Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mayor Daley Plans "Final Solution" for Illinois Gun Owners
Chicago Sun Times ^ | February 13, 2003 | Frank Main and Fran Fran Spielman

Posted on 02/13/2003 8:42:44 AM PST by Mini-14

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last
To: Mini-14
"Suburban Republican women legislators are becoming more and more supportive of reasonable gun control measures,"

SAVE THE ELEPHANTS FROM THE RHINOS!

21 posted on 02/13/2003 9:26:20 AM PST by suijuris
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mini-14
Suburban Republican women legislators are becoming more and more supportive of reasonable gun control measures,"

Of course below is what Hizzhonor believes is "reasonable gun control". Governor Blag (the impaler?) goes right in line with him too, other than the increase in the FOID fee, and that only because it was costing him votes downstate and it's a bit too soon to reverse himself again on the issue

Sources said Daley is promoting nine separate gun-control recommendations, six of which were previously introduced in the General Assembly and died.

Now Daley is proposing to raise the fee for a FOID card from $5 for every five years to $25 per year to cover new security measures that would require every applicant to be fingerprinted and photographed in person, sources said.

...

The mayor also wants a 10-day "cooling off" period before a buyer can take possession of a gun--up from three days, sources said.

Daley will reintroduce six other proposals: a ban on assault weapons such as Uzis; a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines; a one-gun-a-month purchase limit; background checks for firearms bought at gun shows; state licensing of gun dealers, and a requirement for gunmakers to test-fire every gun sold in Illinois for a computer database on the unique "fingerprint" each gun leaves on a bullet. The database would allow investigators to link bullets to guns.

Since Illinois firearms laws are already enough to gag a maggot, the prospects for the future are dim indeed. All this in a state whose Constitution reads ""Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Section 22, Article I of the Illinois Bill of Rights." ( The Sixth Illinois Constitutional Conventions Committee on Bill of Rights in their official commentary interpreted this provision in 1970 as a guarantee that "a citizen has the right to possess and make reasonable use of arms that law abiding citizens commonly employ for purposes of recreation or protection of person and property." Any use of the police power, the Committee said, that "attempted to ban all possession or use of such arms, or laws that subjected possession or use of such arms to regulations or taxes so onerous that all possession or use was effectively banned, would be invalid.")

22 posted on 02/13/2003 9:31:58 AM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mini-14; Travis McGee; sit-rep; MileHi; M Kehoe; Lurker; Critter; SuperLuminal; copycat; Chapita; ..
THE 2ND AMENDMENT IS HOMELAND SECURITY!

That's why enemies of this nation and all it stands for are so hell bent on undermining, negatig and destroying it.

They know.

23 posted on 02/13/2003 9:32:57 AM PST by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The_Macallan
(This is from Chapter 22 of my novel, 28 chapters are posted on the website.)

“I’m sorry Mr. President, I’m afraid the scope isn’t much better; it’s a very common inexpensive model, one of millions really... I think we’re going to find that the sniper left us a sterile gun, virtually impossible to trace. And that could be part of a message the sniper might be sending us.”

“What message? Expand on that.”

“Mr. President, there’s probably ten million high powered hunting rifles floating around out there with telescopic sights capable of hitting somebody at five or six hundred yards. It’s anybody’s guess how many of them have been fine tuned enough to hit somebody at a thousand yards or more, that’s over a half a mile. And I don’t mean hit a section of a stadium, I mean hit one particular person, like what just happened to Senator Randolph.”

The situation room went dead quiet, all of them knew Senator Randolph, and several of them had been to her house at one time or another. The sniper had obviously planned the assassination well in advance, and if the sniper could get her, he could get any of them. A dozen minds were imagining what their houses looked like from distant vantage points, and if anyone had already done similar assassination advance planning research at the distant edges of their lives.

The president said softly “Ten million? Ten million potential sniper rifles?”

“Or more” replied the FBI director.

“So Senator Randolph’s assassination was not some incredible feat by an Olympic level target shooter or a trained military sniper, it was just an ordinary shot by some yahoo with a… junk rifle?”

“I’d say it was better than ordinary, but basically, yes, I’d agree with that assessment Mr. President.”

“Then all of our emphasis on the semi-automatic assault rifles has been misplaced? We’re in greater danger from… ordinary hunting rifles?”

“So it would appear sir, I’m sorry to say.”

“And Senator Randolph had a standard Secret Service detail for her personal protection? And they were unable to prevent this?”

“That would appear to be correct.”

“Then we’re going to have to totally revamp how we provide security for the senior leadership ASAP!”

The FBI Director paused, considering his words carefully. “Mr. President, I would say that it would be just about impossible to put a five or six hundred yard moving security perimeter around all of the national leadership. Or even one hundred yards for that matter. We just don’t have anything like that amount of trained manpower, you know what’s involved in your own protection…extending that kind of protection to the Senate, to the Senior Executive Service…to hundreds of key personnel… it’s just not possible.”

24 posted on 02/13/2003 9:33:58 AM PST by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
Just goes to show, that with gun grabbers, today's compliance with the law is tomorrow's loophole and a prison felony the day after that.

Gets my vote for quote of the day!

25 posted on 02/13/2003 9:35:26 AM PST by cmak9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dcwusmc
One could only hope that Daley would be required to live by the very laws he proposes and then gets mugged

One could hope but we all know it won't happen. He will use fraud to maintain his position for the rest of his life, and he will be surrounded by armed bodyguards every minute. While telling everyone that he is a "man of the people".

26 posted on 02/13/2003 9:38:26 AM PST by alpowolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ranxerox
I don't know exactly what "the police power" is, I presume it means ...

... that the police get to say what the rest of the section means.

27 posted on 02/13/2003 9:39:04 AM PST by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
Should have added that the information on the meaning of "police power" comes from the NRA-ILA website.

28 posted on 02/13/2003 9:42:03 AM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Mini-14
First, understand Daley's motivation. It's not to disarm the populace in general; it's just that the city has over 600 homicides a year, generally committed with handguns. He's trying to do something about it. Given who's shooting each other up, and why, I don't think that these laws will do anything about it, though. A recent study of Chicago homicides revealed that both murders and victims in Chicago had more than 8 arrests each prior to the murder; in fact, the victims averaged a few decimal point more arrests than the shooters!

But I don't see how these laws will do anything. What they should do is follow the example of Boston where use of a gun in a felony gets you automatic jail time, regardless of any other deals.

Daley is used to getting stuff like this through the legislature because Chicago has about 1/4 of all the votes in the state. The old deal was that Dick ran Chicago and the Democrats, the GOP ran Springfield and downstate, and the suburbs were up for grabs. But now with a Democrat in office in Springfield, there's going to be some turf wars. The deal was often expressed in clauses in laws like this that a given law would only be effective in cities above a population of 250,000, which for decades meant that the law only applied in Chicago. Now there's a couple of suburbs pushing that number, but little matter.
29 posted on 02/13/2003 9:47:01 AM PST by RonF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mini-14
Article 1, Section 22 of the Illinois State Constitution:

"Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Interesting language, no?

30 posted on 02/13/2003 9:57:16 AM PST by rudypoot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RonF
First, understand Daley's motivation. It's not to disarm the populace in general; it's just that the city has over 600 homicides a year, generally committed with handguns. He's trying to do something about it.

You give him and most of the other gun grabbers too much credit. They all know that their solutions will not work, have never worked anywhere else for that matter. Their prime, and in most cases only "motivation" is to keep themselves in power. They could care less about a bunch of (minority) gang bangers offing each other. Whatever his motivatioin, his tactic is to disarm the populace in general. As far as special punishment for "use" of a gun in a "felony", that too is bovine excrement. Let the violent crime itself have the sure and severe punishment, for too many times the "felony" is completely non-violent and the "use" consists of having a gun somewhere within 20 yards, loaded or not, visible or not. It's just another way to demonize guns and gun owners.

31 posted on 02/13/2003 9:59:39 AM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: sit-rep
It's almost time...
32 posted on 02/13/2003 9:59:42 AM PST by Noumenon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
It's almost time. Ben Mitchell bump.
33 posted on 02/13/2003 10:00:45 AM PST by Noumenon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Mini-14
Richard Daley is also the one suing the BATFags for every firearms owner's information in the COUNTRY, on the theory that one of us, one day, might drive through Chicago. What a scumbag.
34 posted on 02/13/2003 10:03:59 AM PST by dcwusmc ("The most dangerous man, to any government, is the man who is able to think things out for himself.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Condolences bump. Please let me know if you need some storage north of the border.
35 posted on 02/13/2003 10:04:56 AM PST by Ronaldus Magnus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dcwusmc
bump
36 posted on 02/13/2003 10:07:01 AM PST by Centurion2000 (Chance favors the prepared mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Mr_Magoo
I need to look up the lobbying rules for IL. Although we do have an IL chapter for SAS, it is very new. Looks like it's time that SAS IL takes its first few steps...
37 posted on 02/13/2003 10:08:43 AM PST by technochick99 (Self defense is a basic human right. http://www.2ASisters.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mini-14
The problem I see with Democrats taking over a legislature and forcing unpopular legislation through, is this: When the Republicans re-gain control, the unpopular legislation is NEVER repealed!
38 posted on 02/13/2003 10:10:40 AM PST by bimbo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bimbo
Amen. That's one of my favorite don't-get-me-started topics.

They always use the same excuses. For example, "gee, we have a majority but it just isn't big enough, maybe next time".
39 posted on 02/13/2003 10:25:47 AM PST by alpowolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Mini-14
How does an FOID compare to a poll tax? Are you not being charged a fee to exercise a constitutionally protected right?
40 posted on 02/13/2003 10:27:20 AM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson