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.
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,763,471 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by doc1
Look at it this way. If law-abiding vicitims of violent crimes were to use guns to protect themselves, even more people would get shot.
We can't have any of that now, can we?
Actually the vast majority of people that get shot in Chicago are NOT "innocent victims" shot by "vicious predators". Sometimes that is the case but in the vast majority of cases, the shooter is about one step above or below the shootee. Often it is just a matter of who shoots who first. One is usually in one gang and the other in another gang. People vs Folks. Been going on for decades and will for decades more- gun ban or not.
If you get a map of Chicago and put a pin in it where all the shootings are, you will find that 98% of them occur in relatively small areas of the city like Englewood, Lawndale, Roseland and Humbolt Park. The rest of the city usually ignores it.
Actually the vast majority of people that get shot in Chicago are NOT "innocent victims" shot by "vicious predators". Sometimes that is the case but in the vast majority of cases, the shooter is about one step above or below the shootee. Often it is just a matter of who shoots who first. One is usually in one gang and the other in another gang. People vs Folks. Been going on for decades and will for decades more- gun ban or not.
Actually this year a lot of victims have been innocent victims, sad but true. Also, many of the gang wars that are going on are not gangs that are part of "People" vs ones that are part of "Folks"
Many of the wars are Vice Lords against other factions of Vice Lords, GD's vs Breeds(which both ride Folks) etc...
I just clicked on this thread to see how you going to blame all this one all on "libs", since you apparently can't write an entire sentence without mentioning the word.
So what is your point exactly? You don't seem to have much concern for the 15 victims of violence in Chicago. So are you saying that you believe that if the victims were armed with handguns (we don't know that they weren't armed) they could've defended themselves? Or are you trying to make the case that handgun bans are ineffective to begin with?
Or is this another sad throwaway thread for to rail against your bĂŞte noire--the elusive and devious "libs."
The point is, LIB, that if you ban guns, you still have gun violence by those who don't respect the laws.
Actually the vast majority of people that get shot in Chicago are NOT "innocent victims" shot by "vicious predators". Sometimes that is the case but in the vast majority of cases, the shooter is about one step above or below the shootee. Often it is just a matter of who shoots who first. One is usually in one gang and the other in another gang. People vs Folks. Been going on for decades and will for decades more- gun ban or not.
If you get a map of Chicago and put a pin in it where all the shootings are, you will find that 98% of them occur in relatively small areas of the city like Englewood, Lawndale, Roseland and Humbolt Park. The rest of the city usually ignores it.
So in other words, these shootings are a good thing. Trash taking out the trash.
The point is, LIB, that if you ban guns, you still have gun violence by those who don't respect the laws.
then wouldnt it of made sense to of used a location that still has a handgun ban?
And again, there was not a ban on all guns in Chicago. My goodness please, you are starting to sound like the Dems by not using full truths and facts to make a point.
...And again, there was not a ban on all guns in Chicago. My goodness please, you are starting to sound like the Dems by not using full truths and facts to make a point.
"Assault" weapons have been banned for a number of years. The only type of gun that has been legal in the city for the last 28 years was shotguns. I guarantee 99% of the shootings in the last 28 years were not done with shotguns.
"Assault" weapons have been banned for a number of years. The only type of gun that has been legal in the city for the last 28 years was shotguns. I guarantee 99% of the shootings in the last 28 years were not done with shotguns.
You need to use the full truths and facts.
Actually shotguns and rifles. As the former city ordinance stated, long guns that were not classified as assault weapons.
92% of the shootings in the past 3 years were with handguns. Which of course were illegal, which goes to show that even though handguns were banned in the city of Chicago, this did nothing to curb gun violence. Gun bans don't work, sorry to tell you.
And in less than a week the city was considering another one that they hoped would stand. That one showed me that the government of Chicago doesn't like to see the Supreme Court of the US going against them and they are ready to try again.
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.
Trash taking out the trash.
