Lawmakers: Military could quell Chicago violence

www.washingtonpost.com...

Two Illinois lawmakers say violence has become so rampant in Chicago that the National Guard must be called in to help.

Chicago Democratic Reps. John Fritchey and LaShawn Ford made a public plea to Gov. Pat Quinn on Sunday to deploy troops.

The request comes amid a recent surge in violent crime, including a night last week that saw seven people killed and 18 wounded, mostly by gunfire.

well isnt this interesting, lawmakers suggesting they put troops in chicago to quell everyday city violence... but they refuse to do send troosp to our southern border where our national security is at risk??? i dont get it. this could be a prelude to all kinds of cans of worms..

Because its the presidents "home town". It needs to be safe so when he isn't at Camp David or Hawaii he has a safe place to go. There is violence in every town, and city what makes Chicago any different? Maybe they should fire the police chief and get one that knows what they are doing.

It's sick.

Not only is it unconstitutional, it's absurd.

What are they going to raid houses too?

Armored vehicles and assault rifles on the streets of America? Under Pentagon command?

It's 100% unacceptable.

Originally posted by sonoflibra
Maybe they should fire the police chief and get one that knows what they are doing.

Exactly. You slammed the nail on the head.

Your solution is simple, and highly effective.

There are many social issues we can address as well that would aid in solving the root issues of our inner city crime problems.

I'd rather solve the problem than accept military on the streets to react to that problem.

It won't stop crime at all, I promise. Crime happens because of social issues and enviornmental issues, no amount of police/military presence will ever solve that.

Are the streets of Baghdad patrolled by US Military? Are they SAFE??? Let's use some common sense here and look at REAL WORLD EXAMPLES.

still having problems down here in texas on the ft hood deal hassan nissan waxed 13 souls got a 50,000 dollar helio ride to san antonio hospital for a 10,000 dollar psych evaluation under the new obama health care program and they still cant figure out whats the matter with him 13 people no longer have the ability to breathe and old ladies are told that obama care wont pay for a ride in an ambulance go ahead and just try to walk the last 5 miles to the emergency room i think hassan nissan deserves to live if he can take the lead that he administered to thirteen people what happened to cnn on this story

reply to post by robatmj12


What does that have to do with the subject?

Originally posted by muzzleflash
It's sick.

Not only is it unconstitutional, it's absurd.

What are they going to raid houses too?

Armored vehicles and assault rifles on the streets of America? Under Pentagon command?

It's 100% unacceptable.

How exactly using the National Guard unconstitutinal? I mean that is what they are for.

I know having them shipped off to Iraq these last few years may have fogged your memory, but they are supposed to be used inside the confines of our borders. They don't call them National Guard for nothing.

Chicago is to big of a city for one states National Guard to do it by themselves. Besides if they did use the IL National Guard to do it, a majority of them probably come from Chicago so they won't fire on their own family and friends

reply to post by sonoflibra


There wouldn't be any firing on anyone. To many great alternatives then bullets.

Besides if that family or friend tried to harm them then they aren't that great of a family member or friend.

I would send a rubber bullet or canister toward a "friend" or family member if they tried to chunk a bottle through my skull.

I am in whiting IN just across the border and work on the southside of Chicago let me tell you its not as bad as they are making it out to be

Originally posted by Miracle Man

Originally posted by muzzleflash
It's sick.

Not only is it unconstitutional, it's absurd.

What are they going to raid houses too?

Armored vehicles and assault rifles on the streets of America? Under Pentagon command?

It's 100% unacceptable.

How exactly using the National Guard unconstitutinal? I mean that is what they are for.

I know having them shipped off to Iraq these last few years may have fogged your memory, but they are supposed to be used inside the confines of our borders. They don't call them National Guard for nothing.

It's unconstitutional to use the National Guard as law enforcement. You don't understand how bad it is to use military for law enforcement just ask the Iraqis.

reply to post by sremmos


The Governor can call the Guard into action during local or statewide emergencies, such as storms, drought, and civil disturbances, to name a few.

The Guard has a unique dual mission, with both Federal and State responsibilities. During peacetime, the Governor through the State Adjutant General commands Guard forces. The Governor can call the Guard into action during local or statewide emergencies, such as storms, drought, and civil disturbances, to name a few.

www.globalsecurity.org...

You will notice the term civil disturbance used a couple of times as one of the roles the NG can be used. I believe this is what is happening now and is why they are being requested.

I again ask.

If this is their purpose, what is unconstitutional about it?

Originally posted by sonoflibra
Chicago is to big of a city for one states National Guard to do it by themselves. Besides if they did use the IL National Guard to do it, a majority of them probably come from Chicago so they won't fire on their own family and friends

It isn't the whole city of Chicago that is having the "problem", we are talking about a few areas...it is mostly because of how Chicago is set up.

Like someone else said...it's not as bad as they try to make it. I go to Chicago often...if you don't go into places that you don't know...you shouldn't have any problems.

Quelling an emergency civil disturbance is NOT bringing in the National Guard to conduct general law enforcement.

A civil disturbance is a riot, an uprising, or something along those lines. A high crime rate =/= emergency civil disturbance and so such a use would be unconstitutional.

By your logic they can just declare anything an emergency civil disturbance and bring the national guard in.

How long will the National Guard be staying to stop this "emergency civil disturbance?"

[edit on 26-4-2010 by sremmos]

reply to post by sremmos


By what is being conveyed they feel that they are in the middle of a civil disturbance.

There police force cannot handle the amount of violent crimes and need help. That is yet another mission of the NG, if you bothered to read the link then you would see that another mission is to support local law enforcement when needed.

Seems like they might need it.

Civil disturbance. Check

Police force needs support. Check.

Do you need a third? So far we are 2 for 2 in that bringing in the NG is within the Constitution.

I was mistaken then, I apologize.

I can not imagine what people think of Chicago. It is a mega city... if your expreience is with a large city of say 250k .... Chicago is more than 10x that size , cities within cities. The problems in the city started many years ago even before oldman rich daley. The violent crime rate (it's being said ) was higher in the 60's.

Under little dick daley street cops are handcuffed in the areas where the current shootings are taking place.

The supt. of police hand picked by daley is x-f.b.i ,competent but just another highly paid pol. ( read no real big city experience / daley puppet)

To those folks calling for a military presence
... just quit your job. for you have no clue what is the function of the military.

The corruption in chicago's political structure is epic (read FUBAR).

Unwilling to Properly place blame and gutless when it comes to making the needed correction....they call for an air-strike.

reply to post by sremmos


Apology is accepted.

Big of you to admit when you are wrong. I get the feeling you will be the only one who is man enough to do so.

I had really believed what I said, I try not to ignore reality as much as possible even if pride or my own ideologies disagree with it. I'm glad I argued with you though as at least I learned something.

If the idea of the National Guard is such a bad idea, or unlawfull, do you think they might think about using private security firms like Xe?

It's not ideal as we've seen from their "adventures" in Iraq and Afghanistan, but maybe it is an option they would consider.

CX.