Enginerd

iTrader: (1)

Yeah this is what happens when your city privatizes public parking. The company pulled in $100M last year at the old meter rates. And some still think the mob is dead in Chicago....bwahaha .

Gun crime in the city is pretty much all south side gang related. Of course a ban will reduce crime in IL! HA! Good luck!

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

I can site a plethora of examples of state run services increasing fees and citing the same reasoning, the difference being that Chicago Parking Meters, LLC. is able to do it profitable.

The city sold off the parking meters/spots because they needed cash and were unable to figure out how to make money on it.

Hell, the article itself names a few state run services [e.g., the CTA bus fare increase] that are doing the same.

Anyways, in DC I often park in a garage for $8-10 an hour without complaint, although I think the parking meters are still only around $2 an hour and are privately run. I can even pay with my cell phone.

also, I'm sure parking in Chicago is hard because most cars are abandoned and taking up spaces since thier owners are murdered during their visit.

still, it's funny to see a $6.50 an hour parking meter...I'm sure hte company worked out a sweet deal with the city and were even able to add in fee increases at will.

olderguy

iTrader: (19)

THREAD DRIFT

C'mon guys this is where I come to find out if I can use my RPG in Chicago! Not what it's going to cost me to park my fertilizer truck on the South side.

Tekel

iTrader: (2)

Watch out Illinois, you may end up with legislation as early as this week that makes ANY RIFLE with a detachable magazine illegal. We are talking Everything from the AR, AK, to the Ruger 10/22 and M1 Carbine and Grand.

Illinois State Senate Trying to Ram New Gun Ban Through Lame Duck Session

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

I do think that any welfare programs that have financial incentives for (A) having more kids and/or (B) single parent families can be counter-productive. It's really a very interesting and multi-faceted problem and I don't know what the right solutions are.

For example, one of the elements that was brought up in a recent paper or study I was skimming (probably the one I linked to earlier) is that the geographic segregation or isolation - that is: living, working (or not working) and hanging out in the same shitty neighborhood - reinforces all sorts of negative behaviors that make it that much more difficult to move on and up.

Think of dialects or speech patterns and vocabulary. Imagine one of the backwoods Appalachian still runners from the TV show Moonshiners trying to apply for a "decent" job. Just their accent and vocabulary would get doors slammed in their faces, before you ever got to qualifications and work ethic. The same goes for an inner city thug whose primary inspiration for dress, attitude and language is a glorified prison culture.

The violent and aggressive attitudes can also be a perpetuating element. You have to act "hard" and tolerate no disrespect because you feel will be perceived as an attractive victim. You can't be a nerd and pay attention in class and do your homework or you'll look like a punk to your peers.

None of that does you any favors when you are trying to get a "good" job.

That's also part of the culture. Either you have a father who grew up in that environment and instills those values of aggression in you or you have no father for a number of possible reasons and end up turning to a gang for a sense of protection and belonging.


So, you're a highschool dropout raised by a single mom who works a minimum wage job and collects welfare with multiple kids from multiple fathers. You've already gotten a bunch of minor arrests and you believe your choices are that you can either go work at the local Burger King for $8/hour or go sell weed on the corner, aspiring to maybe move up to crack and then become the next 50 Cent or Jay-Z.

The idea of being the next Mark Zuckerberg (or Mark Parker or Mark Cuban) never enters in to their consciousness.


I'm not sure exactly how you break that cycle now that it is so deeply ingrained but upward mobility by ethnic minorities is definitely possible. Look at the European immigrants from the early 1900s (Irish, Jews, Scandinavians, etc), Asian immigrants including Indians, Hispanic immigrants, etc.


I know discussing racial issues is playing with a tinderbox but it does appear to me to be a large aspect of the conversation missing from most firearm-related death conversations.

Granted... There have been no black mass shooters in the USA that I know of off the top of my head. That's been mostly whites with a couple of Asians thrown in.

rleete

iTrader: (21)

Spoiled white brats do mass shootings because they have no peer group, and are looking for infamy. Black gang bangers do drive-bys for the approval of the group.

Neither one (usually) obtains the weapons legally.

fooger03

iTrader: (2)

"Starting 10 months from today, new children will no longer qualify for any government assistance programs beyond the standard dependant tax-deduction. Also, starting today, the government will fund abortions according to this pay structure:
Any female's first abortion: 95% funded.
Any female's second abortion: 50% funded and 50% on a 9-month payment plan.
Any female's third and subsequent abortions: 0% funded and 100% on a 9-month payment plan.
If any payments from previous plans are delinquint, the woman does not qualify for benefits.

Additionally, any abortion can be 100% funded IF AND ONLY IF the female undergoes an irreversible and completely free sterilization procedure AT THE SAME TIME.

As an incentive, any woman 18 and older can voluntarily undergo the sterilization procedure while not pregnant and receive a one-time payment of $1500. At 23 years old, the $1500 payment option begins being prorated yearly until it becomes $0 at age 35.

No additional taxes are required to support this program. This program is overfunded by the money saved by no longer providing government support to new children."

The only exception to no government funding is a temporary reprieve from a significant reduction in income, limited to a 3 to 6 month adjustment period of benefits which quickly fall to zero.



There you have it: I've reduced gun crime by 50% AND saved the government considerable amounts of money.

MWatson17

Is it just me, or have other people's friends been buying guns like crazy lately? At least 4 people I know have bought guns in the last month when they have expressed no previous interest in them...

fooger03

iTrader: (2)

I rec'd a newly purchased gun on Monday.... I only became interested in buying this one when I picked up an EOTech sight about a month ago, and I only became interested in an EOTech sight when I bought a shotgun with a receiver mounted picatinny rail, and I only became interested in buying a shotgun when my hand-me-down home defense pistol had a part failure.

The timing of the purchase of the gun that I just bought was definitely accelerated by current events.

olderguy

iTrader: (19)

DC Sniper just took his time. One by one.

olderguy

iTrader: (19)

Same here. And ammo is getting scarce(on backorder or sold out)

Enginerd

iTrader: (1)

I'm looking to purchase my first gun soon. Applied a few weeks back so I could go out shooting with my pops at his fish and gun club. Unfortunately, it's taking forever to get approved due to the demand right now. I was reading through the other gun thread a while ago trying to get an idea for a first gun. Dad's got something for clay shooting and hunting, so I don't really know what I should get. I fear inflation will scare me away from buying anything.

Tekel

iTrader: (2)

See that right there is something that is BS. No American should need to apply to be able to buy a gun.

Enginerd

iTrader: (1)

Eh, I disagree to a point. I think it was this thread I posted in already. The state requires a background check only. Due to the number of requests right now, they have a bit of a backlog. I firmly believe the minimum requirement should include the background check and a minimal safety training.

I can't say where to draw the line on the limits of gun ownership. Frankly, my opinion is in line with my view of abortion: if given the choice, 99.9999% of people will know their own limits and capabilities. The 0.0001% makes national news and blows the fun for everyone else.

Tekel

iTrader: (2)

Well if you're in Illinois you don't need to worry. By the time they are done ram rodding this new legislation through, you will only be able to buy cap guns and muskets.

Tekel

iTrader: (2)

Posted this in the gun thread and not politics thread yesterday.

From the Illinois law that will be voted on very soon. (As in today or this week)
It grandfathers in individuals owning items and they can be given to heirs but they can't sell them in the state. Companies and individuals can sell them out of state. It also adds additional requirements to registering guns. This is ridiculous.

The law http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/full...AID=11&Session
Underlined is what talks about banning

Just read it again. It bans any pistol or rifle with a detachable magazine. Overreaching much?

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

Some of you probably dont know that Illinois recently lost their SCOTUS case banning concealed carry and must adopt CCW. Illinois was the only NO-ISSUE state, and now the whole country has CCW of some kind, with the exception of the Washington DC. Some states are MAY-ISSUE and make it really hard to carry, but the law is there... and they get better every year.

The recent MAJOR legislation you guys are quoting for IL is designed to force a compromise in the CCW law being written. The anti's want MAY ISSUE really bad so they can heavily control who gets CCW... ie, psych tests, weapon sepcific licensing (like in Cali), expensive permitting and training, "just cause" stuff, etc... which means only the rich and connected will qualify.

By introducing heavily restrictive new general gun laws, hey can now compromise by saying... "OK, you can have your semi-auto's, but you have to accept MAY ISSUE regulations for CCW, oh yeah... and no semi-auto's either... and max 5rd mag limits".

The big problem is that the City of Chicago (with actual gun permitting and registration laws to just own one), is dictating the law for the rest of the state. Currently there doesn't seem to be a way to avoid a compromise of some kind. Illinoisianers (some on this board) want CCW badly. In 2011, when Wisconsin adopted CCW, they received 150,000 applications in the first year (and I guarantee you that all of them vote). Representatives know that CCW is a huge voting issue, and will play a give/take game that (if they're not careful) is going to hurt somewhere.

The problem for the anti's is that they have until mid-June to get their version of CCW passed or IL will become a Constitutional Carry state. This means that the pro-gunners have to stay heavily engaged because the Anti's are trying everything.

IL is also a non-Class3 state like California and has a unique system called FOID where all state residents are required to get a permit to own a gun. The guns aren't registered, but the people who own them are.

On some other gun-boards I frequent, it's expected that the anti's primary goal is to get MAY-ISSUE, and that they'll be willing to drop the current legislation to get it... which means they'll just revisit the current legislation in a year. On the flip-side, some states like Louisiana have made changes to their State Constitutions that make it very hard to enact anti-gun laws... one at a time.

bootz

You guys are seriously paranoid gun fetish freaks. RPG in civilian hands, give me a break.

Or are you just refighting the civil war where an oppressive Federal government imposed its will on the 'freedom' (sic) loving South.

Which country is more likely to slip into totalitarian dictatorship or anarchy, gun shy Canada or gun crazy Mexico?

mgeoffriau

iTrader: (7)

Who can tell me what Canada and Mexico have in common?

samnavy

iTrader: (7)

Bootz, you should read the whole thread. It's a great discussion that has strayed very far from what the title would suggest, and has become a very interesting and intelligent discussion on gun rights and more. You could learn a lot around here with an open mind, or simply by reading the whole thread before commenting.

In any case, there's really nothing wrong with a civilian owning explosive weaponry. Things like RPG's aren't all that expensive (relatively speaking), and the costs of safe storage shouldn't be a huge issue if you have the funds to buy one. I challenge you to come up with a constructive and well-thought-out argument why civilians shouldn't be allowed to own RPG's. HINT: If you'll read the whole thread, there are some that you can regurgitate.

In any case, with only 6 posts to your credit, you've completely shown your *** and demonstrated to the board you have little to offer in the form of intelligent conversation. Good luck around here.