2nd Amendment Upheld by Supreme Court - Could Chicago be next?

Just to start off, here's a few links to news stories that you might want to check out.

Daley vows to fight for Chicago's gun ban

Jury still out on city gun ban

Mayor Daley calls Supreme Court's gun-ban reversal 'a very frightening decision'

Landmark Ruling Enshrines Right to Own Guns


The 2nd Amendment was written for a reason. It wasn't put into the Constitution just for the government's uses but it was also put there for the common good of every person that lives within the border. I should reword this. For the common good of every person that 'legally' lives within the border.

Granted, it was written during a time when there wasn't a police force but that was then. Even now I believe that the 2nd Amendment should be fully instated everywhere. I grew up in a household that hunts and shoots firearms. For now, I do not possess any firearms within the city limits. It's illegal to do so thus I do not.

I believe that people should have the choice to bear arms. If you don't like guns then don't have them. Simple enough. I believe that a person should be able to have a handgun in their home for protection. A part of me thinks we should be able to carry them in public as well.

Mayor Daley stated, "Then why don't we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West..." at a recent speaking engagement at Navy Pier. Why not?

There were court systems in the larger areas during the "Old West". There was also local Sheriffs and Deputys in many of the towns and the gun was a major factor in many disputes away from the towns. Public hangings were allowed then as well. Imagine if they were today, would crime go down? No one knows until we try.

In today's society a trip back to the old west could be a disaster. With the generations becoming softer and more outspoken it could lead to a large 'thinning of the herd'. Which isn't necessarily bad in a theoretical sense but in reality it would be horrible.

Within the past few months here in Chicago there have been a lot of deaths due to gun violence. Which could possibly be used as a platform to help keep the gun ban. But here's the question that I pose.

Are these deaths due to "gun violence" a result of people that have the legal means to own the firearms?

The answer to this question is no. As of this time it is illegal to own handguns within the city limits of Chicago. So these people that are shooting other people are breaking the law to begin with.

So how can the blame be put on the guns?

I've wondered for years how anyone can say that guns are bad. I've never understood this. You can go out and adopt a child. Do you know what your going to get with that child? Do you know the family history behind that child? Do you know if that child will become an alcoholic, drug dependent or anything else about that child when you adopt it? No, you don't. It's a gamble but it's a gamble that is worthwhile.

Do you know what you get when you purchase a gun? You get a gun. You know that it was built. You know what it was built for and it never strays from what it is. Until the person that wields that gun decides to use it for something else. A gun is a gun. It's the decision of the person holding the gun as to what they use it for.

Another example.

As I'm writing this and you see any misspelled words. Who misspelled those words? Was it the program that I'm writing through or was it just me? Could I place blame on this program due to the fact that I pressed the letters in the wrong manner? No, I can not.

Guns bring more violence.

This argument is over done. The only way that the violence will raise is due to the fact that people will be able to defend themselves from the numerous thugs that already have the illegal guns. When people can stand up for themselves they will. When the playing ground is level there will be more instances. Perhaps now the right people will be getting hurt instead of the wrong ones.

Lately there has been a lot of deaths due to gun violence in Chicago. Mostly younger kids that have access to illegal firearms. Has anything been done to find out where these firearms are coming from? Why do these minors have them? Has anything been done to try and rid these areas of these firearms? No one knows for certain except those that are directly involved. There have been no statements made to confirm or deny these procedures.

However, I'm sure it will all come up in court once someone decides to try to overturn Chicago's ban. The city will gladly try to make it seem that all of these people that caused the shootings we're from nearby suburbs. Suburbs where it is legal to own handguns. They drove into the city to shoot a person.

Children's deaths due to guns.

Again, I don't believe that guns cause the deaths of the children that find their parents handguns. I believe that to be the full fault of the parents. If your stupid enough to leave a gun in your home, fully loaded and accessible to your child then your stupid enough to lose a child. That gun did not call out your child's name and it did not ask your child to pull the trigger.

Your an adult and a gun owner. Take the responsibility to teach your children about the gun and how it's to be or not to be used. Put the gun in a place where your child can not get to it. They make gun safes for a reason, not only to protect the guns but your family as well.


In a lot of the articles that I've read it seems that certain people are very scared that the citizens of Chicago could have guns. You can now legally own rifles and shotguns in the city. Rifles which can shoot farther and more accurately than a handgun. Shotguns that can be more destructive than many handguns. What's the difference? You can't hide rifles and shotguns as easily as handguns.

Imagine if the city decided to put forth a license for people to be able to carry a gun. It could be a reasonably priced license anywhere between $500 to $1,000. This license would only be available so people could carry the weapon in public. It would not be a license for ownership because that would be against the Constitution.

Now lets say a majority of people can now carry these weapons. When they are assaulted by a mugger, a rapist or any numerous other scenarios; they have the ability to protect themselves. They have the ability to level the playing field. I'm not advocating that this should happen, I'm just putting a scenario out there.

With the playing field leveled I believe there would be less crime. The "bad guys" would have more to worry about other than just the police or wearing multiple layers of clothing to escape. Of course in the beginning there would be more deaths on both sides of the spectrum. Which is why there would have to be certain training seminars that any person obtaining this license would have to go through to obtain it.

According to an article about Texas' Right to Carry law on the NRA-ILA website: "Gov. Bush vowed that Texas` Right to Carry law would make the state a "safer place," and statistics prove he was right. Texas` homicide rate has declined to its lowest point since the 1950s and has decreased a startling 60% from the high under his predecessor. Murder rates in Texas fell by 25% between 1995 and 1997, much faster than the 16% decline in states without "shall-issue" laws. Overall, Texas` total violent crime rate has dropped 20% under Gov. Bush and is lower than at any time since 1974."

Imagine if Illinois and Chicago adopted this policy.


Maybe people could walk around any where they wanted without holding their mace, a knife or any other object in their hands.