How is the gun ban in Chicago doing?

[fskimospy]

That's you buddy. all up and down in this thread you have been intellectually trounced because you won't allow yourself to be wrong. Guess what? You only hurt yourself and your continued attempts at obfuscation prove you're nothing more than a mental midget who wants to play with the big boys. Well you'll have to have integrity first and you haven't demonstrated any of that so you have a LONG way to go.



Are you even coherent?



You can support whatever ban you want (just like a liberal lol) yet that won't change the amount of ignorance and intellectual dishonesty you have displayed in this thread. Every time you have been shown your error you toss it aside. You have nothing more to offer me. I have spent too much time on you as it is. Some actually use their brain instead of ignoring it. In the end you have to answer to yourself for your dishonesty and thats no skin off my back.

Enjoy your ignorance.

I think my favorite part about you in this thread is that you are trying to quote Ayn Rand to support your position when you have a quote about god in your signature. She held religion in contempt because of its irrationality and unwillingness to see, the same thing you are accusing him of. Charles mentioned this earlier but you didn't respond.

I mean Ayn Rand was a ridiculous clown, but I think if you are quoting her you might be interested in how that quote applies to you.

 

[Jeffg010]

1. It is doing well in Britain and every other first world country where it is enacted, which means a hell of a lot more than a single city surrounded by a country full of gun nuts with an insane amount of guns.

2. Chicago is not liberal. Vermont can be considered liberal.

3. Democrats are middle/right. Just because the Republicans are now insanely conservative does NOT automatically make Democrats the polar opposite. You are fighting a center/right party. Deal with it.

I'm call you out on your BS about Britain.
http://www.phillyburbs.com/blogs/re...cle_6ecc4266-f517-563d-85d6-331ff4901b6d.html

"he report states the UK has 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 citizens, which is the highest rate in the world.

That figure has skyrocketed ever since guns were banned in that nation. In fact, in the four years after the 1997 ban, the violent crime rate more than doubled."

 

[sigurros81]

I'm call you out on your BS about Britain.
http://www.phillyburbs.com/blogs/re...cle_6ecc4266-f517-563d-85d6-331ff4901b6d.html

"he report states the UK has 2,034 violent crimes per 100,000 citizens, which is the highest rate in the world.

That figure has skyrocketed ever since guns were banned in that nation. In fact, in the four years after the 1997 ban, the violent crime rate more than doubled."

You also need to consider how each country reports their 'violent crime' data, because countries have varying definitions of violent crimes. What may be 'violent crime' worthy in the UK may not be so in the US.

 

[sigurros81]

I think my favorite part about you in this thread is that you are trying to quote Ayn Rand to support your position when you have a quote about god in your signature. She held religion in contempt because of its irrationality and unwillingness to see, the same thing you are accusing him of. Charles mentioned this earlier but you didn't respond.

I mean Ayn Rand was a ridiculous clown, but I think if you are quoting her you might be interested in how that quote applies to you.

So what if a person quote someone that may have different view on a whole different topic? We're talking about gun rights, not someone's personal religious beliefs. It's this sort of narrow-minded black and white mentality that really get you nowhere when considering an intelligent debate.

 

[NoStateofMind]

I think my favorite part about you in this thread is that you are trying to quote Ayn Rand to support your position when you have a quote about god in your signature. She held religion in contempt because of its irrationality and unwillingness to see, the same thing you are accusing him of. Charles mentioned this earlier but you didn't respond.

I mean Ayn Rand was a ridiculous clown, but I think if you are quoting her you might be interested in how that quote applies to you.

Another attempt to divert. Doesn't surprise me in the slightest and reinforces Rands quote. But you can't comprehend that.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Yes, let's not divert away from the subject of this thread, which is apparently now PC Surgeon's inability to distinguish gun bans enforced with borders and gun bans not enforced with borders.

 

[NoStateofMind]

So what if a person quote someone that may have different view on a whole different topic? We're talking about gun rights, not someone's personal religious beliefs. It's this sort of narrow-minded black and white mentality that really get you nowhere when considering an intelligent debate.

This. Eventually he will either admit his dishonesty and therefore regain his self respect or remain in willful denial as the quote from Ayn Rand so clearly put.

 

[Agent11]

Fairy stories? You mean like the ones in this post?

Tell the people of Syria that their "pea shooters" are making no difference. If a violent rebellion becomes necessary it will start with civilians, not the military.

Britain and Australia are heading that way. Such transitions take time. Just because they're not readily apparent today doesn't mean they won't be in 50 to 100 years.

Yes, and in the days of constant monarchy violent rebellions were relatively common, as they were often the only real way of getting things done.

The Civil War equality of arms was due to massive military defections. There is no reason to think such defections couldn't happen again.

No, not really. And actually from a tactical standpoint if a significant population of the US rebelled, the military would be hard pressed to suppress it merely due to the disruption of vital supply/communication networks.

You likely wouldn't be able to get away with another Sherman's march to the sea, thanks to the internet. You can idolize the military all you like, but the fact is for all its strength, it isn't the Chinese army. It's not designed to fight a massive internal insurrection.


Bottom line, a heavily armed populace remains a very effective last-resort counter to tyrannical government. The proof can be seen the world over.

We need to protect our rights not just for this moment in history but also for the future. Who is to say what will come in 50, 100 or 300 years?

 

[Jeffg010]

You also need to consider how each country reports their 'violent crime' data, because countries have varying definitions of violent crimes. What may be 'violent crime' worthy in the UK may not be so in the US.

Ok then tell me what crimes are violent in the UK and not in the US. I gave you a link now if you got proof of this then give me a link.

 

[fskimospy]

So what if a person quote someone that may have different view on a whole different topic? We're talking about gun rights, not someone's personal religious beliefs. It's this sort of narrow-minded black and white mentality that really get you nowhere when considering an intelligent debate.

You missed the whole point. The quote is about the inability to reason, something that is not dependent on topic. It seems odd to call someone an idiot by quoting someone who would have thought you were an idiot for the same reason.

But yes, it is off topic, even though it is amusing. The real question here does appear to be peoples inability to understand what borders are.

 

[Broheim]

Border? No I favor borderless rule encompassing the whole world. Uniform laws, uniform results, no complaining about going to this place or that, because it's all the same and it will all be good.

we already have that little experiment going over here in Europe, it's called the EU and let me tell you, it's not going so great...

 

[sigurros81]

Ok then tell me what crimes are violent in the UK and not in the US. I gave you a link now if you got proof of this then give me a link.

I'm not sure why I need to prove anything if you're an intelligent person who's willing to debate something rationally, you'd at least be considerate of the possibilities. Unfortunately, I cannot truly prove anything because I don't work for an agency that collects such data, so I'm by no mean a professional. I'm not saying you're wrong or right, but you post statistics without considering the fact that these stats generally are never full proof or credible enough to be used in an argument. If you're interested in the truth, a simple Google search will yield a lot, but if you want to be defensive about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_crime

The comparison of violent crime statistics between countries is usually problematic, due to the way different countries classify crime.[2] Valid comparisons require that similar offences between jurisdictions be compared. Often this is not possible because crime statistics aggregate equivalent offences in such different ways that make it difficult or impossible to obtain a valid comparison.

 

[OutHouse]

lets see
2012 Chicago homicides, 513.

2012 US KIA Afghanistan 310.

2012 total Coalition Military KIA in Afghanistan 408.

WTF!

sources
http://politics.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981844512

http://icasualties.org/oef/

 

[Phanuel]

lets see
2012 Chicago homicides, 513.

2012 US KIA Afghanistan 310.

2012 total Coalition Military KIA in Afghanistan 408.

WTF!

sources
http://politics.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981844512

http://icasualties.org/oef/

"Bring the troops home tomorrow and continue the war here. Because we owe it to our troops to let them sleep in their own beds with their families. Wake up in the morning, have a delicious breakfast, drive to war. We can have it in Nebraska. We don’t need that horrible state." - Daniel Tosh

We can just change Nebraska to Illinois.

 

[OutHouse]

"Bring the troops home tomorrow and continue the war here. Because we owe it to our troops to let them sleep in their own beds with their families. Wake up in the morning, have a delicious breakfast, drive to war. We can have it in Nebraska. We don’t need that horrible state." - Daniel Tosh

We can just change Nebraska to Illinois.

Nebraska is a beautiful state and that would be a travesty.

 

[sigurros81]

"Bring the troops home tomorrow and continue the war here. Because we owe it to our troops to let them sleep in their own beds with their families. Wake up in the morning, have a delicious breakfast, drive to war. We can have it in Nebraska. We don’t need that horrible state." - Daniel Tosh

We can just change Nebraska to Illinois.

They should change the setting of the new Robocop movie to Chicago, not Detroit.

 

[Incorruptible]

When will people learn that gun control doesn't work, The criminals aren't going to obey these laws and they only hurt the law abiding citizens who cant defend themselves

 

[chimaxi83]

I live in Chicago. I'm on one of the far edges of the city, hardly ever any crime. I like it. However, the fact that animals and savages are killing each other in this city kinda sickens me, especially when I look at numbers like the ones above that compare Chicago homicides to military KIA.

I stay out of the hoods and ghettos normally, but my job puts me in some of these areas sometimes. They typically don't mess with utility workers (because then we just won't go to the area), but the risk is always there, especially with the tools and electronics that are always with me.

I kinda want to move away from here, to be honest.

 

[sigurros81]

I live in Chicago. I'm on one of the far edges of the city, hardly ever any crime. I like it. However, the fact that animals and savages are killing each other in this city kinda sickens me, especially when I look at numbers like the ones above that compare Chicago homicides to military KIA.

I stay out of the hoods and ghettos normally, but my job puts me in some of these areas sometimes. They typically don't mess with utility workers (because then we just won't go to the area), but the risk is always there, especially with the tools and electronics that are always with me.

I kinda want to move away from here, to be honest.

That really sucks man Is the city doing anything about any of this? Chicago is such a wonderful city, you would think that the governemtn (at any level) would at least see how crime is tarnishing the city and try and make it better.

 

[HomerJS]

It's not!

5 more dead in Chicago. You fools said said banning guys would fix everything.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57566039/at-least-5-die-in-chicago-shootings/

This thread is like living in a neighborhood with a lot of trees. You rake your yard once a week and your neighbors don't rake. Someone walks by your house and says "damn your yard looks sloppy"

 

[OutHouse]

This thread is like living in a neighborhood with a lot of trees. You rake your yard once a week and your neighbors don't rake. Someone walks by your house and says "damn your yard looks sloppy"

i never have nor will i ever rake leaves. that is what the wind is for.

 

[monovillage]

This thread is like living in a neighborhood with a lot of trees. You rake your yard once a week and your neighbors don't rake. Someone walks by your house and says "damn your yard looks sloppy"

http://washingtonexaminer.com/exami...un-control-working-in-chicago/article/2520073

One question to address: If the real problem is that guns can be purchased in other jurisdictions, then why are America's other major cities seeing such huge declines in their murder rates, despite the fact that nearly all of them are near states with relatively lax gun laws?

It's obvious that by Chicago's insanely strict gun laws they've created a pool of victims for the predators to prey on.

 

[irishScott]

Alright regarding the guns coming from neighboring jurisdictions:

Being a life-long resident of Northern VA, we're right on the border of DC. I can leave my family's house and be driving by the Washington monument in 35 minutes. We have lax gun laws relative to DC, and despite the promximity, very little DC crime spills over.

There are a number of reasons, but one of the major ones is that we have no parole for convicted felons. None. You can appeal, but you serve your time.

In 2009, DC murder rate per 100,000 was 24. Farfax County VA: 1.37

I think its clear that guns are not the problem, and that perhaps these cities should look to other issues for their crime epidemics.

 

[nextJin]

lets see
2012 Chicago homicides, 513.

2012 US KIA Afghanistan 310.

2012 total Coalition Military KIA in Afghanistan 408.

WTF!

sources
http://politics.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981844512

http://icasualties.org/oef/

What is the ratio of civilians/ troops to deaths?

 

[nextJin]

Alright regarding the guns coming from neighboring jurisdictions:

Being a life-long resident of Northern VA, we're right on the border of DC. I can leave my family's house and be driving by the Washington monument in 35 minutes. We have lax gun laws relative to DC, and despite the promximity, very little DC crime spills over.

There are a number of reasons, but one of the major ones is that we have no parole for convicted felons. None. You can appeal, but you serve your time.

In 2009, DC murder rate per 100,000 was 24. Farfax County VA: 1.37

I think its clear that guns are not the problem, and that perhaps these cities should look to other issues for their crime epidemics.

lol thats because they moved into my neighborhood (Waldorf), I'm not disagreeing with the principle but with the changes being made to the ghettos up there I guess they didnt want to take the Woodrow Wilson to rob/kill people.