Posted on 08/06/2018 9:19:29 AM PDT by bitt
Is it time for martial law in Democrat-run cities?
Heres a sampling of some recent headlines:
The Chicago Tribune, May 7: Chicago sees its most violent week of the year: 9 killed, 76 wounded; The Baltimore Sun, May 7: Double shooting of teens is first in series of shootings from Saturday evening through Sunday in Baltimore; ABC, New Orleans, May 7: NOPD investigating multiple shootings over the weekend in New Orleans. Equally alarming as the carnage is how desensitized weve become to normalized violence in these culturally rich and historically significant American cities.
Just how deadly and dangerous is the crime? Worse than you think
Ive been hesitant to ask, but I will no longer resist: Is it time for martial law in many (perhaps all) midsize and big cities that have been ruled by Democrats for decade upon decade?
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
That is not the same.
____________________________________
Elaborate please.
It’s also time to investigate these democrat mayors who profit off of anarchy.
Is there any group of hardworking Americans that Elizabeth Warren hasnt vilified?
The Boston Herald | 08-06-2018 | Herald Staff
Posted on 08/06/2018 6:28:05 AM PDT by calvincaspian
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3676901/posts
(while in NOLA) [snip] our criminal justice system, she railed. Its racist. It is. And when I say our system, I mean all the way. I mean front to back. This is not just sentencing reform were talking about here. Were talking about the front end on what you declare to be illegal on how you enforce it, on who gets arrested. [/snip]
These are our own countrymen who are being betrayed by the scum in the other party. We are not invading some other nation, but are protecting our own citizens. Protect the honest, law-abiding portion of the city from these vermin and you’ll win the respect of most of them (you may even win their votes). Also indict the local politicians who’ve allowed this mess to happen...that’ll send a message.
Chicago is a whole different situation, basically a War Zone with no end in sight and it is Black on Black crime. The troops would have to be there indefinitely and probably would have to divide the city up like Berlin was after W.W. II. It would be a mess.
No, eventually they will kill each other down to “sustainable” levels
You don’t need martial law. You need open and concealed carry. You need the mayor to congratulate someone that used a gun to defend their property, life or family.
A letter from the police congratulating someone for properly following the law with respect to use of deadly force.
Crime will disappear, and you won’t have to spend a nickel, because people will go out and buy their own guns for you.
Heck, you could even take your surplus police guns and grant them to property owners and small business owners with no felonies on their record.
Believe me, crime would go down by double digits in a month.
People consent to the government they have and of they want change then they need to demand it. If we send troops to one city then how many other cities will need them next and where does it end? Do we evolve then into a totalitarian government under the auspices of we have to protect the citizens?
Be careful of the road you want to go down , there are consequences.
Gang related? Criminals knocking each other off? Whats the problem? Chicago is only one of a number of Democrat cities where this happens.
Who would protect the National Guard? ........................... Hmmmmmm, no one, they’ll do, remember Ohio State, Newark NJ, and they could use a few Korean volunteers posted on the roof tops. I was a Company CO, in the ARNG years ago, I had many policeman in the unit during the riot control days of the late 60’s. I felt very safe with them, they had their PP pieces with them at all times. When we went into the city during the riots, my driver and RO were both cops. Militarily we weren’t issued ammo, my guys had their own.
Democrats in need of Reconstruction? Again?
“Militarily we werent issued ammo...”
That’s precisely my concern.
Want to save money?
Pay all birthing cost for married couples ONLY in Chicago... for the first child. Then sweeten the pot with a thousand dollars on the first 3 anniversaries. Sounds expensive but it's much cheaper than what we have now.
I think you are right here.
Back in the 1950'S, my family lived in a neighborhood in Indianapolis where blacks became the majority. We were one of the last white families to leave since my father was running a grocery store there. My mother had had enough when she couldn't put clothes out on a line to dry without having stuff stolen. So, we moved away.
The term employed by the media was "white flight". This was about the time that white neighborhoods became locked down with realtors agreeing not to show houses to people of color.
My father continued to run the store for almost a decade. During that time he developed a rapport with the community. At one point, when his store was being robbed at night, blacks in the community told him who the perps were so that he could deal with it.
What the media didn't tell you, which my father learned from his black friends, was that there was also "black flight" going on; i.e., a lot of the blacks were fleeing the crime and bad behavior. This caused blacks to seek housing where they could find relief from misbehaving neighbors. This put quite a strain on black family life for those who wished to raise healthy families. Eventually, they were boxed in by the realtors who wouldn't help them move into safer neighborhoods.
The system has been hard on blacks for a long time.
How about pulling OUT all LEO’s & letting the criminals kill each other off?
Would be a cheap & permanent solution to a long standing problem.
The cities are in rebellion. The shootings are a symptom. About fifty years late in my humble opinion to impose Marshall law.
Won’t happen. Again how long would they have to be there and how would they operate. The troops, once they were gone things would probably go right back to the way they are now.
People consent to the government they have and of they want change then they need to demand it. If we send troops to one city then how many other cities will need them next and where does it end? Do we evolve then into a totalitarian government under the auspices of we have to protect the citizens?
Be careful of the road you want to go down , there are consequences.
____________________________________________________
You’re almost certainly right that it will not happen.
Nevertheless, Chicago is the worst of the worst. It is like having a slice of lawless Mexico inserted into the U.S.
The people do consent to their government and they assume it will protect them. When it fails to do that, there is no reason to be loyal to it.
It is not a sign of totalitarianism if the government sends in troops to prevent people from slaughtering one another en masse in the streets. Let’s not go nuts here. This happens almost every weekend in Chicago.
No, eventually they will kill each other down to sustainable levels
^This I call it self culling.
The problem is not the lack of force. The police in those cities are more then capable of handling the problem. The problem lies with those that live in gated communities and work behind metal detectors and guards while ruling over the lives of others.
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.