w_richards | Chicago Reader

Recent Comments

Re: “City Clarifies New Gun Law--But Still Won't Say How Often the Old One Was Enforced

Federal transport law:

Illinois State Police Transport flyer for the last 2 years:

Posted by w_richards on 07/15/2010 at 8:49 PM

Re: “City Clarifies New Gun Law--But Still Won't Say How Often the Old One Was Enforced

Mick Heres the only thing I've ever found from Chicago on transfer of firearms from straw purchasers to criminals.
It seems the only thing they ever proudly publish is the gun amnesty days which a joke. They should be called turn in your rusty piece of junk day.

5 examples multiple weapons being dealt to criminals. Most cases resulted in plea bargain deals. As this study was from 2006, all you have to do is see how many shootings occur weekly in the city now, to see it failed to put fear into illegal gun activity in Chicago. The City's got plenty of laws already on the books, they just aren't prosecuting cases like they should have all along.

By the way Mick excellent article, Keep asking those questions !

Posted by w_richards on 07/13/2010 at 11:44 PM

Re: “Under the Gun

Wow What a summation... Thanks Mick for your efforts.

Undeniably the council once again jumps off the cliff blindly obeying the mayors rushed agenda. I'll give credit to Fritchey and Ford as at least they are starting to ask questions but are not getting support from the 45 cookie cutter alderman.

When you see a comment:
"But I think we weren't willing to recognize the facts because we didn't want to be seen to be weak on anti-gun laws at the time." Hey Your still not thinking past an election cycle.....
This is the issue that has prevailed for 28 years in the minds of the Chicago politicians. Its about having that often heard "I'm tough on crime" Reelection sound byte.... Thats all that matters to these guys. Its easier for them to enact legislation affecting the law abiding rather that go after the real criminals in the first place. Residents of the affected communities feel the gangs have more rights and protections under the law than the Otis McDonald's of Chicago. And the Mayor once again validated that's his opinion with this week's regulation. There's more stringent punishment in state and federal laws than Chicago's special regulations and restrictions for the criminals.
When's Chicago going to wake up and quit wasting its taxpayers money's? Perhaps quit lining the pockets of constitutional litigators and use that money to create some jobs in the more under privileged areas and encourage kids to avoid gangs. It certainly would save more life's than the mayors standard track.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by w_richards on 07/08/2010 at 11:39 AM

Re: “City Council Passes Strict New Handgun Law a Day After Seeing It For the First Time

This is the same council that rushed into a parking meter contract blowing billions in lost revenue for the city. How much is this one going to cost the city after Alan Gura is thru?

Posted by w_richards on 07/02/2010 at 8:55 PM

Re: “City Council Poised to Pass Still-Unseen Gun Legislation By Friday

What all Chicagoans need to ask out of each Alderman is: Why are my rights being treated differently than the rest of the State / Country?
All of the proposed restrictions are above and beyond what is required from state residents that do not live within Chicago's boundaries.

These are also above and beyond the federal regulations set forth by legislation and regulated by the BATF. A federal form 4473 is filled out each time a firearm is purchased from a dealer. Including here in illinois. A quick search of Gun Control Act of 1968 will show the requirements set forth that all US citizens must legally comply with. Mentally ill, Criminal record, Dishonorably discharged, Domestic violence etc.

Yet still the Mayor insists that your rights as a citizen are not the same as another's once you cross Chicago's city limits.

Posted by w_richards on 07/02/2010 at 11:05 AM

Re: “City Council Poised to Pass Still-Unseen Gun Legislation By Friday

Heres a comment I found a few years ago and its still holds truth:

On Police powers:
"Their job is to protect society as a whole, not any given individual or group. Their function is to come in after the crime (murder, robbery, rape, assault, etc.) has already occurred, collect evidence, and then try to apprehend the criminal for prosecution for a crime already completed so that crime, after it is committed, has a cost. Their job is NOT to stop a crime in progress or to prevent it beforehand. The fact that they very occasionally manage to do these things is because they do, to their credit, try. But if they fail to (which is the vast majority of the time), even if they stand and watch as you're victimized, you cannot sue them for not helping you, because the courts, including the Supreme Court, have consistently ruled that they have no such obligation, even in cases where their negligence was blatant and sometimes even malicious.

If I'm therefore the only one with any obligation or ability to protect myself, my home, and my family, I have an absolute right to the same tools that government officials rely on as their best form of defense. And from police officers to politicians, that tool is a gun, either in their own hands or in that of someone who can always be with them. If they come up with something that works better for them, then maybe I won't own guns (assuming I can legally own and use that new tool instead). Till they do, everyone else should have access to them, for the same purposes, as well. I don't love guns so much as I love that I live in a country that still, for the most part, respects the fundamental human right of every citizen to protect themselves from harm as well the wealthiest or most politically powerful citizen can."

Posted by w_richards on 07/01/2010 at 8:37 AM

Re: “City Council Poised to Pass Still-Unseen Gun Legislation By Friday

It's Not.

Take the time and study what was done in the deep south to restrict the civil rights of the newly freed slaves. Is the Mayor and council trying to repeat history?

Also the city has openly admitted there are hundreds of thousand unregistered guns suspected to be in the city. Just what benefit is it to impose hefty fees and more difficult regulations? Remember a few weeks back the 80 year old veteran with an unregistered handgun that shot the burglar breaking into his home? He hasn't been charged violating the old ordinance but the pistol was confiscated.

Why should "hidden gun" owners now come forward and register now with proposals of more fees and restrictions they have already ignored for years past? Just how many gang members do you think are going to go down to the police station and register their "Gats" after the new laws are introduced?

Posted by w_richards on 07/01/2010 at 7:33 AM

All Comments »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.