It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

29 people shot in less than 18 hours in Chicago

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

Wow, the map says it all; the killings are pretty much all over the place. What an awful place to live.




posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: TonyS

Yet every time I go there I feel safe and don't see anything live this type of violence.
Most of the crime happens in the late evening or early am.



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: Bluntone22

Wow, the map says it all; the killings are pretty much all over the place. What an awful place to live.


Almost all of the shootings occur in select neighborhoods. These aren't areas people think of when you say Chicago. These are areas that are literally like 10 miles outside of the city center. Chicago is a large city geographically and most of the crime is concentrated on the South and West sides of the city. None of these places are areas that anyone would go to unless you 1) live there or 2) buying dope. These aren't tourist areas.



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Its chicago. dying and killing is a way of life there. In short screw em.



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Everyone seems to know what the problems are but not how to save the city and rehabilitate criminals. And I'm suppose to believe we can beat ISIS. Ha.



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
Everyone seems to know what the problems are but not how to save the city and rehabilitate criminals. And I'm suppose to believe we can beat ISIS. Ha.


ISIS requires no saving or rehab...do you suggest we do the same with Chicago?

The real question is are the criminals worth rehabilitation and is Chicago worth saving?



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: Bluntone22

Wow, the map says it all; the killings are pretty much all over the place. What an awful place to live.


Almost all of the shootings occur in select neighborhoods. These aren't areas people think of when you say Chicago. These are areas that are literally like 10 miles outside of the city center. Chicago is a large city geographically and most of the crime is concentrated on the South and West sides of the city. None of these places are areas that anyone would go to unless you 1) live there or 2) buying dope. These aren't tourist areas.


Increasingly, random people are being shot on the city expressways. Shootings from high-rises adjacent to the expressways, or gang-bangers in a vehicle, picking out some random car to blast. Three last week.

It's a 20 minute longer drive, but I take the tollway around Chicago when heading over to visit family in Michigan.

And, as I pointed out earlier, the Barack Obama Presidential Library is going to be smack-dab in one of the high-crime neighborhoods. Visitors should take armored taxis, and leave before dusk.



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 01:24 PM
link   
i am so suprised and confused.



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: PolyCottonBlend

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: DAVID64


Like I said, I don't have a solution. Stricter gun laws?

If it were the ME, covert drops of military weapons would 'fix' it. Or make it worse so air strikes and invasion by the military would be more justified.

We can regime change whole nations but not fix our own hoods.

Or don't want to...

Or don't care to...


an excellent point! as obvious as that seems, I've never thought about that. if, through covert processes (more so than the regular wool over our eyes bs), the government could make progress towards stabilization and regime change in American cities by supplying the means (insert "means" here), would it be as acceptable a solution as those we use in other countries? the government certainly doesn't have a problem DEstabilizing cities!

Bomb them to rubble, then occupy and declare... victory!

Sorry about the collateral erm, damage folks.

How about a loan?



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: MOMof3
Everyone seems to know what the problems are but not how to save the city and rehabilitate criminals. And I'm suppose to believe we can beat ISIS. Ha.


ISIS requires no saving or rehab...do you suggest we do the same with Chicago?

The real question is are the criminals worth rehabilitation and is Chicago worth saving?


Because of the ENORMOUS number of cameras all over Chicago, police know who the gang members are that do the killing, and who the gang leaders are. They could start rounding them up tomorrow, just like ICE does with illegal aliens. But there's something terribly awry.



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 01:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
Everyone seems to know what the problems are but not how to save the city and rehabilitate criminals. And I'm suppose to believe we can beat ISIS. Ha.



The people committing the crime have been to the rehabilitation centers (Jail/prison) many times, and it hasn't deterred them. criminals like that aren't afraid of going to prison. Violence is the only language they understand and nothing can be done to fix things unless Police/National Guard roll in there heavy, and maybe lighten up the "rules of engagement".



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Lab4Us

originally posted by: toysforadults
People need jobs.


And until places like Illinois, California, New York, etc. quit taxing the job creators to the point they have to move to other states in order to survive, there will never be jobs. Also, while I am firmly in favor of a living wage, I am not in favor of providing it unless recipients are skilled enough to properly do the job for which they're being paid. In the end, the Democrats that politically control these hell holes need to come to the realization that enforcing ALL laws is the first step in righting this ship. I would imagine losing it's sanctuary city beacon would help Chicago lose a good number of these shooters.


Problem is that in many high violent crime areas, even police won't patrol. It was that way in Atlanta on Techwood years ago before the city cleared it out, tore it down and built Centennial Olympic Park. I had friends on the police force that wouldn't drive down Techwood. The entire area was basically a free for all. The people there didn't care about others lives in the least and there were daily shootings.

Atlanta finally wised up and wiped the whole place out. Once the order was given to demo the buildings the thugs didn't have much choice except to leave. There were some residents that had been there for years that were elderly and were helped to find new affordable housing, but the vast majority of residents in that area were gangbangers and dealers.

Maybe Chicago should take a page from Atlanta and wipe the area out for some new greenspace.....if you displace a few thousand gangbangers they can be much more easily wrangled based on the fact they can't all find another place to move into next door to eachother at the same time....divide and conquer...its a simple and old strategy that I'm surprised hasn't been used yet.

Find a large venture capital firm willing to get some serious tax writers for putting up the money to demo and rebuild a few blocks of space at a time and you quickly acquire new businesses creating jobs and get rid of the riff raff quickly.


This is by far one of the most rational responses in this thread.

I thought it was worth repeating.

If I could I would give you applause.



Respectfully,
~meathead
edit on 17-4-2017 by Mike Stivic because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: Lab4Us

originally posted by: toysforadults
People need jobs.


And until places like Illinois, California, New York, etc. quit taxing the job creators to the point they have to move to other states in order to survive, there will never be jobs. Also, while I am firmly in favor of a living wage, I am not in favor of providing it unless recipients are skilled enough to properly do the job for which they're being paid. In the end, the Democrats that politically control these hell holes need to come to the realization that enforcing ALL laws is the first step in righting this ship. I would imagine losing it's sanctuary city beacon would help Chicago lose a good number of these shooters.


Problem is that in many high violent crime areas, even police won't patrol. It was that way in Atlanta on Techwood years ago before the city cleared it out, tore it down and built Centennial Olympic Park. I had friends on the police force that wouldn't drive down Techwood. The entire area was basically a free for all. The people there didn't care about others lives in the least and there were daily shootings.

Atlanta finally wised up and wiped the whole place out. Once the order was given to demo the buildings the thugs didn't have much choice except to leave. There were some residents that had been there for years that were elderly and were helped to find new affordable housing, but the vast majority of residents in that area were gangbangers and dealers.

Maybe Chicago should take a page from Atlanta and wipe the area out for some new greenspace.....if you displace a few thousand gangbangers they can be much more easily wrangled based on the fact they can't all find another place to move into next door to eachother at the same time....divide and conquer...its a simple and old strategy that I'm surprised hasn't been used yet.

Find a large venture capital firm willing to get some serious tax writers for putting up the money to demo and rebuild a few blocks of space at a time and you quickly acquire new businesses creating jobs and get rid of the riff raff quickly.


They did that but it didn't work in Chicago. Very familiar with Atlanta and Techwood as I grew up there. Here in Chicago, they tore down Cabrini Green, a massive infamous housing complex in downtown Chicago. Unlike Atlanta, Chicago has a large gang culture. The displaced thugs wound up in rival territories and this often led to violence.

In Atlanta, a lot of the violence is just good ole drug sh*t. Here in Chicago, it is a lot deeper than that as most of the violence is rooted in gang territory disputes, etc. Much of the violence is coming from teenagers shooting other teens. Facebook disses, fighting over hoes, etc. Police chief stated average age of a shooter now is about 15 years old.



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

We could have annihilated Iraq and Afghanistan the first day. But we wanted to nation build and change lives. How about our own?



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 02:20 PM
link   
Its more than drugs and territory... there is a real evil that is also in Chicago and East St Louis. I was contacted to assist a woman who's son was homeless and had traveled to St Louis and then wound up in East st louis. He had been missing for some time and she knew he had been killed in ESL but wasnt getting cooperation in the unclaimed . He didnt fit any of the descriptions, so thats why she was not getting cooperation in reality.. she was just a desperate mom and suffering. I looked into things and there were a LOT of missing in ESL with no bodies found. Later on, we had a real eye opener. A "torture chamber" was discovered on Front street were an unknown number of homeless people had been tortured and killed. Im sure you can google and read all about it.

There is a thing... evil attracts evil and evil people. Where the law fears to tread, really heinous stuff happens and it ripples out. Education, jobs, opportunities.. they dont matter when a place becomes so corrupt and so out of control it attracts real evil stuff.



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

Serious question, because I've seen you bring up this point many times over the years.

Why are fathers or even families important?

I would say culture and peers are much more formative. If all of these black men suddenly lived in the home, do you think their influence would be beneficial? Look at how they act, do you want that attitude more involved in a kids life? Even if they cleaned up their act, we both know that people with gangbanger histories are going no where in life. How is that going to encourage a kid to work hard and act properly, when they see their dad get nothing from living on the straight and narrow path?



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 02:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: dantanna
it sounds harsh, but i live by new york city, jersey city, and newark. i frequently meet 22 year olds with 2 children.


That used to be how it was done. Good old family values. Become an adult at 18, start a career, after a couple years you're having kids. The average age of new parents in the US today is 25, that's the oldest people have ever been in the countries history. In the time of my parents, or at least my grandparents it was more like 20.



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 03:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: Edumakated

Serious question, because I've seen you bring up this point many times over the years.

Why are fathers or even families important?

I would say culture and peers are much more formative. If all of these black men suddenly lived in the home, do you think their influence would be beneficial? Look at how they act, do you want that attitude more involved in a kids life? Even if they cleaned up their act, we both know that people with gangbanger histories are going no where in life. How is that going to encourage a kid to work hard and act properly, when they see their dad get nothing from living on the straight and narrow path?


Fair question.

Fathers and traditional families are extremely important. This not to say there aren't cases where a single parent does a phenomenal job. We are talking about averages. On average, kids raised in single parent homes are worse off in pretty much every measure. It is probably because you lose an income more than anything and it keeps the family impoverished.

To be more specific, I think what is needed is fathers who are in the home who work and are productive, no matter how menial their job/career may be. Young boys need men to set boundaries and to show them how to be a man. What is happening now is that you have a bunch of boys being raised by women who tend to be a lot more emotional. As such, you get these kids who simply do not know how to control their emotions when it comes to disagreements, etc. So while they may be "thugs" physically they are mentally effeminate.

The other issue is that the vast majority of these kids are "mistakes" meaning you have situations where these kids are born to couples who really are not committed to each other. You get say a 21 year old guy impregnating an 18 year old. They were just trying to have sex and for whatever reason they don't use birth control and now you have a child connecting the mother and dad even though their relationship is really no deeper than a one night stand.

What then happens is the father eventually leaves. The mother is constantly saying to the child "Your Daddy ain't sh*t..." Other men come and go in the house. The child simply has no direction. These types of scenarios are repeated over and over in the hood. Kid gets raised by the streets.

It is a cultural failing.

Here is Larry Elder dropping stats...





edit on 17-4-2017 by Edumakated because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-4-2017 by Edumakated because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-4-2017 by Edumakated because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Starting to sound like Johannesburg over there.
edit on 17-4-2017 by Raxoxane because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2017 @ 05:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: CulturalResilience
A program of sterilisation in exchange for benefits.
a reply to: joemoe



It seems to me like that only works if class mobility doesn't exist. If you don't believe class mobility exists, then it shouldn't matter if they get benefits or not, because working wouldn't improve their situation.


Would you care to expand on that point?



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join