|The violence in Chicago-- almost entirely a non-white problem|
“It’s disgusting. I was proud to be a Chicagoan. And now, it’s like, you see it crumbling. It’s terrible. And I see no hope for it. I don’t see anything getting better. It’s just dying.”
“As the largest city in the Heartland, “Chicago” occupies a unique position in the American psyche. New York looks across the Atlantic and Los Angeles across the Pacific, but Chicago looks to America itself, the vast continental empire that it fed and supplied with its plants and industry.”Presently, Chicago sits at the nexus of yesterday/tomorrow for the rest of the nation -- a city where law and order is protected by the white population, whose institutions are now assigned to protect the very people uprooting civilization there.
The latest Paul Kersey at VDare.com is all about Chicago[Mexican Drug Gangs Only Part Of “The War In Chicago”, Paul Kersey on May 19, 2013]:
In parts of the city, it's far too common for lives to be shaped by the persistent threat of conflicts and the culture of resolving them with firearms. In fact, gun violence has come to seem as much a part of Chicago as the seasons. In the last 20 years, more than 12,000 people have been murdered in the city, more than 9,000 of them with firearms. Tens of thousands of others have survived being shot.
Over the years, police, politicians, and community leaders have proposed all kinds of solutions, from banning high-powered squirt guns to bringing in the National Guard. Along with the weather—violence tends to spike during the warm months and mild stretches of winter—the size and deployment of the police force is always at the center of the discussion.
But others argue that it's time to focus on the circumstances that produce violent offenders in the first place: desperation, poverty, fear, addiction to drugs, addiction to guns. In many ways the issue boils down to whether we can afford to take the time to fight such long-standing ills, or whether we can afford not to.
When Chicago finished 2002 with 656 murders, tops in the nation, Mayor Richard M. Daley was embarrassed, outraged, and defensive. "We're doing everything possible," he insisted. Yet the next year he sacked his police superintendent and promoted an aggressive deputy, Phil Cline, with orders to bring the body count down.
Cline did what he was told. He set up special gun teams, stepped up drug sweeps, and seized the cars of gang leaders. Most significantly, he increased the size and duties of mobile forces, deploying them in violence-prone areas to "stop anything that moves," as one officer described it to the Chicago Tribune.
The strategy has become standard practice in violent pockets of cities across the country. But experts say it's only effective if police work with residents and focus on serious safety threats. "Community members can have mixed feelings about these sorts of things, but if the police take advance action to communicate what they're up to, that can help considerably," says Christopher Koper, a professor at George Mason University who's conducted several studies on policing for the U.S.
Department of Justice. "Maybe it comes down to who would you rather lock up, a guy with drugs on him or a guy with a gun on him?"
To many black and Latino residents, Cline's crackdowns snagged far too many regular guys along with the bad ones. Murders went down—way down, from 601 in 2003 to 451 in 2005. But relations with the community eroded dramatically. The number of homicides cleared by detectives began a steady plunge, reflecting a lack of cooperation from witnesses. In 2004 police cleared 61 percent of that year's murders; by 2012 the figure was down to just 36 percent. Cline was ousted in 2007 after a series of police abuse scandals, but the department resumed using mobile forces.Too many black and Latino criminals; not enough white ones.
Welcome to"America's Deadliest City."