E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSReturning to his hometown of Chicago, President Obama touched on issues he address during his State of the Union: Increasing gun violence, Strengthening gun laws, and improving the economy. Watch the entire speech.
President Barack Obama took his push for stricter gun laws to his adoptive hometown of Chicago, as that city endures an epidemic of high-profile shooting deaths.
Speaking near his family home on the south side of Chicago, the president renewed his call for Congress to allow for a vote on his various gun measures. And Obama pointed to recent incidences of violence, including the murder of Hadiya Pendleton, the Chicago teenager who was gunned down shortly after performing with classmates in Obama’s second inaugural parade.
“This week, in my State of the Union, I talked about Hadiya and the fact that, unfortunately, what happened to Hadiya is not unique,” Obama said, noting that Pendelton’s parents were in attendance at his speech. “It's not unique to Chicago."
The president’s adoptive hometown, though, has suffered from an epidemic of gun violence. The city suffered over 500 homicides in 2012, including a record number of gun deaths for victims under the age of 18.
“That's the equivalent of a Newtown every four months,” Obama said, referencing the deadly shooting at an elementary school in Connecticut in December, which left 26 students and teachers dead, and provided the impetus for the administration’s new push for comprehensive legislation to curb gun violence.
Recommended: Hagel delay the latest evolution in 45-year filibuster tradition
Conservatives, though, have also helped popularize Chicago as a prime example as to why the president’s gun proposals are ineffective.
"When President Obama visits Friday, let’s hope we hear something more thoughtful than the usual rhetoric about expanding background checks, to which gangs never submit, and banning some weapons which they rarely use," former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., wrote Thursday in the Chicago Tribune.
“Honesty about what it will really take to face gang violence is the best tribute he can offer to Hadiya Pendleton and the dozens of other children killed in Chicago each year,” Gingrich added in his op-ed, referring to the Pendleton’s parents attended Friday’s speech at Hyde Park Academy.
Obama used his speech at the academy to also talk up elements of his education reforms proposed in the State of the Union address earlier this week, including expanded access to Pre-K education and better federal support for schools and standards. The president also talked up his proposal to raise the minimum wage to $9.00/hour, though such a proposal has already encountered resistance from Republicans on Capitol Hill.
This story was originally published on Fri Feb 15, 2013 4:51 PM EST
Leave a Comment:
Obama is a worthless piece of sh*t.
Hitting the sauce again Boozer?
I often call on the libs to police and keep their crazy, vile lunatic fringe in check. It wouldn't be right if I didn't do the same.
Dude, comments like yours are worthless. Not only do they not help the cause, whatever your cause is, they make it much more difficult for the rest of us. Keep it to yourself, or add something productive and intelligent next time.
WE DONT NEED GUN CONTROL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WE NEED PARENT CONTROL !!!!!!!!!!!!!
most of all murders committed in Chicago is youth "thug / gang bangers" making there bones to get into a gang and retaliation of gang turf and WHAT kind of weapons used HAND GUNS, not assault weapons and Illinois has the strongest gun laws and worst homicide rates !
The parents of these little "thugs" need to start being parents and these "fathers" with all these "baby mama's" this is not a joke ! any idiot can have children, you want to be a MAN , be a FATHER and end this revolving door of violence !
Chicago has a gang problem. Address that issue. More gun laws are not going to stop the violence. Gangs don't abide by the law.
oz
Here is how gangs get guns ....... FROM "LAW ABIDING CITIZENS"
Virtually every gun starts out as a legally manufactured product, but the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) points to three common ways guns move from legal distribution channels to the criminal market:
mike
President Obama should be saying what you said to the parents. And he should be SHOUTING IT. I have said for the past 4 years that President Obama should use his popularity with his race to start saying the things that need to be said. I am NOT being racist, I am being honest. There is a big problem in the black community with fatherless kids and absent parents.
Hey Barry..... have Joe do the math for you.... people in Chicago are not being murdered with ASSAULT WEAPONS.... people in Chicago are not murdered by LAW-ABIDING citizens who own guns.... people in Chicago are not being murdered by anything except the RAMPANT gang activity allowed by years and years of criminal activity running the streets of Chicago.....
don, You say they get guns from law abiding citizens? Corrupt federally licensed gun dealers, law abiding? Straw purchasing, one who buys guns on behalf of someone legally prohibited from possessing guns, law abiding? Gun show dealers who advertise to criminals, law abiding? Sorry, but I don't understand your logic towards law abiding citizens.
very true statement but I bet the Libtards here will be upset by it.
oz
I put "law abiding citizens" in quotes for a reason. The fact that you did not get it does not surprise me.
Those are people who can buy guns for criminals because of the weak laws and weak law enforcement. We need stricter laws, tighter background checks and more vigorous enforcement. Get out of the way, NRA!
Hah! Hah! All you simpleton NRA and Ted Nugent "Gun-Nuts"
It's all going according to plan.
Soon our Socialistic Utopia Paradise will be Realized
on the Planet you once called Earth,
in the Country you once called America.
It was so Easy getting our stealth Muslim/Marxist candidate on in for that 2nd term.
All we had to do was make up all those Lies about Romney having hidden Swiss Bank accounts
and shell-companies in the Cayman Islands to Laundry all those Pension Funds
he stoled from Hard-working blue-collar American Factory workers,
and spread the Lies that he hadn't Paid his Taxes for 10 years! and that he was taking his
trophy-wife's Olympic show Horse off on his Taxes, as a, can you believe this, "Therapy Horse"?
And the Rest is History, as they say! The Voting Public fell for it "hook, line, and sinker".
So now that Obama "the Merciful and Kind", is in for Four More Very-Very-Very-Very Long Years,
and has again Re-Established the Infamous "Obama Snitch Line",
it will be Easy to Keep you NRA and Ted Nugent "Gun-Nut" type "in-line",
if you know what I mean!
I especially can't wait till Obama stacks the Suprem Court of the United States
with as many Socialists aka Dems, Marxists, Leninists, and good-old Fashion Soviet-era Commies
as he possibly can in the Next Four years, and those Judges are Life-Time appointments.
It's all going according to plan.
Soon May-Day will Replace the Fourth of July, and instead of Baseball
we'll make Soccer our National past-time Sport.
Viva la France!
DUI laws.
Tougher than they used to be, and getting tougher in some states. Do they prevent ALL deaths on the roads? Nope. Do they REDUCE some of those deaths? Yep.
But- until they stop ALL deaths, can't we just repeal them, as they obviously are not effective?
What say you, NRA fans?
What say you?
"Republicans for"... you didn't share- and we leftie subversives all appreciate, that....his birth in the '50s was rigged so as to make the Hawaaii newspapers botch reporting his certificate so as to make him elligible for president so many years later. You know- later. The 50s. When everyone just KNEW how easy it would be for a black guy to get the nod for Preisident of the USA some day???
Shhh....keep it on the down low, 'k?
If we didn't have such a violence conducive drug policy then Chicago's murder rate would most certainly drop.
Now that Obama, our President, and the Ruler, Master, and Overlord and King
of all you Republicans, Teabaggers, and NRA and Ted Nugent "Gun-Nut" types
is now Firmly Estabished in your once-precious White House as our Black President,
it's going to be a Long Four (yes! 4) Years for you Cons!
No More "Freedom Fries" allowed! They will be Outlawed!
Only "French Fries" will be Available.
Maybe Now you Cons, Teabaggers, and especially you NRA and Ted Nugent "Gun-Nut" types
have "Learned your Lesson" that you should have Never voted your "Village Idiot" George Bush
and Dick "Darth Vader" Cheney on In for that SECOND TERM.
Paybacks are H#LL,
now aren't they?
arf.
arf.
Chicago has some of the strictest gun control laws in the Country.
Apparently it's not working, since outlawing guns made it so that only the outlaws have guns.
The answer is so simple, yet no one talks about it;
"Use a gun in committing a felony - mandatory 10 year prison sentence, in addition to any time for for the crime itself".
A minimum sentence of 10 years will make any 'tough guy' think twice about using a gun.
The best reason for allowing American citizens to 'have the right to bear arms' is highlighted by a Study on Guns and Crime Rates comparing burglaries in the United States with those in Canada and Britain (where strict gun laws make it virtually impossible to have a gun at home). In this study (link below), only about 13% of 'Hot Burglaries' in the United States occur while the residents are at home, versus almost half in Canada and Britain. That means that it's about 4 times more likely that a burglar would break into your home while your family is home in a 'strong gun control' society. The fear of potentially armed victims causes American burglars to spend more time than their foreign counterparts "casing" a house to ensure that nobody is home. Felons frequently comment in these interviews that they avoid late-night burglaries because "that's the way to get shot."
I would much prefer that a potential burglar (or worse) break into my home when my family is NOT at home out of fear that I might be armed.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/guns/gunslott.html
Maybe President Obama should talk to the Chicago Police Department and some of the surrounding communities about their drinking on duty which means they are not fully engaged in prevention of crimes. WTF is being half drunk, is that like half pregnant or maybe being "half sober"? No wonder the people are shooting each other, the police are to busy drinking.
One thing I do know, that is a person with a gun is more dangerous when drunk or even "half drunk". How about you get caught drinking on duty, especially while armed, you are fired. But the union thugs wouldn't allow that.
ROY
Great Britain may lead in burglaries, but we kick their ass in gun deaths. You want to kill people who steal your stuff. I disagree with you. If life is not threatened it is wrong to use lethal force.
I think it is clear to all but the most intellectually challenged that the vast majority of burglaries occur when no one is home. But you need a gun to kill them anyway ...... a powerful gun that shoots lots of bullets in a short amount of time from a huge ammunition magazine. Good for you. I'm glad you don't live in my neighborhood.
Is it true that the "United Nations" wants to dis-arm the U.S.A. civilians.??
This government cannot take our 2nd amendment rights away all at once, they will have to chip away at it in little increments.
Roy @ 1.17
I would rather a burglar not break into my home at all but if he did I would rather be home so I could blow the piece if sh#$ brains out for the nerve to come on my property and think that what is mine will soon be his.
Someone who would kill so gladly over a property crime is not worth 2 cents.
Wonder how many plane loads of SS cops they flew in before Big Daddy got there? Actually, he probably has no fear, it's where his heart is anyway.
Hello folks, no matter which side of the fence you are on regarding gun control if you want to alter or change the second amendment there is a process to do just that. So those that want to alter the second amendment you have every right to begin the process. This gun debate is a lot to do about nothing.
Boozer- I am by no means a fan of Obama. However, your comment is not the way and intelligent person reinforces his/ her argument.
don97524 "ROY Great Britain may lead in burglaries, but we kick their ass in gun deaths. You want to kill people who steal your stuff. I disagree with you. If life is not threatened it is wrong to use lethal force."
I think you missed my point. I don't have a gun in my house, but I also don't want my family confronted by someone breaking in because they may initially want to steal things, but might do far worse if my wife and daughter were home alone. The idea that we MIGHT have a gun in my house makes that possibility far less likely - apparently about 75% less likely in the United States compared with a strict gun control country like Canada or England.
A prime example is from the following incident;
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/10/16449815-911-tape-shoot-him-again-husband-tells-wife-hiding-from-home-intruder?lite&lite=obnetwork
TrustVerify
It is not necessary to change the 2nd Amendment to tighten background checks and even to outlaw certain weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines. The 2nd Amendment contains the phrase "well regulated" and the Constitution clearly outlines the democratic process for regulating.
I'm curious what people think about when gun policy and the constitution as written and verified by the Supreme court was the opinion of the framers that an armed civilian population is better for the nation as a whole.
Does it fall under "Freedom isn't free"? Is it from old people out of touch? Is changing the constitution a better way than the ridiculous amount of resources and cultural divisions caused by a relatively minor social issue (The national fiscal policies are much more dangerous to the nation than gun ownership.)
I say minor as there were about 2.5 million deaths in 2010. All gun deaths represent less than 1/2 of 1%.
Would changing the Constitution of such a strongly felt right by a large segment of the population be essentially like breaking a contract to many of them. Justifying rejection of a government that no longer protects them from the passions, fickleness, and vagaries of the public as is the strongly stated purpose of the Constitution framers?
Have we as a society become so unsophisticated that all that is needed are dog and pony shows with pretty lights and music for us to ignore the lengthy writings of soul searching and research by the Framers of the Constitution as to balancing the needs of government, people, and individuals?
I do not advise unlimited civilian armament. But the Constitution and the supporting opinions by the framers of it clearly felt it necessary to arm the public to be a credible deterrence from both foreign and domestic oppression.
All the best to everyone, may you all soul search and try to make peace.
Sanescience
None .... NONE of the proposals currently under discussion involve taking away any guns or overturning the 2nd Amendment.
wilsonarden55I BUY ALMOST EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOOD AND CLOTHING FROM ONLINE AUCTIONS.
Stop advertising this SCAM.
When you make a bid and someone bids higher, you lose your money and get nothing.
Chicago is the perfect example of a failed experiment concerning the leftist philosophy. It reeks of the stench of failure. In fact, the whole state of Illinois is a failure.
Obama's a pathological liar with nothing but hatred in his mind for America. Who listens to this fool about anything?
Has any one seen or read what the proposal is for gun control; the big push will be to outlaw all semi-automatic weapons for Private possession; IT HAS ALREADY BEEN SIGNED, it is the arms treaty signed by Clinton and up for vote in the Senate; Reid has not brought it up, he is short of votes to pass it; that is why the President is in a full court press, to get the votes to get it passed; it will make illegal about 85% of all guns in private possession in the United States, our Constitution is being torn to shreds by this administration, drone killings of American citizens, search and seizure without a warrant(patriot act), interception of all electronic communications(already in effect), secret courts, detention without trial, no wonder they want Americans disarmed, wake up folks.
I really wonder how many times I have to pose this question without it being answered, because it underscores the whole "if you're law abiding, why not submit to a universal background check?" argument.
Okay, here goes. There are currently 300 million firearms in this country, and there is no current federal registration process. Therefore, the government doesn't know where any of those guns are (we'll just stick with Title I firearms for the sake of simplicity). Now, if a law was passed today that everyone has to go through a universal background check, how could that be enforced? In other words, I have a gun today. I'll sell it to you today. We have to go through a background check today, so I'll just backdate a bill of sale, or have an understanding with you, that I sold it to you yesterday. How would anyone be the wiser? How could the government prove that you didn't have the firearm yesterday, before the law went into effect, if they had no idea where it was at any point after the FFL transfer? That is the loophole with all 300 million firearms. How can you enforce universal background checks without total registration?
Furthermore, United States v. Miller (1939) states that a prohibited possessor/felon does not have to register a firearm with the federal government, because compelling them to even attempt to register a firearm is compelling them to violate their 5th amendment protection against self-incrimination (they incriminate themselves by admitting that they have a firearm they want to register, though they aren't legally allowed to possess one in the first place). Criminals wouldn't register anyway, but even if they would, they don't have to.
In other words (TL;DR), universal background checks won't work because federal registration won't work, and because the very people you are attempting to stop from having a firearm through registration don't have to register.
The American people deserves a vote !!!
The Giffords deserves a vote !!!
The families of Newtown deserves a vote !!!
The families of Aurora deserves a vote !!!
The GOP-TP and the NRA got to stop fighting the American peoples Will !!!
Excuse my mistake. It was Haynes v United States (1968), not Miller.
The Lott surveys (which you reference here) have been debunked by Hemenway of Harvard School of Public Health as inadequate in sample size and selection and highly biased, resulting in vastly exaggerated estimates of defensive gun use. It's not an authoritative data source - and neither is the Mauser survey, for the same reasons. Meanwhile, the U.S. gun death rates are 92.5 times that of the U.K. (per the WHO).
OK don, why is it that we must have a background check to buy a firearm but no full background check on being the President of the U.S.?
Probably because you're confusing background checks with registration. They're not the same thing. Right now there are many ways in which the sale of a gun can avoid an effective background check. Private sales do not require it, and even if all sales did, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is inadequately mainta ined- most states do not participate fully, especially where mental health issues are involved.
This has nothing to do with gun registration, much less retroactive background checks for the millions of existing guns.
But it's a start.
Pay attention.
Tim, read the rest of what I wrote. I'm not confusing one with another, I'm showing how they're inseparable if you want one to be effective.
Why don't the the presstitutes report all the murders we perpetrate on other countries and where are the progressives regarding the hundreds of thousands of children killed by our country in our name?
Consider the Sandy Hook school shooting. This shooting serves as an excuse for anti gun lobbyists to express their hatred of guns and the NRA and to advance their gun control agenda. Few if any of those hyperventilating over the tragedy know any of the parents of the murdered children. They have shown no similar response to the US government’s murder of countless thousands of Muslim children. The Clinton regime alone killed 500,000 Iraqi children with illegal sanctions, and Clinton’s immoral secretary of state Madeleine Albright, a feminist hero, said that she thought the sanctions were worth the cost of one half million dead Iraqi children. The Bush regime is just as guilty.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4PgpbQfxgo
Suddenly, 20 US children become of massive importance to “progressives.” Why? Because the deaths foster their agenda–gun control in the US.
When I hear people talk about “gun violence,” I wonder what has happened to language. A gun is an inanimate object. An inanimate object cannot cause violence. Humans cause violence. The relevant question is: why do humans cause violence? This obvious question seldom gets asked. Instead, inanimate objects are blamed for the actions of humans.
don97524
Gun Shows and private gun sales: Gun shows have been called “Tupperware parties for criminals” because they attract large numbers of prohibited buyers. A loophole in federal law allows unlicensed or “private” sellers, many of whom work out of gun shows, to lawfully sell or transfer guns without conducting a criminal background check. Gun show dealers have been known to advertise to criminals with signs that read “no background checks required here.”
YOU LIE !!! Doh, Oops I Mean Don, have you ever been to a Gun Show? Apparently Not or your Lie wouldn't have been said. Any Transaction between a Gun Dealer and a Buyer is required by Federal Law to be subjected to a Background Check, There are NO EXCEPTIONS, Think about it. Why would a Dealer sell off the books, they have way too much to lose. Besides there is a story on NBC/DNC about a woman who purchased 30 guns in a month and was selling to those individuals who would rather not or legally unable to purchase. Nice Way to supplement your income, it's somebody else's kid who gets killed.
Now the claim 40% of all gun sales are done off the books is Pure Political BullSh!t, show me the Proof, Besides what some Liberal Hack Fairy Dusted from Thin Air. The Private Sales Between two Individuals is Just That a Private Sale Between Two Individuals, Let's keep it that way. To do otherwise will simply drive those sales into the dark of night and create a Blackmarket that will be totally uncontainable. Much like the War on Drugs, winning that one aren't we.
OBama needs to quit Campaigning and Govern, something which He has No Idea how to do. Start by providing some Parenting Training for those Folks who are producing the current crop of GangBangers. Start by Providing Better Access and Treatment with an Honest Evaluation of the Mentally Fragile. Start by Enforcing the Gun Laws that are already on the books, Start utilizing the Mandatory Sentencing Provisions for those who use a firearm in the commission of a felony. The Mandatory Sentencing is the First Thing Plea Bargained Away by a Liberal Lenient Judiciary. Leave the Law Abiding Citizens Alone, We Aren't The Problem.
Last but not least, Focus Like a Lazer on the Economy. Putting People back to work will help with crime as much as anything. Reform Welfare to make it a Stepping Stone to a Productive Life, Not a Career.
I did, but they are not inseparable. Indeed, they would be more effective if both were implemented but Americans are not culturally ready right now for something as invasive as total registration of all guns.
That does not mean that 100% background checks would be ineffective. Too many guns enter the illicit weapons supply chain merely by failing to ensure the buyer is qualified to own a firearm. The existing system is inadequate and needs to be more effective, that's all.
So, it's a reasonable first step.
There already is a black market, Einstein. That's the problem. Now, of course, 100% background checks combined with gun registration would be more effective, but first things first.
Tim -
We can call it a first step, but what's the point of enacting something you have literally no chance of enforcing? How would that be effective? I'm sure most gun owners would be happy to go through a background check for any transfer. I know I would. But, I don't want the baggage that would have to come along to make sure that law isn't some joke that politicians tell their kids at night.
In other words, what would universal background checks accomplish without registration? The law abiding people would go through them because they're law abiding, and everyone else wouldn't. But, where does that leave us? One more annoyance for law abiding citizens, and one more law for criminals to ignore. And they can ignore it because of both the loophole I discussed, and Haynes v United States.
By the border
Those figures are all from the ATF; obviously you would rather believe the NRA and other myth generators.
Virtually all guns start out in the hands of the law abiding. Right now there's a huge loophole that needs to be plugged. If all law abiding gun owners followed the law, that would be a good start.
If you'd like to go further and require registration, I'm all for it.
You're either not understanding what I'm saying, or you're dodging the point entirely.
There are guns currently in the hands of criminals, and currently in the hands of people willing to help criminals.
Let me put it to you this way. You enact universal background checks today. How will you enforce that law from here on out as it pertains to currently unregistered firearms? How will you investigate violations of this law and have enough to prosecute in a court of law?
I understand what you're saying quite well. But simply because background checks won't solve 100% of the gun problem that is no excuse for doing nothing about the defects in the current background check system.
The firearms black market, like any market, relies on an incoming supply of guns that were once legal. Better background checks will constrict that supply chain, reducing the introduction of new weapons into the back market. The effect is slow and the results are longer term, but again, that's no reason to do nothing.
The flow of firearms into the black market comes from those who wouldn't follow those laws in the first place. It would constrict nothing, because it would be 100% ineffective toward the transfers that already happen unlawfully. The only people affected would be the people you aren't worried about. I'm a math guy, so I understand your t->infinity argument, but it's simply illogical to drop that into a finite society. There are plenty of things you could do that would be both short term, effective, and reasonably meaningful, but universal background checks isn't one of those things.
I say just let the gang bangers kill each other. No one outside of Chicago gives a rats ass. The parents that are losing kids to the gangs can do something if they want it changed. Maybe beat the little darlings to death if they find them with drugs or guns. Both of which is illegal.
Gun shops are selling out in the last two months, Obama- best gun salesmen ever.
tim-2799493 "The Lott surveys (which you reference here) have been debunked by Hemenway of Harvard School of Public Health as inadequate in sample size and selection"
'Debunked' by an anti-gun source?
Gee, I wonder if the 'debunking' might have a bias?
Realistically, virtually all 'gun control' bills are doomed to fail - it's just too much of a 'political hot potato'. Even most Democrats don't want to touch it, although I think it makes perfect sense to have universal background checks and outlaw large magazine clips, but then outlawing some aspects of gun ownership doesn't seem to affect the outlaws, who ignore the laws anyway.
The only realistic thing is to enforce very strict laws against use of a gun in a crime - "Use a gun, go to jail". A stiff MANDATORY prison sentence for ALL criminals that use a gun would make the thugs think twice.
To your point Roy, we could make all gun crimes FEDERAL. Mandatory FEDERAL sentence for all gun crimes, say 5 or 10 years. Maybe lighten up on the longer sentences for the recreational drug users and use those slots for gun crime perps.
Background checks (which almost everyone agrees) types of guns and clip size won't do much of anything as people who are intent on breaking the law just don't care. It's like trying to stop people from robbing banks by making it illegal. Wait it is already illegal, but they do it anyway as criminals just don't care.
Z from AZ,
Now it just sounds like you're rationalizing.
Roy Wilson,
Hemenway is a Ph.D. professor at Harvard School of Public Health, not some NRA shill like Lott or Mauser, and not an anti-gun source at all. Nice try.
For all of you in 2013 who think the 1790 definition of "well regulated" has anything to do with loading on more laws or regulations, please read the Wikipedia article on the second amendment. Back then "well regulated" means the person was well experienced, trained, and familiar with his weapon. It's like a well regulated (and generally expensive) chronograph keeps time accurately. Please stop confusing what something meant when it was written with what you think about it now.
And for semi-automatic, high shot capacity rifles available in 1780, please look up the Girandoni rifle. The phrase "shall not be abridged" was still added by the folks who knew technology was improving. Ironically, this rifle was banned in several European cities but was still carried by Lewis and Clark on their 1804 expedition.
Rather than talking about bans we should be talking about the intent of the Second Amendment - training of the civilian citizens in every community in the proper and proficient use of firearms!
How about some new laws? Any criminal caught with a gun receives a life sentence. Any crime committed while using a gun results in a life sentence. Violent criminals are required to serve their entire sentence , not released early on probation or parole. Mentally disturbed people, who commit most mass murders , are detained and controlled by the state to prevent them from harming themselves or others with guns.
A very large number of murders committed each year with guns would be stopped if violent criminals were kept in jail and the psychotics , most of which evince warning signs for weeks , months or years before their murderous outbursts, were institutionalized.
Okay. Let's go with your analogy. Which cars have they outlawed because of drunk drivers? Do drunk drivers prefer a particular model?
The stricter DUI laws focus on the CRIMINAL not the casr maufacturers nor the booze/beer/wine industry. Your analogy should focus on the criminals not the tools they use to "ply their trade". I don't have a problem with tougher laws for the criminals that use guns to "ply their trade" but I do have a problem with politicians giving lip service and knee-jerk reactions to enacting laws the criminals won't abide by. The criminals aren't penalized by the restrictions levied on legal guns owners.
Booozer
and a gun
That says it all.
Mexico's Army of Aliens.....the disgusting mentality of the gun rights advocates...yep..there os your poster boy.
WANT RESPECT ? ... don't let those folks speak for you.
Definition of gun control: A steady aim and a smooth trigger
The irony is that Chicago (and Illinois) already has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country, and one of the highest rates of violence. Clearly criminals pay no attention to gun control laws. They only restrict the rights of honest people. Whenever the left finally wakes up and realizes this, and takes a different approach, will we ever see positive steps to reduce violence. Current gun control laws do virtually nothing to reduce crime and violence, since they don't target the people who actually commit the crimes and perpetrate the violence.
S.Heriger: I was thinking the same thing. To push FOR gun control he goes to one of the cities with the most STRINGENT gun control but yet also has one of the highest murder rates?
No, if you are going to argue FOR gun control you go to a place with a high crime rate where the gun laws are very loose and THEN compare to a place like Chicago where gun control works, I mean were gun control at least keeps guns out of the hands of criminals, I mean where ....... oh never mind......
Ummm... the truth and facts are not welcome here. Great post otherwise. :)
But, but, but...just one more set of gun control regulations should do the trick this time, right? Wrong. Even liberals understand that these new laws won't do anything. What we are witnessing is the death of the 2nd amendment through a thousand small cuts, rather than by one fell swoop.
Regardless of whether these laws are passed or not, there will unfortunately be another mass shooting, and unfortunately, calls for even stricter gun laws.
Owning and using a gun should be like owning and driving a car. Regulate training, register and license. Had these steps been in place 25 to 50 years ago, we most likely wouldn’t be having this debate.
Guess what, the second amendment would have still been in place, and the Nations People would be seeing a lot less gun deaths.
Remember, many that hate any type of gun control are uneducated white men who think that carrying an assault rifle will make them bigger men.
Job1: Sorry, a right is a right is a right. Driving a car is a privilege.
Notice that the 2nd Amendment is the ONLY right that liberals want you to have a license for?
And the 2nd Amendment is the ONLY right the liberals want to restrict IN CASE someone MIGHT use it incorrectly.
Shucks, you guys are right. President Obama should have gone to New York City where murder rates are down under Mayor Bloomberg.
Also the national murder by gun rate is actualy down. This is pure politcis plain and simple. Hell more people got killed by clubs and hammers last year not to mention all of the fetuses that were terimanted.
DaNoid: ???? Was that supposed to mean something? Was that supposed to make sense? Just curious.
Hmm...maybe it's because the 2nd Amendment Right To Bear Arms where exercise of the right can directly lead to the death of others.
Oh c'mon, the 2nd amendment is in the constitution because the founding fathers just really loved hunting, people! We don't need it now, because PETA doesn't like hunters, so the 2nd Amendment is out-dated. Right? Right? And who hunts in Chicago?!?
And Job1, owning and using a car is nothing like owning a gun. You don't have the constitutional right to drive. And to put it in 18th century founding father terms, it would be comparable to owning a horse. Either way, doesn't matter, it's not protected. Although personally, I think we should teach basic gun safety in school. We teach stranger-danger and sex ed, but guns are only exposed to children in TV.
Job1
Who are the "Nations People"? That sounds very Orwellian, but judging by many of your previous posts, that's probably a Freudian slip, eh?
Do I really have to explain this?
Pro,
You are absolutely right! Great post!
S Heriger - Current laws do virtually noting to curb murder, robbery, rape, domestic violence, speeding or any other crime for people who will commit them. That does not mean, however, that we simply do away with all laws because a$$holes and criminals continue to break them
Please tell me you're not about to make the "Stand Vigilant Against Imaginary Hitler" argument.
Brad, if you own a gun and don't teach your child what to do and not do with it aren't you a bad parent?
kimH-1330542
Buying a gun, owning a gun, shooting a gun, etc are acts which are committed at free will and without victims, hence, they are not crimes. All those other things you just mentioned...never mind, I can't believe I actually have to explain this.
Absolutely, and the gun should be locked up, or at least have a trigger lock. While I don't have children myself yet, I do have my nieces visit me. I've already spoken with my sister and brother-in-law, and we've already spoken to my niece. She's too young in my opinion to see it, being only in kindergarten, but she knows I have it, I've described it to her, that it is locked, dangerous, but safe when handled properly.
So, by your standard, I can't murder anyone with a gun because shooting the gun is an act of free will and there is no victim.
I guess the it's the fault of whoever got shot for being in the general vicinity of where the bullet was travelling, yes?
S. Heriger
It's obvious to any rational person that guns come into Chicago and other cities with strict gun regulations from outside of the city where the gun laws are weaker. Why is it not obvious to you?
Note above how "HONEST CITIZENS" ARE HELPING CRIMINALS GET GUNS. By fighting reasonable gun laws YOU ARE HELPING CRIMINALS GET GUNS.
Da Noid
No, that would then be considered murder. Next question.
Owning a gun is not illegal. Using it incorrectly is. Only the ownership of a gun do liberals want to restrict IN CASE someone uses it illegally.
That is like saying a person should have a license to own a computer IN CASE they consider downloading child porn.
That is like saying a person needs to have a license to own a pen IN CASE they want to commit fraud on their IRS form.
That is like saying a person needs a license to speak in their house or in public (no such thing as free speech) IN CASE they consider yelling fire in a movie theater.
No, sorry - we have laws. You break the law you pay the price. ONLY a gun do the liberals want to restrict IN CASE someone wants to consider using it in a robbery.
No, we punish the criminal WHEN they break the law we don't punish the law-abiding citizen IN CASE they consider breaking the law.
Pro continually spouts this friggin' lie on post after post, conveniently omitting that Memphis, Cleveland, Miami and 14 other cities have a higher murder rate. All he does is post more La Pierre style scare tactics.
Dingle Berry - Gee, thanks for pointing all of that out to me. You just gave me one of those "forehead slapping" moments - I did not know that!
Moving on - Buying a car, owning a car and driving a car, etc are acts committed at free will, so is having sex and taking money from a bank. They are only crimes, when the acts, committed at free by the perpetrators have victims and are considered to be crimes. Trust me, no one is going to land a black helicopter in your front yard and unload the Government troops to take away your little pistols. If, however, you need a military weapon and a clip that holds more than 7 bullets to make you feel free and manly, your problems go beyond gun control and are a little more serious.
Or take away from the law-abiding citizens the ability to protect and defend themselves against the criminals who disobey the laws and those in power who ignore/do not enforce laws which prevent them from exerting control over free people!
Took one of my guns out of the safe last evening..... loaded it & placed it on the coffee table.... then watched it all evening....
Nothing happened... it did not move one inch.... but I figured, maybe it's waiting for me to leave?
So I went to bed....
Got up this morning & it still had not killed anyone.... it didn't fire random shots at the neighborhood....
Imagine that..... the GUN didn't harm anyone.....
Use a gun and your done Penal Code 12022.53 PC.
This is automatic when using a gun in California. Use a gun will automatic add 10 - 25 years on your sentence. If this isn't enough of a deterrent I don't no what is.
@ JOB1
Owning and using a gun should be like owning and driving a car. Regulate training, register and license.
>>>>>>>>>
We already have that. It's called a concealed carry permit. A permit carrier has to be trained, certified and license with mental health screening. And like cars, if you don't take it out in public, you don't need need to register it.
- - - - - - - - -- -
Remember, many that hate any type of gun control are uneducated white men who think that carrying an assault rifle will make them bigger men.
<<<<<<<<<<<<
Here's another liberal bragging that he can be a big man without a gun. I bet you don't wear seat belts and safety glasses either. BTW, why are your fellow brainy libs in California not required to take algebra anymore?
I think this is the first thing to come out of this Administration that comes even close to being the Truth.
Nothing THEY are doing will “fundamentally alter [the outcome] another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down to 1,000 a year”, because they are doing all the wrong things.
Let’s start by allowing those teachers who WANT to ( I have 2 sisters-in-law willing) get the proper training and let them CCW. One armed guard verses 4 or 5 teachers, who, by the way, ARE ALREADY ON THE PAYROLL!
How about we study the problem, You liberals are always going on about how we need more Government Research into things like this, well instead if rushing to ban guns, let's find out which guns, and how they are doing the most damage and address that issue?
How about we do away with the HIPAA laws that prevent the release of mental records for background check purposes? (We need to ensure that there is an appeal process though, to correct mistakes in the background check database)
How about we allow the temporary commitment of mentally unstable people, until the courts can decide upon permanent commitment? This is what allowed and was the motive behind Adam Lanza’s attack on Sandy Hook.
How about we start getting rid of (or at least alter) these Government Programs whose unintended consequences is the destruction of the tradition family? How about we make ‘Dads’ relevant again?
How about we start treating things that are illegal, like they are illegal? Illegal immigration? Illegal Drugs? And criminal activity in general? How about we start executing 3rd time offenders?
I have said it before and I will say it again, liberalism must be a result of brain damage. The emotional, knee jerk responses to this article are hilarious.
From 1918 until 1934, any one in the US could order and have shipped through the USPS, a fully automatic sub-machine(Tommy Gun w/30 or 50 round magazine), BAR (High power machine gun w/20 magazine) or even a M2 .50 cal. Belt fed machine gun, no questions asked. Where were all the spree shootings then (other than criminal gangland)?
It was not uncommon to walk into a local hardware store and buy a case of Dynamite to remove tree stumps. If easy access to deadly weapons is the measure of a deadly society, why were things like the "Bath School Disaster" not regular occurrences?
NO, the only thing that has changed in the last 50 or so years is the Secular Progressive agenda has wove its tentacles into society. Family is irrelevant. Dads are irrelevant. Males, especially white males, are irrelevant or even 'need' to be marginalized. Morals and Personal Responsibility are irrelevant.
My point is, since the 60's and the Liberal Progressive march toward hedonism in this country, with the rise of the welfare state, abortion and easy divorce, discipline in this country is gone. There are no consequences. No longer are men being raised by fathers. And how do you become a real man, if you don't have one to show you the way? Granted it isn't always successful, but it seemed to be more successful than the alternative.
Drug overdoses and brain damage linked to long-term drug abuse killed an estimated 37,485 people in 2009, the latest year for which preliminary data are available, surpassing the toll of traffic accidents by 1,201. And the number is likely to rise as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [ABC News.go.com]
Where is the outrage over this?
More children die in a month from abuse, and neglect, mostly at the hands of those on welfare and drugs than by guns in a whole year. Yet you people scream "Ban the Guns, Ban the Guns". And my guess is less than fifty people(and except for these rare instances, ZERO children) are killed each year with a so called "Assault Weapon", yet this is what you go after? THAT IS STUPID!!!
Is there anything in the Proposed legislation that would stop another Adam Lanza? NO! I have read nowhere that parents can commit their Adult children (or anyone for that matter) for observation while the process for complete institutionalization takes place. This is why Adam Lanza was able to, and the MOTIVE behind the rampage, go to his mother's house, kill her and take her firearms. She was unable to protect herself and other because YOU GD LOW LIFE LIBERALS, GOT YOU PANTIES IN BUNCH OVER THE MOVIE "ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST", AND MADE IT ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE INSANE PEOPLE TO BE COMMITTED TO HOSPITAL.
Emotionally compromised thinking people are driving this debate. And there is no rational argument that can be made to dissuade them from this destructive path.
Or is it your idea that only the Government gets to keep guns?
You should Google "Cop kills 'wife', 'ex', 'girlfriend' etc. Or "Police Corruption". There are several studies done, you can Google that too, that show there is a lower incidence of crime among CCW holders, than the general public and the police in some cases.
And to the right-minded people here, remember to vote up those you agree with. Or add a Kudos or a Ditto as a comment.
Did I over sleep again? Will someone post the bill(s) that are pending that repeal amendment 2, or in some way restrict your right to own what you already own?
Thanks, kids. I'll stay tuned.
"....Where is the outrage over this?"
Well, you big silly- drugs don't kill people. The people that TAKE drugs kill people. (themselves, mostly)
So.... the logic seems to be: "legalize drugs".
Right?
Right, NRA?
What say you??
We need to forget about these "add-on" penalties & send anyone away when they need to go away... don't care if it's a bat, a gun or your hands.....
Ignorance on full display that demonstrates racism so deeply ingrained in the poster that he/she may not even realize he/she is just another uninformed, idiot, racist drone. Typical Obama supporter.
It is time for the Incompetent-in-Chief to put this non-issue aside and stop trying to steal from us our inalienable right to self-protection. None of the proposals the left is offering would have stopped a single instance of "gun violence". Obama is using this subject to deflect from the fact that the economy is not growing and his blame-game has run out of players.
Steve -
I can't even imagine what doom my guns have been plotting under my bed for the last 5 years. I wonder when they'll take action? What happens if I'm not home? It's so corn-fusing!
thetotas:
Sentencing like that might have something to do with CA's financial problems. Seems like a stupid policy to me.
Al Capone supports the NRA, Tommy Guns was the way to go !!!
That's not true - at least not in the past decade or so. The numbers naturally fluctuate from year to year, but overall the rate remains fairly consistent at about 10,000 per year since 2000.
@Simple Theory
It is attitudes like yours that we fear. You come across as exactly what Job1 describes with you irrational hate for the President and your worry that something will be "stolen" from you. Uneducated and uncivilized remarks hurt your cause.
My gun owning friends support keeping our children and families safe, and are glad to do it. Why aren't you?
We do want to keep our children safe.
Thats why we teach them how to use firearms safely and effectively.
As usual, this clown Obama uses the Chicago murder numbers as justification for violation of the constitution, the reality being even if he were able to get his anti-gun agenda pushed through; it would make absolutely zero difference on the streets of Chicago.
The reason is that his gun grabbing agenda has absolutely nothing to do with crime or shootings in general, but everything to do with the disarming of the American people.
By now, most people are keenly aware that Obama's anti-gun push has been on his list of things to do for years, and he was just waiting until after the election.
However, despite his anti-gun cover being exposed, he continues merrily along clinging to his rhetoric. After all, he has his propaganda ministry providing non-stop misinformation.
All Wet Willy
No one is "violating the Constitution." The proposed legislation is completely in keeping with the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. If it were not, the Supreme Court, which has a history of protecting gun ownership, will overturn the legislation.
You are the sad victim of NRA propaganda and right wing media.
Don97524 2.41
Obviously it is you that doesn't understand the constitution and most likely remain blissfully unaware of previous court rulings at both the SCOTUS and various state levels.
Just claiming Obama's gun grab is constitutional doesn't make it so, except in the minds of the rabid anti-gun radicals who are of the opinion they can confiscate most every gun but leave you with grandpa’s 60 year old shotgun to be in compliance with the 2nd amendment. Pathetic.
All Wet
So you make up a story, make believe it's true ........ then you get mad about it. And you call me pathetic.
Job1........."Remember, many that hate any type of gun control are uneducated white men who think that carrying an assault rifle will make them bigger men."
I hereby RETRACT my recommendation to Fox News to hire you for a Fair and Balanced opinion since your "opinions" usually revert to "racist" comments.
Back to the article:
Yep, Chicago is a real good place to "preach" about gun control, especially to those younger gang-banger teenagers hanging out on the corners. There was a young 18 year old Chicago "gang banger" on "First 48" the other night who was charged with "First Degree Murder" of a rival gang member. This kid could care less what happended to him in court. Heck, the "kid" even called his Mom "Hoooa" so one can imagine what was going on at home.
Dumb-farm-boy got it right, the current problem with guns is the decline in our culture and particularly since secular, progressive humanism has become the new, unquestioned orthodoxy in our schools. Hence, the need to go after guns because it's a lot easier to pass ineffective, feel-good legislation than acknowledging or correcting 60+ years of social engineering gone horribly wrong.
Rich folks get to the front of the line for everything. Poor leach drug addicts make a close second over law abiding citizens. Dems fuel chaos by taking from the middle class and pumping that money into ghettos. Does anyone actually believe we can afford to pick up the medical bill for every living being on American soil. Should we set the country up for people that work hard for what they deserve, or so every drug damaged mind can eat for free. When you give our money away to looters it doesnt teach them anything about taking care of themselves in fact it does the opposite, it destroys their self esteem. Dem party of Moms and Grandmas, nothing is safe according to mom. Ive never voted Dem never will. The average american's intelligence has fallen off the charts this last couple decades thanks to rampant drug use. So here we are a broken nation with the most screwed up people on the globe. legalize all drugs and set up mental health facilities that will lock up people too addicted. It will completely strip all drug dealers of all power. The party of moms and grandmas would never do that.
The ignorance behind this argument is the fact that it's way too easy to bring weapons into Chicago from surrounding counties and states.
Practically anywhere in the US a gun buyer can buy u-haul size loads of guns and ammo at gun shows. The US has a serious gun addiction and gun violence problem. Legislation can help.
drive-by-observer
Are you just stupid, or did your mommy drop you while she was stoned?
Ok, let's see if you can follow the logic. {I know it is nearly impossible for a drug adled, dope smokin', hippy, commie Liberal to understand, but here goes}
Drugs and Guns don't kill people, agreed? In fact both have legitimate uses, purposes and are beneficial to mankind, agreed? The illegal use of drugs and guns kill people. So let's ban the illegal use of drugs and guns. What?, wait?, But didn't we already do that? Is it not illegal to possess certain types of drugs? Isn't it illegal for certain individuals to possess certain guns?
NO, If you commie CS, were intent on child safety we would not be having this argument. We would be discussing ways of keeping children safe. Such as exterminating the drug problem. Such as creating more two Parent families, instead of making it easier on single parent families.
Last year more kids {real, babies, (not figurative babies, as in Kindergarteners) died, strapped in car seats, from exposure, than died at Sandy Hook. Completely preventable deaths. Yet, in an emotional knee jerk, completely Liberal, unbelievably stupid, response, you go after the one thing that generally, does the least harm.
One of the few things we have at our disposal to defend against a "Fascist" as you dope smokin' Liberals (who have no understanding of Fascism) call the GOP. Or against "Progressivism", which many GOP mistakenly call everything else.
And by the way. I am all for legalizing all drugs. Coke, LDS, ;-) (Star Trek reference) Pot, ALL of IT. Just don't bother me with it.
My cure for you drug addiction is a .22 cal lead pill delivered at medium velocity to the frontal lobe. Go cook your brains out on acid. But don't expect me to pay "disability" because your "addiction" made it impossible for you to work. I WILL cure your addiction. Lost you job and have to steal to support your addiction. I WILL cure your addiction. How's that Drive By? Still want to legalize drugs?
And you Jack ***, The drugs that were mentioned in that report were already legal drugs, most of the fatal ones were prescription pain killers.
DumbFarmBoy
Your talk about your "cure for drug addiction" is too disgusting for me. Too many of you gun advocates are clearly anti social and so selfish in your attitudes that there is no common ground that you and I can share.
I'm sure it does not break your heart to know that I took advantage of "ignore this author" in order to rid myself of your vile comments.
don97524
And your namby pamby limp wrist-ed solutions to these "Social Problems" is too disgusting for me. Why is it "we must all change" to fit your little world? Kind of selfish, don't you think.
And you obviously have a reading comprehension problem. I DON'T CARE WHO DOES DRUGS (including Alcohol), OR WHAT KIND OF DRUGS THEY DO. My only beef with drug users is that inevitably, I get stuck with the consequences. Their habit, addiction, or what ever inevitably takes over and they get either do something stupid or tragic while on drugs, or in an effort to get them. And my "cure was only intended for those who cause such mischief.
And good for you, instead of pointing out flaws in my argument, demonstrating that you have a better way. You ignore it. Censor people who disagree with you. And yet you will still complain about the ailments of this country, and rush to the government to give you a solution, one that won't upset your delicate sensibilities. We have been doing that for over 80 years now, and while a few areas are showing improvement, we are experiencing a growing number of issues. And you and others like you seem unwilling to associate the correlation between these "solutions" and there resultant outcomes.
According to that other article, isn't Chicago "The city of drunk suburban cops?"
Sees Thru Gloss - apparently you can see but not comprehend. The suburbs are NOT Chicago. Try again!
Seeking...when can we see proof of your Alma Mater?
Mary Joe - I don't give a damn if losers like you know what my Alma Mater is or not. When do we see proof your IQ is over 40?
SS
We see proof that yours is lower every time you post.
rukidding - you and Mary Joe would be funny if you weren't so sad. You're truly classless, unintelligent excuses for people so you fit perfectly in the Republican party. And, dear boy, I could not care less what you think of me. You're irrelevant as a human being.
take your meds SS; try taking them all at once.
you, on the other hand, are two worthless pieces of sh!t.
Uck Fay You Yay, hole of the ass variety.
My, my...can't be having a negative view of the lord and savior now, can we? The cultists will rise up in blind rage at the mere thought of a disparaging remark.
How do you know when Obama is lying? Well, you just know he is because he does it all the time
Simple Theory - I didn't see anyone discussing God on this thread so your post seems particularly foolish - but totally in keeping with all your other foolish posts.
You truly are a sad little person. Pathetic really!
Why propose more gun control in one of the cities that most clearly demonstrates the failure of gun control to curb crime?
Imagine how bad it would be without gun control?
Do you honestly believe the law allows any citizen to shoot a person who isn't targeting them?
And people are allowed to own guns there, just not to carry them around.
Christ, you gun nuts are goofy.
Binkie,
It's you on the left that are goofy...you want still MORE laws, when you can even enforce the ones on the books now... For example, in California, there are approximately 2,000 convicted felons that own guns. The reason why California doesn't actively collect these guns from people we already know are not supposed to own them? Money... Now if California can build a $95Billion+ high speed choo choo to nowhere, don't you think we could use some of that money to pay cops to go out and collect these guns? I mean when does the madness end with you people on the left? You have proof right in front of your nose and yet you want still more laws that you won't enforce....
Mr. Binkie: Those places with relaxed gun laws have significantly less crime than those with strict gun control laws.
Now I understand that is not the only piece of the equation but why is wanting to have a gun for protection goofy?
Ask the mother in Atlanta who was hiding in a crawl space with her two young children while a home break-in criminal was LOOKING for them.
When he found the mother and children he wasn't asking for an autograph. She put 5 shots into the scumbag. Is that the "goofy gun nut" you were talking about?
Or the 18 year old woman in Blanchard, OK at home alone with her 3 month old baby that used a shotgun to stop a home invasion. Is that the "goofy gun nut" you were talking about?
Or how about the carry conceal man in Utah who walked in a store and saw a man (who ironically just bought the large knife in that store) start to stab people. The gun owner pulled his gun and told the man to drop the knife. He did. No shots fired but potentially lives were saved. Is that the "goofy gun nut" you were talking about?
BTW, a Florida State University criminologist study showed that there are approximately two million defensive gun uses per year (that is guns used to PROTECT!!). Is that the "goofy gun nuts" you were talking about?
Find me a major metropolitan center with relaxed gun laws that has the "less crime" as compared to a place like Chicago. I'm just curious...is it really the relaxed gun laws that are causing the "less crime" or might there not be some other factor?
Da Noid: I'll concede that. There are many factors in crime and not just gun laws. You are right a metropolitan area will have more crime than rural Kansas. But the criminals already have guns. Telling law-abiding citizens they can carry a gun is certainly not going to INCREASE crime - simple logic states that. Will it drop much or at all? That I don't know but crime will not INCREASE because a citizen can now carry a gun.
But what is good to look at are areas that recently changed one way or the other so we are not comparing different cities/etc.
When Jeb Bush passed "stand your ground" in 1995 there was significant crime decrease. There was a study (can't find it right now) but criminals were asked what they were most afraid of when committing a crime. They did NOT say the police. In fact the majority said their biggest fear was that the intended victim might have a gun.
Owning a gun is not the crime - using it illegally is. And having a gun for protection will NOT increase crime and does the opposite.
Seems to me that the best thing Chicago could do for themselves....
1) weekly firearms training classes
2) ARM the LAW-ABIDING population with the means to protect themselves
3) put laws in place to PROTECT the law-abiding when they use deadly force to DISPATCH the scum
If you look at the statistics from Chicago itself, from their own PD:
- gun murders are down over half compared to over 20 years ago
- the number of gun crimes committed by citizens with NO PRIOR RECORDS has dropped by 2/3
- the number of gun crimes committed by citizens WITH prior records of same has risen dramatically
- check out the age and demographics (race, etc.) of WHO is doing the killing and being killed
Young black men involved in criminal activity who have prior records, on public streets, late at night, in late summer, are very likely to either be shot or do the shooting.
Preventing a law-abiding white middle-class guy like me with no prior record from owning firearms is going to help HOW, exactly? Preventing the people in entire cities and counties and states in this country where such things are NOT a problem from doing the same is going to do WHAT?
Liberals: seriously. Answer the questions.
Oh, and ProBusiness and Steve are winning the thread. Well done gentlemen.
That is not true for gun-related crimes, which is the whole point.
Why dont Obama propose to clean impropriety (JJjr, Blago) first. Corruption in Chi-Town is abundant as the homicide rate. We might actually lead in that category also....jk actually DC leads the nation in political impropriety.
I'm glad Wayne LaPierre made his point the other day about criminals not submitting to background checks. It gave Gingrich and a lot of folks their talking points on gun violence without expending too many brain cells in the process.
But it proved yet again how stupid the idea is from the left...
JK1963 - no it proves your totally incapable of understanding anything. Your post 7.1 proves that! What a total moron you are and you won't even bother to try to understand anything!
Seeking,
You are nothing but useless noise on this board... The ONLY moron on here is you and your drivel. I really hope that you find someone that will love you for just the way you are (however frightening that is)...
JK1963 - oh poor little boy. Deflecting again. I have a man who is actually a MAN - not a whiney little boy like you. But go ahead and deflect. It's all your ilk has - you truly ARE a pathetic excuse for a human being! And, you show every day that you don't have the brains of a toad!
Seeking,
Trust me, your "man" is probably some wimp of a human being. No one in their rational mind would put up with your snivieling negative abusive personality. You prove over and over again what a bully you are on this board. You remind of the little brat on the playground that made fun of others simply because you had to make yourself feel important.
I made my point about gun control, perhaps you can contribute without an insult? I pointed out that California currently has strict gun control laws and yet we fail to enforce the existing laws. We currently have 2,000 convicted felons that own guns, and yet we (the liberal state of the union) don't have the money to pay law enforcement officers to go and retreive them from people we already KNOW are not supposed to own them. Now given that we are going to spend $95+ BILLION on a high speed choo choo, don't you think our Democratic majority legistlature and our Democratic governor could find SOME money to reduce guns from known offenders?? You want to pass more laws, in the vain hope that yet another law will prevent another Sandy Hook. The reality is that we have laws on the books right now today that will reduce the chances of criminals having guns they are not supposed to own and yet we do nothing about it.
JK1963 - you again make my point. You are fine with your name calling but you can't stand that someone gives it back to a sniveling toad like you.
You've made NO points.
What we need is mandatory registration of every gun; every gun sale; mandatory training for every gun user; licensing just like cars - every so often you have to renew; mental health checks; mandatory background checks even if the seller is an individual. Anyone who breaks any of the laws should be jailed for a minimum of 1 year.
IF everyone was required to file every gun sale, fewer guns would get into the wrong hands.
Oh, and don't whine about the 2nd amendment. No one wants to take your handguns or hunting rifles. However there is NO reason anyone needs an assault weapon or large capacity magazines. Period.
And, no, I don't like wimps which is why I don't like people like you. A real man doesn't need to be like you! They have confidence and know what is good for the country.
My guy has a handgun and a hunting rifle - goes hunting every year. He's been in the military and laughs at buffoons who think they're sooooo big because they have an assault weapon. He's all for a ban on them. He's a real man - not a pathetic little boy who has to make up any shortcomings!
Seeking- Registration and licensing of America's gun owners and their 300 million+ firearms would require the creation of a huge bureaucracy at tremendous cost to the taxpayer, with absolutely no tangible anti-crime return.
@Seeking
I would really like to know your plan for the mental health checks. You do know that there are medical privacy laws don't you?
Also, because I and many other people don't like people who drink, and are affected by them nearly every day, we should create more laws to keep them out of our space too. Why should we be continually subject to the mental and physical damage they do to people daily? Funny that you & many of your friends on this board will verbally attack a certain speaker as a worthless drunkard. Its only the fact, that you and your friends think its ok for it to be wrong for this one person or segment of the population, but no one else.
The drugs you guys and gals are taking today, are far more dangerous than the illegal ones we were taking in the 60's & 70's.
Despite all evidence from a dozen or more countries that have done so effectively, to the contrary of this simplistic statement.
...which would therefore prevent them from buying a gun. That's the point, isn't it?
Most guns used to commit a crime in places like Chicago, where gun laws are more strict, originate in other parts of the country where laws are far more permissive - like Indiana and Mississippi. Virtually all guns begin as legal weapons and at some point make the transition to illegal owners often by straw man sales or simply by virtue of a private sale without a background check.
That is the point. It's not very complicated, but the gun proponents simply choose to ignore it because it would inconvenience gun buyers, and impede sales by manufacturers, neither of which should even be a factor in the debate.
Why does gun control have to be a Democrat or Republican stance? I won't vote for Republican's because of how they have been treating the American people not to mention the lies that came out of Romney's and the rest of their mouths. That doesn't mean I will give up my right to bare arms (2nd amendment) or any other rights. It doesn't mean I want this country over run by illegal's either. Therefore I find it stupid to place this argument on either side of the isle. Now to the argument that one gun is more popular for self defense than another is B.S. I hear some cities don't allow hand guns and want to ban Simi auto rifles or rifles with clips that hold more than 10 rounds. This to me is the stupidest thing I've ever heard, for the fact that in today's home invasion crimes we find more than one person involved and sometimes as many as 4 or 5 people. Tell me how a gun that hold 10 rounds is going to hold off 5 people that may or may not have guns that hold 10 rounds also. That's a total of 50 rounds to 10. Grant you that scenario may not happen to you today but it has happened in the past we have seen it in the news. Would I feel better if I had a 30 round clip in my weapon of choice, absolutely? I also would feel better to just have one weapon rather than 3 + 4 clips. We all have the right to protect our family and when I got married I took a vow to protect my wife. We also have the right to protect ourselves from our government and to do that we need our guns.
Gingrich is an idiot. Background checks are to provide Americans with screening. Nobody expects gangs to.
Gangs shoot at each other or at least to attempt to.
Ban all guns now!
Oh shut up. If you don't like guns, don't buy 1. Maybe you can suck on your "Binkie" and cry for Mommy when bad guys enter your house while you are still in it. In my house, they get 1 warning shot, then the firing range is open.
Binkie,
Why is it that you want to have a background check done to prove who you are to own a gun, yet you don't want to have a background check done to prove who you are to vote??
binkie?...go cry to your mommy...........
Thank god you are no more powerful than the standard keyboard warrior.
If you fools are incapable of understanding the intent to reduce availability of straw purchases by making "supposedly" legal purchasers own up to the purchase(s), then you're as stupid as the gang-bangers themselves. Or worse.
No one is trying to take anything from you, and trying to frame someone else as the "Nancy-boys" here isn't working either. You'll all still have your right to bare arms so you can keep cutting those sleeves off'n yer T-shirts.
JK1963 - okay idiot because voting doesn't kill anyone - guns do! Athough voting seems to have killed the two brain cells you at one time possessed!
Seeking,
Both are rights...please get up to speed...
chick,
But yet Binkie wants to ban all guns... Sounds to me like your fellow liberal is confirming what everyeone else knows about your supposed gun control....
JK again posts like the idiot he truly is!
Dear Mr. Binkie:
Ban all guns? Well, you can try to do so in your political district if you get the political power that is needed. The police you are currently paying to carry out your responsibility to protect your community (and carry guns for you) will miss their guns, though.
Seriously, though, we can all do better job making the world safer. We must find a balance between punishment and prevention. We need some triage here. Punish severely those harming others; no second chances for murderers of the innocent. Provide a way to nurture those children abandoned by those currently entrusted to care for them; take them away from their neglectors and place them with competent people who can and will care for them. Reduce easy ways to obtain firearms by those with criminal intent; background checks for sales between strangers or mere acquaintences (really want to chance a lawsuit over misuse of your former property by someone legally barred from gun ownership?) and secure storage if you own firearms (the NRA recommends one safe for guns and another for ammunition). Obain proper training for each type of firearm you own. As one solution for training, the NRA has certified trainers for firearms.
If we focus on solving the real problems, and not hasseling those with whom we merely disagree, we can make this imperfect world better.
Put a sign in the front window of your home that says:
This is a gun free home.
Get back to us in two weeks to let us know how that works out.
I for one agree with some reasonable limits. Background checks of every gun transfer for example, just as long as no electronic database of gun owners is created, we saw in NY recently how liberals misuse that information.
Regarding gun bans and magazine restrictions- they're just ineffective feel good measures...
Will the psychos and criminals do background checks?They have the big body counts.
If not,stick your background checks where the sun dont shine.
I can go for enhanced background checks that include the mentally ill and EPO's. Of course there needs be a means of getting OFF that list when the EPO is dropped or a person is judged to be mentally sound too. Just so long as NO permanent registration is made out of the NICS checks!
Your absolutely right on bans of both guns and magazines, they're worthless as was shown with the 1994 ban, they proved a mag ban is worthless just the other day by using a 3D printer to print up a 30 round magazine and showed it fire over 90 rounds with no problems.
Probably not, and even if they do, either way they won't be able to buy a gun legally. That's the point, Einstein.
johninpa, there have been several cases recently where convicted felons had guns that they purchased through normal legal channels- in addition there is still a loop hole for private to private gun sales. I am a gun owner, but I see nothing wrong with enhanced background checks, as long as they do not create a gun owner database, I'm fine with that.
While an enhanced background check would not have stopped Sandy Hook there was potential for them to stop the Virginia Tech shooter and the Colorado theater shooter had their names been on a list of those restricted from buying guns. There is no 100% effective solution, but I'm fine with all sales requiring a background check- and you should be too...
Well I didn't think he would be heading for Texas.
President Barack Obama is, arguably, the best gun salesman ever. Over 65 million guns have been purchased since the President took office in 2009. FBI background check statistics indicate that, over the last twelve months, Americans purchased a new gun every 1.5 seconds, a figure which suggests there is much more to the recent panic buying than people just stocking up to go hunting or sports shooting.
The following guns and ammo industry report indicates that every major gun and ammunition manufacturer in the country is running at 100% capacity, with many so far behind that they’ve stopped taking new orders altogether.
Many who have exercised their Second Amendment protections are first time buyers concerned with Federal and State gun grabs being spearheaded by politicians who are using the Sandy Hook school shooting as a pretext to restrict access to personal defense rifles, larger capacity magazines, and even ammunition.
But this may only be a part of why there’s so much demand. There are millions of Americans who are genuinely concerned with not just the government taking their guns, but all of their other Constitutionally protected freedoms as well.
Sir, the next round is on me.
hey obama you ass.....maybe you can work your community organizing magic while you are visiting murder capital.....
mcpaddy- every time you post you show you are low life, crude, and totally ignorant. Married to your sister I'll bet!
di you vote for obama the ass?....you must still be seeking sanity.....good luck
mcpaddy - as I always say, seeking sanity in the Republican party but as lowlife morons like you show daily, there is none to be found. YOU voted for McCain/Palin and Romney/Lyin Ryan. You don't have the brains of a rock!
And the ass here is clearly YOU!
mc,
She is just a festering boil on the butt of society. Obama will be coming to Chicago, home to a crime ridden city incapable of stopping the senseless violence proving once again that strict gun laws don't equate with a lower crime rate.
JK1963 - and you dear are the ass of society - in it's lowest form!
Chicago is not the murder capital, at least not for the U.S. overall. In fact, it's not even in the top 10.
Pay attention.
Seeking you say your "guy" has guns.......If he's living with you I'd keep a close eye on him.......He has to be one emasculated guy.......
hey obama you ass.....how are those strict gun control laws working in chicago?.....not too well it seems...
Most of the guns used to commit crimes in Chicago are being imported from other states where gun laws are more permissive. Why would you expect Chicago's laws to have an impact in places like Indiana and Mississippi?
The biggest problem with existing gun laws is that they are so regionalized. We need consistent laws at the national level to address the problem you're referencing.
Tim, this is the second time I have seen you post this drivel about going to Indiana or Mississippi to purchase guns.... Now I will state up front that I do not know the laws concerning gun purchases in Mississippi, but I do however know all about the laws of Indiana since I am a resident and a gun owner and have purchased many many a firearm here......... Indiana law forbids the sale of a firearm to anyone who is not a resident of Indiana, does this mean that straw purchases can't happen? Of course not, but that could be said of any state that surrounds Chicago....... So your premise that someone from Chicago can simply hop the state line and have a plethora of guns with which to choose from to purchase is absolutely false.......again NO ONE who is not a resident can buy guns in Indiana legally............
RB
I googled "How do criminals get guns. Here is part of the result. As you can see, the major reason is licensed gun dealers who sell to people they should not sell to. The ATF lacks resources to regulate gun dealers largely because of the gun lobby. For example, the ATF has had a part time administrator for more than six years because NRA supported legislators have blocked confirmation. Funding has been denied through the budget process.
Universal background checks and effective enforcement of laws would prevent a lot of guns from falling into the hands of criminal.
President Barack Obama is, arguably, the best gun salesman ever. Over 65 million guns have been purchased since the President took office in 2009. FBI background check statistics indicate that, over the last twelve months, Americans purchased a new gun every 1.5 seconds, a figure which suggests there is much more to the recent panic buying than people just stocking up to go hunting or sports shooting.
The following guns and ammo industry report indicates that every major gun and ammunition manufacturer in the country is running at 100% capacity, with many so far behind that they’ve stopped taking new orders altogether.
Many who have exercised their Second Amendment protections are first time buyers concerned with Federal and State gun grabs being spearheaded by politicians who are using the Sandy Hook school shooting as a pretext to restrict access to personal defense rifles, larger capacity magazines, and even ammunition.
But this may only be a part of why there’s so much demand. There are millions of Americans who are genuinely concerned with not just the government taking their guns, but all of their other Constitutionally protected freedoms as well.
Yes, for crazies like you who preparing for armageddon, I'm sure you're stocking up your bunker with a small arsenal. Too bad that nutcases like you care more about firearms then the hideous human slaughter which occurs on a daily basis in this country.
And BTW pal, you don't know @!$%# about the Constitution and neither do the rest of the gun goons on here. You know who does?? Fella by the name of Barack Hussein Obama. He graduated Harvard Law Magna Cum Laude and then taught Constitutional law at the University of Chicago.
The Second Ammendment is not absolute. It does not give you or any other citizen to carry battlefield grade weapons, just cause you feel like it. That's why you don't see civilians flying F-18's or crusing throught town in an M-1 Abrams tank, much as I"m sure you'd love to have a big old 120mm gun at your disposal.
You're an idiot. You don't see people in F18's and tanks because.... guess what... they cost hundreds of millions of dollars and contracts are made for sale to the government. You want to own one? You can buy one. You can also own the munitions... but good luck getting someone to sell it to you. Properly licensed, you could make your own, if you knew how. But I'm taking the safe bet that you don't. You can own all kinds of automatic weapons if you choose to do so, too. But like anything else, you need a proper license, and they cost big bucks. Lots of old warplanes in the air, lots of automatic weapons out there, civilian owned and operated. But at $10 a shot, not too many people are going to load heavy.
Ozzie Boy- why don't you get off knees before Owebama Magna CUM Laude's on your face.
onermailliw - you prove what most of us know - vulgar, crude, classless, lacking integrity and intelligence are all requirements to be a Republican like you. Your parents would be sooooo proud of the gutter dweller their child has become. You are truly filth!
Seeking are you the pot or the kettle in this instance? Please find another playground to have your recess. Everyone here would rather you go somewhere else to play because we're all just tired of it and frankly find it difficult to like you much because you don't play well with others. Do you ever have anything constructive to add to the discussion or do you thrive on making yourself feel big by belittling others?
I went back to the begining of this blog and found not one single post where you tried to engage in any discussion about the subject at hand.
ALL of your posts are nothing more than jabs at people you don't agree with. Why must you bring your spoiled, crybaby attitude to everything you say?
mytwocents - so since I don't agree with lunatics like you I should go away? You're a total loser and my guess is you only play with yourself. I don't really care if you like me or not. I get along fine with my liberal friends who actually have brains - so I see why that would be a problem for you.
I see absolutely NOTHING constructive you've posted on this entire thread so your comments are less than useful, aren't they?
If you found no comments of mine that engaged in a discussion then your reading comprehension skills are severely lacking as are your social skills. Please have someone of intelligence read to you then explain.
You and your diatribe would be funny if you weren't so utterly HYPOCRITICAL and stupid! Now, do you feel better because as with all the rest of your posts, you just look foolish.
I understand you are more comfortable on a "playground" since children are more your mental speed! Oh, sorry to the children I just insulted!
Now little boy, go away and try to put someone else down. You're not quite up to the challenge since you lack skill and common sense!
And I though Rachel Maddow was a c....er....she don't hold a candle to this blow hard.....
Progressive ideas that don't work, for a Progressive City which don't work, run by Progressive politicians who are corrupt, expressing the idea that the rest of the country should follow their example. How about the news that their Most Wanted is the leader of a Mexican Drug Cartel?
obama is an ass........someone impeach him...
PADDYWHACKO, How profound. I'll bet you spent all kinds of time and effort puking up this post.
Obama must be doing a good job, anything that pisses off your crowd to this extent has to be worthy of commendation.
righto ozzie...........impeach him now.....
mcpaddy - as usual you show your total ignorance. The President has done no impeachable offense! Try again stupid!
Feinstein's assault weapons ban IS in violation of the Constitution. The only way to legally pass it is to amend the document, which we all know WON'T HAPPEN, since it requires 2/3 vote in both houses of Congress. So therefore, if the AWB passes, Obama WILL have committed an impeachable offense.
Ah, how did I know that this article would bring out all the gun crazies from the sewers in which they dwell? Call me a mind reader. If you loons had half as much empathy for those being slaughtered in this country as you do for your dumb ass guns, think how much better this world would be.
Yea, yea, yea, we all know that guns don't kill people but bullets sure as hell do, especially Cop Killer bullets, the kind that La Pierre just loves and fought to prevent them from being banned. But what would you expected from a guy who earns the bulk of his salary from the gun manufacturers and feels compelled to spread fear and hatred. Listening to him, you'd think that no one ever leaves their house without packing and any household that does not have at least a dozen guns is downright suicidal and unAmerican.
How, exactly, did my poor S&W 9mm get involved in a shooting in Chicago by some punk who probably stole a gun or bought one illegally? Maybe you can explain this. I'd love to hear it. Meanwhile, I'll b cleaning my semi auto 12ga shotgun. It's flat black and carries 9 shots total, so try not to be frightened of it.
Like clock work, eh Ozzie Boy? They've had their fingers on the trigger just itching for a 'gun' article for days now, and their edginess is showing. Have no fear, they will have shot up more of their own before the day is over.
@ Ozzie
If you loons had half as much empathy for those being slaughtered in this country as you do for your dumb ass guns, think how much better this world would be.
There is one MAJOR problem with that statement. Murderers have no empathy whatsoever.
Do you think it's acceptable for that punk to be able to buy one illegally, or do you think we should do something to prevent it?
That's how your anthropomorphic tool got involved, by existing laws that do not require 100% background checks to prevent it from entering the illicit weapons supply chain.
chicago is crying out for a community organizer, a savior, the chosen one!!!!!......."what do you mean he is already here?"........obama is an ass......
Classic example of why Obama doesn't get it. ILL has some of the most restrictive gun laws of the 50 states, Chicago has the highest murder rates, year after year, yet he wants more of the same laws that are proven in his own hometown not to work. Not to mention how he keeps putting these dead kids in the spot light to invoke support. Why do honest citizens not need guns but you and your kids need an army of security that we the people foot the bill for.
Any proof of that? Thought not!!
It’s not that Chicago rivals murder wastelands like New Orleans or Detroit, but what’s happening is very alarming for locals. While murder rates in the nation continue to decline, Chicago has seen sharp increases. While murder rates in New York dropped to an all time low last year, Chicago was approaching numbers not seen since the crack wars of the early 1990s.
The city violent crime rate for Chicago in 2010 was higher than the national violent crime rate average by 148.31% and the city property crime rate in Chicago was higher than the national property crime rate average by 44%.
In 2010 the city violent crime rate in Chicago was higher than the violent crime rate in Illinois by 130.33% and the city property crime rate in Chicago was higher than the property crime rate in Illinois by 58.02%.
Chicago has the strongest gun control regime in the nation. Both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines are completely banned in the city. And up until the 2010 Supreme Court decision that legalized them, handguns were banned too.
You can now get a permit to own a firearm in Chicago, but it requires firearms training, two separate background checks and a firearm owner's identification card. As a result of these burdensome and punitive measures, only 7,640 people currently hold a firearms permit in Chicago. But criminals couldn't care less about Chicago's gun laws. Chicago police seized 7,400 guns used in crimes in 2012 alone.
Just like any time in the past when there was lawlessness in the streets as there is in Chicago, you get the CITIZENS to drive them out - WITH arms - WITH the threat of more of their own if they don't stop killing others.
Wouldn't it be easier to use 15' Whacky, Wavy, Inflatable, Arm Flailing Tube Man to run people out of town.
That would be what Owebama is best suited for. He's Wacky, Wavy......
Vigilantism. Great idea.
Not.
While he's in his old home town, maybe he could go back to the old neighborhood and do some community organizing. You know, neighborhood watch for drug dealers and the gangs looking to take over territories. Then call the cops who have announced they will no longer answer 911 calls for that kind of emergency. Then wait for the shooting to stop so everyone can come out of their hiding places and organize a march on city hall to stop the violence.
Rev. Jessie and Rev. Al will come if the camera is running and the mic is on.
No Rev Al and Jessie don't need to show up, they only show up to start the violence
This is one of the reasons they have so many problems in Chicago. Why when this guy broke a gun law that should have put him behind bars, did they let him go?
Alleged gunman in Hadiya Pendleton slaying was on probation for weapons conviction
By Jason Meisner, Chicago Tribune reporter
11:17 a.m. CST, February 12, 2013
The reputed gang member accused of gunning down 15-year-old Hadiya Pendleton last month was on the street even though he had been arrested three times in connection with break-ins and trespassing while on probation for a weapons conviction in recent months, the Tribune has learned.
In two of those arrests, including one just 2 1/2 months ago, Cook County probation officials failed to notify prosecutors or the judge that Michael Ward had been arrested on the new misdemeanor charges and allegedly violated his probation.
The head of the county's probation department acknowledged Monday that his office fell short in its responsibilities and vowed to find out what went wrong.
"There should have been a violation filed, but for some reason there was not," said Jesus Reyes, director of the Cook County Adult Probation Department. "Absolutely, we will investigate."
Reyes emphasized, though, that it was unclear whether any of Ward's alleged probation violations would have led to his being sent to prison for an extended time. The probation department handles thousands of cases each year, and often alleged violations lead only to short jail stints — especially on misdemeanor arrests or if the new charges are soon dropped, as happened in two of Ward's arrests, he said.
"I don't know if something that minor would have taken him off the street for very long," Reyes said.
Today, before Ward's appearance in bond court, prosecutors moved to have him found in violation of probation and held him without bond on the murder charge until a hearing next week.
Bob Loeb, a veteran criminal defense attorney and former county prosecutor, said many judges are reluctant to clog up their calls with probation violations.
"They'll hold them for a while to show them the inside of the jail," Loeb said. "If the new charge is dismissed, then often they don't proceed on the (violation of probation) because they've already accomplished scaring the guy. So nothing else happens."
Ward, then 17, was arrested in October 2011 after Chicago police officers responding to a call of a person with a gun in the 3700 block of South Langley Avenue spotted him running away in clothing matching the description of the suspect, according to court records.
Officers chased Ward and saw him throw a handgun into a grassy area behind a building, the records say. The weapon, a loaded Cobra .38 Special, was later found under a bush, according to court records. Ward told the officers that he had the gun "because the boys from Lake Park were after me," apparently a reference to gang members from a nearby neighborhood.
Ward pleaded guilty to aggravated unlawful use of a weapon in January 2012 and was sentenced to two years of probation by Judge Nicholas Ford. As part of his probation, Ward was ordered confined to his home at night for the first six months, court records show. He also was instructed to complete his high school diploma and attend an anti-violence forum.
Less than three months later, Ward was arrested on the South Side and charged with breaking into a car, but probation officials didn't notify prosecutors that constituted a violation of his probation, Reyes said. At his next court date, prosecutors dropped the charge, records show.
In July, Ward was again arrested on charges he broke into a vehicle. This time, the probation office alerted the state's attorney's office, prompting prosecutors to ask that his probation be rescinded. In August, Ford ordered Ward held without bail, according to the records.
But the break-in charges were dropped the next month when the complaining witness did not appear in court. Three days later, Ford ordered Ward released from custody, records show.
Court records show Ward, now 18, picked up his third arrest in late November. He was charged with misdemeanor trespassing, but probation officials again failed to notify prosecutors, according to Reyes. The charge was dropped in December when a witness failed to show up in court, records show.
Police also arrested Ward numerous times as a juvenile on charges ranging from robbery to battery to marijuana possession, court records show. At least two of those arrests resulted in convictions, and Ward spent time in 2011 on juvenile probation.
Tribune reporter Carlos Sadovi contributed
jmeisner@tribune.com
Ah, those liberal Judges..........
No real surprise, is it? They fail to properly punish a real criminal, and then try to hold everyone else responsible because of their inaction.
Yeah, more laws will fix it.
NOT !
After reading lots of posts on the pro gun control side, I have come to the conclusion that those who are in favor of more gun control laws are interested in only one thing, more gun control. They have no real interest in combating crime, or making the country safer, they only want to go after guns. If they really wanted to do something about the violence they would look toward the people committing the crimes. No gun ever pulled it's own trigger. The actual facts and figures show that the AR style rifle is used in such a small amount of crimes, limits on that rifle will do nothing. It is black and scary looking. The AR is nothing but a semi auto, or auto loading rifle, dressed in black plastic clothing. They cannot and will not understand that.
Somebody needs to tell Obama that he can stop campaigning now, he won the election.
Once again, the White House chooses to ignore the fact that taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens merely makes it easier for violent gangs to perpetrate crime against those people, because the criminals don't give a damn about the gun laws, and they will still have guns when the rest of us don't!!!
By the way, if Obama had sons (and he very well may), they'd be like the street gang members in Chicago.
Guns are a nice inanimate target.
Why don't people look at the incarceration rates among black men? The lack of a father in the lives of many black youth and the high school dropout rates among black teens are two other issues that no one will touch, for obvious reasons. Seems that the real problem is cultural decay. And its worse in some segments than others.
Exactly.
But, when you start bringing up demographics, it's racist! (rolls eyes.)
All trolling aside, addressing the real social issues that lead to this behavior regardless of demographics is the one thing that the gun-control/elimination crowd avoids at all costs.
It requires asking hard questions, facing facts, and taking difficult actions.
It's much easier (and cowardly!) to sit safely in your home and foam at the mouth about clip capacities and the like and feel good about yourself than it is to be truly proactive.
Barack Obama,total phoney,beating an empty drum to make noise.
"I will go to Chicago where all the politicians are friendly.the voters are stupid,and the gangs give the media a good body count for the headlines".
How does this solve our problem of over medicated school shooters in gun free school zones.?
Did he appeal to Rahm and the gangs to get all those guns registered?
Love him all you want,the guys got...nothing.
I voted for him the first time,I expected way more,what a friggin loser.
johninpa - the loser here is you and those like you who don't have a clue but want so badly to pontificate on what you DON'T know! And, frankly, you've shown you know absolutely NOTHING!
You have a president,going to a place where murder is rampant,caused by the very policies he now advocates for the whole country.
You think thats OK and you call your self..."seeking sanity"?
Time for your meds.
johninpa - the policies the President advocates for HAVE NOT caused the problems in Chicago. It is the loopholes that allow sellers to sell guns to people who have no business owning them that cause the problems; it is lack of registration that causes the problems; it is idiots like YOU who cause the problems.
Sorry, seeking sanity in the Republican party but as perverts like you show daily, there is none to be found. Lay off the drugs and maybe you won't kill the little left of your sick brain!
One question for you,stupid,will the criminals in Chicago comply with registration and background checks?
Yes or no?
Absolutely not. But if we start with making registration mandatory we can begin to solve the problem. If we never start, stupid, it never ends. But someone would actually have to have some sense to understand that so, that leaves ignorant idiots like you out!
So,your savior goes to the people causing the problems to tell them he wants to pass laws that will only be obeyed by people not causing the problems and that will somehow cause the people who cause the problems not cause problems any more.
You and that 8 ball should both be in straight jackets.
johninpa - when you call our President "savior" you show that YOU are a total lunatic. I hope they run serious mental tests on you because you posts show you are not mentally fit to own a gun or any lethal weapon.
Your mental disease is that you hate a person for the way they look. You are not rational and can't even begin to see the big picture about anything. You clearly need professional help. I hope your family gets you the help you need before we are reading about you going mad and killing innocent people because you don't have the capacity to cope with anything or face problems rationally. You really are a completely incompetent and very sick individual.
And, if you thought I missed the racist comment you're totally stupid. You aren't clever and show a low mentality that is evident in your post. My guess is your IQ is less than 80. Your jealousy of a man who is heads above you in intelligence AND is black is palpable. You're a pitiful excuse for a man but a perfect ignorant, classless, crude racist!
Cry me a river
Geez seeking, don't you ever stop?
Tell me what do you think about Dr. Carson?
Geez theotas, don't you ever tire of backing the losers? Why don't you decide to talk to the idiots instead of me? Oh, that's right - you won't fight with the ignorant. You don't bother! Go away and take Dr. Carson with you. Carson has no relevance to anything so try to keep up!
johninpa - what a smart response and exactly what I'd expect from you.
@ Seeking..... Are you the pot or the kettle in this instance? Please find another playground to have your recess. Everyone here would rather you go somewhere else to play because we're all just tired of it and frankly find it difficult to like you much because you don't play well with others. Do you ever have anything constructive to add to the discussion or do you thrive on making yourself feel big by belittling others?
I went back to the begining of this blog and found maybe one post where you tried to engage in any discussion about the subject at hand.
ALL of your posts are nothing more than jabs at people you don't agree with. Why must you bring your spoiled, crybaby attitude to everything you say?
WAAA....WAAAA seeking dont like johninpa because hes a racist,he must be a racist because he doesnt like the bestity best president we ever had.
The man goes to Chicago,where they obey no gun laws to push for new gun laws that his VP who made them up says wont work,but it dont matter because the criminals wont obey them anyway.Even this retard seeking says they wont work,but do them anyway because we are jonesing for some new gun laws.
New laws that wont work and will guarantee they will be back for more.
my2cents - believe me, 2 cents is WAY overvalued for your opinion.
johninpa - your post shows your mentality. You've shown exactly how mentally unstable you are. Again, our President is ten times the man you could ever hope to be. And, any "adult" who uses the "retard" word shows what a total low life they are. You are gutter trash and have totally proved my point about your being a lowlife piece of scum. 'nuff said!
I don't think Seeking reads what she writes.
Why don't you decide to talk to the idiots instead of me? Oh, that's right - you won't fight with the ignorant.
What are you taking about, I am not fighting with you.
You want to bet, SS voted for herself. Relax its Friday, enjoy.
@ Seeking........I rest my case.
With you its always the same Sh%#, different post - or is it same post, different sh%#?
Tell you what, Mommy and Daddy have some grown up things to talk about - why don't you go in the other room and play?
thetotas - you've shown how petty you are. Sorry, I don't care who votes me up or not - I don't count votes but you clearly survive on them.
my2centsworth - again, you're opinion isn't worth 2 cents and you have yet to post anything of value but I believe that shows your mental state. Valueless.
tim 2799493 - you've posted sensible comments but, unfortunately, on a thread about guns the hysteria of the "they're going to take my guns" screams against reality. These people will never accept that something needs to be done to stop the slaughter that happens throughout this country - no matter how many bodies pile up and no matter how young those people are. The gun owners value their guns more than people's lives. It's truly sad.
My want to re-think your handle..Re: take my guns..If you would take the time to read all the re-named to feel good anti-gun groups mission statements you will realize their goal is CONfiscation and not CONtrol. Every time a tragedy occurs like Conn. they anti's scream it's the guns, it's the guns when the real problem is the crazies and thugs that pull the trigger..ain't it. You think Obama came up with never let a crisis go to waste..nah, the Brady groups were way ahead of him and ole Rahm..Obama goes to Chicago to pitch for gun laws in a city with the highest murder rate and strictest gun laws in the nation..A city where HE said the young girl was murdered LESS THAN A MILE FROM MY HOUSE..More people died of gang related murders last year in Chicago than troups in Afghanistan where there are every manner of weapons and we are in a WAR..Guess Obama doesn't consider the bIack thugs killing each other over drug turf a war, does he. He## let's do like Kenesaw, Georgia..require all law abiding citizens to keep a gun in their house...ONE MURDER IN 25 YEARS..Compare that with Chicago..not even law abiding citizens have any guns..ONLY THE THUGS. Let's see how the numbers add up..Hmm...Chicago..500+ murders last year X 25 years...Gosh that's 12,500 +++ isn't it........... versus......ONE. still want MORE gun laws that affect law abiding citizens only????