Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Exactly - and why do we have so many gang members? Black market drug sale profits. When kids can't get paid for standing on street corners either directly selling drugs or acting as lookouts or enforcers you'll see that rate plummet.
The NYC method of just gentrifying them out of the city may make NYC look good, but it just pushes the problems into smaller towns.
gentriftying puts "those people", seemingly where they belong, out of sight and out of mind in dead zones where they have no jobs, no opportunities, no chance for an education, no escape from their the hell in which they are imprisoned and are subject to the authority of the "powers that be" that treat them little differently than a feudal lord. These are places that would laugh at the silly notion we're not in a depression right now; they are also in places where they knew it was depression long before 2008.
you know the mantra: we want "vibrant" cities; now if vibrant isn't a buzz word, what is? vibrant means you'll have the bright lights that go along with big cities, flush with top notch entertainment, cultural attractions, the best of restaurants and bars.
vibrant is what makes NYC look good, and for those who can't afford the vibrancy (and growing percentage of our population as more and more of us are maginialized end up not in Manhattan but in Newark or East St. Louis or endless depleted coal towns in West Virginia.
this might be happening in Manhattan, but most of Bronx, Brooklyn, and Queens are not gentrified, and still have many poor areas with huge housing projects. Saying NYC priced out the poor is a lazy answer that doesn't come close to showing the whole picture.
the outer boroughs are not Manhattan although there is definitely much Manhattan in them (look at Brooklyn).
but there is a factor to play in NYC that, while it exists elsewhere (and definitely in Chicago to no small extent) is something strongly associated with that city. If NY has a peer in this regard, it is LA.
Both are still magnets to large scale immigration, chiefly from Latin America and Asia, but Europe itself (paritcularly eastern) is not out of the picture.
The dynamic? Immigrants replenish society. Immigration sends us the risk takers, those willing to start anew, to make a better life for themselves. they take devastated neighborhoods and rebuild them with their hard work ethic and their desire for a better future for their children.
What does that mean? if either NY or LA were dependent on domestic migration, they would have been bleeding population for years, just like so many other US cities.
It would be hard to underestimate how much immigrant neighorhoods have enriched these cities. Of course, this was true for years between the Civil War and WWII for endless cities....Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, et al.
the big boys....like NY, Chgo and LA, but certainly places like SF and Boston....attract people with life style and have escaped the plight of the old industrial cities, places where immigration as well as industry have long since fled.
This post is a great example of one of the world's biggest problems, a lack of accountability. No one is responsible for their own actions. There's always a handy excuse or reason to fall back on. The violence in Chicago is not America's problem, it is Chicago's problem. Also, why do people keep saying guns are the problem? I've owned one for years and have never shot anybody with it. Maybe some people are too unstable, irresponsible or stupid to own a gun but I'm not one of them. Plus, this country was built on gun violence. Let's not kid ourselves.
Even if they make guns illegal they aren't going anywhere. The black market will drive up prices but criminals will have guns just like drug users have drugs, despite the fact that they are 'illegal' Why? Because there's money in it. Money is literally God in this country. So, wake up and smell the coffee.
your seem to think that I and others are saying gun control is a panacea; it isn't. It merely is a logical step to make a dent in the incredible number of murders we face.
If you control guns, there are fewer of them and they fall into fewer hands. Nobody questions that you use a firm arm safely CSS; you're not the issue. It's the easy availablility of guns that is.
You seem to think there is something faulty in my reasoning? why is it that the US has a far higher murder rate than the other major nations in the world, none of which makes guns easily available?
I'm not sure how Chicago's gun problem is Chicago's problem and not the US's. Don't all American cities have a great amount of violence? how can a city regulate guns that come into it when its nation makes them so available.
If our nation was built on "gun violence" why do you accept that as an acceptable status quo. and if that were true, why were there far fewer homoicides in the 1950s than today? There were no Columbines, Auroras, NIU's, Va Tech's, Tuscons, and all those other too many to mention places. Good lord, man, if I thought the US was "built on gun violence", I would shout on the highest mountain top "Stop the insanity"; i wouldn't be shrugging my head and saying "that's the way things are."
How do you propose that Rahm Emanuel and city officials stop gun violence when they have nothing to do with the guns that are in people's hands? what could any city do to stop this?
Guns and the difficulty of getting a job and getting one that actually pays a living wage causes our problems. And every job those ^%$#(*&^*^&&&&&$(*& corporations shift overseas only adds to our social ills and makes violence a distinct possibility.
and last I checked, Rahm Emanuel wasn't outsourcing any jobs to India.
"The black market will drive up prices but criminals will have guns just like drug users have drugs, despite the fact that they are 'illegal' Why? Because there's money in it. Money is literally God in this country. So, wake up and smell the coffee."
ok, fine, let's say we do....then let's admit we have credited a jungle out there and there is a fairly decent chance when you step out your door you will be shot and killed. Of course, when that happens, there won't be any coffee for you to smell.
appartently " Money is literally God in this country. So, wake up and smell the coffee." means you've thrown in the towel. so be it. I'm just grateful for the other forumers who have posted here and quite clearly have not done so, who wish to be part of the solution, not the problem, and who from what they have said have made it very clear to me that they are the type of people who will continue to do the good deed, work to make things better, not because they think that outcome is assured (it is not), but that it is the right thing to do.
Or why not put me in jail next time a black man kills someone? A gun is just a tool.
er...am I missing something here? why does that man who kills have to black? Prerequisite? Apparently you've got a wonderful system of logic that escaped me. I must be dense. Educate me.
If a black man shoots me in the head, will I die more certainly and quickly than if a white man, hispanic, or Asian shoots me in the head? Does it hurt more if the shooter is black?
hey, CSS, I love adjectives. They're a wonderful part of speech. Along with adverbs they make the language so much more descriptive. But, of course, they have to be used correctly, not gratuitously.
so please. Tell me. Remember I'm stupid (and, as you noted, don't believe in taking responsibility; guilty as charged):
why "black"?
you've got a wonderful open forum here and believe me when I tell you, you're fellow forumers are just chomping at the bit to read your explantion. (although I hate to break it to you...not that you care, I realize....but a good percentage of already formed their opinions and pretty sure they know exactly where you are coming from. Present company included)
er...am I missing something here? why does that man who kills have to black? Prerequisite? Apparently you've got a wonderful system of logic that escaped me. I must be dense. Educate me.
If a black man shoots me in the head, will I die more certainly and quickly than if a white man, hispanic, or Asian shoots me in the head? Does it hurt more if the shooter is black?
hey, CSS, I love adjectives. They're a wonderful part of speech. Along with adverbs they make the language so much more descriptive. But, of course, they have to be used correctly, not gratuitously.
so please. Tell me. I'm stupid:
why "black"?
you've got a wonderful open forum here and believe me when I tell you, you're fellow forumers are just chomping at the bit to read your explantion. (although I hate to break it to you...not that you care, I realize....but a good percentage of already formed their opinions and pretty sure they know exactly where you are coming from. Present company included)
Did you read that entire post? I think CSS is a black male and you completely missed his point.
glad to hear there is no crime and violence issue in chicago. also detroit, new orleans and memphis.
i see these type of posts frequently.
signed a chicago native and former resident
Absolutely meaningless. The question is "is this an American problem" versus a Chicago problem. I agree that it is an American problem, throwing foreign cities into the mix shows a complete lack of basic reading comprehension. Chicago is not in the top ten most dangerous cities in the US based on overall crime, and it is not in the top ten in the US in terms of homicides. You can compare Chicago to foreign cities all you like, but depending on how you want to define it Chicago is safer than cities like Philadelphia, Baltimore, New Orleans, St. Louis, Miami, and loads of other cities. It is indeed an American problem.
Gun control can have some impact, but blanket gun bans and control aren't likely to have much of an impact. There are measures that can be taken though:
1 - Make people responsible for the guns they purchase. If a gun was last registered as being in your possession is used in a homicide you need to be held accountable for that. If it's stolen - report it. If it was sold - report that. Otherwise it is YOUR gun. There are people who make a living selling guns illegally to gang members, knowing that the guns are going to be used by criminals. How about we hold some of those guys "accountable". They are the scum of the earth. The penalties shouldn't be the same as a homicide, but you should do some jail time and not be able to buy and sell guns.
2 - Make guns tracable. Ballistics technology combined with digital databases make it very easy (and affordable) to identify guns used in crimes. It may take a decade to build a database that really works, so let's get started now.
3 - Sales of ammo need to be regulated the same way that gun sales are. If you can't buy a gun, you shouldn't be able to buy ammo. In many parts of the country that is not true.
4 - Make sure violent criminals cannot legally get a gun. That includes domestic violence and any violent felony. Psychiatrists should also be able to request that a judge take away someone's right to own a gun.
5 - Chi-town Native has the right idea about addressing drug laws. Drug trafficking is the root of most of the gun crimes in Chicago and all large US cities. Addressing drug related gun crimes in the US will cut the number of gun crimes by at least half, if not more. The crimes that aren't caused by drug trafficking can be very hard to prevent - domestic disputes, drunken fights, psychotic mass killers, etc. Those crimes are best addressed through a combination of gun laws and social programs.
I own over a dozen guns, none of which I use for home protection. A fire extinguisher and big honking Mag Light comprise my home protection, both are FAR more likely to come in handy than a gun in any home protection situation. I see gun ownership as a responsibility as much as it is a right. Oh, and guns aren't magic wands that make bad guys go away, they're just tools, I'm amazed at how many people feel vulnerable without a gun, or feel that having one protects them from everything bad in the world. This is the real world, not some Hollywood movie.
Location: Schaumburg, please don't hate me for it.
955 posts, read 1,831,897 times
Reputation: 1235
Truth is that murder and violence doesn't scare most Chicagoans. Most of us have eyes in the back of our heads and common sense. A large share of the population lives where it is scarce and those who live within it's reach are usually street smart enough to avoid the danger and go about their lives. In the end most of what happens is criminals killing criminals. I'll grieve when the innocent die, but not for those who play in the dirt and wind up getting buried in it.
Yeah, Chicago is world class, but it's also still what it was for most of the 20th century. A gangster city. Todays hoodlums are not going to disappear anytime soon, so we either learn how to navigate this mixed urban landscape and enjoy it's treasures or surrender to the paranoia of non-inhabitants who need newspspers and blogs to tell them what they want to hear.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
