110 Comments - CircularFiringSquad - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:13 pm: So the @A WingNuts still feel unsafe even though they are armed…guess that means carry won’t solve their problem…How about moving? - bored now - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:14 pm: so 80% of those on the ISRA’s email list are cowardly fraidy cats who are scared of the outside world??? sounds about right. *real* americans live in the very american tradition of exploring the unknown and making their mark. but i express no surprise that those who feel the need to be alerted by the ISRA are too scared to live out the american spirit… - wordslinger - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:14 pm: That’s just sad. But the ISRA’s and NRA’s dystopian vision of America brings in contributions and sells guns. - Demoralized - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:14 pm: Can you say paranoia? Do these people just sit around in their houses peeking out the window, afraid to step foot outside because somebody might get them? And what about the universal opposition to ANY gun control measures? Because we all certainly need AK-47’s. And opposition to background checks? That’s just ridiculous. We certainly don’t want to know if some criminal or crazy person is buying a gun. Give me a break people. This is the kind of stuff that hurts your arguments against legitimate onerous gun control measures. Reason has apparently gone completely out the window with this group of survey respondents. - Small Town Liberal - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:17 pm: - Half of the people who took that Internet survey don’t feel safe outside their own neighborhoods? And 80 percent think they’ll be the victim of a violent crime? - Why on earth would you release that information? Apparently my 9 year old niece is tougher than half of the ISRA. Wow indeed. - TooManyJens - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:23 pm: ==Why on earth would you release that information?== Because they don’t realize that not everyone is walking around terrified all the time? I think they really don’t get how out of touch this makes them look. - Wensicia - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:30 pm: I guess this proves the hysterical, paranoid press releases from the ISRA are working. - Elo Kiddies - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:33 pm: What the survey shows is that the ISRA needs to make very little effort to get 4,500 of its members to take action. That is remarkable. If they’re spread evenly around the state (a very big if), that’s almost 40 members per state rep. Anyone who can generate 40 calls from constituents to every member of the House in a two-day window will be have real influence over the agenda. Just how things are. - D P Gumby - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:37 pm: What a relief! I’m glad that all these gun owners are staying inside. I’ll be really scared to leave my house if they all get to go outside carrying their concealed weapons ready to shoot at the drop of a hat because they think everyone is waiting to attack them! - Nearly Normal - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:39 pm: After years of preaching to the choir, what would you expect from a survey of the choir? - nothin's easy - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:41 pm: Isn’t Gallup the outfit that had Romney winning by 7 points? (while under federal investigation for misuse of government grant funds) - Charlatan Heston - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:50 pm: Interesting. Seems the survey takers have an approach to developing their policy positions that is not dissimilar from their opposition who think that an assault weapons and a high capacity magazine ban will magically solve the bloodshed in Chicago and the next madman problem..Don’t ever let the facts get in the way of formulating opinion - VanillaMan - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 12:57 pm: Live in Exurbia? Live outside a densely populated area? You do not have police presence where you live. As more Americans move further away from cities and commute further from home, there is an increasing number of home break ins in neighborhoods depopulated during the work week during working hours - and more frightenly, during early morning while homeowners and their children are home. There has been quite a rash of break ins in my part of Exurbia. At night. While homeowners are sleeping. 8%? Yeah - I believe it. I have tripled my security system presence in my home substantially over the past few months. I do not want what happened to my neighbors to happen to me. It took over 25 minutes for a 9-1-1 call when two men broke into their home at 3AM. My neighbors are taking it upon themselves to be protected from fire and theft. However, they can. Stop the political insults. With cutbacks across the board, with an increasing volunteer and part time presence within police departments, there is an increasing awareness of the need to protect one’s family and self. Who is really the ignorant folks here? The one living without fear and respect for crime, or the ones who are? One of the worse things to say to your neighbors is that they are stupid and cowardly. Show some respect urban and suburbanites. - Small Town Liberal - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:08 pm: Vman - According to the odds above (those are the two numbers separated by the word “in”), about 2% of people will be victims of a violent crime. Yet 80% of ISRA members think they will. You think that seems reasonable? - Colossus - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:09 pm: VM - I am neither an urbanite or a suburbanite, so I guess I’m allowed to say that ISRA’s poll results show that their members are cowardly. You can try to white knight for them, but you’re not going to make much of an impact. Are you honestly saying that 80% of Americans SHOULD be afraid to travel outside their own neighborhoods? that the ISRA respondents are, in fact, effectively and accurately evaulating the risks posed to them and responding in an appropriate way? Or are you trying to introduce other anecdotal evidence to help bolster the ISRA results without having to comment on the self-evident results showing ISRA respondents to be particularly bad at evaluating risk? - MrJM - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:14 pm: I’m Paranoid — And I Vote! – MrJM - VanillaMan - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:18 pm: The first step in a good productive dialog is to not insult the folks locked up in their homes with guns, afraid to leave their neighborhoods. Not smart. I don’t care what your numbers say, these folks don’t expect Offices Winchell and Dunkin to protect them. Protecting your life is still an inalienable right of all humans, as far as I recall. Would you call me a coward for having modern home security? Worrying about my child’s safety? What exactly is so funny about rape or murder? The responses here have been embarrassing and overtly political for no real reason. Politics sucks when you guys do that. - David Ormsby - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:25 pm: – I think they really don’t get how out of touch this makes them look.– Sophisticated public relations – beyond the cowering base – is not their strong suit. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:25 pm: ===The first step in a good productive dialog=== As if the ISRA ever did that. C’mon. - 47th Ward - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:30 pm: ===Politics sucks when you guys do that.=== But not when you do it? Right. Thanks VMan. - Ahoy! - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:31 pm: So ISRA members are more paranoid than average members of society. That makes sense if they really think they need a gun at all times to protect themselves. Otherwise, why would someone have such strong feelings against common sense weapons control? Of course, just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean you should get to carry a gun anywhere you want. It probably means you shouldn’t since you’d be more likely to mistakenly act upon something out of fear. Kind of an ironic situation, those who think they need guns the most are the ones you least want to have them. - TooManyJens - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:32 pm: ==I don’t care what your numbers say== I think I found the problem. You don’t think that figures on the actual incidence of crime should have any bearing on people’s assessment of their risk. It’s not partisan or political to characterize that position as absurd. - dupage dan - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:42 pm: === You don’t think that figures on the actual incidence of crime should have any bearing on people’s assessment of their risk? === The liklihood of your child being snatched from the streets by a criminal stranger is very very small. Yet people take basic precautions because it is the prudent thing to do. I sail across open water and although it is very rare for folks to fall off their boats in moderate weather I still wear a PFD. Lots of people make those decisions all the time because they are concerned that altho the risks are not all that high, the devestation if it happens is too much to contemplate. It’s just prudent. - Colossus - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:44 pm: VM - Saying “don’t insult the paranoids holing up with weapons, that’s not smart” sounds like it’s a stone’s throw away from “it’s not smart to say bad things about people with guns”, with all that implies. If you’re trying to present a positive case for the ISRA poll, you’re off to a really bad start. Turther: The first step to constructive dialogue is to root it in reality. The poll results show that the ISRA respondents are not rooted in reality as it relates to the incidence of violent crime. - How Ironic - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:46 pm: I’m unsure why this was bolded in the article: “less than 5% of respondents feel that the police could protect them from crime.” Realisticlly, that’s probably about right. Police for the most part do not ‘prevent’ crime in the sense that they typcially stop a crime before it occurs. Police RESPOND to crimes that have either occured, or are in process of occuring. (IE I’ve been mugged, or someone is breaking into my home). In those instances, or many others in the time that you are waiting for the police to respond can be the difference between bodily harm, or death. I do not feel that it is unreasonable to either carry a weapon (with training and license) or have one in the home. - VanillaMan - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:50 pm: At what point are you folks offended by my concerns over my home and family safety? Do you think I’m a coward when I lock my doors? How about if I carry pepper spray? How about if I have a fire extinguisher? How about if I have a home security alarm installed> How about if I get my parents a Life Alert? Would you call me a coward if I carried a knife? How about if I had a baseball bat near my bed at night? At what point do you folks start quoting numbers at me and start calling me a coward? Oh yeah - when I have a gun? Why does that bother you? What are you afraid of? Who is the coward now? If you want to believe that a safe society is an unarmed society, then you would also believe that a safer society would be one with no door locks, no home security systems and nothing that could be converted into a weapon, right? If we could do that then we wouldn’t live on Earth - anywhere on it, except maybe Antartica. But, you have to remember about those penguins! So please remember that owning a gun, and feeling a need for a gun, regardless of any statistics you might throw out showing no real reason to fear crime, doesn’t make one stupid, ignorant, or beneath you. It makes them an American. - Fan - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:52 pm: It is comments like I have read here that makes me not want to give any ground to the grabbers. As VMan mentioned, calling names and making accusations has shut this conversation down. The Appeal’s Court has ruled. Live with it. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:53 pm: ===I’m unsure why this was bolded in the article: “less than 5% of respondents feel that the police could protect them from crime.”=== According to Gallup, it’s way higher nationally. Here’s one result. Even after the drop, it’s hugely higher than 5 percent… http://www.gallup.com/poll/19783/confidence-local-police-drops-10year-low.aspx - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:54 pm: ===At what point are you folks offended by my concerns over my home and family safety? === Nobody is offended, VMan. You’re completely missing the point. - Demoralized - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 1:58 pm: @VMan and Fan: Give me a break. Nobody here has said anything about owning a gun or trying to take your guns away. What they have said is that these respondents are crazy paranoid and apparentlty are removed from reality. If you want to defend such nonsense be my guest but it does absolutely nothing for your arguments about gun rights, and in fact hurts your arguments with people in the middle on this issue. You aren’t going to win any arguments with such paranoid drivel. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:01 pm: Okay so i am confused. Using rich’s Book of Odds figures. Why are we even discussing any type of gun control? Seems we are pretty darn safe right now with the current system why change it? After all there where only 323 murders utilizing a Rifle of any type in 2011 out of 12,664 (FBI http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8) or roughly 2.5% so your chance of being killed by an Ak-47 or Ar-15 is 1 in 732,787+. As for the background checks if you sell a firearm in the State of IL and write down the purchasers Foid card number you have done a background check. (I am not claiming the FOID is current but that is the purpose of the thing)Since 2007 murder rates in the U.S. have declined by no less than 3.4% annually. Meanwhile since December 2008 firearm sales in the U.S. have steadily increased. Seems like the gun control is a solution in search of a problem. I guess while the 50% afraid to leave their Neighborhood and the 80% afraid they will be victims of violent crime are not very good at assessing risk neither are the Gun Control Nuts. I think the truly sad thing is the whole philosophy of if it bleeds it leads has convinced us all that there is a huge crime wave. For instance i hear all the time of killings in Chi town makes it seem like it is the Valentines Day Massacre up there every day. Yet when i go up there on Business i don’t hear gun shots echoing down the urban Canyons. A little Perspective on both sides might help the whole mess. As for the study i never saw the silly thing and would love to sit down with whoever came up with it to determine what their major malfunction is. - TooManyJens - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:03 pm: ==Yet people take basic precautions because it is the prudent thing to do.== Carrying a deadly weapon is not a “basic precaution.” - Chicago Cynic - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:04 pm: Vman aside, this is an extraordinary unrepresentative sample. To put it in perspective, numerous national surveys find background checks supported by 85-92%. This survey has them opposed by 2/3. This is an amazingly paranoid bunch. I still find the urban/rural disconnect kind of amazing. In urban and suburban areas, we have street gangs and mafiosos and drug addled criminals, yet I know almost nobody who owns a gun for protection. I know hunters and target shooters, but not A lot of folks who sleep with a gun in the drawer and a baseball bat by the bed. Not sure I can explain the disconnect between likely threats (higher in urban areas) and perceived threats (higher in rural areas). - TooManyJens - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:06 pm: Nor, for that matter, is opposing background checks on gun sales. Even if ISRA’s inflated sense of danger were accurate, why would it follow that we shouldn’t try to keep guns from being purchased by criminals who aren’t legally allowed to have them? - Colossus - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:07 pm: VM - I’m concerned when your concerns for the safety of your family are radically out of step with what is likely to happen to them. No one will fault folks for being too safe. Hell, my grampa didn’t let me use a single power tool until I was 30 without giving me a safety lecture on it, he was the safest guy I knew. But Pop didn’t lecture me about tools I wasn’t using, he was addressing the risk at hand and attempting to mitigate it. Packing life preservers or emergency kits or having a home security system is all perfectly valid. Owning a gun is a reasonable precaution for protection. But claiming that you are literally thousands of times more likely to be the victim of a type of crime than you actually are, and then using that claim to negate the real incidence rate of crime is dishonesty of the highest order. And for the record, in order, here’s why I don’t think much of your attempts to justify the stance of the ISRA respondents: - Tu coque fallacy - Reductio ad absurdum fallacy - Tu coque fallacy (again) - Reductio ad absurdum fallacy - Fallacy of many questions - Ignoracio elenchi fallacy - Mind projection fallacy - While not a formal logical fallacy, I anticipate that use of ‘Murca to support an argument will be adopted as one in the near future. no one is saying here that is it stupid, ignorant or beneath you to own a weapon. They are saying that the poll results show that ISRA’s membership is particularly uninformed on the actual risks they face and suggesting that perhaps an honest evaluation would result in different opinions on the utility of firearms in modern society. If you read these comments and statistics and feel that you are being attacked, then you’ve got bigger problems in your life than a poor understanding of logic. - walkinfool - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:08 pm: When people are frightened enough, information and rational arguments mean little. This so clearly drives the ISRA base, and is their basis for advocacy. VMan’s comments on prudent precautions are well-made. We can argue on when the risk is so small that a precaution does not seem really sensible. His claim that gun onwership is what makes a real American, is clearly overstated. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:10 pm: VMan, I can almost hear the fife-and-drums playing while reading your posts, kind of like when Oliver Douglas would launch into his fevered dialogues on the “American Farmer” on “Green Acres.” But you’ve gone quite far off track. I think the folks you have problems with here — Americans, all, I suspect — are commenting on the results of the poll, in which half the respondents are afraid to leave their neighborhoods. You can see how some might view that as a rather extreme and irrational fear, can’t you? It seems more like agoraphobia. I don’t think anyone’s calling you a coward for locking your door. How did you come to that conclusion, anyway? - Mason born - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:16 pm: I think the really sad part of this is the whole if it bleads it leads. For instance Murder rates in the U.S. have declined by more than 3.4% every year since 2007. Don’t believe me see the FBI. (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8) Yet gun sales have been through the roof ever since 2008 (no cite for that one too many options). I see it every time i visit Chicago for business i hear on the news that there are daily murders and it seems like the Valentines Day Massacre is just another weekend right now. However when i visit Chicago i don’t hear gun shots echoing down the urban corridors. Meanwhile we hear that the Gun Grabbers want a Assault weapon ban. Yet using Rich’s numbers of 1 in 18,960 and the FBI stat of 323 murders with a rifle out of 12,664 means the likelihood of being murdered by a ak-47 or ar-15 is 1 in 732,787+. Meanwhile every firearm sold by private citizens in IL if sold legally have a background check done as soon as you see the other individuals Foid you have done a background check. You cannot even look at a firearm in a Gun Store without displaying that background check. So while the folks that took this survey apparently cannot assess risk very well neither can the Gun Control Nuts. - Big D - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:17 pm: Those statistics would look a lot scarier if you projected them out over a lifetime, rather than simply a year. RAINN (the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network) has estimated that 1 in 6 American women is the victim of an attempted rape in their lifetime. That kind of puts a different perspective on it than the 1 in 541 number. - Skeeter - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:18 pm: While I’m usually first in line to call gun owners paranoid, I’m not sure the survey in question provides the basis for for doing so. I looked, and I couldn’t find a link to the actual questions asked. So far, we have “feel that they could become the victim of violent crime.” If you asked me that question, I would answer, “yes, I could become a victim.” On the other hand, I view the “could” as a very slight risk and on a day to day basis don’t spend any time worrying about it. It depends on how the questions were phrased. - RJ - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:26 pm: Members are not paranoid…this dialog is being driven by false assumptions. Responsible, legal gun owners have NEVER been the problem yet the Governor and Chicago area legislators are fixated on stopping all gun ownership in the state. If Chicago does not want legal gun ownership…let Chicago act on it….leave the rest of us alone and let us exercise our rights. After all….Gun control has worked so well in Chicago. How many of the 500 homicides in Chicago were committed by legal gun owners holding a FOID card. I’ll bet that number is pretty close to …ZERO. It appears that Chicago only want the gangs to have guns. I am fine with that….just dig a very wide sewage canal around Cook County and tear down the bridges first. - Mason born - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:30 pm: As for this poll i have no idea who the heck even saw it. I didn’t and i get the E-mails and the rest of the crap. I would argue that if you have time to worry that much about being a victim of crime you need to find a job. I think Walkinfool made a very good point. –When people are frightened enough, information and rational arguments mean little.– That works for both sides especially if you get your e-mail alerts from the Brady campaign. Collosus you ask why the disconnect between rural and urban when it is more likely to be a victim in the urban areas. I would contend especially int he greater Chicago area that years of Bans and strict requirements have encouraged the thinking of firearms as only tools of the criminals and police. Therefore conditioning those residents to think of weapons as evil. That conditioning is missing in the rural areas for instance my kids began learning about firearms before they were in kindergarten i.e. don’t touch etc. and began to shoot in the 2nd grade with supervision. To them a Firearm is no different than a Power drill or a Circular saw a tool to be used responsibly and carefully. As for why no baseball bats probably comes down to all of our belief that it cannot happen here or cannot happen to me. - Skeeter - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:31 pm: I noted that I don’t think the survey shows that gun owners are paranoid. However, RJ’s post, and notably “Chicago area legislators are fixated on stopping all gun ownership in the state” does show that gun owners are paranoid. RJ, nobody want to take all guns. Nobody like that really exists. - Chavez-respecting Obamist - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:33 pm: Give it a rest, RJ. No one is coming to get your guns. Unless we should… - Mason born - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:34 pm: Skeeter That is a very good point. One i hadn’t considered mow i really wish i had seen the stupid thing. the same thing could be said about the whole 5% cops protecting them. If you asked me if i thought a cop would protect me from crime i would probably say no since i never see cops unless i am doing 75 on 55. However i believe if someone tried to carjack me while the trooper had me pulled over i am sure he would protect me. - Demoralized - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:35 pm: == Results show that two-thirds of respondents oppose background checks on private gun sales – even if the government was required to destroy all records of the background checks.== @RJ - is it responsible to be opposed to background checks??? - RJ - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:39 pm: Skeeter….it looks that way from the cheap seats. I own a number of guns…4 or 5 that were handed down by my father and grandfather, an AR-15, a .45 semi-auto, and a pump shotgun converted to a slug gun (for deer hunting). Under the various proposed restrictions cited by the Gov. and his small circle of friends, all but one of my guns would be affected. That would leave me with an old shotgun that is so old I am afraid to shoot (a wall hanger.) - Colossus - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:43 pm: Mason - I completely understand the disconnect between downstate/Chicago on guns, I think you’re confusing me with someone else. I agree with you that the “tool” mentality is the one that makes the most sense and leads to the most responsible gun ownership. However, I feel like downstaters tend to reject out of hand the experience Chicago has with firearms as if, because it is completely unlike the downstate experience, it doesn’t count. They are both valid (even if not equally desireable) and must be taken into account. - Mason born - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:45 pm: Demo I think what you forget is here in IL we already have those background checks with the FOID card. So you are talking about an additional layer of Bureacrocy (i know i misspelled that). So here in IL there really isn’t anything to gain so why support it?? RJ I could see how you get that conclusion but a lot of the problem is the people writing the law do not know what they are talking about. I don’t think Kotowski wants to take your slug gun i just don’t think he knows what he is talking about. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:48 pm: –..yet the Governor and Chicago area legislators are fixated on stopping all gun ownership in the state.– No, you’re not paranoid. Your belief is grounded in fact and reason. - Chicago Cynic - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:54 pm: Ironically Mason, he’s confusing me with you. And RJ, I’d like to have a little support for this absurd statement of yours: “the Governor and Chicago area legislators are fixated on stopping all gun ownership in the state.” Stopping all gun ownership in the state??? I’m aware of precisely nobody who has said we should eliminate all gun ownership in the state (which means confiscation of all private firearms). This is just more over the top BS that we’ve come to expect from the paranoid 2nd amendment worshippers…just like those that responded to this survey. - Mason born - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:54 pm: Colossus I think you bring up a good point in your Chicago experience with firearms. I for one would never say it shouldn’t be taken into account. I have advocated many times to bring back the death penalty and make it mandatory for felony use of a firearm. I think the disconnect resides in both sides. For instance from my point of view. The weapons that are used on your streets were not sold in accordance with current IL law or were stolen from law abiding owners. Therefore folks like me are getting punished for the actions of the Criminal minority who will not follow those laws anyway. If i may Guess, always dangerous and please correct me, at the Chi opinion. Guns are part of the problem if there were less of them then there would be less problems. To you since you do not own one or wish to (again assumption forgive me) then what is the big deal. I do understand the position i just don’t see how anything proposed will actually help. Even if we could round up every single gun in the U.S. the cartels move tons of Banned substances daily. I am sure they could get their goons new ones within a month. - Mason born - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:55 pm: Collossus and CC i apologize. - Demoralized - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:57 pm: @Mason: We’ll have to agree to disagree. FOID cards are valid for 10 years. You don’t think something could change in that period of time? I don’t know what the procedures are, if any, for revoking a FOID card for criminal activity or for mental health issues. Even so, is anybody going to do anything besides look to see if you have a FOID card on you? I don’t think it’s unreasonable to require a background check. - Deep South - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:57 pm: OMG. I live in a town of about 3,000 here in the Deep South. I often travel to large metropolitan areas such as Chicago, New York, Nashville, Birmingham, etc. Shoot, when I go to New York, I’m in all sorts of neighborhoods in places like Manhattan and Brooklyn, even have dinner at a great place in Harlem from time to time. And travel by subway to get where I need to go. Never even thought about needing a gun or the fact I might become a crime victim. I sure don’t feel the need to arm myself in my own town either. The only reason I’d need a gun in the house is to deal with the occasional rabid animal that might find its way to my back porch. How in the world do people get so paranoid? - Really? - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:58 pm: “Carrying a deadly weapon is not a “basic precaution.” ” Says someone who probably has never had their life threatened or had get a restraining order for their psyco-ex that kept banging on the door every time he got drunk. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 3:00 pm: Did the TRO work? - Really? - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 3:05 pm: No. was later arrested for something else and locked up. - MrJM - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 3:06 pm: “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.” — Jonathan Swift (1667 – 1745) - Carl Nyberg - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 3:32 pm: “Conservatism” correlates with cowardice. - Mason born - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 3:41 pm: Demo Then we need to fix the FOID card Problem. The point i was trying to make is we need one or the other to accomplish the same thing. Otherwise if you have a mandatory background check why do you need the FOID? - Mason born - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 3:44 pm: Carl Would love to know how you got there? Seems like quite a leap. - Buster McBrickle - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 3:47 pm: The surey asked the readers to evaluate the following statement, “I feel safe when traveling to places outside my neighborhood.” Choices were: “Strongly Disagree”; “Disagree Somewhat”; “Not Sure”; “Agree Somewhat”; and “Strongly Agree” - Colossus - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 3:49 pm: Mason - They’re not my streets, never lived north of I74 in my life. A couple of problems with your proposals: 1) the death penalty is no longer an option in Illinois. If you want to bring it back, you’ve got a pretty intense amount of legwork to do to ensure no one will be falsely put there, not to mention the funding mechanism for it. 2) Where do the criminals get the guns from? They buy them from someone. That someone bought them from someone else. Repeat as many times as necessary, and you end up back at an FFL dealer. Is there another access point between the manufacturer and the public that I’m unaware of? Focus on the weak points in the system, don’t just insist the status quo is acceptable. The supply of illegal weapons can be reduced (not eliminated, nothing is ever eliminated), but we don’t have to rely on the honor system when it comes to guns. 3) Yes, cartels move tons of banned substances. Those substances are then consumed and destroyed in the process. By drying up the supply through better tracking through the ownership chain and removing weapons used illegally we can make it much more difficult for individuals to get a hold of durable goods that are massively more difficult to move than drugs. These things don’t grow on trees. They are designed by people, manufactured by people, and sold to people. We have a regulatory structure in place that has proven effective at preventing individuals from acquiring dangerous firearms without trampling constitutional rights, I don’t understand why we can’t expand aspects of it to regulate a market that is, by definition, disfunctional. I’ve heard your thoughts on punishment. What are your thoughts on your fellow law abiding gun owners who, while not breaking any laws, are supplying criminals with weapons? What should be done with them? - Demoralized - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 3:52 pm: @Mason: That’s a fair point and I’m not disputing it. I was just trying to make the point that a gap exists. To me it would be easier to get rid of the FOID card and require background checks when somebody buys a gun. Also, I want to make it clear I’m nowhere close to anti-gun. I think most of the restrictions being talked about right now are bogus. - D P Gumby - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:00 pm: They are so paranoid that they want to allow domestic abusers to keep their guns even after their victims have court orders of protection: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/18/us/facing-protective-orders-and-allowed-to-keep-guns.html?pagewanted=all&src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB&_r=0 - TooManyJens - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:05 pm: For the record, I’m not saying that everyone who doesn’t possess “sufficient” reason should be banned from owning firearms. What I’m saying is that people are making decisions based on fear and bad information. I wish they’d make them based on better information, and I wish that various forces in our society would quit whipping up fear to serve their own agendas. - 47Chief - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:09 pm: - Deep South - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:57 pm: I sure don’t feel the need to arm myself in my own town either. The only reason I’d need a gun in the house is to deal with the occasional rabid animal that might find its way to my back porch. How in the world do people get so paranoid?- Maybe this is how: http://commercial-news.com/local/x546104443/2-men-killed-during-invasion/print - downstate commissioner - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:10 pm: Out of the 15 or so guns I own, only a couple would be banned by the assault rifle ban as now being pushed in Illinois. (Although I guess a 1965 bolt action Enfield rifle with a 12-round magazine would also qualify.) But the simple fact is that I can’t AFFORD an $800 pistol or a $1000 military looking semi-auto rifle, otherwise I would probably have one. THAT is the reason that I oppose these bans. I don’t need one, but I believe that I have the right to own one. As for fear, I am not afraid to go to big cities, even though I believe that I am more likely to be a victim of crime there. As a road worker, there is a chance that I may be injured or killed on the job by a passing motorist-and this is based on real statistics. I wear a green vest, I put up warning signs, even on roads with less than 50 cars a day on them, and I use flashing lights on construction equipment. If concealed carry were legal, I would carry a gun, at least in the car, as a prudent precaution against crime. While I agree that the ISRA brings out the nuts, the other side (the ones trying to take away our guns-and they are) is just wrong. Background checks aren’t that big of a deal to me; I don’t think that they are that invasive of my privcy (which really doesn’t exist in this modern world.) These are my beliefs. I don’t belong to either the ISRA or the NRA, but I am very sympathetic to to their reaction to the gun banners. - Endangered Moderate Species - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:21 pm: ISRA and NRA members are probably more paranoid about crime than other citizens. Nothing new here. A police response time of 30 to 45 minutes is common in most of rural Illinois. Most Illinois Counties have had an incident, in the last decade, of a rural crime that has ended in the death of a victim. Most of the survey respondents are probably rural citizens and violent incidents in their Counties are not forgotten quickly. In actuality, violent crime in rural America is probably less common than urban areas, but the effects of violent crimes in these rural areas are remembered for years. Please remember that rural citizens are very parochial in their views of their communities, neighbors, schools, etc. The survey is not a fair representation of Illinois citizens or rural Illinoisans. - Mason born - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:23 pm: Colossus sorry again i had you confused with the Chicago Cynic who i am sure lives north of I-74. 1. I know the Death Penalty was removed from IL i don’t agree with that removal but we can sub out life in prison with no possibility of parole works fine for me. 2. The problem resides in what amount of infringement you are willing to accept. In this case while most firearms at some point came from an FFL (Note some come cross border or stolen from Military armories) it is illegal for anyone to knowingly sell a firearm to anyone known to be a felon or any of the other restricted classes. The other major source is theft of firearms would you blame the owner of a SUV if it was stolen and crashed into you? The problem comes down to how you fix it. I have no problem with Very sever punishment for Straw purchasers 15-20 sounds close and if you can prove that the individual knew the buyer was a felon and the weapon used in a crime then he should share the penalty whether life in prison or ? 3. Firearms are a worldwide industry. for instance if you travel to Ghana you can purchase a fully Auto AK47 for around 300 American. You cannot touch the Semi-Auto legal version here in the states for less than 800. This means you cannot dry up the supply. In the end the illegal firearms are a lot like the illegal drugs if you impact supply here you simply increase demand and supply comes in from out of country. As a side note it is a lot easier to smuggle a firearm then drugs for example i can toss a pistol in a gas tank drive 800 miles pull it out, clean it, let it dry and it will work good as new. To be honest guns are easier to move then drugs. Attach one to the bottom of your boat and sail right into the harbor, weld one to the frame of your car drive right across the border, place them in a barrel of oil ship it where ever you want. It is a chunk of metal, plastic, and oil attached to any piece of machinery there is nothing for a dog to smell, nothing to see. I am really trying to understand your next to last paragraph. You say it is working yet you want to what make it more intrusive in order to catch what the few who willing violate the existing law because then they won’t violate the new law. You have my answer to the last paragraph. This is for Demo too. What i would like to see is an opening of the NCIS background check system to Civilians. Let me call say “i need to know if i can sell a weapon to Collossus can i”? Then send me a response either yes or no problem solved i get to clear my conscience and you can require i do it prior to transfer. Have system send out an e-mail to seller problem solved. Works for my side because you aren’t registering anything, you aren’t requiring me to pay a dealer to fill out paperwork, and it gives me a clear conscience. Should satisfy you if that is all you want is a background check. On a side note i do not sell firearms to anyone i do not know very closely. If i haven’t known you for years i sell via commision at a local dealer. - Deep South - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:26 pm: 47Chief: Good thing I don’t live in Vermillion County. On the other side you’ve got the South African Olympian who was so paranoid, so sure that someone would break in his house, so ate up with the idea that criminals were waiting to pounce, that he armed himself to the teeth. And then at the thought that his fears were being realized, his paranoia led him to fire blindly into the mystery and he ended up killing his girlfriend. - A Citizen - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:29 pm: V Man -You might want to try my method - Whenever Rich gets one of these gun threads going I get one of my guns out for a good cleaning. I then wait for Word and Skeeter to each post two times and I head out to my local gun shops and buy another one and a lot of ammunition. Why in just the last month I have added an AR15, M1 Garand, 22 Cal semi auto Rifle, and a few semi auto pistols. Plus a whole lot of ammo for them. This always makes me much happier than reading and re-reading all of the tired weary pointless arguments. Try it and let us all know if it works for you as well. - Skeeter - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:33 pm: “I then wait for Word and Skeeter to each post two times and I head out to my local gun shops and buy another one and a lot of ammunition.” That’s not creepy at all. And people wonder why some of us refuse to post using our real names. - Tequila Mockingbird - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:33 pm: I got the email and took the survey and I don’t recall it being worded anything like it is presented here. And by the way, I live in a rural area in the corner of a rural county with limited police coverage, and I have been a victim of crime. Am I paranoid for wanting to able to protect myself and my family while waiting 20-30 minutes for police response? These discussions always take a predictable turn here and degenerate into name calling and insults. - Mason born - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:33 pm: A CITIZEN I’ll try that if you can tell me how i avoid the Talk from the wife about how i have enough and don’t need anymore. BTW bought a new boat got the same talk i thought i’d at least get a new version. - Colossus - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:34 pm: Mason - It’s great that you don’t sell weapons to people you don’t know closely. But not every gun owner is as responsible as you. Since there is no real downside to someone being a straw purchaser, how do we stop them? They’re not violating a law, and there’s no enforcement mechanism anyway. I’m sympathetic to saying “lock them up and throw away the key”, but we can’t afford the prisons/guards/prisoners we have already, so that clearly isn’t an option. These issues all tie together, you can’t just push the problem off onto DOC and call it a day. Regarding thefts from legal owners: please provide a reference for how many guns are stolen from law abiding gun owners every year. I have yet to see anything ever offered to support the notion that stolen weapons are a major source for criminals. Reminder: the plural of anecdote is not data. I realize I sound snippish, but I’ve had literally this conversation several times in the last few months. I do appreciate you being evenhanded and engaging in dialogue, I think this is a valuable conversation. It always comes back to proposing harsh sentences on gun traffickers, which we just can’t afford to do without making other changes within DOC and law enforcement priorities, yet pro-gun people seem to think the prisons (and their budgets) are limitless. I have yet to hear anything other than “15-20 for straw purchasers” and would love to hear a pro-gunner’s thoughts on something else. - How Ironic - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:37 pm: @ Deep South, One would have to assume that Pistorius is telling the truth to believe what he is trying to selling. Sounds like you bought it all. Perhaps he was just wanting to kill his girlfriend and concocted the ‘intruder’ story to cover up the crime. Wouldn’t be the first time it’s happened in human history. - Amalia - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:43 pm: ISRA “survey.” LOL hey, let’s base policy on radio call in shows. - Mason born - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:49 pm: Colossus I actually worked in DOC and believe me there are lots of savings that could be reached if the will was there. Coincidently after working in DOC (while i got a degree) i am even more sure there is a place for the Death penalty. –”By definition, stolen guns are avail- able to criminals. The FBI’s National Crime Information Center (NCIC) stolen gun file contains over 2 million reports; 60% are reports of stolen handguns.” –http://www.prisonpolicy.org/scans/bjs/guic.pdf– That is from a 1995 Bureau of Justice paper. I wasn’t able to find anything newer in the 5 minutes i was looking. Yes we want to see harsher punishment for those that break the law i am trying to see what your objection is besides cost if cost is the only reason to prevent harsher sentences for straw purchasers then for that reason i will shell out a little more. As for Straw purchases being legal you sir are mistaken. It is a felony to sell a firearm to a felon or someone you know to be unable to possess a firearm. If you want to talk why there aren’t more prosecutions talk to the feds they claim jurisdiction. - A Citizen - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:50 pm: Mason - Glock and Smith and W both make Semi auto and revolvers in Pink. Buy her one or two and invite her along to the shooting range. She’ll love it as my wife and daughter do. Skeeter = I always thought that was your real monicker. - Colossus - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:53 pm: Sidebar: Much like with abortion conversations, the shorthand codes for the different sides of the debate are hard to use without offending people. I, for one, hate being called a gun grabber, as I’m not, nor am I “anti-gun”. flipside: gunnuts, pro-gunners….So what should we call each other as a shorthand that won’t bring in all kinds of baggage? - Buster McBrickle - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:54 pm: Does anyone have any ideas about how to get gun owners to get rid of their guns? - Skeeter - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:54 pm: Conversely A. Citizen, I’ve always wondered what the prison psychologists called you. You read posts by certain people and go buy ammo? That’s not normal. - John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:54 pm: - Deep South - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:57 pm: I sure don’t feel the need to arm myself in my own town either. The only reason I’d need a gun in the house is to deal with the occasional rabid animal that might find its way to my back porch. How in the world do people get so paranoid?- Man was gunned down in my neighborhood while walking his dog, armed robbery gone bad. Everyone who knew him said he was a quiet family man who caused no trouble. - Mason born - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 4:56 pm: A Citizen She’d rather i give her the cash and she can buy another pair of friggin Shoes. I swear one more pair and i will have to build a new closet. - A Citizen - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:01 pm: Now now Skeeter, don’t worry, I also buy guns to fire the ammo as well. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:03 pm: – I then wait for Word and Skeeter to each post two times and I head out to my local gun shops and buy another one and a lot of ammunition. Why in just the last month I have added an AR15, M1 Garand, 22 Cal semi auto Rifle, and a few semi auto pistols. Plus a whole lot of ammo for them.– Where do you buy? Skeeter and I should see if we can get commission on the sales we’re generating. But if you continually need to buy a whole lot of ammo to drop me and Skeeter, maybe you should spend more time at the range. - Chavez-respecting Obamist - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:03 pm: A Citizen, that’s one of the more sexist things I’ve read lately. As long as it’s pink she’s going to love it? - Skeeter - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:05 pm: I’m not concerned, A. You are too much of a coward to come into Chicago. And since I don’t spend much time out in areas that lack indoor plumbing, I doubt I will run into you. - A Citizen - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:07 pm: Word - WHOA there - “But if you continually need to buy a whole lot of ammo to drop me and Skeeter, maybe you should spend more time at the range.” That I would never say - even in jest. I will think about the commission thing though. - A Citizen - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:10 pm: Chavez- Sexist - pink guns. It really is sexist but the sell like crazy - go figure. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:13 pm: AC, I misunderstood. When you said Skeeter and I cause you to go out and buy guns and “a whole lot of ammunition for them,” you were talking about gifts. Not necessary. It’s the thought that counts. - A Citizen - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:18 pm: Word - When you said Skeeter and I cause you to go out and buy guns and “a whole lot of ammunition for them - Oh my goodness no. I just find my time more productively spent elsewhere ….. move along, nothing new here. - Skeeter - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:21 pm: Nice to see you backtracking on that one, A. Now run away. You know how. - reelpro - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:23 pm: I took the survey just for fun. It was multiple choice. A lot of the answers were obviously designed to get the responses that they were looking. - ParisIllini - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:32 pm: After reading through a lot of this narrative, I just hope the weather is nice enough tomorrow to go out shoot up a bunch of targets at the range. People that like and own guns will never understand people that don’t like and don’t own guns and vice versa. It is kinda like the different Rural-Urban point of view that has existed since the consitutional convention, through the civil war and still exists today. There is a reason that the Second Amendment, as well as the entire Bill of Rights was written, and those reasons are as valid today as when they were written. - Just The Way It Is One - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:47 pm: The most noteworthy statistic: a whoppin’ 97% of those surveyed OWN “at LEAST ONE FIREARM.” Maybe what this means is that those who actually own guns/have guns in their very possession, are, nevertheless, the most paranoid when it comes to fearing that THEY would become victims of a violent crime–hence, they keep guns available just in case! It’s almost like the dog who keeps runnin’ around in circles chasing after his own tail! - Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:57 pm: Both sides might be wrong. I don’t really buy the NRA argument about self-protection. I have seen too many gun owners stumble from the tavern door to their car door. Does the iSRA bill still have an exemption for DUI convictions? it did. Again, not safety oriented folks. On the otherhand, there are plenty of explanations for the irrational belief system displayed in the poll. maybe they or someone they know was a crime victim. perhaps they were bullied as kids or had a homelife that leaves them feeling insecure or untrusting. Is their heightened fear limited to crime, or does it extend to other worries? We dont know that from the poll. - Small Town Liberal - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 5:59 pm: - A lot of the answers were obviously designed to get the responses that they were looking. - That the majority of ISRA members live in more fear than my 9 year old niece? I guess maybe it’s a new strategy to get the bleeding hearts to sympathize with their need to carry a gun. Not that I really care, but I’m going to have fun pointing this out to my friends back home. - mcb - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 6:29 pm: I hate to break it to everyone here, but the vast majority of illinois gun owners never go near the ISRA site. Not that they necessarily have anything against the ISRA, they just don’t care. This is basically a survey of the most fervent ISRA members. I’m guessing you would get similarly wacky responses from the most fervent followers of Mothers Against Handguns. Ask them how much they fear a school shooting in their town. Then compare that to the books of odds. While we’re at it, just to level the table, what are the odds of that happening? We’ve seen the comparisons between gunshot victims and people beat with blunt objects. But here we are debating banning some of the things least likely to kill you(or be used to kill you). I’d say there’s just as much irrational fear on the parts of both of the extreme sides. - county chairman - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 7:58 pm: why dont we push chicago into the lake the only downside it would kill all the fish gun control is not going to solve the crime in chicago when the judges are corrupt cops are corrupt politicians are corrupt if you know a woman who has been raped and now owns a gun ask her opinion like i have - Skeeter - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 8:04 pm: County Chairman is actually one of the more calm and rational NRA members. - Arthur Andersen - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 8:15 pm: Gosh I hope county chairman is not from my party, but…probably shouldn’t say anything else or A Citizen will be banging on the door of his gun shop screaming, “Give me an AK for AA! Now!” - A Citizen - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 8:45 pm: AA - Which brand do you prefer, and do you have an FOID card? - Logic not emotion - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 9:04 pm: Those odds don’t agree with what I’ve seen elsewhere. For instnace, it seems like I’ve read numerous places that the odds of a woman being sexually assaulted during her lifetime are something like 1 in 4. - Logic not emotion - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 9:13 pm: I just did a search to find a site which claims a woman’s odds are 1 in 3… I also found it stated as 1 in 7. Either way, I think the book of odds is wrong. - John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 9:27 pm: - Deep South - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 2:57 pm: I sure don’t feel the need to arm myself in my own town either. The only reason I’d need a gun in the house is to deal with the occasional rabid animal that might find its way to my back porch. How in the world do people get so paranoid?- Five years ago a man ordered 6 women in the back room of a drewss shop near I-80 in Tinley Park. He shot all of them but one of them lived. One of them was able to dial 911 from a cell phone. Perhaps one of them could have pulled a trigger, but only the bad guy had a gun. He has never been caught. - Arthur Andersen - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 10:38 pm: A, I do, and I’m good. Thanks. - RNUG - Tuesday, Mar 19, 13 @ 11:27 pm: People’s experiences are going to shape their viewpoints. Over the past 60 years, I’ve lived in places most people would consider very safe. Spent the first 20 years going up in a downstate city with no problems I remember. While I lived in a small town for about 10 years, I had my car broken into once and my house broken into once. I knew who broke into the house but couldn’t prove it to the deputy. I did encounter the thieves in one of the town bars and suggested to them in no uncertain terms they were real lucky I wasn’t home; never had another problem with them. After that, I didn’t really worry about the house being broken in to again but I also started keeping a loaded pistol safely stored but accessible at night. After moving back the city, pretty much stored the guns away. Since then, I have experienced one definite attempted break-in and one maybe. I’ve had a couple of items disappear from a construction site with a cop living next door. All of my extended family living in the same city, in good but not quite as nice neighborhoods, have had their homes or garages robbed one or more times. Given that background, maybe I should be a bit paranoid … Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.