leh-nerd skin-erd

I'll repeat what I wrote earlier: I don’t watch much media, I have a short attention span for that sort of thing. Here are things I didn't say: I don't follow the news; I don't ever watch media; I am from Chicago; I am "bombarded with news from that one city"; After reconsidering a potential Tibs/Kay union, I beseech the Comrade to avoid a close personal relationship with you. There's not enough smart in Kay to offset the dullard in you. Your children will be simpletons.

Tibsy and Comrade sitting in a tree Kay Eye Ess Ess Eye Enn Gee First comes love! Then comes consciously coupling and cohabitating with equal division of labor in something that seems an awful lot like traditional marriage Then come the moops in the baby carriage! No sir, not from Chicago, but we have access to online news and news aggregators that covers news outside the area I live. Are you limited to news sources that only produce content related to your Grammies basement? Sad!

“Special rules for electeds”?

Neunundneunzig Luftballons?

I don’t watch much media, I have a short attention span for that sort of thing. I’m happy to listen to your perspective though—what are my media sources, what are they telling me and how am I being manipulated? I’m happy to summarize where I’m at on this: I think Chicago has a crime problem, I think that’s fairly well documented in terms of numbers of murders, the number of violent crimes, and the vast number of victims from those crimes. I don’t think Chicago is the only city with violent crime, but it is the city we’re talking about when we talk about murders and violent crime in Chicago. I think there is a political aspect in focusing on Chicago, and I don’t think that’s at all unusual. If someone thinks politics do not factor into so many things said and done in this country, I think they are pretty naive. I think tying a political party to weakness on any issue—-the economy, big government v small, inflation, and in particular, crime—- is just about as normal a thing as can happen in any given day in the country. I think most people, regardless of any other defining characteristic, when faced with significant exposure to violent crime, and under the impression that their “leadership” has failed them spectacularly, would welcome the National Guard, Guardian Angels, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, a rematch of the fight between Mike Tyson and Evander Holyfield where Tyson chomped Holyfield’s ear and just about anything else to make their lives and streets safer. I think most wealthy, affluent liberals express concern about crime in Chicago, at the same time minimize the problem, express concern about federal involvement, and do so comfortably ensconced in mostly safe neighborhoods. I believe that would change if crime came to call with any regularity. I think blaming the Hoosiers is the equivalent to blaming “slippage for Biden’s decades long confidential document problem, and/or his sharpness and vitality in general. I think some of what I wrote above comes from a place as a conservative voter, some is just common sense and information available to anyone who cares to look.

I think Chi’s point is that while the number in Shreveport is substantially lower, let’s remember Indiana. Thank you. It seems at times that both rooms are in Chicago.

I agree there is no simple (long term) fix--the morons who allowed the problem to reach this point, and the voters who allowed it to happen--have created a multi-tiered issue that will be difficult to fix. For example, the oft-cited "60% of the guns..." seems like a political talking point to me. It would be interesting to see how those numbers are derived, I'd wager there's a lot of guesswork and finger-pointing the other way involved there. Be that as it may, what about the other 40%? Are the people murdered supposed to be reassured that there's a 60% chance that they were killed with an Indiana gun while in Chicago? Are the 40% supposed to rest assured their wounds were born n raised Chicago style? As for 'who' might give a s****, I'd simply suggest many voters might. 'Soft on crime' is a consideration for many voters, and painting the dems as crime friendly is a pretty good strategy. I sincerely hope the dem approach is "Who gives a s*** about crime?".

Could be as simple as they start at the point where they can have the most impact with the lowest potential for problems.

On the other hand if you constantly hear stories of dead bodies, shootings, and victims of violent crime in the city, you might wonder why the leadership is inept, incompetent and unable to solve the problem that has seen massive amounts of money thrown at it. On some level, it goes back to the mindset when the reports of gang members taking over apartment buildings and the perception that the liberal philosophy was “Well, it’s only a couple complexes…”. There may well be a political element to it, that’s nothing new at all.

Never lived there, but loved the times I have visited. I have a close friend who lives downtown--bought a very cool house in a renovated area maybe 20 years ago. His version is that crime is bad, it happens in his neighborhood but at a lower rate than some of the high crime areas. Guy was shot up around the corner a few years ago. I have another friend who lived in the suburbs, worked downtown in his financial services firm who believes the city is not worth the risk anymore due to crime and poor leadership. Part of his view may be skewed because the wife of a friend caught a bullet in the head on the way home to the suburbs, from the downtown office she worked at, and died. He moved south, the firm moved out of the downtown area. Obviously, two anecdotal experiences does not a crisis make, but it certainly sounds like the relative safety of the city is nothing to brag about if you're leading the charge at city and state levels.

Deflection, a classic sign of insecurity.

Your attempt to leverage the death of a child for an endorphin rush is about as pathetic as it gets. Have you no boundaries at all? Be that as it may, it’s possible you’re not a complete sociopath off the board and I’ll say a prayer for you to find some sense of inner peace.

Good Lord, Tough Guy Slim is under the influence again. Read for understanding, not for some springboard to insult someone on a message board because of whatever trauma in your life brought you to this point. The only coward here is you. The 11 year old is the victim, it's a horrible story, and while I think you have some obscure insecurity complex that causes you to lash out behind the protection of a keyboard, we're on the same page here. Take the guy who shot this poor child--who was doing something I did many times as a youngster--and lock him away for ever. I no longer believe in the death penalty, but if I had to make an exception, this would be a front runner. Now--stop for second, take a deep breath, shut your mouth and open your ears for the second part that may have confused you. There is a tik tok challenge where the action is not ringing doorbells, it involves kicking in the door at the house. My point on that was that it is a wholly different activity, completely reckless, foolish and the potential for a tragic outcome seems quite high to me. I am not a gun owner, have no desire to own a gun, so I'm not shooting anyone regardless. However, I can see where a person in fear of a robbery, or in fear of an intruder, or protecting his wife and children might well use a weapon in that scenario. We all know you wouldn't--you would demand a screen name so you could send a harshly worded memo anonymously like it was 1958. What a d-bag.

Yup, and I'm not making the comparison to cars to draw you into a debate about confiscating cars. I am, however, willing to contemplate where we draw the line societally on when possible tragic outcomes are the offshoot of negligent actions of individuals. I don't know the math, but I'd bet a significant portion of serious accidents and fatalities stem from young drivers acting recklessly. If we cede the need for those working folk to have a a vehicle, what about the young who decide they want a car, or they get a car back/forth to school when there is transportation freely available and provided by the school? What about the elderly, no longer working, skills diminished, more dangerous than just a few years back? @Joe Ferguson forever surely has seen a decline in his fine motor skills after years of cheap scotch poured from expensive bottles at the country club. And what about mean blonde (or formerly blonde) girls like @ComradeKayAdams ....notoriously bad drivers while doing their textin, their makeup, their jibjab with their gals on the phone about the latest nylons and such?

I didn’t mean to suggest you said that, I was just asking. Sounds to me like the age old problem of lots and lots of money going through the system, but lots of inefficiency, bid rigging and grift before a legitimate dollar was spent. I don’t know how you change unless it’s cultural, top to bottom.

I think this matter should be worked out. I’m not at all certain how 600 minors arrive unaccompanied without an explanation, whether trafficking is involved, where the parents are or anything else. Yes, I’m good with pausing the matter until details are worked out and we know what’s happening. And if the narrative was that individuals were being placed in the wealthiest (read liberal) part of the city (where the Chi Goosians likely live), perhaps it would not seem nearly as dangerous as where they most likely would be sent. I have always enjoyed my time in Chicago, but it’s got some major issues with crime and violence.

I heard they were offered a trip to Chicago, they declined and requested asylum in a safer place.

Thank goodness they are not sending them to Chicago.

What would you want it to be if you were a resident? Return to status quo? I would hope the sh8tty leadership would honor its obligation to take tax dollars and divert them to programs making the city a safer place to live. It doesn’t seem like less enforcement is the right idea.

Then again you would have to ask why the FBI/DOJ spent countless hours and significant sums to prosecute many people for minor crimes that don’t raise an eyebrow in other cities after 1/6. I’d say it’s a political move in part to juxtapose the perception of soft on crime democrats (who actually sound at time like they are pro-crime) v law and order crowd.

Tragic story. Are you advocating for confiscation of all guns to avoid the scenario above? I’m not sure how you stamp out gross negligence or unfortunate outcomes from the process, any more than a negligent parent who has an accident with a motor vehicle with tragic outcomes for family members.

Absolutely agree. That story was absolutely nuts. However, as Orlando pointed out, some of these “challenges” include kicking in doors as part of the stunt. There’s a major difference between a kid ringing a doorbell 15 times and running, and violently attempting to gain access to someone else’s home. In those cases, I’d think the number of people choosing to defend themselves with a firearm is roughly the same number as those with access to a firearm.

I’m not reading where this boy tried to kick in the door, just that he and his friends rang the doorbell and took off. Assuming that’s accurate, what an insane thing for a person to do—-shoot at a group of people running away from the house after an admittedly aggravating stunt. I did read about the doors being kicked in…and wonder for the 50th time about the stupidity of some of these tik tok trends. That’s a good way to get killed.

Welcome back!

Appearances can be deceiving to the uninformed. See: The Socialati. Bernie Sanders. Zoloft Mandambo. And, Tibsy’s suggestion that I do not care about the country, which prompted my declaration that he was being a moop. Now, of course, you are a moop as well. Perhaps you and the fundamentally decent Tibsy will one day date at a carbon neutral Nearly Diary Queen, fall in love over a Vegnanna Split, get married and raise a whole bunch of little baby moops. Leh-nerd presses the mute button. Leh-nerd, having fallen asleep earlier, awakens from his slumber, and sees the volume set to mute. As he falls back to sleep, a hint of a smile appears on his face…