110 Comments - just sayin' - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:01 am: Oh good, now NRA can raise tons of cash using “Red Dawn” theme. - Jade_rabbit - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:05 am: Car ownership and driving are not protected by the Constitution. Any fee could be considered an infringement on that right. - Carl Nyberg - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:05 am: The NRA wants to keep its financing secret because it is primarily financed by the firearms industry. The firearms industry knows it’s annual demand includes a significant amount of firearms that will be eventually transferred to illegal end users. Therefore, the NRA has as a priority of preserving the firearms transfer system that makes it relatively easy for illegal end users to obtain firearms that were originally legally manufactured and put into the market. - wordslinger - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:06 am: Um, shouldn’t you get that casino first? This is welcome red meat for the gun lobbies. As one of the great political fundraisers, Emanuel has to know that. - OneMan - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:09 am: Yes Carl it’s all a big plot…. Glad you figured it out…. - Downstate - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:15 am: First gun I ever purchased was this year (and I’m in my late 40s). My wife wanted a small revolver for protection when I’m traveling (at least I hope that’s why she wanted it). The number of professional people who are first time gun buyers, like me, is absolutely stunning. Few, if any, are members of the NRA. But now that they are gun owners, they’ll likely be uncomfortable with having to register their firearm. They may be a silent voting force that even the NRA doesn’t count on. Alternatively, my brother-in-law, a longtime NRA supporter takes his voting intructions directly from the NRA. They will mount the campaign against this. If Emmanuel favors the idea, he needs someone else to carry the water. An idea coming out of Chicago is easily ridiculed downstate even if its a good one. - Davey Boy Smithe - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:16 am: Rahm needs some money back after writing a nice check for $399,950 to the Second Amendment Foundation. - SangamoGOP - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:23 am: There is a difference between a gun and a vehicle. The Mayor knows that there is a Con right to keep and bear arms. There is no such right for possession of a vehicle. Just because such a move would make it “easier” for the Mayor to investigate possible crime, doesn’t make such a move Constitutional or right. Life for Chicago residents would be easier and cheaper if the Mayor decreed the streets speech free zones for the coming international meetings. Perhaps he will seek to register charge each and every protestor a fee in order for them to excercise their 1st Amend rights. That way CPD would be better able to target their enforcement and arrests. - Dan Johnson - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:29 am: OK, I’ll bite. My biases: I live in Chicago and know people who have been killed by handgun violence. I don’t hunt. This one strikes me as eminently reasonable. If you have a gun, get it registered, because that will absolutely help solve crimes. For the vast majority of gun-owners who will never lose or sell their gun and have zero risk of their guns falling into criminal hands, getting it registered is kind of annoying, but that seems like a small price to pay for the greater benefit of helping to solve crimes. I don’t really see how registering a gun infringes on constitutional freedoms. Maybe there should be a fee waiver for the indigent so no one loses their right to bear arms because they don’t have money. Aside from that, I don’t see a constitutional burden. Todd? - unclesam - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:31 am: I like the concept, in theory. It does not prohibit anyone from owning a gun (as that is a person’s constitutional right), all that is asked is that the item is registered. I think it’s a fairly balanced concept. The only objection I currently have is why the high price ($65)? I would drop it down to $15. - Don't Worry About the Government - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:33 am: So law abiding citizens, under this plan, not only have to pay to have a FOID card, but also register their handguns and pay a $65 fee? The end result will be the handguns being used to commit crimes will STILL be unregistered and regular citizens will be stuck with a new fee. If 56% of the guns come from outside the city limits then what % come from suburban Cook and the Collars? My guess is 90%+ come from the Cook County area. But why not tax the rest of Illinois? We could use the revenue and who needs those pesky rights and liberties. Reminds me of Frankin’s quote on giving up freedom for security. - Downstate commissioner - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:36 am: If my memory serves me right (and I was a teenager at the time-my dad had to sign for my first one) the FOID was a compromise between the register-all-guns people and pro-gunners. The FOID card was accepted by gun owners in return for not registering individual firearms. Illinois is one of the very few states (2?) that registers gun users. Other states just use the driver’s license for identification. - He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:36 am: I am not a member of the NRA, and I do not own a hand gun, but do own a number of Rifles/Shotguns. I see this as another infrigenment on people and another “Gun Tax”. People wonder why downstaters want Chicago to become a seperate state. - anon - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:38 am: When he gets all the gang members in Chicago to register, I’ll register. The cost is way too high for the regular Joe/Josephine. - Leaving Now - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:49 am: Goodbye Illinois, It is time to leave. Those that are left enjoy higher taxes, increased regulation, more laws and less freedom. - TCB - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:50 am: A fee of $65 per gun? That is outrageous. I have guns that I bought for less than that & someone expects me to pay another $65 in order gain a right that I already have under the constitution. What possible reason, besides revenue, would the mayor have for this fee? If it solves as many crimes as the mayor would lead us to believe, why is there a fee at all? As a hunter of several species & a pleasure shooter, I have a number of guns….I’m obviously totally against this & resent Rahm for even suggesting such a ridiculous idea. - TCB - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:54 am: = like the concept, in theory. It does not prohibit anyone from owning a gun (as that is a person’s constitutional right), all that is asked is that the item is registered. I think it’s a fairly balanced concept. The only objection I currently have is why the high price ($65)? I would drop it down to $15.= What if you had to pay money for access to other constitutional rights? $50/yr to vote $1 to offer your opinion in a debate $5/week to attend the church of your choice Does it still seem reasonable? - dupage dan - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:58 am: “Trouble, oh we got trouble, Right here in River City! With a capital “G” That rhymes with “P” And that stands for Guns, That stands for Guns…..” Rahm Emanuel as Harold Hill in the Music Man seeks to distract folks from trouble in the city with “hey, look, a kitty” schemes. This is doomed from the start. - Anon - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:58 am: The process for owning a firearm is already ridiculously stringent. Get a FOID card, pay $30 and wait a few months for it to come. Then take a gun class (cost $100), get a Chicago firearms permit ($125), register with the city ($12). Permit needs to be renewed something like every 3 years? And now a $65 fee to register with the state? I am ALL for very very strong regulation as long as possession is allowed for eligible people. But I think this crosses from being reasonable regulation to a tax on a constitutional right. - John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:01 am: The NRA is funded by… ME! I’m not about to pay the state $6500 to register my handguns, sorry, Rahm. Hmm, what about Chicago owners? Are they exempt, or do they pay twice, just like with their cars…? - Downstate commissioner - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:01 am: Oops, something else. One of the fears back then was that the government could swoop in and take your (registered) guns if ownership laws changed. Since this has happened in other countries, it is still germane to the discussion, especially with current legislation banning ownership of certain types of firearms being discussed in the IL legislature right now. Privacy becomes the issue, rather than the weapon itself. Remember the Freedom of Information Act vs FOID card owner publication discussion and subsequent legislation from last year? Lisa Madigan’s opinion was quickly knocked down big time. Expect more and bigger fights if this bill is actually introduced… Rahm is showing his complete lack of understanding of the downstate mindset with this. - Amuzing Myself - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:01 am: This middle class voter has four handguns - three of which are heirlooms from my grandfather that I’ve never fired. The other I haven’t fired in ten years, but I like having for protecting my family and property. So, while I’m paying more in state income tax, more for skyrocketing gas, more for local power and likely more in property taxes for Quinn’s wrong-headed plan to bail out the state’s pension system - all while wages are stagnant - the Mayor of Chicago thinks I should pay an extra $ 260 so that he can know I have a gun. I think I can just say that if I were to write what I really feel, I’d get banned. So, we’ll just leave it to a not-too-advanced imagination. Any of those Congressmen, downstate legislators or suburban legislators interested in running for re-election or higher office, better think long and hard before helping something as ridiculous as this pass. I would actually drive to the suburbs and scrape together what little I have left to contributue to campaigns against ANY Republican outside the City of Chicago that votes for this. - wordslinger - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:04 am: The more I think about it, the more I think Emanuel floated this as his Designated Loser proposal. So when the horse-trading starts, he gives up something he didn’t really think was going to fly, anyway. But I know the NRA and ISRA and very thankful. - Amuzing Myself - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:04 am: Carl, It’s already illegal to transfer a firearm without some sort of written record. It apparently doesn’t help at all that there’s a law in place to stop it if it’s still a bad enough problem the mayor thinks there needs to be a registry. I guess those guys that are ignoring the current transfer laws are going to suddenly register their handguns. Right. I want some of whatever it is you’re having… - Judgment Day - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:05 am: Rahm has to have some things on hand to trade. This issue buys Rahm time with part of his base and also acts as exchange/trading material so he can deals on those items that he seriously has to get taken care of, like Chicago’s overall financial situation. - Kasich Walker, Jr. - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:06 am: “Emanuel wants lawmakers to require….” ====== Yeah, yeah, yeah….I’m sure he wants the CTU to go away and the Cubs to win a World Series, too. - Bob - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:09 am: I can see another Fast and Furious. The next thing they will want to do is have a public list of who owns handguns and how many! - SO IL M - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:10 am: Once again this is aimed at Law Abiding Citizens only. If they already know that 56% of the guns that their Gang-Bangers use originate outside of the City, then why do they need this. Why not concentrate on the Criminals instead? Why not make possesion of a firearm by a fellon a class-x felony with a minimum of 15 years, up to life for repeat offenders? - Downstate commissioner - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:10 am: Just realized that $65 per gun is a deliberate ploy to get registration through. Several people on here have mentioned the cost. Supporters of this bill will use comments about the cost to attempt to “compromise” with a $5 or $10 fee- it’s not about the money, people, it’s about the government knowing who owns what. - reformer - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:13 am: TCB Paying to vote was constitutional until it the poll tax was outlawed by the 24th Amendment. I agree the fee would be onerous. I haven’t yet heard a persuasive argument against handgun registration. - dupage dan - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:14 am: Downstate hit it on the head. Don’t complain about the cost of the program - complaing about the program. - reformer - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:17 am: SO IL M == Once again this is aimed at Law Abiding Citizens only.== This sounds like an argument against all gun control laws, since only law-abiding citizens obey them anyway. If a new law would be worthless, why are current laws worth keeping? - More harm than good - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:20 am: Everytime guns have been confiscated en masse a registration list was used. See examples in New Zealand, Australia, Canada, Ireland, New York City, Chicago and I won’t even need to mention all of the Totalitarian regimes that used the same practice. I will never register my guns with the state of Illinois or pay a fee. It’s bad enough Illinois already has the name and address of a majority of gun owners residing in the state. Call me a felon for breaking a law such as this and I will call you a tyrant for imposing it. - reformer - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:22 am: More harm Now that the Supreme Court has finally recognized individual rights under the Second Amendment, it makes confiscation seem like a more remote threat. If Chicago and D.C. can’t ban handguns under the Second Amendment, then how could they confiscate them? - TCB - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:22 am: =This sounds like an argument against all gun control laws, since only law-abiding citizens obey them anyway. If a new law would be worthless, why are current laws worth keeping? = First reasonable thing you’ve said all day. - How Ironic - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:26 am: @Reformer, There is a difference between gun control laws and a registration law. ‘Registering’ your gun via a $65 fee will do little to help solve gun crimes as Rahm would like you to belive. That is of course assuming the criminal that uses a gun in a crime doesn’t leave a note with his/her firearms s/n on it. Of course if they did, the police could simply look into the FFL database, and find out who bought the gun orinally. Why do I need to pay $65 for that? It’s simply a money grab that offers NOTHING towards helping solve gun related crimes. Nothing. - TCB - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:27 am: =I agree the fee would be onerous. I haven’t yet heard a persuasive argument against handgun registration. = The government has no reason to need to know what means of protection that I possess. All these laws would do is take a historically law-biding citizen like myself & turn me in to a common criminal, a felon even! I don’t want the government to know what I have, if for no other reason than I don’t want them coming to get what I have should gun ownership become illegal. - John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:28 am: >>>>If Chicago and D.C. can’t ban handguns under the Second Amendment, then how could they confiscate them? - Ryan from Carrollton - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:29 am: A gun is a tool, no different than an ax, a shovel, or a computer. It is only as good or as bad as the person using it. Downstate Commissioner was right; Canada’s gun registery has been a multi-billion dollar boondoggle with no result. Gun registration in Britain and Australia only led to confiscation. - John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:30 am: >>>>If Chicago and D.C. can’t ban handguns under the Second Amendment, then how could they confiscate them?>>>> (sorry for the incomplete posting, Rich + readers) By regulating which kind you can own, in a tailspin, until all you can own is a dueling pistol. - oh wait, that’s a smoothie - can’t have that either. Give them an inch… I say let’s not give an inch or a mm. - Plutocrat03 - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:31 am: So when Illinois residents create a registry of all guns, the criminal class will just dry up and blow away? Change their weapon of choice to rubber bands? We will then have a significant number of weapons collected in Chicago coming from out of state. Will Illinois then demand that residents of other states have to register their weapons because Chicago won’t protect it’s citizens and visitors? Makes no sense unless you want a guaranteed to lose issue as a bargaining chip - More harm than good - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:31 am: Reformer- the list doesn’t go away. I have watched the Constitution be misinterpreted, amended and disregarded. I don’t need my name with a list of the guns I own. There will come a point when the democratic republic will falter and the Constitution will fail due to a consolidation of power. I’m not trying to sound like a conspiracy theorist and I’m not joining a militia tomorrow. All I know is that when guns are taken from the people there is always a list involved. - Mike am Ike - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:39 am: Let’s take look the F.O.I.D. card was going to cut crime in Illinois.Well I guess it’s coming from the left wing liberal Mayor of Chicago what else can we expect.Hey I got an idea create more jobs in the Chicago area and you might have have less gun crime.Every day I get closer to moving to Mo. - In absentia - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:42 am: Another list for the government to use to round us all up and stash us somewhere in the future. - Shore - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:44 am: The murder rate is at its lowest level in 47 years, this is an unnecessary power grab by the Mayor and a major distraction from the real priority right now of job creation. Here are the stats to back it up. http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/ilcrime.htm - SO IL M - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:45 am: Reformer I am not against all laws, as I stated I am for beefing up laws aimed at actual criminals. I am tho against new laws that do nothing to combat the crime problem in Chicago, but place new burdens on law abiding citizens. Hiding the fact that you want a registery list of all gun owners under a veil of stopping the crime in Chicago does nothing to stop the criminals who are doing the harm. - Ahoy - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:47 am: I live downstate and think it’s a great idea. It’s not that you can’t have them, but you have to register them. We have to register our cars and other things, heck I even have to register my appliances for warranty information. This isn’t a biggie, but I expect people to use the 2nd amendment inappropriately and completely take it out of context. The 2nd Amendment does not mean you can carry all firearms all the time without any kind of law. - Retired Non-Union Guy - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:49 am: More Harm, You left out the most blatant confiscation in recent US history: New Orleans after Katrina If you think it can’t happen here, just look that one up. Here’s an objective take on it (see the section “Confiscation of firearms”) … http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_government_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina - In absentia - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:50 am: I don’t know Ahoy, “The right to keep and bear arms” seems pretty cut and dried to me. - Irish - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:51 am: Chicago’s problems are not going to be fixed by this bill. There seem to be two types of shootings in Chicago. The one where some young adult buys a gun on the street and takes out his frustrations on anyone in sight. Sometimes this is done during a robbery where the perpetrator gets a very nominal amount of money. The other is accidental where a small child gets a hold of a gun left lying around by someone not smart emough to realize the deadly potential of that situation. Registration is not going to stop the first situation. I can see it now as a gang banger hands a gun stolen elsewhere to the other young adult and says “now before you kill anybody with that make sure you register it.” And the first cop on the scene checks the gun serial number and says ” Oh this was registered to Sam Smith of Carpentersville. That makes all of this better.” And the bill will not increase the intelligence of the gun owner in the second situation. So it fixes nothing. All it does is places another tax/fee on the backs of the law abiding citizen that will put more money where the politicians can use it. - Retired Non-Union Guy - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:58 am: Should have added, the federal legislation enacted after Katrina didn’t add much protection for gun owners. It still allows for “temporary” confiscation or even permanent confiscation “if State or Federal laws allow” - MrJM - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 11:59 am: Foolishness. If this bill were to pass and it were to operate precisely as Mr. Emanuel intends, exactly what problem would it solve? – MrJM - chi - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:00 pm: Even if everyone thought registering is a good idea, why does it have to cost $65? BTW, amazing how many comments accrue when the topic is gun legislation. I’m always surprised how much people care about this topic. - Dan Johnson - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:03 pm: Curious: do NRA or ISRA members believe it is a problem that there are so many guns that criminals can buy and it would be better if we can slow the flow of those guns to criminals (without burdening the many people who have guns as heirlooms or guns to hunt and will never sell them?) Aside from going after the criminals, do people think there is any reasonable way for the government to slow the supply of these guns that will be used by criminals to kill people? - Shock & Awww(e) - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:08 pm: So solving crimes is the purported basis for this? It would be QUITE revelatory if individuals willing to commit murder or robbery using a gun were considerate enough to register said firearm in a statewide database. Criminals will surely register their firearm in advance and wait to receive proper documentation BEFORE shooting someone. Only in Rahm’s world… - Porter - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:11 pm: I have lived in Illinois almost all my life and try to be responsible citizen, but if this beomes law I will be a responsible felon. - reformer - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:12 pm: RYAN Canada and Australia don’t have a Second Amendment. We do. MORE HARM, JJJS There’s already a government list with your name on it indicating gun ownership. Should the FOID law be repealed? DJ Sting operations at gun stores and gun shows deter straw sales, just as stings at liquor stores work to encourage compliance with the age-21 drinking age. - Shock & Awww(e) - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:13 pm: Chicago charges $15 for gun registration https://portal.chicagopolice.org/portal/page/portal/ClearPath/About%20CPD/Firearm%20Registration/CPD-31.562%5B1%5D.pdf But da Mayor thinks the rest of the state should pay $65? Nope. No double standard here. - reformer - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:20 pm: Shock & Awww(e) Are you calling for equality between Chicago and the rest of the state? Chicagoans pay for their teachers’ pensions via property taxes, and they also pay for downstate teacher pensions via state taxes. I presume that in the name of equality, you want the state to start paying the employer’s share of Chicago teacher pensions, right? - Nuance - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:20 pm: Are there any statistics on how many guns used in gun crimes in Chicago from outside were found to be stolen? This would seem to have a bearing on the effectiveness of a registry, if it were a statistically significant number. - John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:21 pm: Should the FOID law be repealed? Why, yes it should. The only way to keep “bad people” or the “wrong people” from getting firearms is to keep them from having liberty. If we cannot trust them with firearms then we cannot trust them on the outside. Think about it. - Shock & Awww(e) - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:23 pm: Registering 2 guns would cost more than registering a car title in IL? Registering 1 gun would cost more than a Chicago vehicle registration sticker? Now that’s a bargain! And speaking of the city vehicle sticker… - Jechislo - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:27 pm: At the risk of being banned fro life on this site, I have no comment. - Sideliner - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:27 pm: By all means Rahm. You first. Get back to us when all handguns in Chicago are registered. - Steve Bartin - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:28 pm: Yippie! Let’s have future Jerome Finnegans and William Hanhardts in charge of a gun registry. How come other major cities like Dallas and Houston have less murders and no one is calling for a gun registry? - Retired Non-Union Guy - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:28 pm: Dan Johnson, It would be better if criminals didn’t have guns but, based on national gun control experiments in places like Great Britain (which has draconian laws by almost anyone’s standpoint), gun control doesn’t work. After years of just the Bobby with his nightstick, they are starting to arm some of their law enforcement officers. If you take opposite examples with widespread or even mandatory gun ownership like Israel or Switzerland, they seem to have much lower crime. (Terrorist activities in Israel are a different matter.) The unanswered question is does widespread gun ownership or lack of it affect the crime rate? Or does it have more to do with a cultural / national mindset? People have argued about it for forever and will continue to argue about it. Things most people agree on are that crime rates are at least augmented by poverty / lack of jobs and a lack of police presence. Age (lack thereof) also seems to be a factor. One step Emanuel could take is a expanded police presence that includes both a serious community outreach and a ‘no crime is too small to address’ approach … but that type of policing is very expensive and he can’t afford it. He also needs the buy-in of the multiple disparate communities / cultures in the city; if some groups continue to shelter the criminals in their midst, it makes it much tougher to solve the problem. - Shock & Awww(e) - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:29 pm: reformer Are you actively supporting a double standard? Chicagoans pay $15 to register a firearm. I presume that in the name of equality, you want Chicagoans to begin paying the $65 fee and lead by example, right? I also presume you beleive it’s a good idea to raise fees on the public amidst a weak economy, right? - Leave a Light on George - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:32 pm: Just go back to issuing phantom parking tickets to downstaters. Probably have a better chance at raising a few $ than charging me to register my handgun. Heck, the State Police can’t administratively handle FOID registration now. No way they’ll be able to deal with this. - John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:34 pm: >>>>There seem to be two types of shootings in Chicago. There are five kinds. 1. Drug trade shootings 2. “Honor” shootings amongst the gangers 3. Robbery shootings 4. Crimes of passion 5. accidental shootings among children with found firearms. Now this last category is at an all-time low in the nation, thanks to educational efforts by the gun orgs, like NRA’s Eddie Eagle. In fact, it is surpassed in Chicago by death-from-falling-flatscreenmultimediadevice. - TCB - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:50 pm: =In fact, it is surpassed in Chicago by death-from-falling-flatscreenmultimediadevice= That wouldn’t be a problem if responsible parents would just add their massive wall-hung TVs to the state’s registry of big, heavy crap that hangs on the wall. Where are you at on this issue, Rahm? - Ken in Aurora - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 12:53 pm: I forwarded the story to a co-worker that is a gun owner but not a shooting hobbyist/enthusiast. His reply: “(Nuts to) his plan. I say we do it this way: lawmakers require that all at-risk youth in Illinois be registered with the state and pay $65 for a registration certificate or face felony charges.” - ISRA Don - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 1:01 pm: Rahm, here’s a hint. Pass concealed carry, it reduces crime. The fee structure in HB148 will generate more money for the State because law abiding fee targets are more likely to comply and the income stream would already be allocated to the right places in Govt. - Southwest Cook - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 1:17 pm: Maybe he should propose a compromise… Get rid of the registration fee and allow concealed carry and then we might consider registering our guns. But then I don’t think I would be able to support that because first comes registration then comes confiscation. - Ryan from Carrollton - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 1:19 pm: Reformer, You are correct, Australia, Canada and Britain do not have a right to keep and bear arms. However the U.S. does but that has not prevented places like Chicago or D.C. from essentially banning possession of firearms prior to the Court cases of DC v. Heller and MacDonald. Additionally, the state of California has banned the sale, production, or manufacture of semi-automatic firearms with a detachable clip of 10 rounds or more along with ergonomic features that make them either less ungainly to handle, lighter in weight, or more comfortable to shoot. A former co-worker was stationed in California while he was in the Marines and had a firearm that fit this criteria confiscated. This was essentially the law of the land in the United States for a decade from 1994-2004. - Cook County Commoner - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 1:22 pm: Of course it’a about revenue. But if I have to pay $65 per gun, I also want it in my pocket when I walk in public, especially the late evening walk from my office to Union station. - titan - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 1:25 pm: Some sort of deal to allow some sort of carry open and/or concealed) might make this work, ut otherwise I think it is just posturing. - Todd - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 1:40 pm: Dear Mr. Mayor, Thank you. This thing won’t get 45 votes in the house. For gun owners it is a privacy issue. and a general distrust of Government that once you give them an inch they take a mile. I seem to remember a state rep that wanted $500 FOID cards. That didn’t go over to well either. - reformer - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 1:43 pm: Shock & Awwww(e) In an earlier post, I denounced the $65 fee. I’ll do it again here. I think the real issue is registration, even if the fee were $5. The merits aside, I doubt this will be enacted. Rahm worked his magic to get speed cameras enacted, but that won’t work with this issue. - Kasich Walker, Jr. - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 1:44 pm: I wonder if other municipal leaders can get the press to report on what they want as eagerly. Rahm wants…. red light cameras; speed up the CTA; gun registration; heartbeat of the dance; ability to deputize during G8; big fine increases for protestors; broad summit bid authority… - Dan Johnson - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 1:54 pm: Thanks for the comments, particularly non-union Chicago guy. Interesting. The lack of police presence is a problem. I hope the speed cameras will help deter crime. On a related note, I actually think the distrust of government is an economic problem, because it makes people unwilling to buy things together in bulk through the government that makes our economy more efficient (like transportation infrastructure or health insurance). Todd’s comments helps to crystalize it. - Logical - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 2:02 pm: The 2nd amendment argument in regards to not worrying about this potential law does not work at this time. Four more years of Obama and the potential of replacing a conservative supreme court justice, negates that argument. Swing one of the five in Heller and we could find our guns in the smelting pot. Laws like the proposed one just make it easier for the state to comply. - chi - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 2:02 pm: Republicans will raise a lot of money off of this bill. It’ll also give downstate dems a great opportunity to burnish their ‘conservative’ credentials in an election year, in addition to letting the Mayor get more of his agenda through by eventually giving up on this. The more I think about it, it’s win win for everyone. - supplysgt - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 2:05 pm: I want some of whatever Rahm is smoking! This has as much chance of passing as a pension expansion bill. - railrat - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 2:18 pm: enforcement aside,which would be near impossible, I just sell my guns to my uncle in Wisc. for a dollar and maitain my Ill FOID card then borrow at will, man I hope the ISRA/NRA lawsuits move quick or home resale prices improve better than projected.. this state has lost its compass!! do these Pols stay awake at night or just dream this goofy stuff? - Justcause - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 2:48 pm: He wants to curb the 1st Amendment why not attack the 2nd Amendment, then the 3rd etc. etc. etc - Dan Shields, Springfield, IL - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 3:02 pm: Mayor Rahm needs to take care of his own back yard. The rest of the State could care less what Rahm wants. - Secret Square - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 3:07 pm: “why not attack the 2nd (amendment), then the 3rd, etc.” If anyone decides to attack the 3rd Amendment and force people to “quarter” soldiers in their homes, let me know… - wishbone - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 3:13 pm: Gun rights are the single most important reason that lower and middle class voters vote Republican against their own economic interests, and Democrats like Rahm can’t or won’t figure it out. A useless proposal that will hurt my party. - Anonymous - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 3:17 pm: –I don’t know Ahoy, “The right to keep and bear arms” seems pretty cut and dried to me.– How about this? –A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed– Clear? Actually, from the get-go, the federal government required that white males over 18 maintain a gun for mandatory service in the militia. And, from the get-go, local ordinances regulated the possession of guns in public. If we’re talking about original intent. - JoeVerdeal - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 4:01 pm: The only thing that Rahm’s proposal does is make Illinois look even worse than it would if he had kept his mouth shut on this issue. It would be political suicide for any downstate Democrat to vote in favor of such a thing…..and any business that valued the liberties of personnel involved would have to be disturbed by such a discussion. I know that it is only a fantasy….and I can’t resist saying it once more…..Chicago should be a separate state…..Let ‘em do what they want to do to their own (unfortunate) people. - ah HA - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 4:04 pm: Seems like registration is the beginning of removing guns from their owners as other countries have done… Rahm is running Chicago NOT Illinois PERIOD. - chi - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 4:19 pm: Judging from some of these comments, I wonder if Wishbone is right. If the Democratic party adopted a truly pro-gun platform, would it really allow them to compete in heavily republican places? It seems like gun control legislation is the gateway for a lot of people to start to believe all kinds of bad things about Democratic intentions (killing freedom, socialism, etc). - Ken in Aurora - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 4:26 pm: Speaking as an independent, I can tell you I almost *never* vote D because of the gun issue. On most other social issues I tend to be more in alignment with the Ds over the Rs, but the gun issue is a big thing for me. - bob - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 4:31 pm: A large percentage of crimes are drug or gang related. Everything a drug dealer does with a gun is already illegal, one more gun law will be so insignificant it will not even be noticed by those in the most profitable business on earth. For the rest of us it will be one more loss of freedom, one more tax, but the most frustrating part is …..we know it will do nothing to prevent crime. Our government was recently caught giving guns to violent criminals (fast and furious) so excuse me if I do not believe their first concern is the safety of the people. - Todd - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 4:41 pm: For those of you who think this is no big deal and wonder why gun guys won’t ever compromise, let me see if I can explain it. You see in the late ‘60s the FOID card was the compromise to a Chicago style registration scheme. So we have had the “license” to exercise a right for over 40 years. But that still wasn’t enough for the City. Chicago used their registration scheme to enact a handgun ban and bans on other types of firearms. They simply quit accepting new registrations. And it took a Supreme Court ruling to get them to allow people to register and own a handgun, but now you have to spend over $250, jump through a bunch of hoops, and that still isn’t enough. Back in 2005, the FOID card wasn’t enough and so we had to have all private firearm sales at gunshows called into the State Police despite a person already having a FOID card. And for the last 6 years the City has been pushing legislation to force all private sales to go through a dealer and for us to pay a fee/tax and all the hassles of that. But that still isn’t enough. So when some of you wonder why we never are in the mood to compromise, it is because those who do not like guns, have shown us time and time again that they will want more. And So we say NO. No to your bans, NO to your schemes, NO to your taxes on our rights. No compromise. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 5:38 pm: People, comments about Nazi Germany are always goners. Don’t even try. - Ain't No Justice - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 5:40 pm: Leave it to Chicago! Conceal carry is closer that is ever has been for Illinois (the only state left that doesn’t allow some form of it). I live alone and have two guns and a going to purchase one more. I have had a FOID card for quite awhile and was raised to RESPECT them and trained to use them. Hunting and target is what I use them for ….unless someone tries to enter my home to commit a crime on my property or person. If all guns were registered, only the criminals would have non-registered weapons! We can’t pay the troopers we have now and the cost to have big brother “track” all firearms is ridiculous! Let Chicago do what it wants, but leave those of us south of I-80 alone. - Carl from Chicago - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 5:52 pm: Dan Johnson said: “This one strikes me as eminently reasonable. If you have a gun, get it registered, because that will absolutely help solve crimes.” And Canada is on the verge of repealing their gun registration scheme … because it absolutely helped solve crimes? - Bill - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 5:55 pm: ==Rahm is running Chicago NOT Illinois PERIOD.== Give him another year or two. - PublicServant - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 6:04 pm: What don’t you get about “well regulated”? You con right to own a gun isn’t the issue. The issue is a legitimate need for regulation. Pretty simple. - amalia - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 6:07 pm: well, I was about to write what the what the heck Rahm!!! and then I read Todd at 4:41. jeez. I’m not on board with the new Rahm proposal, but background checks are not a big deal and given how bad things are out there in seller land (see NBC this am, an operation set by Bloomberg) it might be nice to have private sales done in the presence of someone, say law enforcement as it is done in, I think, Penn. but I’m with Wordslinger way up the thread…Rahm has to think this is his loser bill. as for gun bans, the only one worth it is the assault weapons ban, and that is one the legislature should go after. - wishbone - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 7:33 pm: “…the only one worth it is the assault weapons ban” Assault weapons are guns that look scary to people who know nothing about guns, period. The Federal ban was a disaster for Democrats and has hampered the passage of more progressive legislation than any other issue. Thank God it is gone. If you want a liberal agenda passed (and I do) you will support concealed carry and other pro Second Amendment issues. - Motambe - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 7:45 pm: Amazing. No, stunning. If this issue stays alive through the summer, then downstate voter turnout in November just increased 5-8%. Mayor Emanuel, I’m sure your buddy in the White House is thrilled with your efforts to help him win Illinois in 2012! - way south of chicago - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:03 pm: 150,000 gang members in chicago….70% of the crime is gang related….lets go after the law abiding, tax paying gun owner from southern illinois….makes sense to me….and you wonder why we dont trust chicago democrats…. - amalia - Thursday, Feb 9, 12 @ 10:36 pm: @wishbone, well, I think lots of my guns look scary, but the Federal ban is now lifted and more cops are getting shot at in Chicago with things that were previously off limits. the second amendment says well regulated and I’m all for that. - Glock 23C - Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 1:24 am: It’s good to know that over the past few decades Chicago has been one of the safest cities in the country! Everytime I hear of someone committing a crime with a firearm in this great city I can’t believe it. Guns are illegal in Chicago so there shouldn’t be any gun crime. Wait a minute, criminals don’t obey laws! Remember, when seconds count the police are minutes away. - LeeG - Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 6:45 am: Now that Rahm is going to try to infringe on every Illinois firearm owner’s 2nd amendment rights, I hope you all get up and start joining the fight for your rights! I have friends and acquaintences who own firearms that sit back and say “they’ll never get my guns!” To all of those people who believe that, “if you don’t know your history, you are doomed to repeat it”. There are several nations who confiscated the firearms from the citizens and it started by “registration” first. Once all the firearms were eventually confiscated these nations decided genocide was the next step to take. It may not go that far in the U.S. but are you willing to take the chance to find out? Are you that lazy as to allow someone like the idiot mayor of Chicago to restrict your 2nd Amendment rights? The Second Amendment wasn’t put in there to protect hunters or target shooters. It’s there to allow the american citizens to protect themselves from a tyrannical goverment. If not now, when is the time imperative that you get up off your **tt and fight back? You can start by calling your legislators in Springfield and telling them to reject this piece anti-firearm legislation, and better yet, get your hind-ends and get on a bus on March 7th, join the other 8,000 people, and attend IGOLD in Springfield. You can physically visit your legislators office and demand that he/she vote against it. Thanks to all of those who fight for our firearms rights, The ISRA, ICarry along with several other groups stand on the battlefield everyday fighting, while others sit back and complain but won’t lift a finger to get in the fight. Many heroic Americans have sacrificed their lives for your rights…….don’t you think you can give up a day or two to do the same for the generations to come? - Jose - Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 7:48 am: I’m thinking we should pass a law requiring all people exercising their ‘freedom of religion’ to register with the state for $65. Want to attend service? You must be registered with the state and have a FOR (Freedom of Religion) ID. - Benny - Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 8:02 am: Amelia, if you want to regulate some militia somewhere then go right ahead, but the rights of the people shall not be infringed. - amalia - Friday, Feb 10, 12 @ 11:02 am: when in doubt, consult Scalia….regulation! Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.