Black Lives Matter (BLM) is an Auto-Antonym

Post Reply New Topic

Gang violence affects more than just the black communities. There are many gangs, some are black, some are white, some are Mexican, some are other ethnic groups. Gang violence erupts within and between communities.

A young 10 year old girl was murdered in Chicago this last week her name was Lena Marie Nunez.



She was killed when a stray bullet shattered the window and struck her head while she was inside her second-floor family apartment in the 3500 block of West Dickens on Saturday night. The charred glass wounded her 8-year-old cousin, police said. She was in her grandmothers home, watching tv with her brother. Lena was a sweet little girl filled with joy, hopes and dreams.



Sources:
3 children shot dead, another 2 wounded in the crossfire over just 1 week in Chicago
Funeral Arrangements for 10yr old Lena Marie Nunez

With all these people being killed by stray bullets, how can you lot defend all of the guns? Isn't it terrifying that at an time some random person will use a firearm and without meaning to could end your and or someone else's life?

Why is America so dangerous?

I agree, in addition to systemic racism being addressed.....that criminal mindsets must be addressed, too.

This county is full of guns.We haven’t had a homicide in a few years.The last time we did it was meth related.
We had an armed standoff a few months back but the guy had a crossbow.

Rural areas rarely have the dynamics of urban areas even if those urban areas are fairly homogeneous.

[quote="jimmy m”]

Crime was rampant in New York City several decades ago. in the 1990s the New York City police commissioner William Bratton and Mayor Rudy Giuliani, adopted the principles of "the broken window theory". The broken windows theory is a criminological theory that states that visible signs of crime, anti-social behavior, and civil disorder create an urban environment that encourages further crime and disorder, including serious crimes. The theory suggests that policing methods that target minor crimes such as vandalism, loitering, public drinking, jaywalking and fare evasion help to create an atmosphere of order and lawfulness, thereby preventing more serious crimes. When Bratton resigned in 1996, felonies were down almost 40 percent in New York, and the homicide rate had been halved.[/quote]
It should be noted that

1) the crux of Bratton’s approach was about taking a data-driven approach to fighting crime, and prioritising serious crime. There were other aspects such as merging the transport police with the street-level police.

2) criminologists tend to view the reduction in crime under Bratton as being largely down to demographic factors such as fewer young men living in New York and increased affluence, as well as other factors such as the end of the crack epidemic and of course simple reversion to the mean.

3) broken windows theory is similarly not popular. Cities which implement “broken windows” policing don’t see better reductions in serious crime than other cities. And criminals who get housed in nice neighbourhoods still commit the same amount of crime.

Every one of the stray bullet "drive by" victims are at the hands of a criminal. Someone who is in illegal possession of a firearm. Someone who does not adhere to the law.

How did Australia remove the illegal firearms from criminals since the problem of gun violence is at the hands of criminals rather than law abiding citizens? Keeping in mind Australia is less than 1/10th the population of the U.S. and has a fraction of the dense urban populations that the U.S. does so it's an "apples to oranges" comparison.

When my friend got a scholarship on Svalbard, she had to attend shooting course and she was lent a gun she was required to carry outside human-inhabited areas. The reason: polar bears.
Also, as food is expensive but wildlife abundant and hunting seals is free, students routinely survive on seal meat there.

These are not the bullets that kill random children in bad neighboorhoods.

They're also not intentional, if you can reduce the causes that make gang violence likely you can reduce the collateral damage associated with that sort of violence. Police becoming more brutal with the communities where those actions are likely occur will not ever improve the situation.

That's been one of the problems with calls for "gun control" in the U.S. blanket sweeping restrictions that would apply the same for every law abiding citizen (remember criminals don't follow laws). So a law that would prevent someone in the city or suburb from owning a semi-automatic hunting rifle would also prevent someone living in remote rural areas from owning the same rifle they use for protection. Someone living in the remote areas of Alaska, for example, would also be bound by the same blanket laws and perhaps only be allowed to have a single shot bolt action rifle to defend themselves from charging bears.

True,but there are some similarities.Poverty, alcoholism and drug use.
People aren’t as congested, so you don’t have people waging war over a street corner.People aren’t usually in large groups where you can get hit by stray bullets when rival gangs get into it.
There is a lame gang in Springfield MO called the 417 Honkies ,but they aren’t very organized since they are all tweakers.

SATW has commented on Svalbard, so I know about the polar bears.

Generally speaking the guns most suitable for hunting animals aren't the ones most suitable for combat in heavily built up areas and generally there isn't enough money available to make organized crime profitable beyond moon-shining or growing dope, and even then there likely isn't enough money to make killing your neighbour a regular occurrence.

More densely populated areas have more money total (even if it's spread across more pockets), strangers instead of neighbours you know and police who are more likely to use deadly force at least partially for the same reason the criminals might be, you're more likely to be strangers.

A single shot??Better hope you kill it with the first shot, you won’t get a second chance.

Exactly.

There are similarities as well. In some ways the isolation of extreme rural areas (whether they're reservations or other similarly isolated areas) isn't entirely unlikely the isolation that seems to exist in ghettos; there's a similar sense of being trapped and unable to escape those circumstances.

I'd imagine in a more widely distributed community where most people drive there would be far less value to controlling a corner. Who's gonna stop at the one stoplight in town to buy crack or ice? Who's gonna wait there all day for both customers he already knows and can just deliver to? Wouldn't Andy just tell his cousin to go home so he doesn't need to look into it?

Factors like that play into why crime in urban areas is more obvious even if the rural poor likely aren't any less prone to criminal behaviour than urban poor.

I think the all-or-nothing blanket policies are generally a problem here.
Why are law-abiding US citizens unwilling to register their guns? Registration wouldn't affect effectiveness against bears but American gun owners seem to be afraid that registered weapon is too likely to be taken away from them with another blanket policy.