Chicago has what, arguably, are the strictest gun control laws of any major city in the country.
This weekend, Chicago suffered its 700th homicide – an 18 year high, with more than a month to go.
Almost all the homicides – 634 to be exact – have come as the result of gun violence.
Add that to the 3,307 non-fatal shootings so far, and you have 3,941 known instances of gun violence – sure to exceed 4,000 before the year ends (probably before November ends).
So if Chicago has extremely strict gun control laws…
…and gun crime, both fatal and non-fatal, is soaring in Chicago…
…does it not make sense to conclude that there is a disconnect between strict gun control laws and gun crime?
Is it fair to conclude – as I have in maybe a dozen previous blogs, maybe more – that, since illegal guns are used in almost all of these shootings, there are two issues here – gun control for people who obey laws, and gun control for people who do not?
Is it fair to conclude that what has to be addressed is the scourge of violent thugs – mostly gangbangers in Black areas – who get and use guns illegally – mostly against Black victims? And that passing more gun control laws for them to ignore won’t address this scourge?
Is it fair to conclude that laws must be enacted which give illegal gun users at least some reason not to commit gun violence – like, for example, mandatory sentences for anyone carrying an illegal gun, regardless of whether it is being used in the commission of a crime, with the level of mandatory punishment more severe for anyone with a criminal record?
Is it fair to conclude that the statistics shown above prove that whatever efforts are in place to stem gang violence are NOT WORKING? Is it racist to center efforts in the highest crime areas, because that is where the most gun violence takes place….and where the most innocent victims are?
Chicago is on the edge of a cliff, and leaning toward the abyss. It damn well better cut the PC crap and do something about what is happening there.
Ken, when you say “mandatory sentences for anyone carrying an illegal gun”.
Do you mean anyone illegally carrying a gun or that the gun itself is illegal?
I mean both. The idea is to make it worth someone’s while not to be carrying the gun in the first place. If you don’t have one on your person, you can’t use it.
I would be hard pressed if I lived in Chicago to go out unarmed.
I would imagine with the Chicago governments views on firearms that getting a Concealed Carry Permit is next to impossible [unless you have friends in the government].