Dallas Jones asked this question elsewhere. What are some possible answers?
How and why is the gun death tally so high in Chicago if the laws are so restrictive? Please try to focus in on just this city and just this subject-no “well, over in this country…”, no “They’re out to get our guns!”, no “You gun nuts just wanna…”-Just Chicago’s gun deaths and Chicago’s gun laws. What isn’t working, and why.
Flip the cause and effect around. The high gun death tally is the reason why Chicago has such restrictive gun laws. In turn, the cause for the death tally is mostly just population density.
I’m not sure I really get what the argument is. Chicago has more gun deaths then last year so…something about gun control?
Impossible to really have effective gun control on a city level, when the country as a whole is awash in guns.
I never stated which was cause and which was effect. I simply asked for understanding as to why Chicago has a high gun death tally if the laws are supposedly so restrictive? Are there holes in the laws?
Is it easy to get weapons from outside the area and just bring them in?
Too damn vague an answer, ed.
shrug There’s no customs checkpoint between Cicero and South Lawndale. Chicago’s gun laws only affect a gun owner if he bought the gun from a legal dealer in Chicago, registered himself as a gun owner with the Chicago police, or got arrested with a gun. The laws are more “feel like we are doing something” than actually useful for curbing gun violence.
Also the phrase “surpassed last years record of gun deaths” suggests there was some sort of record set last year. Even given the current surge, the number of murders in Chicago is much lower then its peak in the early 90’s, so unless Chicago-area murders have switched from other methods of homicide to exclusive use of firearms, the claim isn’t true.
Are there any numbers on how many shooters were law-abiding citizens prior to the point in time where they pulled the trigger? Have shooters been arrested who, according to these restrictive laws, should not have been able to get their hands on a gun?
Good question. Are there stats for illegally gotten guns involved in gun deaths vs. legally gotten guns involved in gun deaths? Chicago stats only, please.
Well, duh. All those guns had to come from somewhere, right?
Once again, why don’t we leave the vague answers on bumper stickers where they belong? Do you have any info on the surrounding area around Chicago that might point in that direction? How far away from that area do you have to be to easily and legally obtain weapons?
If the importation of guns is the problem, would there be a way to legally slow that down?
Just state your opinion already.
I’m puzzled. Why wouldn’t it be easy? What barriers to such an action do you think might exist?
Because of how our country works (fourth amendment combined with free trade among states), I don’t think there would be any barriers at all to getting guns and bringing them into the area.
And a gun is a relatively big purchase. Even if someone had to drive four hours to get a gun, I don’t think that’d be such a big deterrent. If you’re buying guns for some sort of organized crime syndicate, it’d be a trivial deterrent. And the OP’s article pretty strongly implies that the level of gun violence in Chicago is directly linked to gangs.
Is there any indication at all that a gang who wants to arm its members is going to fail to do so because it’d mean a road trip?
Czarcasm split this new thread from a post I made in the Pit. And thank you.
I am really interested in why urban gun restrictions do not seem to get the desired results. Before we can have a really intelligent conversation about what might be able to be done, regarding gun violence in the US, we have to show where and why something has worked. An example to start the real discussion. So far in all these threads I have read and mostly not replied in, they quickly devolve into the same old talking points.
I will say that I am a multi-gun owner in a rural area where guns very common and not feared. But if you are going to get my sort of person on board with sensible gun restrictions, show me where they work first.
And let us talk about Chicago as a starting point.
Examples of UK or Canadian or Australian policy do not count.
“So high” compared to what? Murders in Chicago:
1990: 851
1991: 927
1992: 943
1993: 855
1994: 931
1995: 828
1996: 796
1997: 761
1998: 704
1999: 643
2000: 633
2001: 667
2002: 656
2003: 601
2004: 453
2005: 451
2006: 471
2007: 448
2008: 513
2009: 459
2010: 436
2011: 433
Police credited surveillance cameras with contributing to decreased crime in 2004.[9]
Not sure where you are getting the “record” from. Murders are down to about 50% of what they were in the 90s.
Here’s a Sun-Times article saying that many guns are bought in or around Illinois. Also talks about the use of straw purchasers as intermediaries between guns and gangs/criminals.
Drive four hours? Shit, there are gun shops in close-in suburbs that you can reach without changing CTA/Pace buses. Go in there with a FOID, select your favorite, and pick it up when the waiting period is up. Easy-peasy and totally legal, but that is not one of the guns that is likely to be used in a crime.
“Only outlaws will have guns” may be bumperstickerish, but it is true if the person got the gun through alternate means or posesses it in violation of Chicago’s specific laws. Chicago’s laws are, at best, something that can slow or stop the law-abiding. Otherwise they only function as something else to convict someone with after a crime has been committed.
I’m just looking for answers about this problem as it pertains to Chicago. No hidden agenda. No leading questions. No “gotchas”. Why should I even form an opinion before I get some facts?