Simply because you say there has been no significant change does not make it true.
Well, just because you say there has been a significant change, does not make it true.
Anyway, I think good questions consist of why do cities such as Detroit, Chicago, New Orleans, DC, and Philly have high murder rates and other places such as Houston, Boston, and Miami do not.
Are those places policing poorly? Are they corrupt?
0
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:
Simply because you say there has been no significant change does not make it true.
Well, just because you say there has been a significant change, does not make it true.
Anyway, I think good questions consist of why do cities such as Detroit, Chicago, New Orleans, DC, and Philly have high murder rates and other places such as Houston, Boston, and Miami do not.
Are those places policing poorly? Are they corrupt?
Well, just because you say there has been a significant change, does not make it true.
Anyway, I think good questions consist of why do cities such as Detroit, Chicago, New Orleans, DC, and Philly have high murder rates and other places such as Houston, Boston, and Miami do not.
Are those places policing poorly? Are they corrupt?
Bringing up other jurisidictions is irrelevant to this discussion. The proper question is whether the changes in gun laws have led to any increase in violence. Unless the other jurisdictions had the exact same changes, they cannot offer any comparative analysis.
You continue to assert their is no significant change. The statistics showing that there was a significant uptick in applications for FOIDs and weapons permits following the law changes at the very least, shows that there was an attempt for more weapons to be placed in private hands. That, in and of itself, is a significant change when the previous law banned handguns outright.
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
Well, just because you say there has been a significant change, does not make it true.
Anyway, I think good questions consist of why do cities such as Detroit, Chicago, New Orleans, DC, and Philly have high murder rates and other places such as Houston, Boston, and Miami do not.
Are those places policing poorly? Are they corrupt?
Bringing up other jurisidictions is irrelevant to this discussion. The proper question is whether the changes in gun laws have led to any increase in violence. Unless the other jurisdictions had the exact same changes, they cannot offer any comparative analysis.
You continue to assert their is no significant change. The statistics showing that there was a significant uptick in applications for FOIDs and weapons permits following the law changes at the very least, shows that there was an attempt for more weapons to be placed in private hands. That, in and of itself, is a significant change when the previous law banned handguns outright.
City of Chicago Residents MUST also have a CFP to legally own or possess a firearm within the city limits. That is the law and the link you provided does not say otherwise.
0
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:
This article explains that you can, how people do, and why they do. Notice the source is a guns rights advocate.
City of Chicago Residents MUST also have a CFP to legally own or possess a firearm within the city limits. That is the law and the link you provided does not say otherwise.
City of Chicago Residents MUST also have a CFP to legally own or possess a firearm within the city limits. That is the law and the link you provided does not say otherwise.
Todd Vandermyde, a legislative liaison for the National Rifle Association, said he believes Chicagoans are getting FOID cards to comply with state law but are snubbing their noses at the city ordinance because they believe the registration process is too onerous.
“They’re taking their chances with the city,” he said. “It’s just an ordinance violation.”
Officials said the statewide number of FOID card holders and applications for cards has also risen in recent years.
As of Jan. 1, 2011, there were nearly 1.4 million FOID card holders statewide, compared to more than 1.3 million a year earlier, Bond said. That’s an increase of more than 6 percent.
There were 321,000 applications for FOID cards statewide in 2011, compared about 287,500 in 2010, she added.
Vandermyde cited several reasons for the statewide rise: he thinks more women are getting guns; more people are hoping the state will pass a concealed-carry law; and more people believe the Obama administration will make it harder to get weapons in the future.
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
Um, no it doesn't assert any such thing.
City of Chicago Residents MUST also have a CFP to legally own or possess a firearm within the city limits. That is the law and the link you provided does not say otherwise.
Todd Vandermyde, a legislative liaison for the National Rifle Association, said he believes Chicagoans are getting FOID cards to comply with state law but are snubbing their noses at the city ordinance because they believe the registration process is too onerous.
“They’re taking their chances with the city,” he said. “It’s just an ordinance violation.”
Officials said the statewide number of FOID card holders and applications for cards has also risen in recent years.
As of Jan. 1, 2011, there were nearly 1.4 million FOID card holders statewide, compared to more than 1.3 million a year earlier, Bond said. That’s an increase of more than 6 percent.
There were 321,000 applications for FOID cards statewide in 2011, compared about 287,500 in 2010, she added.
Vandermyde cited several reasons for the statewide rise: he thinks more women are getting guns; more people are hoping the state will pass a concealed-carry law; and more people believe the Obama administration will make it harder to get weapons in the future.
Bringing up other jurisidictions is irrelevant to this discussion. The proper question is whether the changes in gun laws have led to any increase in violence. Unless the other jurisdictions had the exact same changes, they cannot offer any comparative analysis.
Uh, I didn't say other jurisdictions made any changes, nor did I say we need to look at them as it relates to changes in gun laws in Chicago.
0
Bringing up other jurisidictions is irrelevant to this discussion. The proper question is whether the changes in gun laws have led to any increase in violence. Unless the other jurisdictions had the exact same changes, they cannot offer any comparative analysis.
Uh, I didn't say other jurisdictions made any changes, nor did I say we need to look at them as it relates to changes in gun laws in Chicago.
are snubbing their noses at the city ordinance because they believe the registration process is too onerous.
What is even funnier about you posting this is I said legally. And, snubbing your nose at the registration process is not snubbing your nose at the CFP process.
You're supposed to be a lawyer.
0
are snubbing their noses at the city ordinance because they believe the registration process is too onerous.
What is even funnier about you posting this is I said legally. And, snubbing your nose at the registration process is not snubbing your nose at the CFP process.
are snubbing their noses at the city ordinance because they believe the registration process is too onerous.
What is even funnier about you posting this is I said legally. And, snubbing your nose at the registration process is not snubbing your nose at the CFP process.
You're supposed to be a lawyer.
Notice how you continue to make personal attacks. Do you do that solely to try and divert attention away from the facts?
The CFP process is the Chicago Firearms Permit, which requires applications, background check, review of medical records, etc. The latter two are covered under FOID, but the application and to the Chicago Police and firearms testing are not. So in fact, deciding to forego the application would be exactly what people would be determing is too intensive.
As for other jurisidictions, that is not the point of the thread, nor my issue with it. I am not suggesting gun control works nor doesn't work. I am merely pointing out that laws have changes in Chicago.
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
are snubbing their noses at the city ordinance because they believe the registration process is too onerous.
What is even funnier about you posting this is I said legally. And, snubbing your nose at the registration process is not snubbing your nose at the CFP process.
You're supposed to be a lawyer.
Notice how you continue to make personal attacks. Do you do that solely to try and divert attention away from the facts?
The CFP process is the Chicago Firearms Permit, which requires applications, background check, review of medical records, etc. The latter two are covered under FOID, but the application and to the Chicago Police and firearms testing are not. So in fact, deciding to forego the application would be exactly what people would be determing is too intensive.
As for other jurisidictions, that is not the point of the thread, nor my issue with it. I am not suggesting gun control works nor doesn't work. I am merely pointing out that laws have changes in Chicago.
The latter two are covered under FOID, but the application and to the Chicago Police and firearms testing are not. So in fact, deciding to forego the application would be exactly what people would be determing is too intensive.
Nobody said anything about foregoing any application. Your article did not.
The article you referenced said people are not registering their guns. Which is clearly not applying for a CFP. Specifically: but are snubbing their noses at the city ordinance because they believe the registration process is too onerous.
Why do you continue to try and do things like this when it is so transparent you are wrong on the facts?
0
The latter two are covered under FOID, but the application and to the Chicago Police and firearms testing are not. So in fact, deciding to forego the application would be exactly what people would be determing is too intensive.
Nobody said anything about foregoing any application. Your article did not.
The article you referenced said people are not registering their guns. Which is clearly not applying for a CFP. Specifically: but are snubbing their noses at the city ordinance because they believe the registration process is too onerous.
Why do you continue to try and do things like this when it is so transparent you are wrong on the facts?
The process for purchasing a firearm for Chicago residents is:
•
A valid Firearm Owner's Identification (FOID) Card issued by the State of Illinois
After obtaining a Chicago Firearms Permit, residents can purchase a firearm. Residents must then register their firearm within 5 days with the Chicago Police Department.
The registration process is seperate from the CFP application & approval.
Nobody said people aren't applying for CFP's in the article provided.
The process for purchasing a firearm for Chicago residents is:
•
A valid Firearm Owner's Identification (FOID) Card issued by the State of Illinois
After obtaining a Chicago Firearms Permit, residents can purchase a firearm. Residents must then register their firearm within 5 days with the Chicago Police Department.
The registration process is seperate from the CFP application & approval.
Nobody said people aren't applying for CFP's in the article provided.
The latter two are covered under FOID, but the application and to the Chicago Police and firearms testing are not. So in fact, deciding to forego the application would be exactly what people would be determing is too intensive.
Nobody said anything about foregoing any application. Your article did not.
The article you referenced said people are not registering their guns. Which is clearly not applying for a CFP. Specifically: but are snubbing their noses at the city ordinance because they believe the registration process is too onerous.
Why do you continue to try and do things like this when it is so transparent you are wrong on the facts?
Why do you continue to make personal attacks? Are you insecure about your arguments or facts that it is a diversion? I cannot understand what other reason would exist.
This is getting off-track. No one is suggesting that obtaining a permit or registering a firearm is the same thing. The point is, under the Chicago ordinance, one must do both. It would make no logical sense for one to do either but not both, as it would be an indication that one has or is violating a city ordinance. The point the article was making is that does not appear to be a concern for most as the violation is a local infraction, not a state crime, provided one has a FOID. This would also support the vast difference in numbers between the applications for FOID as compared to the CFP.
But what cannot be disputed, as I have said all along, is the change in the law. And the increase in numbers of FOID as well as the introduction of the ability to possess firearms in Chicago can only create an increase in firearms in the city. If that is your dispute, well I guess the debate cannot continue. But if you acknowledge that more firearms are in Chicago, then it is hard to rule out that impacting crime statistics involving firearms.
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
The latter two are covered under FOID, but the application and to the Chicago Police and firearms testing are not. So in fact, deciding to forego the application would be exactly what people would be determing is too intensive.
Nobody said anything about foregoing any application. Your article did not.
The article you referenced said people are not registering their guns. Which is clearly not applying for a CFP. Specifically: but are snubbing their noses at the city ordinance because they believe the registration process is too onerous.
Why do you continue to try and do things like this when it is so transparent you are wrong on the facts?
Why do you continue to make personal attacks? Are you insecure about your arguments or facts that it is a diversion? I cannot understand what other reason would exist.
This is getting off-track. No one is suggesting that obtaining a permit or registering a firearm is the same thing. The point is, under the Chicago ordinance, one must do both. It would make no logical sense for one to do either but not both, as it would be an indication that one has or is violating a city ordinance. The point the article was making is that does not appear to be a concern for most as the violation is a local infraction, not a state crime, provided one has a FOID. This would also support the vast difference in numbers between the applications for FOID as compared to the CFP.
But what cannot be disputed, as I have said all along, is the change in the law. And the increase in numbers of FOID as well as the introduction of the ability to possess firearms in Chicago can only create an increase in firearms in the city. If that is your dispute, well I guess the debate cannot continue. But if you acknowledge that more firearms are in Chicago, then it is hard to rule out that impacting crime statistics involving firearms.
Anyway, I think good questions consist of why do cities such as Detroit, Chicago, New Orleans, DC, and Philly have high murder rates and other places such as Houston, Boston, and Miami do not.
Are those places policing poorly? Are they corrupt?
That's an interesting question. Anyone have any thoughts?
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
Anyway, I think good questions consist of why do cities such as Detroit, Chicago, New Orleans, DC, and Philly have high murder rates and other places such as Houston, Boston, and Miami do not.
Are those places policing poorly? Are they corrupt?
That's an interesting question. Anyone have any thoughts?
his would also support the vast difference in numbers between the applications for FOID as compared to the CFP.
No it wouldn't considering FOID is for everyone in the state and CFP is for Chicago residents only.
The CFP requires application and training course fees. Which would logically explain the difference in numbers between the applications for FOID as compared to the CFP.
0
his would also support the vast difference in numbers between the applications for FOID as compared to the CFP.
No it wouldn't considering FOID is for everyone in the state and CFP is for Chicago residents only.
The CFP requires application and training course fees. Which would logically explain the difference in numbers between the applications for FOID as compared to the CFP.
That's an interesting question. Anyone have any thoughts?
Yes. Policing policies (such as stop & frisk) and prosecutions would have something to do with it.
For example, in Chicago according to the NYT:
Records show that while some arrests for violating gun laws have been made for violent offenders, others were made for failure to follow the registration rules. But the police have rarely arrested anyone solely for violating the city’s gun ordinance. From 2005 through 2009, there were fewer than 100 arrests a year, on average, in which a violation of the ordinance was the most serious charge, according to the police department.
I think data like that give people reason to believe those who want stricter gun laws don't really want them for crime control reasons.
0
Quote Originally Posted by MaineRoad:
That's an interesting question. Anyone have any thoughts?
Yes. Policing policies (such as stop & frisk) and prosecutions would have something to do with it.
For example, in Chicago according to the NYT:
Records show that while some arrests for violating gun laws have been made for violent offenders, others were made for failure to follow the registration rules. But the police have rarely arrested anyone solely for violating the city’s gun ordinance. From 2005 through 2009, there were fewer than 100 arrests a year, on average, in which a violation of the ordinance was the most serious charge, according to the police department.
Interesting. You'd think people who were actually interested in saving lives would look into this stuff. It's really interesting because many people who used to shoot people in New Orleans apparently don't shoot people in Houston, where many relocated after Katrina.
No, the "gun control deate" isn't about saving lives (though many decent people have been fooled into believing it is). The President, this week, linked the school shooting in Connecticut with gang violance in Chicago (among other places). That's like comparing a lobster to a snow globe, in the sense that each involve water.
0
Interesting. You'd think people who were actually interested in saving lives would look into this stuff. It's really interesting because many people who used to shoot people in New Orleans apparently don't shoot people in Houston, where many relocated after Katrina.
No, the "gun control deate" isn't about saving lives (though many decent people have been fooled into believing it is). The President, this week, linked the school shooting in Connecticut with gang violance in Chicago (among other places). That's like comparing a lobster to a snow globe, in the sense that each involve water.
in recent news, the TSA has said that small (3-4 ounce) snow globes can be carried on as long as they are in quart sized baggies. Cakes and pies are permitted as well, but may require further inspection.
0
in recent news, the TSA has said that small (3-4 ounce) snow globes can be carried on as long as they are in quart sized baggies. Cakes and pies are permitted as well, but may require further inspection.
It would make no logical sense for one to do either but not both, as it would be an indication that one has or is violating a city ordinance.
Yes, yes it would.
Any FFL selling a gun to a FOID card holder who lives in Chicago but has no CFP will be in big trouble.
And pointing out you are wrong on the facts is not a "personal attack"
It is actually true.
The original point I was making and the original response post was stating how easy it wouild be to drive 10 minutes outside of Chicago, purchase a weapon, and bring it to the city with only a fear of being fined for a ordinace violation (civil infraction).
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
It would make no logical sense for one to do either but not both, as it would be an indication that one has or is violating a city ordinance.
Yes, yes it would.
Any FFL selling a gun to a FOID card holder who lives in Chicago but has no CFP will be in big trouble.
And pointing out you are wrong on the facts is not a "personal attack"
It is actually true.
The original point I was making and the original response post was stating how easy it wouild be to drive 10 minutes outside of Chicago, purchase a weapon, and bring it to the city with only a fear of being fined for a ordinace violation (civil infraction).
Well, just because you say there has been a significant change, does not make it true.
Anyway, I think good questions consist of why do cities such as Detroit, Chicago, New Orleans, DC, and Philly have high murder rates and other places such as Houston, Boston, and Miami do not.
Are those places policing poorly? Are they corrupt?
I am not sure the relevance of these cities. I think arguments could be made as to the success/failure various forms of gun laws (I do disagree with the blanket assertion that gun control laws fail to work because 'gun control laws' is too vague a term).
The cities you mentioned are a vast array and various surveys give varied results. One has Houston has the 5th highest city for violent crime in the nation (with some of the most non-existent gun laws). Boston has some of the highest increases in violent crime, with stiffer gun control laws. New Orleans is the murder capital of the US, but has less violent crime than other cities, and also is the easiest to obtain weapons. Miami has the highest violent crime rate, but a much lower murder rate.
Well, just because you say there has been a significant change, does not make it true.
Anyway, I think good questions consist of why do cities such as Detroit, Chicago, New Orleans, DC, and Philly have high murder rates and other places such as Houston, Boston, and Miami do not.
Are those places policing poorly? Are they corrupt?
I am not sure the relevance of these cities. I think arguments could be made as to the success/failure various forms of gun laws (I do disagree with the blanket assertion that gun control laws fail to work because 'gun control laws' is too vague a term).
The cities you mentioned are a vast array and various surveys give varied results. One has Houston has the 5th highest city for violent crime in the nation (with some of the most non-existent gun laws). Boston has some of the highest increases in violent crime, with stiffer gun control laws. New Orleans is the murder capital of the US, but has less violent crime than other cities, and also is the easiest to obtain weapons. Miami has the highest violent crime rate, but a much lower murder rate.
The original point I was making and the original response post was stating how easy it wouild be to drive 10 minutes outside of Chicago, purchase a weapon, and bring it to the city with only a fear of being fined for a ordinace violation (civil infraction).
There are no gun stores in Chicago, so you have to drive outside the city to purchase one.
My point is that you have to have a CFP to purchase the gun if you are a Chicago resident.
If a FFL sells a gun to someone without a CFP they are violating the law.
0
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:
The original point I was making and the original response post was stating how easy it wouild be to drive 10 minutes outside of Chicago, purchase a weapon, and bring it to the city with only a fear of being fined for a ordinace violation (civil infraction).
There are no gun stores in Chicago, so you have to drive outside the city to purchase one.
My point is that you have to have a CFP to purchase the gun if you are a Chicago resident.
If a FFL sells a gun to someone without a CFP they are violating the law.
There are no gun stores in Chicago, so you have to drive outside the city to purchase one.
My point is that you have to have a CFP to purchase the gun if you are a Chicago resident.
If a FFL sells a gun to someone without a CFP they are violating the law.
A CFP is necessary to to purchase a gun in Chicago. A FOID anywhere else. The sales laws exist for the location of the sale of the weapon, not the residence of the purchaser.
If I lived in Chicago and wanted to purchase a weapon quickly, why wouldn't I drive 10 minutes, use my FOID which is much easier to obtain, and simply only risk a ordinace violation.
0
Quote Originally Posted by 14daroad:
There are no gun stores in Chicago, so you have to drive outside the city to purchase one.
My point is that you have to have a CFP to purchase the gun if you are a Chicago resident.
If a FFL sells a gun to someone without a CFP they are violating the law.
A CFP is necessary to to purchase a gun in Chicago. A FOID anywhere else. The sales laws exist for the location of the sale of the weapon, not the residence of the purchaser.
If I lived in Chicago and wanted to purchase a weapon quickly, why wouldn't I drive 10 minutes, use my FOID which is much easier to obtain, and simply only risk a ordinace violation.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
