Quote:
Originally Posted by Chance and Change
In less than 7 hours, 40 shot, 4 fatally as violence rips Chicago
I hope they find each and every one of these "SAVAGES" only a savage would go around shooting people and targeting innocent people with random wild fire.
We need to institute the penalty of "firing squad" execution for these "killers on the wild".... No need to waste money on incarceration.
Sounds like they will end up with National Guards on the Streets of Chicago. If you are caught out with a gun, then you will get the penalty of being arrested, if you don't have a permit to carry one.
No need to scream and whine when fact is, steps have to be taken to stop the killing and bust up the gangs. It should be made illegal to be a member of a gang!!!! consider it a "urban terrorist organization"... just by ones membership within, and aiding and abetting a terrorist organization for those who hang around with gang members.
Across America, there needs to a "Anti-Gang" measure fully enforced!!!! Designated as "Urban Terrorist", and anyone being a member of such organizations, get a mandatory sentence, that includes "Solitary Confinement", so they can't re-organize inside the Prison!!!!
If they are ever released they cannot go back to the community they came from!!! If they are found to affiliate with any "terrorist gang" in any other place, they are given straight life, no parole.
This means "All Gangs", including the Mafiso Organizations as well. The police know whom they are.
Everyone is to pay for street based security cameras, or adding 1-2 cent to the sales tax to pay for it. Security is not free. Its a small fee, to stop the gangs, stop the abduction of women, and the abduction of children, stop the break in and robberies, These cameras should have face recognition software in the monitoring station. If you are "a legit person", then you have nothing to worry about, if you have malicious and criminal intent, then you should worry because you will be identified and caught.
This will save people in cities and in rural communities. This will tremendously curb the violence in the streets, and the abduction of women and children who are going about their daily lives.
Ignorance promotes the necessity of surveillance, there is no community in America that is 'immune from crime and violence".... Anyone with a false sense of security, is not paying attention to the "crazed mindsets of people", whether they are from an monetary affluent community, or from a dire poor community, no from a rural country town, or a rural farm community.
The human being is and has a long history of violence and criminal conduct. We can't go on assuming we are in some place of "exemption". It is not confined to any "skin color", nor is it confined to any race or ethnicity group.
I'd pay for community security without hesitation, even if they said the fee was $5 a month. I think that is not an unreasonable amount to clean up the criminal minded, the rapist minded, and the killer minded that is present in "every community". I'd pay also for a nominal fee for the cost it would take to build fences, around schools with quality security cameras and and trespass alarms. We might not be able to stop everything, but we sure can stop a great deal more than we are doing today.
I don't care for Trump and his policies, but I would not oppose the actions by him to push the bill to install these cameras in communities and business and shopping districts and build these fences around our schools. I don't care for Sessions, but I would not oppose him labeling gangs as 'Urban Terrorist" and begin to arrest anyone found to be a member of a "gang" (Urban Terrorist Group), this includes the Neo Nazi's, the white supremacist, the para military groups, and any other kind of vile promoting group that exist.
|
Holy crap. For once you made a logical post.
Bravo.
But... aren't fences/walls racist? Strange you call for a border wall around schools... but not where illegal immigration occurs...
There is a problem here with what you are proposing in regards to facial recognition and surveillance. The costs associated for it to be effective say 270* panoramic view and in clear high definition would be astronomical.
Las Vegas is surveillance capital of the USA and that was privately funded for casino/hotel liability to ensure no cheating the house occurs. Not so much for preventing or discouraging crime outside the premises.
Does Chicago area bring in enough revenue to support a surveillance network like you propose?
Does an actual police state need to exist? Meaning no guarantee to privacy?
Sure you can say if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about, I'd agree. I will play Devils advocate here on surveillance.
What good is the surveillance of others when the criminal justice system is broken and ineffective? Just last night they had a retired Chicago police Sergeant on talking about how someone can be booked for armed robbery, released with no bond, do the exact same thing again, and the next go around get an ankle monitor.
With facial recognition, what good would it do other than to keep a record of who is committing crime/repeat offenders?
Lenient punishments have to go.
Next question playing Devils advocate here.
Does the surveillance system you propose come with abuses? Meaning rather than focusing on active crime in real time, it is used to simply violate others privacy? Would the likes of modern SJW and activists scream it's racist thus call for the spread of surveillance systems to go everywhere?
While cameras would in theory work, there's no point if there is no harsh penalties put in place to focus on Motive. Incentive. Intent.
You mention community security, my sheriff's office has a program C.O.P. Citizens Observation Patrol. It's purely voluntary, and a foot in to potentially become a deputy.
16 hours for normal c.o.p. training 20 to be active in a boat.
Uniforms and vehicles are supplied via the sheriffs office.
In many cases, if a unit is within the vicinity of a car accident, they fill in the same role as a sworn and bagged officer of the law with filling out accident reports. They're an extra set of eyes and ears for law enforcement. They'll actively patrol an assigned route, just like an officer, and call in when they see an active crime.
Judging by the low numbers of violent and property crime I would almost say absence of violent and property crime since that is how low it is, I would say the program works.
The problem that exists in Chicago seems to be a case of negligence of duly elected officials for not mobilizing police where police are needed most. Why? 2 reasons.
1. Claims of racism. When you have an entity such as BLM that only mobilizes when someone is slain by police in the line of duty, you have a problem of deligitimizing police. Demonizing and shunning police only works against police patrolling trouble areas. Are police perfect? No. Police are human, errors and mistakes can and will occur. If people of Chicago are calling for more government they shouldn't complain when they get more of what they ask for. But I can see it now... more claims of one race arresting another race disproportionately and fanning the flames of tension rather than focusing on the fact police are patrolling problematic areas. You can not claim racism and express faux outrage because of demographics.
2. Liability. The court of public opinion seems to reign supreme with activists and shucksters running amok. Will officers knowingly risk their career over false accusations of racism? Will officers willingly risk their lives to patrol an area where they are seen as an enemy? Sure there are shootings in Chicago. Would the shootings transition from each other to police in a perverse enemy of my enemy is my friend? That's a huge liability for police agencies to throw police out for target practice. Which may be a contributing factor as to why those areas aren't being patrolled enough as is.
Just as I have argued before in terms of justifying a militia and if a tyrannical government were to exist and others have argued but but tanks and fighter bombers and drones and helicopters.
Those are not tools of enforcement. Those are tools of destruction.
Tools of enforcement would be feet on the ground on every sidewalk and on every street corner. To some degree police will have to become militarized.
You can not deny that. Patrols would be needed in an area that hostile, with armored vehicles. All of those surplus vehicles will need to be deployed. A standard issue crown vic, Dodge charger, taurus, Explorer won't stop bullets. An MRAP will.
Soft armor police are issued won't stop more than a handgun round.
Police would need to be issued plate carriers, plates, and trauma pads. They'd have to train for basically urban combat in order to be effective for they lack the numbers. That's just for patrolling never mind serving warrants.
Mobilizing the state national guard, throwing most state police officers into the mix with local and county municipalities would be required and have to happen seamlessly and all at once to patrol and round up shooters.
The problem I see with this, is the mentality of begging for more government. Rather than changing the government they have.
I would rather see the citizens of Chicago stand together and form their own militia and go round up gangs and fill in where the government failed them. Problem is... would it be legit, or would you have others seeking retribution targeting their known adversary that killed a friend/family member. That would show me they are sincere in their efforts of combating violence. If not a militia, call for the sheriffs office to form a volunteer auxiliary wing. Train them. Dispatch them to patrol and be the eyes and ears for police.
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.
