Skip to main content

The Chicago argument (against gun control)

Are you in favor of stricter gun control laws? Have you ever engaged in a debate on the subject with a far-right gun enthusiast? At some point in the conversation, have they brought up Chicago as evidence that gun control laws don't work? If so, you're not alone!

Is Chicago known to have fairly strict gun laws? Yes. Is it known to have a high homicide rate? Yes again. However, there's more to the story than that. The fact is that gun-related crimes have been high in Chicago since before the stricter gun laws were enacted and such crimes have actually decreased since they were put into effect. Even with the stricter gun control laws, there are approximately six times as many guns that are owned in Chicago than in New York City. Also, while the gun laws may be stricter in Chicago than most other areas in this country, such laws are much more lax in other portions of the state and adjacent states. So, just because there is a high homicide rate in Chicago and there are fairly strict gun laws there, doesn't mean that gun control laws aren't effective. The laws have helped to decrease gun crime some over time and it's impossible to accurately speculate on how much impact these gun control laws would have on crime if they were spread about on a national level. So, if anyone tries to bring up the Chicago argument, feel free to relay the before-mentioned information, and anything else you may find from the following links (and others). Best of luck!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_control

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/01/chicago-gun-violence-take_n_2600725.html

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...
2 comments
Read more

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...
2 comments
Read more