Wednesday, October 30, 2013

This explains a lot about Chicago

Instapundit:
GANG VIOLENCE, TERRORISM, AND GUN CONTROL: I suspect, though, that the reason Chicago gangs aren’t targeted is that they’ve got a political accommodation with the Chicago machine. Law enforcement knows how to put a crimp in gang activity when it wants to, without engaging in the extreme measures here. If it doesn’t do that, the presumption is that it doesn’t really want to. 
UPDATE: Gangs and Politicians in Chicago: An Unholy Alliance. “Most alarming, both law enforcement and gang sources say, is that some politicians ignore the gangs’ criminal activities. Some go so far as to protect gangs from the police, tipping them off to impending raids or to surveillance activities—in effect, creating safe havens in their political districts. And often they chafe at backing tough measures to stem gang activities, advocating instead for superficial solutions that may garner good press but have little impact.”

Big surprise. The Chicago Democrat machine is in bed with the Chicago gangs. Tom Wolfe explained it well in one of his best essays-- Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers-- available on Kindle!

Big city Democrat politicians buy off local thugs with government grants, easing off on law enforcement, etc. in exchange for political support and favors. It became quite a game in the 60's and 70's, and persists to this day. 

Business as usual, you might say. But some things are beyond the pale. There is no excuse whatsoever for cutting deals with thugs like that-- cutting deals with amoral men who reduce neighborhoods to war zones and waste lives and grasp power by inciting fear and hate and by laundering money taken from their neighbors at gunpoint. In their reckless avarice these men leave a trail of devastation and ruined lives. 

It's a disgrace to be in bed with evil on that scale. 

The gangs should be ashamed of themselves. 

5 comments:

  1. I think a lot of liberals see criminals as the true victims. That goes doubly for criminals who are black. They sympathize with them.

    I'm reminded of Sheila-Jackson Lee's comments on the House floor: >>Don’t condemn the gangbangers, they’ve got guns that are trafficked — that are not enforced, that are straw purchased and they come into places even that have strong gun laws.<<

    Don't blame the gangbangers?

    You know, there was a time when I might have even agreed with her but that was a long time ago when I was high on drugs all the time and hated anyone who talked about personal responsibility.

    JQ

    ReplyDelete
  2. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyOctober 30, 2013 at 7:39 AM

    Both types of criminal organization are equally mindful of their franchise boundaries and equally zealous in defending them. It's not surprising that treaties are established to preserve the status quo.

    As Egnor notes, "The gangs should be ashamed of themselves." And indeed they should, in my opinion. Gangs provide a service to willing and often eager customers in the black market. Government thugs simply extort money using the overwhelming power of the police and courts.

    The gangs are tainted with the stink of Progressive politicians, not the reverse.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "The gangs should be ashamed of themselves. "

    Seems these modern day hoodlums know no boundaries to how low they will sink, or who they will deal with.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Adm. G Boggs, Glenbeckistan NavyOctober 30, 2013 at 8:01 AM

    By the way, speaking of gangs and Progressive politicians, it's worth noting that bin Laden is dead, and " the number of [terror] attacks and fatalities soared to a record high in 2012, according to a new report obtained exclusively by CNN."

    Surprise, surprise, surprise.
    --- Gomer Pyle

    ReplyDelete
  5. "The gangs should be ashamed of themselves."

    I was eating lunch when I read that!

    ReplyDelete