This week Chicago lost another round of court challenges, as the city continues to try to remove the rights of citizens to protect themselves and families in the face of out of control crime.
Mayor Rahm Emanuel looked somber as he admitted his support for removing the right for legal citizens to buy handguns and restrictions prohibiting gun shops from operating within the city was struck down by a Federal appeals court as violating the 2nd amendment.
While Emanuel continues to lead the way trying to remove the rights of citizens and attempts to create the most totalitarian city in the country in terms of government controls and blatant restrictions on citizens (restricting or removing the right to conceal carry, attempts to ban handgun sales), city officials and administrators have faced repeated failures in court.
Meanwhile, it's interesting that other cities and officials are noting that cities with the highest rates of violent crime (including gun crime) are also cities which have the most restrictive gun laws. Areas with more open and less restrictive "shall issue" gun laws meanwhile on average boast notably lower rates of crime. Perhaps it's time for officials to understand that criminals don't care about the laws they are enacting to try to make themselves feel better — the ones who are impacted are the very citizens who might otherwise 'choose' to exercise their constitutional right to protect themselves and their family.
Nearly every Sheriff in Colorado (except the liberal republic of Boulder) has joined in a lawsuit to stop the ridiculous magazine (15 round capacity maximum) limit law passed by the Colorado legislature this year and set to go into effect in July.
While some constituents have argued the Sheriff's have a duty to enforce the laws passed by the legislators, I think the Sheriff's have it right and that they also took an oath of office to uphold the Constitution, and if a law is passed that is by definition unconstitutional (or reasonably interpreted that way, that's where this will be decided) that they should contest it and at a minimum refuse to enforce it.
Seems like the intent should be to enforce the laws we already have, rather than create new ridiculous ones from law makers who want to score political points but have zero awareness or knowledge about the items they're trying to regulate (Rhonda Fields and other Colorado state legislators, this means you).
In the meantime, for firearm owners and Glock fans, the message locally has been clear. Stock up, assuming you can even find any, because those magazines that fit your stock 9mm Glock are about to be outlawed and make you a criminal (alright, so you're grandfathered in, but can't transfer it or give it to your son legally, etc., so it's ridiculous).
The saga continues, and is being played out across the nation. Unfortunately, for me living in Colorado the trend has been far too liberal and rights degrading. Last I checked, limiting the rights of a homeowner, citizen, women, minorities, etc. from being able to lawfully defend themselves is the wrong way to go.