One, how many "assault weapons" are used to kill people? Depending on your definition of "assault weapon" it is a shockingly low number. The percentage of people killed by rifles - all rifles not just "assault weapons" - is something like about 3% of people killed with firearms. So going after "assault weapons" is going after something like a fraction of a percent of the problem. Why would anyone waste their time going after that and ignoring the other 99.xxx% of the problem?
Ban "high capacity" ammunition magazines? Right. Even though FBI statistics show most shooting incidents involve only a handful of shots. Another completely useless proposal from the "do something" crowd. Well, it does something - moves us closer to an un-Constitutional ban on all weapons. When these measures are in-effective as everyone with better than a room-temperature IQ knows they will be they'll have to do something else, something more. Ban some more, chip away some more at our freedoms.
The Legislature also should expand rules Chicago recently enacted regulating gun shops to cover the entire state. That could help solve the problem of the handful of gun establishments that are the source of a huge number of illegal guns recovered on the street.
The emphasis above is mine. Do you think the author actually read and/or considered what he wrote? Or is he merely regurgitating the party line, supporting the agenda? Consider what he said: the "...illegal guns..." so as I understand that, the firearms used to commit these crimes are, gasp (!) already illegal, or probably more precisely illegally possessed by the perpetrator(s) of the crimes. Hmmm, he is saying these criminals are already breaking numerous laws regarding possession of firearms; committing robberies, assaults, and murders... in other words not too likely (at all) to obey yet another law.
But that's what these liberal "leaders" and "lawmakers" propose. In fact that seems to be the only solution in the liberals' playbook: more laws, more restrictions. These criminals are violent and breaking the law? Liberal solution: further disarm the law-abiding victims. Idiocy, sheer idiocy. In fact, such an utterly stupid proposal no-one capable of tying their own shoes would make it, unless they have an ulterior motive. There has to be another reason these "liberals" and "progressives" want the law-abiding people disarmed. It has absolutely nothing to do with public safety.