In response to:

Chicago's Pointless Handgun Ban

Awlhattin O'Kaddle Wrote: Mar 04, 2010 11:52 PM
The thing about not somehow ending up a 'Convicted Felon' is most important. But it brings up another issue.
I think that the restriction from owning guns should be limited to crimes committed with a gun. If some guy was convicted of embezzling money from his employer, although not exactly a Stand Up Guy, he should not be forbidden from owning a gun. G. Gordon Liddy comes to mind.

I have resumed an old habit of going to Starbucks every day for a huge iced coffee. I always tell them I am there because I like the stand they have taken on 'Open Carry'.

When Chicago passed a ban on handgun ownership in 1982, it was part of a trend. Washington, D.C. had done it in 1976, and a few Chicago suburbs took up the cause in the following years. They all expected to reduce the number of guns and thus curtail bloodshed.

District of Columbia Attorney General Linda Singer told The Washington Post in 2007, "It's a pretty common-sense idea that the more guns there are around, the more gun violence you'll have." Nadine Winters, a member of the Washington city council in 1976, said she assumed at the time that the policy...

Friday, June 01 | 09:20 AM ET
Friday, June 01 | 09:20 AM ET
Friday, June 01 | 09:20 AM ET
Friday, June 01 | 09:20 AM ET