Guns Don’t Cause Gang Violence – Democrats Do

  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Sep 15, 2014 10:42 PM GMT
    cj-- Coopted from one of the better websites.
    Even Chicago’s Police Superintendent seems to understand this (to an extent). Of course, being the good progressive that he is, he glossed right over the primary culprits for Chicago’s woes and instead focused on disarming the law-abiding citizens he has sworn to protect.

    Between Friday night, and Sunday evening, 20 people had been shot in Rahm Emanuel’s gun control utopia (Chicago). Which, unbelievably, shows an improvement over the previous weekend, which tacked on more than 35 gunshot victims to the city’s climbing statistics. And, heck, with the CPD’s recent scandal surrounding how they classify various crimes, it almost makes you wonder if these numbers are more “ballpark” figures than actual stats.

    It would be easy to begin writing an article aimed at the abject failure of gun control. But, truthfully, Chicago’s failure goes far deeper than misguided (Bloomberg approved) regulation schemes. Since the days of Bill Thompson came to an end (nearly 80 years ago) the Democrats have had a monopoly on efforts to fix violence, gang activity, and inequality in the Windy City. And if you’re thinking, “It doesn’t seem to be working”… Well, you’d be right.

    [According to the Police Buzzard ... er, Chief]

    "It’s going to take a while to fix poverty and the breakup of the family unit, and education and jobs. But we can do something about gun laws today and we’re just not doing it."

    Right… Because that’s the problem with Chicago: Too little gun control. I mean, heck, it hasn’t exactly worked out that well so far, but why not double down? Right? The fact is, the failure of Liberalism has brought the city to its current state of deterioration. The Chicago model of unconstitutional restrictions on keeping and bearing arms has done little more than add fuel to the fire. Politicians, meanwhile, have been more than happy to ignore the easily identifiable, but politically tricky, origins of gang violence, and criminal activity.

    Despite embracing the union-lead concept of public education, nearly 80 percent of the city's 8th graders aren’t proficient in reading and writing. And while schools are going without heat, electricity, or (in some cases) adequate security, teachers make a salary that is more than $10,000 higher than the median Chicago household's income. Being one of the best funded education systems in America, it borders on audacious absurdity when the unions start crying about not having enough resources. Especially when you consider the way Democrats are on course to spend the city into being the next Detroit. [I can't wait.]

    Of course, all that tax revenue and debt was being used for a good cause, right? Wasn’t that deficit spending, borrowing, and begging from the State and Federal Government (as well as the general public) supposed to help fund anti-poverty programs, and create “shovel ready” jobs? Because, if that was the case, it seems kinda curious that Chicago has some uncomfortably high poverty rates when compared to other large US Cities. This almost seems like a silly thing to ask, but: Hey Democrats, maybe we could try something new?

    With an education system that has utterly failed inner city youth, and anti-poverty programs that have done little more than spur an exodus of private capital, it’s unsurprising to see violence sweep areas of Chicago like an epidemic... Especially when the “progressives” downtown have managed to disarm most of the remaining law-abiding citizens.

    The lesson of Chicago is rather simple: Progressivism can’t provide for the poor. Progressivism can’t provide the masses with quality education, healthcare, or housing. And, Progressivism can’t keep its people safe. While Democrats have taxed, spent, and regulated with relative impunity, Chicago continues to suffer misery and inequality on scales rarely matched by other US cities.

    Chicago Democrat politicians continue to repackage, and resell, to the city’s voters the very policy proposals that helped create their current plight. I often say that Progressives haven’t had a new idea in roughly 100 years (seriously: Healthcare, tax hikes, deficit spending… it’s all been tried), and Chicago is a prime example of progressive monopoly in government. Each new administration promised its citizens the same policies as the previous administration, with “new and improved” projected results.

    The only thing closer to Einstein’s definition of insanity, was America’s decision to elect a politician from that city to be President of the United States… Twice.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2014 11:22 PM GMT
    Liberals are the problem and they make every situation worse.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14345

    Sep 15, 2014 11:34 PM GMT

    I would not call it a progressive monopoly in government. It is more accurately known as a democratic monopoly in government and Chicago is not alone. Other cities like St Louis, Milwaukee, Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland, Buffalo, Rochester, Newark, and Baltimore have all been under the powerful boot of monopoly control by the corrupt, incompetent democratic party. Where are all these above mentioned cities now after 50+ long years of democratic monopoly ruleicon_question.gif Anyone want to take a guess or pull out statistics from the US Censusicon_question.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 15, 2014 11:58 PM GMT
    Only thing I can say is "everyone has a price and can be bought. What is your?"

    "if you have the money, you have power and you can influence the out come"

    Some laws are written to benefit the rich. There's always going to be a loop hole in the law again to benefit the rich. The thing I don't get is why are you electing the same people over and over and over to be in the Senate, Congress. I know I'm discriminating against the age group but come on your reaching 70, 80, 90 almost 100 years old and your still a senator, congressman give others a chance to be elected, retire already.

    I'm guessing they know (Senator & Congressman) something that the ordinary people who are not making 7 figures a year do not need to know.

    I probably get bombarded with heated debate on this. So bring it LOL

  • tazzari

    Posts: 2937

    Sep 16, 2014 12:06 AM GMT
    The sort of simplistic blame-gaming in the first two posts demeans both of you.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 16, 2014 1:07 AM GMT
    Guns make liberals panic and that's a good enough reason we need them.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14345

    Sep 16, 2014 1:12 AM GMT
    randwander saidGuns make liberals panic and that's a good enough reason we need them.
    Guns also make all democrats shit in their pants as wellicon_lol.gif No wonder it stinks to high heavens in most of these older northern cities.
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2937

    Sep 16, 2014 3:49 AM GMT
    randwander saidGuns make liberals panic and that's a good enough reason we need them.


    Liberal gun-owner here who was on the US Biathlon Olympic team, with a father who was a gunsmith, brother who was national champion, and ....

    Come back when you actually have something to say worth the electrons it took to post this rubbish..