Chicago instituted strict gun control laws and the murder rate went up.
I think it's safe to say that almost none of the shooters were people who'd give up their guns willingly. Guns are part of their lifestyle, as much a part of their everyday life as backyard barbecues.
The most heartbreaking of the murders was a 7 y/o boy who took a bullet intended for his gangster father who, BTW, is NOT cooperating with the police investigation. Obviously, he's thinking of reprisal rather than state justice.
Chicago police confiscated about one gun per hour over the July 4th weekend, the police force was boosted by 1/3 over the weekend, and yet 9 dead and 46 wounded (which, BTW, is better than the toll last year).
Most of the confiscated weapons were taken in "stop and frisk" activities, and many of the same people who want the police to do something about Chicago gun crime will decry stop and frisk as unconstitutional (which it may be, BTW).
The police commissioner in Chicago says that gun laws and gun confiscations aren't helping. He says that what's needed is a more responsive justice system. In other words, more convictions and longer prison terms. (This in a society that already has more people in prison than any other country in the world.) He also said that basically the public needs to take more responsibility and not depend solely on police. In other words, dropping a lot of dimes on gangsters and drug dealers.
So what's the point of this thread?
To antagonize the pro-gun-control crowd, no doubt. That's how it reads to me anyway.
a) the people we don't want to have guns will get them anyway
b) the means being used to get guns off the street may be unconstitutional (I'm referring to stop and frisk policies)
c) the police chief seems to believe that they aren't putting enough people in prison
d) the need for an actual solution to the problem since the usual approaches obviously are a massive failure
e) maybe there is no solution
Un - "d) the need for an actual solution to the problem since the usual approaches obviously are a massive failure"
It is probably safe to say that any solution to urban America's gun problem would of been implemented years ago if one actually existed. We have many social dilemmas for which there seems to be no answer. I agree with the commissioner's appeal to the public for co-operation, in the form of information volunteered.
I agree with the commissioner's appeal to the public for co-operation, in the form of information volunteered.
And put even more young black men in prisons which are colleges of crime, and who will eventually be back on the streets.
I guess just leaving them on the streets to commit further random acts of violence is preferable? Information volunteered by residents could, maybe, perhaps save an innocent life.
It is probably safe to say that any solution to urban America's gun problem would of been implemented years ago if one actually existed
Gun control has been implemented successfully in Australia for some time now. The problem in America comes from the (apparent) constitutional right to bear arms. Ergo, a constitutional change could allow for stricter arm control.
On a side note, are you sure it doesn't say "bare arms"? Like, wearing a singlet is a constitutional right?
Longer prison sentences keeps them off of the streets until the real problem is addressed, and I don't see anyone trying to address that at all.
Hi Guys and Gals;
The solution to violence is the reduction in mental triggers that lead to violent physical action, something I never hear talked about.
If a person is angry enough he or she will pick up some everyday item and turn it into a weapon of deadly force.
It is the cause of anger in human beings that we as a communal group never seem willing to address.
When are we going to address the true underlying cause of human upon human violence?
Requiring all Americans to take state-issued tranquilizers would be one approach.
Got mine already.