Earlier this year, Quigley spearheaded the effort of 55 Members of Congress in filing a “friend of the court” amicus brief, urging the Court to allow Chicago’s handgun ban to stand.
Ummm, different Quigley, I presume.
Posted on 06/28/2010 11:41:53 AM PDT by greatdefender
CHICAGO (CHICAGOPRESSRELEASE.COM) — Today, U.S. Representative Mike Quigley (D-IL) released the following statement after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the City of Chicago’s handgun ban.
Earlier this year, Quigley spearheaded the effort of 55 Members of Congress in filing a “friend of the court” amicus brief, urging the Court to allow Chicago’s handgun ban to stand.
Quigley also supports the right of state and local governments to maintain sensible restrictions on gun possession and use.
“I am disappointed and disheartened by the Supreme Court’s decision today. When illegal guns flood our streets, precious lives are lost and communities are destroyed. However, in its decision, the Court specifically noted that laws regulating firearms are still permissible.
Under Mayor Daley’s leadership, the City of Chicago will now look to enact reasonable restrictions on gun ownership to make it as safe as possible, and I fully support this effort.
While one question was answered today, a much larger and more alarming one looms: Will Congress finally heed the call to enact common-sense gun legislation that would keep weapons out of the hands of the most dangerous segments of society?
Today, there is sensible, bi-partisan legislation before Congress that would close the gun show loophole which inexplicably permits felons, terrorists, and the mentally ill to purchase weapons without a background check. The tragedy at Columbine a decade ago and the recent Pentagon shooting share a common trait: the firearms used in each shooting spree originated from a gun show. A recent gun show audit conducted by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg revealed that 74 percent of sellers approached by investigators completed sales to people who appeared to be criminals or straw purchasers. Inexplicably, special interests and powerful lobbies in Washington have prevented this measure from passing.
It’s time to say ‘no more.’ I plan to work tirelessly in Congress with my willing colleagues to help reclaim the middle ground in this discussion and pass responsible gun laws that make us more safe and more free.”
Last year, Quigley co-authored an editorial with Mayor Richard M. Daley on the urgency to allow Chicago to govern its own streets. He has also called for the reinstatement of the assault weapons ban (which expired in 2004) and is fighting to close the gun-show loophole, a lapse in gun-control law that allows unlicensed gun dealers to sell weapons without performing a background check.
Oh, missed this. The Columbine murderers had committed enough felonies regarding state and federal gun laws that they could have been put away for a long time before they fired the first shot at school. Somehow yet another law would have stopped them?
Earlier this year, Quigley spearheaded the effort of 55 Members of Congress in filing a “friend of the court” amicus brief, urging the Court to allow Chicago’s handgun ban to stand.
Ummm, different Quigley, I presume.
Wow...???
Laws to make us free...
The really sad thing is that there are a lot of people in America today who will read this and think it sounds perfectly reasonable.
Next thing you know, they'll be telling us: "Work Will Make You Free" .... Maybe they'll put it on big signs - hanging on gates...
Yeah, Quigley thinks “illegal guns” flooding the streets is a crisis, but I doubt he thinks illegal immigrants isn’t.
I wonder how he’d comment on a list of all “gun crimes”-or just murders in general, broken down by demographics and ethnicity-I’d be interested to hear his explanation on why Vermont, for example, with the laxest gun laws-pretty much, has next to no “gun crime” yet Chi-town and DC, which have some amazingly restrictive laws, are awash in crime.
Hard to understand........NOT!
If somebody is too dangerous to own a gun, then he's too dangerous to be loose on the streets. Or by "the most dangerous segments of society", do they mean the segments most dangerous to the criminal class of Chicago, whether in politics or not? To a lefty, the law-abiding gun owner is very dangerous -- to his plans for domination.
To Quigley:
FU,FU,FU,FU,FU,FU,FU,FU,FU,FU,FU,FU,FU,FU
Ping.
Wow...???
Laws to make us free...
The way things are going you'll be getting a knock on your door for a comment like that.
FMCDH!
Utter tripe. The so called “gun show loophole” is and always was a sham. And this leftists’ definition of “common sense” laws will equate to making actual gun ownership so onerous, burdensome, difficult and expensive as to make it impractical. Law suits against Chicago’s Shortshanks regime will be endless. And of course, all will be billed to the ever dwindling base of taxpayers
Bloomberg revealed that 74 percent of sellers approached by investigators completed sales to people who appeared to be criminals or straw purchasers.
Most likely they didn’t approach licensed dealers, but
PROFILED those who looked like criminals.
Using that same logic, then let me govern my own life.
No thanks. It isn’t a choice. Gun liberty (self-defense) is a human right.
In this case, safety and liberty go hand in hand.
Quigley. What a GAY name. Guess it rubbed off on him.
When illegal guns flood our streets, precious lives are lost and communities are destroyed.
*** So then the opposite must also be true, RE: legal guns, right Quigley? ***
Quigley is a bonehead. Then again he's a democrat, so I repeat myself.
If you a are a "Gun Dealer", you MUST be licensed by the BATF, period. What he's talking about is Private Sales among Private Individuals, that's what he wants to stop. But even then, as we in IL know if you sell to someone who doesn't have a Valid FOID Card YOU can go to jail. And NO law abiding citizen is going to take that risk.
Which means he's really talking about Criminals. Who ignore the law(s) to begin with. So One, or a Dozen more 'sensible' Gun Laws, won't make a dime's worth of difference to a criminal.
Both are inanimate objects, have no brain, and cannot think for themselves. They are just dumb 'machines'. It is the person at the control who may do something 'illegal' with that dumb machine. The machine has no control over the operator.
He may as well argue that by making inexpensive Laptops or Desktop PC's available for everyone they will increase Home Burglary rates(1).
And speaking of that. I'd bet thee rent that the number of Home Break-ins I hear on the scanner every weekend will DECREASE. Now it's like they wait for the homeowner to go shopping, not caring if one person is still there and break in, and then scoot before they get back. But now they won't know if that lone someone is ARMED.
(1) One thing cheap computers HAVEN'T done is improve peoples spelling :-)
If we go 'back in history', like 1967, guns (Firearms) were EVERYWHERE in Chicago. Yet there weren't any 'bloodbaths'. Sears had them right there in the Sporting Goods Dept, no locks, no chains, no cases. Just pick em up and check em out. And the local Sports Store Sold them too. 'Heck' I was buying boxes of .22 Shorts ($.25 a box iirc) from the Local Sports Store when I was about 14-15 -- no questions asked. And every other household had some type of Firearm and again, no bloodbaths. And we didn't 'go for the gun' after we'd get in a fist fight. You won or lost and that was that.
Soooooo. All things being equal, what has really changed in Chicago, or any big city, from 'way back then' to today that makes it so 'dangerous' for people to have ready access to a firearm???? Hmmmmm, that's a toughie.
Wait! Watson I have it! Demographics!
Ooops I've committed a 'PC Sin'. I just called, 'a spade a spade'. Oh well, I can deal with it :-)
Further evidence that our urban areas are regressing to tribalism.
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.