Why wasn't the Chicago playground attack called a terrorist attack?

Why wasn't the Chicago playground attack called a terrorist attack?

couple reasons.

1. The '13 killed' last week were only wounded.

2. shootings happen every day in Chicago.

3. 90% gang related. The gangs have been here for 150 years. Every kind of machine gun is common.
[ think Mexico is bad - think again ]

The high crime areas are only in certain districts. Many areas are crime free. Guess why.


and the best reason......the big '13 killed' story happened 3 miles from Obama's house.
No kidding.

Obama
5046 S Greenwood Ave, Chicago, IL

Shooting
1809 West 50th Street, Chicago, IL

Look it up and see it's a straight run down 50th Street !!!


news story from September 20, 2013

Well, I don't think it would make Obama look very good. After all he is a native of Illinois. Plus Chicago is already out of control. They rather cover a more surprising attack. The Sandy Hook attack was perfect. who here had ever heard of Newton CT? And on top of that it was much more surprising for something like that to happen there.

Also, if the Media puppets want to push an agenda, I'm sure their just waiting around for the perfect story to arise and completely over blow it.

ok... since the op didn't bring any info to show how these people are being treated too leniently for their tastes, here we go... 4 young men in their 20s have been caught and arrested and have gang backgrounds. They are being tried for attempted murder since no one was killed.

Attempted murder conviction can be somewhat lenient to harsh so we don't yet what will become of it but you can read their names and see their faces and follow the story.

Or, we could just let the CIA come pick em up and ship them to some unknown location and we may never know what will happen to them and for all we know, they could ship them right out of the damn country because with the way the laws on terrorists work... they can keep everything under the rug if they so chose and call it national security and maybe this is what the op thinks is the up side to calling them terrorists but I sure don't see it... I still haven't figured that part out yet.

i have NO idea why we would want to spread the laws on how we handle terrorists to any other group because it gives the government to close the books and do whatever the hell they want.

You know what that will do? It will make gang violence a tool of the CIA rather than just a tool for locals and the FBI. In other words, it will get WORSE.

No, I don't see the point in doing that. What I see is the need to put known criminals to work... mandatory work, not day for day incentive work. The crime they commit hasn't changed no matter what you call it. the punishment is what needs to change and right now prison is just a breeding ground for gangs and they have constructed it that way. Authorities already control a lot of the gangs inside prisons. they don't isolate them because they say it's cruel... isolation is what they need. No, prison and gang lifestyle should not be upheld... that's why prisons should be turned into labor prisons. Petty drug dealers shouldn't go to prison. drugs are rampant in prisons because they let them inside to control the gangs. They should do like china does and make them do boring tedious work if they want to get out...and I'm talking about violent criminals. they should be isolated and made to work, not allowed to run drugs and lift weights all day and contact other gang members.

The LAST thing we need is more secrecy on how their cases are handled.

That is the absolute worst idea.

groingrinder
reply to post by ChuckNasty

 

What matters is the level of pressure brought against them. Domestic terrorists get persistent national law enforcement attention. Gangs get nada.

They get FBI and state federal attention. Think more LE stations have a gang task force than a terrorist task force? But you think they don't get enough attention?

More people are killed by gangs than are killed by Patriots unfairly villified by the Administration.

So we should label them as terrorists just so they can get more attention?

I believe heart disease kills more per year, in the USA, than gangs or terrorist combined. Should we call all fast food establishments terrorists hubs so we can bring them to justice too?

Gang activity used to be top news. Times have changed and so has 'our' focus.

Lingweenie
Well, I don't think it would make Obama look very good. After all he is a native of Illinois.

Wrong. He's allegedly a native of Hawaii. He moved to Chicago after he graduated to take a job as essentially a community organizer. That said, Chicago is Detroit with jobs... The place is corrupt as hell and pretty much always has been with it's history of basically being owned and operated by the Daily crime syndicate for decades now.

reply to post by NotAnAspie


Who said anything about Guantanamo or letting the CIA come and get them? I did not. You sure read a lot into other people's posts that is not there. You have quite the imagination.

reply to post by ChuckNasty


Heart disease is not an organization that is an illegal criminal enterprise. It is not trying to take over territory and kill rivals.

groingrinder
reply to post by ChuckNasty

 

Heart disease is not an organization that is an illegal criminal enterprise. It is not trying to take over territory and kill rivals.

You just described a gang.

Hopefully you see how silly it is to clump groups together just because they kill.

reply to post by groingrinder


But don't get me wrong. I hate gangs as much as terrorists.

WHY the govt can't pool their monies for a common good is beyond me. It IS a waste of tax dollars to place a division between human groups that intend us harm.

If they could only combine their info & money into a common good - crap like this wouldn't have happened.

Note - The patriot act was intended to do this, along with the implementation of homeland security... But we all know how F'd up those ideas played out.

I feel ya, but the topic of this thread compels me. Maybe another thread on this same nonsense would be good. (but worded differently)

reply to post by ChuckNasty


Star. At least we can agree on that.