide, negligent discharges, "crimes of passion" and "overzealous vigilantes" increase substantially when civilians are permitted, through at least a "shall-issue" based concealed weapons permit system, to carry firearms in public."Substantially," is the operative word there. If you can only have a gun with you 50% of the day vs. 100%, it's apparent that the rate of accidental discharges must be less. Unless you somehow manage to double up on your gun exposure while at home. Crimes of passion and overzealous vigilantism work the same way - if you don't have the gun on you at the time, you can't use it. It's a pure numbers game. There's obviously going to be a negative impact; anyone who says otherwise has their head buried in the sand.Now, the question is what's the net impact. Is there a positive impact that outweighs the nearly-indisputable negatives? That's where this discussion always breaks down because it's very very hard to quantify a deterrent. How do you measure "crimes that would have happened but didn't because a bystander might have been armed?" IMHO, accessibility isn't that much of a factor every time you make guns easier for criminals to get, you put a dent in the crime surrounding the arms trade itself. There's also the issue of you having a gun possibly turning a robbery into your murder, but in that particular case, the risk is yours and yours alone, so do whichever you want.So, value public carry as a deterrent for shootings v. shootings avoided because there wasn't a weapon on-hand at the time?
Huck Chaser: Fark It: That's your choice, you don't get to make that for other people.You're right, but I do get to vote for people who do get to make that choice.
Fark It: Timmy the Tumor: Yeah, because all of the 400 homicides so far this year involved guns--guns owned by registered owners."Wanting to reduce homicides" does not equal "gun control ideas" subs.The city isn't asking for ideas to reduce homicides.From their twitter page:"PROBLEM: HOW DO WE GET ILLEGAL GUNS OFF CHICAGO STREETS?"They're framing it as a gun control question.
LaughingRadish: I would think that such behavior would encourage the stupid to try to break in when they think you're not around to steal some of that stuff.
Huck Chaser: The only way option 2 is better than 1 is if BOTH a) the civilian shooters are somehow magically able to instantly tell who the gang members are and who their fellow civilians are, and b) shoot the gang members with 100% accuracy.
Huck Chaser: Secret Master of All Flatulence: Huck Chaser:The people being killed in Chicago are, with very VERY few exceptions, gang members themselves, and therefore are probably armed already anyway.Unfortunately, we don't keep gangmembers in very small geographic areas where only other gangmembers live. They operate in areas that have innocent civilians living there too. They should be able to defend themselves from the criminal scum.You're absolutely right, of course. However, the scenario I always imagine is...Two gang members are surrounded by a small crowd of civilians. The gang members pull guns and start firing at each other. You then have two options:1) The civilians run for cover.2) Some percentage of the civilians pull their own (legal) weapons.The only way option 2 is better than 1 is if BOTH a) the civilian shooters are somehow magically able to instantly tell who the gang members are and who their fellow civilians are, and b) shoot the gang members with 100% accuracy.
xynix: Chris Rock talks about gun control...
Dimensio: A subsequent failure of predictions of concealed weapons permit holders committing any statistically significant amount of violent crime may finally convince lawmakers that impeding legal firearm ownership is not a viable means to address violent crime and thus they may pursue measures of combating crime that are actually effective.
Huck Chaser: The people being killed in Chicago are, with very VERY few exceptions, gang members themselves, and therefore are probably armed already anyway.
jonny99: I suppose it doesn't matter that this spike in gun violence comes *2 years after* Chicago's handgun ban was struck down by the supreme court?/Chicagoan//who doesn't own or want to own a gun
natas6.0: PallMallExecute gang members.Are the cops in Chicago so corrupt that they forgot to be regular-corrupt and do things like take hoods down a dark alley and shoot them in the face?Other countries do it. if you get returned to them (deported whatever) with gang tats and such...you die.My ICE pal swears he heard the gunshot after they dropped off a repeated violent offender in his own country.the guy had been sobbing as they took him off the plane.why can't we do that here?It's not like they're gonna go straight and cure cancer or anything
Vectron: Tough one! How will white people solve this?
PallMall: Execute gang members.Are the cops in Chicago so corrupt that they forgot to be regular-corrupt and do things like take hoods down a dark alley and shoot them in the face?
Calmamity: Fark It: "PROBLEM: HOW DO WE GET ILLEGAL GUNS OFF CHICAGO STREETS?"Why is the answer always "Make them more illegal"?That keeps not working, and we keep doing it.And no, I'm not suggesting everybody in Illinois go around with a Peacemaker strapped to their hip, but something isn't working when we can't even enforce the laws that already exist and some people's answer to that problem is to make new laws.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Aug 23 2017 07:21:25
Runtime: 0.404 sec (403 ms)