Posted on 01/16/2014 5:30:21 AM PST by rellimpank
SPRINGFIELD — In small towns Downstate, murders may happen once every 50 to 100 years, if that frequently, and the worst crimes might be a meth lab getting busted or someone driving away from a gasoline pump without paying.
Yet, these extremely low-crime pockets of the state are precisely where people appear to be lining up the fastest to apply for state permits to carry concealed handguns, according to a Chicago Sun-Times analysis of concealed-carry applications submitted so far to the Illinois State Police.
By contrast, in Cook County, gun owners appear to be moving the slowest to apply for the concealed-carry permits, causing the state’s most populous county to rank dead last of all 102 Illinois counties on a per capita basis, data shows.
(Excerpt) Read more at suntimes.com ...
-—”collar counties”—a new term to me—
The outstate peeps want to make sure that the citizens of ChiTown behave when they are outside the fence. (both meanings)
Probably “blue collar” counties. Why should law abiding citizens of Cook County get licensed - there is obviously no real reason to
Could it be that Cook County is dragging its heels on handing out application forms?
Or perhaps such a large percentage of Cook County residents already have unregistered guns?
“Collar counties” is Chicago speak for those counties that border cook (Dupage, Will, Kane, etc.). In actuality, these are mostly white collar, with plenty of families and only a few pockets of poverty.
“Cook County, gun owners appear to be moving the slowest to apply for the concealed-carry permits”...
Probably due to the never ending brainwashing the claims guns are evil. Most Chicagoans carry without a CCW anyway.
I’m not really sure why this is at all shocking. You’re talking about Chicago, a city which has done everything in its power to prevent gun ownership, and even though that was finally broken, a legal gun owning community isn’t going to magically spawn overnight. There are no gun shops in the city from what I understand, and certainly no gun ranges. It rather requires there to be people with guns before you can get people interested in carrying said guns legally.
“Probably “blue collar” counties. Why should law abiding citizens of Cook County get licensed - there is obviously no real reason to”
No, collar counties is terminology that has been used for a long, long time. It means exactly what it says, those counties that surround Cook County and the City of Chicago, just like a ring around your neck, a collar. Many of those collar counties in the past were Republican, less so now, but still many are predominantly more conservative, especially DuPage County due west of Chicago, about 25 miles out. That’s the County I live in.
An honest citizen might have trouble applying to a criminal gang for a CCW, he doesn't fit in.
The residents of Cook County realize that the Cook County government will resort to all forms of chicanery in order to deny them their Second Amendment rights. They may not want to invest in a firearm until later, on the chance that it may be subsequently considered contraband.
ILLINOIS STATE RIFLE ASSOCIATION
INFORMATIONAL ALERT
WHAT TO DO ABOUT THOSE PESKY “NO-GUNS” SIGNS
As you may know, the concealed carry law enacted last year ironically includes provisions that will greatly impede your ability to defend yourself against violent criminals. Among these impediments to self defense is a provision allowing private property owners to prohibit concealed firearms on their property. The law requires such property owners to post government-approved “no guns allowed” signs on property entrances.
As implementation of concealed carry goes forward, more and more of these “no guns allowed” signs will be springing up in businesses across Illinois. Although law-abiding firearm owners are offended by such signs, most of us accept that private property owners are free to limit access to their property as they see fit. Nonetheless, the placement of such signs poses some serious public policy implications to those who honor free exercise of basic human rights.
In practical terms, the official “no guns allowed” sign actually declares, “No Self Defense Permitted Beyond this Point.” Thus, a property owner who posts a “no guns allowed” sign is telling you point blank, “I don’t care if you and your family are in danger, I will not allow you to defend yourself.” The net effect of the property-owner’s self-righteous indignation is that anyone who enters the posted property unarmed is being set up for violent attack.
The beauty of concealed carry is that only handful of citizens need to be armed in order to protect the greater part of society from harm. This benefit arises out of the fact that would-be criminals are never really sure which citizens around them may be armed. As a result, their criminal urges may be stifled in the interest of not getting shot.
Given the deterrent value of concealed carry, the posting of “no guns allowed” signs openly invites criminals to enter a business to commit mayhem without the fear of facing an armed citizen. Under the concealed carry statute, persons licensed to carry must obey these signs. By their very nature, criminals will not be deterred by a plastic pictogram stuck to a window. Consequently, armed criminals will be absolutely assured that nobody in the establishment is capable of warding off their violent behavior. “No guns allowed” signs give a distinct advantage to those who seek to harm others.
For thugs who may be too shy to perform for an audience, the parking lots of “no guns allowed” establishments would be little more to their liking. It would be a given that anyone leaving such a business would be unarmed and, thus, easy pickings for robbers or rapists. Likewise, these criminals would be free to burglarize cars in the parking lot to harvest guns dutifully left behind by permit holders who enter the antigun business.
All in all, it’s distinctly possible that posting a “no guns allowed” sign makes patronizing a business more dangerous now that concealed carry has been passed than it had been to patronize the same store before the passage of concealed carry.
Quite a few people have contacted ISRA headquarters to report businesses that have posted “no guns allowed” signs. Many of the people ask how they should respond to the posting of such signs. Below are our recommendations.
1. Carrying a concealed firearm in to an establishment bearing an official “no guns allowed” sign is not lawful and should not be attempted.
2. Business owners who post “no guns allowed” signs consider lawful firearm owners to be social outcasts. Therefore, those businesses should be avoided, but not without first hearing how displeased you are with their decision. We recommend that you ask to see the manager and then politely tell him or her that you are a lawful firearm owner and that you disagree with their position on concealed carry. Advise the manager further that, as long as the offensive sign is posted, you will not spend money at their establishment and that you will tell all your friends to avoid doing business with them as well.
3. Reward businesses who allow concealed carry by spending money in their establishments.
4. Remain active in the gun rights movement at a local level.
5. Join the ISRA.
6. Donate to the ISRA so that we may carry on the fight to preserve, protect, and enhance gun rights in the state.
Follow the ISRA on Twitter and Facebook.
Give the gift of an ISRA membership. Not an ISRA Member? Join Today!
>> In small towns Downstate, murders may happen once every 50 to 100 years, if that frequently
The writers don’t understand Illinois history. Downstate IL had heavy mob influence, and was a nexus of bootlegging in the 1920s-30s.
Equally troubling are the bewildered remarks of the downstate "mayor"--"A total of 56 applicants out of 11,048 residents countywide listed Cumberland as their county of residence, the State Police data showed. “I’m shocked about it,” said Tom Bauguss, mayor of Greenup, a farming community that is the county’s largest town with 1,516 residents. . . “In Greenup, I can’t remember the last murder,” the mayor said, adding that he doesn’t even own a gun.
And I don't think the writers knew what to do with the fact that a Democrat was behind the legislation.
Though I don’t know that town, I do know small towns, and I would not be surprised if that mayor was the only one in his town without a firearm of some sort in his house.
So, if an Illinois resident puts a “No Guns Allowed” sign on his house, but carries a high capacity .45 semi-auto at all times, expecting a break in, would he be convicted under the state’s law prohibiting the hunting of criminals?
Leave it to a Shitcago enemedia dhimmi to not understand that the best defense is a good offense, in various calibers/platforms.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.