Chicago’s Restrictive Gun Laws Are Rarely Enforced
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 11:50 am
Article in the NY Times. Yes, the NY Times.
Short story -- prosecution for breaking city ordinances on gun possession were rarely prosecuted, because state and federal laws carried higher penalties. What the NY Times is missing here is that I am sure these laws were not parallel -- i.e. there are not Federal laws that say you can't have a handgun in Chicago. The state laws have the FOID thing, but still, the real prosecutions were for bad guys who actually committed crimes with guns, like robbery, felon-in-possession. Further proof to me that the city ordinances were not about crime, but about controlling the non-criminal population.
Some stats:
- Since 1982, when the city banned handguns, there have been only 2,201 convictions under city laws
- Since 2000, police have arrested 12,697 people under the city law, but prosecutors won only 2,068 convictions. This implies that there were only 133 convictions between 1982 and 1999 --- the article does not address this.
- From January to August of this year, police made 1,168 arrests for aggravated battery with a firearm, about the same number as the same period last year. Presumably these all violated the city ordinance as well, but of course these were real crimes, so prosecuted with actual criminal law.
- Chicago spent $90K fighting McDonald, including $20K from the Joyce Foundation. Glad to hear it. Another $20K the Joyce Foundation wasted and can't use to cause mischief elsewhere.
Surprisingly to me, the article does a pretty good job of making the Chicago gun laws look silly and anti-citizen (as opposed to anti-crime).
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/us/29 ... ted=1&_r=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Short story -- prosecution for breaking city ordinances on gun possession were rarely prosecuted, because state and federal laws carried higher penalties. What the NY Times is missing here is that I am sure these laws were not parallel -- i.e. there are not Federal laws that say you can't have a handgun in Chicago. The state laws have the FOID thing, but still, the real prosecutions were for bad guys who actually committed crimes with guns, like robbery, felon-in-possession. Further proof to me that the city ordinances were not about crime, but about controlling the non-criminal population.
Some stats:
- Since 1982, when the city banned handguns, there have been only 2,201 convictions under city laws
- Since 2000, police have arrested 12,697 people under the city law, but prosecutors won only 2,068 convictions. This implies that there were only 133 convictions between 1982 and 1999 --- the article does not address this.
- From January to August of this year, police made 1,168 arrests for aggravated battery with a firearm, about the same number as the same period last year. Presumably these all violated the city ordinance as well, but of course these were real crimes, so prosecuted with actual criminal law.
- Chicago spent $90K fighting McDonald, including $20K from the Joyce Foundation. Glad to hear it. Another $20K the Joyce Foundation wasted and can't use to cause mischief elsewhere.
Surprisingly to me, the article does a pretty good job of making the Chicago gun laws look silly and anti-citizen (as opposed to anti-crime).
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/us/29 ... ted=1&_r=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;