It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: Bluntone22
Wow, the map says it all; the killings are pretty much all over the place. What an awful place to live.
originally posted by: MOMof3
Everyone seems to know what the problems are but not how to save the city and rehabilitate criminals. And I'm suppose to believe we can beat ISIS. Ha.
originally posted by: Edumakated
originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: Bluntone22
Wow, the map says it all; the killings are pretty much all over the place. What an awful place to live.
Almost all of the shootings occur in select neighborhoods. These aren't areas people think of when you say Chicago. These are areas that are literally like 10 miles outside of the city center. Chicago is a large city geographically and most of the crime is concentrated on the South and West sides of the city. None of these places are areas that anyone would go to unless you 1) live there or 2) buying dope. These aren't tourist areas.
originally posted by: PolyCottonBlend
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: DAVID64
Like I said, I don't have a solution. Stricter gun laws?
If it were the ME, covert drops of military weapons would 'fix' it. Or make it worse so air strikes and invasion by the military would be more justified.
We can regime change whole nations but not fix our own hoods.
Or don't want to...
Or don't care to...
an excellent point! as obvious as that seems, I've never thought about that. if, through covert processes (more so than the regular wool over our eyes bs), the government could make progress towards stabilization and regime change in American cities by supplying the means (insert "means" here), would it be as acceptable a solution as those we use in other countries? the government certainly doesn't have a problem DEstabilizing cities!
originally posted by: Vasa Croe
originally posted by: MOMof3
Everyone seems to know what the problems are but not how to save the city and rehabilitate criminals. And I'm suppose to believe we can beat ISIS. Ha.
ISIS requires no saving or rehab...do you suggest we do the same with Chicago?
The real question is are the criminals worth rehabilitation and is Chicago worth saving?
originally posted by: MOMof3
Everyone seems to know what the problems are but not how to save the city and rehabilitate criminals. And I'm suppose to believe we can beat ISIS. Ha.
originally posted by: Vasa Croe
originally posted by: Lab4Us
originally posted by: toysforadults
People need jobs.
And until places like Illinois, California, New York, etc. quit taxing the job creators to the point they have to move to other states in order to survive, there will never be jobs. Also, while I am firmly in favor of a living wage, I am not in favor of providing it unless recipients are skilled enough to properly do the job for which they're being paid. In the end, the Democrats that politically control these hell holes need to come to the realization that enforcing ALL laws is the first step in righting this ship. I would imagine losing it's sanctuary city beacon would help Chicago lose a good number of these shooters.
Problem is that in many high violent crime areas, even police won't patrol. It was that way in Atlanta on Techwood years ago before the city cleared it out, tore it down and built Centennial Olympic Park. I had friends on the police force that wouldn't drive down Techwood. The entire area was basically a free for all. The people there didn't care about others lives in the least and there were daily shootings.
Atlanta finally wised up and wiped the whole place out. Once the order was given to demo the buildings the thugs didn't have much choice except to leave. There were some residents that had been there for years that were elderly and were helped to find new affordable housing, but the vast majority of residents in that area were gangbangers and dealers.
Maybe Chicago should take a page from Atlanta and wipe the area out for some new greenspace.....if you displace a few thousand gangbangers they can be much more easily wrangled based on the fact they can't all find another place to move into next door to eachother at the same time....divide and conquer...its a simple and old strategy that I'm surprised hasn't been used yet.
Find a large venture capital firm willing to get some serious tax writers for putting up the money to demo and rebuild a few blocks of space at a time and you quickly acquire new businesses creating jobs and get rid of the riff raff quickly.
originally posted by: Vasa Croe
originally posted by: Lab4Us
originally posted by: toysforadults
People need jobs.
And until places like Illinois, California, New York, etc. quit taxing the job creators to the point they have to move to other states in order to survive, there will never be jobs. Also, while I am firmly in favor of a living wage, I am not in favor of providing it unless recipients are skilled enough to properly do the job for which they're being paid. In the end, the Democrats that politically control these hell holes need to come to the realization that enforcing ALL laws is the first step in righting this ship. I would imagine losing it's sanctuary city beacon would help Chicago lose a good number of these shooters.
Problem is that in many high violent crime areas, even police won't patrol. It was that way in Atlanta on Techwood years ago before the city cleared it out, tore it down and built Centennial Olympic Park. I had friends on the police force that wouldn't drive down Techwood. The entire area was basically a free for all. The people there didn't care about others lives in the least and there were daily shootings.
Atlanta finally wised up and wiped the whole place out. Once the order was given to demo the buildings the thugs didn't have much choice except to leave. There were some residents that had been there for years that were elderly and were helped to find new affordable housing, but the vast majority of residents in that area were gangbangers and dealers.
Maybe Chicago should take a page from Atlanta and wipe the area out for some new greenspace.....if you displace a few thousand gangbangers they can be much more easily wrangled based on the fact they can't all find another place to move into next door to eachother at the same time....divide and conquer...its a simple and old strategy that I'm surprised hasn't been used yet.
Find a large venture capital firm willing to get some serious tax writers for putting up the money to demo and rebuild a few blocks of space at a time and you quickly acquire new businesses creating jobs and get rid of the riff raff quickly.
originally posted by: dantanna
it sounds harsh, but i live by new york city, jersey city, and newark. i frequently meet 22 year olds with 2 children.
originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: Edumakated
Serious question, because I've seen you bring up this point many times over the years.
Why are fathers or even families important?
I would say culture and peers are much more formative. If all of these black men suddenly lived in the home, do you think their influence would be beneficial? Look at how they act, do you want that attitude more involved in a kids life? Even if they cleaned up their act, we both know that people with gangbanger histories are going no where in life. How is that going to encourage a kid to work hard and act properly, when they see their dad get nothing from living on the straight and narrow path?
originally posted by: Aazadan
originally posted by: CulturalResilience
A program of sterilisation in exchange for benefits.
a reply to: joemoe
It seems to me like that only works if class mobility doesn't exist. If you don't believe class mobility exists, then it shouldn't matter if they get benefits or not, because working wouldn't improve their situation.