PDA

View Full Version : National Guard to patrol Chicago streets???



ralph wiggum
04-26-2010, 10:50 AM
Two state representatives called on Gov. Pat Quinn Sunday to deploy the Illinois National Guard to safeguard Chicago's streets.

Chicago Democrats John Fritchey and LaShawn Ford said they want Quinn, Mayor Richard Daley and Chicago Police Supt. Jody Weis to allow guardsmen to patrol streets and help quell violence. Weis said he did not support the idea because the military and police operate under different rules.

"Is this a drastic call to action? Of course it is," Fritchey said. "Is it warranted when we are losing residents to gun violence at such an alarming rate? Without question. We are not talking about rolling tanks down the street or having armed guards on each corner."

What he envisions, Fritchey said, is a "heightened presence on the streets," particularly on the roughly 9 percent of city blocks where most of the city's violent crimes occur.

Weis previously identified those "hot spots" and said he plans to create a 100-person team made up of selected and volunteer police personnel to respond to crime there. If guardsmen were to assist police, they could comprise or contribute to that force, Fritchey said.

So far this year, 113 people have been killed across Chicago, the same number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan combined in the same period, Fritchey said.

LINK (http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/04/state-reps-want-to-fight-violence-with-national-guards-help.html)

djones520
04-26-2010, 10:53 AM
I'd say this would warrant it. It's the National Guard, so well within the rights of the State to use. And when you've got just as many deaths as two differant wars in one city, obviously what you've got right now just isn't working.

lacarnut
04-26-2010, 11:02 AM
If they are deployed, allow the National Guard to have guns/ammo and the authority to use deadly force if they are attacked. Otherwise, forget it. Lefties will have their diapers in a wad if that happens though.

Jfor
04-26-2010, 11:27 AM
I'd say this would warrant it. It's the National Guard, so well within the rights of the State to use. And when you've got just as many deaths as two differant wars in one city, obviously what you've got right now just isn't working.

Wrong... wrong... wrong... National Guard are not policeman. There is no natural disaster there. They need to allow the cops to be able to do their damned jobs. Cut the red tape.

djones520
04-26-2010, 11:29 AM
Wrong... wrong... wrong... National Guard are not policeman. There is no natural disaster there. They need to allow the cops to be able to do their damned jobs. Cut the red tape.

Not saying they should serve in the capacity of a police role. More a peace keeping role.

ralph wiggum
04-26-2010, 11:35 AM
Wrong... wrong... wrong... National Guard are not policeman. There is no natural disaster there. They need to allow the cops to be able to do their damned jobs. Cut the red tape.

There are something like 2,000 unfilled jobs in the Chicago police department. There is no money in the budget left to hire replacements for those who have retired or left the force recently.

Jfor
04-26-2010, 11:37 AM
Not saying they should serve in the capacity of a police role. More a peace keeping role.

There is no war! How can they serve as peacekeepers? This is American soil. What will happen if/when one of those NG troops is shot and killed? Then there will be an escalation in which the NG troops will go on the offensive. This is a police matter. If they city of Chicago wants to control the violence springing up, then let the cops do what they are supposed to. They made their bed being light on crime.

Jfor
04-26-2010, 11:40 AM
There are something like 2,000 unfilled jobs in the Chicago police department. There is no money in the budget left to hire replacements for those who have retired or left the force recently.

I am sorry to hear that. I truly am. Is Chicago not one of the cities that doesn't allow its citizens to be armed? Don't you think that there is a direct correlation in the fact that the citizens are not armed? Don't you think that if citizens were allowed to be armed there that they could more effectively make their own communities safer by not allowing themselves to be lawful victims? This is a perfect example of a 2nd Amendment issue.

Megaguns91
04-26-2010, 12:08 PM
I am sorry to hear that. I truly am. Is Chicago not one of the cities that doesn't allow its citizens to be armed? Don't you think that there is a direct correlation in the fact that the citizens are not armed? Don't you think that if citizens were allowed to be armed there that they could more effectively make their own communities safer by not allowing themselves to be lawful victims? This is a perfect example of a 2nd Amendment issue.

Chicago is a city filled with libtard politicians. Look where our great LEADER came from. Chicago politics at it's best.

If there are that many violent crimes occuring the state governer has every right to call in the national guard. They are trained in police skills. Peacekeeping skills. The same skills police officers are trained in.

Jfor
04-26-2010, 12:30 PM
Chicago is a city filled with libtard politicians. Look where our great LEADER came from. Chicago politics at it's best.

If there are that many violent crimes occuring the state governer has every right to call in the national guard. They are trained in police skills. Peacekeeping skills. The same skills police officers are trained in.

I know exactly where B. Hussein Obama came from. I know all about Chicago politics. I know how liberal of a town its politicians have. I believe that the folks who voted these people into office are getting exactly what they wanted. I don't believe that the NG is called for in this case. There is no reason why the NG should be deployed here.

NJCardFan
04-26-2010, 01:06 PM
Wrong... wrong... wrong... National Guard are not policeman. There is no natural disaster there. They need to allow the cops to be able to do their damned jobs. Cut the red tape.
Bingo!

noonwitch
04-26-2010, 01:13 PM
It's not a job for the National Guard.


People made suggestions like that in the past regarding Detroit. The NG has occupied Detroit within the last quarter century, after the 1967 "civil disturbances", as locals like to call the riots. All it accomplished was giving the people who were already considering moving out of the city more reason to want to move.


When the NG occupy a city, they occupy the whole city, not just the problem areas. One of my friends said there was a tank parked on her street for a couple of weeks after the riots, which occurred at least 7 miles from her house. The 67 riots, contrary to popular belief, were pretty limited to a specific part of the city. The city-wide response only made things worse, as far as the white flight was concerned.


If the NG were to occupy Chicago, it would only be a matter of time before some innocent person accidentally gets shot. Then, the lawsuits will start.

ralph wiggum
04-26-2010, 02:01 PM
I posted this elsewhere, but it bears repeating.

What I find so incredibly ironic is that I felt safer in the two neighborhoods where I lived in the city of Chicago than the two other major cities where I've lived in my lifetime. Unfortunately there are pockets of Chicago that are just filled with constant gang violence. Nothing that the city or "community organizers" have done has ever seemed to help. It's a freaking war-zone. I have no idea what the proper solution is. The Chicago police work their butts off...I've known several and worked in a building where one of their satellite offices was located.

noonwitch
04-26-2010, 02:58 PM
I posted this elsewhere, but it bears repeating.

What I find so incredibly ironic is that I felt safer in the two neighborhoods where I lived in the city of Chicago than the two other major cities where I've lived in my lifetime. Unfortunately there are pockets of Chicago that are just filled with constant gang violence. Nothing that the city or "community organizers" have done has ever seemed to help. It's a freaking war-zone. I have no idea what the proper solution is. The Chicago police work their butts off...I've known several and worked in a building where one of their satellite offices was located.



I haven't been to Chicago in a while, but I also realize most of the crime is limited to certain parts of town. Downtown Chicago, the ballparks, the shopping, the clubs and nightlife are all pretty safe things to enjoy.

The thing that diffentiates Detroit from Chicago is that the vast majority of Detroit is like the two bad Chicago areas you mentioned. Downtown Detroit is still pretty safe-Greektown, the stadiums, Wayne State, the Opera House and Symphony Hall are all well-patrolled by the police. Tiger games, in particular, are a very safe venue, unless one gets cheap about paying for secure parking.

Jfor
04-26-2010, 03:11 PM
I posted this elsewhere, but it bears repeating.

What I find so incredibly ironic is that I felt safer in the two neighborhoods where I lived in the city of Chicago than the two other major cities where I've lived in my lifetime. Unfortunately there are pockets of Chicago that are just filled with constant gang violence. Nothing that the city or "community organizers" have done has ever seemed to help. It's a freaking war-zone. I have no idea what the proper solution is. The Chicago police work their butts off...I've known several and worked in a building where one of their satellite offices was located.

Again, I will say it. The cops are not allowed to do their jobs. They bring the bad guys and the bad guys go right back out onto the streets. You take firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens and criminals will run the streets. You can do all the community policing that you want, but if the bad guys keep getting out, then the citizens won't help. There is a reason why folks are silent when it comes to reporting crimes. They are scared. They are scared to point out who it is that murdered someone. They know who it is, but because of the revolving doors of justice that seem to happen in liberal cities, they stay silent.

noonwitch
04-26-2010, 04:02 PM
Again, I will say it. The cops are not allowed to do their jobs. They bring the bad guys and the bad guys go right back out onto the streets. You take firearms out of the hands of law abiding citizens and criminals will run the streets. You can do all the community policing that you want, but if the bad guys keep getting out, then the citizens won't help. There is a reason why folks are silent when it comes to reporting crimes. They are scared. They are scared to point out who it is that murdered someone. They know who it is, but because of the revolving doors of justice that seem to happen in liberal cities, they stay silent.



It's not just the revolving door, it's the family or gang vengenance thing. Citizens have guns, but there are more gangsters than citizens in some places.

I'm for community policing as a theory, but the cops still have to carry and be able to use guns.