Jump to content


Coalition for Safe Chicago Communities et al v Riverdale, Lyons, & Lincolnwood

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
62 replies to this topic

#61 raymond963


  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 200 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 13

Posted 03 March 2016 - 06:45 AM

So in a nutshell: 'Shut up and sit down. You don't know what you're talking about.'

#62 spanishjames


  • Supporting Members Team
  • 2,797 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 12

Posted 03 March 2016 - 07:51 AM


Cook County judge tosses lawsuit brought by Pfleger, other activists vs suburbs over gun shop regulation

Jonathan BilykMar. 2, 2016, 8:27pm...On Feb. 25, Cook County Circuit Judge Franklin Ulysses Valderrama dismissed in its entirety the complaint brought against the villages of Riverdale and Lincolnwood by a group known as The Coalition for Safe Chicago Communities. ......The plaintiffs asked the judge to issue an injunction forcing the villages to put in place the kind of measures recommended by the Chicago gun violence report.In response, the villages asked the judge to dismiss the lawsuit, saying the plaintiffs lacked standing under the law to bring the lawsuit in the first place, and even if they did have the right to sue, had not actually demonstrated the villages had discriminated against anyone. They also argued the courts lacked the authority to order the villages to enact any specific ordinances or rules governing how they would regulate the gun shops within their borders.Valderrama sided with the villages.The judge said he shared the activists contention that the Chicago neighborhoods most afflicted by violence, and the region, as a whole, would be better off if the suburban villages adopted the licensing restrictions recommended by the Chicago gun violence report.But Valderrama said the Coalitions attempt to compel the villages to change their licensing regulations to more closely mirror those on the books in Chicago fell short under the law.Valderrama said the villages were correct in arguing the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring their legal action, as their allegations that the guns from the suburban gun shops were used in too many Chicago street crimes, and that the violence isolated and economically depressed already poor communities in the city - centered not on a concrete, actual injury caused to any of them by the villages alleged lack of regulation, but rather were generalized grievances not sustainable under the state civil rights law.But even if the plaintiffs could establish standing to bring the action, the judge said their case fell short altogether, as it failed to establish a legally recognizable link between the suburban villages policies and the gun violence in the Chicago neighborhoods. The judge particularly noted even the report, which formed the basis of the plaintiffs lawsuit, does not attribute illegal firearm sales and gun violence to the defendants regulation of firearms dealers....

Let's see how much news coverage this update gets. When Pfleger filed suit, there was non-stop coverage by the media for at least a week.

To disarm is to consent to slavery.

#63 Hap


  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,871 posts
  • Joined: 16-May 13

Posted 03 March 2016 - 07:47 AM

They'll be back with some other ill-conceived legal action. Pfleger doesn't care about the result, because he knows that even if they won it wouldn't have the slightest effect on violent crime in Chicago or anywhere else. What Pfleger cares about is publicity.

Ad utrumque paratus