2nd worst weekend of 2015 for Chicago gun violence: 8 dead, 45 wounded

[Faygo Kid]

Source: Chicago Tribune

Eight people were killed and at least 45 people were wounded in shootings between Friday evening and early Monday, making it the second most violent weekend in Chicago this year.

The only weekend that was worse was July 3-6, when 57 people were shot, seven fatally, according to an analysis of Chicago Tribune data on shootings and homicides.

When compared with non-holiday weekends, this past weekend was the worst with 53 people shot. The next highest weekends were Aug. 8-10 with 48, May 15-18 with 46, and Aug. 21-24 with 43.

Forty or more people were shot every weekend from July 24 to 27 to Aug. 28-31. . .

Read more: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-weekend-shooting-totals-20150921-story.ht

---

We ignore this at our own peril. This is not acceptable.

[pipoman]

1. Can someone remind me why

The city with the most restrictive gun control has the most out of freaking control crime problems?

[4dsc]

2. The surrounding cities don't have any restrictive gun control

thus gun are an easy buy just a few minutes away from Chicago.

[hack89]

6. But those cities don't have high levels of gun violence

if availability of guns was the root issue how is that possible?

[gcomeau]

4. Actually...

...the city with historically the worst out of control gun crimes problem enacted the most restrictive gun control in a desperate attempt to do something about it.

But that's futile because they're a *freaking city* and they have no border control. So anyone can just take a drive an hour away to Gary Indiana... or even just somewhere else in illinois... or wherever the hell else they want... load up on guns, then drive them right back into the city. Which is exactly what they do.


http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/01/29/us/where-50000-guns-in-chicago-came-from.html?_r=0



The only way to enact effective gun control is within a region with border controls.

As in, at the national level.

[BarstowCowboy]

5. You're wasting your breath

Trying to explain what you just explained to a gun nut is a waste of time. It's like their ears stop working when they encounter common sense.

[gcomeau]

9. Yeah, but that doesn't mean you let the silliness stand unchallenged. ;)

[friendly_iconoclast]

15. Then why does Houston, in gun-friendly Texas, have a far lower muder rate than Chicago?

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-8/table-8-state-cuts/table_8_offenses_known_to_law_enforcement_texas_by_city_2013.xls

The first number is population, the second the number is murder and non-negligent homicide
and the third is aggravated assault (which would cover non-fatal shootings)

Houston 2,180,606 214 10,270

The numbers for Chicago:

Chicago 2,720,554 414

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-8/table-8-state-cuts/table_8_offenses_known_to_law_enforcement_illinois_by_city_2013.xls

You will, of course, have noticed that there is no figure for aggravated assaults
The FBI explains thusly:

The FBI determined that the agency's data were underreported. Consequently, those data are not included in this table.

I agree-silliness should always be challenged...

[gcomeau]

40. Perhaps try reading this this time.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1212961

You are *reversing your cause and effect*. Chicago enacted it's strict gun control laws IN REACTION TO high crime resulting from gang activity there. As in, the gun crime came when Chicago was ALSO "gun friendly". As for the sociological and economic reasons why Chicago became a major center of gang activity, feel free to take some history courses on the subject if you like

The implementation of gun control simply did nothing about it, because gun control is effectively unenforceable at the city level. So you still have lots of guns streaming in from other "gun friendly" places all around Chicago and fueling the homicide rate. And until those guns stop flowing in that's not going to change. And as long as all those areas arounf Chicago stay "gun friendly" those guns are going to keep flowing in.

[friendly_iconoclast]

44. It appears it's not Chicago's guns that are the problem-it's Chicagoans

Are you aware that Houston used to have a Chicago-level murder rate, with pretty much the same gun laws as now?

Where did these two cities, of nearly the same size, diverge- and why?

Don't expect to see any move for expanded gun control in places that aren't as restrictive
as Chicago. We might reasonably ask:

Why should we move to restrict guns further because of near-medieval violence in Chicago, when another megacity of almost the same size has far less gun violence along with
gun laws that are nowhere near as restrictive as those purportedly 'protecting' Chicago

[hack89]

7. But state borders have significance

States have sovereign powers over many issues. More to the point, states grant rights through their constitutions. There is no magic federal wand you can wave to create national gun control.

[gcomeau]

8. Only barely...

...and only as an effect of the greater distances required to be traveled naturally causing (somewhat) less migration of weapons across said distances. Otherwise they're completely irrelevant to this problem.

Ever had anyone from "state border control" stop you as you passed from one state to another and search your vehicle?

Me neither.

"There is no magic federal wand you can wave to create national gun control."

Except the magic wand called "legislation"...

[happyslug]

10. A state can set up a border patrol and require everyone to stop and be checked at on its borders

The problem is the US Constitution says any PROFITS from such border inspections must go to the Federal Government. Thus the states do NOT want to set up such border police for while the fee to cross into the state can pay for the border patrol officers any profit from such inspections will go the the general fund of Congress NOT the state that set up the border patrol.

Se Article 1, Section 10, paragraph 1 of the US Consitution:

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

[gcomeau]

11. Which makes my entire point.

You have to do it at the national level to have any hope of it being effective.

[pipoman]

14. And that makes your point a constitutional impossibility...

There is no national control which could ever be effective....it is as ridiculously idiotic as trumps deportation plan.

[hack89]

12. States have sovereign powers that the Federal government can't override

It is basic civics.

[former9thward]

13. False.

Nobody legally can go across state lines and "load up on guns". You have to go through a FFL and have a background check. If you are saying this is done by people doing things illegally then they would do the same thing with "national controls".

[gcomeau]

18. Who said anything about legally?

And no it is not the same if you do it at the national level. Try bringing a load of guns into Canada and compare and contrast with how easy it is to bring them into a different US state.

[former9thward]

21. So we should have state border crossings?

[gcomeau]

25. Sigh... No...

That's ridiculously stupid. There should be *national level* gun control.

[pipoman]

27. Do you not understand that you have every piece of

National gun control which is constitutionally possible....in anyone's lifetime... there simply is nothing yet invented which will pass constitutional challenges. Not universal background checks, not "assault weapons bans, not magazine capacities, not waiting periods, not bullet control either....yearning for the impossible is such a waste of time....

[gcomeau]

28. Oh bull shit.

Yeah... doing the same fucking thing most other countries have already accomplished is "impossible".

No, it's completely and utterly possible.

[pipoman]

30. Oh..well...what country has/had a second amendment equivalent?

No, I suppose one could pretend a constitutional amendment is possible....but short of that and a repeal of the 2nd it isn't happening. Almost every year I have been here there has been a poll in gd asking just that in one way or another, every single poll is answered with a resounding 'no'...nobody wants such a thing and it will not happen in either of our lifetimes..

I have had this same conversation for a couple of decades. Those who favor gun control have spent the entire time lobbying for the constitutionally impossible...wasted 20 years...there are so many things which could actually be done..which may actually help....but alas, they prefer pretending over actually doing. ..

[gcomeau]

31. The same country that calls it AN AMENDMENT for a reason.

Now why don't you tell me all about how it's impossible to end slavery... because the Constitution!

[pipoman]

32. Do you really not know this? American history 101 is in order...

The 13th amendment was proposed by 2/3 of the house and senate, then ratified by 2/3 of the states....that is the process which will not happen in the US on this issue during our lives...not 10% of states would be even likely to ratify any such thing.....pretending...

[gcomeau]

33. Won't happen as long as people like you...

...keep laying down in defeat without trying and just throwing your hands in the air declaring something that is clearly possible to be impossible... that's for certain.

[pipoman]

34. No, I am not in favor of repealing the 2nd and never will be...

And no improvement can be made as long as people like you continue pretending a constitutional amendment is possible without a couple of lifetimes of state work....

So here we are....you demanding something which absolutely everyone knows isn't happening and ignoring those things which actually could happen...in fact people on your side of this issue oppose the possible in favor of wishing and pretending for the impossible ...more of the same....

[gcomeau]

39. I was extending you the benefit of the doubt...

...and assuming you were a reasonable person who was simply defeatist.

And no improvement can be made as long as people like you continue pretending a constitutional amendment is possible without a couple of lifetimes of state work....

How about you go back through my posts and find where I said anything remotely resembling that bolded part kiddo?

[friendly_iconoclast]

45. Gun owners are a large enough voting bloc that working with them is necessary...

...if anything is going to be done on a national level- and they have little, if any,
incentive to work with gun control advocates.

Ignoring them hasn't worked. Insulting them hasn't worked-though FSM knows
you lot love to do so:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11729858

You cannot guilt-trip them into giving up what they value or criminalizing themselves
as you do not have the moral authority to do so.

Not to put too fine a point on it- You need them more then they need you.
Recognize that, acting accordingly, and we all will get somewhere better

[christx30]

24. True, you can't do it *legally*,

but anyone that's going to gun down someone on the streets of Chicago isn't concerned about doing anything legally.
You can't do it legally, but you can do it practically.

You want to make guns illegal? Sure worked out for drugs. Nearly impossible to get a joint now days.

[gcomeau]

26. Sigh...

You want to make guns illegal?

No, rationally regulated. Like in most devellopped nations.

Sure worked out for...

...pretty much every other devellopped nation on Earth? Why yes, yes it did.

[GGJohn]

17. Wait! Wat?

You want border control?
Do you mean border checks at the state lines?

[gcomeau]

19. No.

That would be freaking stupid.

I'm pointing out that you can't implement gun control *without* control of the border around the area you're trying to keep guns out of.

So if you want it to work, do it at the level where you have that control. Nationally. If you do it at the city or state level don't expect shiny success stories.

[GGJohn]

20. Got it.

Thanks for the clarification.

[snooper2]

41. Chicago is fucked up because of gangs, lack of education and bullshit drug prison sentences

ripping families apart-

your past time of gun control won't fix anything - Address the other issues first then crime will go down-

[ileus]

16. The guns make them do it...

[Skittles]

22. cue the gun humpers to yammer about laws already on the books

[branford]

23. Gun rights advocates would stop "yammering" if the relevant laws

were actually enforced with determination and regularity. You should direct your criticisms to federal, state and local law enforcement officials. I'm certain that President Obama and Attorney General Lynch would love to hear from you.

In fact, most firearm rights proponents would be more than happy to see effective enforcement of current laws against straw purchases and other related matters.

Moreover, would you care to explain why the surrounding cities and towns outside of Chicago, most without restrictive gun control, don't even have a fraction of Chicago's rate of violent crime, firearm and otherwise?

[Duckhunter935]

29. I notice the crickets

when that question of crime in the surrounding areas where guns are readily available has been asked a few time in this thread. Interesting.

[friendly_iconoclast]

46. Is the answer more laws that won't be enforced?

Is there some critical mass of legal verbiage that, when reached, will actually have an
effect?

[Fix The Stupid]

35. Watch "Requiem for the Dead..."

Synopsis:

"More than 32,000 people die from gun violence every year in America, an average of 88 people per day. REQUIEM FOR THE DEAD: AMERICAN SPRING 2014 highlights a few of the estimated 8,000 individuals who died from gunfire that spring, drawing exclusively on found media – news accounts, police investigations and social media – to shine a light on little-known stories of tragic loss, bringing the victims to life in their own words and images. "

Those are STAGGERING numbers.

That film should be a must-see for all Americans.

[GGJohn]

36. You do realize that 2/3rds of those deaths are suicides?

Better mental health services would greatly cut down that number.

[Fix The Stupid]

37. Yes. Probably in 80% of the cases I watched...

Need to start spending resources on Mental health - not building air craft carriers and the like.

[GGJohn]

38. Absolutely, less spending on the military,

more spending on social services, things like better funding of mental health, more spending on infrastructure, more spending on education, more spending on job training, etc.
These are steps that can be taken to greatly reduce the overall violence in our country.

[NonMetro]

42. Gun Nuts Cherry Pick Information To Refute Gun Control

They're like someone who says: "Ha, ha! He put on mosquito repellant and got stung, but I didn't put any on and I didn't get stung!"

They find some city with less restrictive gun control that has a lower firearm death rate than one with more gun control, but will never mention the fact that overall gun deaths are down in the United States in the last 20 years - and a lot of that is because of gun control. Contrary to NRA propaganda, gun control works to reduce gun violence.

[hack89]

43. Hold on a second

are you saying that gun control is stricter now than 20 years ago? The federal AWB has gone away, concealed carry has expanded to all 50 states and Heller has voided gun bans in DC and Chicago.

[friendly_iconoclast]

47. It seems that the so-called gun nuts aren't the ones cherry picking information...