Guns and Shootings in Chicago: Here's the problem... (neighborhoods, law)

[A2DAC1985]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Really? Crime has been dropping for two decades and two months of CC are the reason?

Can you imagine what it would have been like without CCW?

I can only imagine 100, 200, 500, or 1,000 shootings would have happened if CCW wasn't legal!

...right?

[Chicago76]

Originally Posted by chicagohunter

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/24/chicago-crime-rate-drops-as-concealed-carry-gun-pe/?page=all

Facts are alarming, don't let them bother you though.

The homicide rate has been below 17 per 100K since about 2004 with a couple of years of exceptions (2008 I think it went up a bit) and 2012 (the year we have both the heat wave the and freakishly mild winter, both of which tend to push the homicide rate up as people are forced outside). It was back down in 2013 before CCW existed. The fact that it's taken a further drop (of about 1 per 100,000) over an 8 month period of time is proof of nothing.

A lot of things have occurred this year, all of which could push the rate down:

-better implementation of police intell and strategy, which was just getting implemented 2 years ago.
-horribly cold winter (people stay indoors and out of trouble).
-nice mild summer (poor living in homes without AC aren't forced to stay outside at 9pm because their house is a heat-retaining kiln from 100 degree days). That's the problem with heat waves in poor areas in particular. Your home is the last place you want to be for some relief in the evening.
-CCW
-population decline in troubled neighborhoods.
-Some of it could be random given that we're talking about an 8 month run.

The fact that the homicide rate seems to be declining because fewer gang members are dying would appear to refute the assertion that CCW has much (if anything to do with the drop). Gang members know the opposing gang member didn't go through a CCW course to secure a legal permit. They just haven't been quite as effective at killing each other this year.

[mayorofnyc]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

I never heard about homicides in Chicago in the news until the recent past. And certainly not in the national media. It's obviously due to Obama and the conservative media's hatred of him.

I am from out-of-state and I can attest to this.

I had no idea that Chicago had a large gang presence or a very high crime rate until maybe about 2 years ago. Before then I thought Chicago was just about as safe as New York.

Prior to Obama, the media poster child for black-on-black crime was always either New Orleans, Detroit, Baltimore, or Philly. This "Chiraq phenomenon" is definitely no coincidence.

[Huckleberry3911948]

lots of people in chicago carry concealed guns. they are illegal and they are felons but they have them just the same.
how is that working out?

[mayorofnyc]

Originally Posted by A2DAC1985

"If only Chicago let law abiding citizens have guns, there wouldn't be as many shootings."

"If more people were allowed to conceal carry, there wouldn't be as many murders, crimes, etc."

Those are two "general" ideas/thoughts/opinions that are floated around all the time. I have an analogy for those, but that's coming at the end.

We can all agree that gun violence is an issue that Chicago faces. It's not a widespread issue in the city, but an issue that is fairly specific to certain areas of the city. Can we agree on that? Yes? Good, let's keep going.

First and foremost, in places where firearms are easy to obtain and easy to carry on your person out in public does not mean it is automatically safer, or less murders are committed via firearm.

Here's a story from Indianapolis. Notice the other cities in the info graphic? Illinois has tough, "draconian", guns laws on the books. So why do such gun friendly, compared to Illinois, states like Missouri, Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio have cities with the same, or higher, murder rate compared to Chicago? From what I hear all the time, more guns are the answer. But apparently more guns aren't the answer for Columbus, Cincinnati, Detroit, or St. Louis.

Poverty and lack of social/economic mobility are probably the biggest factors for high rates of violence in a community. Black unemployment & poverty rates on the southside of Chicago is similar or equal to that of Detroit's, with nearly the same population. The only difference is that one city happens to be in a gun friendly state (Michigan) while the other is not (Illinois). The gun laws or lack thereof didn't really make a difference. Wherever you have above normal levels of poverty you will have above normal levels of violence.


As to your point regarding the effectiveness of CCW in deterring crime. I don't think the chance of a citizen being caught off guard is a reason to not carry. This guy was totally blindsided by an armed robber, but was still able to defend himself unharmed. It only takes a fraction of a second to draw and fire a weapon:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vj1Fpfb2F2w

[lenniel]

guns don't kill people, people kill people.

[A2DAC1985]

Originally Posted by lenniel

guns don't kill people, people kill people.

I think a more apt, and truthful, saying would be, "Guns don't kill people, bullets kill people".


Chris Rock agrees with me (NSFW, obviously… it's Chris Rock)

But I'm willing to accept the "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" logic. But first I need to know if you think a 9 year old girl killed someone, or a gun did. I mean, the gun couldn't kill someone, so it had to be the person, right?

[A2DAC1985]

I agree with that parts I didn't quote, just FYI.

Originally Posted by mayorofnyc

...As to your point regarding the effectiveness of CCW in deterring crime. I don't think the chance of a citizen being caught off guard is a reason to not carry...

Being caught off guard isn't a reason for me. Everyone gets caught off guard at some point in time.

But what I am saying is that if I want to rob a police officer, what do I do? I shoot him before he gets a chance to shoot me because I know that cop has a gun, and is LEGALLY allowed to draw it on anyone that they think might "be a threat" at anytime, and shoot to kill. Much like some people think a CCW license is like (side note: it isn't).

If everyone is allowed to freely own and carry a gun wherever, then the criminals are still going to be criminals, but they're just going to escalate it to the highest level from the start.

[chet everett]

"they're just going to escalate to the highest level from the start."

In the US most states have laws or at least legal tradition that make the punisment for causing harm to a law enforcement officer more severe than similar actions against a member of the general public.

Battery Against a Police Officer | Criminal Law

Similarly it is extremely rare for a law enforcement officer to be killed / wounded in a premeditated act of violence as the tradition is for other authorities to put a higher priority on finding such a perpatrator and exactling punishment against them.

Frankly anyone that "shoots first" at a law enforcement officer is largely either utterly insane or so warped /out of touch that they will almost certainly be locked up for the rest of the life or die on death row.

It is not hard to see how similar efforts on the part of concealed carry advocates could similarly lead to any criminal found to have shot first on someone lawfully carrying a weapon would lead to similar high profile prosecution / hard sentences...


BTW -- Interesting article of a very committed adovocate of using gun ownership to make folks in traditionally rime ridden areas feel more secure -- Dismantling the stigma of guns | Feature | ChicagoReader.com

[A2DAC1985]

Originally Posted by chet everett

...Frankly anyone that "shoots first" at a law enforcement officer is largely either utterly insane or so warped /out of touch that they will almost certainly be locked up for the rest of the life or die on death row...

I'm sorry you took my post so literally. I should have been more precise. My bad.

I brought the hypothetical cop into the situation because from what I hear and read, the insinuation is that having a CCW makes the holder of that license a "deputy", so to speak. It's never outright said, but the implication is if someone is a CCWer and someone else tries to perpetrate a crime against them, they can pull out their gun and use deadly force… much like a police officer.

Try to steal a wallet from a cop? Expect to have a gun in your face, and possibly bullets in your body.

Try to steal a wallet from Joe Blow with a CCW? Expect to have a gun in your face, and possibly bullets in your body.

When people talk about having CCW as a deterrent for crime, they're talking about criminals knowing that potential victims are armed and ready to shoot them if they try to perpetrate a crime.

But, as everyone also says, "Criminals are going to be criminals".

So it goes like this:

1. Criminal wants to be a criminal and do criminal things.
2. Criminal picks a target that may or may not be a CCW holder.
3. Criminal still wants to do criminal things to the victim.
4. Criminal wants to live another day to do criminal things.
5. Criminal pulls the gun and shoots the victim before the victim can draw their possible weapon and shoot the criminal.