Jump to content

Armed Robbers on Train Platforms


Neumann

Recommended Posts

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/armed-robbers-target-passengers-as-they-get-off-trains-across-chicago/

 

Teams of armed men have been lurking on train platforms and robbing passengers as they disembarked. I guess it's safer when only robbers can be armed.

With the rise in permit holders the bad guys are striking in the gun free zones.

This shouldn't surprise anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/armed-robbers-target-passengers-as-they-get-off-trains-across-chicago/

 

Teams of armed men have been lurking on train platforms and robbing passengers as they disembarked. I guess it's safer when only robbers can be armed.

With the rise in permit holders the bad guys are striking in the gun free zones.

This shouldn't surprise anyone.

 

 

I do believe the law was written that way to 'channel' the victims into the clutches of the legislator's relatives. Can't have some rep's or senator's nephews or nieces getting ventilated by law abiding citizens when they go to 'get paid',

 

JMHO, and reason I don't want to ride the el anymore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by mauserme, December 31, 2017 at 12:36 AM - No reason given
Hidden by mauserme, December 31, 2017 at 12:36 AM - No reason given
I distinctly remember taking the Belmont Red Line early one morning where maintanance crews were washing away what I assume was a homicide due to the massive amounts of blood. I saw a lot of **** when I road the El for several years, but that one stuck with me. Even moreso then the guy sitting a few seats down who randomly started jerkin it to the redeye.
Link to comment

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/armed-robbers-target-passengers-as-they-get-off-trains-across-chicago/

 

Teams of armed men have been lurking on train platforms and robbing passengers as they disembarked. I guess it's safer when only robbers can be armed.

If this was any other mammal other than human beings being targeted in this manner,

the liberals would be screaming that this is a canned hunt.

 

Discuss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/armed-robbers-target-passengers-as-they-get-off-trains-across-chicago/

 

Teams of armed men have been lurking on train platforms and robbing passengers as they disembarked. I guess it's safer when only robbers can be armed.

With the rise in permit holders the bad guys are striking in the gun free zones.

This shouldn't surprise anyone.

 

 

One of these days, they will roll up a snake-eyes when they mistakenly choose one of the many concealed carriers who are engaging in civil disobedience and ignoring the CPZ sign on the CTA. Then, things will get interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were supposed to be 970 new police officers added to the CPD. The addition of 1000 new employees overall to CPD was supposed to make a huge impact on crime in the city, but I just don't see it.

 

http://abc7chicago.com/news/cpd-announces-plan-to-hire-nearly-1000-new-officers/1520303/

 

I think things are getting worse in Chicago, not better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/armed-robbers-target-passengers-as-they-get-off-trains-across-chicago/

 

Teams of armed men have been lurking on train platforms and robbing passengers as they disembarked. I guess it's safer when only robbers can be armed.

If this was any other mammal other than human beings being targeted in this manner,

the liberals would be screaming that this is a canned hunt.

 

Discuss.

 

 

Actually it is a canned hunt.

Leftists love to create victims. Mainly out of non-cronies. The left love thugs and criminals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yea but there's also more officers retiring than being hired. so it's net negative

 

I know of some guys who are over the age limit (laid off cops) who can't get hired but want to become cops. The state law AUTHORIZING age discrimination prevents them.

 

I tell them to move out of state, or at least out of the 6 county range. The sane states love experienced LEOs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks fake.

 

The December 1999 Scientific American mentioned Moller and the Skycar 200. The URL that I listed has been active since that time.

 

Along with other flying vehicles, a more recent on-line mention of Moller occurs at the very end of this Scientific American article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/flying-motorcycle/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were supposed to be 970 new police officers added to the CPD. The addition of 1000 new employees overall to CPD was supposed to make a huge impact on crime in the city, but I just don't see it.

http://abc7chicago.c...ficers/1520303/

I think things are getting worse in Chicago, not better.

 

yea but there's also more officers retiring than being hired. so it's net negative

 

 

 

If you've followed the decline of cities like Detroit, Stockton, East St.Louis, Gary Indiana and others, one thing they all had in common is that as conditions worsened and crime increased, none of the political rulers of any of these cities ever increased the size of their police departments. In fact the opposite occurred. Police department budgets were frozen even as crime soared.

 

Earlier this year a member of the ILGA from a Chicago district introduced a bill to reimburse low-income mothers for daycare costs. The only person to question where Illinois was going to get the money to pay for it - was Jeanne Ives. The bill passed and was voted out of the house.

 

As soon as anyone talks increasing the size of Chicago's police force, the same people who propose every conceivable free giveaway suddenly become budget conscious and start questioning "Where is the money going to come from? Who is going to pay for this?"

 

Rahm Emanuel is conducting a PR campaign to try to trick Chicagoans into believing that the net size of the Chicago Police Department is increasing. He'd rather do that than actually hire more police officers.

 

This is the same path that Detroit went down.

 

When the politicians could fool people into believing that the crime was mostly happening in bad neighborhoods, they could carry on business as usual. But now, street thugs are coming out from those bad neighborhoods and robbing people on State Street and Michigan Avenue, they're carjacking people all over the Chicagoland area and they're robbing people all along the CTA routes.

 

I don't expect the politicians to change a thing, people like Madigan and Cullerton are getting rich, why would they change anything? But people will move, businesses will relocate, they'll leave Illinois, and what will be left behind will be nothing but ruins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am fortunate to not live in the city of Chicago, and I go into that cursed city less and less often in recent years. Other than an occasional visit to the Art Institute I could avoid Chicago totally and not have any problem with that. During my limited time in that city I absolutely do not use public transportation. I understand that many participants to this Forum live in Chicago and/or must use public transport to get to and from work, and they have my sympathy. But if I had to choose between the possibility of being discovered with a concealed firearm, and the consequences of such discovery, versus the potential harm to me as an unarmed victim, the choice is pretty obvious. And maybe, just maybe, a Bernard Goetz type incident on a Chicago subway train might be what is needed to challenge the current prohibition contained in the concealed carry law. A lawful self defense shooting would not result in charges or conviction if so charged for the lawful shooter, but could result in prosecution for carrying in a prohibited zone. Maybe the concept of "necessity" could be used as a defense, saying that breaking this law was a necessity to avoid the much worse outcome of being physically unable to defend oneself against a criminal attack. That could be the rationale for a court to declare the prohibition itself an unconstitutional violation of the civil rights of the shooter. In any event, I really do not understand why so many would be willing to expose themselves to potentially fatal violence rather than violating a statute prohibiting carry on public transport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/armed-robbers-target-passengers-as-they-get-off-trains-across-chicago/

 

Teams of armed men have been lurking on train platforms and robbing passengers as they disembarked. I guess it's safer when only robbers can be armed.

With the rise in permit holders the bad guys are striking in the gun free zones.

This shouldn't surprise anyone.

 

 

One of these days, they will roll up a snake-eyes when they mistakenly choose one of the many concealed carriers who are engaging in civil disobedience and ignoring the CPZ sign on the CTA. Then, things will get interesting.

 

The shooter might be greeted with open arms, but Chicago would have a knife in the one hand. He would be pilloried in the press, and prosecuted for unlawful carry by Illinois. We have fearful ladies taping "No Berettas" signs on doors throughout the North Shore, with or (mostly) without permission by business owners. To the liberals, any good is a bad gun, and only leads to trouble. Guns are guns, whether in the hands of a gangster or a licensed citizen. The greatest fallacy is that a simple sign or law will keep the bad buys away. Yet this is the conclusion of every attempt I've made to persuade my liberal friends.. It always comes down to "I don't like guns."

 

Make no mistake, there are many DGU encounters which go unreported. On a simple statistical basis, there are about 10,000 armed robberies each year in Chicago, and about 1-1/2% of the residents are licensed to carry. We should see 150 encounters, yet only one or two are reported each year. If no shots are fired, and the assailant runs, literally, for his life, it never happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I hear the "I don't like guns" mantra, I always say "but obviously lots of bad guys like guns, and as much as you don't like them, I'm sure you would like it even less to have a bad guy pointing a gun in your face, let alone shooting you". I try to reason with the anti-gunner, saying that bad people are real, violence is real, and while none of us want to be part of violence, we each get to make a choice as to how we will face violence, either as a helpless sheep being circled by the wolves, or as armed sheep capable of stopping the threat of the wolves". Usually the answer I get is something like "well, I just don't like guns, I don't want to be around guns, and I don't want to be around people that have guns" or other nonsensical answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As soon as anyone talks increasing the size of Chicago's police force, the same people who propose every conceivable free giveaway suddenly become budget conscious and start questioning "Where is the money going to come from? Who is going to pay for this?"

 

 

 

 

The answer is obvious. Cut the money going to cronies and there is more money for services that benefit the ordinary people. That won't happen.

 

However, police are actual legitimate government services that serve the common good. More money for police means less money for cronies.

With the exception of hiring tons of cops just to write tickets. Do we want Chicago to become the next New Rome, Ohio? They won't write moving violations now because the city is not paying their printing bill on time, but they are paying their administrative notice of violations bills on time for obvious reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually the answer I get is something like "well, I just don't like guns, I don't want to be around guns, and I don't want to be around people that have guns" or other nonsensical answers.

Then try the 'Socratic method' to drill down. "OK, what about guns do you not like?" Then drill down on that answer. Usually at some point you get to an irrational reason, or they contradict themselves. If they respond to the first, with "I don't know, I just don't like guns", then you may have to lead them a little.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APC2jnOSfhQ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...