What Daley plans to do if the Supreme Court overturns Chicago's handgun ban ...

[spin]

Daley mulls options if court OKs handguns

CHICAGO, June 17 (UPI) -- Chicago will ensure that officials can account for handguns if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns the city's 28-year-old handgun ban, Mayor Richard Daley said.

"If the ban is overturned, we will see a lot of common-sense approaches in the city aimed at protecting first responders," Daley said Thursday, outlining steps to protect police officers, paramedics and emergency workers from being shot when responding to an incident at a home.

"We have to have some type of registry," Daley told the Chicago Tribune. "If a first responder goes to an apartment, they need to know if that individual has a gun."

***snip***

Chicago is looking closely at what Washington did after the ruling, Daley said. The city is also looking at California, which has some of the most comprehensive gun laws in the nation.

Chicago already requires registration of rifles and shotguns, which are legal in the city. Those regulations could be applied to handguns, Corporation Counsel Mara Georges told the newspaper.

The city may also rewrite its current ordinance to include stronger, more controversial measures, Georges said.

Those measured could include requiring databases to track a gun from the manufacturer to the gun shop to its owner, Georges said.

They could also include ballistic fingerprinting that requires manufacturers to test-fire guns and keep a record of the unique ballistic markings left on bullets and shell casings.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/06/17/Daley-mulls-options-if-court-OKs-handguns/UPI-91261276807939/

[AtheistCrusader]

1. So, a bunch of crap that doesn't work. Great.

I expected nothing less.

[saigon68]

2. He is an evil Fuck

Just like his criminal father
See riots 1968 (LOL)

[spin]

3. Daley hopes to plant as many hurdles as possible ...

in the path of anyone seeking to own a handgun in the Windy City.

The average working class citizen will not be able to afford the expense or have the time to obtain a permit.

The rich, elite and politically connected will be able to get a permit.

But Daley is the lord and monarch of a feudal empire and serfs never do enjoy many rights in a feudal society.

[PavePusher]

4. I'm speechless.

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

[PavePusher]

5. Oops, no, I'm not.

"...we will see a lot of common-sense approaches in the city aimed at protecting first responders."

How about some approaches aimed at letting the Citizens protect themselves until the "first (second, really) responders" feel like showing up, you gutless wonder-fuck?

(Not you, spin...!)

[DonP]

6. Daley has never intended to obey any rulings

He's known all along that the legal fees (his brother's law firm - what a coincidence) are going down the tubes. He's intended to use every con game and trick he has to keep this in the courts with multiple appeals and follow up lawsuits on registration, type of gun regulation. None of it is based on any real legal principles, all based on his goal of never allowing any citizen to own a gun while he is in power. Emphasis on the word "Power".

It's funny. When George Wallace refused to obey a Supreme Court order to desegregate we all knew why he was doing it and opposed it openly.

When Daley refuses to obey a similar order I wonder how many representatives will stand and speak out against him for it?

It will take some people a second and a half to spout that; "Well, there's no comparison, this is about guns".

[PavePusher]

7. It's about bigotry, no matter how they will slice it... n/t

[Hoopla Phil]

8. This is why I'm really hoping for Strict Scrutiny. n/t

[Euromutt]

9. "We have to have some type of registry" Well, of course you do

"If a first responder goes to an apartment, they need to know if that individual has a gun," while perhaps compelling at first glance, is actually a lousy argument for having a registry. Someone illegally in possession of a firearm isn't going to register it (and thanks to Haynes v. United States, such a person can't be punished for failing to register it, as that would be self-incrimination) so the fact that there's no firearm registered to a particular address is no guarantee that there is in fact no firearm present. And arguably, any first responder will probably be at greater risk if any firearm present is illegally owned, and thus unregistered (and we know there are plenty of illegally possessed firearms in Chicago already). The upshot of all this is that first responders really need to assume that any residence they go into may have a firearm present, which obviates that particular purpose of a registry.

Basically, Daley wants to implement a whole bunch of measures that are redundant or ineffective (or both), none of which will do a goddamn thing to curb violent crime, but which will impose an unnecessary burden on anyone with the temerity to want to legally own a handgun in Chicago.

[Callisto32]

10. Who knows what will happen?

The courts are frighteningly willing to sacrifice civil liberties on the altar of "officer safety."

That's how the police can get away with murdering small and caged dogs.

[friendly_iconoclast]

11. Gotta admit I was wrong about Daley Jong-Il

Circa two years ago I didn't think he would be the George Wallace of gun control.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x179066


Let's hope he becomes "the Bull Connor of gun control", instead.