Girl at birthday party killed by stray gunfire
Enough... when will Illinois have had enough... I'm disgusted beyond words that the one thing Government must provide: basic security in our homes and streets; is just totally beyond us.
I listened to this story on the way to Rochelle this AM and it makes you cry to listen to her friends talk on the radio.
Update: Here's Dawn Turner Trice in today's Trib,
Maybe what bothers me most is that the criminals as well as too many lawmakers just don't seem to care.And a few lines down we find Sen Obama singing with Bush and Cheney at the Gridiron,
The Democrat from Illinois can sing. And, as it turns out, he can do so on tune and with rhythm.Trice is right here when she concludes,
At the Gridiron Club dinner, with President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney a few seats away, Obama delivered the Democratic response to an audience of hundreds of journalists and dignitaries Saturday evening. After he finished, even the president offered a touch of backhanded praise.
This I do know: Spring is not a hopeful season for everyone in Chicago. For residents of neighborhoods like Englewood, the warm weather doesn't just signal for them to prepare the ground for budding flowers.It's not a hopeful time for many neigborhoods in Chicago and else where in Illinois. I like to see some bi partisan good humor, but this isn't the time to be silent about thugs taking over.
And the coming season doesn't always invite the children to play, outdoors or apparently indoors, for that matter.
In the poorest communities, spring beckons for the thugs to come out and ply their reckless trade and, too often, for the parents to get flowers ready for the graves.
Crime should be an issue, and someone will comment gun control is the answer. There was a time I would have been sympathetic to that but I don't know how you can face someone in Englewood and tell them they should disarm themselves when the City can't control the streets.
37 comments:
Streets yes..but in our homes? Not so sure about that. Why is these even being posted here Bill?
She was shot dead in her home from a stray bullet.
Not appropriate issue for the politicians (and voters) who run our Cities and State?
How do you propose the government provided what you call "basic" security in our homes?
People have to stop acting like animals
especially certain neighborhoods and the subculture of gang violence
You would think the Blacks would have had enough with their enslavement by Democrat entitlements, but they embrace the Dems and hate Republicans. Go figure that one.
anon 6:38
Who question if security is "basic"?
If the right to have a birthday party for my kids without worrying about stray bullets isn't a right.
Too bad that girl and her friends weren't packing heat. Maybe one of them could have fired back. That would have been a deterrent!
Bill - So if you have a birthday party for your daughter it's the governments responsibility to secure it? That makes no sense. Government is supposed to keep our streets safe...not our homes.
Wow...including that Obama line really has no point in this post Bill. Please explain why that's in there oh master blogger.
Wow...including that Obama line really has no point in this post Bill. Please explain why that's in there oh master blogger.
Let's not lose sight of one matter: The NRA deserves some blame for at least the first death last week. The person who shot Sarkesia Reed sprayed 29 rounds, hitting seven homes.
A person above claimed the result would have been different if Reed's family also had a weapon. That person is probably right. If they also had an automatic weapon, even more innocent people would have been killed.
When the NRA tells us that assault weapon bans are a bad thing, we need to remember Sarkesia Reed.
The gang problems in Chicago are beyond the issue of Gun Control at this point. Make them completly illegal and the only ones with guns will be the criminals.
I hear a lot of crap talked about on how to fix this. Normally even if these approaches work at all it is a marginal improvement.
I propose a more drastic, but possibly a sweeping, approach...
Have the Governor declare Martial Law, send out the National Gaurd and sweep the city and arrested under the power of Martial law anyone with an illegal guns or drugs. (Give 24 hour notice so that there can be no excuses about why they have the weapons or drugs)
Now I am a conservative and I don't like government very much and it is very rare I would support something like this, but the National Gaurd is more than a tool for the federal government! Use it. Perhaps this will send the worst element packing from our states.
I also would note it would take the right kinda of governement and a limit on how long the Martial Law lasted to protect innocent civilians. And there can be no doubt that this is a risky solution.
But the questions that runs through my mind is how many more kids have to die from illegal guns, how many more kids have to die because of drugs, how much longer are we going to leave people living in miny war zones? (I have heard Democrats and Republicans giving speeches for years and they are happy about 1 and 2% improvements...that is not good enough anymore)
Its time for us to do something besides talking. Declare Martial law once and sweep the city, and then maybe, just maybe we will never have to do it again.
If there is a better solution, BELIEVE ME, I am listening.
Was the gun used in this incident legally purchased and registered? I don't know for a fact, by I feel confident guessing no, no it was not.
So, you have to ask youself: would banning the sale of such weapons to FOID holding, law abiding citizens have really prevented this tragedy? I don't know for a fact, but I feel confident in guessing no, no it would not.
I'm not saying that there aren't any reasonable points to be made in support of some form of gun control. But let's not pretend that a ban on such weapons would really do anything to stop criminals who already are obtaining and using them illegally from continuing to do so.
CP -- the real outrage is where this happened...there would be public outrage and support for tougher gun control if this happened in say Naperville...but given it happened on the South Side, we can't turn a blind eye to the fact this is just as much about race as it is about guns.
To some extent you are correct presidentpalmer. I didn't address the race issue because the comment was already too long. Yes there is a race issue...on both sides.
The culture of the inner city is imploading on itself. The music focuses on rape, murder, and gang banging. Divorce rates are killing the sense of morality. And jobs refuse to come, not primarily because of colour, but the violence.
This has infected the inner city community. But before you get to huffy about it just being racism on blacks, I would note one of my friends got stabbed 19 times in the back when I was a teenager...and that was in jacksonville il...he was white and so was his attacker. violence knows no colour. The culture is the primary problem, not the race. (note I said primary, not no problem at all)
The inner city culture needs reformed, but before we can give them a chance we need to make it safe up there. That was the point of my last entry.
anon 8:28
Mayor Byrne moved to Cabrini Green. I liked that move.
Obama had the misfortune to be found singing on the Trib today just below the story of another child shot to death in Englewood.
So me, the all mighty blogger, stuck both stories together.
My first reaction is marshall law too. I'm thankful for Daley's cameras.
I don't know what to do in all honesty beside express a sense of outrage.
If anyone were harmed in my house, I would call the police and hold them accountable... that seems so obvious it seems foolish to respond. The laws apply inside my house and out....
Hey bill, I actually agree with you up to this point on the law applies inside your house...If I am raping someone inside the house doens't the law apply, if I am selling drugs the law applies, ect...
However be careful with this or the government can decided that it needs to pass more laws that tell you what to do in your house.
Examples:
Liberals: banning Gay Sex
Conservatives: banning Homeschooling
Moderates: deciding what internet sites you get on
So lets be carefull how far we take this.
The point is how detached and out of touch Obama is or isn't. Obama is singing in the beltway and kids are dying in Illinois. He was an elected official for years and what changed in his district. There is a significant underclass and dysfunctional problems in these areas that has not been addressed.
I agree that Obama’s gridiron performance is a red-herring here, but perhaps his endorsement of a banker who “financed property used for a gun store so notorious that it was sued by Mayor Richard M. Daley and finally shut down by federal authorities” for Treasurer isn't. (http://thecapitolfaxblog.com/2006/03/13/gun-shop-convicted-felon-got-loans-from-state-treasurer-candidates-bank/)
But the real issue here is: would completely banning the sale and possession of these weapons by everyone in the state really do anything to stop their use by people who are already obtaining and possessing them illegally?
Hey were talking about Chicago here, where is the governor in all this?
Bush and Obama are federal...this is primarily a state issue...the attacks on these two really don't help the problem (And I really don't like Obama, but this isn't helping)
The state needs to get off its butt and do something.
Actually, the repeal of the assault weapons ban was at the federal level.
With regard to the actions of Sen. Obama, I note that after the first plane hit the World Trade Center, President Bush continued to read a story to children. That, my friend, is out of touch. But I digress.
Does anybody have any reason that the assault weapons SHOULD be legal?
I am not claiming that the ban would solve all of our problems. I am claiming that it would solve some.
Further, I note CP's statement about rap music. I also note that CP claims not be racist.
I wonder who sang the following lyrics: "I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die."
Is CP claiming that southern white culture has been damaged beyond repair? If not, please explain the relevance of the music comment.
Skeeter,
The music comment was part of my explanation to inner city community problems and racism.
There are few people who don't argue that the inner city has a big problem with crime, divorce, violence, ect...
I was explaining how the problem was bigger then just guns and racism. and by the way I like some rap music, but the message by some of the music is very damaging to a culture already in trouble. And I don't approve of it in other music forms as well.
And does anyone remember that the reason we have the second amendment is to protect us from our government?
Rap music has nothing to do with it, please. You can drive around the suburbs and hear rap music coming out of Biff and Buff's BMW that their daddy bought for them.
There is absolutely no reason anyone needs to own an assault rifle, period.
The second amendment crowd is amazing in the amount of violence they'll tolerate in the name of keeping their right to own a gun. Nevermind that when that amendment was written, there was no national police, or local police for that matter, and it was incumbent on citizens to protect their property and families. Not only that, the Continental Army was made up of men who went back to their farms when the war was over.
CP:
Are you really claiming that if semi-automatic weapons became illegal in the U.S., our government would seize the opportunity and turn into a fascist dictatorship? Is that your best defense for allowing Americans to own semi-automatic and automatic weapons?
I am not advocating that all firearms be banned. I am claiming that we do not need weapons like the one used to kill Sarkesia Reed. Those weapons are not used by hunters and they are not used to protect households from the encroachment of government. They are used for crimes.
The left fond of telling us poverty breeds crime.
I think crime, especially violent crime, breeds poverty.
If government would fufill one of its basic missions: of keeping the peace; people would be free to solve many of their problems that we're dumping onto the government now.
It's tought to get an education or hunt for jobs when you live a war zone like this. When going home from work means changing your route ever day to keep thugs off balance to your habits, you appreicate how government is badly failing citzens.
“Does anybody have any reason that the assault weapons SHOULD be legal?”
“They are used for crimes.”
Well, in a free society, you need a reason to make something illegal, not a reason to keep it legal.
And no one has yet offered an explaination of how the banning of these weapons will help keep them out of the hands of criminals who are already obtaining, possessing, and using them in violation of the law. So perhaps one solution we can all agree on is to better enforce the gun laws already on the books? If we do that, and it doesn’t work, then I’ll be a little more open minded to the need for more gun control laws.
So enforcing the law is going to stop gun violence, but not stopping the creation of the guns won't? That makes no sense.
Bill, please, provide me where it's the government's duty to provide, what you call, basic security in our homes? I'd like to see that.
I'm so sick of the second amendment crowd I could spit.
There are two very valid reasons for not banning assault weapons (or specifically semi-automatic versions of assault rifles).
1) Ex-military and other citizens who enjoy target shooting at ranges will provide the bulk of any militia/insurgency should the United States itself ever be invaded.
If you don't believe an insurgency of citizens is effective, you need only look to Iraq today, Vietnam of the 50s and 60s or the French Resistance of the 40s. A well-armed citizenry with strong Nationalistic feelings pretty much make it unfeasible to successfully invade and occupy a nation.
2) There is little else to prevent the small occurence of dictatorship except an armed populace.
If you don't agree look to all the nations which have experienced coups in South America. These unarmed populaces had little to no control over their governments being toppled and most were unable to eliminate the ruling juntas until guerrilas were established.
Now the argument will be that 1 or 2 will never occur in the US. We shouldn't ever be too sure. I imagine the Romans of the 1st century never anticipated the Rome of the 3rd or 4th centuries. What is an inpenetrable power or solid republic today could well be dictatorship or vanquished superpower of tomorrow.
Gish,
We have a pretty 'well-regulated militia' and fine standing army to fend off the Goths( Ostro & Visa), Vandals, Huns and other hordes. Sleep soundly on that note.
Allowing assault rifles any public use is pretty damn stupid.
I have been shot at and missed and have witnessed too many burials of students killed in the cross-fires.
Assault rifles should not be legal outside the military and law enforcement.
anon 1:26
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility...
Gish, that is one of the most patently absurd arguments I've ever read. It almost defies critique in it's bald-faced absurdity.
Bill, I am equally glad that you were called out on the Obama non-sequitur in this post - and that you are bringing these sad tragedies into the conversation.
There is one simple answer to at least get us started: more cops.
Let's quit fooling around arming Kansas and Wyoming for the "Red Dawn" terroritst attack that isn't going to happen, and recognize that senseless street violence terrorizes many more Americans than al Queda ever can.
Ok Bill, but what about the "basic" security you keep saying is supposed to be provided to protect us in our homes?
more cops works for me...
...the blogosphere is amazing for the "call out feature"...
non sequiter... faulty logic..maybe, but I'm a little angered about seeming indifference to violence against children which has happened twice now in a district he once represented.
I'd admire him more if he flew home and spoke out.
When you consider all the hype around All Kids, and then the silence when kids are shot, it's striking.... shameful really.
and anon 3:24... you and I don't connect.. about all I can say.
Why is there black-on-black violence and not white-on-white violence?
Damn, race-hustling poverty pimps like Jesse Jackson keeping his peeps DOWN. I'm surprised there isn't black-on-Democrat violence. Kill the Massah keeping them enslaved.
There's no white on white violence? That may be the most ignorant post ever.
Part of the problem is this is treated as a racial thing.
Mary Mitchell wrote this today,
So what is really to blame?
It is the cowardice of the young black men who sought cover in a crowd of children; it is the cruelty of the other young black men who were determined to kill them anyway.
That's who we must hold accountable for this wave of destruction.
I don't know why she added the black adjective. What's the point. These guys were cowards and cruel killers. Enough said... it's a community problem.
We had a group of kids beat and kill another kid here in Kane County maybe a year ago. All the ones arrested were white. No one made anything about while on white violence. It would have sounded absurd. They were just thugs, and drunk.
Maybe the first step is dropping the racial adjectives and recognizing were all citizens of Illinois and its a community problem.
I did see Daley last night on TV. And he was good and I agree with him, but its a big problem then just controling guns. Way bigger...
Pat Hickey-
Assault rifles are entirely different by definition than assault weapons which are a more nebulous grouping.
Assault Rifles imply by design selectable automatic (meaning choice between semi-automatic, burst or fully autmatic fire) weapons firing a rifle round.
Assault Rifles are banned to everyone outside the military and police by Federal law.
As to the rest of it, my statement was to present a valid reason within the confines of the reasoning behind the 2nd Amendment. You don't have to agree but history has shown that well armed insurgencies can both play a major part in resisting outside invasion and play a major part in resisting takeover within one's own government (coup). I never argued as to the likelihood of either one occurring within the US in the near or even far future. However as history has shown all nations that rise to dominance must eventually be succeeded by another group.
Senoanon-
Come on. It is sad that you have no real critique. If you don't agree then say why. At least we can have a dialogue. Pat Hickey disagreed and I tried to further explain my position while trying to understand theirs.
Post a Comment