Finding the middle on guns in Oak Park

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Print

By Dan Haley

Editor and Publisher

Maybe it's clearer in retrospect. Maybe it's mostly clear to me, and others will disagree. But back in 1984 when Oak Park passed its ban on handguns — passed it by a margin but not by a landslide — it was a symbolic action. It was a hope-filled action that came with the expectation that towns and cities across the state and the nation would follow suit, that strong national gun control initiatives would take hold.

Oak Park was going to be a harbinger, not an isolated town on the edge of a tough city with too many guns. Not many people thought Oak Park's handgun ban was the magic bubble that would protect our borders from all gun violence.

That was then. Today we need to start any conversation about guns and their regulation by stipulating that, with the political makeup of the current Supreme Court, the Second Amendment is in political ascendancy. It is just a fact. And so more efforts in the current situation to run straight up against the court, as Oak Park and Chicago recently attempted, are going to fail, are going to divide, and are going to result in enormous legal costs.

That's OK. The 1980s were a hopeful time for actual gun control. This era isn't. But the need to try to find some place in from the margins of the NRA's intimidation and the "to the ramparts" rhetoric of the gun control left is more important than ever. And again, Oak Park has the opportunity to be a leader in this moment. If we take it.

Can we have a discussion where we focus on the possible? Most reasonable people agree there are too many illegal guns on our streets, too many knuckleheads shooting wildly at each other, too many small kids getting injured and killed.

So like the rapidly expanding national organization, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, let's start the discussion by saying the Second Amendment is what it is. But how do we stop guns from coming illegally into the country? How do finally make the current laws on background checks actually work? How do we shut down the illegal trafficking in guns that takes place every day?

Recently Oak Park's public health board, at the direction of the village board, held a hearing on guns and solicited citizen input on what options remain possible locally to put reasonable regulations on the legal possession of a handgun.

It did not seem like the most productive format for a genuine discussion. Now, as he has for a long time, local gun rights advocate David Schweig is asking the village board to create an ad hoc commission — Lord knows Oak Park understands that concept — to talk about guns and regulation.

I've known David for decades, all through the local gun debates. And when we go to the margins, we vehemently disagree. But when we talk in the middle, we find there are things to discuss that might have some impact on lessening gun violence without infringing on the rights — as currently defined by this court — of gun owners.

David wants six local citizens who support gun rights and six local citizens who seek strong gun control to sit down over months and see what common ground there might be. He has made the case for this twice in our Viewpoints section in the past couple of months. Now Village President David Pope is suggesting he may be open to the idea.

It can't hurt. It might help. It will give Oak Park a fresh chance to find out if our much touted tolerance for diverse views is more than a PR aura. And, just like in 1983, it will give Oak Park the opportunity to play, in a small way, a leadership role on a life-and-death issue.

Contact:
Email: dhaley@wjinc.com Twitter: @OPEditor

Reader Comments

226 Comments - Add Your Comment

Comment Policy

CCW laws  

Posted: February 11th, 2013 10:51 PM

Here's another viewpoint on the effect of CCW on http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/do-concealed-weapon-laws-result-in-less-crime/2012/12/16/e80a5d7e-47c9-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_blog.htmlcrime:

ian from oak park  

Posted: February 11th, 2013 9:41 PM

What about the facts? ...... Why does crime go down, instead of going up, in places where CCW (i.e., concealed carry of firearms) is legal? ..... Passing laws which effectively only affect the already-law-abiding doesnt' magically fix anything. We can't outlaw guns, it's too late for that. Let's get real, or should we continue pretending that public outrage and new laws will magically solve the problem, when in fact they are exercises in futility?

GUNZ DONT KILL, CRIMINALS WITH GUNZ KILL  

Posted: May 9th, 2012 9:19 AM

Guns are not the problem, its when the gun get into the wrong hand,Criminals will get gun regardless of the law so what should YOU do when one of them burst through your door Mr GUNZ KILL?

Editorial  

Posted: May 8th, 2012 5:54 PM

SO did Dewey win? Why bring up the Tribs erroneous ways if you believe their article about the shooting in Austin?

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: May 8th, 2012 5:20 PM

GUNZ: using your methodology and words against you. I never said it didnt happen, I wanted an address. 5500 West Congress parkway is a location not an address.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: May 8th, 2012 1:45 PM

5500 block of West Congress Parkway

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: May 8th, 2012 1:44 PM

Brian, It didnt happen. There are no shootings on the West side of Chicago. Guns really dont kill thousands of people. Guns tend to help our society. They allow us all to express our freedom and rights. Guns for all should be a campaign slogan. Dont leave home with out it. If guns were NOT so destructive, people wouldn't need them to protect themselves against them.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: May 8th, 2012 12:19 AM

To GUNZ KILL: What is the address? That is the same question you demanded of me when I posted about the Oak Park Police killing the burglar who was holding the naked woman hostage in Oak Park. You demanded an address. Didnt the Chicago Tribune proclaim Dewey the winner over Truman in its headline? So, I ask the same question of you. What is the address of the shooting?

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: May 7th, 2012 9:02 PM

More Gun love close to home.....Man wounded in Austin shooting -http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-man-wounded-in-austin-shooting-20120507,0,4707068.story

John  

Posted: May 5th, 2012 4:19 PM

@Q. Guns, like cars, are already 'titled'. The FUNDAMENTAL issue is that someone, somewhere, some time ago, decided that 'gun control' was the obvious solution to whatever problem they were trying to solve. The reason that controlling guns doesn't work is that it is the wrong solution to the societal problems that it's meant to address. If you want to resolve violent crimes involving guns, or accidental shootings, you need to find a different starting point other than controlling the gun.

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: May 5th, 2012 3:29 PM

Cont... drivers license but the automobiles weren't available then so now we have the law that says it's not a right to have a drivers license, it's a privilege and if you want the right to drive a vehicle you are going to need to be responsible to buy auto insurance. All of these rights and privileges get so mixed up I don't know how anyone can know for sure what they have a right to or not in a civilization.

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: May 5th, 2012 3:27 PM

Cont... responsibility and will not want that to be any part of their right of free gun ownership because they have the right to own a gun if they are old enough which is another part that the NRA and the gun owners don't seem to be fighting against because you have the right to own a gun at any age, or did the constitution place an age requirement on gun ownership. If the founders of the constitution would have had automobiles they would have made it a right for everyone to have a Cont...

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: May 5th, 2012 3:22 PM

This answer is simple if controlling guns means following the path guns take. The manufacture makes them and the dealer sells them. No mistake about that. The dealer sells to the individual and there is no mistake about that in keeping track of the gun. What loses track is when the individual sells the gun, and the buyer sells it to the next person and so on. If you want to track guns they give them titles like automobiles have, but I don't think gun owners want to take on that Cont...

John  

Posted: May 5th, 2012 2:20 PM

@Dan Haley. Your article fails at the onset by continuing to use 'gun control' as a starting point, i.e., "What level of gun control is reasonable/achievable?" A better starting point might be "Why do we want to control guns?", and then solicit ideas for addressing those factors that do not involve controlling guns, since the evidence is overwhelming that gun control fails to reduce gun-related crime or accidental shootings. Just a thought, if you're really interested in trying a new approach...

John  

Posted: May 5th, 2012 2:05 PM

I get that - for whatever reason - some people don't like guns. I really do. What completely escapes me is why those same people continue to think that banning guns is the solution to crimes involving guns, despite ALL the evidence to the contrary. And why they don't push to demystify guns by encouraging shooting sports, educate children in schools, and hold adults (parents) accountable for maintaining a safe home environment.

John  

Posted: May 5th, 2012 1:55 PM

Which of my points do you disagree with? Do you disagree that armed populations must logically be more civil? That if teachers were armed, you wouldn't have unimpeded shooting carnage at schools? That the 2nd Amendment states that Americans have a right to own and BEAR arms? That the Swiss govt encourages shooting education and sports? That the Swiss have the highest gun ownership rate and lowest crime rate in Europe? That gun ownership in US cities is inversely proportional to crime rates???

John  

Posted: May 5th, 2012 1:46 PM

@MichaelO... And your point is... what?? A major reason we have a 'gun violence problem' is that - for the most part - the anti-gun crowd simply isn't bright enough to carry on a debate on the topic; they reason by emotion, not logic, opinion, and not facts. Consequently, no real debate can occur. Your comment represents a logical fallacy in that it is unconnected to the topic. Point in fact, in certain African countries where guns are less available, you do have "drive by" machete attacks.

MichaelO from Oak Park  

Posted: May 5th, 2012 11:46 AM

When was the last time you heard of a drive-by knifing?

John  

Posted: May 5th, 2012 11:30 AM

As the saying goes, "When was the last time you heard about a shooting at a gun show?" When people have the FREEDOM to carry a weapon openly, senseless gun violence will end. IT REALLY IS THAT SIMPLE. Our Founding Fathers understood that concept when they agreed upon the 2nd Amendment. Why don't you??

John  

Posted: May 5th, 2012 11:25 AM

I would simply point out that when a MAJORITY of the population is armed, the ENTIRE population necessarily becomes more civil towards one another. If you truly want to end gun violence, then end laws that encumber the right of private citizens "TO BEAR ARMS". If you want to end accidental shootings, then adopt the Swiss model and begin encouraging gun education in the schools, beginning with gun awareness in pre-schools. Think about it...

CARZ KILL  

Posted: March 8th, 2012 1:54 PM

Trib reporting today how Chicago and other Ill municipalities are already being sued on post-McDonald gun control ordinances...OP is heading in a direction where it will be sued again. Is the alleged "expert" going to indemnify OP like Chicago supposedly did? Where is the accountability for that fiasco?

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: March 8th, 2012 12:40 PM

TomKoz, thaxs for taking up the fight. What do you think,Justice and GUNZ KILL are the same posters?

TomKoz  

Posted: March 8th, 2012 10:23 AM

Justice, Natural Law / Self-Preservation allows you to kill someone who is threatening/attempting to kill you or others!

Justice  

Posted: March 7th, 2012 11:20 PM

The 2nd amendment doesnt allow a person to kill another.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: March 6th, 2012 9:14 AM

To Q from Oak Park: During the Scopes monkey trial in the 1930s, Clarence Darrow for the defense, called on William Jennings Bryant, a Creationist and Bible Scholar to disprove the Creationism. On 2/29 I posted a statement that I didnt believe in in order to argue a point. That post caused you concern. Since the bait was not taken, I with draw the post and I am sorry for causing you concern.

tomkoz  

Posted: March 5th, 2012 10:32 PM

"A citizen may not be required to offer a good and substantial reason why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right's existence is all the reason he needs." 2nd Amendment RIGHT !!!

TomKoz  

Posted: March 5th, 2012 10:30 PM

A HUGE decision in Maryland that will have the anit-gunners shaking in the boots !!!!! http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=29194&pid=314721&st=0&#entry314721

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: March 4th, 2012 4:01 PM

IF we want to kill someone go ahead, if we dont dont. Gee such a tough decision. Guns must GO!!

TomKoz  

Posted: March 4th, 2012 12:43 PM

We should get Illinois to follow Iowa's lead !!!! http://www.guns.com/iowa-house-democrats-storm-out-capitol-pro-gun-bills.html

Let's Move On from OP  

Posted: March 4th, 2012 5:01 AM

Wow, you're STILL talking about this? Can we please summarize the law without all of the emotional, political crap? To wit: Get a gun if you want one...it's legal. If you don't, don't get one and stop trying to decide what's best for everyone else. CAN WE PLEASE MOVE ON?

Jim Coughlin  

Posted: March 4th, 2012 12:36 AM

The quote posted by Paul has been wrongly attributed to Sigmund Freud. There is also no evidence that Freud apeaking about the Irish ever stated that, "this is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever".

Paul Kersey  

Posted: March 3rd, 2012 9:37 PM

ih8idiots, It's YOU who is unstable; not me. Your apoplectic responses are proof of that. Freud would have a field day with you. "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." --Sigmund Freud, General Introduction to Psychoanalysis.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: March 3rd, 2012 9:33 PM

ih8idiots baby, you need to deal with your transference issues Just like the racist who always throws the race card, or the closeted gay who rails against homosexuals, you transfer your mental instability, lack of self-control and psychoses to law-abiding gun owners.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: March 3rd, 2012 9:31 PM

ih8idiots - Your posts are nothing but inane insults and bitchy, smarmy, immature attempts at one-upmanship; and you fail miserably, just as I'm sure you've failed at life, you small insignificant person.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: March 3rd, 2012 9:26 PM

ih8idiots, report me to the authorities? - send the Gestapo or the KGB to my home for the midnight knock at the door? You're a joke. Concerned Oak Parker asked a polite, logical question and I replied civilly. GUNZ KILL disagrees with me but can still hold a civil debate. You on the other hand are a flaming (insert insult here). Your posts are but inane insults and bitchy, smarmy, immature attempts at one-upmanship; and you fail miserably, just as I'm sure you've failed a

Paul Kersey  

Posted: March 3rd, 2012 8:43 PM

ih8idiots - You're an ass and I'm tired of your pissy little tantrums. So you want to infringe on my 1st Amendment rights as well as my 2nd Amendment rights? Bottom line is I have weapons and there's not a DAMN THING you can do about it. If you think you have stones - molon labe - come and get them.

ih8idiots  

Posted: March 3rd, 2012 8:29 PM

Hey Wednesday Journal, have you reported this idiot's homicidal threats to the authorities yet? I'd hate to see you have mud on your face when the inevitable happens.

ih8idiots  

Posted: March 3rd, 2012 8:27 PM

Paul Kersey, when you violently promised a bloodbath if you don't get your way, were you including your grandchildren, or just the neighborhood kids?

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: March 3rd, 2012 1:09 PM

jesus was killed by people with a CROSS????!?!?!?!?!?

realitysux  

Posted: March 2nd, 2012 10:24 PM

RE: Gunz jesus statement on 2/27- Following the logic in your statement about jesus, crosses should be outlawed because jesus was killed by people with a CROSS. Also, since many of the criminals and weapons in this country are due to lax border security, i assume that you strongly support strict enforcement of the borders and immigration laws regarding undocumented immigrants.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: March 2nd, 2012 9:03 PM

Justice: Its called civil and criminal court.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: March 2nd, 2012 6:07 PM

Logical question Concerned. My youngest is 18 and has been shooting since 11 - was taught gun safety since 5. She knows what guns can do, and is a responsible shooter. Also, I live alone, so my weapons are under my tight control, and no one comes over and just wanders around, taking a gun. When the young grandsons come over, the guns are secured. As I said earlier to GUNZ, we can play "what if" all day long. Registration is the 1st step to confiscation - won't happen here.

Justice  

Posted: March 2nd, 2012 3:10 PM

Great. The constitution is hid behind to bear the weapon. Where is it when you kill the wrong party in the wrong situation?

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: March 2nd, 2012 2:26 PM

Justice, a constitutional right,none, however self defense of yourself or another,yes.

Justice  

Posted: March 2nd, 2012 10:10 AM

Tom, When is it in someones constitutional right to kill another?

TomKoz  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 11:50 PM

Justice, care to post any statistics and/or your resources to your latest unfactual emotional opinion/response. Of the 49 states that do follow the Constitution and allow law abiding citizens to carry firearms how many do you think have ever "changed their minds" and enacted laws to moreso Restrict citizens rights on the issue??? Here's a hint: NONE!!!!

Justice  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 8:18 PM

When to kill or not is not something that should be left up to uncertainty. More guns in more peoples hands will just create more problems not solve any.

Concerned Oak Parker  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 6:35 PM

Paul Kersey: What if a younger relative of yours or other teenager gets ahold of your gun and goes to the high school and kills people? This bothers me because it's what really happens. We need fewer guns around and we need regulation on safety for the guns that are out there. . storing guns, registering them, etc.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 6:05 PM

Disabled veteran living alone intruder in my home = fear for my life or serious injury. If he moves toward me instead of leaving or getting on the ground when ordered to, he gets shot - weapon or not. Important note: you don't shoot to kill, but shoot to stop. If that means shoot him to the ground then so be it.

Justice  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 3:44 PM

What if someone breaks into your home? Can you shoot them dead. Weapon unseen?

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 3:14 PM

Justice, to shoot a rapist is an emotional call. Police are not allowed to make emotional decisions when applying force of any kind. I don't like the viciousness of a rapist. I don't think it would be easy for anyone to back off when stumbling upon a rapist in the act. Add to it a child, and that makes it even more difficult. Brian Slowiak mentions the What If factor, if the What If is the rapist has a knife or some other type of weapon, then that may likely change the scenario.

Justice  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 1:33 PM

So now that more citizens want to be judge and jury, more useless deaths will occur. How many criminals who would not be a threat to someones life get killed?

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 1:21 PM

Justice: as stated the States Attorney and training officers taught me not to shoot a rapist IN THAT LIMITED CASE YOU STATED.However,one small fact added changes the rule. The What If game is played contstantly.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 1:01 PM

More legal carrying citizens using guns. http://triblocal.com/downers-grove/2012/02/22/police-man-shot-stranded-motorists-car-window/

Justice  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 12:39 PM

IS a rapist deserving of being shot dead at the hands of anybody, police included, if he/she doesnt have a weapon? Hey Brian, what did they teach you about when to use deadly force?

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 11:36 AM

TomKoz, it's very difficult to vomit on command. I suggest peppering the rapist with a blast from a 12 gauge shot gun. Once you do that, I'm sure you will be vomiting until the police arrive.

TomKoz  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 9:54 AM

So Q from Oak Park, are you suggesting that IF you, your wife, mother, or daughter were about to be dragged into a dark alley by a thug or two intent on Raping, that you/them do what..... vomit on the attacker as the Illinois State Police suggest??

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 9:50 AM

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park, I knew that you didn't mean using deadly force on anyone who may be possibly innocent, because I read your posts and they are good.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: March 1st, 2012 9:07 AM

Yes Q, I understand all that.

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: February 29th, 2012 11:48 PM

Brian Slowiak, if the person may be innocent, that isn't that saying the person is not doing anything that would require the use of deadly force? I'm just not catching what you really mean. If the person is shooting at people, then the person is not considered possibly innocent. If a person is seating in his car not doing anything, I don't think you mean that person requires deadly force. I'm just always reserved with the usage of deadly force, only to meet the same or equal force.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 29th, 2012 8:54 PM

To Q: the catch word is might.

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: February 29th, 2012 5:45 PM

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park "I would think that you are against the police using deadly force on any person,because the possible offender might be innocent." We are all against Police using deadly force on anyone who is innocent.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 29th, 2012 2:07 PM

GUNZ< if that is the case and since you are pro abortion, anti capital punishment, and protector of all innocent life,I would think that you are against the police using deadly force on any person,because the possible offender might be innocent.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 29th, 2012 11:40 AM

No, but I DO have smoke detectors, a fire extinguisher and a fire drill/escape plan. Preparedness, not paranoia.

ZY from Oak Park  

Posted: February 29th, 2012 11:40 AM

No Gunz kill, insurance covers property, and take care of the rest.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 29th, 2012 9:58 AM

I suppose you all have a HUGE tank of water in your back yards to help fight the blaze if your houses go up in flames too?

thoughts  

Posted: February 29th, 2012 9:43 AM

Continued %u2028Marshall v. Winston %u2028Morgan v. District of Columbia%u2028 Morris v. Musser %u2028Reiff v. City of Philadelphia%u2028 Sapp v. Tallahassee %u2028Silver v. Minneapolis%u2028 Simpson's Food Fair v. Evansville %u2028Stone v. State %u2028Weutrich v. Delia

thoughts  

Posted: February 29th, 2012 9:41 AM

The police are not obligated to protect individuals. Castle Rock v. Gonzales %u2028Warren v. District of Columbia%u2028 Riss v. City of New York Barillari v. City of Milwaukee%u2028 Bowers v. DeVito%u2028 Calogrides v. City of Mobile %u2028Chapman v. City of Philadelphia %u2028Davidson v. City of Westminster DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services Ford v. Town of Grafton Hartzler v. City of San Jose%u2028 Keane v. City of Chicago Lacey v Palatine Lynch v. N.C. Dept. of Justi

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 29th, 2012 8:01 AM

In this case, three rape victims sued the District of Columbia for negligence on the part of the police. Two of three female roommates were upstairs when they heard men break in and attack the third. The police failed to espond properly despite several followup calls from the women. The women were then raped, robbed, beaten, and forced to submit to the attackers' sexual demands for the next fourteen hours. Thanks, but I'll combine 1911 (a gun, GUNZ)with 911.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 29th, 2012 7:57 AM

GUNZ, "Just call the cops" -that may not be enough - look at Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981) an oft-quoted[2] District of Columbia Court of Appeals (equivalent to a state supreme court) case that held police do not have a duty to provide police services to individuals, even if a dispatcher promises help to be on the way, except when police develop a special duty to particular individuals.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 8:07 PM

Brian, My point is rarely does the OPPD shoot and kill anybody. I am not advocating for the PD not to have guns. Cops need and should have them. If the cops didnt hardly ever use a gun to shoot and kill anyone in the last 50 yrs, the same can be said for any residents needing them to defend their life. Just call the cops.

Concerned Oak Parker  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 7:02 PM

In view of the shooting at the high school in Ohio, I heard that the shooter stole a gun from his uncle who had multiple weapons at his home. The availability of guns to family members is always a scary possibility. If guns were not so prolific, this would be less of a problem. Guns should be stored properly and away from easy access by family members.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 6:39 PM

Sgt. Grego shooting it out with the taxi cab bandit at Austin & Washington. Present day officer in the shoot out with the pay as you go bandits at North and Harlem. Tommy Dvonch shooting at the motorcycle shootist. The Giordanos robbery on North Avenue. Rick Defelice getting shot through his hat. Officer wihin the last few months taking down an armed burglar.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 5:28 PM

Is three your answer?

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 5:03 PM

GUNZ we did this once before. Off. Rich Downs shot to death a knife wielding rapist about 1980. The A&P shoot out with Frank Teague in Forest Park and Oak Park. The Jewel Store armed robbery on North Avenue. More recently the double rapist in River Forest who shot himself in the head while aiming at OP police officers. The armed robbery of the Clark gas station at Elmwood and Madison.

Facts  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 3:53 PM

Ken piece from June 2005. http://www.oakpark.com/News/Articles/06-28-2005/A_quarter_century_of_______chronicling_communities

Facts  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 3:52 PM

The story was in one of Ken Trainers columns recanting some OP history yr by yr. "In November, a man with a long criminal record, recently out of prison, invades the home of an Oak Park couple, stabs the husband, who manages to alert police while the intruder escapes holding a gun to the wife's head. After a 30-minute chase through east-central Oak Park, the kidnapper is killed in a shootout. The hostage is unhurt, but Officer Charles Willet receives a gunshot wound in the abdomen."

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 3:43 PM

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park, like your honesty.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 3:38 PM

What was the address? So lets get the facts accurate. How many people have died at the hands of the OPPD in the last 50 yrs? Even if this is true, it was 29 years ago.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 3:22 PM

LSW:I am not brillant. I strive to be brillant

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 3:20 PM

Chic Trib 11/24/83. Bandit was paroled early despite long record. "couple arrived home about 7pm to find Cleora Watts inside their home""Watts stabbed the man in the face""Watts came out of the home holding the nude woman hostage""he lowered his gun and took his arm away from his hostage""police suddenly had a clear shot and shot Watts six times"All this after a second home invasion trying to obtain a stolen auto.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 3:11 PM

The truth will set you free...not Guns. Sorry. As much as you think a gun can save you, your family, society , etc.......It simple wont. That's the truth and I can live with that.

Luke ScottWalker from Oak Park  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 2:57 PM

Brian S: thanks for having my back. You, like me, are a brilliant man with a heart of gold. It's intersting for folks like us to live amongst the leftists of our fair village. Some of them provide intelligent & reasoned (though still wrong!) counterpoints to my (our?) point of view, but most are knee-jerk, unthinking emotional spewers like Gunz. There really is no reason to waste energy trying to counter Gunz' rantings with factual info. It is fun watching him/her go apoplectic however!! Peace!

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 2:36 PM

OPPD has not shot a criminal dead in 30 yrs.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 2:35 PM

Jesus Loves, not Kills. Guns Kill not Love.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 1:15 PM

To Lack of knowledge kills: Months ago she posted the OPPD has never killed a home intruder.I proved her wrong and she never acknowledged.GUNZ cant dine out because she cant answer the question placed to her by the wait staff,"What can I get you".I dont want you to step aside, I want you to work w/me. In 6 months the only living thing to respond to GUNZ will be her cat, and only if the cat is hungry.

Lack of knowledge kills  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 12:34 PM

Brian, I concede...step right this way sir. So it's been a habit for months that she has avoided hard questions?

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 11:24 AM

If there are no guns on the streets why does any law abiding person need a gun to protect themselves from others with out guns? No guns= no gun violence!

Brendan  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 11:12 AM

Ryan, if a car was not available to the drunk then the car would not become a weapon in the hands of a drunk. Same thing goes with a gun being available to individuals young and old with a high potential of using this weapon for criminal activity.

TomKoz  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 10:53 AM

Another Illinois anti-gun blogger unwilling to defend his position when presented with facts. Check it out here http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Lets-Follow-The-Entire-Second-Amendment-140575523.html

Ryan  

Posted: February 28th, 2012 9:34 AM

Violent CRIMINALS kill people; gun's don't. Guns are simply a tool. Blaming guns for deaths is like blaming cars for drunk driving. Restricting firearm ownership and possession does NOTHING to stop the criminals, who ignore all the laws anyway. It simply disarms and makes victims protection-less. Why do the fervent gun banners never acknowledge this simple truth? The ONLY people harmed by these gun-banning laws are law abiding citizens; the criminals love those laws.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 27th, 2012 8:13 PM

Not so, Lack of knowledge kills. Luke Scott Walker and I both demanded that GUNZ state her position on pro abortion, innocent life, months ago. She wouldnt answer then but was tripped up nicely by TomKoz on Feb 20,as well as myself with John 2:15. We know we have her on the run when she posts but does not answer.

Lack of knowledge kills  

Posted: February 27th, 2012 7:50 PM

Hold on Brian Slowiak, my question was first! Gunz never answered why Jesus told his disciples to purchase a sword if they didn't have one. Wait your turn in line :)

TomKoz  

Posted: February 27th, 2012 5:44 PM

GUNZ, I am willing to bet all that I have that Most if not all of the shooters did NOT acquire or own the firearm legally (except the Westmont police). Point is, non of the victims had a fighting chance because law abiding citizens are not allowed to legally carry firearms to defend themselves from law breakers!!

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 27th, 2012 5:42 PM

Jesus didnt kill anybody this weekend, people with GUNS did.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 27th, 2012 2:20 PM

GUNZ, you never responded to Jesus carrying and using a whip. Your Feb 20 post "Republican gun toting people""They dont seem to have a problem in taking a life in the chair,but its not ok in the womb" Since your not REP, I infer from your DEM side you are against taking a life in the chair and for taking a life in the womb. Thanks for pro abortion stand point and your self appointed position on defining innocent life for the rest of us. GUNZ is pro innocent life, only if she has the choice.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 27th, 2012 1:04 PM

2 dead among 7 wounded in Friday shootings. At least seven people were shot Friday between noon and about 8 p.m., according to Chicago police.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 27th, 2012 1:00 PM

Looks like guns in Ohio are up to no good(killing) again today. Children no less!! More gun headlines gun owners should be proud of:Man shot during West Side youth street fight.3 shot, 7 others injured after car hits fire department vehicle in W. Pullman. Man held without bail after fatal shooting at party. Boy charged, 1 sought after shots fired during altercation with police on NW Side.Police: Westmont man shot after pointing rifle-like object at officers. 2 people shot in Harvey.Last 48hs

Larry Dantonio from Berwyn, Illinois  

Posted: February 27th, 2012 12:45 PM

I see we have another Board of Health Meeting about Gun Control scheduled for Tomorrow at City Hall. Funny I don't see any articles about that here. And the only guest speaker is Mark Walsh, Campaign Director, Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence. Guess which side he will be on. When do the Pro Gun people get their day in front of the Board of Health....Or will they

thoughts  

Posted: February 25th, 2012 8:19 AM

Hold your breath Oak Park. D.C. is re-contesting the lawyer fees from the Heller case from the case that started in 2003 and ended in 2008. It could go as high as 3.1 million. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/both-sides-appealing-award-of-more-than-1m-in-attorneys-fees-in-historic-dc-gun-case/2012/02/23/gIQA2H5MWR_story.html

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 23rd, 2012 2:40 PM

Gee, my own fan club - I'm flattered.

Ban Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 23rd, 2012 2:03 PM

Nice try Paul.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 23rd, 2012 12:40 PM

Ban Baptismal Fonts? INDIANAPOLIS - A toddler died after being found submerged in a baptismal font at an Indianapolis church, The Indianapolis Star reported.

Thoughts  

Posted: February 23rd, 2012 12:05 PM

State law already http://www.isp.state.il.us/foid/firearmsfaq.cfm look for : Will I be held responsible for my child who has access to a firearm? Yes. Illinois law (720 ILCS 5/24-9) More at the link. Enough already with the fear mongering.

TomKoz  

Posted: February 23rd, 2012 11:27 AM

GUNZ, how many kids died last week as a result of stabbings or blunt force object??? Drowning??

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 23rd, 2012 10:32 AM

Girl Shot in 3rd-Grade Classroom.SEATTLE %u2014 An 8-year-old girl was in critical condition Wednesday after she was shot in the abdomen at her elementary school near Seattle, and one of her classmates was detained, authorities said Wednesday.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 21st, 2012 8:36 PM

@ Elliot Fineman when you said, "The element of surprise trumps the gun carrier". That's where situational awareness enters the picture. Be aware of your surroundings and the bad guy won't have a chance to put a gun to the back of your head. It takes work and practice, but it becomes second nature. A weapon is not a substitute for common sense and situational awareness, but is a great addition to them.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 21st, 2012 8:07 PM

Stay the course Brian.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 21st, 2012 8:06 PM

Brian - you caught me off guard. Accept you? Of course! It's an honor; we all stand together. I'm just an average Joe from Glen Ellyn, now in Virginia Beach VA. I have my "gun rights" but get incensed when some who are clueless want to deny others their rights. Violent crime is low here, and I taught my 3 daughters gun safety and marksmanship when they were young (the oldest is a PhD candidate GUNZ). Whether or not they choose to own/carry a gun is up to them. Stay

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 21st, 2012 7:43 PM

The same thing can be said for any instrument which can do good but can also harm - i.e. cars and alcohol. Realistically, taking weapons from every law abiding citizen because of this incident will not solve the problem anymore than taking everyone's car keys because someone got behind the wheel after having too much to drink in Wheaton last night and ran someone down on Roosevelt Road.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 21st, 2012 7:42 PM

GUNZ, that's wrong, that's sad and that's frustrating. That's NOT how firearms are to be used. Where were the parents, where was the gun kept? and so on. Gun ownership is a RESPONSIBILITY that must be taken seriously. It's not a joke and it's not a game. Everyone loses in a situation such as this.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Partk  

Posted: February 21st, 2012 7:06 PM

If Paul Kersey will accept me,I will stand with him.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 21st, 2012 6:45 PM

More bloodshed today in Chicago where a 15 yr old boy shot dead his brother. And the beat goes on.......

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 21st, 2012 5:48 PM

H8fulidiot - Until I saw your postings, I thought "Village Idiot" was an imaginary figure. Now I know Oak Park must be proud of you - its own classic village idiot. Well good citizens of Oak Park, my job is done here - please treat your idiot kindly - it's obvious his mother didn't.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 21st, 2012 5:45 PM

H8fulidiot - By the way, I've handled weapons since I was 12, was a weapons specialist in the Army and I've never shot anyone as a civilian. I have my concealed carry permit - no not from the Peoples' Democratic Republic of Illinois. I own guns and there's NOTHING you can do about it. I bet your face is purple right about now as you get ready to stroke out.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 21st, 2012 5:24 PM

H8fulidiot - Do you really think that gun owners will allow their guns to be confiscated without a fight? Would Blacks allow their voting rights to be taken away without a fight? There would be bloodshed in either case - a prediction, not a threat. Besides, if I REALLY wanted to do violence to you it would be more satisfying to feel the impact of me hitting you than shooting you. Relax junior, that's not a threat either, you're not worth the time.

ih8idiots  

Posted: February 21st, 2012 4:19 PM

Kersey, everyone who can read saw your promise that there would be bloodshed, and everyone knows exactly what you mean by that. Of course, you're too much of a wuss to stick by what you say, so you're running away from your own words like the gun fetishist coward you are. Keep posting, gun nuts, and keep proving to the vast majority of the communtiy that you're too mentally deranged to ever be allowed to carry weapons.

John Doe from Oak Park  

Posted: February 21st, 2012 1:10 PM

Oak Park's focus on gun regulation is dumb. Concealed carry WILL become law in Illinois. OP will not become a more dangerous place to live due to this type of law. Guns obtained through illegal means ARE the ONLY problem. This is solved through better policing and more clearly focused community activism. Furthermore, knowing your neighbor may be packing heat will help Oak Parkers mind their poor manners. Don't get your panties in a bunch - fight a real cause.

thoughts  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 11:02 PM

Thinking the village is only an ordinance away from yet another court settlement.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 8:08 PM

To nuns at St. Mary of Celle,I was listening. John 2:15"So he made a whip out of cords and drove them all from the temple." GUNZ was also wrong at the Health Dept. meeting when she asked that gun safety be brought up in schools. Mc gruff, Say no, get away, tell an adult is part of the study plan.I told her she wasnt informed in the balcony.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 7:48 PM

Help, please. Didnt Jesus use his rope belt as a whip to drive the money changers from the temple? Has anyone heard that bile story reference?

TomKoz  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 5:54 PM

Dennis, I respond so that others who are possibly "on the fence" on the issue can read / get another prospective. A perspective based on fact, logic, and reason that may help them understand the issue(s) and possibly help garner their support.

Dennis the not so menace  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 5:49 PM

I want to know why anyone would even respond to a troll like gunzkill? He's obviously a rabid liberal who thinks he can dictate what is best for all society,and if you disagree,then you're an uneducated atheistic idiot. Just ignore him/her.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 4:08 PM

Sounds like a plan epic putz. I'll come unarmed - except for my rapier wit and sharp sense of humor.

epic putz  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 3:44 PM

Why do I get the feeling that Ih8idiots is the same person as epic lulz? It must be they both use the same style of attack comments without the hint of irony. Maybe GUNZ KILL, Ih8idiots/epic lulz and Paul Kersey should be on this proposed committee. If so, please televise the committee meetings. They would be a hoot to watch.

Travis Bickle   

Posted: February 20th, 2012 3:16 PM

You talkin to me ?

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 3:05 PM

mimi - good catch.

TomKoz  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 2:22 PM

Me guesses that GUNZ is just to smart for us unedumacted tipes.

Lack of knowledge kills  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 1:59 PM

Alright Gunz...you ask and answer "Would Jesus carry a weapon? NO!" Please explain Luke 22, when Jesus tells the disciples if you don't have a sword to go sell your cloak and buy one. You make a huge error likening Jesus to us in asking would Jesus carry a weapon seeing as how Jesus came to earth for the purpose of willingly going to an undeserved death. John 10:18 he says no one takes his life from him but he lays it down himself. We on the other hand are not here to die for mankind.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 12:33 PM

Answer the question GUNZ - stay on topic GUNZ - put up or shut up. Guessing maybe a GED for you?

TomKoz  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 12:33 PM

GUNZ, are you suggesting that law abiding citizens protect themselves by presenting their diplomas to criminals that wish to do them harm??? At least, the Illinois State Police suggest on their website that women discourage rapist by vomitting on themselves.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 12:28 PM

Education can set you free from the paranoia that you think GUNS will protect you from.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 12:27 PM

What is the education of all the people who use guns in the crime blotter that KILL everyday? Whats the education of the people who use guns in crimes everyday that appear with mugshots?

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 11:57 AM

Tell me what you propose and how you propose to do it. I'm listening. So far you haven't impressed me.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 11:55 AM

H8yourselfidiot, too bad you can't read; I didn't call for bloodshed. Your out of control histrionics don't bother me, but bring your emotional stability into question and make you look bad. I'm waiting for you to call me a racist, sexist and Nazi - the trifecta. Wipe the spittle off your chin, change your panties and maybe we can have a reasonable discussion. As I posted yesterday, tell me what you propose and how you propose to do it. I'm listening. So far you haven

TomKoz  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 11:55 AM

GUNZ, clearly you have no reasonable or logical arguement!

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 11:42 AM

Gunz - I posted my education yesterday in response to your bogus claim that inversely compared education levels with gun ownership, but you neglected to post yours. Care to share? mimi - Spot on, good catch.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 11:37 AM

Clearly you dont live by the bible.

TomKoz  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 11:33 AM

GUNZ, THINK !!! your description "Republican gun touting people" believe firearms should be available for self DEFENSIVE purposes, and that capital punishment is justifiable for the criminal proven guilty of murder. WHAT crime is the baby in the womb guilty of???????

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 11:18 AM

Would Jesus carry a weapon? NO! How can most Republican gun touting people be pro gun yet get up in arms about the contraception issue? They dont seem to have a problem taking a life in the chair, but its not ok in the womb? Then on top of all that, hunting is sport. Now they want guns to kill people that they choose a threat.

ref  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 10:35 AM

Most of us are urban types. I think there is a big difference between the idea of a gun in a rural area and one in an urban area. I know this will inflame emotional types, but we live in close quarters here, and having lived in both types of areas, there are different needs and concerns.

TomKoz  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 9:56 AM

Gunz, I would bet that most of the Anti gun people are progressive liberal folk?

mimi  

Posted: February 20th, 2012 6:34 AM

I think "Paul Kersey" is having fun here. Remember, that's the name of the Charles Bronson character in "Death Wish."

ih8idiots  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 11:12 PM

Paul Kersey is calling for bloodshed, and the little wuss cries about people calling him names? Typical moron gun fetishist, once again proving that he doesn't have the emotional capacity to responsibly own a weapon, much less carry one.

Lack of knowledge kills  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 9:42 PM

Gunz, and I mean this with all sincerity and no malice, please don't start making comments about the church, the Bible, or God's will. You've posted a gazillion times and I don't recall one comment referencing the Bible or Christian doctrine. Please don't start commenting about knowing what the Bible says in relationship to gun control to lift up your own views. There are brothers and sisters in Christ on both sides of this political view. I assure you it's not a major issue of our faith. Thanks

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 7:28 PM

I would bet that most of the pro gun people are church going folk? Is that possible?

Quit Bickering Already and Face Facts  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 4:40 PM

Furthermore, fear mongering is played out. If someone wants to shoot you, law or no law, they will find a way to do so. So instead of arguing constitutional rights and silly ordinances, how about we use the energy to educate the public with common sense. Either way, don't create a situation that hands power over to fear and criminal enterprise. I sincerely doubt that banning handguns makes OP any safer...it just makes people look elsewhere. The NIMBY approach doesn't solve much.

Quit Bickering Already and Face Facts  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 4:25 PM

Oak Park confuses me. Making guns illegal ups the ante for black market sales, which increases revenue for criminals. It also makes citizens sitting ducks. Let's get real here. We're not talking about handing glocks out at block parties, we're talking about allowing people to lawfully apply for and own a weapon. How about making a lock box mandatory with a gun sale? If supply goes up, demand goes down, and with legal ways to obtain a weapon, you can track gun owners and the guns themselves.

TomKoz  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 12:47 PM

@ Paul Kersey: Simple solution - DEMAND that all elected officials and appointed judges FOLLOW the Constitution on ALL matters. Regarding this specific issue - allow ALL law abiding citizens (18 and over) the Right to Keep and BEAR arms - if they so choose. It IS a Right that "shall NOT be infringed"!!!!!

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 12:28 PM

OK, now that we've gotten past the name calling and insults, tell me what you propose and how you propose to do it. I'm listening.

TomKoz  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 11:45 AM

To all of the NEIGHBORS of anti-gunners: Please place a big sign in your front yard with an arrow pointing to the antis' house stating that your neighbor does not believe law abiding citizens should have firearms, that they are unarmed and that you promise not to use your firearms to defend them or their family.

ref  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 10:24 AM

principle, not principal.

hm  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 10:24 AM

Paul Kersey, go back and read your post. Imagine that a liberal said that (and that would mean you would disagree with it in principal). You might understand what the rest of the world hears when you write things like "i promise you there will be bloodshed."

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 9:39 AM

ih8idiots you really must hate yourself. Like all libs, you can't help but go to the namecalling when you get your panties in a twist. I threatened no one - just made a prediction. Go sit down, take your meds and get yourself under control. GUNZ, when the world is so safe that guns aren't needed, I will be happy, but we're not there yet.

Mike Weisman   

Posted: February 19th, 2012 9:37 AM

@ Elliot Fineman >>>>>Fact is you realistically cannot protect yourself. The element of surprise trumps the gun carrier. >>>>> So untrue, Elliot, so untrue. People are protecting themselves everyday in this great nation with their personal firearms. Not every situation requireing armed self-defense is an instant ambush. BTW: How's your boycott going? Luv my French Roast.

rez  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 1:32 AM

To the people who talk about illegal guns and owners vs legal guns and their owners... Most guns were once legal before they feel into illegal hands, that ended in bloodshed. Glock don't make illegal guns for criminals and legal ones for the good guys. Adding to the pile of legal guns is a sure way to quadruple the illegal guns that will become illegal when the wrong owner fires it. A serial number is not hard to file away.

ih8idiots  

Posted: February 19th, 2012 12:49 AM

And here we have Paul Kersey, a so-called "law abiding" gun nut, threatening to kill people. Typical gun fetishist can't seem to go a single day without threatening to kill someone, shed some blood, water the tree of liberty, etc, etc, etc. Guns don;t kill people, gun nuts kill people. The trick is to keep guns out of the hands of gun nuts like Paul Kersey.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 18th, 2012 9:20 PM

Hey Paul, Dale Earnhardt still had to wear a seatbelt in his car when he drove to the track. You sound like one of those career gun people. Oh what would you do in a gun free world. Just to think? Hmmm. Peace does and can exist with out them. Really.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 18th, 2012 5:40 PM

(continued) If you want to take my guns...never mind, no need to threaten someone who won't back up his bluster. But if it ever comes to attempted confiscation - I promise you there will be bloodshed.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 18th, 2012 5:38 PM

@Gunz-Education-Bachelors Degree, 3 Masters Degrees, including an MBA. Advanced military schooling, retired as a senior military (Army) officer. Adjunct professor; traveled and lived in various countries - multilingual. Security clearance. If you don't want a gun, then that's your choice and I respect that. If you want to take my guns...never mind, no need to threaten someone who can't back up his bluster. But if it ever comes to attempted confiscation - I promise yo

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 18th, 2012 3:39 PM

Very doubtful that Oak Parkers are buying the guns. Hows the website working for WCF?

Tom from Oak Park  

Posted: February 18th, 2012 12:27 PM

That's all you can come up with Gunz I guess so much for your "HIGHER EDUCATION" that makes you feel like your better than everyone, I thought you should know the new gun store in Oak Park is doing very well it seems Oak Park residents want guns they must be the uneducated ones as you like to claim.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 18th, 2012 11:34 AM

Handguns Tommy

Tom from Oak Park  

Posted: February 18th, 2012 11:31 AM

Where did you get your info when it comes to guns and peoples education level Gunz I cant find statistics like that anywhere wait that's because they don't exist, It must be nice to be able to make thing up to try and prove your point and by the way Gunz you still haven't told us your stance on abortion yet it must be anti because you care so much about life but why do I think it's not you hypocrite.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 18th, 2012 11:12 AM

OPRF, funny that you bring up education. It would be interesting to see the correlation between education and gun ownership. My guess is that handgun ownership will have a inverse relationship to education. The higher the education obtained the less people own handguns and the less education will have higher handgun ownership. That would make sense in Oak Park, where most are educated through college.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 18th, 2012 11:09 AM

Yawn, Unfortunately not everybody wanted to wear seat belts either. The Govt can have a positive affect/effect on societies!

OPRF Achievement  

Posted: February 18th, 2012 7:31 AM

@ Haley quit focusing on Guns so much - and focus a little on Education in this Town and the impact to come by your Good Friend Quinn. He is behind shifting the Tax burden of Teacher Pensions to us. How will this impact OP - it will drive Us to be even less diverse. It will drive even more to leave OP. What is your Position on this?

Yawn.... from OP  

Posted: February 18th, 2012 7:14 AM

Isn't all this politicized bickering over yet? Bottom line -- Get a gun if you want one (yes, we know it's legal), shut up if you don't (sorry, you don't get to decide what's best for everyone else). Conversation Over. Good Talk.

ih8idiots  

Posted: February 18th, 2012 1:24 AM

What Elliot says. Guns are not magical amulets that protect the bearer from harm, no matter how often the gun fetishists rub them. More guns in the hands of the so-called "law abiding" gun owners (who as evidence demonstrates are mostly just pre-criminal gun owners) only means more guns in the hands of active criminals. It's an arms race that the truly law abiding can never win, unless they wish to give their life over to constant paranoia, in which case they still lose. Grow up, indeed.

Elliot Fineman  

Posted: February 17th, 2012 11:24 PM

Fact is you realistically cannot protect yourself. The element of surprise trumps the gun carrier. The criminal does not approach and say "draw." They have a gun to to the back of your head before you know they are there. And you will not dare move. They not only will take your money, they will also take your gun. President Regan was surrounded by secret servicemen looking for trouble. A kid with a $45 handgun got off all 6 shots hitting 4 people before being subdued. Policemen ca

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 17th, 2012 11:02 AM

Gun control proponents cannot deny that people use guns successfully against criminals, but they tend to play down how often such events take place. The purpose of this map is to draw more attention to this aspect of the firearms policy debate. http://www.cato.org/guns-and-self-defense/

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 17th, 2012 11:00 AM

Gun control proponents want legislation that will restrict access to firearms. The rationale for such legislation is to reduce accidental shootings and the criminal use of guns against people. But if harm reduction is the goal, policymakers should pause to consider how many crimes--murders, rapes, assaults, robberies--are thwarted by ordinary persons who were fortunate enough to have access to a gun.

Jim In Houston  

Posted: February 17th, 2012 10:18 AM

"When one person shows a gun to another who has one as well, bad things tend to happen. Very bad thing. " Really. That's the best you can do? Not a shred of evidence for your hyperventilating conjecture? What about if one of the parties is a cop? What about when one of the parties is Jeanne Assam (Google her)?

Ryan  

Posted: February 17th, 2012 8:55 AM

Oak Park needs to get on board with the rest of the nation. Onerous gun restrictions have ZERO effect on crime. They make life difficult for law-abiding citizens, and deny them the right to save their own lives in self-defense. The criminals ignore the laws anyway.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 17th, 2012 8:27 AM

The what if's become reality. Just open your paper, or turn on your TV. Gun death is all around us. No what if's, just innocent people dying for no good reason. When one person shows a gun to another who has one as well, bad things tend to happen. Very bad thing.

Paul Kersey  

Posted: February 17th, 2012 7:01 AM

What if a big tree fell on them as soon as they got out of their truck? What if I had a heart attack in the parking lot? What if Chuck Norris suddenly drove up and kicked their butts for me? We can play "what if" all day long. The bottom line is I had a gun, they didn't, and we all went home alive without any shots being fired.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 9:46 PM

What if all three had guns? We all know what the outcome would have been. Certain death. Not what I would call progress.

Paul Kersey from Virginia Beach VA (formerly Glen Ellyn)  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 6:06 PM

GUNZ KILL - "Take the gun away and you dont have to worry about the judge and jury." How's that working in Chicago, Gunz? I'm a disabled Vet who was road-raged several years ago. Despite my efforts to disengage, 2 guys who were bigger and badder than me blocked me in. I displayed my hostered weapon and they hauled a$$ out of there, saving all 3 of our lives - a 2 on 1 unarmed fight would have killed or crippled us all.

BHirsh from Miami FL  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 5:59 PM

GUNZKILL - Yes, they do. But, some people NEED killed.

BHirsh from Miami FL  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 5:54 PM

The question isn't what you do, it's how you do it. Your goals are admirable, but your historical methods are not. When MAIG says "illegal guns", it really means ALL guns. Nobody is fooled by this misrepresentation. You say you want to stop trafficking in illegal guns. Fine. But, you must do it WITHOUT infringing on the rest of us, or it's No Sale. You want to get "illegal guns" off the street. Fine. But, you must allow LEGAL guns on the street in the process, or it's No Sale. See? REASONABLE.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 5:16 PM

If the laws cant be followed or enforced. Take the gun away and you dont have to worry about the judge and jury. Eventually, we can rid society of all guns and live like respectable people once again.

Mike the Limey  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 4:55 PM

There's no such thing as illegal guns, only illegal possession thereof. Firearms owners have spent DECADES demanding that existing laws & penalties be exercised against those who use firearms to commit crimes but this has been ignored, with felons often seeing NO jail time for illegal possession. There is NO NEED for new laws; only a full use of those extant.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 4:22 PM

To milk4me: the village banned freedom of speech by not allowing for sale signs in front of private homes for sale. The same story ending, civil suit and the village lost. The past is the future.

milk4me  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 4:10 PM

Gunz: Do you really think that thugs own their guns legally in the first place? Why would one more law (that only honest people would follow) make a difference to them? What's your proposal to completely and totally eliminate every firearm in the country? Magic? If they were somehow wiped out, the thugs would simply adapt and start using machetes, swords, chainsaws...whatever worked for them. Then there would truly be no way to resist them. What you seek is Utopia and it doesn't exist.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 3:46 PM

Exactly my point. Make it illegal to have guns and people will not have them, thus not shoot anyone. I sound like a broken record, but if you dont have guns, you cant have gun violence.

Tom from Oak Park  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 3:45 PM

This is one of the most anti gun "news papers" I have ever read and I find it funny that they take money for advertising from Cabela's a company that sell more guns than any other company in the United States, What a bunch of hypocrites at the WJ.

Bian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 3:35 PM

Yes, but only if buckled by a person.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 3:35 PM

Not until the law was past that human beings had to wear them did they start to save more lives.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 3:33 PM

Brian seat belts save lives. FYI

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 3:15 PM

GUNZ KILL posts:"Control both. Start with the weapon of choice". The weapon of choice is the human being. The handgun never has had any choice at any time.

Russ  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 2:43 PM

Jim, I don't support gun control because we don't need any more regulation and it has been proven it doesn't work. However, I was pointing out that using Kennesaw is some what faulty logic. Gun laws have ZERO to do with crime in Kennesaw. Gun crime is a symptom of broken homes and culture, neither of which are are an issue in Kennesaw. If the left wants to prevent gun violence, they need to focus on fixing the broken cultures in the communities where gun violence is prevalent.

Jim In Houston  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 2:05 PM

"Jim, to be fair, Kennesaw is basically a hick town in GA that is sparsely populated by large city standards. " And to be fair, your experience in OP is entirely to be expected based upon the results of modern scholarship. Your attempt to explain away the results on the basis of demographics is an admission that you basically understand that the culture and character of the people who own the guns is more important than the existence of the guns.

GUNZ KILL  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 1:05 PM

Control both. Start with the weapon of choice.

Russ  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 11:02 AM

Jim, to be fair, Kennesaw is basically a hick town in GA that is sparsely populated by large city standards. Kennesaw is to Atlanta as Plainfield or some other far out podunk exburb is to Chicago. Crime and violence wouldn't be an issue in Kennesaw even if guns were banned as most of the perpetrators of the daily gun violence live no where near Kennesaw. My point still remains, controlling gun violence can only be done if we control the thugs. The libs are focusing on the wrong issue.

Jim In Houston  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 10:37 AM

"But back in 1984 when Oak Park passed its ban on handguns...it was a symbolic action. It was a hope-filled action that came with the expectation that towns and cities across the state and the nation would follow suit, that strong national gun control initiatives would take hold." This is so sweet. Perhaps you also don't remember that following your town's emotional blunder into the Brave New World, Kennesaw GA REQUIRED guns in the home. Guess which town got the required results?

Mark from Forest Park  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 8:38 AM

If you want to start a conversation about ending ILLEGAL activity, that's great! But keep in mind that illegal activity is already in violation of existing laws: i.e. the solution to gun crime is law ENFORCEMENT, not law creation. Making more laws only affects the law-abiding citizens like myself (who chose to buy a house across the street in Forest Park, to avoid Oak Park's draconian nanny mentality)

Dan in Oak Park  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 7:54 AM

From reading the comments it sounds like CC in Illinois would result in a more polite society where you would not disrespect a person, their spouse, their pet or cut in line. We would treat everyone as our equal-equally armed. It might be a good trade over the status quo.

Facts Are from Reality USA  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 5:32 AM

http://www?.nj.com/ne?ws/jjourna?l/guttenbe?rg/index.s?sf http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0106/Baltimore-Mayor-Sheila-Dixon-resigns-as-part-of-plea-deal Yeah, based on reality, the Mayors in this extremist left wing, ultra minority group are very lawless and prone to criminal activity and they know whats best for everyone in contorlling violence, uh yeah right!

Facts Are from Reality USA  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 5:30 AM

http://lat?imesblogs.?latimes.co?m/lanow/20?10/01/ingl?ewood-mayo?r-resigns-?after-plea?ding-guilt?y-to-misde?meanor-con?flict-of-i?nterest-ch?arge.html http://www?.csmonitor?.com/USA/P?olitics/20?10/0106/Ba?ltimore-Ma?yor-Sheila?-Dixon-res?igns-as-pa?rt-of-plea?-deal http://blo?g.al.com/s?potnews/20?09/10/larr?y_langford?_found_gui?lty.html http://art?icles.cnn.?com/2008-1?0-28/justi?ce/detroit?.mayor.sen?tenced_1_k?ilpatrick-?and-beatty?-justice-a?nd-miscond?uct-judge-?david-gron?er?_s=PM:C?RI

Facts Are from Reality USA  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 5:29 AM

More.. http://web?logs.sun-s?entinel.co?m/news/pol?itics/brow?ard/blog/2?011/03/tam?arac_mayor?_beth_tala?bisco_t.ht?ml http://art?icles.cour?ant.com/20?10-09-15/n?ews/hc-web?-perez-sen?tencing-09?15-2010091?4_1_abraha?m-giles-ju?dge-julia-?d-dewey-ed?die-albert?o-perez http://www?.jsonline.?com/news/w?isconsin/8?6273007.ht?ml http://www?.lohud.com?/article/2?0103010346 http://www?.lohud.com?/article/2?0100401/NE?WS02/40104?05/-1/news?front/5-ne?w-domestic?-charges-a?gainst-May?or-Bradley

Facts Are from Reality USA  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 5:27 AM

Here are some of those leading mayors and their crimes. http://www?.tnonline.?com/2011/s?ep/20/cork?ery-behind?-bars http://www?.themonito?r.com/news?/span-3843?4-style-fo?nt.html http://www?.brownsvil?leherald.c?om/article?s/-127960-?-.html http://www?.recordonl?ine.com/ap?ps/pbcs.dl?l/article??AID=/20100?610/NEWS/6?100319/-1/?NEWS http://www?.sc-democr?at.com/new?s/2011Apri?l/19/news3?.htm

Facts Are from Reality USA  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 5:25 AM

You mean 600 members, the ultra left extremists out 19,335 cities (less than 3%, ROTFLMFAO) in the US are rapidly expanding their new clothing line, Dr Hitlers Youth!

SGT R.Lee Emery from USMC  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 5:23 AM

Leave it to some insane irrelevent minority count anti gun, anti freedom progressive to want to tell everyone else what to do in a Napoleonic childish rant that is all people with such limited mental capacity have the ability to retort with when the snake oil they are selling is not being bought by the majority of people.

ih8idiots  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 2:29 AM

Leave it to a gun nut hillybilly from the Confederacy to confuse correlation with causation.

Nanjing03 from Beaufort, SC, USA  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 12:37 AM

According to the U.S. Department of Justice studies through their own National Institute of Justice /Bureau of Justice Statistics, and the FBI Uniform Crime Report, every year for the last two decades, there are fewer and declining violent crimes and fewer and declining gun accidents where law abiding citizens are allowed to keep and bear arms. Essentially, according to NIJ/BJS and the FBI, more guns = less crime. Likewise, there is a definite causal effect to more guns and less crime.

Nanjing03 from Beaufort, SC, USA  

Posted: February 16th, 2012 12:26 AM

As somebody standing at the edge of the swamp looking in, I have to wonder whether or not the residents of Oak Park realize that the old useless gun control laws of the past have since been replaced with the successful concealed carry reforms of the present. You don't have to wonder what will happen if and when you adopt similar reforms. Look no further than the rest of the country on the positive side, and Orwellian gun control meccas like Chicago and Mexico on the negative side.

milk4me  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 10:23 PM

What happens if the village decides to limit the First Amendment Rights of residents? What if we couldn't post our comments on this page? Would we still be looking for middle ground? (and yes, speech can cause deaths...before someone tries to say it doesn't) Also, why do so many reporters/writers say things like "the intimidation of the NRA"? The NRA is not an evil corporation, it is a group of Americans banded together to preserve their rights.

John Butch Murtagh from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 9:58 PM

I can understand President Pope jumping on the 6/6 faux commission idea. It's nearing the 2013 elections and letting a civilian commission vet the issue will give incumbents a buffer. What I do not understand is the WJ jumping on board. Is the a return to the 1970's when ad hoc committees were formed regularly? Before jumping into this, is the board and WJ going to consider a likely outcome? That is a prudent approach deciding whether the approach has merit. There are also existing commissions that could address this. What is the advantage of creating two groups with totally adversarial positions debating a volatile subject? Was a process developed from organizing the teams to presenting to the board? Or will they just wing it?

Charleton Down From The Mountain  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 8:35 PM

>>>>So like the rapidly expanding national organization, Mayors Against Illegal Guns>>>> That's not rapidly expanding, that's desperation.

Info  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 8:03 PM

Gun road rage from a yesterday. http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/02/14/man-shot-in-road-rage-incident-in-southwest-suburbs/

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 7:44 PM

ih8idiots, I didn't know about it being common place shooting people in line when they get out of line, but if I travel in that State, I will make sure not to be doing any line cutting.

@ ih8idiots  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 5:59 PM

I fgured out what race you are a long time ago.

ih8idiots  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 5:26 PM

Oh, Q, there are a million examples of that. Over the holidays some yahoo redneck in Missouri got cut in line when shopping and pulled out his gun. He was, as the gun nuts like to say, a law abiding gun owner registered for CC. The thing is that in backwoods places like SE Missouri, this kind of behavior is so commonplace, it hardly makes the news anymore. And this is exactly what we can expect in IL if CC passes.

ih8idiots  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 5:23 PM

Exactly what we need, hillybillies from Tennesee imposing their hillybilly values on the rest of the country, just like God intended.

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 5:17 PM

It didn't take long to get the latest on gun usage. A fight broke on in a check out line and a gun was whipped and and fired. This is one of the problems of people whipping out guns and firing, because bullets hit others too. If you ever have been upset when someone cuts you off in traffic, giving the finger or driving out that cars ass, then you aren't the type that should be packing a gun.

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 4:44 PM

REVISED: Paul from Oak Park, I think Dan was saying the 2nd amendment changes dependent on who is in power to say what it means.

Q from Oak Park  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 4:43 PM

Paul from Oak Park, I don't think Dan was saying the 2nd changes dependent on who says what it means. Nothing more, and nothing less. Willbill from Knoxville, you may have less killing with your numbers, but it's a big problem in Chicago, and the suburbs. Some people may think it will go down if you allow people to pack guns, but it won't. It will only give an opportunity to equal a bad guy with a heater, but that equal is dependent upon both parties having their blasters aimed at each other.

Paul from Oak Park  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 2:54 PM

So, the Second Amendment "Is What it Is"? That says it all. There can't be compromise with people whose true goal is to limit gun ownership for anyone, no matter how law abiding, if only that pesky Supreme Court would let them. You can't accomplish that, so you ask gun owners to join with you in curtailing their rights incrementally. Sorry, not interested. Tell the gang bangers to hike up their pants, stay in school, and stop having kids at 15. Maybe that will help.

Willbill from Knoxville, TN  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 2:26 PM

We do not need any more discussion or any new laws. We need to enforce the laws that are on the books while recognizing citizen's right to keep and BEAR arms. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl01.xls http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl01a.xls

William from Knoxville, TN  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 2:23 PM

Moreover, after a dramatic increase in firearms sales and ownership after the last Presidential election including an increase in first time firearms purchases and an increase in firearms carry permits, gun ban groups and zealot predicted that there would be a corresponding increase in murders. However, the U.S. homicide rate decreased from 5.0 per 100,000 in 2009 to 4.8 per 100,000 in 2010.

Willbill from Knoxville, TN  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 2:22 PM

Here are the inconvenient facts that those calling for a "Genuine discussion" ignore. Firearms rights have been expanded over last several years, and more citizens are now free to carry firearms in more places. Yet, homicides, including homicides with firearms, as well as all other violent crime have been decreasing since 2006.

Russ  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 2:09 PM

I guess I don't get why the advocates of gun control believe restricting law abiding citizens is some how going to stop illegal gun running and thugs from getting guns. Almost all gun violence is committed with a gun obtained by illegal means already, so gun control does absolutely zilch to stop gun violence. Gun control laws do not apply to criminals. I am failing to see the logical connnection of Oak Park's stance with actually preventing crime and violence.

Carl from Chicago  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 1:34 PM

Look at the extremes - "total prohibition" and "total freedom." Gun control advocates want either some or many prohibitions, while gun rights people want no prohibition (ie. "shall not be infringed"). Anytime a "no prohibitions" person compromises with a "some prohibitions" person, the net effect is to move from freedom toward prohibition. Any compromise or "middle ground" guarantees only one thing - that gun freedom supporters loose ground. That is why we won't compromise.

Going Bust from Schaumburg  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 12:23 PM

What can Oak Park really do? Any Oak Park regulation on handguns ends at the border of the city. Pass whatever regulation you want, but anyone with working feet or an automobile can walk or drive around the regulation. Maybe you need a quality barrier with a few police checkpoints to enter or exit the city with a good search of the town after the barrier is erected.

Dan in Oak Park  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 12:21 PM

Illinois already regulates guns and ammunition through FOID cards and required NICS background checks. Every other state has some form of concealed carry except for Illinois, so we are bucking a national trend, not just living under an anomaly created by the current SCOTUS. It is time for VOP to stop wasting time and effort on national issues. Let us get together and solve the pigeon poop problem on the Marion Street underpass.

Brian Slowiak from Oak Park  

Posted: February 15th, 2012 11:00 AM

1st paragraph,3rd sentence "It was a symbolic action".Not true. Residents were arrested. Private property was ordered destroyed.That is not symbolic. Residents who used a handgun to defend themselves were charged with murder. I a all for the open discussion advisory board.

Find a garage sale near you!

In search of local garage sales? Find out what sales are happening near you on our map and listing page.

Quick Links

Sign-up to get the latest news updates for Oak Park and River Forest.


            
SubscribeClassifieds
Photo storeContact us
Submit Letter To The Editor