• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Chicago to expand "Gun Free Zones" (1 Viewer)

This is the "Feelgood" solution, which gives the impression of caring and doing something about a problem while actually doing nothing at all.
 
cpgrad08 said:
It looks like good old " Freedom loving" Chicago is at again. After losing the Handgun ban and the state of Illinois allowing CCW. Chicago wants to ban all guns and ammo within a 1,000 feet of schools including any building or park in that radius.

Rahm Emanuel seeks big fines for gun offenses near schools - Chicago Sun-Times
Click to expand...

What you've linked to is a members-only site; but the gyst of the portion that IS printed only talks about stiff fines for weapons offenses -- not gun-free zones.
 
cpgrad08 said:
It looks like good old " Freedom loving" Chicago is at again. After losing the Handgun ban and the state of Illinois allowing CCW. Chicago wants to ban all guns and ammo within a 1,000 feet of schools including any building or park in that radius.

Rahm Emanuel seeks big fines for gun offenses near schools - Chicago Sun-Times
Click to expand...

what do you expect from a guy like Rahmbutt. I sure hope he applies that rule to his armed securtiy guards.

Of course he cannot pack a smith and wesson dressed like this!

2010-10-04-RahmEmanuelballetboy.jpg
 
MaggieD said:
What you've linked to is a members-only site; but the gyst of the portion that IS printed only talks about stiff fines for weapons offenses -- not gun-free zones.
Click to expand...

works fine for me and I'm not a member.

Here is snippet.
The ordinance, which the mayor intends to introduce Wednesday to the City Council, would create new “school safety zones.” Anyone convicted of possessing a gun, ammunition or another “dangerous weapon” in a zone would face a fine of $1,000 to $5,000 for the first offense and a mandatory 30 days in jail.

A second offense would carry a fine of $5,000 to $15,000 and a mandatory three months in jail.

A third offense would carry a fine of $10,000 to $20,000 and a mandatory six-month jail term.
Click to expand...
\

It's more then just a fine.
 
cpgrad08 said:
works fine for me and I'm not a member.

Here is snippet.
\

It's more then just a fine.
Click to expand...

I wonder how they think those gang bangers are going to pay those fines. :rofl
 
MaggieD said:
I wonder how they think those gang bangers are going to pay those fines. :rofl
Click to expand...

about as many who obey other laws concerning guns.
 
Actually this is a dangerous thing if you are gun supporter. The list will grow to include parks and then churches, and in a city like mine that would effectively ban all guns in most of the city because you cannot throw a stick without being within 1000 feet of a park or church or school. Pretty sure it would never happen in my state or city, but it really is part of the incremental strategy.

That said, I do see the left taking the same incremental approach toward guns as the right is toward abortion so I do find some amusing karma parallels in it.
 
Fisher said:
Actually this is a dangerous thing if you are gun supporter. The list will grow to include parks and then churches, and in a city like mine that would effectively ban all guns in most of the city because you cannot throw a stick without being within 1000 feet of a park or church or school. Pretty sure it would never happen in my state or city, but it really is part of the incremental strategy.

That said, I do see the left taking the same incremental approach toward guns as the right is toward abortion so I do find some amusing karma parallels in it.
Click to expand...

Then Chicago will being taken back to court ( wasting Tax payer dollars again) and be force to take the law off the books. Guess they didn't learn after the court throw out their handgun ban. I t would be nice a Gravel mark on Emanuel forehead.
 
The report also states that people with CCW will not be affected by the new ordinance.
 
Captain Adverse said:
The report also states that people with CCW will not be affected by the new ordinance.
Click to expand...

Not the point. It's Chicago trying to other ways to bring back their gun ban.
 
Yeah, that will help for sure.... all those gangers and thugs who aren't obeying the gun laws and don't-murder-people-laws NOW will SURELY obey the new gun-free-zone laws!



:lamo :lamo


I don't know whether to laugh or cry...
 
Goshin said:
Yeah, that will help for sure.... all those gangers and thugs who aren't obeying the gun laws and don't-murder-people-laws NOW will SURELY obey the new gun-free-zone laws!



:lamo :lamo


I don't know whether to laugh or cry...
Click to expand...

Just laugh so hard that you cry
 
Just gonna point out that (a) this law is almost certainly intended to go back to restricting weapon use and (b) despite a year of my life living on the South Side in Hyde Park and plenty in the suburbs, I've only ever seen one person open-carrying outside of law enforcement and gun stores.

The guns stay in places like Englewood where the cops don't do anything in the first place.
 
Goshin said:
Yeah, that will help for sure.... all those gangers and thugs who aren't obeying the gun laws and don't-murder-people-laws NOW will SURELY obey the new gun-free-zone laws!



:lamo :lamo


I don't know whether to laugh or cry...
Click to expand...

They're going to disobey a lawful order from a corrupt mayor. It's poetic justice.
 
cpgrad08 said:
It looks like good old " Freedom loving" Chicago is at again. After losing the Handgun ban and the state of Illinois allowing CCW. Chicago wants to ban all guns and ammo within a 1,000 feet of schools including any building or park in that radius.
Click to expand...

That's a nice start but it should be extended to at least 10 miles.
 
Joe Steel said:
That's a nice start but it should be extended to at least 10 miles.
Click to expand...
Yeah, we'd better ban protesting, privacy, cars, and the consumption of alcohol within 10 miles of schools too.
 
I'm sure the criminals approve of the new and expanded target list.
 
I get why my fellow Chicagoan's might be bothered by this (If they didn't read what the NRA guy said), but why do people from other states and cities care at all?

Here's the bit I found interesting:

Vandermyde said anyone who obtains a concealed-carry permit in the future would be exempt from the ordinance. That would leave criminals who have not obtained their guns legally, he said.
Click to expand...

So according to Vandermyde, the ****ing NRA's lobbyist, we have a gun law being proposed that can only punish criminals, and the response is to oppose the law? How ****ing retarded is that? Seriously, don't give that guy a gun, he'll blow off a toe.

IMO, it doesn't go far enough. If it only affects those who carry illegally near a school, make it a mandatory 20 year jail sentence. **** 'em. I'm actually outraged by the murders and the killing here, and I say **** the criminals. We've buried enough kids in this town already.
 
The only real solution for Chicago is suppressed weapons and those willing to hunt gang members for sport. A pile of retired ganstas on every street corner would certainly help, and nobody in the affected neighborhoods are going to call the police. Even if they did the cops wouldn't show up. I'm thinking paint ball tactical teams looking for a little bigger thrill. Consider it extreme late term abortion and all will be forgiven. It's already been proven that liberals do not value human life unless it affects the agenda, these guys would be largely ignored.
 
Joe Steel said:
Only if they involve gun carriers.
Click to expand...

Got news for you. The people doing all the killing in your fair city have guns. Refusing permits to law abiding citizens only expands the problem. But then, you already knew this. When gang members kill each other it is ignored. When gang members kill innocents it is used to forward bigger government. The lives lost have no value except as it applies to the agenda. Those who write the rules know CCW works, they themselves carry or employ guards who do. Even the guy who suggested the National Guard come in and clean it up basically admitted that the solution involves more guns to take out those doing the shooting. They just wanted them to be carried by anonymous strangers in uniform rather than citizens. When it comes to problem solving, chicken**** politicians prefer to be insulated form it by at least a few degrees of deniability.
 
I seem to remember Blago being willing to sell a Senate seat, maybe some of your corrupt leaders would be willing to pocket some permit money for a new type of hunting license. I don't know if Ted Nugent is any good at being stealthy, but he apparently just killed a bunch of destructive animals in Texas, he'd probably pay good money for a sporting permit in the city. It might even make a good reality show.
 
Tucker Case said:
I get why my fellow Chicagoan's might be bothered by this (If they didn't read what the NRA guy said), but why do people from other states and cities care at all?
Click to expand...

Are you being facetious, or have you woke up today and suddenly had a dream that the heavily state based federal setup you prefer actually came into effect?

While it may be a Chicago law, it's a law dealing with something that is a nationally protected right that is a struggling issue both on a national, state, and city level all across the U.S. A major U.S. city expanding something like this provides a possible example point for other cities, such as the wonderfully gun friendly Washington DC, to use as the basis for similar types of expansions. So while I agree with your seeming annoyance if people were commenting about it singularly because they think it's stupid for Chicago, I can understand reactions to this local story from a national population because there is a larger dialogue going on about the general topic on a national level and local laws play into that discussion.

Here's the bit I found interesting:

So according to Vandermyde, the ****ing NRA's lobbyist, we have a gun law being proposed that can only punish criminals, and the response is to oppose the law? How ****ing retarded is that? Seriously, don't give that guy a gun, he'll blow off a toe.
Click to expand...

And here I agree and it makes me wonder how much people really read the story. I can understand arguing it's a somewhat useless law that you don't think is going to get enforced and could possibly just set the stage for removing the concealled carry exepmtion at a later point while keeping the law in place. But it's definitely something that doesn't work with the normal "new laws just hurt legal gun owners" argument that is so often tossed out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom