Chicago Moves Quickly To Draft New Gun Ordinance
June 30th, 2010
Chicago Moves Quickly To Draft New Gun Ordinance
Chicago Mayor Richard Daley will push for a strict handgun ordinance to replace its doomed gun ban that will likely include limiting each resident to a single handgun, requiring gun owners to have insurance and prohibiting gun stores from setting up shop in the city, his top lawyer said Tuesday.
This is all part of the way things are done. Rulings are handed down, the losing side tries to make new rules that comply to the letter of the new but the spirit of the old. If it’s not good enough, the new rules get challenged and, if warranted, overturned. And establish precedent along the way.
Chicago Corporation Counsel Mara Georges weighed in:
She said that limiting Chicago residents to one handgun would pass constitutional muster. Nowhere has the court determined that “a person is entitled to more than one handgun,” she said. “And one handgun is sufficient for self defense.”
She said banning gun shops in the city is another reasonable restriction. She said studies have shown a disproportionate number of shootings near gun shops and because there are dozens of gun shops in the Chicago area — 40 in Cook County alone — a ban would not inconvenience gun buyers.
Regardless of what anyone thinks about Georges’ logic, let’s just look at her previous statements about the 2nd Amendment, gun laws, and how they’ll hold up in court:
City Corporation Counsel Mara Georges has told two City Council committees she’s confident Chicago’s law will stand.
Georges tells Aldermen the Supreme Court’s decision on Washington, D.C.’s handgun ban shouldn’t apply to Chicago, because previous Supreme Court rulings have said Second Amendment “right to bear arms” doesn’t apply to local governments, like Cities. She says D.C. is a federal jurisdiction.
Hmmm. She didn’t quite get that one right.
Anyway, it’s probably easier for everyone if she convinces Daley to just keep trying to restrict things unreasonably. That way the challengers don’t have to travel all over the country to get stuff struck down.
Tags: IL
June 30th, 2010 at 1:58 pm
Limiting people to only 1 gun would be a logistic nightmare. You’d have to keep a database of everyone that has already bought one. Then you’d have to make this database accessible to the gun shop owners in every part of the state because otherwise someone in Chicago could go to some other part of IL and buy a gun. What if your gun gets stolen or is confiscated for evidence because you need to use it for self defense? Do you need to show proof that your pistol is missing?
It’s a horrible idea.
June 30th, 2010 at 1:58 pm
[...] but it certainly doesn’t help many in the overall scheme of things. And, particularly given Chicago Mayor Daley’s plans in the wake of McDonald, I don’t really believe that the gun issue is going to go away any time [...]
June 30th, 2010 at 2:15 pm
You’d have to keep a database of everyone that has already bought one.
No doubt that’s seen as a feature, not a bug.
June 30th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
If one gun is sufficient for self-defense, then one stupid statement is sufficient free speech.
July 1st, 2010 at 3:08 am
The fact that it is a horrible idea is the point. Make gun ownership as intimidating and inconvenient as possible to discourage the law abiding from even trying.
I used up all my inspiration on this topic over in the MO thread. =P
July 1st, 2010 at 8:40 am
Only one gun? Heck, everybody should own at least two firearms, so one will be loaded and ready when you’re cleaning or servicing the other one!
I think the time has come to put up huge walls around cities like Chicago just to keep the inmates in their own asylum where they can’t try to impose their misguided will on the rest of us.
chicopanther
July 1st, 2010 at 10:44 am
From these quotes, she doesn’t sound very smart. I’m glad she’s on their side…
July 1st, 2010 at 12:59 pm
Criminals will still get 10 guns if they wish.
Disarm the law abiding citizens and you create subjects and victims.