• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Lawmakers want to deploy the Nat'l Guard in Chicago

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
imported post

I just watched a report on Fox on this:

Two lawmakers want to deploy the Nat'l Guard in Chicago to fight crime because it is so high. The superintendent of police is against it. He rightly points out that military don't generally worry about the rights of individuals as they set about doing the harsh things that they do.

I have a different idea. How about letting the good folks in Chicago protect themselves by, say, I don't know, carrying a pistol?
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
imported post

I am sure it was not intended as an insult. Military training is vastly different from police training. Except in the event of complete societal breakdown, it would be foolish to use those trained to make war to enforce the laws.

The point I was hoping to get folks to address is that the solution of allowing LACs to be armed is being ignored.
 

cloudcroft

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,908
Location
El Paso, TX (formerly Colorado Springs, CO)
imported post

If Chicago got rid of 38.6% of its population overnight, it'd be a WHOLE lot better there for everyone else crime-wise. After that, send another 26% packing to improve things further. Finally, mop-up among what's are left and sendthose loserspacking, too (can we deport them ALL to Canada?).Raze any public housing/tenements/run-down low-life apartments/crack-house neighborhoodsto the ground and never rebuild them. End result: Things would be a lot more peaceful, safe (even at night) and no more additional cops would be needed, and certainly no National Guard. Chicago would be a NICE place to live afterwards after all the trash was gone and you could see the potential.

After that was done (or concurrently would be better)it's time for my 'prison reform' plan...no more new prisons would be needed and many of them would bevacant and therefore available forrehabbing/remodeling for other uses.

Of course that won't happen, but tell me that would not have a HUGE impact on crime and turning things around literally overnight. It would in ANY city in this country where there are problems (even here where I live).

Oh, I almost forgot: Get rid of sorry Mayor Daley, all his cronies and anyone else who share his liberal PC socialist 'vision' because we can't have them still there or it'd start all over again. House-cleaning on thisscale should only need to be done once.

-- John D.
 

Ruger

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
545
Location
Occupied Greensboro, North Carolina, United States
imported post

eye95 wrote:
The superintendent of police is against it. He rightly points out that military don't generally worry about the rights of individuals as they set about doing the harsh things that they do.
I see that you agree with the superintendant's opinion of the military....


Can he support those remarks? IMO, such broad, hateful statements should not be made unless they can be backed up. :D

The thing I like about the OC community, as opposed to the antis, is that usually they post rationally, not emotionally. We should leave the emotionally-charged, rash, and unsupported claims to the anti community.


Personally, I find that statement to be so vile that it demands objective proof or to be denounced by any rational person.

That is a vile and unacceptable thing to say without proof. I frankly don't care if proving the generalization is impossible. Proving generalizations is horribly difficult. That is precisely why we should not generalize--especially in an insulting way.


Moving on until such proof can be provided. :p

:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
imported post

Military training does not include search warrants, Terry stops, civil rights, etc.

Law enforcement training does.

If that is not sufficient support, by all means, move on. I will too.

Again, this statement was not meant to be an insult. It is a practical recognition that the training given to military and law enforcement are different--which is why freedom-loving people do not want the military doing law enforcement.
 

cloudcroft

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,908
Location
El Paso, TX (formerly Colorado Springs, CO)
imported post

Well, I think the militaryshouldn't be doing 'nation building' in sorry hell-hole useless hate-America countries, either. That's insane (and I shouldknow what insane is). Besides,when we leave, it will all go back to their 'traditional sectarian Stone Age' violence anyway. What a complete waste of American blood and treasure...

And the National Guard shouldn't be overseas anyway, it should stay HERE!

I think itironic though that some Chicago lawmakers are calling for the National Guard to deploy in their cities. How embarrassing to admit you can't control your own city. Isn't Mayor Daley's anti-gun agenda working? Chicago should bea one of the SAFEST and PEACEFUL cities in the country...kind of like New Orleans, right?

...which reminds me: MaybeDaley should consult with that other POS loser and former Mayor Nagin of New Orleans/Katrinainfamy, who called in the National Guard because his mostly Democtrat cityALSO had out-of-control violence he and his NOPD couldn't handle. Maybe Nagin could give Daley some tips?

Two Democrat mayors who can't control their cities. I bet there are more, like the mayor of DC for example? Is there something they all have in common? [Hint: It starts with a 'D']

;)

-- John D.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
imported post

I think it ironic though that some Chicago lawmakers are calling for the National Guard. How embarrassing to admit you can't control your own city. Isn't Mayor Daley's anti-gun agenda working? Chicago should be a one of the SAFEST and PEACEFUL cities in the country...kind of like New Orleans, right?
To me, that is the essence of the problem here. The reason the lawmakers want to facilitate the further trampling of rights is that the current level of trampling rights has exacerbated the very problem it purportedly was solving!
 

cloudcroft

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,908
Location
El Paso, TX (formerly Colorado Springs, CO)
imported post

eye95,

True.

And please, no one tell me how 'intelligent' the average American (or voter) is. They aren't. Afterall, lots of VERY average Americans voted for these fool mayors...and of course, even the President.

So what do you do with such numerous ignorant people who are ARMED -- with a vote that DOES matter?

To paraphrase King Theoden (Lord of the Rings): "What can men do against such reckless ingorance?"

-- John D.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
imported post

The average American voter, by definition, has an IQ of 100. ;)

Whether or not every adult should have the vote, regardless of mental capacity, is not a debate I would want to get into here. But, yes, I believe that Americans have foolishly elected a lot of the officials who ruining our Republic.

The most practical defense we have against such future foolishness is to continually and rationally advocate for our rights.
 

Ruger

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
545
Location
Occupied Greensboro, North Carolina, United States
imported post

cloudcroft wrote:
Ooops...I wasn't being 'rational' just fantasizing (again)...so don't count me amongst the "OC Community" lest I give you alla bad rep! :uhoh:

-- John D.


No prob. Actually, I don't think that the military should be doing the job of police officers either. My previous post (with the exception of the first sentence) was comprised entirely of direct quotes from eye95.

If you read this thread, then you will understand the context of my previous post: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum4/42857.html

Apparently it isn't ok to make generalizations about police officers, but it is ok to make generalizations about those in the military.

Double-standards really suck ;)
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
imported post

Ruger wrote:
cloudcroft wrote:
Ooops...I wasn't being 'rational' just fantasizing (again)...so don't count me amongst the "OC Community" lest I give you alla bad rep! :uhoh:

-- John D.


No prob. Actually, I don't think that the military should be doing the job of police officers either. My previous post (with the exception of the first sentence) was comprised entirely of direct quotes from eye95.

If you read this thread, then you will understand the context of my previous post: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum4/42857.html

Apparently it isn't ok to make generalizations about police officers, but it is ok to make generalizations about those in the military.

Double-standards really suck ;)
I thought you had moved on. Or, had you accepted my support for stating that the National Guard is less able to protect individual rights? That their training does not teach them about warrants, Terry stops, RAS, etc., while the training for LEOs does?
 

Nutczak

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
2,165
Location
The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Talk of calling in the military has been heard for years now to try and stop the criminals on the south side of Chicago.

This is not the first time.

I am going to keep my mouth shut about my feelings on what should be done, but I have a feeling cloudcroft and I may be on the same page.
 

Ruger

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
545
Location
Occupied Greensboro, North Carolina, United States
imported post

eye95 wrote:
I thought you had moved on. Or, had you accepted my support for stating that the National Guard is less able to protect individual rights? That their training does not teach them about warrants, Terry stops, RAS, etc., while the training for LEOs does?
eye95, I actually agree with you on this one. I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to use your own words to point out what appears to be a double standard. ;)
 

Felid`Maximus

Activist Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2007
Messages
1,711
Location
Reno, Nevada, USA
imported post

cloudcroft wrote:
If Chicago got rid of 38.6% of its population overnight, it'd be a WHOLE lot better there for everyone else crime-wise. After that, send another 26% packing to improve things further. Finally, mop-up among what's are left and send those losers packing, too (can we deport them ALL to Canada?).

Your comment reeks of racism which is thinly veiled. It is obvious that you are referring to the demographics of Chicago. To remove people specifically because of their race is abhorrent. It is an evil far greater than the criminals. Governments doing things like that have caused more bloodshed in the last 100 years than all gangsters combined. Instead, why not remove crime by giving people weapons to defend themselves. Legalize drugs and I bet 80% of all crime everywhere in the country goes down since most organized crime exists for and is funded by the illicit drug trade. Instead of targeting innocent people, just arrest all the corrupt politicians and violent criminals.
 
Top