PDA

View Full Version : Chicago Mayor Daley to hold gun conference


DrediKnight
01-02-2009, 7:01 PM
Hope this is not a dupe... I did search and found nothing but It's from the 18th so I expect it's already been discussed....


December 18, 2008

Daley to hold gun conference, conduct search for Duncan successor

Mayor Richard Daley said today that Chicago will host a "gun conference" next month to look for ways to beef up gun laws and get guns off the streets.

The mayor said he would bring in leaders from across the country and people who have lost loved ones to gun violence. He said the attendees plan to review recent Supreme Court decisions that limited how cities can regulate guns.

"I believe the court's ruling presents us with an opportunity to continue our efforts," Daley said.

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2008/12/daley-to-hold-g.html

bwiese
01-02-2009, 7:23 PM
"I believe the court's ruling presents us with an opportunity to maintain Alan Gura's retirement fund from Chicago taxpayers' pockets."

hoffmang
01-02-2009, 8:02 PM
I have a hunch that this might be "how are we going to drop the ban while remaining intransigent." Daly knows they're going to lose that eventually.

Alan Gura is going to end up on the Forbes 500 if these cities don't stop violating the Constitution.

-Gene

yellowfin
01-02-2009, 8:13 PM
What amount of sting can be heaped on to make them want to stop? Half a million to a million dollars doesn't hurt enough to make Daley and company give up. What does? $100 mil? $1B? Seriously, what can we throw at him to make him call it quits? We gotta hit them with something that hurts bad enough.

hoffmang
01-02-2009, 8:38 PM
$400 to $500 an hour for as many hours as Daley can stall. It's a long time...

-Gene

69Mach1
01-02-2009, 10:46 PM
I hope that there's at least an accountant among them.

gotgunz
01-02-2009, 10:52 PM
I think it would be great if a group of Calgunners attended and offered to purchase from the city every firearm they stole from the residents.

Just for the reaction if nothing more. LOL

sholling
01-03-2009, 8:16 AM
What amount of sting can be heaped on to make them want to stop? Half a million to a million dollars doesn't hurt enough to make Daley and company give up. What does? $100 mil? $1B? Seriously, what can we throw at him to make him call it quits? We gotta hit them with something that hurts bad enough.
Hit them where they live with a class action civil rights lawsuit. The right to keep and bear arms didn't begin with Heller, the SCOTUS merely began enforcing an existing civil right with Heller. A suit seeking $50k for each victim of this civil rights violation for each year that their rights were violated should capture some attention.

Think about doing the same thing here in California. 20,000,000 victims times $10,000 times the 20 years that the blatantly unconstitutional AWB has been in place. The numbers get large. :thumbsup:

FoShizzle
01-03-2009, 8:19 AM
Daly must explains what the hell an "assault pistol" is.

hoffmang
01-03-2009, 8:56 AM
Hit them where they live with a class action civil rights lawsuit. The right to keep and bear arms didn't begin with Heller, the SCOTUS merely began enforcing an existing civil right with Heller. A suit seeking $50k for each victim of this civil rights violation for each year that their rights were violated should capture some attention.

Think about doing the same thing here in California. 20,000,000 victims times $10,000 times the 20 years that the blatantly unconstitutional AWB has been in place. The numbers get large. :thumbsup:

Unfortunately, civil rights law doesn't work that way. The best you can do is nominal damages (think $1 or $1000 total) and legal fees. If a government spends a whole heck of a lot of time those legal fees can add up and there can be up to a 2x multiplier for fees. That's why DC was hit with $2+ Million after Heller.

-Gene

sholling
01-03-2009, 9:08 AM
Unfortunately, civil rights law doesn't work that way. The best you can do is nominal damages (think $1 or $1000 total) and legal fees. If a government spends a whole heck of a lot of time those legal fees can add up and there can be up to a 2x multiplier for fees. That's why DC was hit with $2+ Million after Heller.

-Gene
Thank you for that bit of information.

Mayhem
01-03-2009, 9:49 AM
Honestly they don't care. It's not their money it doesn't come out of their pockets. Its the taxpayers. They will just cut back on stuff like road improvements, low income housing, and law enforcement. All they care about is grabbing headlines, Claiming "tough on crime" and "getting guns off the streets". The fact they just cut Law enforcement, disarmed law abiding citizens then threw them to the wolves with no protection will just get lost int the Liberal redirect.

CCWFacts
01-03-2009, 10:07 AM
Honestly they don't care. It's not their money it doesn't come out of their pockets. Its the taxpayers. They will just cut back on stuff like road improvements, low income housing, and law enforcement.

In fact they like spending the money because, beyond getting heroic headlines for themselves, it goes to their friends' law firms.

It's great that Gura and others will make personal fortunes defending the rights of Chicagoans and all other Americans.

yellowfin
01-03-2009, 11:57 AM
^ What will be even better will be to organize taxpayers lawsuits against the Brady organization for advising Daley et al to waste their money.

bwiese
01-03-2009, 12:49 PM
^ What will be even better will be to organize taxpayers lawsuits against the Brady organization for advising Daley et al to waste their money.

That attempt would be laughed out of court.

motorhead
01-03-2009, 2:07 PM
the voters have the final say on squandering their money. we just booted our city attorney for that reason (and a myriad of others).
my question is, how do any of them sit down with heller so far up their collective butts? il politics are in the spotlight now as it is, this won't end well for daley or any of his lackeys.

BillCA
01-03-2009, 4:14 PM
Having been notified by SCOTUS that possession of firearms within one's own residence is constitutionally protected, including firearms "in common use", the City of Chicago's refusal to repeal an unconstitutional ban will be actionable after incorporation is settled. In that case, I'd suggest a suit under Title 18 USC §241 and 242 as shown below.


USC Title 18, § 241 Conspiracy against rights (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000241----000-.html)
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

§ 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both;
and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both;
and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

hoffmang
01-03-2009, 4:43 PM
Having been notified by SCOTUS that possession of firearms within one's own residence is constitutionally protected, including firearms "in common use", the City of Chicago's refusal to repeal an unconstitutional ban will be actionable after incorporation is settled. In that case, I'd suggest a suit under Title 18 USC §241 and 242 as shown below.


Sadly they get qualified immunity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecutorial_immunity) until the issue is firmly established in their Court of Appeals (aka 7th Circuit.) Incorporation isn't done so they get to claim that immunity until the second case.

-Gene

yellowfin
01-03-2009, 11:12 PM
That attempt would be laughed out of court.
Why exactly? If I were an architect and I submitted faulty blueprints for a building and such ended up costing the client money because of the structure failing, I could be very easily sued for that.

jacques
01-03-2009, 11:29 PM
This is pretty much the same thing that happened in DC. You can bet there always be a bastion of resistance somewhere that will not give in until they send in the feds.

hoffmang
01-04-2009, 12:23 AM
Why exactly? If I were an architect and I submitted faulty blueprints for a building and such ended up costing the client money because of the structure failing, I could be very easily sued for that.

Sadly just not the way the law works. You can't generally be held accountable for political advocacy. Imagine your theory running the other way against pro-gun folks.

-Gene

BillCA
01-04-2009, 6:13 AM
Sadly they get qualified immunity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecutorial_immunity) until the issue is firmly established in their Court of Appeals (aka 7th Circuit.) Incorporation isn't done so they get to claim that immunity until the second case.
-Gene

I got that Gene. That's why I included "after incorporation is settled". If the 7th Circuit incorporates, I'd give Chicago 30 days to strike the law or amend it. If they fail to uphold the rights of the people, then file a civil lawsuit, alleging $1 in damages and $1 in punitive fines per person in Chicago, per day, after 30 days. With 2.87 million people in the city, this adds up very quickly. (Then use the money to start a non-profit anti-corruption watchdog agency in Chicago. :thumbsup:)

hoffmang
01-04-2009, 11:08 AM
I got that Gene. That's why I included "after incorporation is settled". If the 7th Circuit incorporates, I'd give Chicago 30 days to strike the law or amend it. If they fail to uphold the rights of the people, then file a civil lawsuit, alleging $1 in damages and $1 in punitive fines per person in Chicago, per day, after 30 days. With 2.87 million people in the city, this adds up very quickly. (Then use the money to start a non-profit anti-corruption watchdog agency in Chicago. :thumbsup:)

Lets say hypothetically, Chicago wasn't where the incorporation case came from but it was Nordyke and Nordyke went to SCOTUS. Chicago would not lose qualified immunity until after another case was finalized in the 7th Circuit. Your hypothetical case wouldn't pierce. Also, there are not class action civil rights cases. Its $1 and legal fees times 2, period - at best.

-Gene