Posted on 01/30/2013 12:40:17 PM PST by ButThreeLeftsDo
Not a single gun shop can be found in this city. They are outlawed.
Handguns were banned in Chicago for decades, too, until 2010, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that was going too far, leading city leaders to settle for restrictions some describe as the closest they could get legally to a ban without a ban.
And yet Chicago, a city with bans on both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, finds itself laboring to stem a flood of gun violence that contributed to more than 500 homicides last year and at least 40 killings already in 2013.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
What would happen if people in Chicago were permitted to freely possess and carry?
It would be fun to try it and find out.
If banning guns worked, Chicago would be a model of safety. Their ban wasn’t meant to keep criminals from getting them, only law abiding citizens.
I predict not a lot because the people killing each other are black and Hispanic gang bangers.
Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation. Yet there have been 41 murders in the month of January which puts it right on track to meet last year’s 500+. That’s 2x what LA has and 4x what New York City has, and Chicago ranks 3rd in size behind those two cities. Holder’s people just like to kill.
Cheap shots from corrupt liberal bosses. While the DC Supreme court decisions may have paved the way for law-abiding citizens to rearm themselves legitimately, Chicago’s murder statistics aren’t affected by them. That is the sole boon resulting from corrupt local government’s choice to ignore the real, ethinic/racial problem.
They need no permit, in my opinion. I know you agree. But allow me to suggest an improved phrasing so the gun-grabbers understand:
"What would happen if people in Chicago were to fully exercise their rights instead of having them unconstitutionally trampled?"
There. That's better. :-)
It’s against the law to sell crack or meth in Chicago too... and it’s against the law in all the surrounding cities. And ALL over the country too.
Does the above fact have a chance seeping into the brain of a New York Times person? Will they ‘get’ what that might mean?
Does giving organized crime a billion dollar industry seem like a good idea to ‘oh so liberal’ journalists? Might there be implications and unintended consequences?
Are they stupid?
As expected, the “solution” offered by the article is to make the infringements even stricter, make the penalties tougher, and apply them across the entire nation!
Not only are the victims mostly poor minorities, the perps pose no threat to the elite.
They’re not going anywhere near these neighborhoods without a plenty of armed security and a pre-visit security blanket.
But MN dems invite more thugs here from there then won’t why crime want up.
Oh, come on....we all just need another round of diversity training!
Rev Acree needs to get out of Chicago a little more... The lessons that need to be learned from Chicago have nothing to do with extending their stupid laws to more civilized areas of the country. Clueless... totally clueless.
Oh, come on....we all just need another round of diversity training!
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
I wonder if they have tried MIDNIGHT BASKETBALL?
If nothing else another way to have a money grab from the Fed.
Just pass a law requiring registration and buying a license.
Taking guns from Americans and sending F16s to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Obama’s America.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.