11, including child, 3, shot in Chicago park

LTC8K6

Penultimate Amazing
Joined
Nov 26, 2002
Messages
21,423
Location
Directly under a deadly chemtrail
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-09-20-01-33-58

CHICAGO (AP) -- Eleven people, including a 3-year-old child, were injured late Thursday when someone opened fire on people in a park located in Chicago's Back of the Yards neighborhood.

Chicago Fire Department officials said the child was in critical condition. Two other victims were also in critical condition, officials said.

Officer Amina Greer said the shooting occurred shortly after 10 p.m. Thursday. According to Greer, at least 10 ambulances responded to the scene, transporting victims to several area hospitals.

A witness, Julian Harris, told the Chicago Sun-Times that dreadlocked men fired at him from a gray sedan before turning toward Cornell Square Park and firing at people in the area. He said his 3-year-old nephew was wounded in the cheek.

...

Gun control laws are pretty strong in Chicago, iirc.

Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Illinois#Local_laws
 

It might be restrictive compared to other part of the US, but really, you can't call that restrictive compared to many other countries. It jsut ban a certain category of semi automatic arm as far as I can tell.

Anyway I seriously doubt *any* gun law on state level would work, as long as the next state (to which you can travel without control) has no such restriction.
 
It might be restrictive compared to other part of the US, but really, you can't call that restrictive compared to many other countries. It jsut ban a certain category of semi automatic arm as far as I can tell.

Anyway I seriously doubt *any* gun law on state level would work, as long as the next state (to which you can travel without control) has no such restriction.

You can't buy a handgun legally out of your state of residence, without the paperwork and background checks, and you would then have to pick the handgun up from a Chicago FFL holder. I think Chicago still bans handgun sales altogether though, so you couldn't even do that. I don't think any other big city totally bans handgun sales.

So, I seriously doubt these thugs are driving anywhere to obtain a gun illegally when they can do it right in Illinois. They aren't obeying any laws, let alone gun laws.

The police find far more guns on the streets of Chicago than NYC or LA, for example.

If you are a criminal and need to obtain a gun illegally, as you'd have to with the restrictions, it makes no sense to drive out of state.

The penalties in Illinois are relatively light for violating gun laws. Which is probably part of the problem.

The shooting is most likely gang related, another big problem that doesn't get enough attention or enough jail time.

Many gun crimes in the states are due to gang activity.
 
Last edited:
The laws may be strict, but access to guns is still pretty easy.

This situation is more about inner-city gang issues, than gun control.
 
Again ???

:(

Sure. Strictest gun laws around and the murder capital.

Slack enforcement of gun laws. Little effort to combat gang activity.

Straw purchases are very much illegal in all 50 states, and they are not a common way for criminals to get guns. So it seems like this has to be largely an enforcement problem with existing laws.

What is a straw purchase?

A straw purchase is an illegal firearm purchase where the actual buyer of the gun, being unable to pass the required federal background check or desiring to not have his or her name associated with the transaction, uses a proxy buyer who can pass the required background check to purchase the firearm for him/her. It is highly illegal and punishable by a $250,000 fine and 10 years in prison.

What percentage of criminals obtain their firearms from friends or family or the street?

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 40 percent of criminals obtain their firearms from friends or family and another 40 percent obtain their firearms from illegal sources on the street.

Can the firearms criminals purchase illegally on the street come from straw purchases?

According to the ATF, the average "time to recovery" (the time span between the initial purchase of a firearm to the time that it is used in a crime) is more than 11 years. This tells us that criminals typically are using older, recycled firearms, not newer firearms recently purchased from licensed retailers. So, unless you believe that criminals are buying firearms only to use them a decade after the purchase, it is clear that straw purchasing is not a common method for criminals to obtain guns.

http://www.dontlie.org/faq.cfm
 
Lots of guns, easy access for criminals, lack enforcement and insufficient punishment = gun problems.

It is hardly rocket science, but it is still beyond the abilities of Chicago's leaders and CJ system to deal with.
 
The laws may be strict, but access to guns is still pretty easy.

This situation is more about inner-city gang issues, than gun control.

Local gun laws cannot have any real effect unless the borders are sealed.

Since you cannot do that, such laws are symbolic only.

What is needed is a national licensing law requiring practical and medical testing, background checks, and provision of continuing insurance, registration of every legal gun with formal title, annual inspection of all registered guns by a licensed gunsmith, and very Draconian penalties for violations of the law such that nobody would take that ridiculous risk.
 
Local gun laws cannot have any real effect unless the borders are sealed.

Since you cannot do that, such laws are symbolic only.

What is needed is a national licensing law requiring practical and medical testing, background checks, and provision of continuing insurance, registration of every legal gun with formal title, annual inspection of all registered guns by a licensed gunsmith, and very Draconian penalties for violations of the law such that nobody would take that ridiculous risk.
111684cdc4364b7b17.gif
 
You can't buy a handgun legally out of your state of residence, without the paperwork and background checks, and you would then have to pick the handgun up from a Chicago FFL holder. I think Chicago still bans handgun sales altogether though, so you couldn't even do that. I don't think any other big city totally bans handgun sales.

So, I seriously doubt these thugs are driving anywhere to obtain a gun illegally when they can do it right in Illinois. They aren't obeying any laws, let alone gun laws.

The police find far more guns on the streets of Chicago than NYC or LA, for example.

If you are a criminal and need to obtain a gun illegally, as you'd have to with the restrictions, it makes no sense to drive out of state.

The penalties in Illinois are relatively light for violating gun laws. Which is probably part of the problem.

The shooting is most likely gang related, another big problem that doesn't get enough attention or enough jail time.

Many gun crimes in the states are due to gang activity.

If gun were restricted on the whole US, the guns would not be so easily available. The problem is, many do not want to restrict gun in any fashion. Therefore gun bought in a state can legally or illegally very easily go from one place to the next.

This is a much different proposal when gun are restricted country wise. Sure people can illegally get guns, but the probability is much lower, and more importantly, they don't expect other to have gun and are less likely to use them against random people.

We had a gang criminality where I live just like you had. But you know why it rarely do the news around where I used to live (well except when they started to burn all those car around Paris) ? Because when they fight and go to the hospital it is because of using knives, or bludgeon. That need far more guts and go body to body with the intended victims, than pressing a trigger. That still happened because there are such people everywhere. And guns, the very rare which was for sale, were a very very rare occurrence.

The point is NOT to make guns impossible to get, the points is to make them unavailable not readily available, a costly rare occurence.

if you have widespread gun sale to everybody, then those will *always* be widespread among the thugs.

Accept the dead and accept the gun non-control. Or refuse both. You can't chose and pick.
 
Last edited:
If gun were restricted on the whole US, the guns would not be so easily available. The problem is, many do not want to restrict gun in any fashion. Therefore gun bought in a state can legally or illegally very easily go from one place to the next.

This is a much different proposal when gun are restricted country wise. Sure people can illegally get guns, but the probability is much lower, and more importantly, they don't expect other to have gun and are less likely to use them against random people.
We had a gang criminality where I live just like you had. But you know why it rarely do the news around where I used to live (well except when they started to burn all those car around Paris) ? Because when they fight and go to the hospital it is because of using knives, or bludgeon. That need far more guts and go body to body with the intended victims, than pressing a trigger. That still happened because there are such people everywhere. And guns, the very rare which was for sale, were a very very rare occurrence.

The point is NOT to make guns impossible to get, the points is to make them unavailable.

if you have widespread gun sale to everybody, then those will *always* be widespread among the thugs.

Accept the dead and accept the gun non-control. Or refuse both. You can't chose and pick.
My main issue is with the part I highlighted. According to the news report I heard this morning (CNN, with more than just a headline, though granted not incredibly in-depth), this was not about shooting someone considered a threat; it was part of gang activity, looking for someone to shoot, not hold up and then use the minimal force necessary.

Not that it undermines your broader point (it may, but I'm not getting into that just yet), but it doesn't apply to this event.
 
If gun were restricted on the whole US, the guns would not be so easily available. The problem is, many do not want to restrict gun in any fashion. Therefore gun bought in a state can legally or illegally very easily go from one place to the next.

This is a much different proposal when gun are restricted country wise. Sure people can illegally get guns, but the probability is much lower, and more importantly, they don't expect other to have gun and are less likely to use them against random people.

We had a gang criminality where I live just like you had. But you know why it rarely do the news around where I used to live (well except when they started to burn all those car around Paris) ? Because when they fight and go to the hospital it is because of using knives, or bludgeon. That need far more guts and go body to body with the intended victims, than pressing a trigger. That still happened because there are such people everywhere. And guns, the very rare which was for sale, were a very very rare occurrence.

The point is NOT to make guns impossible to get, the points is to make them unavailable not readily available, a costly rare occurence.

if you have widespread gun sale to everybody, then those will *always* be widespread among the thugs.

Accept the dead and accept the gun non-control. Or refuse both. You can't chose and pick.

Well, I don't think the dead are related to our gun laws, but to the lack of enforcement and lack of punishment of gun crime and other crime. Lack of even addressing the youth crime issue, imo.

We have plenty of gun laws already.

We actually seem to be loosening up the punishments, it seems.

Why does Congress and the media constantly focus on AR-15 rifles and "assault weapons", when they are almost never used in crimes?

I don't know.
 
Local gun laws cannot have any real effect unless the borders are sealed.

Since you cannot do that, such laws are symbolic only.

What is needed is a national licensing law requiring practical and medical testing, background checks, and provision of continuing insurance, registration of every legal gun with formal title, annual inspection of all registered guns by a licensed gunsmith, and very Draconian penalties for violations of the law such that nobody would take that ridiculous risk.

That would disenfranchise the poor, unless it is subsidized.

Such government regulation would also certainly come with fees.

Poor people would then be the only ones restricted from owning guns.
 
Well, I don't think the dead are related to our gun laws, but to the lack of enforcement and lack of punishment of gun crime and other crime. Lack of even addressing the youth crime issue, imo.

We have plenty of gun laws already.

We actually seem to be loosening up the punishments, it seems.

Why does Congress and the media constantly focus on AR-15 rifles and "assault weapons", when they are almost never used in crimes?

I don't know.

Because the gun manufacturers are a powerful lobby and need to sell a lot of guns to stay in business. Perhaps they can afford to throw the AR-15s "under the bus" so they can keep selling handguns. Okay, I just made that up, but when in doubt, follow the money.

That would disenfranchise the poor, unless it is subsidized.

Such government regulation would also certainly come with fees.

Poor people would then be the only ones restricted from owning guns.
Well, aren't they the ones shooting each other? ;)
 

Back
Top Bottom