“Every week it’s someone else. It’s retaliation, this person for that person, and it doesn’t stop. Every time there’s a body down, there’s going to be another one and another one. You’re talking about poverty and families broken up and people not having opportunity and losing their way. Violence is what we talk about in these chairs. We talk about it. We analyze it. But we don’t have easy answers.” – Herb Harrington in A Weekend in Chicago: Where Gunfire is a Terrifying Norm [via nytims.com]
Home Quote of the Day Blue Force Gear Quote of the Day: No Answers for Gun...
I have a very simple answer. Send in the National Guard and roll through the ghettoes like it was Fallujah. Take every documented gang member or drug dealer you find, and lock them up permanently.
Change that from “documented gang member” to “documented gun owner” and you still think that’s a good idea? Because it’s the same violation of rights.
Weird how dui checkpoints are constitutionally legal for publuc safety but sweeping a ghetto for weapons and drugs isn’t.
Actually “DUI Checkpoints” are not constitutionally legal”. Yeah, you can call it a safety check but agencies cannot set up checkpoints specifically to look for drunks.
The Supreme Court weighed in on the question in a 1990 decision and determined that DUI checkpoints are in fact a legal and valid law enforcement method….
This x1,000,000,000. I can end up on the no-fly list as a legal and law abiding gun owner but the local gang groups (Bloods, Crips, BGF, MS-13, etc., etc….) are not classified as terrorist organizations when they terrorize the city?
Yeah, nope. Gang members are basically domestic terrorists. Sometimes you need to put the boot in.
If you’re delusional enough to substitute “gun owner” for “gang member” then you have no idea what you’re talking about. Besides, 1 will get you 10 that most of those scumbags have outstanding warrants anyway.
Ironic how many articles I remember reading here on TTAG of other websites and news outlets labeling law abiding gun owners as “domestic terrorists”.
Do you want me to explain how gangs are a textbook example? Just because leftys use that label to sling mud, does not mean that others do no desperately deserve that label.
They’re domestic terrorists with connections. In Chicago it’s well-documented that there are extensive relationships between the gangs and the machine.
They already know who these guy are. They’ve all been locked up before many times. But they keep letting them out.
The people who run Chicago aren’t about to do anything differently than they have for the past 80 years. Why should they? It’s not like they’ll be voted out of office. The Democratic party decides who’s going to run on the Democratic ticket and that’s who wins.
You have some really terrible ideas.
I would actually say have them roll them into Daley Plaza and start pulling papers on the mayor, alderman and every politician in the place. It’s likely there’s a lot of money being misappropriated that is needed to build and maintain these crumbling communities. Yes the police would be rolled into this but largely not the rank and file officers. It would be a distinct effort to remove politicians from policing which is one of the main reasons that Chicago and cities like it are in the bind they are right now.
In terms of sentencing, we need to stop emptying the jails on parole/probation. Either moves need to be made to rehabilitate people for real or they need to do real time to get the point across it’s wrong to hurt others.
Lastly, we need to not be afraid of calling a bad person such. This means felons, corrupt politicians, corrupt police officers anyone and everyone who’s poisoning our society regardless of demographics.
Sorry. You dont get a pass or even sympathy when your culture celebrates drugs, misogyny and violence. Sorry you just dont.
Along with attacking any fellow black for being “like whitey” for getting a good education and speaking correct grammatical English or being called an”uncle Tom” for getting a good blue collar job.
Until the law abiding black culture starts calling out the “gangsta culture” as a cancer in the body of the black people, and eradicates it, the primarily black violence towards other blacks will continue.
One word: “MOVE”!
There are answers, but they aren’t the answers that the big government type like to hear.
Stable, healthy, loving, and firm families are what Chicago needs. Chicago needs solid godly fathers who love their wives and children, and teach their families the Bible (dare I say the word – patriarchy).
Mothers who only make babies with one man (and are married to him) are also pretty beneficial (patriarchy).
As a fan of TTAG, I must point out that allowing regular citizens the right to keep and bear arms for their own defense is also critical.
But if the mammas marry their baby daddies they won’t get their Obamamoney.
That’s the point. We need people in government that won’t promote and incentivize disfunctional families. People will take the initiative to do what’s best for them and society incentivized stable people who add value to society. Government incentivizes parasites and moochers in exchange for keeping the status quo in power.
This. Right here, in your one quip, is the root of the breakdown of the family in the US. It started in the urban black population, but now the cancer is attacking the latino population, and the white population isn’t far behind.
Once the government started the direct financial incentives to get the fathers out of the home, the problems accelerated – rapidly. But even after that, we found out that we were giving incentives for women to have more children out of wedlock.
One of the biggest data points to come out of the “welfare reform” legislation in Clinton’s second term was this: People on all sides of the issue argued that “women didn’t have more children to gain a bigger government check.” Both conservative and liberal think tanks, pundits and flapping heads argued that “no one would deliberately have a child just to increase their AFDC check…”
What we found out after the legislation passed and the word went out that the automatic increases for an additional child born while the mother was already on welfare were stopped, and the two-year clock was put in place, suddenly the birth rate went down in these households. The Catholic anti-abortion groups had been worried that the decrease in benefits would make more women turn towards abortion, the liberals were worried that children would starve.
NONE of these things happened. But the number of women already on welfare having successive children went down – dramatically. In other words, the welfare program, as constituted, gave women incentives for having more children when they were already on welfare. Stop the incentives, and the growth in the problem slowed down.
Just thought I’d leave this here:
The trend you’ve correctly identified has been propelled by the invention of cheap, reliable DNA testing. A woman can now have children from several different fathers and hit-up each one for child support. This is especially rewarding at the mid- to lower end of the financial spectrum, rather than relying on one man who may not be a suitable resource provider.
And here’s the kicker: it makes sense for a woman in or near poverty to have different children from different fathers. It gives her children genetic diversity; taken as a group, they have a greater chance of escaping poverty.
I’m not saying it’s right. The nuclear family has been proven to be a stable foundation for financial success. But it is a thing.
Republicans need to push a lot harder on school choice. The Democrats have created their permanent underclass of inner city voters who think they can’t survive without your government mandated handout, and for the most part they’re right, they can’t. The first thing the Democrats did was destroy the public school systems (while lining their pockets in the process) so these people don’t have any skills worthy of a living wage. That problem needs to be fixed first, then you can tackle making people less comfortable in their poverty.
Yep, Art out WestI,
I’ve been reading “Biohistory” by Tim Penman, (I heard an interview with him and Stefan Molyneux on youtube) where he shows that the directives of various religious faiths actually promote the ideal societal environment on a genetic level for civilization. He also shows why, when a culture turns away from those “old fashioned” religious directives. the culture collapses, all based upon evolutionary and genetic directives.
Along with the r/K selection process, it truly explains on a scientific basis, why civilizations grow and then ultimately collapse into chaos.
Very eye opening!!
I always appreciate educated comments and I will have to check out the book you’ve mentioned, but I have to point out that the r/K strategies are biological, not socioeconomic. No matter how many state-sponsored children an unwed mother has, we as human are all K-type strategists.
Her FITNESS, on the other hand, is through the roof. “Survival of the fittest” has nothing to do with physical fitness, it refers to biological fitness, which is the ability to propagate successfully and often, the less effort the better.
Exactly!! It is genetic directives that cause r/K selection; it is various societal formations, such as monogamy, the training or not, of young children and waiting to have sex only after being married, as examples, that help to counteract these genetic tendencies.
“Biohistory” doesn’t speak directly about r/K selection, but it does speak about how the societal and cultural norms as to marriage and different ways of raising children can support or counteract genetic tendencies that support civilization, or lead to it’s destruction.
Take the national guard and roll through the poverty striken areas. Set up job fairs, drug rehabilitation clinics, planned parenthoods and soup kitchens. Park a book mobile on every street corner. That would be my tax dollars well spent. Educating and feeding my countrymen.
There are already Planned Parenthood clinics in the ‘hood. That’s where they make their money.
The popo may have shot (wounded or killed) many blacks “n da hood” over the last 50yrs. With or without cause.
But without question Planned Parenthood and the Demtard Party, have KILLED millions of blacks in the same period. Blacks who would have been citizens (and likely demtard voters). Why no upset over this? Because the dem party is the massa.
THEN the dems import millions of illegal and “legal” immigrants from around the world.
Why must this be such a complex issue?
Chicago and Detroit don’t have a gun problem, they have a BLACK problem.
It isn’t whites who are shooting each other everyday.
Blacks have an inherently lower IQ which leads to a lack of impulse control and critical thinking. Why anyone thinks a multiracial society is beyond me. Oh yeah, 60 yrs or cultural Marxist brainwashing, that’s how reality becomes inverted.
Apartheid or repatriation is the only acceptable answer.
I bet you like to dress up like a spooky ghost any chance you get.
Next thing you know he’ll be telling us they can’t swim because their bones are too heavy.
It’s not bone density. It is BMI which is primarily due to muscle tissue. But that isn’t why so many blacks can’t swim. It’s cause dey scurred.
He’s not wrong. The lower average IQ of the US black population is well documented. Let’s be honest, modern black society selects AGAINST intelligence.
It doesn’t make them any less human, but it does mean that we can’t expect the group to react the same way to incentives as more normalized populations do.
IQ is not solely a function of heredity, it’s also a product of education.
I haven’t done an exhaustive study on this but I looked at the “hot spots” for gun violence and violence in general according to various states and the FBI and cross referenced that with education results (admittedly based on standardized testing which may not be the best indicator in the world) and what did I find?
Lo and behold, the places with the most violence also have the shittyest educational systems.
Now correlation is not causation, but I’m thinking this is part of the problem.
Actually, early childhood IQ, which is what was measured, has jack shit to do with education. You can’t stiffen up a bucket of spit with a handful of buckshot. No amount of education will help people who are simply not intellectually capable of grasping advanced concepts.
Oh, and the population scale link between IQ and heredity has been well established. There’s a reason why certain populations test lower. It’s a direct result of those populations selecting against high intelligence for dozens of generations. For some excellent examples, look at Central America and the Islamic world. There’s a reason why those populations average in the 80s and it ain’t education.
“…intellectually capable of grasping advanced concepts.” is not the issue.
You don’t need membership in MENSA to hold an average job.
What you *DO* need is being raised with a work ethic so you will show up for work and do what you are told to do.
“80% of life is showing up” isn’t just a slogan…
To be economically competitive in the modern technological job market, you need an IQ above 90. That’s simple reality. If your IQ is in the 70s and 80s, your best job prospects involve custodial work or manual labor.
Work ethic and economic success requires the self control necessary to delay gratification. That’s simply absent when your IQ hits sub 85 territory.
For those of you following along at home, 15 points in IQ is a full standard deviation away from the mean. That means that someone with an IQ of 70 or lower is functionally dumber than 95%+ of the human population.
Come on, we know it’s really some ill-defined, ever fluctuating principle that caused those cities to collapse. The actual inhabitants have nothing to do with it! 😉
Please, do continue to point the finger at black people for having an inherently lower IQ than white people while writing a comment which is barely coherent.
The incoherence of an argument does not make it false. The generally lowered IQ levels in certain populations has been scientifically proven over and over again for over a century. Why these trends exist is a combination of heredity, culture, and economics working to select against high IQ individuals within these populations.
After all, if the low IQ baby mama has six kids while her higher performing classmate waits until she’s married and has two, how many generations do you think it’ll take to drop the average IQ of the population?
The Idiocracy premise, iirc.
The idiocracy premise is only feasible in a democratic system with a strong welfare state. Take away either of those variables, and the problem tends to be self-correcting. I’m not a big fan of either Democracy or the welfare state.
If you live in a dangerous and shitty place and don’t have the means to raise a child, don’t create a child. It is not that hard a thing to avoid. I didn’t think I’d be an adequate parent so I didn’t have a child, so I know this can be done and have followed my own advice.
Yeah but let’s say you’re a bored 13 year old boy with no father figure, no part time job, Mom works all night when you get home from school, and the girl just down the block thinks you’re cute and is willing to put out.
Now imagine there’s LOTS of bored boys and girls, and the only sex-ed they get is a 90 minute PowerPoint and isn’t until they get to 10th grade. And imagine they’ve been watching porn since they were in 5th grade.
Blame the schools and the internet.
Actually, I already I knew why these babies were being created. I still suspect it is the weakest link in this chain of disaster though.
Side conversation – For my own part, if I could go back to my teens, I’d have taken Prozac or something similar for the libido reducing effect. I suspect that I would have done a lot better in almost everything without that very problematic hormonal influence. I am not advocating mandating chemical castration but I am saying I would have preferred it for myself (not the “mandated” part, of course).
“We talk about it. We analyze it. But we don’t have easy answers.”
Ah the wringing of hands, the babbling of the intellectually lazy, the products of how many decades of progressive thought drummed into the minds of otherwise good people.
No one likes to see these things, no one wants violence. But if you are faced with a man with a gun intent on doing harm to you there is only one ‘easy answer’. And no, it’s not easy but on a certain level it’s trivially easy – you defend yourself or you do not. Best not to be in such a situation, obviously, but sometimes they come to you.
But here’s the thing. The state cannot protect you, no matter how many times they tell you they want to, that they plan to, that they will. The truth is worse than that – they do not even care about you.
They want a monopoly on the mechanisms of self defense because they want to control the power. That is the only reason. Their lies that they are the only ones capable of wielding this power, that people are safer without guns, that all you need to do is call 911 are nothing but that, lies. How many times have we seen gun control enacted to support truly evil progressive ideas such as keeping black people from arming themselves, laws created by politicians who are working with organized crime, corrupt politicians who are certain to surround themselves with armed men while working only to prevent you from doing the same thing for yourself or your family?
They will be there to take pictures and notes, and to clean up. If you are lucky they will actually show up in time to save you, but you put yourself in that position, to rely on that luck, on your own.
People have the right to defense of self, and if your communities laws prevent that, you have to work to change those laws to work within the confines of the constitution, or find another community.
Or hope you are lucky.
Of all the things that infuriate me about liberals, the trope of “there are no easy answers” they toss out when their self-serving, virtuous plans blow up in our faces is the most infuriating.
Yes, there are a great number of societal problems that have easy answers. The reason why liberals think that the easy answers aren’t easy is because the simple and workable answer offends their left-wing sensibilities.
Take the problem above: This problem of predatory crime is the result of the breakdown in the inner city [black] family. The “black” part is optional – the breakdown is happening in other racial groups as well. The breakdown has happened because liberal ideas about allowing people to live off the dole have blown up into huge societal problems. This isn’t a “black” problem because in the UK, you can see exactly the same issues in their “councils” housing projects as well in white-as-typing-paper communities. It might be less lethal in the UK, but the overall crime issue is all there.
Once we started subsidizing urban poor to stay that way, to remain out of work, to have children out of wedlock, we put in the down payment on this dystopia. Now, even supposed ‘conservatives’ won’t talk about ending welfare. The political “leadership” has created a permanent underclass of crime, dependance and sloth, all so that the upper class intellectuals can preen and feel really good about themselves for “having done something.” And that’s what this is really all about: upper-class pecksniffs wanting to feel good about themselves. So they give us these speeches and policies about how we taxpayers “must do more” about this, that, and some other thing, all of which it turns out make the problem worse. The gun control in Chicago is just one more example of these types of policies – it makes some elites feel really good about themselves, but the actual effects are impossible to deny: more crime, a population of unarmed victims in waiting, and a predatory cohort of young, violent males allowed to run rampant in the city.
One solution would be to enact legislation holding policy think tanks, policy wonks and social activists who call for various government policies to be held personally accountable when their ideas don’t work. This should be applied to everyone asking the government to meddle in the lives of others – from global warming scientists expensive and radical nonsense on national energy policy to welfare advocates in cities and states.
Indeed, these things always come down to ‘easy answers’, oh it’s so terrible here, what is to be done.
What he is leaving unsaid, and everyone knows instinctively but refuses to verbalize is; ‘there are no easy answers as long as I continue to refuse to accept personal responsibility’.
Like Ben says above, oh we need to position bookmobiles. Uh huh. Anyone in this country, that is willing to accept personal responsibility to learn to read, will succeed if they work at it. The resources are there, it’s not even difficult. But they refuse to even to this.
Of course there are no easy answers, when you wait for someone else to solve all your problems.
Some things are simple. Learn to read. Get a job. Move. Get a gun.
But you cannot force a man to take responsibility for himself. And the progressives love this, because that can setup these bookmobiles and say to themselves, look, I have made a difference.
We can force people to become responsible for themselves. But to do so required a brutal and frank policy of making the consequences of irresponsibility high and painful – which many soft-hearted people don’t want to do.
A great example: There was a homeless bum here in Wyoming a couple winters ago who found, through a wrinkle in the law, that he could camp on the ground just off an on-ramp to the freeway and not be removed. There was no legal way to shift him out of his encampment on the freeway on-ramp – and he remained on a local on-ramp for months.
Local law enforcement adhered to both the letter of the laws and the Constitution and didn’t try any funny business to shift him out of there. They’d make frequent “welfare checks” on him, (reckoning that all the attention from the law might haze him out) but they found him to be complying with the law, so they left him there, figuring the first really cold nights would move him down the road.
But some soft-hearted (and soft-headed) women in the community, claiming “Christian charity” or some other such self-serving unctuous twaddle, kept bringing this bum food and clothing – allowing him to persist there for many weeks longer than he would have. Had people just said “OK, that’s the way you want to live, go to it, have fun!”, the first couple of nights of sub-zero temps would have moved him out.
But nooooo…. some people just have to feel good about themselves.
Even the article admits that a small number of people are causing a large amount of havoc. But, the people and their officials do not want to lock them up.
Drugs. Gangs that deal drugs. Turf wars between drug dealing gangs. And, a culture that does not wholeheartedly reject this stuff. The Fourth of July weekend is coming, more overtime work for ambulance crews.
As long as folks in those communities keep voting for the same corrupt, complicit political party nothing will change. They are choosing this fate year after year.
Do the people of the communities, the city, and even the state want to throw a substantial number of largely minority gang bangers in jail? Or do liberal concerns like “disparate incarceration rates” and “society’s role in the creation of young offenders” help to stop them from taking action?
As they fret, policemen, emergency room staff, and courts brace for more work.
“…But we don’t have easy answers.”
That right there is the biggest part of your problem. Easy. You don’t have easy answers because you aren’t trying to solve an easy problem. Instead of wringing your hands or standing around waiting for someone else to do something why don’t YOU go out there and make a difference?
Sorry, the only people left in those neighborhoods are either complicit or powerless to do anything (thereby indirectly complicit). They can pray with Pfleger all they want, God helps no one not willing to help themselves.
What other neighborhood in the US would tolerate teenage stupidity such as not being able to walk down a certain block of the street?
Being as how Illinois is like $6 billion in the hole and Chicago has a drug problem bigger than Donald Trump’s hands, I can’t imagine why they haven’t legalized or at least decriminalized weed yet. Two girls, one cu- I mean, two birds one stone.
Secondly, until someone figures out what regulations need to be enacted/ redacted to get some businesses coming into Chicago and Illinois proper, none of this is likely to change long term.
I’m not naive, I realize that some folks will always be criminals, but to me the whole thing is becoming similar to what we see in the Middle East. Namely, that if you have nothing to live for, no future, no hope, no chance of bettering yourself, no chance of you kids bettering themselves, you end up living in the moment day in and day out because why not? It’s the path of least resistance, and you’re essentially f*cked no matter what anyway. You make stupid decisions because you have nothing to live for. So instead of joining the Army so you can take the GI Bill dough and attend some sort of schooling or technical training to build a future for yourself and your family, you become involved in crime.
Reduce the black market by legalizing/ decriminalizing, make up some of the tax shortage through the revenue, reduce everyone else’s taxes (including businesses) with the new massive excise revenue stream, attract business to the area, and suddenly folks aren’t shooting each other in droves every weekend.
And the potheads arrive. How about free kiosk on every other corner Southside of Chicago. Get FREE POT, Obamaphone and ballcap.
Better idea. Every resident that has no arrest for drugs, violent crime, etc gets a free AR, 12ga, or automatic. (with a trigger lock – for the chilluns).
Arrive? Lols, seriously?
In L.A. Rampart Division called these neighborhoods “self cleaning ovens”.
The Brookings institute says there is three simple rules for getting out of poverty.
1. Graduating from high school.
2. Waiting to get married until after 21 and do not have children till after being married.
3. Having a full-time job.
If you do all those three things, your chance of falling into poverty is just 2 percent. Meanwhile, you’ll have a 74 percent chance of being in the middle class.
Ah, but there’s no “street cred” in doing any of those things.
Bar for #1 is actually much higher. Modern “educrats” will pass out a diploma just for showing up most days for 4 (or so) years of HS>
1A. Learn to read
“just for showing up”
Are you kidding? These school admins are so determined not to allow a kid to flunk out, the will bend over backwards to give them opportunity to graduate without even showing up.
That is to say, they give out online coursework to facilitate the learnin nowadays.
Not because they want kids to learn mind you, they want their sweet federal money.
And none of this has to do with actual learnins, trust me. The kid needs to do that shit on their own time. Of course they have the option to do it sooner, or later, that’s not important, but it is mandatory. Not for the school, the kid, that is.
Funny, those are also on the list of things that will take your divorce rate from 50% down to the low teens….
I’m shkoced that I found this info so easily.
That’s way more clever than I was expecting. Thanks!
. I read your post and went and fixed a nice cup of mangosteen tea and sat down to relax and I felt better. Thank you.
you love to sell frames but do we really need them? I get it’s personal choice. If it were me I wouldn’t give a toss as long as I could see. Mr.CBBCanadianbudgetbinder recently posted..
Lily-white liberals broke the black family. No less a Democrat than Daniel Patrick Moynihan warned his fellow Democrats and liberals what the “Great Society” programs would do to the black family in his report in 1965. At that time, Moynihan was worried about the 23% of black children being born into households without fathers. Today, that number is nearly 70%.
All of Moynihan’s worst predictions have come true, and far worse besides.
Mine and Your tax dollars subsidize the piss poor decision making of others. Don’t know about you, but it pisses me off every friday.
A lot of good observations here. I’d like to add a few more.
The simple reality is that African culture is fundamentally violent, and always has been for hundreds if not thousands of years, such that they know no other way. So it should come as little surprise that said streak of violence would take root in a place like Chicago, which, perhaps more than any other American city, provided the giant petri dish for it to culture in.
Even in other American cities black culture is leaps and bounds ahead of Chicago.
I’ve said that Chicago is proud to be America’s third eye, and determined to keep it that way. Probably nothing short of tactical nuclear weapons will ever change it.
It’s the fact that Chicago culture infects the rest of the state and this country that really gets my goat.
But in the end, they have only themselves in the mirror to look at and blame.
Waaa? I thought they found Islam. The religion of peace??
I find the opinions of people in Chicago talking about crime SOOOO boring. Chicagoans democratically chose their politicians, laws, and policies. Each election they have the opportunity to try something else and they stick with what they have. The alternatives are obvious and the people there have rejected them. Talking about Chicago is only useful when talking with people who who haven’t completely drunk the Democrat kool-aid and actually want avoid living in an urban hell-scape.
Damn Chicago Amish. No, wait…..
Let the gang bangers kill each other. Hell, encourage it. Eventually, as the scum is skimmed off the gene pool, the problem will correct itself.
Put a wall round the city, drop several tons of military surplus m-16s. Add in regular air drops of ammo and small amounts of food. Let problem solve itself.
Meh-arm the good folks,LONG mandatory prison sentences,prison road gangs might help,death penalty for murder(banned by ex-felon Republican RINO governor George Ryan) maybe bring in the guard. But all the whining black folks are still voting “D” so none of that will happen. It’s not like they don’t know who’s doing the vast #’s of shootings. Heck a mob of young bucks chased(ON CAMERA) a black couple from the Gold Coast(a helluva’ nice neighborhood) into Lake Shore Drive where the gal was struck and killed(last week). Even with video evidence baby momma still denied her boy was a murderous thug. There is no remedy. Just avoid Chiraq…
Gang bangers are domestic terrorists
Thierry,Les guillemets Ã©tant &lqaso; couplÃ©s&nbup;» avec le « chÃ¢peau » (que j’utilise trop peu car je manque de cannes…), Ã§a fait une moyenne !… Je vais faire un effort ! Pierre Henri
But but liberal policies.
Virtually all of these posts ignore simple economics and the cause of this violence.
The illegal drug trade in Chicago is a multi billion dollar industry that provides lucrative employment opportunities for tens of thousands young men who earn far more in untaxed income than they would in an entry level job.
The major risk of this job is not arrest, but your competition blowing you away for either moving in on their turf or you protecting your turf. With some street corners generating $10,000 per day in untaxed drug revenue the stakes are high, hence the need to acquire firearms illegally and the shootings and deaths that come with it.
Bottom line – if upscale City and Suburban residents were not buying illegal drugs, none of this would happen. So for those of you that like to smoke weed and think it is harmless, think about the small children walking to school who get hit by stray gunfire as drug gangs battle over the money that you spend which goes to buy the illegal guns that kill people, many of whom are innocent and caught in the crossfire.