- Created: Friday, 10 June 2011
- Written by Erich Pratt
It was a year ago this month that a crime wave was supposed to sweep the streets of
The Supreme Court ruled that the city’s handgun ban violated the rights of residents, making the ownership of such firearms legal after they had been banned for almost 20 years.
Gun control activists were just sure that legalizing handguns was going to be a bad thing. After all, murders in the
Well, just ask the 45-year-old
“I was scared for my life,” she said, relating how she opened fire with her handgun after the burglar confronted her with a tire iron in her basement. “I thank God that I'm still here.”
It’s good to know that there are some people who are happy the
But those controls aren’t making a whit of difference in keeping bad guys from getting firearms, and they’re only making it more difficult for law-abiding residents to protect themselves.
Even so, people like this
* “The Supreme Court gun decision moves us toward anarchy,” said David Ignatius of The
* The Court’s ruling “could prove far more destructive -- quite literally -- to our nation’s communities,” said Supreme Court Associate Justice John Paul Stevens (who is now retired).
Not to be outdone, then-Mayor Richard Daley stated that the key issue in the
But one must now ask the all-important question on this one-year anniversary: since the Court ruled against
Well, not quite. While
Last year marked a 45-year low in
In other words, Daley &
Fearmonger: “Someone who stands to gain power, influence or funding by spreading fear in the general population.”
Get that. It doesn’t matter if a fearmonger’s prediction ever materializes. A fearmonger only wants to scare people into adopting his solution to the problem. For Daley & Co., the fear of what could happen is intended to frighten everyone into supporting even more gun control.
And that’s why it’s helpful to go back and examine some of their statements. After all, one way to test the validity of someone’s world view is to see how well he can predict the future.
Whether it’s Harold Camping telling us when the world is going to end, or Barack Obama explaining that his stimulus package will keep unemployment under eight percent, or a big city mayor promising that more gun control will keep people safe … if they can’t correctly forecast the future, then it shows the world their ideas are fundamentally flawed.
No wonder that the fearmonger usually loses his cool when his predictions fail to materialize. Such was the case with Mr. Daley, who got testy with a reporter when he was asked about the effectiveness of his city’s handgun ban which was enacted in 1982.
“It's been very effective,” Daley snarled, grabbing the gun off the table in front of him. “If I put this up your -- your butt, you'll find out how effective it is. If we put a round up your, ha ha.”
Richard, you’re so funny. We’re all laughing … not! Actually, people are laughing at Daley, but it’s because of his hypocrisy.
Hypocrite: “A person who engages in the same behaviors he condemns in others.”
That describes Richard Daley, who fought to keep Chicagoans defenseless when he was in office. But now that he’s retired, he wants full-time protection that most mortals simply can’t afford.
While most residents of the city need to spend hundreds of dollars and wait several weeks to buy a legal handgun, outgoing Mayor Daley demanded five armed bodyguards to protect him -- all at the taxpayers’ expense, of course.
Mr. Daley doesn’t have to pay a dime, and he doesn’t have to fill out any paperwork.
Maybe if we forced hypocrites like Daley to live under the laws they want to impose on everyone else, then maybe … just maybe … they’d understand the ineffectiveness of gun control.