Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Of course it's fair that they have guns and you don't. John Kass, ChicagoTribune.com

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...2930868.column

    That Washington, D.C., gun ban that the Supreme Court should toss out any day now because it is unconstitutional is often compared to the handgun ban in Chicago.

    But what's not often reported by the decidedly pro-gun-control media is that since Chicago's anti-handgun law went into effect in 1982, only two classes of people have had ready access to firearms:

    The criminals. And the politicians.

    Cynics who scoff at everything decent suggest these are one and the same, but taxpayers know the difference.

    Criminals are often poor people who are led away in chains and go to state prison, for decades or lifetimes, for using guns as weapons against taxpayers. Politicians wear nice suits, drive luxury cars, and when they go to prison—federal prison, and only for a few months—they go away for using government as a weapon against taxpayers.

    Criminals get guns the old fashioned way, by stealing them or buying them illegally. Politicians write the anti-gun laws, and wonder of wonders, they often exempt themselves and call themselves peace officers.

    In Chicago, our politicians often go around surrounded by armed bodyguards on the city payroll. Or they walk our streets strapped. Or they know a guy who knows a guy in some suburb, and they become deputized peace officers so they can carry.

    Politicians are not violent by disposition. They live in some of the safest neighborhoods, with wrought iron fences, automatic garage doors, cameras on light poles and armed police bodyguards.

    Meanwhile, the taxpayers, who live without bodyguards, are told that if they want to protect themselves with a handgun just like the politicians, they themselves will be criminalized.

    It is all about power in the end.

    The founding fathers understood this, and crafted the Constitution accordingly. They understood Chicago before it was.

    My favorite example from previous columns is the case of Anthony "Spittles" Pizzirulli, a top Democratic Machine precinct captain. Spittles was a city foreman when he was discovered at one of the top hotels in Chicago, the Ritz Carlton, in a $760-per-night room, though he made $51,000 a year.

    A hotel busboy noticed that Spittles had a gun. And what a gun it was. Police found it, and noticed its serial numbers had been filed off—a federal offense the last time I checked. They also found recreational drugs.

    In the lockup, Spittles kept insisting—gun or no gun—that he'd walk in a few minutes. But not before he spit on a female sergeant, told her to find another female to have sex with and made rude comments to other cops who wanted to slap him.

    But they couldn't. Because just then, in walked a powerful Chicago alderman and that alderman walked him out, just as Spittles had predicted.

    Ald. William Banks (36th), the younger brother of 36th Ward boss Sam "Pastries" Banks, arrived at the station and demanded to speak to the commander. They had a conversation and Banks expressed his point of view, that Spittles should walk.

    Spittles walked hard. He was fired but never served prison time for his blatantly serial-number-deficient handgun.

    Another guy known in the 36th Ward is Ronnie "Little Pistol" Calicchio, the deputy director of Mayor Richard Daley's Department of Business Affairs and Licensing, in charge of liquor licenses and other stuff, like how restaurants on Rush Street use city sidewalk space.

    He's not a cop, but he feels he just needs a gun. But not a police gun. A cool secret agent gun. Just like James Bond, a Walther PPK, though he was not supposed to carry a gun, and there was question as to whether he was properly certified by a state board that allows politicians to carry.

    In a meeting with me and his supposed boss—his department chief, not Ald. Banks—the boss said Little Pistol wasn't allowed to carry his pistol on city time—ignoring the fact that he was in violation of the city gun ban.

    I took Little Pistol by the hand, spun him around without warning, and lifted his jacket. There was a metal object in his pants, and he wasn't glad to see me. I asked what it was.

    "That?" Calicchio said. "What? That? Oh, that's a clip to holster a gun. It doesn't suggest anything, other than if I needed to carry a gun, if I needed to, that's something I could put it in."

    Rather than fire him, Daley promoted him. When I last saw Little Pistol a few days ago, he was holding up a wall at a sidewalk cafe, the street lined with black Mercedes, and I made a pistol sign with my finger and thumb and winked. He smiled back.

    That day, the gossip out of Washington was that the Supreme Court was ready to knock down the D.C. gun ban, and then the natural progression would come to Chicago.

    But Spittles and Little Pistol and the political class don't have to wait for the 2nd Amendment to apply to them in this city of reformers. That's the Chicago Way.

    jskass@tribune.com


  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    Excellent column and sounds about right.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  3. #3
    Regular Member Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,086

    Post imported post

    The responses are overwhelmingly pro-gun. The few responses from antis are for the most part mind numbingly stupid. The remainder are just poorly reasoned from false premises.
    --- Gun control: The theory that 110lb. women have the "right" to fistfight with 210lb. rapists.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Deanimator wrote:
    The responses are overwhelmingly pro-gun. The few responses from antis are for the most part mind numbingly stupid. The remainder are just poorly reasoned from false premises.
    Even good reasoning from false premises leads to a false conclusion.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,086

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Deanimator wrote:
    The responses are overwhelmingly pro-gun. The few responses from antis are for the most part mind numbingly stupid. The remainder are just poorly reasoned from false premises.
    Even good reasoning from false premises leads to a false conclusion.
    They've now degenerated into juvenile name calling.

    We win.
    --- Gun control: The theory that 110lb. women have the "right" to fistfight with 210lb. rapists.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Gary, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    518

    Post imported post

    The powers that be in the People's Republic of Chicago have decreed that commoners are only worth whatever they are able to contribute to the city's coffers in taxes. As long as they are ATMs providing money to King Richard and his cronies, why should they be allowed to own guns? Isn't it obvious? If they own guns, they will all of a sudden have the means to yank their chains off and and throws the bums out with authority! When will Chicagoans wake up? Only time will tell.



  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    tattedupboy wrote:
    The powers that be in the People's Republic of Chicago have decreed that commoners are only worth whatever they are able to contribute to the city's coffers in taxes. As long as they are ATMs providing money to King Richard and his cronies, why should they be allowed to own guns? Isn't it obvious? If they own guns, they will all of a sudden have the means to yank their chains off and and throws the bums out with authority! When will Chicagoans wake up? Only time will tell.

    They'll get theirssooner or later.

    Even the Soviet Union lasted only 70 years or so.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •