It always gets my attention when an out-of-town paper runs an editorial on Chicago and this one from the Wall Street Journal is no exception. It’s about the homicide rate in Chicago and gun control. They scoff:
Democrats blame guns for the violence, and on Monday President Biden announced a new regulation on firearms, including restrictions on privately made weapons. Yet Illinois already has strict gun laws. It requires a license for all gun ownership and universal background checks, among other rules. Chicago bans assault weapons, silencers, mufflers and laser sights; limits the sale of handguns and high-capacity magazines; and restricts sales at gun shows. This amounts to much of the progressive gun-control wish list, but it isn’t making Chicago safer.
The real problem is the lack of political will to stop the mayhem.
I don’t think their assessment is quite right. I think that the prevailing opinion among Chicago Democrats is that, if Indiana, Wisconsin, and Missouri had gun control as strict as Chicago’s, it would reduce Chicago’s problem with gun violence. And Chicago does have a problem with gun violence and, indeed, with crime more generally. There are fewer homicides in Chicago this year than last year at this time but more than 2018, 2019, and 2020. The number of carjackings in Chicago last year exceeded those in New York and Los Angeles put together. And hardly a day goes by without a report of a tone-y store on the Mag Mile being looted. Some of them have already been looted several times this year.
And Chicago’s problem is actually a lot worse than a lack of the political will. It is patently obvious that Chicago’s problem is gangs and the sad truth is that there are Chicago pols in bed with the gangs. There are NGOs whose relationship to the gangs is roughly the same as that between the IRA and Sinn Fein—when they’re shooting at each other they’re gangs and when they’re engaged in community organizing they’re NGOs.
Personally, I don’t have a problem with strict gun control (but for the pesky 2nd Amendment) but I’m afraid that such measures are futile. It seems to have escaped the president’s among other’s attention that laws primarily influence the law-abiding. Criminals are criminals because they don’t obey the law. Chicago’s homicide problem is mostly criminals shooting each other and innocents being caught in the crossfire.
“I think that the prevailing opinion among Chicago Democrats is that, if Indiana, Wisconsin, and Missouri had gun control as strict as Chicago’s, it would reduce Chicago’s problem with gun violence.”
Magical thinking. All of those venues have laws against illegal drugs, but the drugs still find their way to Chicago. That’s what the guns are all about.
“…Chicago pols in bed with the gangs.”
With a Mayor like Lightfoot and a DA like Foxx nothing will change. I’m supposed to be sympathetic with Chicagoans, but its a self inflicted wound.
“Personally, I don’t have a problem with strict gun control…”
I suspect many would favor more restrictive control, except that they understand if they give an inch they will lose mile. Anyone who trusts a gun zealot’s reassurances is a fool.
“Criminals are criminals because they don’t obey the law.”
What so many can’t get through their thick skulls. Maybe a mental health professional can intervene and talk sense into gun violence perps. Yeah, that’s what I’m going with……
Maybe they need to post shrinks at the subway stations in NYC.
The whole discussion is misconstrued. The problem is NOT gun violence; it is black violence. Whether black violence can be suppressed by policing is a real question. If the violence has a genetic cause, then no acceptable level of policing will work.
Guns are already controlled. I wish that phrase could be dropped from the debate but then of course, there would be no debate. The issue is a very small number of violent urban people without gun ownership or carry permits illegally obtaining firearms, mainly pistols, and using them to shot others like themselves. There are already laws against everything they are doing. Further laws restricting the rights of others will not solve this problem of young criminals shooting each other and innocent by standers. If it is the violence people truly wish to suppress, then targeted law enforcement, profiling, is the most likely solution.
“violent urban people”
Dog whistle for Black.
Police need to stop the killing without using violence themselves.
They’ve known that for decades.
Give them one year to fix this or abolish the police.
Profiling used to be the number one method of the day back when police walked beats. Then it became politically incorrect. Horror for “urban people” (read: black – not a dog whistle), but a bonanza for criminals and the Race Baiting Industry.
My daughter has resigned from her Washington DC “underprivileged kids” (read: black) teaching position. As I suspected, the liberal professor who got in her head with the save the world crap is now in the trash heap. She has learned first hand what the pathologies of urban black families are. The final straw was the crackhead mom who insisted her kid was an angel, even though he objectively fails all math developmental statistics. So she failed him. This didn’t go well with the mother (threats and such) or administration, who just want to move the kids along. She gave it two years and will do just fine, all the wiser to liberal bullshit. I fear for the kids being done such a disservice at the liberal alter.
It all started with The Great Society, people.
When police walked a beat they were not profiling, they actually knew the people. I dont know the issues in Chicago as well as Dave but I suspect that lack of trust is a big issue. I certainly saw that in Philly. Minority communities didnt trust the police and with some justification. The police were much freer with their beatings in the black neighborhoods. Corruption was incredibly rampant (I had tickets fixed too) and since the police were all white they favored their own neighborhoods.
Anyway, hard to regain that trust. Takes time but you can probably do it with the ordinary citizen. Not so much with gangs.
Steve
Drew- Sorry to hear about your daughter. Really. It certainly could be possible that some idealistic liberal set up a cant win situation there. I do know what you describe sounds very much like what goes on in our coal country schools. Few liberals up there. Solid GOP country but lots of alcoholism, drug abuse and unemployment. We had to fire one of our employees, a mid-level making 6 figures, because she was stealing drugs to give to her daughter to sell and/or hand out at school. Mostly just so she could be one of the cool kids. Teachers end up dealing with the dysfunction created in our communities and families on a more personal and prolonged level than most of us. Irritates me to see them bashed so much. Hope she finds a better place.
Steve
â€It all started with The Great Society, people.â€
So true, that the origination point was long ago, and liberally implemented by people loosening the educational guidelines to make students “feel good†in lieu of receiving a “good education.â€
Years ago my sister started her teaching career in a Los Angeles minority high school. She adhered to the principles of grading students on their academic performance rather than passing them because of their demographic placement in life. Because of the high failure rate in her class she was heavily chastised by school administrators, and had all four tires slit on her car, probably by a retaliating student. Soon thereafter she quit.