Blame Philly gun violence partly on Iraq, mayor says

http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/news/local/16486302.htm

Mayor Street said yesterday that the Iraq war is a contributing factor in the frustrating increase in gun violence and homicides on the streets of the city.

Speaking to the Daily News editorial board, Street said the daily dose of violence streaming back in news reports from the Iraqi battlefields has changed attitudes in the city.

"I believe the fact that we are a country at war has something to do with the attitude of people in the streets. Let me tell you, it's not just this city. I have seen it everywhere and I've talked to people a lot about it," Street said.

"We are a country that is becoming less and less civil. We are a place where people will pull out a gun and shoot it at the drop of a hat," he said.

He recalled the shock 10 or more years ago when reports began to surface of youths brutally beating another child over a pair of sneakers. Today, he said, adults draw guns and fight over seats in a restaurant, over parking spots and over highway indignities.

has absolutely NOTHING to do with this.

It's all the negative media stuff from Iraq.

Sounds logical to me... :crazy:

Very few shootings occur by those who have the permits. Most are illegally carrying.

That mayor's a moron. Crime always gets worse when the economy tanks. Domestic violence and other types of crime rise, too, not just gun-related crime.

citizens.

IMO it's more reasonable that Concealed Weapon Permits skyrocketed because law-abiding citizens realized law enforcement could not protect each citizen and ultimately self-defense is a personal problem.

SCOTUS has repeatedly ruled government is not obligated to protect an individual citizen unless she/he is custody.

The only one capable of defending an individual at all times is that individual and IMO that person is entitled to keep and bear effective, efficient tools to defend self as so clearly stated in some state constitutions.

Today, the most effective, efficient tool for self-defense is a handgun.

My opinion is firmly grounded in the words Pennsylvania used in its constitution adopted 28 Sept. 1776 before it ratified the U.S. Constitution on 12 Dec. 1787.

Pennsylvania said in its constitution, A DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OR STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA dated 28 Sept. 1776, "That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights, amongst which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."

Pennsylvania also said "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power."

Because those rights were inalienable, PA's citizens could not have given those rights away when they ratified the U.S. Constitution.

PA ratified the BOR on 10 March 1790 and with contemporaneous knowledge of the Second Amendment, PA modified its constitution that took effect on 2 Sept. 1790 and retained its statements about "inalienable rights".

Vermont used almost identical words in its constitution of 1777.

For Pennsylvania, Vermont, and other states that declared self-defense is an "inalienable right" their citizens have that right protected by either the Second Amendment or the Ninth Amendment.

Very clear and concise, and I agree with you 100%

I guess it's one of the ways in which I diverge from "mainstream liberalism."

I fully support one's RKBA, I have no issue with people who choose to legally carry concealed weapons.

Here in Connecticut, our State Constitution, Article I, Section 15, states: "Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state." Sadly, actually trying to get yourself a gun permit is becoming more difficult (and costly). I think the lawmakers here read the above article as, "Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state, but the Government is going to do its best to prevent you from bearing anything more deadly than a butter knife."

Come on. This is not a nation at war. If we truly were at war, our industries would be nationalized and we'd be using ration cards just to get food and clothing. This sounds like a cop-out.

Maybe it has nothing to do with Iraq, and everything to do with you being a CORRUPT, INEPT, INCOMPETANT MAYOR?

I'm so glad the Democrats won't have this pimple on our ass any more after November.

If I could collect enough signatures I might run for mayor, as a Republican. Katz is the only guy they ever throw up there and he isn't any better than the rest of the field really. I might get the nomination by default.

problems.

:eyes: That is so off the mark I can't even think of anything to say. And I live near Philly. How about you have decided to take the sunset cruise, Mayor? Short timer's disease--blame it on someone else.

The worst mayor in the country without a doubt. I'm deeply ashamed of having voted for and worked the polls for this moron twice. But there are no alternatives in Philly. The Democratic primary is the mayoral election here.

A few people got blasted over here since the beginning of 2007 and the mayor didn't blame Iraq.

I think that's because Philly is closer to Iraq geographically than SF.

Damm them!

(I got better)

What an utterly assholishly STUPID claim to make.
Surely a city the size of Philly can find someone
better than this moran to be mayor?

Don't blame me for John "Simpleton" Street, I begged Sam to switch back to the Democrats.

But you can't deny that his point has "some" merit. The problem is, most of the kids doing all of the shooting in my beloved city ain't doing it cause they want to be like the soldiers on TV.

-snip-
"When you existence is in jeopardy, and you see those whom you are supposed to emulate committing unspeakable crimes for less, morality runs the risk of being left by the way-side. When you see the U.S. Attorney General justifying torture, beating people up don’t sound so bad. When you hear that the Vice-President’s old company has stolen billions of dollars from American tax payers, you and me, with the help of the VP, robbing liquor stores don’t sound like such a big thing. When the President of the United States invades a country to gain control of its oil, burglary seems like small potatoes. When you find out that the Bush administration had been breaking laws left and right, and have left America morally and financially broke, all while their friend are the only people who benefit from such acts, you begin to believe, MAYBE CRIME DOES PAY. And when the Republican controlled government drags us into a war with dubious evidence that costs the lives of hundreds of thousands of people on both sides, human life tends to lose its value." Circa Oct. 2006
-snip-
http://myeasybase.com/cgi-bin/cgiwrap/ezbase/start.cgi/contrl/Patriot_s4truth/site/index-article.html?tag=53

Let me add that when the people of Philadelphia see there Mayor resorting to violence and intimidation durring elections (i.e. his roving gangs in rental vans stalking people they thought were voting for Katz in North and West Philly), integrity goes out the window.

Does anyone know anything about this Tom Knox guy?