Here is Cord Jefferson writing at BET on Chicago’s rampant gun violence:
Exacerbating the fact that Chicago has become a veritable war zone is the fact that much of this violence is the Black-on-Black crime African-Americans have struggled with for decades now. Despite only making up about one-third of the city, Chicago Blacks accounted for nearly 80 percent of all homicide victims. More specifically, in the first six months of 2012, of the 259 people killed in Chicago, 201 were Black.
…
In the immediate aftermath of the Holmes shooting, there was an outcry from pundits and other citizens who feel that it’s more important than ever to get guns off our streets. I agree with these people, but before Holmes was ever a threat, Chicago was a bloodbath. Why did everyone wait until now to say the guns have gotten out of control?
…
When gun-control advocates are heard most is always following a major shooting in a suburban town like Aurora or Littleton, Colorado, home of Columbine High School. Those were indeed tragedies that deserve national attention and outrage about how easy it is to arm oneself in America. That said, in urban communities around the United States, the death tolls continue to skyrocket higher and higher every day. Let’s also consider those victims in our debates about gun control. If we don’t, it seems as if we think they’re a lost cause.
I’m not sure if this is supposed to be a joke. Chicago is the only major city besides Washington D.C. to ban gun ownership. They’ve had such policies in place for about 30 years, yet they still have one of the highest murder rates in the nation. By definition the guns that are being used in Chicagoland crime are illegal. What policies can be enacted? The only one that comes to my mind is stop-and-frisk. But we all know that this is racist even though, as Jefferson unwittingly points out in his piece, that most of Chicago’s murderers are black. So outsiders do have a serious answer to Chicago’s problem; it’s just not the one that guys like Jefferson want to hear.
As a side note, I’m interested in doing a piece on a correlation on Chicago’s firearms ban and the on-going problem of youth flash mobbing and the random attacks that have captured the news. Any thoughts on that subject are welcome in the comments.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Well we need to ban ALL guns NATIUONWIDE.
The reason there is such a high crime rate in Chicago is becusse they be getting the guns form redneck stats.
In these debates, I often start by citing two well established facts. First, that several countries have enacted quite strict gun bans over the last 15 years while some others and many States in America have over the same time frame opened the door to more gun presence in society.
For the first group, gun-crime has gone up. For the latter, gun-crime has gone down. So what if Texas has 10 times the gun violence than England. It used to be lower in the UK and higher in Texas.
It is better, I think, to avoid talking about the subject of what all the causes might be. That is really a distraction, imho. It is better by far to hammer the point that gun control advocates were totally wrong with their predictions in both cases. FWIW, I doubt anyone really can ever understand adequately something this complex. It is enough to say that prohibitions of victimless activities (which precisely defines responsible gun ownership) are a waste of time for the most part and always encourage habituation to “criminal” behavior.
It is all exactly like the great experiment of the prohibition of alcohol. We know now what can go wrong with such a seemingly noble idea.
Re: Magazine size. Magazine fed guns have been in wide use for at least 100 years. The militaries of the world have systematically studied and battle tested these things on a massive scale. As one would expect, the “standard” magazine is the type that has been found best for killing the enemy in real world conditions. Afterall, that is the business they are in. So what is a “higher capacity” mag than the standard ones the military uses? It is a silly gimmick that tends to jam or get fumbled. Which is exactly what happened in Colorada recently and with the Loughner guy in Arizona. An over-stuffed gun is not a stronger gun.
When a person hates guns they seem almost incapable of knowing much about them and so what they think of as “common sense” is usually useless and irrelevant..
Gun control is the liberal’s preferred solution to black crime. If you don’t have liberals living near blacks, you don’t get a lot of gun control. Look at Vermont: lots of liberals, but no blacks. Pretty loose gun rules. Look at Alabama: no liberals, lots of blacks. Pretty loose gun rules. Illinois, New York, California? Lots of liberals, living near lots of black. Pretty restrictive gun rules.
Interestingly, the problem really is NAM-on-NAM crime. In Oakland, a few years ago, there was *one* white murder victim, out of over 100 murders. It’s been similar since then. Basically, if you’re not a drug dealer, or involved with drug dealers (or prostitutes), or married to a linux filesystem developer, and you’re white, you’re not going to get killed. You might get beat up, or robbed, or have your car stolen. But you’ll live.
Flash mobbing and rioting don’t connect with gun laws, I think they connect more with NAMs living by whites who are easily intimidated. There were never black riots in the south, as far as I know. But Northern whites are very timid around blacks. And California whites are very timid around Mexicans, as we see from the Anaheim riots.
But Northern whites are very timid around blacks.
Which is why blacks up north never expect a cold gaze or strong body language from a white. When they get that from a white man, they ALWAYS give way or lower their eyes. I wrote about this in more detail on your (Thracumachus) blog recently.
“Exacerbating the fact that Chicago has become a veritable war zone is the fact that much of this violence is the Black-on-Black crime African-Americans have struggled with for decades now.”
Crime is not something the African-American struggles with, it is something the African-American community embraces. High murder rates in the African-American community is the inevitable result of policies that almost all African-Americans support. These policies will never change because African-Americans and white liberals will never allow them to change.
Isn’t gun crime in so-called gun-free Chicago a win-win? Pretty soon the blacks will start on the liberals in Chicago.
“Which is why blacks up north never expect a cold gaze or strong body language from a white. When they get that from a white man, they ALWAYS give way or lower their eyes. ”
I’ve seen this a lot on HBD sites and it’s complete BS. Are some blacks exaggerating their willingness to engage physically? Sure. But HBDers want it both ways – they want to cast blacks as rowdy, dysfunctional, and fighting more than whites, yet also want to say that blacks are mostly just posturing and really pussies when it comes to actually “throwing down.”
Maybe PA is a huge, intimidating white guy, but his experience is surely not common. Blacks mostly do back up their shit-talking, take a stroll around YouTube or WorldStarHipHop for evidence. Maybe they do it packs, but they’ll still give you an ass-whopping. Talk back at your own risk as this could very well happen (see video at link):
http://robert-lindsay.blogspot.com/2011/06/man-savagely-beaten-in-akron-ohio-pizza.html?zx=67f3c22aa3f928f9
I’m tall and athletic but not a “huge, intimidating white guy.” I’ve written on this subject at length before. The short version: alone, blacks have more bark than bite.Several years ago one jumped me on teh subway. He was bigger than me. I kicked his ass and he ran away. I’ve used the subway every day for the past decade and see blacks every day. One looks at me, and I look right back, with a cold, emotionless steady gaze. Direct eye contact, but like I am looking through him. Not to provoke, but to hold my ground. In 100% — not 99, not 98, but 100% — of the cases, the black guy drops his eyes.
I’ve also had blacks walk toward me in crowded public areas without making an effort to make room — I know immediately that they are one of those chip on the shoulder types, usually wearing a suit — and I shoulder ram them. Happened twice recently, One guy said nothing, the other gave out that bitchy little indignant high-pitched mewl “muddafucka.” And that’s it.
Now, I do not go to ghettos and stare down groups of blacks, That woudl be just stupid.
internetbadass,
It sounds like PA is dealing mostly with higher class black men, who probably are more bark than bite. I also suspect the ones who engage in this passive aggressive behavior are the wimpier ones. These guys benefit from the thuggish, violent reputation of underclass blacks, without having to face the same dangers they do.
I guess it depends on where one lives. Where I live there are lots of NAMs from the best to the worst and it is highly determined by the neighborhood.The suburbs are suburbs but the inner city where I live neighborhoods are a patchwork. The plan I practice – and I do mean exercise-practice is to constantly study ones environment even to the point of brief eye contact, actively maintain or increase physical distance from perceived bad guys, if challenged aggressively, retreat and try to hide – and in the last stages of attempted retreat and concealment be ready to deploy another thing you have been practicing with.
This is the way the cops and the law prefer you do it, regardless of the details of the law. They are actually jealous, because such purely defensive tactics carry much lower legal risk and shades of gray than police shooting situations. The police have to control dangerous people. We do not.. We do need to give DP every opportunity to reveal their intent while using that time to get your unsnapped weapon and under control.
The great big catch is here is that obvious efforts to avoid, retreat, and;or hide can trigger predatory instincts within a thug or mob. Which is why displaying all that threat avoidance can turn out badly if you encounter folks who are looking for a specific type of victim – AND YOU ARE IT!!
Kinda like playing dead during a bear attack when,the bear was motivated by extreme hunger from the start.
It sounds like PA is dealing mostly with higher class black men, who probably are more bark than bite.
Not exactly. I don’t deal with pure ghetto often. Mosty a wide assortnement of the city’s residents on the subway and streets. The average black male (most black people I see on my trecks into and through the city are middle-aged black females) will be what you can call working class — employed, but one foot solidly in the ghetto. And of course suit-wearing blacks as well. It is commuter hours, after all. Also, full-ghetto teenagers. The black guy who jumped me several years ago was full-on ghetto, adult. But a downscale type, rather than the blinged-out type. The latter move in groups, and are the most dangerous.
I rarely see blacks go into “bite mode” when one-on-one. He will yell a lot (“bark”) and maybe posture and flex, but he’s bluffing. Blakcs rely on white people’s unease about making a scene. The danger is when they are in a group and there is no general public around to call 9-1-1 on your behalf.
One bluff I called, which I described on Roissy three years ago: I pull up into a parking space, and a car with two aggrieved blacks stops as my woman and I get out, and the passenger is yelling somethign about me cutting him off. I look at him calmly (yes, I did cut them off) and I said matter of factly “I didn’t see you.” The passenger throws off his seat belt and does this move like he’s about to jump out of the car and rush me. I calmly take my glasses off and put them on top of my car. I’m ready to tell my wife to run into the store (it was a white upscale area). And so the guy — you could almost hear the needle scratch across a stopped record — freezes in mid-step and says with wind completely taken out of his sails “what did you say?”
I repeated myself, looking straight at him “I didn’t see you.” And he says “oh, I thought you said somethign else” and deflated goes back into his car.
Obviously, you always want to use good judgment. I know blacks well, and I can read them. But ghetto Hispanics, for example I don’t know that well so I woudl be a lot more careful.
threat avoidance can turn out badly
In shady situations, the best default way to carry yourself really is a straight, fearless emotionless attitude. Looking ahead, and looking at them in passing with no aggression or provication, and no communication in your eyes. Don;t be shy about eye contact, just do it with no provication. Like you are watchign scenery.
Unrelated: a cheesy leftie song form the early 90s by Temple of the Dog, called “Hunger Strike” underscores my point about Pearl Jam, unlike Nirvana and some of the earlier Seattle bands, being a propaganda tool of MTV/corporate suits — but musically genius.
In tis particular song, Chris Cornell’s voice, with Eddie Vetter’s, and the lead guitar, create a brilliant combination. Vetter’s vocals are God’s masterpiece.
To continue on-topic, Hole is another great, underrated early 90s Grunge band. Courtney Love had “it,” however ephemerally. But doesn;t impermanence often go together with beauty?
HERE they are doing “Violet.”
See her at 0:22. Pure white trash at its most playful, wild, true-to-self sexual apex. It only works when you’re young though — chicks like her do not age well — too much wear, too much heavy fuel. Back in 1993 I banged a chick who had exactly that look and mannerism. That naughty and somewhat crazy (and I mean crazy in a clinical sense) smile of hers drove me wild.
PA:
For the mestizos, at least, I don’t think you have to be overly wary. I went to a tech school in Phoenix back in the 90s and lived in an area that was a working class white neighborhood deep into transition into a Mexican ghetto, complete with guys selling tacos and ice cream out of carts and wild graffiti. You do have to lock your shit up and alarm it. My bike got stolen twice until I realized that a cheap single-speed one would suffice in never getting stolen, but never was there any confrontational stuff. Even people who were clearly gang members didn’t go out of their way to confront strangers either physically or verbally, they just seemed to loiter in parking lots, play annoyingly loud music and smoke weed. Place was a run down ugly shithole, but the food was good and pretty cheap and it never seemed dangerous. If I wanted something nicer, I just had to ride to the other side of the highway, where the nice neighborhood was. I’m guessing crazy shit went down, from the amount of police action passing by at night, but it seemed if you wanted trouble, you had to go looking for it.
Chuck, as much as I like your blog, this horrid black-on-gray theme makes me want to read it less and less. Consider revamping it.
Segregation is another option .
In Northern California we don’t see that many blacks. Those that we do so, say, in CostCo, are pretty dumb but pulling down reasonable amounts of money from Whitey.
“The fourth doorman of the apocalypse 07/28/2012 at 8:31 pm
Isn’t gun crime in so-called gun-free Chicago a win-win? Pretty soon the blacks will start on the liberals in Chicago.”
That’s exactly why they want to implement stop and frisk. Blacks are now roaming in elite areas and attacking elites from time to time. Stop and frisk is effectively oppression which reminds the lower classes who’s in charge and that they are under their numb.
PA, I’m not sure where you live but it’s probably not a good idea to thumb wrestle in public with shiftless blacks over meaningless things like right-of-way for your shoulder or who wins out in the cold war during the exchange of menacing, steely glances… not unless you’re ready to go to jail or have the time to get in a scrum and see the police come. The reason that blacks win in these little exchanges is because they truly are ready to fight (and also go to jail) if it means saving face and maintaining their “hard” image in front of friends. I’ve come too much too lose for that type of nonsense.
Camlost, PA already said that he engaged them 1-on-1, not in groups?
Pingback: Linkage Is Good For You – 8-5-12 | Society of Amateur Gentlemen