In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Mayor Daley: Ruling doesn't apply to Chicago!
Spider7115
Member Posts: 29,704 ✭✭✭
An angry Mayor Richard Daley on Thursday called the Supreme Court's overturning of the Washington D.C. handgun ban "a very frightening decision" and vowed to fight vigorously any challenges to Chicago's ban.
That challenge was not long in coming. Hours after the high court's ruling was made public Thursday, the Second Amendment Foundation and the Illinois State Rifle Association sued the city and the mayor in an effort to overturn Chicago's quarter-century ban on handguns.
City officials expressed confidence the city would prevail in any court challenge, asserting, among other things, that the 2nd Amendment as part of the Bill of Rights restricts the federal government and does not apply to state and local governments.
"It's a big blow to those of us who believe in common sense gun laws," Gov. Rod Blagojevich said during an appearance at a West Side community agency to announce a summer jobs program. "And as a result, it's the wrong decision."
Earlier, Daley expressed outrage at the 5-4 court decision.
"Does this lead to everyone having a gun in our society?" Daley asked while speaking at a Navy Pier event. "If they [the Supreme Court] think that's the answer, then they're greatly mistaken. Then why don't we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun, and we'll settle it in the streets if that's they're thinking."
"We think we're such an improved society," he added. "The rest of the world is laughing at us."
In finding Washington D.C's law against handgun ownership unconstitutional, the high court determined that Americans have the right to own guns for self-defense and hunting.
It was the first time in nearly 70 years that the court had taken up broad questions about the 2nd Amendment's protections of the right to bear arms. The city of Chicago, which has had its own ban on handgun ownership since 1982, had filed a brief with the court in support of the ban in January.
Even before the suit was filed challenging the Chicago Weapons Ordinance, city officials said they believed the Chicago law did not fall under the Supreme Court ruling.
"We are confident that this does not invalidate Chicago's ordinance at this point," said Jennifer Hoyle, spokeswoman for the city Law Department.
Benna Solomon, deputy corporation counsel for the city, asserted that the Supreme Court decision applies only to the federal government. Washington D.C., she said, is part of the federal government, but Chicago is an independent home-rule unit of Illinois.
"The court notes that it is not required to consider whether the 2nd Amendment also applies to state and local government, and therefore it does not consider that question," Solomon said. "The court had previously held on three occasions the 2nd Amendment does not apply to state and local government, and it does not reconsider or even address that issue in this opinion."
"We are prepared to aggressively litigate this issue and defend this ordinance," Hoyle added.
In railing against the Supreme Court ruling, Daley stressed the danger of private gun ownership, especially for the children of gun owners.
"We've shown time and time again how many children have been killed in their homes by guns," he said. "Parents are away, they get the gun. Parents are away, the child takes the gun, runs out in the street and has an argument, comes back and shoots somebody."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-supreme-court-gun-ban,0,3522044.story?page=1
That challenge was not long in coming. Hours after the high court's ruling was made public Thursday, the Second Amendment Foundation and the Illinois State Rifle Association sued the city and the mayor in an effort to overturn Chicago's quarter-century ban on handguns.
City officials expressed confidence the city would prevail in any court challenge, asserting, among other things, that the 2nd Amendment as part of the Bill of Rights restricts the federal government and does not apply to state and local governments.
"It's a big blow to those of us who believe in common sense gun laws," Gov. Rod Blagojevich said during an appearance at a West Side community agency to announce a summer jobs program. "And as a result, it's the wrong decision."
Earlier, Daley expressed outrage at the 5-4 court decision.
"Does this lead to everyone having a gun in our society?" Daley asked while speaking at a Navy Pier event. "If they [the Supreme Court] think that's the answer, then they're greatly mistaken. Then why don't we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun, and we'll settle it in the streets if that's they're thinking."
"We think we're such an improved society," he added. "The rest of the world is laughing at us."
In finding Washington D.C's law against handgun ownership unconstitutional, the high court determined that Americans have the right to own guns for self-defense and hunting.
It was the first time in nearly 70 years that the court had taken up broad questions about the 2nd Amendment's protections of the right to bear arms. The city of Chicago, which has had its own ban on handgun ownership since 1982, had filed a brief with the court in support of the ban in January.
Even before the suit was filed challenging the Chicago Weapons Ordinance, city officials said they believed the Chicago law did not fall under the Supreme Court ruling.
"We are confident that this does not invalidate Chicago's ordinance at this point," said Jennifer Hoyle, spokeswoman for the city Law Department.
Benna Solomon, deputy corporation counsel for the city, asserted that the Supreme Court decision applies only to the federal government. Washington D.C., she said, is part of the federal government, but Chicago is an independent home-rule unit of Illinois.
"The court notes that it is not required to consider whether the 2nd Amendment also applies to state and local government, and therefore it does not consider that question," Solomon said. "The court had previously held on three occasions the 2nd Amendment does not apply to state and local government, and it does not reconsider or even address that issue in this opinion."
"We are prepared to aggressively litigate this issue and defend this ordinance," Hoyle added.
In railing against the Supreme Court ruling, Daley stressed the danger of private gun ownership, especially for the children of gun owners.
"We've shown time and time again how many children have been killed in their homes by guns," he said. "Parents are away, they get the gun. Parents are away, the child takes the gun, runs out in the street and has an argument, comes back and shoots somebody."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-supreme-court-gun-ban,0,3522044.story?page=1
Comments
It's also hilarious to see Yankee Liberals screaming state's rights.
"Even before the suit was filed challenging the Chicago Weapons Ordinance, city officials said they believed the Chicago law did not fall under the Supreme Court ruling."
Then why did they do this:
The city of Chicago, which has had its own ban on handgun ownership since 1982, had filed a brief with the court in support of the ban in January.
Idiots!
what a f'n idiot, he wouldn't know common sense if it hit him in the head
"Does this lead to everyone having a gun in our society?" Daley asked while speaking at a Navy Pier event. "If they [the Supreme Court] think that's the answer, then they're greatly mistaken. Then why don't we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun, and we'll settle it in the streets if that's they're thinking."
No, but is leads to the choice for those who want a gun and a choice for those who do not want a gun.
That guy is an idiot!
"Then why don't we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun, and we'll settle it in the streets if that's they're thinking."
I have to go clean my Vaquero, pardner! [:D]
Answer: Yes
Question: Mr. Daly do you know of any other large cities in the U.S.A. ?
Answer : yes
Question: Would you consider Atlanta, Dallas, Indianapolis, Detroit, Miami, New Orleans, Las Vegas.. large cities?
Answer: yes
Question: Then do you believe something is wrong with the crime rate of Chicago?
Answer: yes
Question: Well can you explain how the other cities mentioned have no gun control and their crime rate is lower?
Answer: No ..
federal law says everyone must be read their rights when they are arrested...that law overrides all other state and local city laws...
federal law says any woman can have an abortion...that overrides all state laws...
the federal and constitutional laws on freedom of speech override any laws any state may introduce...
the list goes on, im sure all of you can list a lot more instances where federal law overrides the states and local laws.
why then doesnt your second amendement of your constitution...the document that all of your laws are based around override the states and local government laws????
surely the next step would be to go back to the supreme court and get a lot more specific gun control laws ruled on one way or another?
there should be no reason why the court couldnt be asked to rule on the machine gun ban...and say whether you can have "assult rifles" , and any other law you care to name?
why would there be a need for there to be individual cases for every question they could be asked to rule on?
its a pity heller and the nra didnt go for broke and force the court to rule on a heap of things at the same time...actually get some clarification instead of having a situation where there are dozens of questions left hanging in the wind with no definitive answers....
"Does this lead to everyone having a gun in our society?" Daley asked while speaking at a Navy Pier event. "If they [the Supreme Court] think that's the answer, then they're greatly mistaken. Then why don't we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun, and we'll settle it in the streets if that's they're thinking."
This guy really needs to study up on the old west! Most towns outlawed carrying guns within the town limits and in all honesty the high noon showdowns were very rare!
But what do you expect from someone who learns about the old west in the movies![:(!][xx(][:(][}:)]
I'd love to see this ruling lead to a Federal CCW so we don't have to deal with anti-gun states, counties and LEO's to get a permit and could travel anywhere in the US with a concealed handgun.
+1
The rest of the world laughing at us? More like envying us, our freedom to speak our minds, publish our opinions, and to keep and bear arms.
I agree. Does he seriously think Canada, Australia, Great Britain, Japan, etc. are laughing? They aren't laughing; they're crying.
You could see the smoke coming out of his ears.
So he says here the ruling doesn't apply to Chicago.
If not, why was he so upset.
I think he protests too much.
He knows damn well it does apply to his town and he is in deep legal doo doo, Chicago will spend hundreds of thousands only to lose in court.
Dumb Mick.
Daley says the Second Amendment does not apply to Chicago.
Then this must mean that the First Amendment does not apply, either.
When a newpapaper writes an editorial criticizing Daley, he can send in the Chicago police to shut down the paper.
Intersting.
HEY TR!
What were you saying about the other "ineffective" groups?
Where was the NRA on this one? You think MAYBE the NRA will join in too after SOMEONE ELSE does the work?
quote:Hours after the high court's ruling was made public Thursday, the Second Amendment Foundation and the Illinois State Rifle Association sued the city and the mayor in an effort to overturn Chicago's quarter-century ban on handguns.
Intersting.
HEY TR!
What were you saying about the other "ineffective" groups?
Where was the NRA on this one? You think MAYBE the NRA will join in too after SOMEONE ELSE does the work?
In spite of your taunting attitude I will answer your question. I am a dues paying member of the SAF. The Ilinois State Rifle Associan is the Illinois state NRA affilate. When the D.C. case was argued in the SCOTUS, one of the three lawyers at the plantiff's table was a lawyer employeed by and a longtime NRA member/lawyer.
Please find another pro-gun rights group to howl about how you have no support for them.
And regarding some doing the "work" how much work have you done in regards to helping with gun rights? When you are not running your mouth that is.
Hey, I am an ISRA member also. Where are you located? I am in Southern Illinois about 25 miles east of St. Louis MO.
You usually make sense on this fourm. The one thing we can all be sure about is that the lawyers will continue to make a lot of money debating this one.
I for one think this is the most positive action I have seen in my lifetime. The only thing Dailey has accompolished with all his gun control laws is to make Chicago one of the most dangerous citys in the country. Yes we will still have restrictions, and always will have, but this is a step in the right direction. Currious to see how Obamba is going to go against the Supreme Court decision if he is ellected?
City officials expressed confidence the city would prevail in any court challenge, asserting, among other things, that the 2nd Amendment as part of the Bill of Rights restricts the federal government and does not apply to state and local governments.
The problem with that is that Section 1. of the fourteenth Amendment
has been held to mean that the Federal Constitution also applies to the states.
N Amendment 14
(Ratified July 9, 1868)
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
An angry Mayor Richard Daley on Thursday called the Supreme Court's overturning of the Washington D.C. handgun ban "a very frightening decision" and vowed to fight vigorously any challenges to Chicago's ban.
That challenge was not long in coming. Hours after the high court's ruling was made public Thursday, the Second Amendment Foundation and the Illinois State Rifle Association sued the city and the mayor in an effort to overturn Chicago's quarter-century ban on handguns.
City officials expressed confidence the city would prevail in any court challenge, asserting, among other things, that the 2nd Amendment as part of the Bill of Rights restricts the federal government and does not apply to state and local governments.
"It's a big blow to those of us who believe in common sense gun laws," Gov. Rod Blagojevich said during an appearance at a West Side community agency to announce a summer jobs program. "And as a result, it's the wrong decision."
Earlier, Daley expressed outrage at the 5-4 court decision.
"Does this lead to everyone having a gun in our society?" Daley asked while speaking at a Navy Pier event. "If they [the Supreme Court] think that's the answer, then they're greatly mistaken. Then why don't we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun, and we'll settle it in the streets if that's they're thinking."
"We think we're such an improved society," he added. "The rest of the world is laughing at us."
In finding Washington D.C's law against handgun ownership unconstitutional, the high court determined that Americans have the right to own guns for self-defense and hunting.
It was the first time in nearly 70 years that the court had taken up broad questions about the 2nd Amendment's protections of the right to bear arms. The city of Chicago, which has had its own ban on handgun ownership since 1982, had filed a brief with the court in support of the ban in January.
Even before the suit was filed challenging the Chicago Weapons Ordinance, city officials said they believed the Chicago law did not fall under the Supreme Court ruling.
"We are confident that this does not invalidate Chicago's ordinance at this point," said Jennifer Hoyle, spokeswoman for the city Law Department.
Benna Solomon, deputy corporation counsel for the city, asserted that the Supreme Court decision applies only to the federal government. Washington D.C., she said, is part of the federal government, but Chicago is an independent home-rule unit of Illinois.
"The court notes that it is not required to consider whether the 2nd Amendment also applies to state and local government, and therefore it does not consider that question," Solomon said. "The court had previously held on three occasions the 2nd Amendment does not apply to state and local government, and it does not reconsider or even address that issue in this opinion."
"We are prepared to aggressively litigate this issue and defend this ordinance," Hoyle added.
In railing against the Supreme Court ruling, Daley stressed the danger of private gun ownership, especially for the children of gun owners.
"We've shown time and time again how many children have been killed in their homes by guns," he said. "Parents are away, they get the gun. Parents are away, the child takes the gun, runs out in the street and has an argument, comes back and shoots somebody."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-supreme-court-gun-ban,0,3522044.story?page=1
If the ruling doesn't apply to Chicago, then let Chicago go join the Commie Canada. In fact if all those Commie states went and joined together is would be a boon to the rest of us (US).
Margaret Thatcher
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
Mark Twain
Sorry Mr. Daley but SCOTUS didn't write the constitution they just interpret it.
If the second amendment only applies to federal law I wonder what kind of reception Mr. Daley would have if he said the States also have the right to prohibit free speech??
Quote:
"Does this lead to everyone having a gun in our society?" Daley asked while speaking at a Navy Pier event. "If they [the Supreme Court] think that's the answer, then they're greatly mistaken. Then why don't we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun, and we'll settle it in the streets if that's they're thinking."
This guy really needs to study up on the old west! Most towns outlawed carrying guns within the town limits and in all honesty the high noon showdowns were very rare!
But what do you expect from someone who learns about the old west in the movies![:(!][xx(][:(][}:)]
Absolutely correct, the shootouts portrayed in the old westerns were very rare according to historians, this guy Daley is complete scum.......
chicago sucks, Ive lived here for 2 years now and he and all his aldermen can carry weapons but we cant.
dang Bullies[:(!]
Besides to actual AMERICANS even live there anymore?
quote:If they [the Supreme Court] think that's the answer, then they're greatly mistaken.
Sorry Mr. Daley but SCOTUS didn't write the constitution they just interpret it.
If the second amendment only applies to federal law I wonder what kind of reception Mr. Daley would have if he said the States also have the right to prohibit free speech??
From what I understand about Daley, he interprets the Constitution only as it applies to him and to hell with the people he was elected to represent.
OleDuk[V][V]
be something in the water up there. Well the law showed Capone.
Wonder if they up to showing Daley too?[;)][;)]
How is keeping honest citizen unarmed going to cut down on these shootings, when it is the criminals using illegal guns that are still shooting people? The fact that his stupid anti handgun law hasn't kept the crime rate down is a perfect example of how he or any other Mayor can't protect anyone no matter how many stupid anti gun laws they pass. And, it is the exact reason why the average Joe Citizen needs to be able to protect their self's.[:(!]
Trinity +++
quote:Originally posted by freemind
quote:Hours after the high court's ruling was made public Thursday, the Second Amendment Foundation and the Illinois State Rifle Association sued the city and the mayor in an effort to overturn Chicago's quarter-century ban on handguns.
Intersting.
HEY TR!
What were you saying about the other "ineffective" groups?
Where was the NRA on this one? You think MAYBE the NRA will join in too after SOMEONE ELSE does the work?
In spite of your taunting attitude I will answer your question. I am a dues paying member of the SAF. The Ilinois State Rifle Associan is the Illinois state NRA affilate. When the D.C. case was argued in the SCOTUS, one of the three lawyers at the plantiff's table was a lawyer employeed by and a longtime NRA member/lawyer.
Please find another pro-gun rights group to howl about how you have no support for them.
And regarding some doing the "work" how much work have you done in regards to helping with gun rights? When you are not running your mouth that is.
LMAO. See, I can still get your goat TR. [;)]
But really, with ALL the MONEY and POWER your vaunted NRA has, why weren't THEY leading the charge INSTEAD of SAF?
You aren't REALLY going to drag out your tired and ragged line about"What have you done", are you?
this outside challenge to their gun laws is going to be very very interesting.