Guns in Chicago (ticket, cell phone, registered)

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by aragx6

The gun show loophole means that private sellers at gun shows are not required by federal law to conduct any kind of background check, even though gun dealers who operate private gun shops must.

Except, of course, for the state laws which make this impossible in many states. And if you sell more than a couple of guns a year, you are going to be regarded as a dealer, not a private seller.

And yes, the idea of ANYONE with a gun makes me uncomfortable. I have friends who conceal and carry and it makes me very uncomfortable. I see it as far more likely to escalate a situation.

There is no evidence for that feeling. Do you think your feelings should be more important than facts?

[Happy in Wyoming]

I believe the 30 day test is the answer for many people.

Carry a gun for 30 days. Don't carry one on the 31st day. Make your decision.

[aragx6]

Again there seems to be this impression that everyone who dislikes guns is somehow ignorant of facts or simply hasn't spent much time around guns -- in this case, i fall quite to the opposite. My father was in law enforcement, was a responsible and knowledgeable gun owner and taught me proper gun safety and use from a very young age.

[Humboldt1]

You are from suburban St. Louis, not the country. People from the country have different values. Like it or not, most of the gun nuts you are afraid of are rural people for the most part. I happen to not be overly into guns because my father was a Vietnam vet who dislikes guns. While everyone else around me growing up had a bb gun by 6 and their first rifle by 12, I was not encouraged to do so. Many of my friends here in Chicago who are also from rural backgrounds (funny how people of similar backgrounds and values stick together) are more into guns. I believe people should have the right to have guns (handguns too) but this probably comes from my rural background and conservative values more than anything else.

You as a suburbanite and citydweller will never truly understand the values associated with someone who grew up in rural America, just as I will never truly understand the values of people in the city or to a lesser extent suburbanites (keeping up with the Jones crap). It is just like people from the city and the suburbs to a lesser extent do not go to church nearly as often as people who live in rural America (I know there are exceptions but in rural Indiana towns virtually shut down on Sundays with no liquor sales and most shops closed). It is different here in Chicago and bigger cities. Also, I am more conservative than the average person, in part because of the morals instilled in me from an early age (anti-abortion, anti-affirmative action, anti-tax and gov't programs). This is from parents who had me to go church every Sunday and every Wednesday for the first 18 years of my life. I continued on going to church in college and still attend church on Sundays.

I am not saying city folks are any better or worse than country folks, just different. Kind of like comparing the most hardcore gun nut to the most liberal flower child.

There are certainly people like you aragx (more liberal) in small towns but they are few are far between and people such as yourself tend to gravitate toward more urban areas to people who have similar values. Bloomington, IN and Nashville, IN are fairly liberal for rural areas in southern Indiana but this is a function of all the liberals at IU and the fairly liberal shop owners in Brown County (who happen to be generally very conservative on guns). For those who don't know, Brown County is a bigger and better version of Long Grove.

I too have gravitated toward urban areas (Indianapolis and now Chicago) because of more opportunities. This may also be why you have chosen a larger more prosperous area such as Chicago over St. Louis (I was very disappointed in St. Louis over New Year's as the city proper seems to be in serious decline since I attended school there with lots and lots of open space that is starting to look like East St. Louis and Gary). The suburbs are still nice, but I much prefer Chicago's suburbs.

[WhaThe]

Old thread and I admit I have not read it all yet but it seems like the place to put this news clip.


"The Supreme Court is expected to announce this morning if it will hear a challenge to Chicago's ban on guns."

Supreme Court to hear Chicago gun cases - Chicago Breaking News

[Manigault]

Originally Posted by WhaThe

Old thread and I admit I have not read it all yet but it seems like the place to put this news clip.


"The Supreme Court is expected to announce this morning if it will hear a challenge to Chicago's ban on guns."

Supreme Court to hear Chicago gun cases - Chicago Breaking News

I think the court is going to hear the three Chicago gun cases, plus ones from the second circuit and ninth circuit.

The question is on if the second amendment applies to the states or just federal districts. There is a chance that the court could rule that the second amendment does apply to the states, but still uphold the Chicago and Oak Park gun laws as being reasonable restrictions.

[Drover]

I'm skeptical they'll enjoin the 2nd upon the states, but if they do and then find an outright ban is reasonable, then we might as well not have a 2nd amendment.

[Muppet123]

I'm hardly a NRA member, but I really don't see why a law abiding citizen should not have the same protection that the criminals have. Sure, I have a legally registered shotgun, but frankly its big and cumbersome. I'd rather have a .38 or something a bit easier to ready if I ever had to defend myself.

Then again, there is already a loophole in the law. Any handgun made before 1899 is not considered a gun by law. This might sound a bit dumb, but I doubt a criminal would look and laugh at a Colt .45 (the gun not the malt liquor) being pointed at them.

[Drover]

Yeah, Easterbrook... that well-known liberal judge...

But the latest iteration of our favorite troll does make a point in that the USSC has already ruled on the reasonableness of an outright ban and found it to be unreasonable.

[skipcromer]

Easterbrook was nominated by Reagan.

Just sayin...