City, state prime targets in gun rights lawsuits
#1
Posted 08 March 2012 - 09:28 AM
http://www.chicagotr...0,7831041.story
I was truly astonished by the placement and the tone of the article. Who would have thought that a Chicago Tribune article on this topic would be on the front page, and would have a reasoned, neutral tone supported by factual reporting? Dahleen Glanton has written an article that is reminiscent of the newspapers of 40 years ago, when newspapers were worth reading for something other than the sale ads and the movie listings.
- John F. Kennedy
#2
Posted 08 March 2012 - 10:23 AM
Got my comments posted.
Seriously, the legalization of dueling would end political pandering and solve political corruption in the State
ITWT Club Member 001
ONE STATE- ONE LAW
#3
Posted 08 March 2012 - 10:32 AM
Quote
More than 1000? I'd say so.
Trib link
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."-- Benjamin Franklin
#4
Posted 08 March 2012 - 10:44 AM
#5
Posted 08 March 2012 - 11:03 AM
This Mike Moore seems like a cool cat, and that was a good article
"A government that does not trust it’s law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust.” James Madison.
“To prohibit a citizen from wearing or carrying a war arm… is an unwarranted restriction upon the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of constitutional privilege.” [Wilson v. State, 33 Ark. 557, at 560, 34 Am. - 1878"]
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.
#6
Posted 08 March 2012 - 11:17 AM
#7
Posted 08 March 2012 - 11:58 AM
I don't like Mr. Vice referring to us as the "gun criminals"!
#8
Posted 08 March 2012 - 12:36 PM
papa, on 08 March 2012 - 11:58 AM, said:
I don't like Mr. Vice referring to us as the "gun criminals"!
#9
Posted 08 March 2012 - 12:55 PM
#10
Posted 08 March 2012 - 08:32 PM

NRA / ISRA
#11
Posted 08 March 2012 - 10:28 PM
~"An invasion of mainland America is unwise. Behind every blade of grass a rifle would await us"
-Yamamoto Isoroku
Yes. I'm predicting that Chicago/Cook county will be sold out in order to get "shall issue".
#12
Posted 09 March 2012 - 01:10 AM
Skorpius, on 08 March 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:
#13
Posted 09 March 2012 - 01:26 PM
It was my understanding that Ezell vs. was just about opening a range, not having anything to do with permits, registration, and fees for mere ownership. In essence, to be able to better comply with Chicago's regulations, rather than to challenge them on the whole. Even Benson vs. only picks and chooses and does not cover it in total. I know some of the Maryland language is promising and could potentially be used in a future suit.

NRA / ISRA
#14
Posted 09 March 2012 - 02:17 PM
"permits, registration, and fees" would be much more difficult to win. But challenged in bits and pieces and
stacked together, they change the whole landscape. In the amended complaint I can see challenges to
different aspects of the Chicago ordinances.
Quote
of firearms by shooting range patrons other than a one-time, one-hour exemption for taking a class. These
provisions bar individuals from (1) practicing with or sampling different firearms, (2) practicing the use of
firearms without purchasing and registering a firearm, (3) purchasing ammunition for self-defense, and (4)
replacing older ammunition, by firing it at the range and then departing with fresh replacements.
43. But for the criminal enactments and burdensome requirements and restrictions contained in the Ordinances
challenged in this complaint, Plaintiffs Ezell, Brown and Hespen would frequent a Chicago gun range for
recreational shooting, and to maintain and improve their proficiency with firearms.
#15
Posted 09 March 2012 - 02:37 PM
The reporter could have left the quote out, I guess, but it's a strong quote and there couldn't have been many from that side of the aisle--and the reporter probably didn't make it up or prompt the Brady guy to say it, so why blame her?
I was very impressed with Mr. Moore's eloquence and with the quote from Valinda that they used to conclude the article:
Quote
But Valinda Rowe, spokeswoman for IllinoisCarry.com, which has held forums across the state to drum up support for concealed carry legislation, said gun advocates will continue their focus on Illinois.
"This is something that needs to be fought on three different fronts — the judicial front, the legislative front and the electoral front," said Rowe. "If we can't work with legislators to get them to change their stance, maybe their constituents can elect someone else."
________________________________________________________________________________
Be an IGOLD Marshal! Your mother would be proud!
"What if they threw a huge pro-gun demonstration in an anti-gun political capital and nobody volunteered?"
(With apologies to Bertolt Brecht. Sorry, Mr. Brecht.)
________________________________________________________________________________
#16
Posted 17 March 2012 - 04:30 PM
FWIW: There has been some discussion about language and wording. There is a good book called "Words That Work: It's Not What You Say, It's What People Hear" that is worth the read.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users











