• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Chicago’s newly armed residents send murder rate plummeting

I wouldn't jump to conclusions here about repeal of Chicago's CCW law.

Overall crime, according to McCarthy is down. There could be several factors why it is, one, the colder weather, and two, tripling the budget alloted for overtime police officers saturating problem neighborhoods with beat patrols.

In the 60's and 70's, it wasn't unusual to see cops walking beats in neighborhoods, and it wasn't unusual in the 80's to see cops on bicycles patrolling neighborhoods and the lakefront.

Chicago police: Crime down 16 percent, homicides down 18 percent - Chicago Tribune

Not to discredit the OP's news or blog opinion, but there is always more to a picture than meets the eye.
 
Wiseone said:
....
Click to expand...

I'm most impressed with your defence. Social psychologists have studied that as well. You do not want to read what they have to say.

Would it not have been better to address your wobbly conjecture and BELIEFS. Or is the Wise one a misnomer. It appears so.
 
AJiveMan said:
I wouldn't jump to conclusions here about repeal of Chicago's CCW law.

Overall crime, according to McCarthy is down. There could be several factors why it is, one, the colder weather, and two, tripling the budget alloted for overtime police officers saturating problem neighborhoods with beat patrols.

In the 60's and 70's, it wasn't unusual to see cops walking beats in neighborhoods, and it wasn't unusual in the 80's to see cops on bicycles patrolling neighborhoods and the lakefront.

Chicago police: Crime down 16 percent, homicides down 18 percent - Chicago Tribune

Not to discredit the OP's news or blog opinion, but there is always more to a picture than meets the eye.
Click to expand...

What you say is true but that should have been negated by what gun control promised would happen. The point is is it coincidence that such actions seem to be followed by a decrease. One may look to other state to confirm this same result I suppose. Has anyone of them reported and increase of crime?
 
Crimefree said:
What you say is true but that should have been negated by what gun control promised would happen. The point is is it coincidence that such actions seem to be followed by a decrease. One may look to other state to confirm this same result I suppose. Has anyone of them reported and increase of crime?
Click to expand...

Well, NYC had some of the strictest gun laws, and their gun related homicides were the lowest in 2012.
 
AJiveMan said:
Well, NYC had some of the strictest gun laws, and their gun related homicides were the lowest in 2012.
Click to expand...

Are you saying there is something unique and relevant about if we removed vehicles from citizens and vehicle crime decreases..... You may have missed something. Most people are not fools.

I asked if CRIME reduced. Did crime reduce in New York?
 
NIMBY said:
Who is to make this determination on trust.
One person, two, four, eight, etc.
How is trust defined in the actions of the government, the person, the RW collective?
We end up here every time.
Are we to have over 300 million citizen countries with their own force fields around their property and themselves ? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Trust should be granted until one is shown to be untrustworthy. It becomes pretty sticky when we start allowing individuals in authority to decide who is trustworthy based on "just because" rather than reality. Most gun-control starts with the premise that law abiding citizens are not responsible or trustworthy enough to handle owning a firearm without shooting up a school or murdering someone over a parking spot so we are doing what is best for them. We trust people until they prove they cannot be trusted. We do it with things that are more dangerous than firearms so why the emphasis on firearms?
 
BretJ said:
Trust should be granted until one is shown to be untrustworthy. It becomes pretty sticky when we start allowing individuals in authority to decide who is trustworthy based on "just because" rather than reality. Most gun-control starts with the premise that law abiding citizens are not responsible or trustworthy enough to handle owning a firearm without shooting up a school or murdering someone over a parking spot so we are doing what is best for them.
Click to expand...

Which describes exactly the disgustingly oppressive nature of gun control. They don't like or trust others who have not or will not join their sick society.
 
Wiseone said:
3lcd.jpg
Click to expand...

Sean Penn? He went full retard.......
(Seriously....))
 
Wiseone said:
Well for one if you're formally trained in firearm use then it should train you how on how to have a different mindset when carrying a firearm, that's the obvious answer. Secondly for an untrained person carrying a weapon in my opinion could have a number of psychology impacts like an increased feeling of paranoia, to a heightened sense of power and authority.
Click to expand...

Yet there are far more CCW holders than law enforcement. Which group ends up shooting more bystanders or innocent people?

Are there people that are willing to take more risks? Certainly. I have seen them, but from personal experience, they are far and in between. In addition, there have been times I have been willing to step up and help (after a quick ORM evaluation) to help someone knowing I have the ability to defend myself if things went south. Risk is not always a bad thing and some people are willing to take risks to aid other people rather than wait on someone else to do it.
 
1750Texan said:
I don't have a problem with anyone CC...just lets not pretend that it is an over-all crime deterent, just like we should claim that the streets will be a bloodbath allowing CC.
Click to expand...
That is where both sides get it wrong. Arguing more guns = anything is hyperbole.
Reality trumps hysteria except when we are dealing with politicians.
 
Crimefree said:
I have never quite figured why firearm owners are held to a higher standard. It all almost certain that those that do believe that somehow the gun controls the owner. Who must therefore be watched, monitored, tested, limited and restrained in case the gun takes over. Naturally there are restrictions, tests, qualifications and history which allow them to predict what somebody will do in the future. This prediction ability is never ever applied to themselves since they are better than others.



Firearm owners try really hard to appease the paranoid fear and hatred prone. Unfortunately like a fear of heights, fear of guns cannot be appeased.
Click to expand...

They demand more accountability and want to track firearms more than paroles and criminals.
 
Crimefree said:
Are you saying there is something unique and relevant about if we removed vehicles from citizens and vehicle crime decreases..... You may have missed something. Most people are not fools.

I asked if CRIME reduced. Did crime reduce in New York?
Click to expand...

Vehicles?

They claim in NYC gun homicides were lower in 2012, 20% lower. Reduced crime? beats me, I don't know, but you could use Google and look it up for yourself.

Chicago is boasting about a lower crime rate.
 
BretJ said:
Yet there are far more CCW holders than law enforcement. Which group ends up shooting more bystanders or innocent people?

Are there people that are willing to take more risks? Certainly. I have seen them, but from personal experience, they are far and in between. In addition, there have been times I have been willing to step up and help (after a quick ORM evaluation) to help someone knowing I have the ability to defend myself if things went south. Risk is not always a bad thing and some people are willing to take risks to aid other people rather than wait on someone else to do it.
Click to expand...

You're comparing two very different things by comparing CCW holders and police, for one police go into dangerous situations whereas CCW holders should at least attempt to avoid them first. And how many CCW holders are there compared to police? Are you looking at a city, state, country? How many wrongful shootings are there amongst the two?

What meaningful answers would we get to answer these questions? Probably none
 
1750Texan said:
I don't have a problem with anyone CC...just lets not pretend that it is an over-all crime deterent, just like we should claim that the streets will be a bloodbath allowing CC.
Click to expand...
From the very mouths of convicts, they have overwhelmingly said they are more afraid of an armed potential victim than a police officer. That right there says they take extra precautions not to pick off someone armed and ready to defend themselves.
 
Wiseone said:
You're comparing two very different things by comparing CCW holders and police, for one police go into dangerous situations whereas CCW holders should at least attempt to avoid them first. And how many CCW holders are there compared to police? Are you looking at a city, state, country? How many wrongful shootings are there amongst the two?

What meaningful answers would we get to answer these questions? Probably none
Click to expand...

Nationally, there are just under 700,000 law enforcement officers. The state of Florida alone has over 1,000,000 CCW. Regardless of police officers being put in a position of more risk, how many bystanders or completely innocent people have been shot and killed/injured by police officers vice CCW holders?

My point is that CCW are no more likely to shoot innocent people than law enforcement. Given the numbers are so disproportional, one would think that CCW holders would have far more incidents if a firearm makes one more likely to take risks they would not otherwise take.
 
Wiseone said:
I dont know everything there is to know and depending on what weapons we are talking about and how to employ them I think my training is better than most who talk about weapons here.
Click to expand...

you can look around the world and maybe you will find someone who knows more about civilian self defense issues, the law, tactics and weapons. But I sort of doubt it unless you travel in the sort of circles I do.
 
BretJ said:
Nationally, there are just under 700,000 law enforcement officers. The state of Florida alone has over 1,000,000 CCW. Regardless of police officers being put in a position of more risk, how many bystanders or completely innocent people have been shot and killed/injured by police officers vice CCW holders?

My point is that CCW are no more likely to shoot innocent people than law enforcement. Given the numbers are so disproportional, one would think that CCW holders would have far more incidents if a firearm makes one more likely to take risks they would not otherwise take.
Click to expand...

Assuming all that is true what does it have to do with anything? Keep in mind i'm not opposed to CCW, I'm just wondering whats the point of comparing it to police? Why is what the police do relevant to this?

TurtleDude said:
you can look around the world and maybe you will find someone who knows more about civilian self defense issues, the law, tactics and weapons. But I sort of doubt it unless you travel in the sort of circles I do.
Click to expand...

No one cares about your fantasies turtle, personally I'm kinda tired about hearing all of your crazy claims. I don't care what "circles" you're apart of or think your apart of or who else is in these circles or what you all do together on the weekends, its meaningless.
 
Wiseone said:
Assuming all that is true what does it have to do with anything? Keep in mind i'm not opposed to CCW, I'm just wondering whats the point of comparing it to police? Why is what the police do relevant to this?



No one cares about your fantasies turtle, personally I'm kinda tired about hearing all of your crazy claims. I don't care what "circles" you're apart of or think your apart of or who else is in these circles or what you all do together on the weekends, its meaningless.
Click to expand...

I guess you are upset Wiseone because your posts tend to tell other people what they need, what they don't need but your opinion as to what others should do has no merit. I spent almost a quarter of a century in federal law enforcement and 15 years on top of that as a really good shooter. I also have used a firearm for self defense in a civilian environment, have defended cops and LE agencies in shooting cases etc. I guess this bothers you because when i see you claiming what other people "need" I just laugh it off as a post based on complete lack of information
 
cpwill said:
How very astonishing :roll:

[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

I'm from Chicago and these democrat clowns here in Chicago have no desire to stop the violence - gun violence (or any violence) to these idiots is just another "tragedy" that only government can solve.

Chicago and Crook County is so horrible and backwards I wouldn't recommend anyone to consider this city or county as a potential place to live.

Chicago is the home of the tyrants, and I will give Chicago 5-10 more years before they collapse like Detroit, and you know what? the only reason why this city hasn't is because that punk Obama is in the WH and continually throws economic favors to Crook County and Chicago.

I love Chicago as far as its architecture and how gorgeous the city actually is but the corruption is just insane.
 
Wiseone said:
I'd be careful at jumping to conclusions, there's no information on the circumstances of each murder nor any information on any any potential murders were stopped by a privately owned firearm. And there's no other information on what other things may have occurred to drop the murder rate. Also 2012 was a oddball year in the decade's trend

2000: 633
2001: 667
2002: 656
2003: 601
2004: 453
2005: 451
2006: 471
2007: 448
2008: 513
2009: 459
2010: 436
2011: 435
2012: 516
2013: 415

Crime in Chicago - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can see it sticks out with nearly a hundred more than the years around it, so comparing that to other years is being deliberately deceptive as its not indicative of a trend. And as you can see for 2013, where the law was overturned in July 2013, had a similar number as the past several years except for, again, 2012. Lastly since we only have three months of data for 2014 its not enough to say for certain that Chicago is on a downward trend.


I rate the claim that the overturning of the conceal carry ban on Chicago has had a significant impact on the murder rate as....

Inconclusive pretending further data
Click to expand...
By golly, if Chicago was the ONLY example we've seen where gun laws were changed to allow for law abiding citizens to defend themselves, you'd be right.

It's not.

but do carry on with you're little angle, it's cute to watch.
 
Wiseone said:
Well I would hold someone who walks around with the kind of power that a firearm provides to a higher standard, the potential harm they could cause if they ever missed used it is much greater than what an unarmed person could do if they decided to become violent. Seems obvious to me.

Also there's a psychology aspect to carrying a weapon as well, it can change the way you think and the way you perceive the world around you.
Click to expand...

A guy in an 18-wheeler loaded with Gasoline, or toxic chemicals could kill far more people and do far more damage than any person could with a gun. That such has not happened yet is merely a lack of imagination on the side of crazy people. Thankfully.

Do you worry about each 18 wheeler you see hauling dangerous cargo?
 
Wiseone said:
I'd be careful at jumping to conclusions, there's no information on the circumstances of each murder nor any information on any any potential murders were stopped by a privately owned firearm. And there's no other information on what other things may have occurred to drop the murder rate. Also 2012 was a oddball year in the decade's trend

2000: 633
2001: 667
2002: 656
2003: 601
2004: 453
2005: 451
2006: 471
2007: 448
2008: 513
2009: 459
2010: 436
2011: 435
2012: 516
2013: 415

Crime in Chicago - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can see it sticks out with nearly a hundred more than the years around it, so comparing that to other years is being deliberately deceptive as its not indicative of a trend. And as you can see for 2013, where the law was overturned in July 2013, had a similar number as the past several years except for, again, 2012. Lastly since we only have three months of data for 2014 its not enough to say for certain that Chicago is on a downward trend.


I rate the claim that the overturning of the conceal carry ban on Chicago has had a significant impact on the murder rate as....

Inconclusive pretending further data
Click to expand...

Our murder rate coincides with our weather...

For some reason gangbangers don't like to bang in the cold.
 
MrVicchio said:
By golly, if Chicago was the ONLY example we've seen where gun laws were changed to allow for law abiding citizens to defend themselves, you'd be right.

It's not.

but do carry on with you're little angle, it's cute to watch.
Click to expand...

By Golly whenever someone starts a topic about Chicago I do believe Chicago is the only place I need look! I didn't say CP was wrong, I said theres not enough data to confirm him correct.

Are you arguing against my analysis or is it just a knee jerk reaction to me posting?
 
Wiseone said:
Assuming all that is true what does it have to do with anything? Keep in mind i'm not opposed to CCW, I'm just wondering whats the point of comparing it to police? Why is what the police do relevant to this?
Click to expand...
You were stating that some people will take greater risks if they have a CCW. That would imply you think taking a risk is a bad thing. I was stating that if having a CCW implies some will take risks they would not take otherwise, that assumption has not been born out given the number of CCW holders. I pointed out police officers to show they were as likely if not more so to make a mistake with ORM as CCW holders when given the disparity in numbers, it should be the other way around by a huge margin. Not sure if I am explaining the logic very well.
I realize you are not anti-CCW. I also understand that you feel there should be additional CCW requirements, but my thoughts are there has been no real compelling cause to show your concerns have been born out. You will never be able to filter out the asshats that get a CCW, a badge or a position of political power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom