Archive for the ‘Guns’ Category

Mayor In Illinois Makes Life Hell For 2nd Amendment Supporters…Requiring Unresaonable Restrictions

Wednesday, July 28th, 2010

Political corruption is synonymous with Illinois.

During the 1950s, Mayor Richard J. Daley’s political machine dictated every Illinois politician’s next move. It included the neighborhood alderman as well as a string of governors who spent time behind bars. Today, there is another arrogant ex-governor who will hopefully spend time behind bars.

Things haven’t changed much. Today, “junior,” or Mayor Richard J. Daley, is successfully manipulating a recent decision of our nation’s highest court. Daley is presently the Second Amendment’s most ruthless, obnoxious opponent. The Second Amendment guarantees our right as Americans to own and bear arms, and Chicago law forbids handgun ownership. While Daley surrounds himself with heavily armed, around- the- clock security, he belittles firearms ownership by his Chicago constituents.

Daley recently encountered someone who refused to cower to his demands. Otis McDonald, a black man and multiple crime victim, moved to Chicago forty years ago. Today this son of a Louisiana sharecropper is 76 years old. McDonald holds impressive credentials. An Army veteran, he became head of his local union as well as a maintenance engineer at the University of Chicago. All McDonald wanted was the ability to defend himself on the street as well as in his home.

*Otis McDonald decided to act. He sought out Illinois gun right activists, and eventually became the lead plaintiff in the case that became known as McDonald v. City of Chicago. The Chicago crime rate had risen steadily since the handgun ban was made law 28 years ago, and McDonald’s case would include not just Chicago, but state and local governments as well. To quote McDonald, “It’s impossible for Mayor Daley or any politician backing the gun ban to know what it’s like to live unarmed on a block where bad guys are packing guns and willing to shoot.”

In June 2010, our nation’s highest court ruled for McDonald and guaranteed a law-abiding individual’s right to have a handgun — even in the city of Chicago. Will this change lower the city’s crime rate? It should. In comparing Chicago’s murder rate to that of our fifty other largest cities, Chicago’s rate was falling before the 1983 handgun ban. After the ban, the trend reversed. From 2007 to 2008, the FBI’s latest figures, the U.S. murder rate decreased by 4.7 percent while Chicago’s increased by nearly 15 percent.

Mayor Daley is not accepting the high court’s decision. In order for Chicagoans to legally own a handgun by possessing a Chicago Firearms permit, they must jump through a series of unreasonable, if not impossible, hoops. Applicants must first be fingerprinted. Then they must pass a background check. Since the federal government already requires a background check for any gun purchase, this may or may not be acceptable as I don’t know where Daley is drawing the line.

Next comes the hundred dollar application fee plus fifteen dollars for every gun registered. Applicants must then, if they have survived so far, take and pass a four hour class plus one hour of training at a gun range. They must then submit affidavits signed by state-approved firearms instructors. So far, it is not known where these instructors can be found, or who approved them.

Daley’s arrogance in defying a Supreme Court ruling is ludicrous! I can reasonably predict what is going to happen. In defiance of Daley, Chicago residents will continue to purchase their handguns in an Illinois community outside Chicago as Chicago has no gun retailers. Like all of us, they will fill out the yellow federal firearms purchase form, pass the background check, and wait the mandatory waiting period. If they are ever arrested for not having a Chicago Firearms Permit, they have the Supreme Court ruling on their side. They can fight it and win.

I would like to comment on Chicago then and now. In 1961, when I pointed my Smith & Wesson into the faces of “would be” rapists and murderers who threatened to bust in my windshield with a crowbar, they backed off because their minds were clear. Their brains weren’t fried on drugs. In 1957, when a knife-wielding subway robber asked me for my money, he didn’t carve me up after I gave him my $1.57. His mind was clear. Today’s drugs have altered clear thinking to the point where rational acts are not a part of the equation. Otis McDonald knows all about this.

In supporting Otis McDonald, the National Rifle Association supported all of us. It is a good reason to join the NRA if you don’t belong. If you don’t know where to go, call me and I’ll personally sign you up. The NRA has been criticized recently for seeming overstepping its usual boundaries. A case in point are Supreme Court nominations. If our highest court isn’t composed of justices who support our Constitution, those things most important to us, including The Second Amendment, may be lost. It does relate, and the NRA needs to pay close attention.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Chicago Gun Ordinance May Be a Direct Violation of 2nd Amendment Rights

Monday, July 12th, 2010

CHICAGO – A new gun ordinance in Chicago that is being touted as the strictest of its kind in the entire United

The ordinance permits residents to have only one working gun at a time in their homes and prohibits them from stepping outside…even onto their porches or in their garages…with a handgun. You think this will make folks angry?

Following the lead of Washington, D.C., which enacted a strict ordinance after the Supreme Court struck down its gun ban two years ago, Chicago also requires prospective gun owners to take a class and receive firearms training.

Chicago’s ordinance also bans gun shops from setting up shop in the city and bars anyone convicted of a violent crime, domestic violence or two or more convictions for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs from owning a handgun. Basically, you will be under the scrutiny of some pretty serious background check procedures.

However, Chicago is allowing for a 90-day grace period in which residents who owned handguns illegally during the ban can register them without penalty.

Chicago’s ordinance was widely criticized by gun rights advocates, who have said the city is simply trying to make it as difficult as it can for people to own guns and putting up unconstitutional roadblocks in their way. They promised lawsuits and last week, even before the ordinance went into effect, at least two lawsuits were filed challenging the constitutionality of the ordinance.

City officials have said they believe the lawsuit is constitutional and that the Supreme Court specifically ruled that local jurisdictions have the right to impose reasonable regulations and restrictions.

Personally, I see this type of legislation as a direct attack on my right to bear arms, and is just paving the way for increased control. Some time ago I wrote about gun legislation in Arizona that would allow guns in establishments that serve alcohol. While I also didn’t agree with that, I think that these types of legislation on opposite extremes of gun control help ensure there is indeed middle ground left.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

Historic Defeat for Gun Lobby Regarding Weapons Laws

Thursday, July 23rd, 2009

The nation dodged a bullet Wednesday. In a rare defeat for the powerful gun lobby, the Senate routed an amendment that would have federalized concealed-weapons laws by forcing all states that issue such permits to gun owners to honor those granted by other states. States with strict rules regarding concealed firearms, such as California, essentially would have had their laws nullified by states with lax rules. Yet so spineless have gun-control advocates in Congress been in recent years that there was no guarantee common sense would trump political cowardice. It was a nailbiter, but the amendment failed on a 58-39 vote.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

Arizona Wants To Throw Out Law And Order

Monday, June 29th, 2009

Unbelievable and ridiculous; to me at least. Arizona law makers are working on a bill that would legalize concealed weapons in bars. Granted of course, there are going to be rules and restrictions, but get ready everyone for the return of the Wild West to Arizona. Pretty soon you’re gonna start hearing stories of bar fights where everyone but the bartender was wiped out. Of course the shooter got away on a really fast horse.

The bill does allow for bar owners to ban gun totin’ patrons. But there are a lot of really angry owners who believe that booze and ammo are a recipe for a serious disaster.

“This might be one of the stupidest things that I have heard of,” said Mike Nelson, who owns Pomeroy’s bar in Phoenix and plans to post a sign on his front door outlawing guns in his bar as soon as possible. “Can you think of a single reason guns and alcohol should be intertwined?”

And guess who’s behind this push for the Wild West. None other than the National Rifle Association.

Now for the big news. There are already 40 states where this is allowed. Georgia was #40 when it passed a similar bill in 2008.

“These laws are common sense,” said NRA spokeswoman Rachel Parsons. “Restaurants are not immune to criminal activity. Law-abiding people — regardless of whether they’re in restaurants, cars or homes — they should be able to protect themselves against criminal attack.” Common sense if your the NRA spokesperson.

Below is some really great logic from one of the bill’s sponsors.

Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, said it’s about time Arizona passes such a law, and that the most important thing is that people carrying guns into bars aren’t allowed to drink. “You don’t want intoxicated people with weapons, and this bill continues the prohibition against drinking and carrying,” said Kavanagh, a retired police officer in New York and New Jersey. “What is the problem with having a gun in a delicatessen where someone is having a beer with their pastrami two tables away?”

Hell, that was really funny. I’m going to enter a bar and not drink. That sounds like someone denying the very nature of bars.

Now, the bill would of course only apply to the 127,000 Arizonans who have passed a criminal background check, and taken the required eight-hour training course. Even so, alcohol has been known to do some funny stuff to people, and that means there are 127,000 chances that something could happen.

Frank Murray, owner of Seamus McCaffrey’s Irish Pub & Restaurant in downtown Phoenix, said he opposes the law and will prohibit his customers from coming in armed.”It’s kind of like the Wild West days,” he said. “We’ve got enough nuts out on the street walking around with guns. We don’t need them in places with alcohol and families.”

To me that is the kind of logic the Arizona legislation needs to be applying. Heck, I’m also going to start packing if everyone else does.

Let me know what you think about this issue. I THINK IT SUCKS!

Technorati Tags: , , , ,