Previous Post
Next Post

Occasional commenter W.H. Thompson runs the invaluable which meticulously chronicles the Windy City’s always astonishing crime, murder and mayhem. To hear Hizzoner the Godfather and his bootlicking police commissioner Garry “We’re Right and You’re Wrong” McCarthy tell it, Chicago crime is down. Yes, well tell that to the 53 people who were murdered (41 shot to death, 224 wounded) during August. To say nothing of 7,286 aggravated batteries, aggravated assaults and criminal sexual assaults. So how do the moguls who manage Mogadishu on Lake Michigan reconcile the fact that they have some of the toughest gun laws and, at the same time, the most horrific crime rates in the country? They mostly don’t. They do a little sidestep when presented with uncomfortable facts which contradict the civilian disarmament narrative. But when pressed, they dutifully adopt the Bloombergian misdirection tactic of blaming neighboring states for having egregiously “lax” firearm laws. Somehow the fact that those other states also have comparatively minuscule crime problems never gets mentioned, though. Probably just an oversight.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. In their narrative, guns cause crime. They have blinders to the notion that the stolen guns come from very low crime areas where people are not shooting each other to death like it’s Sadr City Baghdad before they t-walled the entire place. Oh, wait, T-walls…I think I am onto something.

    • “Low crime areas”, except for all the gun stealing and gun trafficking?

      I’m sorry, you can’t have the argument both ways either. You can’t say that the high crime in Chicago is unrelated to guns, when more than 80% of the murders are with guns.

      • Would those murders still have occurred if there were no guns in Chicago?

        Some probably would not have occurred, but I’m willing to bet, most of those murders would have happened by other means.

        Humanity has been killing itself long before guns were invented.

      • Is that why the “gun crime” rate is so much higher in all areas that the guns supposedly come from than it is in Chi-town? I know that I am way more afeared for my safety in Champaign or Toledo than I am on the loop.

      • You need a little lesson in correlation vs. causation.

        Murders are committed with guns. That’s correlation; there is a relationship between murders and guns. Namely, guns are used in murder.

        However, guns do not cause the murders to occur. Criminal motive causes murders to occur, as any law school student will tell you. Because there is no causation in that relationship, removing guns from the equation will not stop the murders. Discounting the fact that you can’t remove guns from criminals, there are a plethora of other deadly weapons that can be used.

        Removing guns would have adverse consequences though. As has been shown time and time again, arming citizens reduces crime. 98% of all mass shootings occur in “gun free zones” simply because murderers seek out soft targets. Disarming the law-abiding, which is all that gun-control laws do, does not and will never stop evil people from committing evil acts.

  2. When I hit “post” for my first comment, I got the white screen of death–must have offended the censor. So I try again, with less colorful language.

    There is a certain logic to their illogic though–criminal s buy their guns where they are “easy” to obtain, and commit their crimes where only they and the police are armed. If I were a gangbanger, it would make sense to me.

    • We’re having a problem with comments immediately after posts go up. Working on it. Thanks for your patience.

    • That’s exactly the point everybody is making. The difference is that realist know you can’t get rid of criminal guns by law, only legal guns, which means the more illegal guns are, the more you get Chi-style crime stats. The hoplophobes have their fingers in their ears, eyes closed, saying la la la la la and hoping that after a rip van winkle, the fairy god father, Bloomberg, will have somehow turned bluster into reality, and somehow made illegal guns vanish too.

      Or, to put it another way, there are a certain number of guns. Laws only change the ratio of legal to illegal guns. The more illegal guns there, the more crime. Criminals aren’t stupid, so they migrate from areas with high numbers of legal guns to areas with high numbers of illegal guns.

      It’s simple logic and arithmetic, but you have to have brain engaged to understand it, and eyes and ears open to know of it.

      • “[c]riminal guns?” A gun is an inanimate object that is utterly lacking in free will. What is a “criminal gun”?

        • A criminal gun is a gun that breaks into peoples houses and roughs up the place then proceeds to stampede tge women and rape the cattle

    • Years ago while researching a story I stumbed on the World Socialist Oranization webste. They claimed that partial socialism would not work because it would be infected by capitalism from the outside. Their solution was that the entire world had to convert to socialism ALL AT THE SAME TIME, and then it would work perfectly. Very nice claim since ti will obviously never happen and so you cannot tell them they are wrong.

      Seems like exactly the same argument Chicago is using. Civilian disarmament doesn’t work because those dastardly neighbors keep ending in guns. If we ever want civilian disarmament to work we have to disarm EVERYBODY, all at the same time. That’s the ticket!

      • As with world wide socialism local or unilateral disarmament doesn’t work because freedom is a natural state and where ever it is lesser their is an over pressure while where ever it is greater there is a vacuum, since nature abhors a vacuum people will gravitate from less freedom to more as surely as gases in a closed system (which is why the Soviets had border guards facing inwards while countries like the US have them facing outward).

        What the disarmers and the socialists both have de facto admitted and surely without meaning to is that what they propose is so abhorrent to the people that unless there is no where left for them to flee the system cannot work. They make a fine indictment of their own ideologies seemingly without being aware of it.

    • That’s not how it works though Mark. The majority of the bangers hardly every leave there ‘turf’ for a wide variety of reasons both practical and cultural. They most certainly don’t sally raiding parties to the suburbs to acquire guns, lacking the diversification of skill/job set, command structure and organization to put together anything even looking like such an operation.

      Bangers tend to acquire guns within their own neighborhood and through existing criminal acquaintances. Some of these guns may well be ‘trafficked’ in the media-centric sense of having been purchased through dealers via a straw man with the intent to divert them to criminal street sales. Most have been obtained in burglaries originally perpetrated by addicts who then trade the arms to their local dealer for drugs. The dealer in turn either fences the guns to those with the connections to sell them in the city at a profit, in which case they then act as a de facto procurement arm for wholesalers who then distribute to individual retailers (not brink and mortar stores with anything like legitimacy but rather individuals with gang affiliations who have a customer base) within the city (illicit and unlawful at every step along the way) or else simply trade them up the line again as partial payment on their next drug shipment, in which case the bangers, who act as facilitators at the receiving end of the drug smuggling chain receive the arms more directly.

      This pattern of guns traveling backwards up the drug supply chain to end users in inner city areas accounts for the majority of out of state guns found in the possession of the criminal gangs. It’s several orders of magnitude more accurate than the Quixotic notion that disorganized and relatively immobile inner city youth collect cash and a straw buyer and then journey several states over into areas where gun laws are less restrictive to purchase guns (absurd on its face since with a straw buyer who is qualified and a supply of cash they could have obtained the arms more locally, or even more bizarrely that they organized a supply detail who’s mission it was to undertake an interstate burglary spree for the purpose of obtaining arms.

      As for the thought that the bangers commit their crimes where only they and the police are armed; This begs the notion that the bangers focus their criminal misdeeds on an unarmed populace while what they are actually involved in is providing security for an international drug distribution network that is far larger than anything they’re involved in and almost completely outside of their control. As the statistics bear out, their ‘victims’ are generally limited to either known actors within the drug trade (i.e. rival gang members, i.e. the competition), each other in fall outs over money and snitching, and innocent bystanders who almost certainly were not targets themselves but rather became collateral damage of an effort to intimidate or dispose of rivals.

      In short, guns are not a cause of violence but a symptom of endemic violence occasioned by a highly lucrative black market in which the participants cannot take recourse to the normal mechanisms of business or society such as courts and contracts, forcing even minor disputes to be settled by violence coupled to a near tribal social structure in which government intervention is eschewed in favor of personal rectification of dispute where each act of violence has a legitimate chance of spawning more violence by way of vengeance attacks, eventually producing a vicious cycle of violence in which the participants are often no longer even aware of the original grievances that produced said cycle in the first place.

      The solution requires elimination of the profit motive and disenfranchising effect of the black market (i.e. legalizing drugs and providing legitimate importation and distribution channels), a reversal of decades of cultural and social isolation with in the inner cities. A reintroduction of the rule of law and acceptance of governmental mechanisms for dispute resolution, provision of adequate means for legitimate economic activities in the vacuum created by the withdraw of the black market economy, a reinstitution of the family as the basic social unit as opposed to the gang filing that role, effective repatriation of the half million young inner city men currently incarcerated on non-violent drug charges alone (basically prisoners of the drug war that must end before the violence of the inner cities can be resolved) and a re-enfranchisement on the part of inner city residents as citizens of a free state rather than independent tribal units opposed by and to their own democratically elected government and its agents.

      Or, in other words, it’s such an utter disaster that there is no one solution, or even 3 or 4 that would resolve it quickly but rather a true sea-change is needed akin to the sorts of nation building that has been done in the past to resolve other tribal style disputes in other areas of the globe. Within a free state, respecting the civil rights of those involved, it’s impossible to fathom any simple, quick, or single pronged strategy that would mitigate the violence in a meaningful way though the immediate cessation of the drug war with concomitant institutionalization of legal import and distribution (such as exists for alcohol) would go far in dispelling the violence by removing profit as a motive to violence and removing the binding power of the gang/tribe as a social and economic unit.

      • “…a true sea-change is needed akin to the sorts of nation building that has been done in the past to resolve other tribal style disputes in other areas of the globe.”
        We have proven ouselves incapable of doing that time and time again. We merely transplant the worst elements of our society to complement the worst elements of the victimized society.

        • I don’t think I can agree with that statement Jus Bill, however I suspect that many of the difficulties of dealing with these situations in foreign lands are either absent or heavily mitigated when addressing them domestically.

          Specifically there is the disparity of force and resources we can bring to bear locally versus globally, the lack of a language barrier, lessened cultural/religious barriers, the permanence of our dominion and presence domestically versus the time we will devote to foreign nation building, the vastness of our connections with the domestic population in question, the lack of external support and mobility for the population in question domestically (i.e. they lack foreign state support or refuge) the extremity of our existing infrastructure and control of same within the domestic regions in dispute, the populace to be pacified has no existing military or paramilitary force of substantial merit and finally and wholly unlike foreign nation building efforts we have little or no need to negotiate the process or outcomes with the population in question as they are citizens of the self same nation undertaking the project and wholly beholden to it’s laws essentially into perpetuity.

          Thus all the things that make foreign nation building so difficult are either largely absent or reversed when such technique is applied domestically. Within the constitutional boundary and subject only to the will of the voters there are so few restrictions in the course and process that it should be a simple matter of simply acting rather than any prolonged discourse involving process, especially given that on the state and national level and in most cases even in city government the population being pacified are not statistically relevant to electoral outcomes.

          The more difficult portion of this proposal is gaining acceptance that the situation has deteriorated to the degree that such steps are necessary and appropriate, which is highly unlikely to happen. However, to the degree that we, that is the majority of the people, insist on retaining our rights regardless of it’s impact on the inner city population their situation will continue to worsen until at some point the violence there will spill over into ‘safe zone’ neighborhoods which will eventually (in the absence of the ability to disarm everyone) result in increased focus on and action for the problems of inner city violence.

          (One can take a look at the drug war and it’s consequences in Mexico to see what our own inner city violence problem can become without intervention, and clearly an increased tempo in the drug war only serves to exacerbate the problem).

  3. I don’t know whether to smile at the thought of a site with a name like that shining a light on the gun control super-fail that is Chicago or frown at the sadness.

    • Well said, Felix. Why would a criminal go where they can be killed by legal guns? The safest places to commit crimes are the Gun Free Zones and civilian disarmament states. A random CCW holder could screw up a perfectly good crime.

  4. It’s Shitcago what can you say?
    This is what they deserve.
    It’s a damn shame the rest of IL is stuck with the place.


    • 28 times black mobs of 800 black teens went out to loot our stores and shops for Christmas. They do this every year. How can we stop this. Also how can we stop there knockout game . There mobs knockout and is killing our teens, or putting them into comas, NO HATE CRIME HERE, WHY?

  5. My wife and daughter told me they were going to the Windy City to look for wedding dresses and such. I said not on my dime and given the current state of affairs in people violence with guns no way. Instead wedding dress from Cincinnati and my wife is headed to Florida where the wedding will be in November for her dress. Money spent better elsewhere.

  6. When Rahm-hole and the Streetlight Assassin start flapping their gums, a lot of hot air escapes and not much else, apart from lies.

  7. Yes Rahm its everybody else’s fault we all buy guns in our gun friendly states then invade chicago and rape pillage and plunder drop our guns on innocent urban youths then run back to our gun friendly states before you know what’s happened yea that’s the problem….

    • Blacks raped 500,000 people last year. Get a gun and don’t be there victim, Top 2 killers in US are blacks and illegals, who kill more than Iraq War each year. That’s 2 wars a year inside USA..And no news..Liberals control our news. To hide black and illegals crimes on the Good people in USA.

  8. I see this whole self-defense thing as a huge red herring. The issue should be, “The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed.” We should confront them with that, and ask, “Why are you so eager to commit treason against the Constitution of the United States?”









Comments are closed.