Chicago abolishes gun registry that's been in place since 1968

[Little-Acorn]

Bit by bit, Chicago is being dragged kicking and screaming into the civilized world where people are entrusted with their own protection instead of being subjects waiting for police to do it.

Rahm Emanuel, to no one's surprise, is doing a lot of the kicking and screaming.

Get used to it, Rahm. There's more to come.

----------------------------------------

http://news.yahoo.com/chicago-abolishes-gun-register-place-since-1968-191119536.html

Chicago abolishes gun registry in place since 1968

By Renita Young
Sept. 11, 2013

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Chicago on Wednesday reluctantly abolished a 45-year-old requirement that gun owners register their weapons with the city, marking a victory for advocates of gun rights such as the National Rifle Association.

The city council voted to end the gun registry in place since 1968 to comply with court rulings against Chicago and Illinois gun control laws, and to bring the city into line with a state concealed carry law.

"I happen to think the court's wrong. I think their interpretation is wrong," Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel said of the rulings that forced Chicago to eliminate the registry. He spoke after the council voted.

(snip)

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2010, in a case challenging Chicago's gun restrictions, that every state and city must adhere to the Second Amendment. The ruling did not strike down the Chicago restrictions directly, but sent the case back to a U.S. appeals court for review.

In December 2012, the appeals court ruled that Illinois's ban on concealed carry was unconstitutional and gave the state six months to create a law allowing guns to be carried in public.

Illinois approved a concealed carry law in July, giving control of gun regulations to the state and essentially nullifying Chicago's power to require that gun owners register their weapons and have a city firearms permit.

The measures approved by a voice vote on Wednesday complied with the new state law. In addition to eliminating the gun registry, the measures eliminated the requirement for gun owners to have a Chicago firearm permit.

[Arbo]

Bet Chicago doesn't through away the old registration list, but instead hides it away for future days. Anti-gun idiots.

Rahms biggest fear is that law abiding citizens get guns and start taking care of their own defense, and the crime rate drops, showing the reality that law abiding citizens + guns = GOOD.

[red state]

I hope a pro gun movement continues but I have my doubts. Even so, there are the little battles from judges who still feel that they are above the Constitution as we've seen in some of the REDDEST STATES such as Mississippi. They really opened a can of worms on that one when it comes to open carry....I doubt you'll ever see folks exercise their rights to open carry as was once the case earlier in our history (especially in places where ignorance and liberalism abound). Many, through a false promise of security, throw away rights and then wonder why they get the victimization seen in towns like Chicago, DC and other liberal strong holds.

So, what restrictions would find acceptable, Little Acorn? I have reservations on any 2nd Amendment limitations but do see where precautions are necessary or where respect for others apply. Say Courts of Law, school visitors and where folks have requested no firearms (such as some churches, businesses and homes). I personally prefer to not support such folks but I will respect their request under reasonable circumstances. I will NOT, however acknowledge their request when it comes to my automobile. That is just my take on things through the eyes of a throw back from the country. Throw the regulations out and keep the guns through the power of our Constitution. As Nugent says....the 2nd Amendment is my conceal carry or any other kind of carry "permit".

[Arbo]

So, what restrictions would find acceptable,

Those with real mental issues I can see as a valid excuse for denying. Violent criminals... currently even non-violent felons loose that right, and I think if time is served, time is served, I can't get on board with those convicted of violent crimes ever owning again, but non-violent, sure.

Perhaps if a restraining order due to DV is in place, I can see taking any weapon someone might have.

Other than that, no restrictions. Want a machine gun? Go for it. What a .50 cal, go for it. Your right.

[red state]

Just to clarify, most of us have been conditioned over the years and it really doesn't matter how old or young we are cuz the conditioning has worked. We been so accustomed to compromising our convictions for others (be it the small homosexual community, abortion, God or GUNS). We are taught to be quiet about our ideals (and rights) while THEY shout from the mountain tops about theirs and we've probably grown tired of compromise or being reasonable when THEY have no intentions of respecting our views and heritage. Nothing about gun control is reasonable or logical and many Americans have had enough BUT I still fear that the years of propaganda and promises of false security and FREE STUFF will have many trading in their rights.

Hopefully what has happened in Chicago and other places will continue cuz folks are sick of having their cake taken from them and left with mere crumbs. That is tyranny. Bad apples always ruin the barrel and even in Red States, we see what could appear to be good laws against bad people but ends up being a bad law altogether. This law prevents poachers from killing deer and other game animals from the road but all it really does is prevent folks from having loaded guns with easily accessible ammo thus making anyone's legal right to effectively protect themselves null and void. Also, another tactic by the left is in labeling others KraZy or violent. This is dangerous in that translations can vary (from returning vet to a trumped up charge during an actual crime such as theft or more simple misdemeanor where only fines are applied for so-called violent behavior. Still, if a violent crime was not committed and you've done your time, by all means pass the bullets. However, folks charged and convicted of a violent crime (using a gun) should never again be allowed to misuse or misrepresent those of us with proper understanding of how and when to use a gun.