Rudy is in better control of his mental faculties than Biden. Rudy does like to rant in public - that doesn’t make him “mentally incapacitated”. It might make him crotchety.
at least 72 shot in chicago
- Thread starter TopSecretBoiler
- Start date
Is it racist to acknowledge that 90% of the shootings over the 4th of July weekend we in primarily black neighborhoods?
Is it racist to acknowledge that over 90% of those shot were black?
Do you agree that it's likely that 90+% of those doing the shooting were black?
So, explain to me again why, if Stop n Frisk works, why it's racist? You go where the problem is, and if that gun problem is in the black neighborhood, well, then that's where you eradicate the problem.
And by the way, according to NBC, it works:
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opini...-worth-remembering-rush-criticize-ncna1151121
That's not how Congress works. It's not...the House passes a bill, then the Senate takes the exact one and passes it exactly as is.
The Senate didn't even take it up to discuss or offer an alternative version that then gets hammered out between the 2 bodies. The Senate did nothing.
If the Senate wants to pass universal background checks, they can't just sit on their hands. Do you agree?
Give me a break with this stop and frisk crap. Black and brown people are unjustly profiled without stop and frisk, now you want to implement this. You can't just stop folks walking down the street and frisk them without just cause. That is why the Supreme Court deemed stop and frisk unconstitutional. It's easy for you to say implement stop and frisk when you most likely won't get stopped. I will.
welp just like with other gun control legislation, you will lose your freedom. the judge did not rule the practice itself unconstitutional — just the way that the city police had carried it out.
How Federal Laws Are Made
Congress is the legislative branch of the federal government and makes laws for the nation. Congress has two legislative bodies or chambers: the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives. Anyone elected to either body can propose a new law. A bill is a proposal for a new law.
Steps in Making a Law
- A bill can be introduced in either chamber of Congress by a senator or representative who sponsors it.
- Once a bill is introduced, it is assigned to a committee whose members will research, discuss, and make changes to the bill.
- The bill is then put before that chamber to be voted on.
- If the bill passes one body of Congress, it goes to the other body to go through a similar process of research, discussion, changes, and voting.
- Once both bodies vote to accept a bill, they must work out any differences between the two versions. Then both chambers vote on the same exact bill and, if it passes, they present it to the president.
- The president then considers the bill. The president can approve the bill and sign it into law or not approve (veto) a bill.
- If the president chooses to veto a bill, in most cases Congress can vote to override that veto and the bill becomes a law. But, if the president pocket vetoes a bill after Congress has adjourned, the veto cannot be overridden.
True or false: The vast majority of the shootings in a large urban area like Chicago are committed by black or brown?
Also, the cops that partrol these hoods were a lot of the shootings occur know who the troublemakers are.
They know the drug dealers, gang bangers and felons when they see them on the street. These are the guys who would need to be targeted for SnF. Not the guy walking down Michigan Ave on his way to the office.
H.R. 8 | Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019 is the bill that you are referring to.
The motion was blocked by Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith of Mississippi, who argued that the bill should not be “exempt from consideration by the appropriate committee of jurisdiction.”
“Legislation that would affect the rights of American citizens under the Second Amendment should not be fast tracked by the Senate,” Hyde-Smith said Thursday.
“If this so-called common sense bipartisan legislation was indeed crafted with strong bipartisan input, it shouldn’t have any problems advancing by regular order,” she added. “Many questions about this legislation need to be answered before it’s forced upon law-abiding gun owners.”
It appears to be a simple one-page bill. I didn't see anything that jumped out at me as a deal breaker that the Republicans would object to, so if the senator from Mississippi blocked it based on the reasoning that it shouldn't be fast tracked by the Senate, I would argue once again that this was simply a ploy to kill it based on objections from the NRA. As I've often stated on this board, I'm not a fan of those in Congress who won't do their damned job. It's politically expedient to blame everything on a sitting President but you can trace most of the dysfunction of our federal government back to our legislative branch.
Does every bad issue that happens within African American community default to slavery and discrimination excuses?
Stop with the excuses, pull themselves up and lead their way to a better tomorrow.
I can hear it now, Mayors and Governors of these crappy conditions NYC, Chicago and other areas are putting the public thru saying, "sorry folks, I couldn't get the job done as I'm oppressed due to slavery and discrimination." How long does that work?
Answer: Next election cycle.
That is my point. These jackasses were seemingly stopping any and everybody they found that was black and brown. These included folks in and outside the so called high crime areas. Black students, teachers, engineers were all stopped and frisked during this period and it was deemed constitutional. They did not find many guns anyhow after thousands of these stops were made.
How would you like if the police stopped and frisked every white male between the ages of 16 and 21 to see if they had guns to prevent shooting up these high schools?
So, the Senate could have taken it up in another way if it wanted to pass it. It did not. To say there's no way around 1 member of the Senate is just not the case.
So nobody saw this?
You mean more cops didn't stop the problem?
https://www.foxnews.com/us/chicago-july-4-weekend-police-response.
Chicago is gearing up to deploy an additional 1,200 police officers throughout the city’s streets for this upcoming Fourth of July weekend.
You mean more cops didn't stop the problem?
https://www.foxnews.com/us/chicago-july-4-weekend-police-response.
Chicago is gearing up to deploy an additional 1,200 police officers throughout the city’s streets for this upcoming Fourth of July weekend.
What cop in their right mind is going to go out of the way to proactively stop violent crimes in the current environment in Chicago?
Out of the way? .........you mean not do their job? I don't understand.
I also don't understand how more cops didn't help to solve the problem. Will you address that?
Maybe because Chicago is broken after decade upon decade of D "governance". Parts of the city are like a third-world warzone, controlled by gangs, not the cops. The cops respond AFTER the crimes are committed and the criminals are long gone.
It's not that more cops isn't the solution, it's that Chicago has such a gun violence problem that they're just simply outnumbered. Plus, there's the no-snitch culture in these hoods where people won't cooperate with the cops investigating.
I also suspect that a lot of these cops want to return home to their families after their shifts. They're not going to put themselves in a situation, in the current environment, where some crazy person with a gun tries to be the neighborhood hero by killing a cop.
The cops don't have the support of the mayor, governor or many of the citizens in these communities.
You really think they're going to risk their lives trying to prevent 2 gang bangers from killing eachother?
So what are solutions if cops can't do much? Just live with it.
One thing Chicago has been vocal about is gun trafficking laws, which they can't do anything about because they aren't being trafficked within, but usually from a state like Indiana. Over 20% of guns that are confiscated as part of a crime are traced to Indiana.
P.S. Chicago is certainly not a great situation, but it also isn't even close to having the highest gun violence per capita in the country (which is sad in itself).
“But muh guns!”
Also:
“Look at all the gun violence! Something should be done about it”
Then:
“But don’t you dare come after muh guns or you’ll find one of muh guns right down your throat”
That pretty much sums it up right?
I've said it before and will say it again. It's the 'culture' in these neighborhoods.
It's not the guns. It's not slavery. It's not bad cops.
It's a situation where the Chicago leadership has created a long term culture of dependency, non-accountability, lack of self reliance, lack of consequences.
As for the gun comment, guns don't shoot themselves.
Both NY and LA, cities much larger than Chicago, had few shootings.
The solution is easy. Support law enforcement, get rid of the bad ones and have consequences for the criminals committing crimes. Today perpetrators have more rights than the victims. Reducing any consequences for crimes makes crime pay on every level.
In Chicago especially, you have a DA, Mayor and Governor that don't support law enforcement.
Why would a cop risk his/her life in an area where they might have to pull their weapon, knowing that the consequences for doing so could cost them their job?
thats the key point...
any time another new rule/regulation is created, they should ask if its worth the life of another person to enforce that rule, and the life of a person violating that rule.
[whether thats having the wrong gun, the wrong plant/drug, a traffic violaton, selling a single cigarette, etc.]
Last edited:
That is the point I'm trying to make. In NYC, the police stopped black people above and beyond the gang bangers and drug dealers. They were stopping and frisking black people going to work, going to the city colleges mostly with no just cause other than being black. That is why it was deemed unconstitutional. Nobody thought about stopping and frisking Italians in NYC to prevent membership into the cosa nostra.
So, did the ends (vastly reduced gun crimes, shootings and murders) justify the means?
If Chicago could reduce it's shootings and murders by 50% in these hot zones, by implementing SnF, would it be worth it?
If U.S. could reduce it's shootings and murders by 50% in these hot zones, by implementing a gun ban, would it be worth it?
If you are referring to abolishing the 2nd amendment and seizing all of the guns from all of the citizens, the answer is NO
How can stop and frisk work when they stop and frisk people with no criminal history for the most part? They may get lucky and find someone with a gun every now and then. It did not work in NYC and will not work no where else. Blacks are already racially profiled as it is without stop and frisk. It is unconstitutional anyway. You just can't stop people without just cause. You can't stop people for just walking to work, school, gym, entertainment etc.
Do you know what % of murders and gun crimes are committed by licensed/legal gun owners? It's Less than 10%.
The problem isn't the guns, it's the people who get guns illegally.
Also, have you ever looked at the gun laws in Chicago? Even before the laws were changed a few years ago, they had some of the strictest in the country. And guess what? Chicago was still the murder capital of the country even with it's gun 'bans'
Last edited:
That’s a pipe dream. Criminals will still find ways to get their hands on guns. Everyday citizens would be defenseless against them in doing what you are espousing.
You don't have to worry yourself about stop and frisk laws returning. I really doubt that unarmed social workers will be going out of their way to proactively seek out the criminals on the streets.
Like clockwork, a disingenuous argument. Guns are easy to get in Wisconsin and Indiana, guess where criminals in Chicago get their guns?
So your argument isn't for police to arrest criminals and for DA’s to prosecute them so that they are behind bars, right? That would be racist of course. What’s your solution that keeps guns away from the criminals while allowing citizens with the ability to protect themselves?
You don’t seem to understand. Under stop and frisk, law abiding black citizens were being stopped and frisked. That ain’t right. That is why stop and frisk sucks and never to be implemented again. It is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!! You can’t stop people for no reason.
