Many U.S. cities see their share of shootings during the hot summers, whether in the streets or domestic-related.
But you know your city has a problem when the shootings persist in the dead of winter.
Perhaps the coming bitter Arctic cold will temporarily freeze the street violence, but that's about it.
Ironically, Mayor Dennis Williams - in an interview with WDEL only last week - seemed to spurn a suggestion on police deployment from Council member Bud Freel. Yes, the mayor said he was willing to sit down with Freel, but the mayor added that many of the ideas he's heard have been floating around for years. The mayor may actually be correct. But clearly, the current strategy has not turned things around. And given the perception that this mayor is micro-managing the police department...
Sunday saw a double-shooting, in the 500 block of East Fifth Street near North Lombard Street, a normally more quiet area. A playground is situated nearby.
So far in the new year, six people have been shot in the city, two fatally. Not a good omen for 2014, on the heels of an unusually violent 2013.
Michael Fleming reminds us in Town Square Delaware how Wilmington is not hermetically sealed from the rest of the state: "We are All Wilmingtonians"...
" many of the ideas he's heard have been floating around for years.." Time to start implementing some ideas instead of just shouting rhetoric.
Mike from Delaware
Mon, Jan 6, 2014 10:29am
The criticism I've heard here against the Giuliani approach is they only focused on Manhattan and not all of NYC. Still, that's a far larger population than Wilmington and NCC combined and it worked, so why not have the city/county join forces in this effort to rid this area of this senseless shooting, mostly in the city, but sometimes even in the glorious suburbs? It's got to be a better solution than what they've been doing for three administrations, NOTHING, but much hand-wringing.
Mon, Jan 6, 2014 4:32pm
Of course, tea-baggers and holy rollers overlook the obvious: Strict gun control laws.
"Wilmington is not hermetically sealed from the rest of the state"
Hermetically seal Wilmington. Not a bad idea. Like that TV show where an impenetrable dome sealed off a whole town. And downstate, they are not Wilmingtonians. They hate Wilmington.
Funny, a lot of cities have declining crime rates. Not just New York. Even Philly. Wilmington used to be the bank robbery capital, and now it's working on becoming the murder capital.
Those high-crime neighborhoods have lots of churches, and lots of church-goers. Church attendance is higher in many inner-city neighborhoods than in Bunkerville neighborhoods where fundamentalists live. Guess religion doesn't solve much of anything!
Mon, Jan 6, 2014 7:01pm
Unfortunately, the Wilmington crime has been gradually spreading to the suburbs for awhile now. Just last week, a teen was shot to death in Newark, a place where murder has been relatively rare.
Mon, Jan 6, 2014 7:02pm
Hey Bill: If you lived in one of these neighborhoods, you might be going to church too. Ever heard of "foxhole religion?"
Mon, Jan 6, 2014 7:41pm
Pizza: I've heard of it. Something Ike made up (pandering for votes). Whatever. Hasn't helped much. Must be "god's will." Besides, funerals are good business for preachers.
Mon, Jan 6, 2014 10:48pm
"Of course, tea-baggers and holy rollers overlook the obvious: Strict gun control laws."~billsmith
Brilliant idea... I'm sure all the weapons involved in these crimes are LEGALLY owned right? Gun control only affects law-abiding citizens... IF Wilmington PROSECUTES those caught with illegally-owned weapons and those committing any armed robberies, then the city would be on the right track. The next step is increased police presence in the areas where the violence/drug activity continues to thrive. Just as most of us slow down in known speed-trap areas...criminals will avoid heavily patrolled areas because they don't want to be caught.
Tue, Jan 7, 2014 3:53am
Earl: If it's known, it's not a speed trap. Cops maintain a visible or an expected presence to get you to slow down. If they want to generate ticket revenue, they are surreptitious. Or focus on all those out-of-state people driving through (who don't vote locally).
Criminals are dumb. Criminals are not careful. Criminals don't think ahead. Exceptions noted, but those don't include the types of people we're talking about here.
And this problem doesn't just come from guns. It comes from the fact that recreational drugs are illegal (while guns are legal). Illegal booze during Prohibition created the modern Mafia and modern organized crime. Illegal drugs has taken criminal activity far beyond what happened then.
Funny, Delaware is a death-penalty state and there's still all this killing. A deterrent, really? Curious that the homicide rate is consistently lower in states (and countries) without the death penalty.
MikeFromDelaware read some article on "the broken window theory" years ago and now tries to come off as an expert on police procedure. I guess he didn't bother to read about all the scandals involving Rudy and the NYPD, or the instances of cops shooting down unarmed civilians and beating suspects. Tea baggers like the idea of getting tough on crime until some cop decides to stop and frisk them (can't imagine it happening to THEM) and they start crying like little girls about "tyranny."
Mike from Delaware
Tue, Jan 7, 2014 7:03am
Billsmith: Unlike you, who does believe he knows everything, the only reason I support the Giuliani plan is that it worked; I'm no expert, but the results are what sold me. By the way, I'm not against legal pot. But I would not support the legalization of crack, cocaine, or heroin. The drug wars aren't over pot, but those hard drugs, so legalizing pot wouldn't stop the gun violence. I don't believe we need more stoned & drunk folks behind the wheel, but I don't believe pot is the problem those other drugs are. Then again, I'm no expert on this subject like you.
I've advocated the Giuliani plan be implemented not just in the city, but countywide. You'd oppose that, because then you'd be crying like a little girl when the cops stopped you & they smelled the aroma of pot in your car. It wouldn't surprise me at all that you enjoy that forbidden fruit, given some of the attitudes you have.
I do agree with EarlGrey... The city & county should prosecute those found with illegal guns.
Tue, Jan 7, 2014 9:26am
MikeFromDelaware: As the lawyers say, you assume facts not in evidence. There's lots I don't know. Unlike you, I don't offer opinions on what I don't know.
As I say, you read some article about broken windows policing. It sounded good, so don't look further. Don't think about it further. Just keep parroting something you read. Above all, don't look into the side-effects and unintended consequences. Don't look at what actually happened in New York. No, that would get in the way. You deal with everything in the same superficial, closed-minded fashion you deal with religion.
For the record, you can also make the case that crime went down in New York because of legal abortion, and future criminals not being born (sort of the reverse of "It's A Wonderful Life").
It's amazing how easy it is for people who don't know what they are talking about to offer solutions.
Mike from Delaware
Tue, Jan 7, 2014 9:39am
Billsmith: Anytime you disagree with someone, you make assumptions about how a person gets info, etc., etc., that because that person doesn't come to the same conclusions as you, that person must be an uninformed, bumbling idiot, hayseed, etc., who just fell off the turnip truck, blah, blah. Whatever. No point trying to have a discussion with you, because ONLY your view is worthy of consideration. So enjoy your monologue.
Tue, Jan 7, 2014 12:46pm
MikeFromDelaware: Wrong again! I make assumptions based on how people support their conclusions and the "information" they cite. I disagree with George Will, too, but you're no George Will.
Mike from Delaware
Tue, Jan 7, 2014 1:19pm
Billsmith: I never claimed to be George Will. You're wrong again, instead of stating what your solution to a question would be, you instead attack the person, his or her knowledge, how that person conducted research, that person's poor conclusions, etc., etc. It always has to get personal and insulting when discussing anything with you, when the other person doesn't agree with your conclusions.
No one standing at the water-cooler having a discussion would put up with, or would want to bother having a discussion with someone who does what you do; you'd be avoided [probably were when you were working, and for good reason - am guessing you're retired].
A friendly discussion where folks disagree is one thing, but don't get personal, disagreeable, insulting, putting the other person down, etc., etc.; but that just isn't how you operate. Amazing I discuss this same sort of stuff with others on other blogs, email, at a real water-cooler at work and NEVER have to deal with this crap. So it's not me, my friend.
So just as I'd avoid getting into a discussion with you in the work place, I'll avoid getting into a discussion with you at this cyber water-cooler. There's enough real stress and nonsense in the real world to have to deal with, without having to put up with such non-important non-sensical crap here from you. So you can battle Mrpizza and EarlGrey, I'm done. Congratulations ! YOU WIN !!!! You just can't reason with some folks. I'll continue to pray for you. Be at peace.
Tue, Jan 7, 2014 3:24pm
MikeFromDelaware: I don't have a solution. That is one of things I don't know. I do know the rules of valid reasoning and I will point those out to you. If your reasoning is invalid, your conclusions are invalid. You're guessing. You'd rather have potato-potahto conversations, which I consider nothing more than hot air - windbagging. In your world, how one reaches conclusions doesn't matter. That would be one definition of "faith."
You've done this "you hurt my feelings and I won't play with you any more" bit before - several times. Pardon me if I don't take it seriously.
Mike from Delaware
Tue, Jan 7, 2014 6:26pm
It's not a matter that you hurt my feelings - you didn't - I simply want to discuss ideas, thoughts, etc, without it being a blood sport. You say you don't have a solution to this particular subject, yet you condemn the one idea I present without saying why you believe it wouldn't work here in puny Wilmington, yet worked in NYC.
I don't have a problem with you disagreeing with my point-of-view, but rather than offer a better idea or some other way to look at a issue (remember my Swiss cheese analogy), you trash me or whomever here disagrees with you. For me, that's not a constructive use of my time & I'm choosing to no longer try to have a discussion with you, because I've tried over & over again & we both know the outcome is not going to change.
For whatever reason you get your kicks out of arguing rather than sharing ideas. Your approach is I'll bully all of you here to see it my way. I try to simply express my thoughts, hoping to maybe convince you or the others of my point-of-view while being open to hear yours & the others' points. As I've said a number of times I was interested in hearing your point-of-view & quite often learned something of interest, but not at the expense of being treated like some mental defective, which is how you view a number of us here as your words & attitude express almost daily.
I'll continue to post here; I'll just not bother responding to your posts. Mrpizza seems to enjoy battling it out with you. I'm sure he'll provide you with many hours of feeling superior, until he too tires of it & also stops bothering to try to discuss stuff with you.
Other new folks will come here too. So don't fear, you are good at getting folks to comment, so the monologue comment I made earlier won't actually happen. You'll soon have new folks over which to feel superior. You never quite ever caught onto the concept that you'll get more flies with sugar than vinegar. Be at Peace.
Tue, Jan 7, 2014 7:47pm
"You never quite ever caught onto the concept that you'll get more flies with sugar than vinegar. Be at Peace."
MikeFromDelaware: That was pretty much Jesus' approach but you seem to prefer St. Paul dishing out vinegar.
Tue, Jan 7, 2014 9:09pm
Personally, I prefer John the Baptist.
Wed, Jan 8, 2014 4:00am
The consensus seems that the Guiliani approach is what is needed.
Wed, Jan 8, 2014 4:45am
Geez! And what exactly is the "Giuliani approach?" Think hard.
No answer? That's because there isn't one. Never was.
Crime rates dropped in New York. Rudy took credit for it. That was on the brainstorm of his campaign consultant - wait for it - Roger Ailes. The guy who gave us Tricky Dick and Fox News. The gullible and lazy media kept repeating this claim as fact, although crime rates had been going down for three years before Rudy took office. Classic example of the rooster claiming credit for the sunrise.
"Broken Window Theory." That was implemented by the police commissioner. The one Rudy sacked when he started getting too much attention and too much credit for the reduced crime rate.
Mike from Delaware
Wed, Jan 8, 2014 7:10am
Kavips: I agree. Now how do we convince the Mayor, the Police Chief , & City Council to implement the Giuliani Plan?
Wed, Jan 8, 2014 1:36pm
MikeFromUnaware: Shut up! Go away. Ignorant people aren't entitled to an opinion. What's all this drum-beating for Rudy? Because he's Italian?
Wed, Jan 8, 2014 11:41pm
Rudy is not Italian. He is Gui-ish.
Add your comment: Attention: In an attempt to promote a level of civility and personal
responsibility in blog discussions, we now require you to be a member of
the WDEL Members Only Group in order to post a comment. Your Members
Only Group username and password are required to process your post.
You can join the WDEL Members Only Group for free by clicking here.
If you are already a member but have forgotten your username or password, please
Please register your post with your WDEL Members Only Group username and password below.