Why isn’t gun control working in Chicago?
Despite the media’s intense attention to mass shootings, homicides, violent crime and gun deaths are all decreasing nationally, according to the latest FBI statistics. But not in Chicago. So what is causing the unacceptable wave of gun violence in Chicago?
It’s not because of lenient gun control laws. 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…
One question to address: If the real problem is that guns can be purchased in other jurisdictions, then why are America’s other major cities seeing such huge declines in their murder rates, despite the fact that nearly all of them are near states with relatively lax gun laws?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
The problem us decades of uninterrupted progressivism.
forest on January 31, 2013 at 5:43 PM
Criminals don’t give up their guns.
RickB on January 31, 2013 at 5:44 PM
It couldn’t be because of the people who live there…..
Nah.
Free Indeed on January 31, 2013 at 5:46 PM
Iowahawk addressed this point today with statistics. But the answer to the question is easy enough to find.
Karl on January 31, 2013 at 5:46 PM
There was a NYT article I read earlier today that started off with the same premise but then blamed the lack of those controls in other jurisdictions as the reason Chitowns laws weren’t effective.
catmman on January 31, 2013 at 5:48 PM
Liberals don’t obtain their guns legally.
Pork-Chop on January 31, 2013 at 5:49 PM
Global Warming, you fools.
Why do I have to explain everything around here.
Bishop on January 31, 2013 at 5:50 PM
I’m sure they conveniently carved up Obama’s legislative district, but it would be interesting to look within the boundaries of his defunct district and look at his legacy numbers. We’ll know what we can expect nationally.
Buddahpundit on January 31, 2013 at 5:50 PM
Supposedly something like 90% of gun crimes “prosecuted” in Chi-Town result in no convictions.
What good are gun laws if they aren’t enforced?
Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2013 at 5:50 PM
lack of morality? nah, couldn’t be. it must be global warming or something.
Sachiko on January 31, 2013 at 5:50 PM
Nope, we sure don’t want to discuss that little fact do we?
arnold ziffel on January 31, 2013 at 5:51 PM
The reason for criminal law is that you cannot expect all people to do the things that make for a thriving society. The laws are there to give the power to the state to take these people out of the society and place them behind bars where they cannot damage the rest of society. It has a a degree of prevention for some people, but we know plenty of people are intransigent in their desires and needs to cause harm to the rest of society, but it cannot prevent all cases of an act.
It is illegal to murder someone, but even when a person knows they will be caught, some still commit the murder in order to accomplish their goal, even if they are stopped after. How much more for an intransigent that thinks they can get away with the action? Now, if a person thought the act would be in vain, they might not try to act at all. Fear of being shot dead before they get their goal accomplished many times will prevent them from acting. The whole idea that you disarmed everyone but the criminals means they are no longer fearful of being stopped before they reach their goal. OPEN SEASON.
astonerii on January 31, 2013 at 5:51 PM
Schadenfreude on January 31, 2013 at 5:55 PM
Because gun controls are only effective on law abiding citizens.
antipc on January 31, 2013 at 5:55 PM
And the criminals in charge force the innocent to give up theirs.
RadClown on January 31, 2013 at 5:55 PM
Thought experiment:
What if we repealed all of the ineffective gun laws in Chicago, then made it mandatory for mothers to have a firearm and then enacted a version of the castle doctrine such that if one of her children were in harm’s way she could shoot to kill.
turfmann on January 31, 2013 at 6:01 PM
So I guess we are still pretending that drug dealing gang bangers are not having turf wars and will kill each other at the drop of a hat.
The reason has to be anything but that.
NeoKong on January 31, 2013 at 6:02 PM
Markos JUST tweeted the reason the rate is so high is because of “interstates.” I kid you not. Can someone screenshot that for me?
Notorious GOP on January 31, 2013 at 6:02 PM
If the problem is the guns from other cities, then why is the murder rate lower in those cities where the guns came from?
There are more states that allow CC permits than ever before. Crime is dropping to all-time lows everywhere — except Chicago.
jdpaz on January 31, 2013 at 6:13 PM
If it’s supposedly the “Lax Gun laws” around Chicago, then why isn’t this a problem in similarly sized cities?
Galt2009 on January 31, 2013 at 6:14 PM
Don’t register them or submit to background checks either.
petefrt on January 31, 2013 at 6:16 PM
Great minds think alike and all that..
Great mind on your part at least..
Galt2009 on January 31, 2013 at 6:20 PM
Why haven’t the Leftists figured that out yet?
Galt2009 on January 31, 2013 at 6:21 PM
Criminals don’t use “assault firearms” with 30 round magazines either.
ProfShadow on January 31, 2013 at 6:22 PM
The Chicago Progressives, both voters and elected leaders, are scared to death of concealed carry because they do not want South Side blacks armed. This petrifies them. I think it goes all the way back to the 1968 Chicago riot. This is still in the mind of the older generation of Leftists.
So, the law-abiding blacks are left defenseless in a warzone with only the notoriously corrupt CPD to rely on.
visions on January 31, 2013 at 6:26 PM
davidk on January 31, 2013 at 6:27 PM
Because it isn’t about guns or about violence. It is all about controlling “the masses” that you and I are members of in the population.
ProfShadow on January 31, 2013 at 6:27 PM
Republican Congress and …..BUSH!
Sheesh, on reflection, it was easy
ProfShadow on January 31, 2013 at 6:28 PM
Oh, I suspect that most of the progressive activists know it full well. But of course they can’t admit it, or it would defeat their pretense about public safety.
Since when did we ever expect progs to be honest with us?
petefrt on January 31, 2013 at 6:30 PM
Are you suggesting that people are responsible for their actions?
{clutches pearls, lies back on fainting couch}
single stack on January 31, 2013 at 6:31 PM
Yes, it’s all about control with them – they don’t’ care whether it actually solves the problem.
Reference what ‘no-brainer’ Biden said today:
Galt2009 on January 31, 2013 at 6:44 PM
They are not interested in that. They are only interested in expanding government power over citizens. They are not interested in reducing violance or making anyone safer except their own jobs. They won’t take a closer look at what is going so horribly wrong in Obama’s hometown and anyone who does so is just a racist right wing nut job.
Dollayo on January 31, 2013 at 6:59 PM
An armed society is a polite one…witness: nobody ever shoots up a gun store. I can’t understand why the law-abiding population in Chicago isn’t screaming for relaxing gun restrictions further.
Guns are the great leveler. It doesn’t matter if the criminal is bigger, stronger, younger, faster or even numerically superior as long as a well trained, law-abiding gun owner (with a magazine of sufficient capacity) is there and willing to stand up for what’s right.
If the gun grabbers don’t like the 2nd Amendment, start rounding up your super-majorities in Congress and get referendums going in the states to change it. Good luck with that. Until then, what part of “shall not be infringed” don’t they understand?
Either the Constitution is sacred in it’s entirety, or the whole thing is eventually at risk.
Don’t. Give. An. Inch.
End Rant
VA_gent on January 31, 2013 at 7:01 PM
From an earlier gun thread today…
In other words, chump is implying that there should also be limits on the rights of women, gays, illegal immigrants, and also limits on Presidential powers.
Isn’t that right, chumpster?
Del Dolemonte on January 31, 2013 at 7:05 PM
Chicagoans.
ted c on January 31, 2013 at 7:21 PM
Makes sense to me.
Goose… gander.
petefrt on January 31, 2013 at 8:00 PM
The same reasons it never works anywhere else.
bgibbs1000 on January 31, 2013 at 8:08 PM
Why isn’t drug control working in Chicago? and why are they not even trying for the most part.
They can’t stop the manufacture, sale and distribution of drugs but for some reason they think a new law will make them stop the manufacture, sale and distribution of firearms.
tjexcite on January 31, 2013 at 8:17 PM
That’s why there’s no meth or heroin in Chicago….because, unlike those filthy guns, meth and heroin are illegal…well, almost everywhere.
xblade on January 31, 2013 at 8:33 PM