Posted on 04/24/2008 10:32:59 AM PDT by kiriath_jearim
An outburst of gunfire rattled Chicago during the weekend, with at least nine people killed in 36 separate acts of violence.
The shootings were reported from Friday until Monday morning, police spokeswoman Monique Bond said Monday. They included gang shootings, drive-by attacks, and even one case in which someone used an AK-47 to shoot up a plumbing supply store.
Authorities did not immediately say whether any of the shootings were thought to be related.
Police Superintendent Jody Weis blamed an excess of guns and gangs.
"There are just too many weapons here," Weis said Sunday. "Too many guns, too many gangs."
During the same weekend last year, there were 19 shootings, including four homicides, and 21 shootings were reported during the same weekend in 2006, police statistics show.
New police data released Saturday showed Chicago's murder rate for March was down about 1 percent from March 2007.
“Too Many Guns?”
Yeah, too many guns in the hands of the dirtbag criminals who pay no attention to gun control “laws.”
Not enough guns in the hands of law abiding citizens who are unable to defend themselves thanks to gun grabbing liberals and their draconian, unconstitutional “laws.”
Maybe the Chicago officials should ban gangs?
Hey, I've got an idea! Why doesn't Chicago just ban guns and make gang crime illegal. That should solve the problem!
Sounds like Weis is too much of a candy-ass to round up the gangs....
Too many spoons cause folks like Rosie O'Donnel to be overweight. The opponents of logic always seem to want to blame an inanimate object for anything they don't like.
It's almost funny....
Wow! Nothing like stating the obvious! Duh alert.
I’m just curious as to how many gun crimes are being committed by “legal” firearms in Chicago as compared to illegal firearms? How many legal firearm owners are there in that city? How many who have illegal firearms? How many of those with legal firearms belong to a gang? How many belong to a gang who have illegal firearms? When they utilize an attack against the entire spectrum of firearms they are making a very bad argument.
Jody, Jody, Jody... Surely you know what you’re saying about “too many guns” is untrue.
Is Daley making you say that? Was it a condition of your employment?
“There are just too many weapons here,”
Do you think that he learned that “truism” in Philly or is he just a quick learner?/s
It’s easy to see why he left the FBI.
I had too many guns last weekend, but none of them shot anyone. They just sat there. Why are Chicago guns so evil? Those poor innocent youths.
Could it be too many stupid, barbaric, thugs with their pants hanging down to their knees, their caps on crooked not obeying any laws?
In other words, those wild, wacky, crazy Amish “youts” once again on a horse and buggy rampage buggy by.
Could it just possibly be that?
it’s rare, very rare, when you see a gun just get up
and walk out of a house and onto the street
and shoot someone.
/s
The Chicago City Counsel is apparently a pack of felons and they have CC! Yet we peasants and serfs are left defenseless.
You hit the nail on the head, SoldierDad.
By the way, I have a message for your son.....
“Thank-you for your service to the country.”
My guns are funny that way too. But, reading all the news articles about how guns attack people on their own inspired me to do the right thing and lock them in a big, heavy safe when I'm not walking them, just to be 100% sure...
I don’t have too many firearms (2) in my home. In the time they have been in my home (17 months since I inherited them after my father died) they have shot zero people. Before that my father owned them for uncounted years, along with several other firearms. In all those years the number of people shot with those firearms is zero. I don’t really think the problem is with the number of firearms.
I will forward your message to my son. Many thanks for your kind words.
How can you be sure that they don’t hear you coming home, and then just return to the spot where you left them?
You know, like the light in the refrigerator.
Well now you’ve done it. Just when I thought my cynicism about politicians had reached its maximum limit, I find that there is still some room for more.
Sprinkle talcum powder around them, then you know when they have been out creating mayhem.
When you catch them creating mayhem I suggest 2 minutes in timeout corner.
What I normally do is place a string of hair somewhere on the gun. If the hair is gone when I get home, I know that the gun has once again gone out on its own, without my permission.
I have one Beretta that I had to unload and cable lock inside my safe, because it just refused to behave itself. I blame it on its Italian heritage. My Smith and Wessons and Glocks are far better behaved. They fear the cable lock.
Just about the only shootings that ever happen are in downtown Atlanta, or the occasional latino gang shooting over in Gainesville.
The problem is the hardened city people with no conscience or moral compass. I can sympathize with some of the inner city youths who grew up with no Dad and little money, but that's no excuse to go around shooting people.
It's a tough problem for city mayors to tackle. Once a kid is in his teens, he/she has already formed a view of the world and either has a conscience or doesn't. All the rural kids around here go hunting and shooting and they don't shoot each other. I don't know what to do about gangs in Chicago, but I guarantee that taking away my guns and your guns is not going to save any lives.
I do, but the local pols seem to think that 'shoot on sight' is harsh.
L
Actually, taking away guns from people will have the oposite effect - namely, more people will be killed by guns. Sounds counterintuitive to the anti-gun people, but then they apparently don’t understand that you can’t take guns away from people who don’t report having those guns. You can only take guns away from those who register them.
Imaginary conversation:
“There are too many guns here!”
OK, let’s get rid of some guns. First thing we do, let’s take the guns away from the police.
“What?!?! Why should we do that!?!?”
Well, first off, we know just how many police officers there are, and each one has at least one gun. So we can get that number of guns “off the streets” in one fell swoop. Won’t you feel safer with fewer guns on the street?
“Of course not! Police officers are there to protect us. They won’t use guns against us!”
Actually, the police are there to try to figure out what happened after the crime is over. The police have no responsibility to protect you. And as for legally owned guns, those aren’t used in any significant numbers in crimes. So why do you think that by taking guns away from those LEAST DISPOSED TO USE THEM ILLEGALLY will you reduce crime in any way?
One can dream, can’t one?
Mark
All Citizens of the City of Chicago are to report to the nearest Emergency Room in order for the City (at no cost to the Citizen) to amputate the index finger of each hand. Once this is done all Citizens of the City will be protected from gun violence, for without the index finger, no trigger can be pulled.
If this act fails to insure the socialist utopia that all true Citizens of the City of Chicago dream and yearn for, we will, through our influence with the State of Illinois, force the Citizens of the State to follow our lead until peace reigns through out the City. If for some unknown and unthinkable reason, this does not provide the City with the safety and peace that it so richly deserves, the middle finger will be removed from each hand. Such action may be done anyway in order to provide for disturbance prevention. For without the middle finger, no one can flip the bird.
By the Aldermen and People of Chicago
Richard Daley Esq.
(sarc off)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.