Sweep Time
- Chicago police have arrested 38 suspected gang members for selling drugs on the city's South Side.
In a press release Saturday, Chicago police Superintendent Garry McCarthy said one of the open-air drug markets was near a school. A second undercover investigation found three street gangs were working together to sell drugs.
"Dismantling drug markets is critical to decreasing gang violence and criminal activity in our communities," McCarthy was quoted in the release. "We improve the quality of life in our City by taking down these drug markets and removing the involved criminals, weapons, and narcotics from the streets."
So now we're going all the way back to Phil Cline's policing methods?
Silly thing though - it worked. Conspiracy cases sent entire hierarchies of gangs to prison for years at a time, leading to a more fractured gang structure and disrupting the cycle of shootings and killings. And homicides dropped below 500 for the first time in years.
Imagine that
Silly thing though - it worked. Conspiracy cases sent entire hierarchies of gangs to prison for years at a time, leading to a more fractured gang structure and disrupting the cycle of shootings and killings. And homicides dropped below 500 for the first time in years.
Imagine that
posted by SCC at 12:05 AM
121 Comments:
Send them to prison and keep them there. Probation and 60 days in IDOC doesn't do shit. These judges need to put them in prison for 10 years...just so they will be there for about 3 or 4. Governor Potatohead will continue to let these thugs out on early release.
But guess what...the judge is still going to let them go on probation. The ASA's are still going to do everything they can to knock the charges down to misdemeanors. The problem is not with us...it's with the court system.
What's old is new again.
Guess that means the cook county jail is now 462 or less inmates away from being full -- Preckwinkle is gonna be pissed.
Electronic monitoring for everyone!!!
Meanwhile Gary brags about taking gang bangers off the street....time will tell.
In goes these 38 out goes how many?
How many illegal immigrants too?
Anonymous said...
I read that Brookins heads the city councils black caucus... Who is leading the city councils white caucus?
3/03/2013 09:04:00 AM
-----------------
There is no white caucus... That would be racist if one existed,, just like there are no all white colleges or white college funds. Thought you knew only white people can be racists.
saw all the rental cars in area 1 today parked and ready to go. wisconsin and flordia plates. no emergency equipment and overpriced rentals meanwhile no new police car purchases. what a joke
Oooh! A NEW strategy!
- Garry McCarthy
Unfortunately, this doesn't mean shit in the grand scheme of things.
Like everytime before, all this does is provide a break for all involved; from the very few legitimate citizens left inhabiting those areas, to the assholes slinging dope in all types of weather wondering if today will be the day they wind up with 1505 funds in their pockets... all the way down to the guys in Narcotics glomming that in-house, day off OT initiative for all its worth.
This is a 7th inning stretch in the never ending dope game. The Triple-A gangstas will be getting the call up from the minors as soon as the heat dies down.
This is a spit in the ocean. A bandaid on a gaping wound. This is pomp and circumstance orchestrated by a floundering superintendent via a mayor facing his worst ratings since taking office. This is an engineered distraction from pension grab attempts, spurious red light camera deals and aldermen employed as counsel to convicted felon gang members.
Now just shut up and write some contact cards, you damned Sheep.
Any who's who in that bunch? Couple Reverands kids....?
So how much cash money did you net in the sweep Garry?.. I keep telling people there IS money in the ghetto. These people are not as poor and destitute as you think.
How many LINK cards were confiscated in the sweep Garry??
I seriously would like to know.. LINK card is the most fraudulent abused government program out there.
Dont worry, between Toni Preckwinkle and Pat Quinn these bangers will be back slinging dope and shooting people in no time
They are actively emptying the jails
OT-Good job to Lt Dickhead 20 tact. Way to go pissing off J.V. and A.O. two workers. Good for them leaving you and 20. Good luck guys. See you run tact as good as you ran the watch. M.L. must be really good.
I could be wrong but, wasn't there some type of CPD & gang leader summit, whereby the gangs were requested NOT to set up open air drug markets TOO near the children?
Maybe the City can file a grievance for the violation of the verbal contract the two negotiated?
I am no Phil Cline fan because of penchant for promoting incompetent sycophants ( chief of dicks comes to mind) but he was totally correct about the street corners. It took New York a decade to drive the drug dealers off the street and that reduced the homicide rate. It takes dedication, patience and above all a willing prosecution. What is happening now is exactly the opposite-- Search Warrants for numbers and what do the dealers do? To the streets with their dealing. Unreal.
SunTimes: Cops on overtime help drive down murder rate in city’s ‘hot zones’
So more manpower IS the answer! He earlier claimed we had enough officers, and homicides goes up. Now he brings on more manpower and homicides goes down??? Just say it Gary, you were wrong! We need more manpower! SAY IT!
We're gettin' there guys.
Our new approach is workin'.
"Gotcha covered with that 'crime is goin' down jazz'."
"Norm, pass me a beer here."
Good timing for McPressRelease, with the killer quote: "Dismantling drug markets is critical to decreasing gang violence and criminal activity in our communities," It's no coincidence we're seeing this a few days after the news about Brookins broke. He's obviously willing to fight for his job.
Congratulations to those officers involved but I regret to opine that while this might provide some relief and favorable headlines in the short term that it will do nothing to solve this problem in the long term.
Narcotics is the world's most profitable business. And economics and nature abhors a vacuum. Trying to deal with the business side of the drug issue (as opposed to the user side) is like trying to kill the hydra-headed monster - ain't never gonna happen. New participants will always appear as the profit potential is simply too great. Why make $7 per hour at a fast food joint when starting salaries here run $500 per day, all in cash. If you were a kid in the hood with no job, no education, no cash and no future, seriously, what would you do?
We have poured billions into the war on drugs since the 1960's and what have we accomplished? Exactly nothing. Except foster a lot of corruption. Among politicians, judges, and sadly police officers as well.
So what is the solution? Legalize it. All of it. Have the government distribute it and tax it.
And what you will see is that violent crime will drop substantially - over night. Why? Much of the violence to day is fueled by disputes related to the drug TRADE (a distinct and separate issue from drug USE). Legalize drugs, and instantly the drug dealers won't have a business, and will therefore have nothing to fight about.
Some will no doubt disagree with me - perhaps strenuously. Here is my response: try it for a year or two or three. And if it does not work out like I believe it will, then we can always go back. Are you man enough to take that challenge?
One thing is clear: what we are doing now is simply not working.
Prohibition did not work, and sadly after 40 years and billions of dollars, the war on drugs has been a complete failure as well.
Not a LEO, just a lawyer.
This proves the pro-active, aggresive police work get results. Hire more officers so this type of action can continue. Back up the officers when the shithead complain.
the problem with these "sweeps" has always been that the numbers sound impressive but most of the time it is low level dealers or people who are just hanging around that get swept up. it is why they have never been very effective at doing much of anything long term. I would be real surprised if the net incarceration time of all 38 ended up being as much as 50 years. courts just do not dole out much time for low level flunkies and guys with a few ounces of pot to sell. there is no room in the prisons for those kind of offenders. better not to even waste the resources to bust them in the first place.
if you really want to go after gangs, you have to be willing to do what it takes to get the leaders and they are very tough to get at. only the feds have had much success there and that is because their time horizon is a lot longer.
Next Monday there will be a march at City Hall to bring back Jodi Weiss.
According to McStupid's logic, the Pilgrims also sold drugs to the Indians.
Do like China. Public execution.
Did you notice the press has not given any credit to all the people who told them that the reduection of manpower was bad.
remember:
Rham lied
People died
Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
I read that Brookins heads the city councils black caucus... Who is leading the city councils white caucus?
3/03/2013 09:04:00 AM
-----------------
There is no white caucus... That would be racist if one existed,, just like there are no all white colleges or white college funds. Thought you knew only white people can be racists.
3/04/2013 12:33:00 AM
I am glad that finally other people are talking about this issue. I wish it was brought up more. This thinking perpetuates what is going wrong with America.
Tell me McDrunky and Rahm don't read SCC ! A kid working at Subway could have told them they needed more police out there. Now all of a sudden this is a new strategy.
Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
I read that Brookins heads the city councils black caucus... Who is leading the city councils white caucus?
3/03/2013 09:04:00 AM
-----------------
There is no white caucus... That would be racist if one existed,, just like there are no all white colleges or white college funds. Thought you knew only white people can be racists.
3/04/2013 12:33:00 AM
Maybe if you studied U.S. history you would know all about historically white universities.
O.T. Do Something Or Shit The Fuck Up
Once again some people are whining because a boss, a sgt. or someone else with authority fucked them over. It is happening right now in my district.
Well what the fuck? If you and your fellow coworkers don't know what to do then you are dumb. If you know what you have to do and don't do it, you are a coward. Now go get some activity, pussy.
My God is this what the department has come down to? I worked with someone and he was frantic for activity. So I thought he needed activity for VRI. Nope. I inquired and he said "if I generate activity then it keeps everyone happy and they don't bother me". This is what the status of our department is my fellow officers. This is how scared some of us have become. This is why the city will fuck us over during this contract negotiation. We are fucked. Have a nice day!
Oh no! Why does this department only lock up and arrest young black men?
garry your the man!!! you surely know your shitz! your putting a huge dent in crime... lol
hey mcdummy.....sweep deez nut$
So the "Wonderboy" still fails to develop a new strategy! So what was the real reason to bring in an outsider?
Stack em deep in every nook, cranny and crevice at county. Ship em to Arizona, Sheriff Joe could handle them and "tent" them way cheaper then we ever could and still turn a good profit. Win, win.
38 down...now only 10,000+ to go.
God Bless Phil Cline
anyone who was on a tact team from mid 80's to mid 90's will remember the sweeps...each area took turns, each district would send a team and the any team with 20 or 25 arrests got to go home. didn't matter that people got locked up for nothing or just checking their mailboxes. sometimes we even arrested a real gangbanger....what a joke it was, and nobody wanted to go to court as only one officer was assigned court officer for all the teams arrests, even if he wasn't on the scene. most of the time judge thru them all out.....I think it was "mob action" and of course, it was just a numbers game as usual....
Funny how it all went full circle.
Anonymous said...
I read that Brookins heads the city councils black caucus... Who is leading the city councils white caucus?
3/03/2013 09:04:00 AM
-----------------
There is no white caucus... That would be racist if one existed,, just like there are no all white colleges or white college funds. Thought you knew only white people can be racists.
3/04/2013 12:33:00 AM
There are no all Black Colleges either, moron. There are Historically Black Colleges, opened because Blacks weren't allowed in many Schools, regardless of qualification. People of all Races, Creeds and Colors are allowed to and do attend.
Talk to the moron LT in 010, his attitude is that if its a north end black drug dealer, it's nickel and dime nonsense, if its a south end Hispanic gangbanger, then a bag of weed, that the guy will get out of jail in 4 hours, thats gold. Morons lead us, what do we do? Mc car thy, do you have an answer for incompetent bosses? I wanna work, but I have a moron boss stifling me. Free me. I'm not lazy, but I definately will not give you twenty contact cards, but I will give you a dude selling dope. Do you want comps that numbers or REAL results?
Today's "Deceptive Reporting" Award -- to Channel 9 News
..for showing a CAPTIONED photo of a "Smith and Wesson .357 Magnum" revolver (K-frame, small grips, 2 1/2" barrel, Model 19)...
...while providing a voice-over about "imported guns that do not meet American standards"...
...and then cutting to the perennially shrill, oily, and disgusting Ald. Luis Gutierrez, who was urging that various handguns be "banned."
Oh. Even the sight of Luis is like fingernails on a blackboard. Then he starts talking, squeezing it out between those many opossum-teeth of his.
What more could you ask?
Sweep deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez
Ed Burke is the head of the City Counsel White Caucus. He just doesn't like to brag.
They are coming for guns!!
http://news.cweb.com/law/legal-issues/245107-overkill-in-the-suburbs.html
Doesn't matter because it happened in crook county. Nothing will happen to them and they will walk away with a slap on the hands and be back out working the corners. The cook county court system could care less if the CPD wants harsh punishments. Sorry Gmac!
With already too many "black and browns" in a crowded Dart Motel 26, I expect leniency on the part of the Cook Co St Atty office.
So why bother, unless you need to have a press conference to boast.
What state, federal charges did they arrest them under? What charges are they going to trial with?
What will their bond be?
Who will prosecute them? The weak ASA's or corporation counsel? The Feds?
How many of the 38 arrested will see any jail time? 90 percent of arrests see no jail time. Just look at their rap sheet. Arrested numerous times but less then 10 percent convictions!
Now all of a sudden they want us to be the Police again? Kiss my ass and the shitty contract we will get. You bastards got the department you wanted so deal with it.
suntimes said it's because Mc535 is pouring units into the bad areas which means other areas are under patrolled like none at all.
as stated here and elsewhere anita and dirty toni will plead them down and let them out and the cycle starts again
"So what is the solution? Legalize it. All of it. Have the government distribute it and tax it."
_________________________________
And what makes you think that "street drugs" would simply go away? It's always going to be cheaper and stronger on the streets. Is the U.S. government going to start buying these drugs from the cartels? They would have to right? In addition, how many "functional" crackheads and heroin addicts do you know? They won't be able to hold down a job and they have to get money from somewhere. Guess what...they're still going to rob and kill to get their drug money. I'm tired of hearing idiots like you who think that legalization is the answer to all of our worries. I guess if you make murder legal that will cut back on crime as well. Legalization would work for weed, but not the hardcore stuff. Not a lot of people are getting killed for weed though.
Lets not put fat Phil on a pedestal just yet. He also had the detectives reclassifying the homicides as death investigations and promoted a lot of these bosses. So his numbers look great only because of once again fudging the numbers.
If we had more manpower, we could do more sweeps. Many more.
Sorry, I slipped and let some logic in my thinking.
I forgot I work for the city of Rahm.
Anonymous said...
Next Monday there will be a march at City Hall to bring back Jodi Weiss.
3/04/2013 09:12:00 AM
And he's gonna look awful silly out there, marching around all by himself.
Do like China. Public execution.
3/04/2013 09:15:00 AM
that's always been my policy.
Chalkie
Laughable quote of the post, "So what is the solution? Legalize it. All of it. Have the government distribute it and tax it."
Alcohol is still the number #1 killer of the adult male. Plus all of the associated related offenses, ie. lack of productivity, disruption of family (domestics). Ask any cop, nurse or doctor in an ER.
Legalize it and we will have triple the calls of domestics, overdoeses and disruption to family events.
O.T.
011 2nd, 3rd watch, it doesn't matter.
I was working with my partner J.P. when he told me that he just came from the locker room where Sgt. L.F. told him that our activity sucked so we went to talk to DDS H.S. he said when he worked a beat car with F.G. they kicked ass and took names and that if we didn't like it we could tell W.M. what we thought.
Well my partner says listen my FTO was R.E. and that W.M. couldn't carry his jock strap. He said in fact all the old school guys, E.R., J.K., l.M. could police rings around all these FNGs who think their shit don't stink.
I'm pretty P.O'd about all the B.S. we have to put up with in this new CPD. It's all FUBAR.
In fact my WC E.B. told me to BOHICA. I'm not sure about that one. I'll have to Google it.
I'm OUT.
And what makes you think that "street drugs" would simply go away? It's always going to be cheaper and stronger on the streets. Is the U.S. government going to start buying these drugs from the cartels? They would have to right? In addition, how many "functional" crackheads and heroin addicts do you know? They won't be able to hold down a job and they have to get money from somewhere. Guess what...they're still going to rob and kill to get their drug money. I'm tired of hearing idiots like you who think that legalization is the answer to all of our worries. I guess if you make murder legal that will cut back on crime as well. Legalization would work for weed, but not the hardcore stuff. Not a lot of people are getting killed for weed though.
3/04/2013 03:46:00 PM
1. It's always going to be cheaper and stronger on the streets.
bullshit. let the pharmaceutical industry do what they do best: make drugs, sell drugs, employ citizens, pay taxes, earn profits.
2. Is the U.S. government going to start buying these drugs from the cartels? They would have to right?
no. wrong. see above.
3. In addition, how many "functional" crackheads and heroin addicts do you know? They won't be able to hold down a job and they have to get money from somewhere. Guess what...they're still going to rob and kill to get their drug money.
guess what.... obamacare, medicaid, etc.
drug addictions treated as a disease = prescribed drugs.
4. I'm tired of hearing idiots like you who think that legalization is the answer to all of our worries.
i'm tired of hearing from idiots like you who think that anyone thinks that anything is the answer to all of anyone's worries.
are you just worried that legalization of controlled substances will fuck up your non-taxable cash flow?
5. Legalization would work for weed, but not the hardcore stuff.
legalization will work for every controlled substance, it just won't work for the interwoven cabals profiting from the criminalization of said controlled substances.
6. Not a lot of people are getting killed for weed though.
tell that to the victims of gang turf warfare, the fast and furious obama doj scandals, etc.
if you want to make the argument that decriminalizing controlled substances will result in putting thousands and thousands of dope dealing gangbangers out of work, eliminating the steady flow of dope cash into the ghetto, the pockets of politicians, 'community leaders', 'defense attorneys', corrupt judges, democratic campaign coffers, etc..., you might start to make sense.
if you want to make the further argument that all of these thousands and thousands of now unemployed gangbangers will likely attempt to replace their previously lucrative dope dealing incomes with incomes derived from other traditional criminal activities, thus increasing the number of occurrences of said traditional criminal means of 'earning' their incomes and thus increasing the need for law enforcement efforts, including the need for more law enforcement officers, be my guest.
or, rather, SCC's guest.
Deceptive Reporting Continues At 5
Channel 9 TV still with pic of 2 1/2" S&W Mod. 19 front and center as example of "junk gun."
For a number of reasons, I am deeply, personally offended by this; a top-grade, hand-timed exemplar of perfection...practically usable by not a whole lot of people...and a piece that no one who knows anything would ever want to let off indoors if they could help it, and not especially outdoors either.
Ald. Luis Gutierrez lecturing about "junk guns," old "Saturday Night Special" crap rehashed from the Gun Control Act of 1968.
I was there for that -- going to stop street crime, remember?
If there is anyone more unpleasant than Luis Gutierrez, I have never met them -- and I hope fervently not to.
Anonymous said...
Now all of a sudden they want us to be the Police again? Kiss my ass and the shitty contract we will get. You bastards got the department you wanted so deal with it.
3/04/2013 02:47:00 PM
Really? Where is your pride? The oath that you took. You are a disgrace.
-OFF TOPIC-
Hey SCC,
It's witness slip time again and I was wondering if you could help spread the word?
http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=35192
Everything that's needed to know is pretty much explained in the link.
Thank you.
Phil Kline did not do something new. Undercover drug operation is the only way to deal with these drug rings. The tact team stop and jump out method generall is ineffective. Thes undercover missions go on in every city in America and have done so for many years.
Legalize Hard drugs and you think this will stop the gang activity? Not thinking very clearly , are we? Just look at the experience of some countries in Europe who tried this and then tell me the same thing. And, a recent study of gang violance in five major cites in the US ( not Chicago or NY) indicated that drug sales had little to do with gang violence. but, I have to admit, Chicago might be different.
Brookins ? A prime example of what is wrong with the city council, way too many of them and way too much power.
OT:
FRICKEN A -- N.R.A.!
We need three votes. THREE VOTES!!!
If you never called, wrote, or gotten involved in politics NOW IS THE TIME!
==================================
via CapitolFax...
Monday, Mar 4, 2013
* The NRA’s Todd Vandermyde wants his group’s supporters to retaliate against Chicago over concealed carry. Vandermyde made his demand in a column about last week’s House floor debate on the issue…
During the debate on the carry amendments we saw Colleges and others try to make it impossible to carry in public, but then, we also saw 68 (there were 67 votes with one of our good guys out for a medical reason) votes for our shall issue, preemptive carry amendment. That sent shock waves through the building as the City of Chicago has now gone into panic mode as we are now 3 votes shy of a super majority to pass a bill. And those votes are out there.
That vote was significant. The City is already trying to intimidate some of the votes that showed up on the bill. And now it is time for us to go into overdrive. Any bill that is a legislative initiative of the City of Chicago, we should oppose. And any downstate or suburban rep that supports us should vote “Present” on all the City bills going forward. They want more red light cameras? Vote “no.” They want special treatment to do X or Y? Vote “no” or “present” and leave them with their 35 votes that are not a majority in the House, nor enough to pass ANY bill.
-----
also...is Madigan's game plan falling apart??
--------
***
[...} But just two days after that long day of gun debates, the wheels seemed to fall off.
If anybody else’s proposal had been shot down in the House by a vote of 66-1, with only the sponsor voting for it and all Republicans taking a pass because it was so “out there,” the ridicule would have been piled high on the sponsor.
And if that same sponsor saw all of his other proposals die a similar fate on the same day — with one getting just two votes, another getting three and another getting five — well, the sponsor probably would have been considered a rank amateur.
But that’s exactly what happened Thursday to Madigan, the supposed master of three-dimensional political chess.
Apparently sending a political message, Madigan ran four pension reform amendments that were so radioactively harsh that nobody wanted to go near them. Instead of prompting a debate, few rose to speak. Instead of putting the Republicans on the spot, they refused to cast any votes.
Instead of getting members to think about the serious pension-funding problem, Madigan gave them an easy out via a cartoonish charade. Instead of convincing them that his leadership was needed, they rejected his ideas out of hand.
And the speaker’s heavy-handed, top-down management will undoubtedly continue.
Madigan’s spokesman told reporters last week that a request by state Rep. Jack Franks (D-Woodstock) for a special committee to take testimony and openly debate pension reform was the “craziest idea” because the House has held numerous committee hearings, only to see the Republicans withdraw bills and duck votes.
Complete story is here > http://capitolfax.com/2013/03/04/nra-wants-overdrive-against-all-of-chicagos-agenda/
There are no all Black Colleges either, moron. There are Historically Black Colleges, opened because Blacks weren't allowed in many Schools, regardless of qualification. People of all Races, Creeds and Colors are allowed to and do attend.
3/04/2013 11:53:00 AM
Yes, your statement is correct. However, there still are fundraisers for the Negro College Fund. And, if you look at the racial breakdown of who attends these " black colleges", there are very few of other races. This came about through the terrible discrimination that ran through this country and really still exists in corporate America. I dont think anyone is in a hurry to dismantle these historical colleges and rightly so. But, I do think it is time to dismantle a " black caucus" whether in the city council or in the US Congress.
And what you will see is that violent crime will drop substantially - over night. Why? Much of the violence to day is fueled by disputes related to the drug TRADE (a distinct and separate issue from drug USE). Legalize drugs, and instantly the drug dealers won't have a business, and will therefore have nothing to fight about.
If you believe this you are truely a moran and an igonorant moran ( is that a double negative?).
"LINK card is the most fraudulent abused government program out there."
3/04/2013 04:00:00 AM
I don't know about that.
One $75,000-per-year "Social Service Administrator" = 31.25 basic-life-support food recipients at $2400/year/each.
Want meaningful budget cuts? Aim high.
OT-Good job to Lt Dickhead 20 tact. Way to go pissing off J.V. and A.O. two workers. Good for them leaving you and 20. Good luck guys. See you run tact as good as you ran the watch. M.L. must be really good.
HAHAHAHHAHAH Workers in 020!We can all be replaced. Get over yourselves.
A lawyer surmises that --
"Legalize drugs, and instantly the drug dealers won't have a business, and will therefore have nothing to fight about."
3/04/2013 08:34:00 AM
However, based upon observable daily events, police suspect that --
People without the context, insight, or impulse control to be able to tolerate even a few days of conventional employment, who have become used to rims and beats and gold and bigscreens, and who have been driven completely, permanently insane by music videos about Lamborghinis and AK-47s and helicopters full of $100 bills and duct-taping victims and torturing them to death, will remain true to type and will simply hammer their accustomed "starting salaries [of] $500 per day, all in cash" out of the first innocent person to walk by.
"Conspiracy cases sent entire hierarchies of gangs to prison for years at a time, leading to a more fractured gang structure and disrupting the cycle of shootings and killings. And homicides dropped below 500 for the first time in years." -- SCC
There is also the proposition that the fragmentation of gang structure has led to more violence by removing gang elders and taking any restraints off the shorties, and creating hundreds of new factions that are banging away at each other all day and night.
Probably both ideas are equally true -- just at different points of a cycle that will continue as long as the Inner Party can continue to fragment the structure of Western civilization, so as to preclude any genuinely effective solution.
Like him or not, Phil Cline knew what he was doing. He knew this job inside out and always was teaching the younger guys the right way to do things.
Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
I read that Brookins heads the city councils black caucus... Who is leading the city councils white caucus?
3/03/2013 09:04:00 AM
-----------------
There is no white caucus... That would be racist if one existed,, just like there are no all white colleges or white college funds. Thought you knew only white people can be racists.
3/04/2013 12:33:00 AM
What goofs you are. Name an all black college or all black fraternity. My ma has a white friend down the street married a white man she met while they both attended an "all black college" in Mississippi. Furthermore there are scholarships based on religion, gender, sexual preference, parental employment. You guys are turds. I never saw a "men's organization" either but you see plenty of "women's organizations" and I never was offended. I wouldn't dare suggest that I understand what it's like to be a copper or veteran that's a woman. I know they deal with a few things I don't. People always form coalitions when they are the minority. You do it. I do it. We all do it. Go to a conference tomorrow with a whole bunch of out of state cops and I got money you'll find all the Illinois and better yet Chicago cops. Hypocrite.
One thing is clear: what we are doing now is simply not working.
Prohibition did not work, and sadly after 40 years and billions of dollars, the war on drugs has been a complete failure as well.
Not a LEO, just a lawyer.
3/04/2013 08:34:00 AM
I'll bet you're crying your eyes out about the "failure" that is the war on drugs.
Just how much have you made representing the dope dealers in the past years?
$1200 for probable cause, and $1000 for every court appearance? That sound about right?
Anonymous said...
Lets not put fat Phil on a pedestal just yet. He also had the detectives reclassifying the homicides as death investigations and promoted a lot of these bosses. So his numbers look great only because of once again fudging the numbers.
3/04/2013 03:52:00 PM
HOLY FUCK YOU ARE OOHH SOOO RIGHT! Because it never happened in the mid'90!
I serve with Phil Cline on the Executive Committee of the CPMF. A better copper there never was. His policies worked then and will work now. The CPMF is a tribute to Phil's respect and love of not only the CPD but law enforcement as a whole. Stay safe you CPD officers out there.
Michael T. Sweig from Nevada.
OT --
"Not at this time."
Today's appalling moral disconnect -- all couched in corporate gibble-gabble.
911 call reveals nurse refused to give dying woman CPR
Nurse - "...we can't do CPR at this facility."
911 dispatcher - "OK, then hand the phone to the passerby. If you can't do it, I need, hand it to the passerby, I'll have her do it. Or if you've got any citizens there, I'll have them do it."
...
911 dispatcher - "We can't wait. She can't wait right now. She is stopping breathing. Is there anybody there that's willing to help this lady and not let her die?"
The nurse replies, 'Um, not at this time."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505269_162-57572300/911-call-reveals-nurse-refused-to-give-dying-woman-cpr/
Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
I read that Brookins heads the city councils black caucus... Who is leading the city councils white caucus?
3/03/2013 09:04:00 AM
-----------------
There is no white caucus... That would be racist if one existed,, just like there are no all white colleges or white college funds. Thought you knew only white people can be racists.
3/04/2013 12:33:00 AM
Maybe if you studied U.S. history you would know all about historically white universities.
3/04/2013 09:30:00 AM
Uh oh! That would mean reading and learning that we never would have had "black" anything except that we weren't allowed to share with whites. W.E.B. DuBois and George Washington Carver come to mind...an intellectual and an all out genius, both denied enrollment and work at colleges (Harvard being one) that were for white people, so much for not having historically white institutions. I'm sorry,I stand corrected. George Washington Carver actually was accepted into college when they thought he was white. They didn't kick him out until they out he was black. Tell the Mormons to drop BYU. Tell the Irish Catholics to drop Notre Dame..then we can talk about caucuses and networks.
Anonymous said...
There are no all Black Colleges either, moron. There are Historically Black Colleges, opened because Blacks weren't allowed in many Schools, regardless of qualification. People of all Races, Creeds and Colors are allowed to and do attend.
3/04/2013 11:53:00 AM
Yes, your statement is correct. However, there still are fundraisers for the Negro College Fund. And, if you look at the racial breakdown of who attends these " black colleges", there are very few of other races. This came about through the terrible discrimination that ran through this country and really still exists in corporate America. I dont think anyone is in a hurry to dismantle these historical colleges and rightly so. But, I do think it is time to dismantle a " black caucus" whether in the city council or in the US Congress.
3/04/2013 06:41:00 PM
Now trust me when I say I don't care much about what the black caucus is talking about because I don't see how it benefits me. You still have to understand that people want to feel represented and understood, and oftentimes they don't when they feel like they have to rely on people who they are not sure care about them. If you have a copper that speaks broken Polish because his parents immigrated from Poland and you meet a Polish immigrant offender on a call...he is probably going to rather talk to the old broken Polish speaking copper than any other white raced cop even if he can understand and speak english with that guy. Like Pfleger or not, he can overthrow most of any black alderman out south because black people trust him. Flat out. They don't see him as "white"..he's family. There are a lot of white cops on the job who can go into worst neighborhoods in the city, on a block full of black or brown people and get respect. It's called people skills but for real...everyone doesn't have them. So these groups will want someone who they think cares, whether its true or not, they need the perception at least.
OT-Good job to Lt Dickhead 20 tact. Way to go pissing off J.V. and A.O. two workers. Good for them leaving you and 20. Good luck guys. See you run tact as good as you ran the watch. M.L. must be really good.
3/04/2013 06:51:00 AM
Please - no one is interested in the slowest district in the city. Why do you guys even have a tact team? If it's so bad come south of Douglas and lets talk police work.
If you believe this you are truely a moran and an igonorant moran ( is that a double negative?).
3/04/2013 06:43:00 PM
Moran = Irishman
Moron = you
Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
I read that Brookins heads the city councils black caucus... Who is leading the city councils white caucus?
3/03/2013 09:04:00 AM
-----------------
There is no white caucus... That would be racist if one existed,, just like there are no all white colleges or white college funds. Thought you knew only white people can be racists.
3/04/2013 12:33:00 AM
I am glad that finally other people are talking about this issue. I wish it was brought up more. This thinking perpetuates what is going wrong with America.
3/04/2013 09:25:00 AM
****************
United Negro College Fund
Miss Black America
Congressional Black Caucus
National Associations of Black Journalists
National Black Catholic Congress
N.O.B.L.E
That's just a few. Substitute white on any of those, and you will be in Federal court in 5 minutes. Separate AND equal? Doesn't compute.
The only Sweep worth a damn is Blackhawks come playoff time.
Lord Stanley 2013!!
*******************ALERT************SCC NEWSROOM*******
Look at he transfer order out Sunday! More sergeants to iad! Why? Simple seems the supt wanted more sets to meter out more days off boys and girls as he is pissed at street coppers because he is OT liked! Be careful, write proper paper, don't get caugh you lose job,pension,freedom all because off trying to do a thankless job in the ghettos of shitcago,
On another note did you notice potato head Quinn vetoed casino bill, so no casino for this city, no additional promise pension monies owed to har working coppers! He won't cut welfare,aid to illegals nope cut things for the working stiffs,he demoratic way!
#1 A man was shot in front of a grammar school at 1200 hrs or so today at 79th and Honore. Several shots go through a 5th grade classroom with students present. No one hit. Thank God except the man outside.
#2 3 people arrested a short time later with guns a few blocks from the school.
#3 Gmac says his plan, putting more people in gang areas, is working, they caught 3 POSSIBLE offenders a few blocks away.
#4 this cancels #2 and #3 even though #3 was a good job catching 3 people with guns. BUT SHOOTING SOMEONE IN FRONT OF A FULL CLASSROOM OF 5TH GRADERS, WITH BULLETS FLYING THROUGH THE ROOM DON'T SOUND LIKE A GOOD PLAN TO ME.
#5 Need a new plan and please do not say stupid things like that. Not everyone is Channel 9.
Like him or not, Phil Cline knew what he was doing. He knew this job inside out and always was teaching the younger guys the right way to do things.
LMFAO ,you gotta be kidding me!,all that Phat Phil knew to do was eat at Tuscany with all of his pals on the taxpayers dime and he still doing it at the with the CPD Memorial money making six figures as the board president includiong his bovine sidekick molloy the 2 fat asses are making a cool half a million collecting gold pensions and from the memorial fund,so keep feeding the pigs!
There are no all Black Colleges either, moron. There are Historically Black Colleges, opened because Blacks weren't allowed in many Schools, regardless of qualification. People of all Races, Creeds and Colors are allowed to and do attend.
3/04/2013 11:53:00 AM
Yes, your statement is correct. However, there still are fundraisers for the Negro College Fund. And, if you look at the racial breakdown of who attends these " black colleges", there are very few of other races. This came about through the terrible discrimination that ran through this country and really still exists in corporate America. I dont think anyone is in a hurry to dismantle these historical colleges and rightly so. But, I do think it is time to dismantle a " black caucus" whether in the city council or in the US Congress.
3/04/2013 06:41:00 PM
The United Negro College Fund was designed to give financial support to students going to Historically Black College's (HBC's). No one's putting a gun to anyone's head to donate money and the HBC's have no control over who applies to them. You will find people of all races at these schools, particularly International Students. As for the Congressional Black Caucus, you'll notice that Obama has distanced himself from them publicly. As a minority group in the very literal sense of the word, they serve a purpose by effectively using their power as a voting bloc. The Irish and Italians and Germans have their own political entities. In the same vein, being Black is as much about ethnicity as it is about Race.
Like him or not, Phil Cline knew what he was doing. He knew this job inside out and always was teaching the younger guys the right way to do things.
He sure was...when he wasn't busy promoting people to the exempt rank who were his friends...who never went to college...like Mike Cronin and a few others. Cline was yet another example of a boss doing as he wanted, for his friends. Not that he wasn't a good boss, but while everyone else who wanted to get promoted to Sgt. or Lt. was returning to school to get either the 60 hrs. (sgt) or B.A. (Lt), his friends didn't have to do damn thing, except be 'friends of Phil.' And let's not forget the patrolman/footman from 014 who never went back to school who he promoted to Sgt...for his last 18 months before mandatory retirement at age 63. He later became (for a short while, anyway) the Chief of the nearby mobbed up suburb (with no college education whatsoever)... What a joke!
In re: Legalization of Drugs
First, let me say thank you to my supporter, whoever you are, for the well articulated 6 point post you posted in my absence.
You made the statement:
if you want to make the argument that decriminalizing controlled substances will result in putting thousands and thousands of dope dealing gangbangers out of work, eliminating the steady flow of dope cash into the ghetto, the pockets of politicians, 'community leaders', 'defense attorneys', corrupt judges, democratic campaign coffers, etc..., you might start to make sense.
Yes, that was EXACTLY the point that I was making and thank you for articulating it so well.
Second, others took issue with my statement that if drugs were legalized, drug dealers would no longer have a business, and therefore nothing to fight about.
You took my statement out of context, or at least the context I intended. There is no doubt that gangbangers can and will ALWAYS find SOMETHING to fight about but in the more narrower context, they could no longer fight over something that no longer exists. Further, does this mean they would automatically turn themselves into responsible citizens? Of course not.
Third, another poster posits that even if drugs were legalized, that users would still commit robbery, burglary, prostitution in order to get the money to buy the drugs. Not true, as the entire point of having the government provide the drugs free or at such low cost is to make the commission of those crimes unnecesary.
Fourth, a comment was made about the ill-effects of drug use, similar to the ill-effects of alcohol. I agree. But my post focused on the drug TRADE and not drug USE. I agree that legalizing drugs will do little to cure the ill-effects of drug use, just as the legalization of alcohol has done little to cure the ill-effects of alcohol use. But I truly believe it will result in a noticable reduction of violent crime. After all, when was the last time you heard about gang-land slayings related the sale of alcohol?
In a nutshell, I believe that many (but certainly not all) drug users would be perfectly content to sit in a corner and get high, and not do too much to bother anyone, if you just gave them the drugs instead of putting them in a position (as we do now) where they have to commit crimes to support a very expensive habit which is way beyond their means.
Legalizing drugs is not a perfect solution, just a better one. Just like legalizing alcohol is a better solution than Prohibition, as history has proven.
I have also failed to hear any one argue, even in the slightest, about how the war on drugs has made any "gains" or "improvements" since we started several decades and several billion dollars ago. You got that argument? I'd like to hear it.
The best I have heard is "well, it's like taking out the trash...if we didn't do it regularly, things would really start to stink". Really? Then how come drugs are as available today as they have ever been?
Or perhaps that drugs are immoral? They are immoral because they are illegal. They are illegal because they are immoral. Sorry, flag on that play and a 20 yard penalty for the use of circular logic.
And I stand by my final challenge: let's try it for a couple years. If it does not deliver MEASUREABLE RESULTS, then I will support YOU in your efforts to return to making drugs illegal.
Finally, and off-topic, a sincere thank you to all the blue shirts. You risk your lives everyday to protect law abiding citizens from the savages. No matter how dysfunctional the Dept and your job is, we appreciate what you do and we have your back.
Not a LEO, just a lawyer.
In re: Legalizing Drugs - Part 2
To those who called me a moron, I have a simple question (or 2).
First, since you're such a genious, what is your solution?
And second, if you merely favor a continuation of the current "war on drugs", please answer this:
WHAT DOES VICTORY LOOK LIKE?
Everybody gets in a war to win; nobody gets in a war to lose.
And every military offensive as a specific goal, in a specific time frame.
LIttle ones, like "take hill 457 by 1800 hours tomorrow"
Or big ones like "the unilateral surrender of the country of North Vietnam within the next 6 months".
Specific. And Measurable.
Skip the feeble platitudes like "we need to stem the supply of drugs into the country" or "we need to reduce the demand for drugs".
Not specific. And not measurable.
The US (eventually) saw it would never win the war in Vietnam - and left.
The Soviet Union (eventually) saw it would never win it's war in Afganistan - and left.
The US (eventually) saw it would never win war against liquor - and quit.
So my friend, since you seem to advocate for a continuation of the war on drugs, please answer the question:
WHAT DOES VICTORY LOOK LIKE?
Not a LEO, just a lawyer.
I think a big argument against legalization of any drugs is this:
There is a certain (and I believe large) portion of the populace that stays away from drugs, even casual use, because drugs are illegal. They also stay away because many workplaces and professions will not hire nor keep people whom cannot pass a drug test. Legalization will open the doors for those people to start using, which will lead to more accidents and problems in the home and workplace including lack of productivity and absenteeism. Even if its legal, the poor will still need money to get it, and that will continue the need for crime to support the habits, and a probable increase to satisfy the new users.
In 2009 (the most recent stats I could find in a quick search)" 37,485 people died from overdoses and brain damage linked to long term drug abuse" (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Drugs/drug-deaths-exceed-traffic-deaths/t/story?id=14554903). With legalization, those numbers will only increase.
The idea of legalization as a solution is a fantasy.
So my friend, since you seem to advocate for a continuation of the war on drugs, please answer the question:
WHAT DOES VICTORY LOOK LIKE?
Not a LEO, just a lawyer.
3/05/2013 01:51:00 AM
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
(with a side dish of me)
Chalkie
There is no white caucus... That would be racist if one existed,, just like there are no all white colleges or white college funds. Thought you knew only white people can be racists.
3/04/2013 12:33:00 AM
I am glad that finally other people are talking about this issue. I wish it was brought up more. This thinking perpetuates what is going wrong with America.
3/04/2013 09:25:00 AM
****************
United Negro College Fund
Miss Black America
Congressional Black Caucus
National Associations of Black Journalists
National Black Catholic Congress
N.O.B.L.E
That's just a few. Substitute white on any of those, and you will be in Federal court in 5 minutes. Separate AND equal? Doesn't compute.
3/04/2013 09:32:00 PM
You toss out the names of organizations,but you didn't research why those organizations were created. Typical.
3/04/2013 08:34:00 AM
I'll bet you're crying your eyes out about the "failure" that is the war on drugs.
Just how much have you made representing the dope dealers in the past years?
$1200 for probable cause, and $1000 for every court appearance? That sound about right?
3/04/2013 08:02:00 PM
Good question.
Sorry to inform you that the answer is zero because I don't practice criminal law, and never have.
But you are on the right track. I believe that all the politicians, policemen, prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges and rev-runs, who pound on the table the loudest to stamp out drugs are the same ones whose real motivation is to continue to derive a financial benefit; lawful, unlawful, or both.
Not a LEO, just a lawyer.
....will remain true to type and will simply hammer their accustomed "starting salaries [of] $500 per day, all in cash" out of the first innocent person to walk by.
3/04/2013 07:16:00 PM
stand for something or fall for anything.
there is no more efficient and effective motivation to action than getting hit upside the head with a brick.
even cavemen knew this.
the bleeding hearted need to really bleed before they will ever open their eyes and see anything past the tips of their own noses.
when you put up with shit, you get covered in shit.
either embrace being immersed in it or flush it.
there are no innocent persons, only clueless ones.
On another note did you notice potato head Quinn vetoed casino bill, so no casino for this city, no additional promise pension monies owed to har working coppers! He won't cut welfare,aid to illegals nope cut things for the working stiffs,he demoratic way!
3/04/2013 10:17:00 PM
He'll approve the casinos after the "Pension Reform"-aka Pension Theft bills are passed.
Not a LEO, just a lawyer.
___________________________________
Obviously, you can drive away from a "drug related incident" I cannot.
You can profit from a drug related incident, I cannot.
When we can kill those involved in the drug trade then I will call it a drug war. Until then we can only call it a haphazard bar fight.
"Drug war" is just a label with no meaning created by a politician.
11:38pm Let me get this straight, you are upset with Phil for promoting guys who didn't have 60hrs of college, guys who came from a generation where college was for rich kids? Guys who came from a generation where you went to the armed forces or straight to work? Guys who took this job in the pre union and great benefits age and had to work side jobs to make sure that their kids went to college someday. Guys who didn't go to college on the city's dime into one of those programs run by CPD bosses that you don't learn anything and get handed a degree. Get over yourself, college is not essential to doing this job and this is from a guy who had a grad. degree before coming on.
LAWYER CALLS FOR FREE DRUGS FOR ALL
"Third, another poster posits that even if drugs were legalized, that users would still commit robbery, burglary, prostitution in order to get the money to buy the drugs. Not true, as the entire point of having the government provide the drugs free or at such low cost is to make the commission of those crimes unnecesary."
3/05/2013 12:03:00 AM
* Nice try.
We didn't say that USERS would commit more crimes -- we said that the DEALERS would be unwilling to give up their Cash Money Brothers, music-video lifestyles, and would simply do a lateral move more heavily into other crimes (than they already are).
* Now we know what a lot of these people mean when they say "legalization."
No point in bothering with someone who simply writes both sides of the dialogue to suit himself.
"We have your back."
Yeah, right.
You toss out the names of organizations,but you didn't research why those organizations were created. Typical.
3/05/2013 09:07:00 AM
Keep it real my friend. Don't assimilate to the American way. Keep doin what you are doin. Hard working Americans of all colors expect it now.
We are watching the spiral.
That's just a few. Substitute white on any of those, and you will be in Federal court in 5 minutes. Separate AND equal? Doesn't compute.
3/04/2013 09:32:00 PM
You toss out the names of organizations,but you didn't research why those organizations were created. Typical.
............................
I'm aware of why they were organized, and the needs which existed at the time do not really exist today. There are women of color in the Miss America contest, there are people of color in every political strata that exists, including the House of Representatives, the US Congress, City Councils, Governers offices, Mayors offices and oh yea, the President is black. The Catholic church has people of color in high office, in fact two of the presumptive favorites for becoming elected Pope are black Africans. NOBLE? The law enforcement profession has plenty of black leaders including the two black men that led CPD. Journalism? Watch TV. Many people of color, with blacks in the lead numbers wise as newscasters, sportscasters, and weather casters. not to mention the numbers of black print reporters and columnists. The UNCF? Funded to help black students who, because of the residue of slavery and Jim Crowism were unable to afford college. An outstanding idea, no longer as needed. Don't get me going on the distribution of grants and scholarships. Colleges line up to give money to kids of color in order to fill their quotas, to the exclusion of white kids from the exact financial circumstances. If you want an example of this exclusion, look up the University of Michigan Law School entry case.
I get that many of the groups I listed were needed when founded. In numbers there is strength to make changes. But hey, as long as the racially exclusive groups can exist, why not keep them right? Or maybe someone needs to say that some of them can cease to exist because the need for them may no longer exist. And I stand by my assertion that if someone tried to start a Miss White America contest or a white political caucus or a white catholic congress they would be pilloried in public and sued in federal court.
So get off of your high horse, you have no fucking idea what I know or don't know.
Good question.
Sorry to inform you that the answer is zero because I don't practice criminal law, and never have.
But you are on the right track. I believe that all the politicians, policemen, prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges and rev-runs, who pound on the table the loudest to stamp out drugs are the same ones whose real motivation is to continue to derive a financial benefit; lawful, unlawful, or both.
Not a LEO, just a lawyer.
3/05/2013 09:14:00 AM
There is not one REAL Policeman that would not want to see the drug trade disappear and take all the misery it causes with it.
I think a big argument against legalization of any drugs is this:
There is a certain (and I believe large) portion of the populace that stays away from drugs, even casual use, because drugs are illegal. They also stay away because many workplaces and professions will not hire nor keep people whom cannot pass a drug test. Legalization will open the doors for those people to start using, which will lead to more accidents and problems in the home and workplace including lack of productivity and absenteeism. Even if its legal, the poor will still need money to get it, and that will continue the need for crime to support the habits, and a probable increase to satisfy the new users.
In 2009 (the most recent stats I could find in a quick search)" 37,485 people died from overdoses and brain damage linked to long term drug abuse" (http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Drugs/drug-deaths-exceed-traffic-deaths/t/story?id=14554903). With legalization, those numbers will only increase.
The idea of legalization as a solution is a fantasy.
3/05/2013 07:36:00 AM
1. I think a big argument against legalization of any drugs is this:......
no, the big argument against the decriminalization of controlled substances is the loss of un-taxable income, on both a local, national and international level.
2. There is a certain (and I believe large) portion of the populace that stays away from drugs, even casual use, because drugs are illegal.
did a certain, large portion of the populace stay away from liquor, in all it's forms, during Prohibition?
3. They also stay away because many workplaces and professions will not hire nor keep people whom cannot pass a drug test.
the currently controlled and prohibited substances which these drug tests test for are also, in various forms and for various therapeutic purposes, already available and widely used via medical prescription. if you are going to sustain this argument, you will have to vigorously question the prescribing of these substances by the medical practitioners.
4. Legalization will open the doors for those people to start using, which will lead to more accidents and problems in the home and workplace including lack of productivity and absenteeism.
see above. also, does the current use of alcoholic beverages by a large portion of the populace result in a large portion of that portion abusing same, to the point of creating the problems you state? and, if so, would not the same addiction treatments currently available for alcohol also be applied to substance abuse/addiction?
without the need to criminalize said substances, and, thus, vastly inflate their commodity value to the producers, distributors and retailers of same? said commodity providers, at all levels, being the source cause of violent criminal acts committed nationwide?
5. Even if its legal, the poor will still need money to get it, and that will continue the need for crime to support the habits, and a probable increase to satisfy the new users.
treated as an addiction, and thus as a disease, medical insurance, of whatever type, will pay the cost of prescribed medication. a cost which will be far less than the current cost, in money and blood, of the 'war on drugs'.
6. .......With legalization, those numbers will only increase.
are you saying that you dislike the conclusions of a fellow named Darwin?
7. The idea of legalization as a solution is a fantasy.
the idea that government is anyone's nanny is a fantasy. government is in the business of power to control, which is the means to garner a limited number of individual's wealth, without earning same by honest endeavor.
"You toss out the names of organizations,but you didn't research why those organizations were created. Typical"
okay......some organizations were created....black this, black that, minority this or that....so....then what? substitute black for white, and....people scream racism!! how about, take the race or color out altogether, or....use the race, whatever that is, and tell everyone else to shut the f$$k up....how's that?
However, based upon observable daily events, police suspect that --
People without the context, insight, or impulse control to be able to tolerate even a few days of conventional employment, who have become used to rims and beats and gold and bigscreens, and who have been driven completely, permanently insane by music videos about Lamborghinis and AK-47s and helicopters full of $100 bills and duct-taping victims and torturing them to death, will remain true to type and will simply hammer their accustomed "starting salaries [of] $500 per day, all in cash" out of the first innocent person to walk by.
3/04/2013 07:16:00 PM
entering from stage left: CCW!
tadaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
c'mon, babycakes, make my day.
Chalkie
If you believe this you are truely a moran and an igonorant moran ( is that a double negative?).
3/04/2013 06:43:00 PM
no, but it is an illiterate's misspelling of the word 'moron', as well as 'ignorant', 'truly', and, for a second time, 'moron'.
just in case you were actually wondering.
In re: "I think a big argument against legalization of any drugs is this....."
-------------------------------------------------
First, thank you to 3-5-13 @ 5:39 PM for putting forth points 1-7 in my absence. Here are my own thoughts as well.
1. "There is a certain (and I believe large) portion of the populace that stays away from drugs, even casual use, because drugs are illegal."
You just might be right.
You also just might be wrong. Some of the appeal for drug usage, particularly among new users, is that they are doing something illicit....the appeal of being a "bad boy" and getting away with. If it is no longer illegal, it is no longer illicit, and the bad boy appeal disappears. So this one could very well go either way.
2. "They also stay away because many workplaces and professions will not hire nor keep people whom cannot pass a drug test."
I am on the same page with you on this. I think that ANY employer who wants to drug testing (even if drugs are legal) should be able to do so.
I also believe that drug testing (even if legal) should be MANDATORY for anyone receiving any type of "entitlements" such as Section 8, link cards, O-zero phones, etc, etc.
As been pointedly observed here on SCC before, why the hell should policemen (among others) be subject to drug testing to qualify for their job, when shitheads who want to get a welfare check for doing nothing are not?
3. "Legalization will open the doors for those people to start using....."
Doubt it. Drugs are so available right now that anyone who wants them can get them.
Perversely, the opposite might occur. Cigarettes (which are obviously legal) and cigarette smokers (of which I am one) are finding themselves increasingly ostracized. Once legal, drug users might very well likely find themselves ostracized as well.
4. "Even if its legal, the poor will still need money to get it, and that will continue the need for crime to support the habits, and a probable increase to satisfy the new users."
No. No. And no again. That is the whole point of having the government provide the drugs for cheap or free. So that users would not have to commit the crimes, to get the money, to pay for the drugs.
5. "In 2009 (the most recent stats I could find in a quick search)" 37,485 people died from overdoses and brain damage linked to long term drug abuse"
True.
But each year over 300,000 die from cigarette smoking, more than 8X.
Yet narcotics are illegal, but cigarettes are not.
How do you reconcile cigarettes being legal, and narcotics not being legal? That the interests of Virginia tabacco farmers would be harmed?
6. If it makes anyone more comfortable, I have no problem with legalized drugs being limited to certain geographical areas. Similar to the way prostitution is/was legal in Amsterdam, but was limited to the "Red Light" district only.
Define the area. Fence it off. Give the all the junk they want. Send in a few pizzas now and then. And send the coroner by once and while to pick up the dead bodies.
Problem solved. (With apologies to Chalkie)
Not a LEO, just a lawyer.
To Not a Leo: my final thought....you mentioned cigarettes, (I am a former smoker). I agree with you. It is shameful that the government profits from tobacco related miseries. They ban advertising but take the ad money anyway. Same with booze. I am a retired LEO, and I have always felt that the #1 responsibility of government SHOULD be protecting the welfare of its people. That is done in some instances by regulating drinking age, tobacco purchase age (as if THAT works) mandatory car insurance etc etc. then the government profits from tobacco, booze and gambling. To add drugs to that mix is not looking out for the people. I know the "war"'on drugs is an abject failure. But I just cannot justify legalization.
Nice talking to you.
Anonymous said...
"You toss out the names of organizations,but you didn't research why those organizations were created. Typical"
okay......some organizations were created....black this, black that, minority this or that....so....then what? substitute black for white, and....people scream racism!! how about, take the race or color out altogether, or....use the race, whatever that is, and tell everyone else to shut the f$$k up....how's that?
3/05/2013 06:06:00 PM
Sir/madam,the reason those organizations exist is because blacks were not allowed to join the professional organizations that represented their profession. The reason there is no "national association of White journalists" is because the profession was controlled by...wait for it. WHITES! Moreover,the reason that historically black colleges and universities were created is due to blacks not being allowed to enroll into universities such as the U.of Texas;Ole Miss;Miss.state;LSU;U.of Alabama;U.of Georgia;U.of Florida;Florida state;U.of South Carolina;U.of North Carolina;North Carolina state;U.of Virginia;U.of Tennessee;U. of Kentucky;U. of Maryland. If you look closely you will realize those schools are in the south. Even after my father was honorably discharged from the army at the conclusion of WW2 he,nor any other black veteran could enroll into any of those schools. Finally,start studying United States history and you will learn some interesting stuff. Glenn Beck is not a history teacher.
4. "Even if its legal, the poor will still need money to get it, and that will continue the need for crime to support the habits, and a probable increase to satisfy the new users."
No. No. And no again. That is the whole point of having the government provide the drugs for cheap or free. So that users would not have to commit the crimes, to get the money, to pay for the drugs.
--------
Obviously you live in a fantasy world.
You're assuming that everyone involved in the drug trade only commit crimes to support the use of drugs.
Do you think the Dope Boy will become a productive human being and start working for a living? NO.
Do you think the typical crack smoker aka former dopeboy/ex convict/lifelong piece of shit will become a productive member of society? NO.
You can legalize drugs. Just don't do it under the guise that crime will stop. A majority of people who commit crimes to obtain drugs, do so because it is what they know. The people who sell drugs, sell drugs because they do not want to work. They wil find something else to make money and it will not be legal.
I am a retired LEO, and I have always felt that the #1 responsibility of government SHOULD be protecting the welfare of its people. That is done in some instances by regulating drinking age, tobacco purchase age (as if THAT works) mandatory car insurance etc etc. then the government profits from tobacco, booze and gambling. To add drugs to that mix is not looking out for the people. I know the "war"'on drugs is an abject failure. But I just cannot justify legalization.
Nice talking to you.
3/06/2013 08:41:00 AM
so, you're a democrat.
re: 3/06/2013 12:42:00 PM
"Obviously you live in a fantasy world.
You're assuming that everyone involved in the drug trade only commit crimes to support the use of drugs."
no, you are assuming that the quoted commenter is assuming....
"Do you think the Dope Boy will become a productive human being and start working for a living? NO."
do you think that anyone, but you, is thinking that the.....?
"Do you think the typical crack smoker aka former dopeboy/ex convict/lifelong piece of shit will become a productive member of society? NO."
ditto the above.
"You can legalize drugs. Just don't do it under the guise that crime will stop."
nice apocalyptic leap there, buddy.
"A majority of people who commit crimes to obtain drugs, do so because it is what they know."
sort of, except that it's also, to their minds, a quicker and more instantly lucrative means to obtain the money to purchase the substances they are addicted to, substances they have easier access to on the street, than they'd have submitting to the current addiction treatment schemes imposed and limited by the very illegality off said substances.
"The people who sell drugs, sell drugs because they do not want to work."
no, they sell drugs because the cash income from said activity is greater than they know they could ever 'earn' by traditionally honest means. plus, no normal interviewing/applying for the job, no rejections for criminal background, pissing hot, lack of work experience, insufficient education, 'bad attitude', etc. in a way, the drug dealers are sort of equal opportunity employers.
"They wil find something else to make money and it will not be legal."
of course, many to most will, and that's where the enforcement of laws prohibiting natural criminal acts will continue to be enforced, all the more vigorously, since there will be no more need to expend law enforcement resources upon the futile and artificially created prohibition on certain controlled substances, for the primary, if not sole, purpose of grossly inflating the market value of said substances.
yes, prohibition breeds profit, huge profit, un-taxable profit, imposing far more cost to the taxpaying public than any amount of dope money seizures could ever offset. and that's just the economic costs.
the moral, ethical, emotional and 'benefit to society' reasons for prohibition are merely the successful sales pitch behind the actual reasons: governmental power to control + huge un-taxable profits = drugs are bad. bad drugs. (but those gaining sure do count on the consumers continued demand, don't they?)
RE: 3/06/2013 06:34:00 PM
Nice try jerk off. You omitted YOUR original premise. Oh wait its right here .
-------------------------------------------
4.) "Even if its legal, the poor will still need money to get it, and that will continue the need for crime to support the habits, and a probable increase to satisfy the new users."
No. No. And no again. That is the whole point of having the government provide the drugs for cheap or free. So that users would not have to commit the crimes, to get the money, to pay for the drugs.
-------------------------------------------
Let me give you a hint. People on this blog can spot bullshit. When you just respond with a "re" and don't quote the original text, especially when YOU wrote YOU reek of bullshit. You are only the fool who writes post by breaking them down sentence by sentence. Make a concise point. Just like at court people start tuning out when you break out the old straw man and drone on and on admonishing said straw man.
Make a concise point. Just like at court people start tuning out when you break out the old straw man and drone on and on admonishing said straw man.
3/07/2013 12:00:00 PM
concise point #1:
are you admitting that you have the attention span of a gerbil? and the reading skills of a cps dropout? and the deductive abilities of a democrat?
concise point #2:
the criminalization of controlled substances is all about making said criminalized and controlled substances far more valuable than their intrinsic worth, both by controlling the manufacture, distribution and dispensation of said controlled substances, via legal prescription only dispensation and by, thusly creating the illegal market for same.
concise point #3:
i didn't post the posts you think i posted. thus, no dick button for you.
concise point #4:
a concise point can be easily made by anyone, as in: 'gibs me dat chit 'fore i caps yo ass, beyotch!', thus, your desire for all points made to be 'concise' implies that you value brevity far more than you value substance. a democratic trait if ever there was one.
do you prefer brevity over quality when you polish your knob?
Anonymous said...
Make a concise point. Just like at court people start tuning out when you break out the old straw man and drone on and on admonishing said straw man.
3/07/2013 12:00:00 PM
concise point #1:
are you admitting that you have the attention span of a gerbil? and the reading skills of a cps dropout? and the deductive abilities of a democrat?
concise point #2:
the criminalization of controlled substances is all about making said criminalized and controlled substances far more valuable than their intrinsic worth, both by controlling the manufacture, distribution and dispensation of said controlled substances, via legal prescription only dispensation and by, thusly creating the illegal market for same.
concise point #3:
i didn't post the posts you think i posted. thus, no dick button for you.
concise point #4:
a concise point can be easily made by anyone, as in: 'gibs me dat chit 'fore i caps yo ass, beyotch!', thus, your desire for all points made to be 'concise' implies that you value brevity far more than you value substance. a democratic trait if ever there was one.
do you prefer brevity over quality when you polish your knob?
3/07/2013 06:31:00 PM
Concise point #5. Hilarious. You get a .5 deduction for bringing up political affiliation. Score:9.5.
3/07/2013 06:31:00 PM
Okay, it wasn't you. Sure. Carry on building that straw man sir.
Concise point #5. Hilarious. You get a .5 deduction for bringing up political affiliation. Score:9.5.
3/08/2013 09:19:00 AM
hey, that should have been a 2 point bonus, buddy.
on second thought, deducting is just the kind of thing a democrat would do.
what comes next, an irs audit?
Okay, it wasn't you. Sure. Carry on building that straw man sir.
3/08/2013 01:06:00 PM
"You could wile away the hours
Conferrin' with the flowers
Consultin' with the rain
And your head you'd be scratchin'
While your thoughts were busy hatchin'
If you only had a brain
You'd unravel any riddle
For any individ'le
In trouble or in pain
With the thoughts you'd be thinkin'
You could be another Lincoln
If you only had a brain
Oh, you would tell you why
The ocean's near the shore
You could think of things you never thunk before
And then you'd sit and think some more
You would not be just a nuffin'
Your head all full of stuffin'
Your heart all full of pain
You would dance and be merry
Life would be a ding-a-derry
If you only had a brain"
(no cover charge, just for you.)
http://secondcitycop.blogspot.com/search?q=tagger
robert a ray aka post still vandalizing the city.
Anonymous said...
Concise point #5. Hilarious. You get a .5 deduction for bringing up political affiliation. Score:9.5.
3/08/2013 09:19:00 AM
hey, that should have been a 2 point bonus, buddy.
on second thought, deducting is just the kind of thing a democrat would do.
what comes next, an irs audit?
3/08/2013 04:50:00 PM
No,no,no! Adding political affiliation was equivalent to putting a bumper sticker on a Ferrari. Score:8.5. You called me a Democrat.
No,no,no! Adding political affiliation was equivalent to putting a bumper sticker on a Ferrari. Score:8.5. You called me a Democrat.
3/09/2013 10:46:00 AM
Democrat.
It's not a political party, it's a state of mind.
As in, your mind belongs to the state.
Thus, a point deduction on a humorous post contradicts the fundamental absence of humor of said democratic state of mind.
As in, since democrats can't take a joke, fuck 'em. Humorously speaking.
That model 19 S and W was carried by Inspector Lewis Erskine in the old FBI series. Nice gun.
Post a Comment
<< Home