Chicago Tribune: "Guns and justice"

[friendly_iconoclast]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/chi-0608edit1jun08,0,7430003.story

chicagotribune.com
Guns and justice
June 8, 2009

Supporters of the Chicago ordinance prohibiting handguns may be forgiven for thinking that the 2nd Amendment may not be a problem after all. Last year, the Supreme Court struck down a similar ban in the District of Columbia, putting the Chicago law in grave jeopardy. But now, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in an opinion written by the highly conservative Judge Frank Easterbrook, has upheld the ordinance. So maybe there is hope for it?

Not much. The appeals court decision merely recognized the limits of last year's decision. The Supreme Court ruling applied only in the district, which is unique in being a federal enclave. The justices found that the 2nd Amendment limited the power of the federal government to regulate guns, but they left for another day the issue of whether the limits apply elsewhere.

The appeals court noted that in the past, the Supreme Court has "rebuffed requests to apply the 2nd Amendment to the states," and said its previous interpretation "is open to re-examination by the justices themselves when the time comes." In the meantime, Easterbrook wrote, it's unwise for a lower court to "strike off on its own." So the ordinance stands.

This decision is a model of judicial humility and restraint. But it tells nothing about how the Chicago ordinance will fare once it reaches the highest court in the land. Much as we wish it were otherwise, the landmark 2nd Amendment verdict offers little hope that the city's ban will survive.....

Chicagoans are wondering: If this handgun ban is so wonderful, why do we have +/- 3X New York City's murder
rate? King Ritchie seems determined to (as one commenter put it) "fight this to almost the last dollar. The
last dollar he plans to spend on the Olympics..."

[virginia mountainman]

1. In accordance with prophacy...NT

The loss in Chicago, was necessary, for it to get to the SCOTUS...

[Euromutt]

2. Ah, the paper that gave us "bolt action assault rifles"

(The weapon in question was an unscoped Mauser.)

It is odd how the author seems to notice that the Chicago handgun ban isn't actually stopping criminals from packing heat, but doesn't connect the dots.

[gorfle]

3. One word: drugs

The simple fact is, Chicago has huge drug-related gang problems. These people are operating a multi-billion dollar industry outside the law, so when there are business disputes, their only option is to solve them outside the law, in an ever-escalating barrage of violence.

If every firearm in the world vanished tomorrow, these people would still have goon squads armed with clubs and machetes with which to cut down their rivals.

There are by some estimates around 70,000 gang members in Chicago. This is a force roughly half the size of coalition forces currently in Iraq. It is more than any country sent to Iraq except for the United States.

It is my view that these gangs represent a far, far greater threat to the security of the Unites States than the Taliban. We only pursue the Taliban with such vigor because they killed 3000 white-collar workers and destroyed some prime real estate, whereas gang members generally only kill each other and other poor people unfortunate enough to live in and around blighted gang battlegrounds.

America does not have a gun problem. America has a drug-fueled gang problem. If America had more sensible drug laws and provided better social and economic opportunities for inner-city youths you would see a tremendous decrease in gun crime - far more than any gun control law could ever achieve.

[Statistical]

4. +1. The drug war also skews the crime stats.

Crime is down from the 1990s but victimization rates for average law abiding citizen are down even further.

Take homicide rate: 5.6 per 100K (compared to 9.8 per 100K in 1991).

So does that mean the average law abiding citizen has a 0.56% change of being murdered?

No. Among urban young adults (18-25) involved in the drug war (and it is a war) the homicide rate might be 20X higher. This brings the average up and as a result to reach an average homicide rate of 5.6 per 100K the "non drug war" sub population must be lower than 5.6.

Domestic violence is another uneven grouping. Those involved in a violent relationship have a homicide risk much higher than the statistical average while who aren't conversely have a lower one.

A more rational approach to illegal drugs would lead to lower crime. Crime rates spiked during prohibition not by any change in the behavior of the population as a whole (other than buying illegal alcohol) but by the actions of the sub population involved in the alcohol wars. Simply because once again a very valuable business was pushed underground. Could rival liquor gangs seek redress via the court system? Of course not, so they solved their problems with "good ole violence".

[DonP]

5. This is related to a local shooting here

Last week a young and popular Chicago cop was shot and killed and another wounded by two gang members in Englewood. The same guys had been arrested for several parole violations two weeks prior, including one for a gun possession. This is a paroled felon, caught with a gun, and released by a judge, even with 3 parole violations.

I wish I could say that it's finally dawning on the Tribune editorial board that there is a big difference between law abiding gun owners and gang members with illegal weapons. But I doubt it.

I think they are just getting gradually resigned to the inevitable decision by SCOTUS to incorporate the 2nd amendment and have it apply to cities and states. Then the Chicago gun bans will go away, even with Daley spending millions of tax $$$ fighting them every step of the way.

What might be worth noting is that the comments were up to 50 last time I looked and not one comment supported the existing gun bans. Most comments run about 100 to 1 gun owners versus gun control people. Now even that 1 has disappeared it seems.

Our gun free Utopia of Chicago will go the way the rest of the country does ... and the shooting death rate may actually start to drop.

Now we work on getting a concealed carry law next.

[spin]

6. Gang members must love living in Chicago...

It was there, in the 6000 block of South Hermitage, that paths tragically crossed as the reputed gang members, Shawn Gaston and Kevin Walker, allegedly fired onto the street from a passing car, fatally shooting the plainclothes officer in the head as he talked to a resident about the earlier shootings.

******snip*****


Gaston, the alleged shooter, was arrested in 2007 for carrying a loaded gun in the 6000 block of South Paulina -- and about two blocks from Valadez's slaying. He pleaded guilty to a felony and was sentenced on March 20, 2008, to two years' probation by Judge Bertina Lampkin. He is due in court before Lampkin next month on a violation of probation.

Gaston, of the 6200 block of South Paulina, has been arrested at least 13 times on charges that include robbery, assault and gambling. He's listed on several arrest reports as a member of the Gangster Disciples.

Walker, of the 2500 block of West 70th Street, pleaded guilty to a 2008 aggravated armed robbery in the 6400 block of South Fairfield after he pulled a man from a truck as an accomplice held a gun to the man's head, according to court records.
http://www.policeone.com/gangs/articles/1838772-Gang-members-charged-with-murder-of-Chicago-cop/

Chicago has a mayor who is doing everything in his power to avoid allowing honest citizens to own handguns. Unarmed citizens pose no threat to armed criminals. A criminal can pursue his chosen line of work without fear of a homeowner or a citizen on the street shooting him.

Meanwhile, the criminal can carry his handgun with little fear that he will face serious jail time if caught by the police. If the judge does sentence him to probation, he can just violate it because it's no big deal.

Chicago is "gangsta" heaven. Al Capone would be proud.

[gorfle]

7. And yet...

And yet, rather than address these issues, the anti-gun crowd keeps crowing and pining for the day that all guns are gone.

[spin]

8. I wonder if an honest citizen in Chicago was caught with a handgun...

what punishment would he face?

[DonP]

9. It's a felony bust here.

If you're caught with a gun it's usually a felony charge.

If convicted you lose your right to vote, own firearms or hold office.

They are selective about prosecutions though. Every now and then a self defense story leaks to the media. Last year for example we had a 80+ year old WWII Army vet, I think it was in Chatham, who's home had been broken into by thugs twice before - shoot and kill one of the criminals and wound the other when they broke in on him and his wife. The police and states attorney didn't charge the guy. I'm sure they confiscated his gun though.

They also never seem to prosecute the families or friends of aldermen or precinct captains either for some odd reason.

I think they make the call on how sympathetic the citizen would look on the news (and how stupid they would look prosecuting him).

[spin]

10. So it looks like the criminals who illegally carry...

get off with a slap on the wrist while the honest citizen gets real punishment.

Can't have honest people threatening the lives of hard working criminals and gang members.