How do I register a firearm in Chicago? (station, police)

[LM1]

Originally Posted by Manigault

I am a hunter and and I reside in the Chicago
There are many ways to protect a home and family without using or possessing a pistol. I later had to get a new babysitter because her 10 year old son was killed when shot in the head by his friend firing a pistol they found in a home.

You cannot negate logic with anecdotes.
There are plenty of tragic cases of firearms misuse or accidents throughout the history of time, just as there are plenty of instances of people who used them to protect themselves in situations where a "baseball bat" wouldn't do. There are also times when access to a firearm isn't the "end all" magical ward of evil that the owners hoped it would be.

It all boils down to the concept (totally foreign to some people) that you don't have to worry about honest people owning firearms, since they're honest. You cannot really cite the instance of an accident that occurred somewhere out there to deny all law abiding and competent people the right to own a firearm. That is logically fallacious.

[via chicago]

this whole forum is one perpetual case of deja vu

[UnderTheLiveOaks]

Looks like you got an answer, Chris. Forms are available through Chicago police stations. If you need more info, 311 (city info) might be a good call to make!

[LM1]

Originally Posted by via chicago

this whole forum is one perpetual case of deja vu

What do you expect?
Any time firearms are mentioned, you will have people who use them responsibly and do not fear them- people who "understand" them- and you will have people who do fear them and cannot fathom how they be used responsibly- people who are ignorant, because they have no experience. The fearful ignorants want to "ban" them because it's a natural human instinct to seek to eliminate what which you fear and don't understand.

It's a yin/yang sort of thing (even though one side is correct and the other is incorrect)

[UnderTheLiveOaks]

Maybe take it to another thread?

There are two types of people. Those who can use a message board responsibly- those who "understand" them- and those who are afraid of them and cannot fathom how they could possibly be used responsibly.

[Manigault]

My experience (reading the local media) is that on many more occasions handguns are used by kids to shoot each other or by spouses in marital spats or are stolen then they are ever used in self-defense situations. And there is no logical fallacy there.

Handgun fanciers mis-state and ignore a handgun's forseeable misuse. This includes the dolts who fire off rounds on New Year's and the people who miss what they are shooting at with tragic consequences. Things are different in the big city. Here, as in other big cities, the police are not allowed to fire a warning round in the air. Just a little bit off verticle and that warning round goes into someone's rec room. Anecdotally, I would say that handguns are seldom used for home defense or hunting. Situations like the one in Louisiana where the guy capped the Japanese student with a .45 outside his house on Halloween killing him while the kid was looking for a party, are much more common.

[LM1]

Originally Posted by CarolinaBredChicagoan

Maybe take it to another thread?

There are two types of people. Those who can use a message board responsibly- those who "understand" them- and those who are afraid of them and cannot fathom how they could possibly be used responsibly.

So far, your replies in this thread have amounted to:

1) Telling the OP that he already received his answer
2) Fulminating about your own perceptions of what constitutes "appropriate".

What a benefit you've been to this thread.
I personally thank you for your tireless dedication to providing such informative replies.

[LM1]

[quote=CarolinaBredChicagoan;1661317]Maybe take it to another thread?

Originally Posted by Manigault

My experience (reading the local media) is that on many more occasions handguns are used by kids to shoot each other or by spouses in marital spats or are stolen then they are ever used in self-defense situations. And there is no logical fallacy there.

Actually, that's hugely logically fallacious for a number of reasons.
First, whenever the entire predicate for your knowledge-base is "what I see in the media", that's usually a pretty good sign of actual ignorance. I'll give you a hint- the media isn't "fair" when it comes to reporting this issue.

Secondly, in Chicago anyway, the law abiding are already prohibited from owning handguns. Of course you're going to hear about misuse more than legitimate use in a city where legitimate use has been outlawed.

Handgun fanciers mis-state and ignore a handgun's forseeable misuse. This includes the dolts who fire off rounds on New Year's and the people who miss what they are shooting at with tragic consequences. Things are different in the big city. Here, as in other big cities, the police are not allowed to fire a warning round in the air. Just a little bit off verticle and that warning round goes into someone's rec room. Anecdotally, I would say that handguns are seldom used for home defense or hunting. Situations like the one in Louisiana where the guy capped the Japanese student with a .45 outside his house on Halloween killing him while the kid was looking for a party, are much more common.

I'm not going to turn this post into a complete debate, but I would suggest that you examine the real, live actual facts that are out there for anyone to see before making statements like "handguns are seldom used for self defense". You are terribly incorrect and outright wrong.
We aren't asking what angels look like here. The truth is out there and you too can form your own opinion using it if you dare seek it.

You really, really seem to be caught up on anecdotes.
Isolated anomalies and anecdotes aren't good reasons to establish procedures that impact everyone. They also aren't a legitimate basis for logic. Using anecdotes to establish ones outlook on this workd is called "knee jerk". Like, if a kid runs over a nun in his fast corvette- we don't ban all corvettes just because one person misused it and "no one needs to drive over 70 miles per hour"

Nanny-staters really kill me. They all have this grossly flawed view of the world that doesn't hold up to even the slightest logical scrutiny.
(be warned- all prospective residents- they exist in inordinate numbers in the city)

[UnderTheLiveOaks]

Originally Posted by LM1

So far, your replies in this thread have amounted to:

1) Telling the OP that he already received his answer
2) Fulminating about your own perceptions of what constitutes "appropriate".

What a benefit you've been to this thread.
I personally thank you for your tireless dedication to providing such informative replies.

I'm trying to keep things moving, there, chief. We've already hashed and rehashed this stuff. If you'd rather let a mod close the thread, that's cool too.

[LM1]

If Manigault wants to have the last word (which will assuredly be used to cite an anecdote or a little story of some kind) he/she is welcome to it.