Is Chicago incapable of combating the flash mob phenomena gripping parts of the city? Well one certainly has to wonder when you read an article that describes a situation of mob action and then the police commander in that district makes a statement that upon investigating that situation that there was no evidence of a "bona fide incident." What in the hell does that mean exactly? Did the person reporting the violence get it wrong when a crowd of twenty were pulling people out of cars and taxis after gathering in front of her building? If that wasn't a bona fide incident, than what is?
Flash mobs* are a problem and trying to diminish their presence isn't a very smart thing to do. Then again, the Chicago Police Department is woefully understaffed and probably realize that this problem will get worse before it gets better. I can understand the dilemma they are in, but using an "if I don't see it, it ain't happening" approach isn't going to work either.
Unfortunately, while everyone has been heaping praise on what former Mayor Daley did for Chicago, they completely ignore what he didn't do. The price of corruption during Daley's tightfisted reign was that public safety has been compromised. Yea, there is a recession blah, blah, blah, but the fact is a lot of money was made at the expense of public safety. The revenue pot is simply not large enough to support the needs of the city and those who have had their hand in the pot as well.
The only way to combat crime is to have a police force at optimum numbers. And that is something Chicago hasn't got. While I agree that shifting resources is not a bad idea in the short term, it will do nothing in the long term. The Chicago Police Department is too undermanned to prevent crime from moving into other areas left vulnerable with such a redistribution. What Chicago needs is more police on the streets!
In the meantime, what citizens and tourists should remember is that there is generally safety in numbers. Thugs like to prey on the defenseless and tend to stay away from those who have the means to defend themselves, as such maybe it is time people stock up on a few rolls of half-dollars from their bank and at the first sign of trouble put them into each palm. Nothing like a jolt to the jaw with make shift brass knuckles. Enrolling in a self defense class isn't a bad idea either. Men and women who shun violence and/or haven't developed defensive skills would be wise to carry mace on their person, it does work!
Of course, I still think that the preference should always be to report those incidences of groups gathering or suspicious behavior, however, given the murky definition of "bona fide incident" you may be better off helping yourself a little too. I don't advocate violence, but I'll be damned if I let some opportunistic punks roll me without a fight. It shouldn't have to be that way, but if the police are incapable of protecting you then the onus is on you to defend yourselves the best you can.
While we are on the subject -
perhaps one should consider who they vote for before security needs arise?
* a reader had commented that the term "flash mob" has been incorrectly used by the media and thus picked up by bloggers like me. While I agree that the original intent of flash mobs may have been an attempt at harmless fun or pranks via social networks - I believe it also has spawned into another device used by gang-bangers. As I remarked to the comment, what else do you call a gang that shows up in a flash and disappears just as quickly? I prefer not to get into the semantics of how the term used in the context of this post or how the phrase was coined. Please accept the post for what it is worth and in the future we will be a little clearer and simply call it mob action. Thank you.
The roving bands of thugs are NOT "flash mobs." A flash mob is a large group of people who assemble suddenly in a public place--often organized through social media and texts--to perform an unusual, harmless stunt for a brief period, then quickly disperse. Please get it right.
I was thinking along similar lines, that they appear to be gang bangers who, having picked their own areas clean, are moving to where they can rob people and actually steal something.
It is one thing if people congregate (and the "gang loitering" ordinance was ruled unconstitutional), and a different thing if an organized gang is engaged in assault and robbery.
Many others around Chicago Now asked why this wasn't reported in the general media until the incident in Streeterville, and I guess Spinner is correct in asking why the media is now using the wrong name.
Point well made and I refer you back to my reply to Spinner. I am sure that these thugs are looking at greener pastures for booty. And yes they are engaging in a criminal enterprise. Even though the media may distort the two phenomenon, let me say this too - that is just a matter of semantics. Whether harmless antics were the intent by flash mobs, these gang bangers have picked up on it and are using it effectively at the moment. Just goes to show you the negativity that can be born from the likes of Facebook, et al.
I have the feeling that the criminal gangs don't need Facebook. After all, they got along for at least 90 years without it.
However, the Tribune article, which used the proper term "mob action," did say "Chicago police started implementing strategies to address mob action incidents, which are often coordinated via text messages or social networking websites, in downtown and neighborhoods near it. Police said the youths in many cases come downtown using mass transit."
The "mass transit" angle was why the CTA Tattler picked up the story.
However, I wonder how frequently it is tweeted "Let's take the L, go outside the Museum of Contemporary Art, and roll some people." If nothing else, it shouldn't be too hard for the police to pick up the trail of those messages.
True they don't need Facebook, but criminals and thugs do use it as we have seen by the number of stories in the "global" news. As for tracking the enormity of Twitter messages, man I don't know what that would entail given the manpower shortage.
But again, in future posts I will refer to it as mob action, but it still seems a matter of semantics to me. The fact that IPads and IPhones are prized items, it seems to me there is already a technological edge to it all. The reality is criminals and gang-bangers do use technology.
It would be a wonderful thing to take these "mob action" gangbangers, give'em, guns with tracer bullets and send them to Afghanistan and Pakistan to "mob action" against Al Qaeda and the Taliban! Let's make these losers useable to EARN their stay in the USA or keep them where there crime spree can continue AND end against a formidable foe!
Wonderful Idea Chicagoan, I am all for it. FYI, I am old enough to remember when the judges down at 26th and California used to offer chronic trouble-makers the option of jail or Nam.
I am an Old Leftie on all sujects including race relations, but I also did a number of years as metropolitan newspaper reporter and editor. I note that, still, the press reports (print and radio/TV) recoil from identifying the skin color ("race") of the perps. Yes, to do so may run the risk of inflaming "racism". So I heard from the Urban League and NAACP whenever I allowed a serial stickup man to be identified as black. I continued to do so because I believed a story was incomplete without the identification as "white" or "black". Store proprietors and customers who were potentially at risk deserved to have the information, for one reason. Same thing would go for citizens in the neighborhoods now put at risk by the bands of brothers. The fact that "black" neighborhoods are plagued by the same criminal activity may be regretted, but it doesn't relieve the need to give citizens the facts they need to protect themselves.
I would never hold your old leftie views against you my friend. I am a moderate and as such view both sides with equal deliberation, at least in theory. LOL. It is sad we live in a politically correct world where one must refrain from calling an ace an ace. I too believe people have the right to know who their assailants are and the media should not shy from it.
Crime is everywhere and it is not limited or skewed to one race or another. National statistics show roughly a 50/50 split, so I suppose it is more geographic than racial. Unfortunately, urban areas have a higher incidence of poverty in black areas. It is what it is. One thing I would caution those in the Urban League or NAACP, they need to stop making excuses and get to the core of the problem, which is a breakdown in familial values. Kids having kids and hanging out on street corners is a sure recipe for failure, and crime.
Spinner, I will take that under advisement and thank you. However, I am not sure that a flash mob is engaged in just performing unusual, harmless stunts. Perhaps the characterizations made by the media have pasteurized the two. If I recall, the first instance of a flash mob involved a group rushing into a retail store and stealing goods. At least that is how I read it. Now, if the phenomena of "proper flash mobbing" as defined by those in the social networks has been defamed, then they should take it up with the thugs who have taking their harmless antics to another level. Gangs of thugs appearing and disappearing in a flash seems for all intent and purposes a "flash mob." But I get your point and since I am just an Average Joe who follows the news I will differentiate between the two the next time. Thanks.