Just another victim of the Chicago meat grinder... that gets ZERO attention from the outrage mob..



Boy, 9, Gunned Down in South Side Yard: 'He Was a Nice Little Boy'

The 9-year-old, who was set to enter fourth grade, was gunned down in a South Side yard Wednesday evening.

Officers found the 9-year-old boy shot multiple times in a backyard in the 1200 block of East 71st Street around 4 p.m. Wednesday, said Officer Amina Greer, a Chicago Police Department spokeswoman. He was taken to Comer Children's Hospital, where he was pronounced dead, Greer said.

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20140821/grand-crossing/9-year-old-boy-fatally-shot-greater-grand-crossing

This is a very good article the articulates the hypocrisy of the outrage mob..

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-kass-met-0822-20140822-column.html

Crickets.

Where's the outrage?

Where are the rioting mobs?

Where's Sharpie or Holder?

Oh, I remember. There's no money in Negro ferals killing innocent negro babies.

Hypocrites.

where is the evidence someone being PAID TO PROTECT< killed the child

murder is a crime that happens too often everyday in all groups and when citizens murder each other there is most often an expectation for 'justice' to be served

there is a higher standard/expectation from those receiving a PAYCHECK to be a part of 'justice' than for jane and jill criminal,,,,

its sad that people truly don't understand the difference in the two types of situations....


there is 'outrage' about such citizen on citizen violence, it manifests by attempting to change gun laws, and it changes WITHIN those communities by open and public discussions about potential solutions,,,,,,

Changing gun laws won't take guns out of the hands of ferals.

Just the reverse. It gives them more confidence their victims will not be able to defend themselves.

The feral/animal who killed this kid is a victim?

Here is one example why extremist liberals are idiots.

no one said anything about the killer being a victim, but sure that he will be prosecuted as the killer he is,, as he should be,, and therefore there is no protest that is going to stop citizens killing citizens

and there is something called extremist logic which knocks the whole gun debate off track

the crazies who believe that not allowing any guns will stop crimes
and the crazies who believe that giving all types of guns to EVERYBODY will stop crimes

I tend to believe most people will fall in the middle of those two EXTREMES,,

though people do make another extreme leap of logic that regulating gun sales and manufacturing is equivalent to taking all guns away

its just not the case,,,

yep,she is a Rare Type of Stoopid!

It's the case of violating the Constitution. The trick is to regulate the criminals, not the honest citizens.

the constitution doesn't say sale and manufacture cant be regulated

criminals are citizens who commit crimes, and before they are caught in a crime, they are still a citizen

cant regulate citizens WITHOUT regulating the criminals amongst them as well

You don't understand the meaning of the word "abridge".

Yep,didn't you Friend,The Sharp one quip:" People Do Not Have The Right To Unregulated Rights In This Country"?
What a blithering Idiot!Dumber 'n' Poop!

http://www.westernjournalism.com/al-sharpton-people-do-not-have-the-right-to-unregulated-rights-in-this-country/

nah, I just interpret 'well regulated' in one way, while others focus on 'abridged'

really? ad hominem is a large sign of no real argument...btw

let me give examples,,, for you

what is commonly referred to as 'rights', in relation to the constitution, is the bill of rights, the first ten commandments which read




the first amendment has to do with a prohibition of CONGRESS when it comes to issues of speech or religion...however there are crimes such as incite to riot, or killing animals, which are directly related to peoples 'speech' and 'religious' practices,, so it is not an ABSOLUTE prohibition against being involved in any type of speech or religious practice,,,


the second amendment , I wont discuss, it obviously is interpreted from two different aspects, the part that says 'regulated' and the part that says 'abridged',

the third amendment is outdated having to do with soldiers forcing their way into someones home without consent,,,

the fourth amendment, just in its wording, about 'unreasonable' searches and 'probable' cause calls for a judgment call or regulation regarding what is reasonable or unreasonable, and what is or isn't probable cause,,,


the fifth amendment requiring grand jury indictment and prohibiting double jeapordy stands firm


the sixth amendment regarding criminal prosecution be held in the STATE AND DISTRICT where the crime occurred by an IMPARTIAL jury
clearly, contradictory, when the lawyers argue that the STATE AND DISTRICT cant produce impartiality due to media coverage,,

skipping the seventh regarding common law

eighth amendment is probably the most obscure and the least absolute
'Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.'

how is 'excessive' determined? how is 'cruel and unusual' determined? some standard or regulation has to be documented for such an assessment to be consistently made,, dontcha think?


ninth amendment is not a right but a statement that the numbers on the rights are not based upon any type of importance

as is the tenth explaining that anything not specifically mentioning congress in the constitution is to be determined by states,,,