Quote:CHICAGO — Seven people, including four men killed in a gang-retaliation attack at a fast-food restaurant and a pregnant woman found with a gunshot wound to the head, were gunned down in three separate incidents within blocks of each other Thursday, police said.

The latest convulsion of violence, which occurred over a 12-hour period in the city’s South Shore neighborhood, comes as Chicago tallied nearly 900 murders in the past 15 months.

Two people — a 27-year-old man and a 23-year-old woman — were fatally shot as they drove near the South Shore Cultural Center, a popular cultural and recreational spot operated by the city’s park district, around 11 p.m. Thursday.

Police said a black Jeep drove alongside the victim’s van and opened fire, causing the victims’ vehicle to strike a pole. The woman, who was sitting in the front passenger’s seat, suffered a gunshot wound to the head, and the man —who was a documented gang member — was shot in the side, according to police. Both were pronounced dead on the scene.

In the quadruple homicide about seven hours earlier, four male victims were found in or around the Nadia Fish and Chicken restaurant, according to police.

Police said a male suspect approached the restaurant and fired shots. When officers arrived at the scene, they found two of the victims — 28-year-old Emmanuel Stokes and 32 year-old Edwin Davis —inside the restaurant. Dillon Jackson, 20, was found dead outside the restaurant. His brother, Raheem Jackson, 19, was found in a nearby yard.

Shortly after noon, police responded to an incident at an apartment about a mile from the restaurant in which Patrice Calvin, 26, was found dead with a gunshot wound to the head. She was four months pregnant, according to police.

"She was a beautiful person," said her mother Patricia Pulliam, who spoke briefly to USA TODAY as she left Calvin's apartment on Friday.

The seven killings in South Shore followed another gang-related fatal shooting in the neighborhood late Wednesday, in which police said four men exited a vehicle and opened fire on a 37-year-old man as he was walking on a sidewalk. The man, who was wounded on the side of his body, transported himself to an area hospital, but later died from his injuries.

No suspects are in custody in any of the incidents. Police declined to comment on whether the shootings are connected.

Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said investigators believe the shooting at the restaurant was "gang-related retaliation," but declined to provide more specific details because of the ongoing investigation.

Read more:

Chicago nabs dozens in 'Traveling Vice Lords' gang linked to coke, meth and heroin

Chicago politicians to Trump: Less talk, more action on gun violence

Chicago, after Trump's 'carnage' comment: Show us the money

A team of detectives canvassed the area Thursday evening, looking for private security video from businesses that may have captured portions of the incident, Guglielmi said. The department also beefed up patrols in the neighborhood following the spate of shootings.

With more than 760 murders last year, Chicago tallied more killings than New York City and Los Angeles combined. It was the highest murder toll for the city in nearly two decades.

In the first three months of 2017, murders have slightly decreased with the city recording 123 murders through Sunday, compared to 136 at the same time last year, according to police department data.

The bulk of the murders have occurred in a few predominantly black and Latino neighborhoods on the city’s South and West sides. Police department brass say the vast majority of the killings are tied to the gang-fueled drug trade in those areas.

On the campaign trail and during his first two months in the White House, President Trump has repeatedly criticized Mayor Rahm Emanuel and the city leadership for not doing enough to stem the violence. Trump has also made vague threats to order federal intervention.

Emanuel and Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson have called on Trump to help fight the gun violence by sending the city more ATF agents and federal prosecutors. They've also asked Trump to boost funding for job and mentorship programs.

In recent months, the police department has built a series of data-driven support centers in some of the city’s most violent neighborhoods that use hyper-local video and data to help officers more quickly respond to shootings and help police predict where the next incident may occur.

While the data suggests modest reduction in violence, some residents in the city's hardest hit neighborhoods say it's hard to feel the progress that police and politicians are touting.

"The politicians, or the police, they're not doing their job," said Natasha Dunn, a South Shore resident. "The police, most of them mean well, but for the most part there is this lax way of dealing with crime in our community because there is this perception that we are all criminals. We are being ignored."

Tio Hardiman, who heads Violence Interrupters, a Chicago organization that works to mediate gang conflicts before they turn violent, said federal, state and city leaders deserve criticism for the handling of the situation in Chicago.

"President Trump, Governor Bruce Rauner and Mayor Rahm Emanuel, if they cannot find a bonafide solution that actually stops violence in Chicago, then they should start providing the young men on the South and West sides of Chicago with bulletproof vests and helmets," Hardiman said.

Quote:




[url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/31/does-the-white-house-really-want-michael-flynn-to-get-immunity-apparently-maybe-not/?tid=pm_politics_pop][/url]

(03-31-2017, 07:20 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: These Chicago politicians like to keep harping about gun violence, but are they instituting any "stop and frisk" policies, like the one that was quite effective in New York?

(03-31-2017, 07:29 PM)Nately120 Wrote: The police presence in Chicago is just fine.  Sending the police that are running preventative operations in the loop and other reasonable areas of the city into gang territory is the last thing that place needs.  

(03-31-2017, 07:32 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: So, are you suggesting that the city has pretty much ceded territory to gangs?

(03-31-2017, 07:20 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: These Chicago politicians like to keep harping about gun violence, but are they instituting any "stop and frisk" policies, like the one that was quite effective in New York?

(03-31-2017, 07:39 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Effective at what? 

Promoting racial profiling?
Denying people their 4th amendment rights?
Increasing distrust in police authority? 
Devaluing homes?

(03-31-2017, 08:04 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Effective at lowering the murder rate, violent crime rate, making the streets a safer place for law abiding citizens to walk on.

(03-31-2017, 08:15 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Is there proof of causation, there? I'm just curious because there has been come disagreement over the effectiveness of the practice. Those graphs don't provide a convincing argument for causation

I would also like to see the results with a stop-and-frisk implementation that was not deemed unconstitutional.

(03-31-2017, 08:23 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: If a person has been convicted of a felony, they are not allowed to possess a gun, right?  What is wrong with stopping and checking to make sure that they don't have one?  It is no different that Driver License check points that States conduct.

(03-31-2017, 08:30 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Can you tell a felon on sight? Do we brand them on the forehead, or something, and I was unaware? Did a felon give up all of his rights after serving time?

Interestingly enough, when looking at those graphs again it is hard to even argue correlation. Crimes were on the decline well before the implementation of stop-and-frisk. You'd have a better argument for correlation between the drop in violent crimes and the federal assault weapons ban.

(03-31-2017, 08:36 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Yes, people have individual faces.  A person in law enforcement is trained to recognize faces.  Everyone who's ever been arrested has a "mugshot".  More specifically, Police that work the same beat know who's who in that neighborhood.  So yes, absolutely felons can be recognized on sight.

(03-31-2017, 08:42 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: And so we again go to the last of those three questions, did felons give up all their rights? Does a person simply being a felon constitute a reasonable suspicion that a crime is taking place? I'm betting the courts would say no.

Quote:United States[edit]

In the United States, loss of rights due to criminal conviction can take several forms, including voting disenfranchisement, exclusion from jury duty, and loss of the right to possess firearms

(03-31-2017, 08:47 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Well, maybe they do lose some rights.


Specifically, the loss of rights varies a bit from State to State.  In fact many States hold that a person convicted of a felony must qualify for a restoration of rights, in order to register and vote.  Pretty sure that the firearm part is Federal.

(03-31-2017, 08:49 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Show me any state that says they lose their liberty against unreasonable searches once they have completed serving their time. After all, that is the right we are talking about being violated in stop-and-frisk situations.

(03-31-2017, 08:53 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Again, I see it no different than holding driver license check points.

(03-31-2017, 08:49 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Show me any state that says they lose their liberty against unreasonable searches once they have completed serving their time. After all, that is the right we are talking about being violated in stop-and-frisk situations.

(03-31-2017, 09:02 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Perhaps being a former felon increases the rule of Reasonable Suspicion and therefore a stop that may be deemed to not fulfill the reasonable suspicion rule by a non-known felon may be reasonable if the person is known to have participated in the activity in the past.

A convicted felon may not lose his or her protection from unreasonable search; however, their likelihood of committing such a crime may lower the reasonable suspension rule.

Stop and frisk and unreasonable search are not the same and SCOTUS has ruled as such.