Gridlock spreads to crime bill
Friday, Mar 10, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Sigh…
The latest attempt to crack down on gun crimes amid a persistent surge of Chicago street violence stalled at the Capitol on Thursday, caught in the vortex of the historic gridlock that’s sowed deep distrust between Democrats who control the General Assembly and Republicans loyal to Gov. Bruce Rauner.
Passing a gun bill is often difficult due to differing regional attitudes toward firearms, but the complex one under consideration also drew complaints that it was too soft on drug criminals or too hard on minorities.
Chicago police Superintendent Eddie Johnson told lawmakers the measure would give officers an extra tool in the fight against gun crimes. The city’s top cop was able to dodge political embarrassment when the bill cleared a committee by a single vote, but any hope backers had for quick passage out of the Illinois Senate was dashed amid an overall lack of support.
Democrats quickly pointed the finger at Republicans, accusing them of acting at the behest of Rauner, who they continue to blame for last week’s squelching of a so-called grand bargain designed to end the budget impasse.
* Sun-Times…
Rauner’s administration, however, would only say the bill is under review.
Raoul said he was confused about the opposition – noting it was Rauner’s executive order that prompted the creation of the commission in order to reduce the state’s prison population. Figures from December show the prison population has dropped by 9.1 percent since Rauner took office.
“If you’re going to hold some people in prison longer, you’ve got to do something to decrease the population of the people who really shouldn’t be there as long as they are. Some of them shouldn’t be there at all,” Raoul said. […]
Republicans voted no on the bill, saying they support increased sentencing for repeat gun offenders but wanted a “clean bill” — without the other reforms attached, despite them coming from Rauner’s created commission.
* CBS 2…
The proposed reforms scare Eric Wilkins. He is a paraplegic who was shot in 1999, and fears tougher gun penalties could trap black men carrying guns for protection.
“My father was cab driver, and he had been robbed and shot multiple times. He always told us, ‘it’s better to be caught with it than without it,’” he said.
State Senator Kwame Raoul, who’s a state sponsor of the bill, flatly rejected the point of view Wilkins expressed. He said as a father of a 19-year-old, citizens must do everything they can to confront the city’s gun problem.
“And for those who say, ‘these are people who are just illegally carrying weapons, they haven’t shot anybody yet,’ I’d prefer not to wait until they shoot somebody,” he said.
* ABC 7…
Valerie Weaver is a mother in mourning, who said her 20-year-old daughter Wilteeah Jones and her unborn granddaughter, who was to be named Maleah, would probably still be alive if there were stricter gun laws for repeat offenders. She believes that when the person who killed her family pulled the trigger, it was not the first time.
“I don’t think that’s the first killing he did, and it might not be the last. Until these laws are enforced there are going to be killings in Chicago,” Weaver said.
Jones and her 20-year-old boyfriend Malek Bingham were among the seven people killed in Chicago in February on the deadliest day of 2017.
“They chased my baby down, a 9-month pregnant woman, and chased her down and killed her like nobody loved her. We loved her and miss her so much,” Weaver said.
* Tribune editorial…
While gun violence is chaotic by nature, there are recognizable patterns. When the University of Chicago Crime Lab looked at 2016’s increase in bloodshed, it found that about 80 percent of homicide victims had a prior arrest, and almost 30 percent had a prior gun arrest. Yes, the victims. The Chicago Police Department used an algorithm to create a strategic subject list of about 1,400 gang members most at risk to shoot someone or become a victim. It’s this world of endemic criminal activity that lawmakers have the opportunity to disrupt.
The point of the legislation is to focus on some of the predictable circumstances in which shootings occur — gang rivalries, drug dealing, arguments — and try to make it less likely guns are involved by raising the cost of being arrested while armed. The most tragic scenarios put a gun in the hands of gang members who recklessly sprays bullets at rivals and hit innocent people: On one Saturday evening last month, 11-year-old Takiya Holmes and 12-year-old Kanari Gentry Bowers were shot in the head by random gunfire during separate incidents. Both girls died. […]
A 2013 gun violence bill foundered in Springfield because opponents worried that long sentences would hurt crime-ridden communities by warehousing young men in prison instead of rehabilitating them. This bill deals with that issue by giving judges flexibility and includes other components to attract broader lawmaker support. Sometimes, though, larding up the bill also puts it at risk of toppling.
As lawmakers move forward, we hope they keep their focus on combating Chicago’s crisis of gun violence. Passing this bill will help.
Sounds like we need a new editorial on the GOP’s objections.
- Arsenal - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 9:48 am:
It’s probably good politics for Dems to connect this to Rauner’s other failures, but this seems to me more like the normal Republican queasiness about further gun regulations. And while I don’t agree with that queasiness (although I think Wilkins’ position is well-taken), I understand that it’s quite a big ask for them to get over it.
- Rocky Rosi - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 9:53 am:
Crime bill is just a thought. African American reps don’t like the language in the bill.
- Lucky Pierre - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 9:54 am:
Only a felon has to be worried about carrying an illegal firearm.
A non felon cab driver would not break the law by carrying a firearm.
If 30% of homicide victims had a prior gun arrest it stands to reason that many would be alive today but in jail if the gun laws were harsher.
The community would be better much safer if these individuals were “warehoused” instead of out on the street killing their neighbors.
How many of the 1,400 gang members are felons and carrying illegal weapons?
Clearly something has to change and quick. Making the penalty for carrying an illegal weapon closer to what the penalty in other big cities like New York would be a great idea.
I think the prison reform the Governor is pushing is for non violent offenders
- Deft Wing - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 9:56 am:
Wasn’t bipartisan criminal justice reform Rauner’s soft landing spot? Heck, Jim Durkin has been all over Chicago gun violence issues.
Right now, this administration has the Exelon bill as it’s only legislative “win” … which amounts to a rate hike on consumers to subsidize a huge corporation. #Winnin’
- DuPage - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 10:09 am:
I had heard a proposal years ago that might have some merit, without increasing penalties for just carrying a gun for “protection”. It was for using a gun to commit a crime. It went something like “pull a gun to rob, rape or assault =mandatory minimum 10 years added, fire the gun=20 years, if the bullet hits someone=30 years. This would get some of the most violent criminals off the street for a long time. At the same time that would make a distinction between just having a gun for protection vs USING it while committing a crime.
- Arsenal - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 10:13 am:
==Right now, this administration has the Exelon bill as it’s only legislative “win” ==
It’s got some other Criminal Justice Reform stuff, but that kinda thing only sells so well. He keeps touting an increase in primary school funding.
- CJCDave - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 10:38 am:
DuPage, what you described is current law in Illinois. Possess a gun during the commission of a crime and that adds 15 years to the mandatory prison sentence, fire the gun and it adds 20 years to the mandatory prison sentence, and fire the gun and cause great bodily harm or death, and it adds 25 years to the mandatory sentence.
The challenge is that in Chicago very few of those who commit robbery, aggravated battery or murder with a gun are ever caught, and so these sentences cannot be imposed on most of those who commit these crimes. Only about 25% of murders result in an arrest, and fewer than 10% of the robberies and aggravated batteries with a firearm lead to an arrest.
- Deft Wing - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 10:39 am:
You are certainly correct, Arsenal. I was speaking from a political-pop perspective. I believe the lone legislative “success” with any lasting effect thus far is the Exelon bill … which may end up being a political albatross Rauner later regrets.
- Arthur Andersen - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 11:21 am:
“A non felon cab driver would not break the law by carrying a firearm.”
Lucky, you can’t be serious.
- Anonymous - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 11:24 am:
Carrying a concealed firearm (UUW in Illinois) was a misdemeanor before 1995, when Republican governor George Ryan insisted it be a felony. Since then thousands of citizens have gotten felony UUW charges, people like landlords in high-crime neighborhoods and business owners who carry cash.
Brandon Phelps’ concealed carry bill has a public transit ban, which makes a CCL almost useless for the black population in Chicago. Black Caucus Democrats should keep a close eye on Todd Vandermyde in any sentencing bill. NRA has shown that it will cut deals with police unions and sell out the interests of blacks in Chicago to trade off for other agendas, like legalizing silencers, but no effort to repeal the CTA ban so licensed citizens can protect themselves.
- Todd - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 11:33 am:
The issues witht he bill some repubs don’t like is the lowering of drug penalties.
The gun stuff requires a person be a convicted felon. Have a redicate offense or gun offense, and then get picked up again as a felon in possession.
Kinda like a 3 strikes rule. This isn’t the McCarthy bill of a couple years ago. and Kwame & Zalewski should be commended for the gun parts they worked out.
- blue dog dem - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 11:56 am:
Get rid of CCL requirement and pass a Stand Your Ground law. Amen.
- Roman - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 12:37 pm:
== the Exelon bill as its only win ==
Not to go too off-subject, but I think that bill has been way over-hyped as a Rauner legislative victory. The leadership of both parties in both chambers wanted it to pass. The unions and greens lobbied for it and several Republican districts benefited directly from the bill’s passage. Sure, Rauner successfully negotiated changes to make the bill signable from his perspective, which relieved Republican members of any concerns about voting for a bill the governor didn’t like. That was certainly helpful. But, c’mon…this wasn’t LBJ passing the Civil Rights Act.
- Teddy K - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 12:54 pm:
“that (Exelon) bill has been way over-hyped as a Rauner legislative victory.”
Yep. Shows how low the bar is set for something to be deemed a “success” for Rauner. Kinda like Trump’s State of the Union address.
- Rod - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 1:40 pm:
CJCDave is correct very few of the murder cases in Chicago are closing. I don’t agree with Anonymous that the concealed carry permit is useless for African Americans in the city as a crime deterrent because of its ban on public transportation. In some cases members of Chicago’s African American community have defended themselves from robberies due to being armed on the street its documented.
But a concealed carry permit won’t stop the murders we are seeing, because so many are actually hits or botched hits killing innocents. If you are getting out of your car and a drive by attack on a drug dealer walking down the side walk happens your firearm won’t save you from being collateral damage.
It is also important that there is opposition to the bill by some members of the Black caucus. Patricia Van Pelt voted no because the bill did not address the underlying cause of the violence which is drug consumption in her community that fosters open air drug markets and turf wars related to them.
- FormerParatrooper - Friday, Mar 10, 17 @ 3:34 pm:
We cannot agree to keep repeat violent offenders in prison because we cannot agree to let non violent offenders have less time for much less serious crimes. We are afraid that if we lessen the criminality of marijuana offenses it shows we are soft on the heroin problem. Or if we enforce the proposed laws against violent repeat offenders, we will be lessening rehabilitation chances for people who have a pattern of violence.
Because letting violent repeat offenders serve less or no time because prisons are overcrowded and expensive is a better option for society because the pothead smoking a joint in the alley is more dangerous. I get it now.