Tuesday, July 22, 2008

RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

Frank Penn, a contributing writer for the Chicago Daily Observer, takes our mayor and, to a lesser extent, our superintendent to task on their opinions concerning the the Heller decision.
On Daley
After hearing Daley and others in our ruling classes bemoaning the Heller decision with inane and absurd arguments I wondered where Illinois democratic politicians go to get their IQ’s lowered.

On Weis
that the overwhelming majority of homicide offenders AND their victims (who are often in possession of firearms themselves when they are killed by the offenders, often in mutual combat) are convicted felons who are presently prohibited by any number of federal, state, and local laws from even possessing, much less employing, in crime any firearm at any time.
Weis said in a Sun-Times article that 75 percent of Chicago’s murders involve firearms. So far this year, Chicago Police have responded to 15,000 “man with a gun” calls and 27,000 calls of “shots fired.” Does he really believe that allowing law abiding citizens handguns in their homes would create a significant increase of these statistics?

Interesting read.

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

One might have the right to own a firearm in their residence, but not to walk out in public with it. Cities and Towns should have the right to say "NO" to concealed carry. And really, does one need an AR-15 or AK-47? These types of weapons should be allowed to be banned.

Anonymous said...

The 2nd Amendment should be preserved in its full integrity adn law abiding citizens should have the right to keep and BEAR arms.

Unlike the politically appointed hack above me: Tue Jul 22,01:13:00 PM I understood what the Founding Fathers knew,that the citizens might have to reclaim their government from corruption and decadence before Americana falls just like Rome fell.

Anonymous said...

And really, does one need an AR-15 or AK-47? These types of weapons should be allowed to be banned.

Tue Jul 22, 01:13:00 PM

Do you really want to start down this slippery slope? After all, who really NEEDS an H3, or three dogs and a cat, or a double burger with cheese that has more than 3000 calories? Who needs candy, a fur coat, cigars, whiskey, beer, or any other luxury? And who will determine who needs what? I don't want my rights to be based on what someone thinks I need. You don't either.

Anonymous said...

'Bout time you posted a new thread, SCS. Sometimes I wonder if I'm reading a blog or the Chicago Reader. They only publish once a week too!

Rue St. Michel said...

If you're qualified to carry and have no mental illness in your background - why should it matter whether you carry an assault rifle or a .22cal?

Remember: The Second Amendment guarantees ALL the other Amendments and Rights within the Constitution.

Anonymous said...

yeah you cocksucker, i do need my AR15. geek.

Anonymous said...

I am not a member of the NRA, but I do beive in the individual right to bear arms. There is endless discussion from liberals that guns kill people. These are the same drunks that kill more people in DUI crashes each year than guns.
These are the same people who claim that law enforcement DEMANDS strickter gun laws based on possession, but never ask an actual policeman. They ask the Mayor's apointed Police Chief.
I am a police officer. I ama Republican with moderate view. I vote for what I want; nd taxation to help the lazy is not what I want. I would love every citizen "legally allowed" to cary a firearm to have one. I know that every time I make a traffic stop it is dangerous. I also know that when I pull over the middle aged white/black/hispanic/asian male/female wearing business clothes for speeding/blowing the light or stop sign, etc. I don't normally have to worry about them shooting me. I am always careful, bit if they had a gun I would be more so. Either way, I belive that my wife and children should have the right to feel and be as safe as I am when I am off duty. They should have the every reasonable avenue to protect themselves and others from harm. Any research I have done has revealed that permission to carry has reduced crime. Whether that is the trend now or just a fact of incarceration: only time will tell. I belive that we should give it a chance and I belive that Chicago politicians should stop strong arming companies to donate to bullshit causes that don't do a thing. I wish I had more BB guns....I'd buy another firearm!!!!

Anonymous said...

So why not a regulation of types of weapons allowed? Should people have RPG's like those wandering around in Iraq? Some types of weapons are a little bit too much for the general population here.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
One might have the right to own a firearm in their residence, but not to walk out in public with it. Cities and Towns should have the right to say "NO" to concealed carry. And really, does one need an AR-15 or AK-47? These types of weapons should be allowed to be banned.

Tue Jul 22, 01:13:00 PM

Your a moron.Truly un-educated."to keep and BEAR"which means to have on ones person.I have a god given right to carry a firearm.

I dont have to show need for an AK47,this is America.The speed limit is 55mph in Illinois,I can still buy a Ferrari and drive it.

Anonymous said...

THOUGHT EVERYONE COULD USE A LAUGH

A man walks into a pet store and is looking around when he spots a chimpanzee in a cage marked, "$1000". The man looks a little closer and discovers that the chimpanzee is wearing a tie and a hat and is twirling a set of handcuffs around his finger. Curious, the man summons the shopkeeper and asks him what the deal is with this thousand-dollar monkey.

"Sir, You have discovered our Police Officer Monkeys. This one is our basic Patrol version. It's got a POST Basic certification; can fire 'Expert' with a Glock, Remington 870, or an AR15; knows the Penal Code and Traffic Code by heart and is up-to-date on Cultural Diversity and Active Shooter Response. Very good value for a thousand dollars!"

The man is suitably impressed and moves to the next cage, which is occupied by a gorilla - also wearing a hat and tie, but is gnawing on a pen instead of the handcuffs.

The price on this one is $5000. Shopkeeper exclaims, "Ah, sir! You have discovered the Sergeant model! This one has a POST Advanced certification, is capable of training any other monkeys in basic firearms skills, mechanics of arrest, physical training, investigation and small unit tactics! It can even type! Very good value for five thousand, sir!"

Impressed, the man moves to the last cage. Inside, he finds an orangutan, dressed in the same hat and tie as the others, but holding only a coffee cup. "What does this one do that he's worth $12,000?" asks the man.

The shopkeeper clears his throat, "Ah, sir, well, um.... we have never actually seen him do anything except drink coffee and play with his dick, but he says he's a Lieutenant."

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
So why not a regulation of types of weapons allowed? Should people have RPG's like those wandering around in Iraq? Some types of weapons are a little bit too much for the general population here.

Wed Jul 23, 08:17:00 AM

Why not an IQ test for voting and breeding purposed too?Oh,by the way,currently by Fedral law you can own an RPG-7.

Anonymous said...

Should people have RPG's like those wandering around in Iraq? Some types of weapons are a little bit too much for the general population here.

Wed Jul 23, 08:17:00 AM

Good God, will you please stop hanging out at Starbuck's? Those weak-minded liberals have softened your brain! An RPG is not a firearm! I guess next you'll be saying that we shouldn't be allowed to carry suitcase nuclear weapons. (And by the way, if you're seen carrying an RPG in Iraq, you'll get holed. They're not legal to carry there, dope!)

Anonymous said...

Americans should really exercise their bodies, then you don't have to need the latest firearm. (most of these just sit in a gun safe never getting the use it should) Its like a fancy golf club. If you do well with a regular one , why update to a fancy one?

Anonymous said...

Lt. class in the works? A little birdie says...

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Americans should really exercise their bodies, then you don't have to need the latest firearm. (most of these just sit in a gun safe never getting the use it should) Its like a fancy golf club. If you do well with a regular one , why update to a fancy one?

Thu Jul 24, 09:10:00 AM

What will a 100lb women do,what about my wheel chair bound grandma?Will my 12 year old son be able to chuck norris willy the crack head or put some .22s in wildhog.
Those of diminished capacity should be seen and not vote.

Anonymous said...

Wed Jul 23, 02:48:00 PM

Now that's funny!

Anonymous said...

You don't need an assault weapon of any type.

Most homicides involving a firearm occur with a .22 (whatever gun you choose to use).

A .22 could never be considered an "Assault Weapon" by anyone that has even smelled gunpowder.

The 9mm might be used a lot by gangbangers, but is far from the most lethal caliber.

Just remember - the most deadly animal on the planet is a bee.....

lawya said...

--One might have the right to own a firearm in their residence, but not to walk out in public with it. Cities and Towns should have the right to say "NO" to concealed carry.--

I just posted this on SCC, but I'll repeat as this bears repeating.

The Heller decision cannot be read in any way as allowing a blanket-ban on carrying outside of the home. The decision says that the right to bear may be restricted by allowing bans in certain types of "sensistive" institutions like schools or government offices.

The decision says that a local government can decide to ban concealed carry. This is a dig at DC and Chicago, as something like 48 states explicitly authorize concealed carry.

The entirety of the decision is that there is a private constitutional right to KEEP and BEAR arms. Your right to keep and bear may be limited by:
type of weapon (e.g., sawed off shotguns can be banned);
place (private owners may institute gun bans on their property, and government can ban guns in "sensitive" governmental places);
person (felons and the mentally ill);
manner of bearing ("concealed carry", or presumably conversely an "open carry", but not both).

I hope the NRA asks for immediate injunctions in both DC and Chicago.

If Chicago and Illinois are smart, they will both tailor laws in accordance with Heller, and then mandate that a person be charged only under a law written in accordance with Heller where that person can be so charged.

As an example, if you can charge someone with uuw for carrying under a law that blanket-bans carrying by anyone, the law itself is unconstitutional.

However, if you can charge a felon with uuw for carrying under a law that blanket-bans carrying by felons, the law is probably constitutional.

Chicago and Illinois would be well advised to draft laws, duplicative in necessary, that are strictly in accordance with the broad individual right to keep and bear as set forth in Heller and the 2nd Amendment.

Anonymous said...

Off subject…

I understand that they just put a class of sgt’s on the street but does anyone know if they are planning to make another class this year? Also, if they are still down sgt’s how short are they?

Anonymous said...

Please take a look at this site and SCS please post a link to the blog on SCS:

http://www.bordermovie.com/

BLOGSITE:

http://www.border-movie.blogspeaks.com/

Anonymous said...

The Ghetto Lottery Continues:

LOGAN SQUARE:
Dog killed, officer sued
A Northwest Side woman filed a battery suit against a Chicago Police officer and the City of Chicago after the officer allegedly busted into her Logan Square home with a gun drawn and fatally shot the family dog in front of her daughter. Fabiola Robles filed the suit Friday in Cook County Circuit Court. The suit claims that on Dec. 12, 2007, the officer forcefully entered a closed door at Fabiola Robles' home with his weapon drawn and discharged his gun inside a darkened stairway, fatally striking the family's pet boxer, Rocky, twice in the neck, the suit said. The five-count suit seeks more than $50,000 in damages.

Anonymous said...

I like vermonts sytem better,pure second amendment.

Please keep in mind that this is an open blog
that can and is read by people other than Chicago Police Officers.