Trump's 'feds' now in Chicago to fight gun violence 'epidemic'

a reply to: Gryphon66

"So what you're really saying" is, we've been living under despotism for the past 80 or so years? Or is this a new thing?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
... and now, predictably, all the right-wingers LOVE them some Federal interference in State and local matters.

Good to see that the Right's core authoritarianism is once more proudly displayed.

Well Illinois / Chicago laws / law enforcement werent fixing anything. I suppose you would rather believe there is nothing wrong in Chicago so nothing needs to be fixed. Considering Chicago welcomed the task force and forwarded 20 CPD officers to it you might want to let them know the feds are interfering. Apparently CPD and the state of Illinois didnt get your memo.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Weeeelll, thank goodness you don't make your living "supposing" what other people believe.

Again, a simple point: you guys on "the right" hated Federal interference pre-January and you love it now.

/shrug

a reply to: Gryphon66


I thought the Right was all for the Waco Federal crack-down, and the Federal crack-down on those pipeline protestors a few months ago?

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Gryphon66


I thought the Right was all for the Waco Federal crack-down, and the Federal crack-down on those pipeline protestors a few months ago?

The American Right does love totalitarian overreach. They love it more when they're doing it.

originally posted by: SaturnFX
Just gonna point out that if this was done a year ago, this board would be lit up on how Obama the Tyrant is sending in federal foot soldiers to take away states rights and be the dictator they were demanding he was going to be for 8 years.

Change the guard, put a different letter in front of the name, and voila..freedom troops.

Obama never operated in ways that would help anyone. He sent in armed goon squads to squash liberties, not to liberate anyone. He armed the IRS, FDA, and other agencies, and militarized civilian police. Just not in Chicago.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Yup and still do.. Since you conveniently tried to side step and deflect let me refocus for you. It is not interference when the Feds and local police are working together. Interference would be sanctuary cities violating the law by releasing wanted criminals.

That is the difference. Surely you can understand that?

Who did you work for during the elections again?

originally posted by: Xcathdra
It is not interference when the Feds and local police are working together.

That sounds like a convenient excuse.

Why are feds even needed if local LEO know what is needed better than those flown in? This is the argument used over and over again when the feds try to exert jurisdiction in local matters.

a reply to: daskakik

Im not sure how local and federal agencies working together are a "convenient excuse".

A task force can focus on specific areas where as local police dont have that luxury or dont have enough resources to make an impact in the big picture sense. Bringing in Feds allows them to focus on the issue, it brings in extra manpower for that issue and it makes federal resources available where otherwise they might not be.

While local police have jurisdiction, the feds have overlapping jurisdiction in some areas. Gun crimes would be one of those areas. Chicago certainly doesn't have to cooperate however the Feds don't need CPD permission in this particular area since federal statutes also cover this area.

The only thing the Feds cant do is just show up and take over a case from local police (some rare exceptions exist).

Any particular reason you have issues with federal officer assisting local police to help deter / stop gun crime? Are people that paranoid / hate the government that much that they would rather see the trend in gun crime in Chicago continually go up rather than working together to stop it?

That attitude is one im noticing more and more from the left. Its like being on an airplane, not liking the pilot and hoping he crashed the plane.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Im not sure how local and federal agencies working together are a "convenient excuse".

It is an excuse in the sense that "working with local LEO" makes it OK.

Any particular reason you have issues with federal officer assisting local police to help deter / stop gun crime? Are people that paranoid / hate the government that much that they would rather see the trend in gun crime in Chicago continually go up rather than working together to stop it?

The point is that that is what a bunch of people opposed when the feds got involved in the past.

That is what, Gryphon66, IMO, and I'm pointing out, the hypocrisy of some people on the right now being OK with DC poking its nose in local matters when, for decades, the cry has been that it was overreach and an abuse of power.

That attitude is one im noticing more and more from the left. Its like being on an airplane, not liking the pilot and hoping he crashed the plane.

Did you complain about it when it was coming from the other side?

originally posted by: daskakik
It is an excuse in the sense that "working with local LEO" makes it OK.

It does make it ok even though its not needed in this scenario.

originally posted by: daskakik
The point is that that is what a bunch of people opposed when the feds got involved in the past.

and thats the past...

originally posted by: daskakik
That is what, Gryphon66, IMO, and I'm pointing out, the hypocrisy of some people on the right now being OK with DC poking its nose in local matters when, for decades, the cry has been that it was overreach and an abuse of power.

It would be inappropriate for the Feds to swoop in without clear jurisdiction. Since gun crimes are also a federal law violation they are within their authority to act in Chicago. I dont believe there is any hypocrisy in this case based on those facts. Also, CPD is working with the task force, forwarding 20 officers to it.

originally posted by: daskakik
Did you complain about it when it was coming from the other side?

When there was no clear jurisdiction by the Feds yes. As a perfect example the controlled substance act is being used by the eds in a manner inconsistent with its intent and is a violation of states rights. States were meant to decide for themselves their own medical standards. Using the CSA to go after states who legalized marijuana is a clear overreach in my opinion. Because of the Supremacy clause though they get away with it.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You missed the point when Gryphon made it and you are still missing it.

It isn't about you specifically. It is about those who claimed to be "that paranoid/hate the government" in the past but are now OK with it.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Xcathdra

You missed the point when Gryphon made it and you are still missing it.

It isn't about you specifically. It is about those who claimed to be "that paranoid/hate the government" in the past but are now OK with it.

sure - just like a lot of Democrats who were ok with the obama admin illegally spying on citizens but then freak out when TRump won because he now has the same authority.

In this case though its not overreach since its overlapping jurisdictions. It is not a difficult concept to understand.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
sure - just like a lot of Democrats who were ok with the obama admin illegally spying on citizens but then freak out when TRump won because he now has the same authority.

Sure, them too. That doesn't make the excuse any better.

In this case though its not overreach since its overlapping jurisdictions. It is not a difficult concept to understand.

I'm not talking legalities, I'm talking about people being OK with it.

That is also a simple concept.

a reply to: daskakik

Sure but given my experience I find that everyday people think they know the law when in reality they dont. A perfect example is arguing the FEds are somehow overreaching / interfering in local law enforcement areas, like gun / gang violence in Chicago, when in reality they arent.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Sure but given my experience I find that everyday people think they know the law when in reality they dont.

Doesn't matter because that is not what I'm talking about.

Someone who mistrusts/hates the feds doesn't really need to win an argument in court to continue to mistrust/hate them.

Good news of sorts. Since the Federal Agents began "assisting" Chicago police, shootings have decreased. Notice the trend of the daily graph at: heyjackass.com...

a reply to: carewemust

Hate being a debbie downer, not really, but all I'm seeing is 4 less than last year (2016) but 100 more then the next highest year (2012). Every other year back to 2009, except 2016, were even lower.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Gryphon66


I thought the Right was all for the Waco Federal crack-down, and the Federal crack-down on those pipeline protestors a few months ago?

I don't think pretty much anyone Right was for the Waco crackdown just the dems at the time.

Even after they burned all them children to death because of a few guns.

The pipeline putz's were environmental activists, there with the blessing of obama and his EPA, not protesters.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: Xcathdra
Sure but given my experience I find that everyday people think they know the law when in reality they dont.

Doesn't matter because that is not what I'm talking about.

Someone who mistrusts/hates the feds doesn't really need to win an argument in court to continue to mistrust/hate them.

Of course not... They will continue to hold that mindset regardless of facts and how wrong they are.