Jason brought that strawman up out of the clear blue; I was only trying to put a touch of proper context to what Houngan was referencing.
Houngan
2068
Something many probably don’t know about, but a lot of big corporations are refusing to do business with firearms-related industries. It’s now become political as well:
Mayor Rahm Emanuel is taking his gun control push to private banks and asking major lenders in Chicago to stop doing business with firearms manufacturers.
In a letter to TD Bank and Bank of America on Thursday, Mr. Emanuel asked the CEOs to force gun manufacturers they do business with to “find common ground with the vast majority of Americans who support a military weapons and ammunition ban.”
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/25/rahm-emanuel-takes-battle-against-guns-banks/#ixzz2JHNQGTHY
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
I suppose there’s no legal issue, but it seems pretty unsavory.
Jag
2069
Mayor Emanuel needs to focus on the more immediate issues in his city.
garin
2070
It’s basically a form of boycott, right? Why is that unsavory?
Political leaders stepping outside the established political processes to exert influence on some private businesses to undermine some other private businesses. Yes, nothing unsavory about that!
garin
2072
I took it at face value, that a letter was just a letter. If he actually has the power to make it an implied threat, then I understand we’re getting into unpleasant territory.
Although it would be a surprising situation if the corporations were beholden to the politician and not the other way around.
It’s the mayor of a city writing a letter to local businesses with a concern about their business practices. Sorry you don’t agree with his concern. If you live in his city, do feel free not to vote for him.
Houngan
2074
Bank of America is not a “local business.” Maybe he could ask them to stop giving loans or doing business with anyone that has an address in the five blocks north of the University, since that’s where most of the gun crime happens. If he could force out all the businesses and people living there, problem solved!
H.
p.s. Yes, that’s hyperbole in the service of illustrating a point, since everyone seems to have a case of the literals in this thread.
Chicago’s murder rate is an interesting issue. I think it’s most interesting when contrasting against NY. Compared to Chicago’s history, it hasn’t been as extreme as one would think (though it has bumped up), given how much press it’s gotten lately:
1990: 851
1991: 927
1992: 943
1993: 855
1994: 931
1995: 828
1996: 796
1997: 761
1998: 704
1999: 643
2000: 633
2001: 667
2002: 656
2003: 601
2004: 453
2005: 451
2006: 471
2007: 448
2008: 513
2009: 459
2010: 436
2011: 435
2012: 506
Houngan
2076
The most interesting thing is that it bucks the trend of the rest of the country, and seems to be on track to continue to do so. For 2011 it’s all the way down to 16th in murder among cities, though it’s the second mega-city on the list, Philadelphia being first at 21/100000. I do have to wonder about the numbers, though, since I think Chicago gets to ignore places like Gary, IN which is somewhat of a satellite city while Philadelphia is probably absorbing the Camden rate as well. (If it isn’t, then Camden’s rate is somewhere around 70/10000)
Eh, I’m of two minds. My city’s mayor makes political statements about various things all the time - I kind of view that as his job. Nobody believes there’s any kind of threat involved with not agreeing with him because there’s only so much a mayor can do. A politician jumping on a popular bandwagon is not exactly earth-shattering news. Neither is a company’s decision to shy away from unpopular businesses that have been in the headlines.
That said, Chicago has a recent history of political corruption (my region does as well, although oddly enough not in the Mayor’s office) and therefore local businesses might have a different perspective on things.
Lynch
2078
The figures regarding the UK ban are mixed. Less expected murders is not the main argument for more gun control in my opinion though. As for the criminals-would-even-take-more-control-argument-if-civililians-were-not-allowed-to-own-firearms-argument: I really don’t think any criminal fears civil resistance.
Rahm’s letter is cute, but it’s pretty harmless. It’s not like when they kept Walmart out of town, or Nanny Bloomberg’s latest social control initiative, or San Fran’s handgun ban they admitted would be struck down due to state pre-emption. Some cities enjoy fucking around in their sandboxes. Just as long as they stay in there. I doubt the national banks will care.
Houngan
2080
First, let’s all stop using phrases like “take control.” Nobody suggested that, it’s not on the table. At worst I would expect to see a shift towards crimes against persons where there are more home invasions and muggings, we’re not going to have 20’s-era Chicago.
As to whether criminals fear armed citizens, it seems like I’ve seen a few surveys that indicate they do, especially in the case of home invasion. It seems logical that if we fear armed criminals, the reverse would be true.
Sheriff Clarke of Milwaukee County has some advice for his citizens:
I’m Sheriff David Clarke, and I want to talk to you about something personal…your safety. It’s no longer a spectator sport; I need you in the game, but are you ready? With officers laid-off and furloughed, simply calling 9-1-1 and waiting is no longer your best option. You can beg for mercy from a violent criminal, hide under the bed, or you can fight back; but are you prepared? Consider taking a certified safety course in handling a firearm so you can defend yourself until we get there. You have a duty to protect yourself and your family. We’re partners now. Can I count on you?
But Sheriff Clarke! I’m a mentally unstable felon with mommy issues! How can I protect myself in the police’s absence?
I bet you this is partly a stunt to increase his budget or save his department from another cut. The comment about laid off cops gives it away.
I need you in the game, son.
Houngan
2084
It’s really interesting since Milwaukee is next door to Chicago, both geographically and crime-wise, being only slightly behind in murder rate. Talk about polar opposites in attitude.
p.s. But yeah, blatant attempt to scare up some funds.
I’ve always found elected peace officers to be a weird thing. I see cops as being bureaucratic, rather than discretionary or policy-driven. The whole elected sheriff thing rubs me the wrong way. Only elected judges bug me more, in terms of elected local government.
Houngan
2086
Sure, because a judge can do more damage. The Sheriff is usually away from the actual policing going on so his impact is limited to schmoozing for money and having lunch. It’s never really sat well with me either.
