PDA

View Full Version : Chic. Trib. Editorial (ETA: and on 3/30/11 IL Assn of CoPs) Supporting CCWs!


Paladin
03-31-2011, 2:42 PM
Looks like the NRA was right in going after low-hanging fruit before making the push in the last holdout states. With 48 states issuing CCWs, and 40 being Shall Issue or better, even a Chicago Times' editor is on our side now, when the issue is getting play in IL.

When you realize that the cultural acceptance of CCWs by "fly over" country is now driving what is happening in the major coastal urban areas (I include Chicago in that since culturally it is more like NYC than downstate IL), you realize how radical this is and why it has been so difficult. I can't think of another instance where this has happened (outside of line dancing and NASCAR, which are window dressing compared to altering people's view of an individual RKBA).

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-0331-chapman-20110331,0,4417269.column

A few short quotes:

"False fears about concealed guns"

"Experience is a dear teacher," said Benjamin Franklin, "but fools will learn at no other." Give some credit to fools: At least they eventually learn from experience. What would Franklin say about people who don't?

By that, I refer to gun-control advocates alarmed that the Illinois Legislature may vote to let licensed individuals carry concealed handguns. . . .

The two holdouts? Wisconsin, where Republican Gov. Scott Walker has endorsed the idea, and Illinois, where Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn has not.

But Quinn has vexed many downstate Democrats by abolishing capital punishment and allowing same-sex civil unions. So speculation is that he may have to make it up to them by going along on concealed weapons. . . .

The problem for opponents is that they have sown fear from the beginning, only to harvest a meager crop.

CalBear
03-31-2011, 2:50 PM
Nice writeup.

bigcalidave
03-31-2011, 2:56 PM
Great writeup. I'm confused by the subtext of the main image...

The slayings carried out by permit-holders amount to fewer than one of every 200 murders. For every licensee who killed someone, there are more than 20,000 who didn’t. What is that statistic based on? 1 in 200 murders? Does that include self defense shootings?

Oh, stats provided by our favorite VPC... and refuted pretty well. I shouldn't skim.

jl123
03-31-2011, 3:00 PM
Great writeup. I'm confused by the subtext of the main image...



What is that statistic based on? 1 in 200 murders? Does that include self defense shootings?

That;s the first thing I thought about as well.

bigcalidave
03-31-2011, 3:01 PM
That's what I get for skimming :) So yes, great article.

Maestro Pistolero
03-31-2011, 3:01 PM
Well, that was a breath of fresh air.

jnojr
03-31-2011, 3:06 PM
Could Chicago have shall-issue before California? :rofl2:

Nick Justice
03-31-2011, 3:33 PM
Are those blank rounds I see in the photo, or are they snakeshot?

choprzrul
03-31-2011, 3:47 PM
How cool is that!

rivraton
03-31-2011, 3:50 PM
Could Chicago have shall-issue before California? :rofl2:

Probably, and that's not funny. :(

yellowfin
03-31-2011, 3:57 PM
Nice article, but it still gives the Brady folks the undeserved assumption of honesty.

CCWFacts
03-31-2011, 4:46 PM
Those kind of statements have also appeared in the SF Chronicle and so on. Political opposition to CCW is based on factors which are rational, but have nothing to do with public safety or crime, and so articles which address public safety and crime make no difference to CCW politics in Chicago and SF.

For example, the gangs of Oakland have considerable political power. Do you think that the gangs of Oakland will be swayed by public safety based arguments?

VAReact
03-31-2011, 5:03 PM
Probably, and that's not funny. :(

Stranger things cetainly have happened -or HAVE they?!?:(

microwaveguy
03-31-2011, 5:29 PM
Well of course the hand wringers had to write a counter editoral
Not really worth reading ............. same old stuff , but for your amusement

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/search/chi-110328thompson_briefs,0,5402934.story?obref=obnetw ork

SanPedroShooter
03-31-2011, 5:44 PM
Those kind of statements have also appeared in the SF Chronicle and so on. Political opposition to CCW is based on factors which are rational, but have nothing to do with public safety or crime, and so articles which address public safety and crime make no difference to CCW politics in Chicago and SF.

For example, the gangs of Oakland have considerable political power. Do you think that the gangs of Oakland will be swayed by public safety based arguments?

I am intrigued by your comment. Can you elaborate with out going to far off topic? What factors make up the political opposition to CCW reform in CA if it isnt safty concerns?

I am pretty sure where you are going with this and I believe I have been thinking along the same lines, but I would like to see your explanation.

Andy Taylor
03-31-2011, 5:47 PM
Very cool article.

CCWFacts
03-31-2011, 7:53 PM
I am intrigued by your comment. Can you elaborate with out going to far off topic? What factors make up the political opposition to CCW reform in CA if it isnt safty concerns?

I am pretty sure where you are going with this and I believe I have been thinking along the same lines, but I would like to see your explanation.

I've detailed all this before, and I don't want to write a novel here, so I'll keep it short and give you links which you may need to follow.

For an overt example of the political "juice" that Oakland's gangs have, take a look at the sad story of Your Black Muslim Bakery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Your_Black_Muslim_Bakery). There are a lot of indicators of how much local political power they had before they crashed and burned; for example, this letter from Mayor Dellums (http://www.eastbayexpress.com/eastbay/dellums-scarlet-letter/Content?oid=1083983) praising them. Plenty of other examples which I won't go through here.

Do you think that Your Black Muslim Bakery, which is now known to be a gang front, will listen to arguments about citizens being able to defend themselves against gangs?

And don't believe that gangs' political influence ended with the end of YBMB. Uhuru House and many other gang fronts continue to control a lot of votes and money and therefore Oakland politicians.

Why do you think none of the Oakland pols ever demand some obvious solutions, like, "let's give any gang member (convicted felon) found with a gun a ten-year Federal sentence." Nope, that would upset too many constituents.

Let's look over at San Francisco and LA and other cities. Gangs do, indeed, have their political fronts and apologists in those cities, including some who have enough political juice to profit handsomely from the city while continuing their gang activities (http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jun/02/local/me-noguns2). There's also another factor: sheriffs, like Sheriff Baca, bring in millions of dollars in campaign contributions through their deft handling of the CCW system. You think Sheriff Baca cares about a few murders or rapes vs. a million dollars for his campaign fund?

Let's look at the power of the police unions in our urban cities like SF, LA and Oakland. Their enormous cash flow is based, in part, on their residents feeling helpless and afraid of crime. Right now, if someone in LA is afraid of being the victim of crime, his only outlet for that fear is, "let's throw more money at the police department so I'll feel safer." (The financial catastrophe that results from that will soon be upon our cities.) Do these union leaders see any benefit in some other way to deal with that fear?

And at a less abstract level, many off-duty and retired cops get safe, mildly glamorous and lucrative gigs working as "drivers". It would be a lot harder to charge whatever they charge for "driving" if more people could compete for that kind of EP work. Would you rather hire a 20-year LAPD veteran, or a 20-year Mossad veteran? I know I would take the Mossad veteran, but unfortunately the Mossad veteran can't carry a gun in LA, whereas the LAPD veteran can, so the Mossad veteran might end up selling groceries at Elat Market for example, despite his suitability for EP and security work.

All of these factors are instances of small groups with powerful self-interests dictating policies that are contrary to the more "dilute" self interests of the population as a whole.

SanPedroShooter
04-01-2011, 6:29 AM
Thanks for elaborating. I had always assumed the public safety unions were against ccw reform because of control/dependence issues (their control of US, our dependence on THEM) but I had not really thought out the details.
Its fascinating in a way, like watching a passenger train come off the rails. When does baca's behavior reach the level of being criminal??

yellowfin
04-01-2011, 6:54 AM
What factors make up the political opposition to CCW reform in CA if it isnt safty concerns?

Gun control is politically profitable for them.

A. Starting in the 1960's it gave them an alternative to racism to have a minority class of people to hate as a substitute for racial minorities, which they can blame all the ills of society upon and then appeal to the desire for social order and "safety" of communities, parents, teachers, etc. "Safety" means "keep those eewwwey scary people away from us!" Us vs. them identity politics. Gun control is segregation reinvented.

B. Keeping Jim Crow laws, which gun laws are, gives them the power to negate Constitutional rights and by doing so maintaining the idea that they can do so in other areas so long as they can come up with a plausible reason. That makes them very powerful indeed.

C. They realized in the 1980's and forward, it gives them a means of gerrymandering gun owners out of the population of key large cities thus to skew the ideology and thus the vote a certain way.

D. It's a convenient scapegoat for their (likely intentional) failed social experimentation.

E. It's a convenient catch all voodoo doll to rally all their various constituency groups who have their different adverse connotations for gun owners. Feminists use gun control as a means of spiting traditional masculinity. Various ethnicity interests groups use it as class warfare by proxy. Religious and quasi-religious pacifists think they can reduce violence. Elitist academics who think they can reinvent society in their own perfectionist image seek to demolish the imagery that contradicts their worldview. And so on. Put together, these are a highly motivated and organized voter block that has serious money behind it.

F. The previously mentioned LE and prison unions and industry that love high budgets and pay for them with campaign contributions rivaling the entire economies of some small countries.


The reason they cling to the anti gun schtick is that it pays out in more ways than every other single thing they have, and more than many of them put together. Without it the political complex that supports the anti gun platform would be SERIOUSLY hurting as the things they have become accustomed to getting away with they likely couldn't in its absence. They push it and fight like their lives depend on it because there's a very real possibility that life as they know it does.

Mulay El Raisuli
04-01-2011, 8:08 AM
This is from the Chicago Tribune?! Color me stunned!


Are those blank rounds I see in the photo, or are they snakeshot?


It looks like a single round of buckshot (?) to me. I have read that some people like to rig up rounds like this for indoor practice. The naturally-occurring feeding problems aren't critical, but one can work on trigger control & aiming w/o making a lot of noise.


Well of course the hand wringers had to write a counter editoral
Not really worth reading ............. same old stuff , but for your amusement

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/search/chi-110328thompson_briefs,0,5402934.story?obref=obnetw ork


And it includes the usual distortions of fact & a whole heaping pile of nonsense. Which is sorta amusing, I guess.

But there is one interesting item that is fact, but needs additional detail for the sake of context. Yes, Tombstone, AZ did have an ordinance against the carrying of guns. It was shoved through by one pimp & card cheat to keep the other pimps & card cheats (along with everyone else) helpless so that there wouldn't be any interference with the first pimp's 'business.'

That's hardy a great recommendation for gun control. In fact, it rates as about equal to the race-based reasons that brought us gun control in the first place.


The Raisuli

CCWFacts
04-01-2011, 8:10 AM
Oh yeah, Yellowfin reminds me of the other big factor. I'll re-state one of his points in another way:

Anti-gun laws in California are used to drive conservative voters out of the state. They know they can't outlaw churches or conservative viewpoints, but they sure can outlaw guns and CCWs and by doing so, encourage conservative voters to vamoos from the state. It has worked. How did the state that elected Reagan as governor turn into the state that elected Kamala Harris in a state-wide election?

Wherryj
04-01-2011, 8:27 AM
Thanks for elaborating. I had always assumed the public safety unions were against ccw reform because of control/dependence issues (their control of US, our dependence on THEM) but I had not really thought out the details.
Its fascinating in a way, like watching a passenger train come off the rails. When does baca's behavior reach the level of being criminal??

Several decades ago? But who is counting?

CCWFacts
04-01-2011, 1:25 PM
Looking at the bigger picture, the fight over CCW and guns has nothing to do with CCW or guns or public safety. It has to do over views on the proper role of government. On the one side, we have a collectivist world view which says that the focus should be on the group, and individuals should rely on the group (the state) for their basic needs. This includes education, healthcare, personal security, jobs, everything. The opposite view is the individualist view, which says that individuals are responsible for their own basic needs, and if an individual fails in some way, it is his own failure to deal with.

Of course the police unions want individuals to be helpless and reliant on the unions' own services, just like Exxon wants you to have to drive to work, or Microsoft wants you to require MS Windows. While we tend to think of policemen as conservative type people (law and order, conformity, clean-cut image), the reason why they are strongly allied with the left wing here in California is because the police unions have a big financial stake keeping the population dependent on the state for at least one of the fundamental needs.

Wernher von Browning
04-01-2011, 1:53 PM
Remember this is the city where the illustrious former mayor said this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfW0DDC1LGs

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EJX8fIbzC4&NR=1


I have a modest proposal for Little Richie Daley -- let him lead by example and dismiss his armed police guard (he may not be mayor anymore, but you can bet that he's still surrounded by the Chicago Heat Parade).

yellowfin
04-01-2011, 2:06 PM
There's that, but at least to me it's about holding government to rules and constraints versus being able to make anything up as they want to and taking a "L'etat c'est moi" attitude towards the people. We are citizens, not subjects, and CCW and other firearms matters are a matter of whether or not we are respected and whether we have any control and say in our lives versus it all being decided for us.

MP301
04-01-2011, 10:27 PM
Great write up. Me predicts many more like this as some get a clue or are personally scared the police cant protect them. Striking while the irons hot we are!

MP301
04-02-2011, 12:33 AM
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=416155


We are on a roll here....

Paladin
04-02-2011, 11:14 AM
Now even the IL Association of CoPs has come out supporting CCWing!

Both these changes being announced publicly now, versus last summer after McDonald, makes me believe it is the retirement of Dailey rather than SCOTUS' decision in McDonald, which is driving these changes. If true, that shows you how corrupt IL is -- their CoPs and main newspaper feared Mayor Dailey more than the US Supreme Court!

The IL State Rifle Assn is the state affiliate of the NRA and a plaintiff in McDonald -- http://www.isra.org/

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/illinois-association-cheifs-police-support-legalizing-concealed-carry-proposal-20110331

Ill. Assn. of Chiefs of Police Support Legalizing Concealed Carry Proposal

State Rep. Brandon Phelps (D-Harrisburg) and leaders of the Illinois State Rifle Assn. have been negotiating for months with law enforcement officials across the state. . . .

[Phelps] hopes the General Assembly will send it to Gov. Quinn by the end of April.

As currently written, the Phelps proposal says the Illinois State Police “shall issue” a concealed carry handgun permit within 75 days after an application is submitted. . . .

Supporters of concealed carry admit privately that their prospects have vastly improved since Richard M. Daley announced his impending retirement.

Daley is a vigorous opponent of concealed carry. But his influence in the State Capitol is vastly diminished since he became a lame duck.

CCWFacts
04-02-2011, 8:31 PM
Now even the IL Association of CoPs has come out supporting CCWing!

That is pretty amazing! I can't imagine any California police orgs ever being positive or neutral on CCW.

If Chicagoans can carry before Angelenos that's going to, I don't know, give me some kind of twitch for a few days.

MP301
04-02-2011, 10:36 PM
:rofl2:

That is pretty amazing! I can't imagine any California police orgs ever being positive or neutral on CCW.

If Chicagoans can carry before Angelenos that's going to, I don't know, give me some kind of twitch for a few days.

USMC VET
04-02-2011, 10:56 PM
Love the article and may actually steal some quotes out of it. Thanks to the op for posting.

pitchbaby
04-03-2011, 1:39 AM
Not bad... not bad at all

CalNRA
04-03-2011, 1:48 AM
Leaders of the Illinois Assn. of Chiefs of Police voted Wednesday to change their stance on the issue. They now support legalizing concealed carry



Phelps said the measure will likely be amended further.

sounds like the CoP association is seeing the writing on the wall and trying to jump on the band wagon to retain some credibility and SOME control. Notice they are supporting "legalizing", not "shall issue".

I wonder what "amanded further" means? Legalizing without shall issue will just make it "may issue". We all know how well that worked for 25 million+* of Californians living in no issue counties.

*sfbay 7,427,757
la county 9,818,605
monterey 401,762
slo 246,681
santa barbara 423,895
ventura 823,318
orange 3,010,232
san diego 3,095,313
imperial 174,528

JRob
04-03-2011, 10:18 AM
sounds like the CoP association is seeing the writing on the wall and trying to jump on the band wagon to retain some credibility and SOME control. Notice they are supporting "legalizing", not "shall issue".


Exactly - this does not indicate a newly-found respect and support for citizen self-protection or newly-found common sense....its all about damage control because they can't stop the speeding train.

uyoga
04-03-2011, 10:50 AM
Other than somewhat hazy on some of the conditions stated as fact, an excellent article. More of these, please!

Gray Peterson
04-03-2011, 1:15 PM
CalNRA,

The bill they are supporting is shall-issue. There will be no carve outs for Chicago. They negotiated the language and it included "shall-issue" and carry preemption.

Funtimes
04-04-2011, 12:56 AM
I can't wait for something like this to pass in IL -- Hawaii will be the last state with a total prohibition on bearing of arms.

CalNRA
04-04-2011, 1:34 AM
CalNRA,

The bill they are supporting is shall-issue. There will be no carve outs for Chicago. They negotiated the language and it included "shall-issue" and carry preemption.

I hope so.

What will be "amended further" then?

sjalterego
04-04-2011, 2:58 PM
Veering a little off topic. In the picture accompanying the cited article, what type of ammunition is that shown?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2011-03/60530307.jpg

The case has a radius that curves over where the bullet would normally extend out of the case and there is no bullet protruding beyond the case. It looks like there is something inside the case but what kind of projectile that would be is unclear.