Pols want NG troops patrolling Chicago

| April 26, 2010

The Associated Press and Stars & Stripes report that Chicago politicians are pleading for National Guard troops to bring down the crime rate. Their reasoning is that an equal number of Americans have been killed in Afghanastan and Chicago so far this year. Yeah, that makes sense. Not.

I can imagine the hoopla once an un-armed Guardsman gets popped by a street thug who has no rules of engagement. Or the reverse- a Guardsman shoots a thug in self defense.

National Guardsmen, generally speaking, are not trained in police operations, nor should they be. Guard duty in the military is basically walking around looking mean with an empty magazine in your weapon. That might work in the daytime on Chicago streets, but I figure nights are little different.

There are more 13,000 sworn officers in the employ of the Chicago PD, that’s the size of an infantry brigade. According to Wikipedia, there are 9700 Illinois National Guardsmen. If even half of them are MPs or combat arms troops (the usual ratio of combat arms troops to their support troops is 1:7), they’re not much of a reinforcement especially if you consider the time and effort it would take to train them.

Funny how you can apply Kipling to civilians and their view of the troops today; For it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Chuck him out, the brute!”
But it’s “Saviour of ‘is country” when the guns begin to shoot….

Category: Military issues, Society

17 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Casey J Porter

This is a disaster in the works.

Lucky

Tommy is a great Poem, and rings JUST as true today as it did 100 years ago.

rick

This is what you get when you denied law abiding citizens their right to keep and bear arms. I say send in the guard, declare martial law, and let the guard commander become the mayor and the police chief. Declare that anyone carrying a weapon will be shot on site. Well the good folks of Chicago can’t carry so the only ones with guns will be the bad guys. Kill hell out of ’em. Problem solved in about a week and the guardmens can go back to their families and the law abiding folks of Chicago are safe again.

UpNorth

Won’t happen that way, Rick. Daley will just come up with an explanation that it’s all the fault of the gun owners. Can’t offend his base, don’t ya know?
I agree, with one minor point, Casey. Chicago has been a disaster for quite a long time, now. Any city that includes Bernadine Dohrn and Billy Ayers as “leading citizens” is in deep dog shit.

defendUSA

Hello. My name is Pauletta Revere…

The brown shirts are coming, the brown shirts are coming!!!!

arcadian

I think 13,000 would be roughly 3 brigades under the brigade combat team organization (each ~4000 troops).

AW1 Tim

So lemme get this straight…

The Posse Commitatus act prevents us from putting troops on our border to secure it, but doesn’t prevent us from putting troops on a city street to secure it?

WTF, over?

Lawyer for Hire

That 13,000 is a bit high.
Per secondcitycop.blogspot.com, the new Chicago PD contract counts just under 9,800 total basic officers despite an official strength of 11,500 for that classification.
(language warning)

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=13350456&postID=8061037509011254188

Posse Commitatus aside, Chicago doesn’t need the National Guard, it needs a wing of B-52s followed by the 1st Armored Division.

NHSparky

See, Tim, there ya go, using logic and shit…

ponsdorf

defendUSA: BINGO!

In this case though, there are wing nuts galore on the right who are already railing against The Police State and this may fuel that lot more than enough to offer the SPLC and Homeland Security more fodder.

I see the deployment happening and the furor engendered being used by disparate groups in ways that have no/zero/nil impact on the streets of Chicago.

As Casey noted: A disaster in the works.

Chomsky and Alinsky – The Playbook??

Floyd Looney

The problem areas are small, representing around 9% of the Chicago population.

You do not need the NG.

Old Trooper

I agree with Casey; no good can come from this.

Ray

If Chicago had merely allowed it’s law abiding citizens the right to keep and bear arms, this problem would have never gotten to this point.

justplainjason

Even in Chicago the last thing I would want to see is troops patrolling the streets. It is just a recipe for disaster.

Here is a crazy idea step up police patrols in the higher crime areas, do more foot patrols to have a better prresence in the community. That is what worked in Iraq you would figure it could work in Chicago…well maybe not they have elected Daley for 20years, and community organizer is an actual job title.

gunshytourist

Great commentary. I particularly liked the comments made by the readers. As one reader stated, the political hypocrites are up in arms about Arizona making itself secure, but then they are requesting troops in Chicago. I linked to your commentary with some additional commentary of my wn here:

http://aroundotown.blogspot.com/2010/04/more-on-gun-free-safe-streets-of.html

Anonymous

Based on the tone of the article, I think this boils down to money moreso than anything else. If the “facts” are true as stated, then there is a shortfall of police, and it appears the city has little or no inclination to fund the hiring of more officers to fill in the ranks. So, what better way to get those bodies on the streets and not have to pay for them than to ask for the NG. Never mind that IL’s budget is barely a step above California’s right now.

Junior AG

“Never mind that IL’s budget is barely a step above California’s right now.”
Illinois pretty much wants to kick Chicago off the state map…