Chicago defies Supreme Court, enacts ever more bizarre gun restrictions

[PLC1]

no I am saying its the reason they want tougher laws...how many gang bangers you think they got jailed up for longer on tough gun charges that would have still been on the street? Fact is with easy access to guns there, murder rate would most likey be even higher...problem is like Mexico...you just leave Chi get guns and drive back and have them or sell them for a profit.

if city A has 1,000,000 people and City B has 1,000,000 as well
City A has 50 gun deaths, and 300 wounded
City B has 2 gun deaths and 6 wounded,

one city do you think will be more in favor of gun laws to restrict there use?

If Montana had there state filled with Gang Violence, and not open feilds and wild life...I am sure its gun views would not be the same..

If City A has restrictive gun laws already on the books, and City B doesn't, wouldn't that be at least some indication that perhaps restrictive gun laws don't work? Could it be an indicator at least that such gun laws could lead to more gun deaths?

Is it possible that allowing law abiding citizens to protect themselves actually leads to less violence?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

If City A has restrictive gun laws already on the books, and City B doesn't, wouldn't that be at least some indication that perhaps restrictive gun laws don't work? Could it be an indicator at least that such gun laws could lead to more gun deaths?

Is it possible that allowing law abiding citizens to protect themselves actually leads to less violence?

you can debate all you want on if gun laws work...my point was more on Views of gun control.

US have very light gun control

Most of Europe has very tight

US has far more Gun deaths

I don't think it is as simple as, gun control = less gun deaths...

Also, do you think if Chicago had less gun control..and more easy access to guns...the crime in CHi will go down? I highly doubt it. Most of the gun violence is gang violence...do you think they don't think the other gang is armed? The rest majority of the rest is Domestic...you think the husband may have a pretty good idea if his wife was armed when he shoots her?

This idea that somehow guns will lower crime because you don't know who is armed...fails on 98% of all gun murders...

 

[PLC1]

you can debate all you want on if gun laws work...my point was more on Views of gun control.

US have very light gun control

Most of Europe has very tight

US has far more Gun deaths

I don't think it is as simple as, gun control = less gun deaths...

Also, do you think if Chicago had less gun control..and more easy access to guns...the crime in CHi will go down? I highly doubt it. Most of the gun violence is gang violence...do you think they don't think the other gang is armed? The rest majority of the rest is Domestic...you think the husband may have a pretty good idea if his wife was armed when he shoots her?

This idea that somehow guns will lower crime because you don't know who is armed...fails on 98% of all gun murders...

Yes, the US had less restrictive gun laws than Europe, yet more gun violence than they do. You also put your finger on the reason: gang violence.

If I'm living in Chicago, or any one of several cities where gang related murders take place every day, where home invasions and armed robberies are commonplace, would it make sense to take my gun rights away? Hardly. The gangs aren't going to care what the gun laws are, they are going to be armed. If they are armed, so should the law abiding citizenry.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Yes, the US had less restrictive gun laws than Europe, yet more gun violence than they do. You also put your finger on the reason: gang violence.

If I'm living in Chicago, or any one of several cities where gang related murders take place every day, where home invasions and armed robberies are commonplace, would it make sense to take my gun rights away? Hardly. The gangs aren't going to care what the gun laws are, they are going to be armed. If they are armed, so should the law abiding citizenry.

and yet based on the laws, those areas with the major gang problems, have strict gun laws...and the public supports them overall. I don't see inner city people in bad areas being the backbone of the NRA ...I see people who live in the burbs and rural areas..

Also the gang violance...most often not anything that the average person being armed would have any deference against...1. its mostly gang on gang, both are armed, and oddly the fact the other side has a gun, never stops them. And 2nd, most people who even if they own a gun, and are there for a rare home invasion with people with guns..will have no change to use it, fail to use it, or are more likey to try and end up dead.

given the choice of having cops arrest anyone with a gun in the area...or thinking that well I will just get a gun, and in that are case they come after me..I will happen to have access to it...be ready to use it, actually use it, and be better with it then they are with theres.....Sorry but for most people, take the guns away wins that battle.

does anyone know if there is any study that says anything on this? like in my state, one that showed if inner city Minneapolis has a far greater support for gun laws, then rural and suburban MN...or some other state like mine

 

[PLC1]

and yet based on the laws, those areas with the major gang problems, have strict gun laws...and the public supports them overall. I don't see inner city people in bad areas being the backbone of the NRA ...I see people who live in the burbs and rural areas..

Also the gang violance...most often not anything that the average person being armed would have any deference against...1. its mostly gang on gang, both are armed, and oddly the fact the other side has a gun, never stops them. And 2nd, most people who even if they own a gun, and are there for a rare home invasion with people with guns..will have no change to use it, fail to use it, or are more likey to try and end up dead.

given the choice of having cops arrest anyone with a gun in the area...or thinking that well I will just get a gun, and in that are case they come after me..I will happen to have access to it...be ready to use it, actually use it, and be better with it then they are with theres.....Sorry but for most people, take the guns away wins that battle.

does anyone know if there is any study that says anything on this? like in my state, one that showed if inner city Minneapolis has a far greater support for gun laws, then rural and suburban MN...or some other state like mine

The question isn't whether inner city or suburban dwellers are more likely to support gun laws, but whether restrictive gun laws increase or decrease the level of violence. I put the question "do gun laws stop gun violence" in the search window, and came up with several pages of opinions and organizations asking for donations, but not one study to answer the question.

I can remember such a discussion earlier, with no conclusion. The fact is, we don't know whether restrictive gun laws have an effect one way or the other.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

The question isn't whether inner city or suburban dwellers are more likely to support gun laws, but whether restrictive gun laws increase or decrease the level of violence. I put the question "do gun laws stop gun violence" in the search window, and came up with several pages of opinions and organizations asking for donations, but not one study to answer the question.

I can remember such a discussion earlier, with no conclusion. The fact is, we don't know whether restrictive gun laws have an effect one way or the other.

I know the question, and fact is only way to solve it , is to do it and find out. you can't take one city with one law banning it, and think it will have much effect when they just buy the guns easy 50 miles away. Also there are just to many other factors to play that any study would be flawed as you can't take out all factors...honestly just the fact it was realy hot out for a month can effect the numbers for a city ( crime and violence go up in major heat waves) a change in the econ, maybe the police at same time crack down more...or less and that effects things..

But I think its also important to understand why people think the way they do, and its not about how the left just wants to take guns away becuse they do....its because Liberals tend to have alot more numbers...in major cities...where hand guns have a very different meaning then conservatives who live more in the burbs and rural areas...

Also I think the idea that guns somehow will stop others from useing guns...fails badly as it would end with alot more gun use, and very few crimes stoped because of them...and very very few ever useing them for real self deffence...of course you can't prove it one way or the other, but I think logically less guns = less gun deaths...

now I say this as someone who thinks that we do have the right to bear arms, with limits...I was not even against MN's conceal and carry law....but I do think that the logic of many who argue against any gun laws, is very flawed. and that just becuse we have a right to things,..does not mean we are better off for having them

 

[Gipper]

Also I think the idea that guns somehow will stop others from useing guns...fails badly as it would end with alot more gun use, and very few crimes stoped because of them...and very very few ever useing them for real self deffence...of course you can't prove it one way or the other, but I think logically less guns = less gun deaths...

So you "think." Really? Based on what study, data, etc???

You have no idea what you are talking about...as usual.

More guns means less crime. It has been proven over and over, but due to your "condition" you are unable to understand this.

Please read John Lotts book "More Guns, Less Crime" and educate yourself on ONE topic.

Just because you are too ignorant to know how to handle a gun, afraid you might shoot yourself due to your depression, or afraid you might shoot someone else in a fit of rage again due to your "condition," does not mean you know anything about GUNS!!!