Blog powered by Typepad

« Computers improve the world - REALLY? | Main | 'Boing-boing' Boris biffs the burka! »

Wednesday, 08 August 2018


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Black youths over here and over there doing the same thing because, well, that is what they always do. In London, I don't know if the black youths are native born, imported from the far flung Common Wealth or new 'refugees' from African shit holes. But, as long as I have been alive, this kind of behavior has been common, just much worse now, at least in my part of the world. The old timers back in the day simply called it 'population control'. Now it's well beyond that.

In this current back drop, the reason for the dramatic rise in black on black murder is that word--'politicians'.

It's not just Chicago. Even in the small towns around me, it is almost always the lead item on the local news cast. These towns no one outside of North Carolina will have ever heard of.

That's a start.

It seems to me that most of the violence is for the purpose of defending a sales pitch for the illegal drugs trade.
Drugs are easily available throughout the west, and those criminals running it have a reason to advertise, if only by word of mouth.
The war on drugs is in effect a war to keep the drugs trade in the hands of criminals.
Provide legal access to drugs and you bankrupt drug gangs. The members will perforce find another means of sustenance. The buyers will get a better, less dangerous product. And the right time to do it is when unemployment is low, so that the ex drug dealers have a legal alternative.
Sure it would be a step towards perfection if we stopped people from wanting the stuff. But forcing people to buy from criminals makes things worse not better.

My lovely wife was born and spent her first fourteen years in Franco’s Spain. During that time she says she never felt the oppressive pressure of the regime. To the contrary, there was a sense of safety and freedom ideal for a child growing up. Doors were left unlocked, vandalism unheard of and the “garrote vil” took care of serious criminals as well as the odd communist.

What might be of benefit could be the application of a bit of Mano Dura, although this is anathema for our times.

What Pat wrote.

Also, the reason certain people keep bringing up Chicago is the perception that, because it's usually run by Democrats and Obama got his start there, it's some kind of liberal, soft-on-crime haven. As someone who has actually lived there, I can report that it's definitely not. Like any other large city its social and governmental imperatives are different than those of rural areas, and that's caused friction with what are currently conservative forces across the US.

As a percentage of the population, St. Louis, Baltimore, Detroit, New Orleans, Newark, Milwaukee and the District Of Columbia all have higher murder rates than Chicago. The murder rates for St. Louis and Baltimore are more than twice as high.

Months ago I showed evidence the problem in Chicago was caused by closing public housing and spreading gangs throughout the city. Law enforcement is catching up with the changes. You don't have to worry about what to do. Chicago, Illinois and federal police are working on the problems. Only politicians and their unquestioning stooges try to politicize them.

It's also not true that all the gangs are black. There are gangs of all ethnicities and countries of origin. Where I'm currently living in the "country" outside Indianapolis, most drug gangs are white. Their drugs of choice are methamphetamine and opioids. The opioid problem is mostly among white people:

Random road checks with massive force and all vehicles and people with guns or drugs put inside on remand and sentenced six months for drugs one year for illegal guns and two years for both doubled sentence for each subsequent offence.

As a by product of my proposal, the drug cartels in central/southern America, the Taliban, Hezbollah and a few others would find themselves short of cash- helping to stabilise the whole world.


"As a percentage of the population, St. Louis, Baltimore, Detroit, New Orleans, Newark, Milwaukee and the District Of Columbia all have higher murder rates ... The murder rates for St. Louis and Baltimore are more."

Yes of course but so what?

"[L]iving in the "country" outside Indianapolis, most drug gangs are white."

Just curious Bob but, do those white gangs exhibit the same, or nearly the same, propensities for "scatter-shot shootings" that result in so very many innocents (or at least individuals either too old or young seemingly to be, active participants in drug/turf wars) getting added to the tallies?

It is my understanding that, in the two urban centers I'm passing familiar with, Little Rock and Memphis, whereas the shooting victim tallies in "the minority areas" are concerned, those two mirror the experiences of Chicago, Ferguson, and Baltimore however, where the white gangs hold sway, 90+% of the kilt victims (oddly more stranglings/mutilations than gunshot) are found in isolation rather than pedestrian neighborhoods and exhibit, oh I don't know how to put this but, the killings seem to be to more "exacting standards" I suppose.

It's politicians:

What about the same in London as David wrote above?

Perhaps David, that article might go a ways toward your "Something must be done but what?"

You have two problems out there, old fruit. First is the Right to Bear Arms, So all of Chicago can become armed to the teeth, and nothing can be done about it. They are just excercising their Constitutional Rights.
The second is that in the UK no one has any right to bear arms. Certain people have earned the privelige of bearing arms, but only after complying with onerous rules.
So in Chicago the problem is best left alone.
In England the laws can be enforced, although how that can be done in the present political climate is for greater sages than I to resolve.

Peter, first of all welcome to D&N. Thank God, there is indeed a huge difference between 'over here' and 'over there' because of the difference in gun ownership, however, in London the knife appears to be the weapon of choice and the death rate is creeping up. I'm afraid that I do not agree that the problem is best left alone in Chicago. Although I am not able to offer definitive advice because of my lack of detailed knowledge, nevertheless, it is an outrage that people are being slaughtered in such numbers. It requires political will which is why, up above, I proposed that referenda on increasing police action/power against drugs and guns be held simultaneously with Mayoral elections in order, one hopes, to give the politicians the willpower to act.

Incidentally, Peter, your writing style has a faintly familiar ring to it, have we 'met' elsewhere?


I didn't see your reply until now. The "so what" is that the American right isn't concerned about violence anywhere else 1/10th as much as it is Chicago's. The "issue" is raised as a bank shot criticism of Obama, the Obama administration, Democrats, and other out-groups.

There is violence in the white drug gangs, particularly among those that are also bikers. Generally, though, the crimes they commit tend more along the lines of theft, weapons trafficking and money laundering. You're right the nature of the violence isn't as intense. People in Chicago are packed together tighter than those out in "the country", so there are more interactions of all kinds.


"The "so what" is that the American right isn't concerned about violence anywhere else 1/10th as much as it is Chicago's."

So the American left is?

You'll recall all the fuss and fury where "mass shootings" are concerned? The fact that, by the very definition of mass shootings, Chicago that so very recently passed weekend experienced four separate mass shootings?


"the American left"

You're changing the subject. There are other cities with twice the murder rate.

The comments to this entry are closed.