E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe mother of Hadiya Pendleton, the Chicago teenager who performed at President Obama's inauguration in January and was gunned down weeks later, is the face of a new ad from Guns Against Illegal Guns.
Cleopatra Cowley, mother of the Chicago teen shot and killed just a week after performing at President Barack Obama’s inauguration, is featured in a new public service announcement calling on Congress to reform the nation’s gun laws.
In the ad, paid for by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Cowley advocates for universal background checks on all gun sales. "Tell Congress to support commonsense reforms so no more innocent children are killed. And no parent has to go through this heartbreak."
Cowley’s daughter, Hadiya, has become the one of the most recognizable faces in President Barack Obama’s efforts to curb the country’s gun laws. First Lady Michelle Obama attended the 16-year-old’s funeral earlier this month.
Cowley herself has also become a leading figure in the fight to pass stricter gun control laws. She and her husband sat next to the first lady during last week’s State of the Union address, where the president told her story as part of his attempt to call on Congress to act.
“Just three weeks ago, she was here, in Washington, with her classmates, performing for her country at my inauguration. And a week later, she was shot and killed in a Chicago park after school, just a mile away from my house," Obama said of Hadiya.
The president again told Hadiya’s story during a visit to Chicago later in the week.
The 30-second ad begins with scenes from the president’s inauguration with Cowley narrating that it was “the happiest day” of her daughter’s life. The ad then quickly flashes to a picture of her daughter’s casket.
A day before the State of the Union, Chicago police announced two suspects were charged with murder for Hadiya’s death. Hadiya was with her friends at a park near her school, and police believe the suspects mistakenly they were a rival gand.
Speaking to NBC News after the suspects had been arrested, Cowley said, “My baby deserves a revolution and I pray that what happened her to her will have an impact.”
Leave a Comment:
No more? Background checks will end the violence? Not likely...
Sadly no mention of the root of the problem: gangs.
Obama and people who target guns know that the real problem is difficult to stop so they target something easy: guns.
Think about it.
Her daughter was killed by a gang member and doesn't even mention it. Think about it.
Hello folks, while Hadiya's death is tragic, she probably would still be alive today if she didn't hang around gang members. I don't know for sure, but I bet the gun that was used in the shooting was obtained illegally so a background check wouldn't have saved her.
Country and Western star McCready committed suicide today, while sad, I guarantee you the gun that was involved didn't jump out of a drawer and magically go off.
When I hear people talk about "gun violence," I wonder what has happened to language. A gun is an inanimate object. An inanimate object cannot cause violence. Humans cause violence. The relevant question is: why do humans cause violence? This obvious question seldom gets asked. Instead, inanimate objects are blamed for the actions of humans.
I don't believe for a second that Hadiya was a victim of a random shooting or mistaken for a rival gang member. From the way it went down with the shooter running up behind the girls and firing a number of shots hitting Hadiya in the back and injuring another girl than jumping into a waiting get away car. She was obviously targeted by the shooter.
The simple fact is guns make it far easier to kill people than any other legally obtainable weapon which is why they are the murder and suicide tool of choice. Anyone who can't understand that has their head in the sand.
No one is suggesting that new restrictions or more vigorous enforcement of existing ones will stop all gun deaths, however there are things that can be done to reduce them and we should be able to agree on that goal.
Theo-
Even Australia’s Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime: In 2002 — five years after enacting its gun ban — the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.
In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9 percent.
Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
Chicago has the STRICTEST gun laws in the U.S.! Did any fricken gun "LAW" ever stop a criminal? Are drugs gone due to more laws? Are drunks not driving cars and killing any one due to DUI "LAWS"? Tell me of ANY LAW that has criminals abiding by them? PLEASE? PRETTY PLEASE? Thats right, with all the laws in this nation, and guess what? Thats correct, we STILL HAVE CRIMINALS!!! Wake up AMERICA: PLEASE?
Theo-3270314,
Criminals have access to deadlier weapons than firearms (bombs for example). Every weapon you take away from a law-abiding citizen only inhibits their ability to defend themselves.
Suicide is irrelevant because people who wish to take their own life will do it. Also, people who wish to commit murder will do it. You don't need a firearm to commit murder. You don't need a firearm to rack up a body count either (bombings).
I am with you in the sense that I understand that guns are deadly weapons. I am trying to tell you, that is the point. If we wanted to make it hard to defend ourselves we would limit ourselves to melee weapons. That way anyone who isn't big and strong would have no fair chance at defending themselves. Survival of the fittest would be how all crimes would be resolved, no hope for those that are old or weak.
There are things that we can do to stop these horrific mass murders.
The only problem is that many people don't understand that permitting a law-abiding citizen to shoot them is the fastest and most effective option to implement. We can work out preventing criminals from obtaining firearms, getting the mentally defective treatment, and many other ideas also. But, I would like you to explain to me how people won't slip through the cracks of those systems.
So, when people inevitably slip through the cracks, the best course of action isn't to disarm ourselves and become more vulnerable, but to allow law-abiding citizens to be armed all of the time, everywhere.
Can we agree on this?
I'll bet the parents of the five year old shot and killed on the steps of her home, or the mother of the four year old shot and killed at the neighborhood ball game in the park would have appreciated the concern and attention of the news media and the president and first lady, too.
Those children were not in gangs, either.
call that number in the ad and tell your congressman that you support the death penality for criminals that just use a gun in the commission of a crime or even if just caught with one and is a gang member...
funny how cops will shoot a bear or mountain lion or like that incident that zoo in Ohio (I think) that the owner let all the animals out...the cops shot/killed all the roaming animals even the more exotic ones just because they COULD be a threat to someone...
but a criminal with a gun in most all cases the cops will try to CAPTURE them...just shoot them like the animals they are...
haditwith
That's one of the stupid arguments people like you us. Because all they have to do is go right outside the city limits and get all the guns they want. Load their cars up with guns from gun shows or have someone without a record buy them from dealers that ring around Chicago city's limits. They are like loan companies around a military base.
I can't believe we're still wasting time on the gun issue... get back to the econmy!
Make everyone have access to jobs, to a better way of life... that'll help more that BHO's fantasy gun control issue. "
"No one is suggesting that new restrictions or more vigorous enforcement of existing ones will stop all gun deaths"
Uh... pretty sure that's the issue of BHO's BS comercial... make you sheeple believe there is a way to stop violence by restricting law abiding citizens the access of firearms. Anything to disuade you from thinking about what the Demoncrats are doing to you...
And you're falling for it...
@Dowhatisright. Before you spout crap read this: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/opinion/australia-banned-assault-weapons-america-can-too.html?_r=0
"Never let a crisis go to waste" -Rahm Emmanuel
This was a gang related shooting. It is ceratainly nice to know that when I turn my guns in, the gang member will as well... certainly... That way when I am approached by a gang member they can kick my ass slowly to death or they can pull out their illegal gun and kill me that way.
Control over gun and ammo sales, will keep guns out of the hands of gang members and criminals. Right now, a criminal can go and buy all the ammo they want for their illegal gun. The ONLY limit is money. There is no excuse for allowing that. Criminals and bad guys have no 2nd amendment rights.
Are the mayors useing their own money or taxpayers money?
The constant barrage of propaganda about gun control is what is causing the current hysteria and increase in violence.
@Screamer....
Those 4 or 5 year olds killed while sitting on their front steps.... Though the kids were not in a gang, the people who did the drive bys WERE in gangs...
The gun control advocates will go to any length to impose new laws and restrictions on law abiding citizens. Every tragedy is utilized by their agenda driven goals that have been around for decades. The gun control advocates are like vultures circling over the graves of people killed by gang bangers and madmen. They do not go after the gang bangers and nuts, they go after the rights of innocent people. This is ghoulish and disgusting.
I feel sorry for her loss, but this woman is just riding the delusional gun control train.
Why doesn't she go deep into the hood and convince the young black men there to stop shooting each other?
Or is that just too much work, mom?
Once again people. Obama's anti gun push has absolutely nothing to do with reducing gun violence an/or crime in general. It is the culmination of his long desired plan to disarm the American people, and exploiting victims of gang violence only serves to obfuscate his real agenda.
The socialists thought they had a winner here but the tide is turning towards rational thought and facts. That said, look for them to push for what they call "universal background checks" during any firearms transaction. Note to the uninitiated, we already have background checks so beware of what the socialists are calling for.
Want to know that a universal background check entails? It is essentially a national firearms registration database, a necessary prelude to eventual gun confiscation.
In any event, this entire diatribe is directed solely at the law abiding American and in no way impacts any criminal one bit, as intended.
Annoying
Yep..some posters actually find the reports of murder, shootings, discussion on a NATIONAL gun control...annoying.
They twist the logic to suit their personal , self perceived, "rights".... and call reformers "delusional".
How about we stop complaining that dead people are interfering with the 2nd Amendment.
That 2nd Amendment, Hitler, Nazi, illegal immigrants, videos, gangs, mental illness deflection is just holding up a
sensible, do-able, pro-active solutions.
Gangs get guns...illegally...from straw sales. #1 Gun deaths in the city of Chicago...traced to a white owner's gun shop in Riverdale....Chuck's Gun Store.
Criminals know this.... try shutting down the sources.
OK, I'll go with your premise. Guns are good for killing people.
You know what would've worked as well (with gruesome efficiency) as what Lanza used at that school in Connecticut?
A supersoaker filled with gasoline and a lighter.
My point: No matter what, people determined to kill a lot of people can do it with or without guns.
What you're overlooking is the stories that NBC will never print.
Here's one about a young man using an evil gun just like the one Lanza used to save his life from burglars:
http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/video/son-uses-dads-ar-15-to-defend-home/
.
.
What is annoying is the wholesale lack of the media's due diligence in reporting when guns are used for good purposes.
Like this:
http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/video/son-uses-dads-ar-15-to-defend-home/
Or this:
http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/armed-citizen-in-tx-stops-shooting-spree-and-saves-cop-by-making-150-yard-shot-with-a-pistol/
That is annoying, unless you are already drinking the kool-aid on the Second Amendment issue.
.
"... police believe the suspects mistakenly they were a rival gang"
A simple three-step process would eliminate the whole problem........
1) Register each gang signs, symbols, colors, etc
2) Register each gang member with their gang
3) Distribute to each existing gang & new gang the registered gang information for easy identification
Sounds stupid, doesn't it..... but registering LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS will have the same effect.... NOTHING
You know who these people are.... arm up & take them OUT.... Barry has a few drones that could help you if needed....
Babble.
Fact: There are a lot of people out there that are bad. Predatory types. Crazy people.
There is NO "solution".
You cannot legislate morality, or ban things that displease you.
People like you tried to do that with the Volstead Act. All it led to was trouble and more trouble.
You cannot name one thing that will prevent criminals from getting guns, now or ever.
.
Please, how many times has the Fed actually prosecuted someone for knowingly falsifying a form 4473?
Read it yourself:
http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf
Now, don't get nervous, I am not blaming Obama..this problem pre-dates him...but Obama would get my support if he actually enforced the penalties for a change.
.
Punish people who lie on that form!
Can't we start there?
.
20 years ago we had a similar number of guns on average per person and we had very very little of these problems back then.
What has changed?
We have lost our moral values.
We have lost the "family" with 70% of those in poverty a child of a single parent.
We have lost instructing our children the teachings of god.
We have an explosion of gang activity (directly related to the above because without family or god they believe the only ones that can be supportive are the other gang members).
We have lost the ability for our children to understand hard work achieves success (now we have "participation" trophies so we don't "upset" the children).
We have video games that glamorize death and destruction.
We have movies that teach profanity, sex, and murder.
In other words it is not the GUN that has created the increase in violence and death - our society has created that.
And to ban guns as a "solution" is like banning cars when there is an increase in drunk driving deaths when the cause is one city block of nothing but bars and strip clubs. Banning the cars will not solve the underlying problem.
And in a similar analogy banning guns will not solve the problem. We have a moral decay in our society and the solution is to refresh the teachings of family values and god. Banning guns is a cop-out. Talk of banning guns is pathetic by this mother and so said that the political left is manipulating this woman NOT to protect further children (it won't) put to push a political agenda. And to ask a mother of a dead child to push a political agenda even though the agenda itself would not have helped in this scenario one little bit is pathetic.
No gun laws could have stopped this.
This is a society problem not a gun problem.
Every time you read
They want to take all our guns away"
Be assured..the poster is not credible.
Every time you read
National Gun Controls that cross State, County and City lines will not help stop shootings
Be assured..the poster is not credible.
Every time you read
Banning Guns
Be assured..the poster is not credible.
Every time you read
The gun control advocates will go to any length to impose new laws and restrictions on law abiding citizens
Be assured..the poster is not credible....because surveys PROVE that the HONEST gun owners want responsibility and consequences from ALL gun owners.
The NON LAW ABIDING gun owners, and those who threat NOT to abide by the laws are America's terrorists.
You can put up all of the prettiest faces, use all the heart tugging stories you want. The facts will not change that it takes a legal gun to stop an illegal gun from ruling the neighborhood.
BINGO!!!!!!!
I've said this all along. And sadly its getting worse.
Huh? What a retarded name for a group.
So, you acknowledge that criminals don't obey laws?
Thanks for playing.
Sure, the old liberal 'dismiss them, even if they have the facts to back 'em up.
Just today Missouri Democrats proposed a gun ban of their own:
http://www.kctv5.com/story/21227729/missouri-democrats-propose-assault-weapon-ban
Please, don't pee on my shoes and tell me it's raining.
Rest assured you still cannot tell me what your plan is to get criminals to stop using guns.
You are not credible, with your vague, vapid pronouncements.
.
.
Studies by people like Josh Sugarmann are biased and distorted. The ever-increasing amount of gun sales prove the point.
Every time I read your posts, I am reminded of the myopic do-gooders who rammed the Volstead Act down the throats of the People. They promised that banning the booze would be the Great Societal Solution.
.
Notice too that #1.30 refused to agree with the proposal of enforcing the laws we already have, especially as regarding the Firearm Transaction Record #4473:
http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf
People who falsify this form should be prosecuted.
That's #1.30 for ya, blind to anyone but herself.
This ad is actually an insult to all the families who have lost love ones to gang violence.
Too bad this mother is simply being used as propaganda, its the socialist way.
@ flnobody
haditwith
And why is it all the surrounding states have lower crime rates? I mean if all the guns are coming from other areas, and guns cause crime, why aren't the crime rates higher where the guns are coming from?
according to www.census.gov/statab/ranks/rank21.html
VIOLENT CRIMES 1 PER 100,000 POPULATION -- 2006 from lowest to highest.
Kentucky is ranked 40th, Wisconsin is 33rd, Iowa is 32nd, Indiana is 29th, Illinois is ranked 13th (542/100k), and Missouri is ranked 12th (by a difference of only 9/100,00)
DC is (not ranked among the states) at 1508/100k, Maine is ranked 50th at 116/100k.
As an interesting side note, the ten states with the least violent crime, also have the lowest percentage population of minorities. I only bring this up, because so many of you try to compare the gun laws in Europe and Australia to the US. And what do the these 10 states have in common with Europe and Australia? A low percentage population of minorities.
If we are going to make comparative analysis of gun laws, then we need to include countries that reflect our population as well. And we need to include countries from Central America, Africa and else where.
You should know then too, that of the top ten most violent states, 8 of them have the highest percentage populations of minorities. Not making this stuff up. Just doing Google searches, and reporting the findings. Oh I know, I am a bigoted, racist homophobe just for pointing it out.
But I have been saying all along, given that the data here comes from several sources from several time periods (as you can see the data I found here is at least 6 years old) we need to study the problem. And not go off half cocked and do something stupid. Would an informed decision be too much to ask from you Liberals? Who are, as you like to remind us so often, so much smarter than we Conservatives?
Every time you read
A posting from RI Mom
Be assured..the poster is not credible.
Dearest Steven and Dumb,
And yet...the clear majority of Americans, law enforcers, and honest, law abiding gun owners.... agree with me.
After awhile, your posts are nothing but personal insults and ignorant comments...identifying you as out-of-touch, stubborn, and a bit overly (paranoid) obsessive about your guns.
I don't want to debate you...but the more you protest, and the crazier the ideas you propose... it just defines your little band of renegades as troublemakers....nothing more.
You aren't angry at me...you are mad at ALL the Americans who totally disagree with your illogical thinking.
.
.
.
.
FACT:
More than 90 percent of U.S. voters supported background checks for all gun buyers, and overwhelming majorities were for stricter gun control laws such as bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.
.
.
Time for you to re-think and examine your motives.
@ RI Mom
Dumb,
Hey, RI Red, I was just bustin' your chops, you set that one up yourself, I just knocked it down. But if you want to get into it then let's dance.
FACT: 5 : a piece of information presented as having objective reality (in essence that which is irrefutable) Well let me Refute this;
"More than 90 percent of U.S. voters supported background checks for all gun buyers," Yeah, I Goggled that and got Bloomberg, Huffington Post, MSNBC, etc. I also noticed this:
You just copied this right out of [reason.com/24-7/.../poll-americans-support-background-check] WOW, how about we give those guys some credit, other wise it is plagiarism. And to top is off, you even misrepresented what the authors wrote by changing “much smaller” to” overwhelming”
Be assured..this poster is not credible.
So yeah, all those reporting this poll are real beacons of unbiased journalism you have here. Now if I quoted something from Fox, how would you feel?
From Reuters: “By a margin of 92 percent to 7 percent, voters supported background checks, the Quinnipiac University telephone poll showed.”
I guess, unless I am mistaken, this is the Survey they are talking about. There are so many things wrong with this I am not even sure where to begin. Have you ever read the book, “How to Lie with Statistics?” by Norton? Probably not, it was copy righted in 1954.
The first thing we need to look at is how the survey was conducted. Let’s see the survey questions and the list of area codes they called, and compare that to voting records so we can see the demographic of the areas called. And did the polling public understand the question. “Do you favor universal background checks on gun purchases?” Do the people understand how such a law will be enforced? Do they understand that this only applies to law-abiding citizens? Do they understand the cost of implementing such a plan?
My guess is the 7% who said No, recognized some of the pit falls surrounding universal background check. Which in order to enforce it; one would need to register every gun in the country. And have no doubt, registration leads to confiscation.
A good question to ask is, “Would you like to pay no taxes?” What are your results from that poll? I’d bet 98% would say yes, without considering the drop in services provided. And technically speaking I could honestly answer yes to this question, as in fact I “Would love to pay no taxes”, even though I am aware of the necessity of paying taxes and it is impossible for a society to pay no taxes.
In a survey, a class of 3rd graders were asked if they wanted free Ice Cream to vote for a certain candidate for class President, 100% said yes. The only problem was, the candidate didn’t have nor could afford the Ice Cream.
Well in a survey conducted by Johnston, Mahurin and McCoskey, 100% of voters are against any Firearms bans, only support limited back ground checks, i.e the current NICS system. So there, I can pull a survey out of my butt too.
So, who is the credible poster now?
“Time for you to re-think and examine your motives.” And why is it, we (Conservative Types) must change to fit your world? Is not tolerance a two way street? No, of course not, not for you people.
56 % ..an overwheming majority...
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/02/56-americans-want-new-ban-assault-weapons/61902/
Once again
You lose
to a Mom.
Shame on you young lady!
Didn't you research before speaking for the entire population?
This poll's demographics:
Since when do 1,772 people represent an 'overwhelming majority'??
RI Mom
From M-W.com
overwhelming : tending or serving to overwhelm <overwhelming force>; also : extreme, great
extreme: 1 a : existing in a very high degree c : exceeding the ordinary, usual, or expected
great: 2 a : large in number or measure 3 : remarkable in magnitude, degree, or effectiveness
overwhelming by a 6% margin, WOW, no wonder you people are ecstatic all the time, you have such low expectations.
Then I guess an overwhelming number of Americans were against the ACA. Yet it still passed. And when most Americans find out how intrusive it will be, especially now at tax time, my guess is that number is going to going to go up.
So what, most people don't even know what an "assault weapon" is, least of all you. You are a joke.
And if you want to know what a mom is, talk to my mother, you are are nothing more than a baby sitter.
I wish that for just a the few months of summer I could bring you out here and show you how real mothers work. But more than likely, it would simply kill you. Let me clue you in. We didn't have time for soccer, or any other silly athletics.
@ Steven B
good call. keep it up.
Gun control really works well in Chicago, NOT!! So why the he!! do they think it will work anywhere else???!!
They just want all of the guns taken away.
And, foolishly they also believe criminals will comply too...
Universal Background Check? How the Hell would that of stop this young girl from being murdered? Hand Guns are not permitted to be carried in public in Chicago. Period. Long before Instant Background checks from the Brady Bill was law. So how does this NEW, Duplicate law stop her being killed by Gang Bangers?
Funny how POTUS never even discussed using Gang Injunctions a proven tactic for virtually eliminating gang violence when implemented. Wonder why? Of course the bastards just relocate to where there is no injunctions. Like Chicago!
Funny how she isn't up in arms about the gang violence that resulted in her daughter's murder. Why not round up the hoodlums that are to blame for the high crime rate in Chicago rather than export the type of strict gun control that contributes to Chicago's notorious violent crime to the rest of the country?
Haven't heard one harsh word from Obama about how he is going to crack down on those gangs. What a fraud.
He doesn't want to get yelled at by Al Sharpton.
All we hear is "gun control" "we must have reasonable gun control" "common sense gun control"-"we have to ban "assault weapons" we have to ban "high capacity clips"-we have to get rid of the "gun show loophole"we have to stop internet gun sales" if we do these things they will stop the "gun violence"
Try this...
1) Actually enforce existing gun laws
2)Lock people up for having "weapons under disability" (felony convictions etc.)
3)Prosecute and incarcerate gang bangers
4) Chicago needs to do what the SCOTUS and Ill. State Supreme Courts Ordered them to do-and enact a plan to issue CCW permits efficiently, and with reasonable speed-that way Chicago then has ARMED CITIZENS-NOT just armed criminals!
When more citizens are armed-the criminals tend to either move,find new,safer crimes to fund their habits,or their population is reduced significantly as they begin to understand that citizens are now shooting back at them!
Chicago-strictest gun laws in the U.S.-also highest rate of gun crime,gun violence,and gun homicide.
Chicago-where the thugs even use 2x4's to beat each other to death-the mayor keeps insisting on more gun control,however so far-no comment on the city's board control problem.
Because, at her root, she's a coward.
If she weren't one, she would be in the hood right now, with other mothers (and fathers, if any are left) and activists working to really fix things.
Instead she's going for low hanging fruit.
Wonder how much she's being paid to do so.
Train the "militia" to do the job needed & then let them go..... the gangs would not stand a chance against an ARMED CITIZENRY & a police force that gets out of the way.....
You do know that what is referred to as "a well-regulated militia" in the constitution has been replaced by professional police forces in today's world. That's right, the reason our forefathers had militias is because they lived on a frontier and didn't have police protection, hence they organized into militias to provide a degree of public safety. What passes for militias these days are the very people our forefathers would have organized against.
None of the proposed laws, bans, restrictions, or back ground checks would have prevented the tragic murder of this young lady. Until the residents of the neighborhoods these gangs prey upon stand and force the gangs out nothing will change. Until the parents of the young men and boy's who make up these gangs make it clear to their children that this will not be tolerated, and the violent behaviour will not be considered as acceptable in any way, will this kind of murder stop. No law will change the fact that gang violence in our cities is no better than the terrorism seen in other parts of the world. Unfortunately, the only way to deal with these animals is the same method used to deal with rabid dogs. The carrying of hand guns in public in Chicago is already illegal. Selling a hand gun to anyone under 21 is illegal. Selling or providing a fire arm to a convicted felon is already illegal. What law not already on the books would force these gang bangers or any one else bent on murder and mayhem, to comply with the rules of polite society?
Forcing the gangs out would be good but not enough. They'll just terrorize someone else. They need to empty our prisons of non-violent offenders and fill them to the brim with gang members. The ones that they don't have room for, just kill.
Gangs are terrorists. they should be treated as such.
The government can not be expected to solve the gang problem with new laws. Good people living in fear of gangs need to stand up together and take the communities back. The good outnumber the evil if they stand together evil will not win.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Edmond Burk
However, good people need to have the courage and the means to stand against evil.
Gangs are evil, they are terrorists. Gangs should not be tolerated anywhere.
Gangs should not be tolerated anywhere.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
We should start by cutting off, for life, the welfare check and all their benefits, to the parents (or in some cases, grandparents) who have "children" who are in gangs, get picked up by the police, getting below a 'C' in school or drop out. It has to start some where...It isn't the decent families who produce these low life thugs.
@ Angela LD....
Well if we cut off their welfare, then they'd have to get a job and eventually become a respectable part of the community... then of course they would have to register as republicans.... see, THIS is why the dems want this on going revolving door of welfare.... they'd lose votes.
National Guard sweeps and the 'shoot first' eradication of all gangs would be a good start.
Universal background checks probably would not have made a difference in Hadiya Pendleton's murder. Criminals obtain their firearms through means that skirt any legal requirements for purchasing and possessing a firearm.
However, violence perpetrated by the mentally unstable with firearms could possibly be reduced through universal background checks IF the states will begin reporting such data to the FBI.
Another stumbling block to universal background checks is implementing a verification system that is also not a national registry of gun owners. I think I have a solution. If you're interested, let me know, please.
Too keep thinking Gun Control will do anything is the main flaw of the equation to solving crime and helping the mentally ill. Neither our a quick fix single solution. Gun Control detracts from stopping plea bargains for felony indictments. Stop early release/good behavior for anybody convicted of a felony. Make prisoners work instead of laying around and exercising.
Universal Gang Injunctions should of been what the POTUS would want for Chicago and all of America.
Rebuild a effective mental health infrastructure. Stop with the PC fooloishness that everybody can be mainstreamed. Allow individuals to be put on a 72 hour hold before they've caused harm to themselves or someone else. Our current laws make civil commitment virtually impossible. It's 2013, we can have the answers when we're ready to do the work.
Naw.. not interested... keep moving along...
Wait - isnt Chicago the place where they have the most strict gun laws in the nation? Yet that didnt seem to save the little girls life. But the Obama campaign is using her death anyways.
Im surprised the Obama team didnt dig up her grave and use the little girls body as a prop... seriously nothing is beyong the bad taste of Obama - I wouldnt put it past them to reconsider this and do it !!
jabber-wolf - It has been pointed out over and over again that gun laws beyond the city limits of Chicago are very lax, in effect negating any benefits that might have resulted from Chicago's stricter laws. Why is that so hard to hear or understand for so many people?
So, in other words, the liberal agenda requires that we impose gun control on the entire world so that guns can't be smuggled into Chicago, and Rahm Emanuel can feel that he's done something to help solve the city's crime problem--which is actually a gang problem, not a gun problem. Good luck with that.
Theo-3270314,
The entire state of Illinois prohibits concealed carry. Illinois prohibits open carry also (unless you are hunting). So, it doesn't matter how lax or strict the gun laws are throughout the state. You aren't allowed to protect yourself as a law-abiding citizen in the state of Illinois unless you are in your home or you want to use something other than a firearm (putting the law-abiding citizen at a distinct disadvantage).
When the law-abiding citizens can't have their guns on them criminals have the advantage.
Theo
It's been stated time and time again that the war on drugs has failed. Prohibition failed. Yes, Chicago has strict laws and surrounding areas don't. So? All of America has strict laws against drugs, yet, drugs are everywhere. Make the ban on guns wider than Chicago, all the way to the borders. Won't matter. Where there is demand there will be supply. You have to address the demand, not the supply, because the supply will always be there. Look up the statistics on where gun crimes occur and who is involved. It is overwhelmingly black gangs in inner cities. THAT is where the eye of the government should be focused.
Theo-
No matter what the gun laws in cities near Chicago are-if Chicago wants strict gun laws-then it is up to Chicago to enforce the laws-only problem is that they must first replace all unconstitutional laws-with laws that are supported by the Federal and State constitutions-INCLUDING issuing CCW permits.
Those for more gun control can forget the "universal background check" schemes-which would make it illegal for a father,mother,grandfather,grandmother,aunt,uncle,brother or sister to place a new .22 or small gauge first hunting shotgun under the x-mas tree for children all across the USA.
The 2nd amendment says NOTHING about loopholes,or sales restrictions,or making everything gun related illegal. Reasonable resrtictions are no violent felons,no nuclear bombs,etc.
Theo - I live in Iowa where the laws are not nearly as strict as Chicago. We had 46 total murders in the entire state in 2011 including ALL forms of weapons not just guns. We have a significantly armed populace. The difference? We have a lot fewer monsters who are allowed to run the streets and are not raised in a family that associates value to human life. Your reasoning doesn't make any sense because if you're right then I should be living in the Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome movie formally known as Iowa.
We're gun owners and we're responsible. We don't have shoot outs at high noon. The problem is the monsters being born into this world then just raised on the streets free to do what they want until they get caught or killed. Sandy Hook was a terribly sad day and a horrible crime but it also represents a small portion of the gun violence problem. It raises the assault word to the top of the page and magazine capacity starts getting thrown around but does ANYONE who wants to ban them look at ANY facts? Like handguns are the tool of choice for committing gun violence? Scary looking rifles are used in a very small amount of gun murders right? We can agree to that FACT. So why blow this up into a full scale attack against the 2nd amendment.
If anyone who is jumping on the bandwagon of trampling my 2nd Amendment rights really wanted to make a difference then I suggest you move to an inner city and be a big brother or sister to these kids. I'm not your enemy and I would give my life to protect another if needed. The problem is kids not being raised but rather released into the wild of life.
That has nothing to do with me, I raise my children. They say please and thank you. We give to charities and we go about our lives with a do unto others attitude. No person on this planet can look me in the eye and tell me that I can't be trusted because of some monster hundreds of miles away did a bad thing and in order to stop another monster I must have MY rights taken. Ban guns and you will have criminals with guns. Years down the road there will be less guns on the street but not less monsters. Solve your monster problem and years from now there will be less monsters. You can choose your path, just don't expect me to drop my values for yours and go the same road. That's part of what makes America great. Hate me or love me, just agree that we can disagree.
R U, thank you for saying what you did. Yes, the gun laws outside of Chicago are a bit more lax, BUT, they don't have the crime problem either. Why can't people think about that? I'm in Kalifornia till I can get out, and the gun laws here are stupid. Yet everyday there are people getting shot, armed robbery, and, yes, the police shooting innocent people.
@Theo....
What about all these gang bangers girfriends who don't have records who buy their hoodie boys a gun?
You think it's honest people just driving up and selling guns out of backs of vans? Don't forget all the low lifes who break in and steal firearms?? Now the liberal news agnency in NY is now posting who owns guns, complete with maps... See, it's the whole anti-gun groups who got it backwards.
WOW! Take a deep breath or two. Would all of you who wasted time cracking back at me please re-read my post. ALL I was saying was Chicago is a poor example of why gun restrictions don't work because gun laws in the surrounding area are lax. If pot was illegal in Chicago and legal all the way around Chicago would you then say Chicago's pot laws don't work because pot is readily available in Chicago? No, of course you wouldn't because it's not a good argument.
I will add this. Yes hardened criminals will always be able to obtain guns, but boys like the Newtown and Columbine shooters wouldn't have a clue how to get a banned weapon, and limited to a couple guns with maximum 10 shot magazines they would not have been able to kill as many as they did.
Fact - none of the current proposals suggest any sort of broad scale banning of guns.
I hunt every year and own several guns so don't even start on me with that.
crazy rU - Yes fewer murders in Iowa with a largely urban population 13% of that of Chicago metro. No surprise there.
Theo - It's the people. Urban, rural or however you want to break it down. Gun violence per 100k people is the number to look at and is also reported by the FBI. So take population out of it and base it on a representative statistic, per 100K people. Chicago is more violent than any surrounding areas hands down and quite frankly should be an embarrassment to law enforcement and social programs there.
Fact - And for those of you who keep posting that nobody is talking about taking away guns you're 100% wrong. Missouri has legislation introduced to confiscate, force destruction of or otherwise remove firearms from their residents right now. If you expect any level headed person to think for one second that there isn't a large liberal leaning movement of law makers who absolutely want to ban guns then there is no hope to talk with you.
So how exactly does infringing on my rights because of an undisciplined monster running the street since birth make sense?
I respectfully disagree with you and your thought process. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to express mine. Hope everyone has a GREAT Monday!
RU - The Missouri proposal only applies to a few specific guns and doesn't have the remotest chance of passage. I certainly don't see any evidence of the "large liberal leaning movement of law makers who absolutely want to ban guns" of which you speak and being a gun owner I do pay attention to such things.
Hope you have a great week.
Should be "Gang Control".
Obama, Holder, Rham.... Nothing but cowards who refuse to address the real issue. COWARDS.
Thanks, crackers like you know all the answers. I'm relieved.
Tet you are a online bully and a coward. Please go away.
I've never understood why blacks call white people crackers when it's mostly black folks who do crack. BTW, your messiah, Obama, is half cracker himself.
The origin of the derogatory term "cracker" arose from "Master, the whipcracker."
Regardless, the reality is politicians aren't saying what they mean, and don't mean what they say. Feinstein should show her true colors -- she wants a complete ban on all firearms in the hands of civilians. Let her push that, and see where the chips fall.
Thanks for the info...I thought 'cracker' maybe had something to do with saltines..Maybe if I saw Django I'd have figured it out!
Background checks are only a start.Support restricted gun sales and banning high capacity magazines.Melt down those instruments of death.
That's right, make excuses for the murderous gang members who committed this horrible crime. You sound just like Obama. Anything to avoid the real issue.
Taken- Maybe you should move to Mexico where it is already illegal for citizens to own firearms.
Maybe you would prefer Great Britain or Australia where women are four times more likely to be rapped than in the U.S.
Yup. Let's ban that crap.
Binkie- You should join taken in the country of choice that has the gun bans you want. The two of you can enjoy the paradise in GB, AUS or Mexico.
The only "instruments of death" that should be melted down are the gang-bangers.
So refreshing to see more and more Americans coming to the defense of the second amendment and folks starting to wake up and realize this is not a republican vs democrat issue but a freedom vs tyranny issue. After we kick the crap out of these globalists on gun control we should push for an audit of the federal reserve central banking system next!
hbebe: Your some kind of special, now aren't you.
Yes, he is, because he's right.
Yes, because taking away inanimate objects is really going to change people's behavior.
What a delusional world you live in. Say hi to the rainbow-pooping unicorns.
We have Universal Background Checks here in California. Problem is the Gang Bangers and criminals don't take their weapons to a FFL dealer for the background check and 10 day waiting period. Hasn't stopped them from their drive-bys and gang killings. If you want to stop gun violence,knife violence or hammer violence you put offenders in jail a long time.
We also have a 3 Strikes Law,it has been in effect since 1994. You commit 3 felonies you go to jail for LIFE!
Murder is down 50%.
Robbery is down 50%
Rape is down 30%
Assaults are down 50%
Background checks went into affect in 1991. What did the Background check do?
Murder went UP till 1994.
What happened in 1994? The 3 Strikes Law that's what happened.
Another thing that happened in 1994? The federal gun control law. Just because two things happen at the same time does not mean there is a causal relationship.
Sorry. Here is the link for the cime numbers per year.
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/cacrime.htm
Betty
The murder rate in California went UP while California had their own Assault Weapons Ban in effect. 3 YEARS before the Federal ban! Are you saying that the Federal Ban stopped the increase in California's crime rate increases? If that were true why didn't the crime go UP after 2004 when the Federal Ban expired? Why did the crime rate DROP from 2004 to 2011?
I think Betty Eyer needs better glasses for her eyes to read statistics. The Federal Gun Ban did nothing to stop violent crime.
Violent crime is not a measure of gun control effectiveness. Gun violence is. They're it the same.
NOT the same (typo/auto-correct)...
Hey Slodon, what're you talking about????? The murder rate in Cali has declined or held virtually steady in every single year since 1992.. statistically insignificant annual variations of tenths or percentage points aside. It peaked in 1980. It is now only 4.8 per 100,000, down from a peak of 14.5 in 1980. Stop making stuff up.
I have no idea whether our gun laws have played in any role in making us safer, but the fact is that we are a lot safer now than we have been at any other time in a generation.
http://www.calwatchdog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Murder-rate-California-1960-2011.png
What society needs is something Obama and congress can not give us, values.
Honor, courage, integrity, trustworthiness, respect, humility, empathy and love are all noble values. Values such as these will reduce violence. These values can not be legislated. No law will change the hearts of humans.
As parents, brothers, sisters, friends, neighbors, etc we can all be examples of these values and teach others the importance of these values. The ills of a community are the responsibility of each and every member of that community.
This is a solution that will reduce murders and other crimes. It has been proven effective century after century in countless places.
Are you a Klingon, or just kinda dopey?
Tet- Cowardly attitudes like yours are the reason that gangs and other evils are allowed to survive.
I am a man. A man who is not afraid to have values, let other people know I have values and will stand and do what is right when my values are needed.
Tet- You on the other hand are threatened by my values so you resort to name calling in order to try to bully me like the coward you are.
You may not like it... but there ARE values in the USA...
A Scout is:
Trustworthy
Loyal
Helpful
Friendly
Courteous
Kind
Obedient
Cheerful
Thrifty
Brave
Clean
and Reverent
Try it, it works... but BHO and the Demoncrats what that to stop, too
All death from crime and violence is horribly tragic. Parading it for political agendas is distasteful. I feel terrible about what happened to this girl and I hope those criminals that committed that crime are brought to
justice. Deaths from violent crime where citizens are involved need be contrasted against historical deaths from violent crimes where government has been involved. If one studies those statics they would understand where the true greatest risks to life lie.
I just assume keep or most basic rights that ensure the government remains that of the
people. I prefer to continue to respect the founding comprise between the Federalists
and Anti-Federalists used to establish our great Republic. Trading one problem for an even potential worse
problem is foolish especially if done through usurpation of government power. Such a trade assumes that such gun control restrictions would even work which I think they would not. One thing we do know is that unchecked government power is historically extremely dangerous.
For those that disagree, write an amendment to our Constitution and if there is sufficient
political will to be successful I will respect those wishes even though I
strongly disagree. In the meantime, if one does not have the sufficient democratic political support to get one’s way, using the proper and agreed upon means using the amendment process for change, stay away from my most basic rights, they are not subject to be so easily striped away by a whimsical public.
Realize many would say that such rights are unalienable where no government has the right to take them away so attempting to strip such rights away may put us on a very risky path. How many people died in our last Civil War and/or how many people would government have to kill that refused surrender their believed to be unalienable rights? Those that think there is a simple utopian solution to prevent such future tragic deaths are looking at one dimension of the issue and falsely assuming it would work.
Correct my fellow Minnesotan. Their is absolutely no empirical evidence that gun bans have any positive impact on homicides or violent crime. In fact many studies have proven to have had the opposite effect.
More drama from the actor -in-chief
Chicago is a shining example of why gun control will not work. These idiots really believe that taking guns from law abiding citizens is the answer. When will these liberal idiots realize that no criminal is going to turn in his gun because it is illegal. An administration like Obama's is exactly why the founding fathers wrote the second amendment.
"Never let a crisis go to waste"--Rahm Emanuel.
Here are a few things that are proven to reduce crime.
Crackdowns on gangs, Community policing, Adherence to the broken windows theory, Expanding American industry, Proper parenting skills and Good people in a community standing up and saying they will not tolerate gangs and crime in their community.
Hadiya was not in a gang nor was she a specific target. Just because Black/minority kids are killed in Chicago doesn't mean they are all members of a gang. She was a studious, high achieving young lady whose life was unfortunately taken away by someone who was probably in a gang or being initiated into a gang or it could even be something else. Stop being so ignorant as to paint every minority victim of gun violence as either a gang member or hanging out with one.
I did not see anyone say that she was a gang member. She may have been hanging out with gang members for reasons unknown. It is possible that she was trying to convince them to turn away from gang life.
From the way the shooting happened I do believe that Hadiya was targeted for reasons as yet unknown.
At least one person stated she would probably be alive if she wasn't hanging out with gang members and that is not true. She was with members of her schools' sport team waiting out the rain. This could've happened to anyone of us for any reason. Just being in the wrong place at the wrong time and minding your own business and you get shot.
I have herd that Hadiya was involved in anti gang initiatives. That is a possible reason why she was murdered. However, we may never know as I doubt the murderer will tell the truth.
Dulcita- I live in Chicago, and the new story went that she was an accidental target, she was hanging out after school at a park under a gazebo, the shooter ran towards the gazebo and targeted 2 guys she was talking to, both of which were in gangs, she was not by any stretch of the imagination, but the 2 guys she was standing next to in the group of people hanging out in the park were
Gosh.. This is too much. Every report agrees that she took shelter from the rain under a covered arcade with a bunch of other kids after a softball game and somebody decided to spray the area under the arcade with bullets for good measure. Do you check the gang affiliations of those around you before you duck under the nearest available shelter once it starts raining? She ran over there once it started pouring, there were at least a dozen people with her, most of whom she probably didn't know, and somebody decided to spray 'em all with bullets. She was unlucky enough to be the fatality.
Stop making things up to suit your political agenda. I don't know where I stand on more gun control yet - kind of waiting to see where this debate goes, still - but I do know I hate opportunistic liars and propagandists. All of you "Hadiya must've done something wrong" crowd need to get a conscience and shut up.
I'd rather trust my gun than some governments "good intentions".
"Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have so enthusiastically acclaimed and adored him and rejoiced in their loss of freedom and danced in his path and given him triumphal processions. Blame the people who hail him when he speaks in the Forum of the new wonderful good society which shall now be Rome's, interpreted to mean more money, more ease, more security, and more living fat at the expense of the industrious."
~ Marcus Tullius Cicero
(106-43 BC) Roman philosopher and statesman
Sadly most posters here, and the delusional gun control crowd, have neither a knowledge or appreciation for history.
Or human nature.
Chicago(and other cities) is rife with crime from the top down. Children live what they learn and what they see modeled and if we as a society look the other way or slap an adult on the wrist when they do wrong how can we or even why should we expect our children to behave better?
We have allowed Hollywood and the media etc. to dictate to us the ideal family structure or lack thereof. Hollywood glorifies the slutty, man whoreish, out of wedlock, shacking up lifestyle and as a result our family structure has been broken down. You might say you don't agree with that lifestyle but think about what you spend your time watching and what you allow your children to watch and tell me all that garbage doesn't have an effect on you and them. The ratings don't lie. We are a hypocritical society. We say to our children: Do as I say and not as I do, but, actions do speak louder than words and our children can see our hypocrisy. They call us on it.
The only way to fix the problems in society is to fix the family. A healthy family is ground zero for our schools, neighborhoods, churches and society as a whole.
Now I am a Christian and I firmly believe in God. And I believe if you want a strong, happy, healthy family that will benefit society then God has to be in the center of it all. The father has to take up his responsibility and model for his son what it means to be a real man. The mother has to model for her daughter what is means to be a real lady. They learn from us and parents are the biggest influence on a child.
For those of you who don't believe in God then you'll just have to get through life the best you can and hope for the best.
Dul- I agree with you. Weather or not a person is a Christian, Islamic, Hindu etc. Children need parents who not only speak of morals but also live by a moral code and instill those values in their kids.
These shameless opportunists can go $crew themselves.
Chicago's strict gun laws won't have an effect until states like Indiana have strict gun laws. Please take a look at the Sunday Chicago Tribune and see how easy it was for a college student from Chicago to go to Indiana gun shows and buy DOZENS of guns for Chicago street gangs. Guns from Indiana cause the majority of gun related homicides in Chicago. We need better regulation nationally in addition to background checks.
You do understand that a person from Illinois can not go to Indiana, Wisconsin or any other neighboring state and buy a handgun. Handguns are by great majority the weapon of choice among criminals. According to federal law you can only buy a handgun in the state in which you maintain permanent residence. Therefor lax laws in other states is not a valid argument.
I really wish that gun control advocates would at least familiarize themselves with current gun laws before clacking away at their keyboards.
Wire- they intentionally avoid facts, statistics, and education because it undermines their position in short order.
It's more important for them to feel like they are doing something - to belong to something - something that requires almost no action, and certainly not asking the right questions.
The right questions are hard! And the answers hurt self esteem!
Dowhatisright76
- " According to federal law you can only buy a handgun in the state in which you maintain permanent residence. Therefor lax laws in other states is not a valid argument."
So what you are saying is the state of Indiana is lax in enforcing federal gun laws. You do understand that he actually did buy numerous weapons and was never questioned in any of his multiple buys? Sounds like a combination of lax laws and lack of enforcement even the existing laws.
Criminals have guns because people with clean records buy them to sell to them.
Most guns used to commit crimes in Chicago originate for out of state.
In Nebraska, you can go to Cabelas and buy a gun and they will send it to a gun shop in your home state which has a federal firearms license, and they have a huge list. If the gun shop you want is not on their list, then you must select one that is. That is the only way they will sell a gun to someone from out-of-state. If Indiana is selling guns to people from out-of-state and allowing them to walk out the door with it, then they are in violation of federal law. A criminal is not going to pass the background check, right? So it stands to reason that someone else is buying the guns for those who should not have them.
There are some gun shows, usually smaller ones, which do sell guns to anyone who has a valid ID and sometimes even if no ID is presented. This is one of the things that should be addressed, but the NRA will not want to see this happen
Tim- Where do you get you information? You are wrong. According to Chicago Detectives most the guns they have traced originate in Cook County Ill.
Nope, I'm right. There are multiple sources for my information, among them an article from last August in the Chicago tribune that references a study by the ATF:
There are also more details in an article that same month in the Atlantic:
Feel free to cite your source for the 'Chicago Detectives' who got it wrong...
Hello, Hello, Hello, is there anybody in there; nod if you can hear me; is there anybody home?
Does anybody out there really think that more gun laws will reduce the gun induced deaths?
Will a ban on assault weapons and 30 shot magazines really stop the shootings? The FBI has reported that an “assault weapon” has been used in 2% of the shootings!
It is funny that you don’t hear the FBI findings in any of the news!
I don’t know if universal background checks would lower the gun deaths. I do know that the current Illinois gun law states that you must be 21 years old to legally own a handgun.
The Chicago gang bangers are usually under 21 and if they are over 21; I am sure that they don’t have an IL. FOID card that allows them to legally own the gun.
Quite frankly; I don’t want to see any more gun regulations! I currently only have 2 guns for home protection.
The founding fathers gave us the right to own fire arms. The current culture wants to take that right away from us. I could go along with a fed background check if: I could then get a card that would allow me to buy a gun.
The fed card would then allow me to legally buy a gun but: it wouldn’t effect the gang bangers!
You can tell these people are mentally sick, Guns against illegal Guns? What so now we assume guns have grown two legs,two arms and a head with brains and can walk and talk?These are the same type of PEOPLE that say that crazy X La Cop was the VICTIM! You know why don,t they come out and say what they really mean and stop beating around the bush, they want ALL WHITE MEN to give up there guns and give MINORITIES secret access to OUR FIREARMS, change the 2nd amendment that X cludes white folks to own firearms and to give all other minorities FREE ACCESS to own anything, THATS WHAT THEY REALLY WANT,You can see it in the ads, there support for that crazy x la cop ( if he was white THEY wouldn,t support him would they). Obama has brought back the phrase : You People Owe Us.
There was this guy who killed twenty six people recently, twenty of them children. He shot each one of them multiple times and saw the effects of each shot, along with the cumulative effect of his behavior. Was the biggest problem in this tragedy the tool or the man with the tool? I ask only because all of the focus is on the gun and not the mind that produced the tragedy. There are certainly any number of federal and state gun laws with varying degrees of strictness, but the mental health system in this country is a joke. Let's avoid that because it doesn't produce near the amount of political bickering and divisiveness. Taking away or restricting the guns is fine, but obviously the Lanza's of this world will still exist. Since we tend to avoid the real problem in favor of the one that provides the most political bang for the buck, don't be surprised if these murders continue to occur regardless of the outcome of the gun debate.
Since most people are against everyone having access to healthcare (Obamacare), what do you suggest?
So, are you saying we need to look at control of crazy people? What an interesting idea! Of course, the ACLU will fight that tooth and nail, but hey, its a start.
Full blown propagandists running the show at MSNBS.
Wouldn't it be amazing if they published stories about law abiding citizens using firearms properly to prevent crime/apprehend criminals/save their lives & those of their families?
It doesn't forward the agenda.
They do publish stories on law abiding citizens and crime. This one law abiding young lady is dead.