• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

why gun bans work

dirtykoala

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
644
imported post

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/04/prosecutors-elderly-man-shot-over-a-dollar.html


A man charged with shooting an elderly man outside a South Side fast-food restaurant allegedly opened fire because he became angered when the victim ignored his request for a dollar, prosecutors said today.

The 84-year-old victim was leaving a McDonald's restaurant in the 7800 block of South Western Avenue at 5:15 a.m. Monday when Melvin Hammond, 21, allegedly asked him for a dollar, Assistant State's Attorney Lorraine Scaduto said at Hammond's bond hearing.

"The victim is moderately hard of hearing and did not hear what the defendant said to him and waved at him," Scaduto said. "According to the defendant's handwritten statement, he felt disrespected by the old man and he became angry, so he shot him."


The gunshot passed through one of the victim's legs, shattering his femur, and he remained hospitalized this afternoon. Police later recovered a 9mm handgun at the scene loaded with six live rounds, Scaduto said.

Circuit Judge Donald Panarese set bail at $600,000 for Hammond, of the 7300 block of South Claremont Avenue. He faces a sentence of up to 30 years in prison if convicted of aggravated battery with a firearm, aggravated battery of a victim over age 60 and unlawful use of a weapon.



imagine if handguns were legal... that old man might have killed that thug that shot him in self defense.
with a handgun ban in place, there was only an injury to a senior citizen. no one died.

/sarcasm
 

bigtoe416

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
1,747
Location
Oregon
imported post

dirtykoala wrote:
Circuit Judge Donald Panarese set bail at $600,000 for Hammond, of the 7300 block of South Claremont Avenue. He faces a sentence of up to 30 years in prison if convicted of aggravated battery with a firearm, aggravated battery of a victim over age 60 and unlawful use of a weapon.
Wait, where is the unlawful possession of a weapon charge? Isn't that the whole point of that law? To further punish people to use firearms in Chicago? He's not even being charged for it! All those laws that he's being charged with are exactly the same as if the gun ban wasn't there. This is absolutely stupid.

Also, there's a law to protect victims over age 60? Equal protection?! How is attacking a 59 year-old any better than attacking a 61 year-old?
 

Chrisc411

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2009
Messages
137
Location
Lemon Grove, Ca.
imported post

bigtoe416 wrote:
dirtykoala wrote:
Circuit Judge Donald Panarese set bail at $600,000 for Hammond, of the 7300 block of South Claremont Avenue. He faces a sentence of up to 30 years in prison if convicted of aggravated battery with a firearm, aggravated battery of a victim over age 60 and unlawful use of a weapon.
Wait, where is the unlawful possession of a weapon charge? Isn't that the whole point of that law? To further punish people to use firearms in Chicago? He's not even being charged for it! All those laws that he's being charged with are exactly the same as if the gun ban wasn't there. This is absolutely stupid.

Also, there's a law to protect victims over age 60? Equal protection?! How is attacking a 59 year-old any better than attacking a 61 year-old?

Oh you know what what the anti-gun's will say "well if we had more gun control things like this wouldnt happen" yup maybe they are right, so lets take away guns so the next time this something like this happens the victim can be stabbed instead and most likely die then they will try for a knife ban
 

dirtykoala

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
644
imported post

Chrisc411 wrote:
bigtoe416 wrote:
dirtykoala wrote:
Circuit Judge Donald Panarese set bail at $600,000 for Hammond, of the 7300 block of South Claremont Avenue. He faces a sentence of up to 30 years in prison if convicted of aggravated battery with a firearm, aggravated battery of a victim over age 60 and unlawful use of a weapon.
Wait, where is the unlawful possession of a weapon charge? Isn't that the whole point of that law? To further punish people to use firearms in Chicago? He's not even being charged for it! All those laws that he's being charged with are exactly the same as if the gun ban wasn't there. This is absolutely stupid.

Also, there's a law to protect victims over age 60? Equal protection?! How is attacking a 59 year-old any better than attacking a 61 year-old?

Oh you know what what the anti-gun's will say "well if we had more gun control things like this wouldnt happen" yup maybe they are right, so lets take away guns so the next time this something like this happens the victim can be stabbed instead and most likely die then they will try for a knife ban
"its better to die by a knife, than to see a gun" - the anti in me
 

PincheOgro1

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
420
Location
Perris, Ca., California, USA
imported post

Chrisc411 wrote:
bigtoe416 wrote:
dirtykoala wrote:
Circuit Judge Donald Panarese set bail at $600,000 for Hammond, of the 7300 block of South Claremont Avenue. He faces a sentence of up to 30 years in prison if convicted of aggravated battery with a firearm, aggravated battery of a victim over age 60 and unlawful use of a weapon.
Wait, where is the unlawful possession of a weapon charge? Isn't that the whole point of that law? To further punish people to use firearms in Chicago? He's not even being charged for it! All those laws that he's being charged with are exactly the same as if the gun ban wasn't there. This is absolutely stupid.

Also, there's a law to protect victims over age 60? Equal protection?! How is attacking a 59 year-old any better than attacking a 61 year-old?

Oh you know what what the anti-gun's will say "well if we had more gun control things like this wouldnt happen" yup maybe they are right, so lets take away guns so the next time this something like this happens the victim can be stabbed instead and most likely die then they will try for a knife ban
or maybe even run over with a car. They should ban cars. Then again the guy could have just beaten the old man to a pulp. maybe we should ban "fists" too.
 

PincheOgro1

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
420
Location
Perris, Ca., California, USA
imported post

Chrisc411 wrote:
bigtoe416 wrote:
dirtykoala wrote:
Circuit Judge Donald Panarese set bail at $600,000 for Hammond, of the 7300 block of South Claremont Avenue. He faces a sentence of up to 30 years in prison if convicted of aggravated battery with a firearm, aggravated battery of a victim over age 60 and unlawful use of a weapon.
Wait, where is the unlawful possession of a weapon charge? Isn't that the whole point of that law? To further punish people to use firearms in Chicago? He's not even being charged for it! All those laws that he's being charged with are exactly the same as if the gun ban wasn't there. This is absolutely stupid.

Also, there's a law to protect victims over age 60? Equal protection?! How is attacking a 59 year-old any better than attacking a 61 year-old?

Oh you know what what the anti-gun's will say "well if we had more gun control things like this wouldnt happen" yup maybe they are right, so lets take away guns so the next time this something like this happens the victim can be stabbed instead and most likely die then they will try for a knife ban
or maybe even run over with a car. They should ban cars. Then again the guy could have just beaten the old man to a pulp. maybe we should ban "fists" too.
 

dirtykoala

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
644
imported post

Army wrote:
None of this would have happened, if the fast food place was banned.
or chicago. citys with high crime rates should be banned!
 

dirtykoala

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
644
imported post

Violent Crimes Drop In Texas Under "Concealed Carry" Gun Law
In 1995, Texans got the right to carry concealed weapons if they obtained permits to do so. Since then, violent crime rates in the state have fallen.

Here are some of the statistics compiled by the Texas Department of Public Safety comparing crimes in 1995 to those in 1999.

  • Per 100,000 population, rates for aggravated assault fell from 429.3 to 370.
  • Robberies declined from a rate of 179.8 to 146.8.
  • The rape rate was down to 38.1 per 100,000 from 45.5.
  • And murders fell from 9 per 100,000 to 6.1.
Since carrying a concealed weapon in the Lone Star State was legalized, overall violent crimes have declined from 644.2 per 100,000 to 561.

As a group, Texans with concealed-weapon permits are far less likely to commit crimes than other Texans, says Sterling Burnett of the National Center for Policy Analysis. "You don't get a concealed carry permit because you want to commit a crime," he points out. You get one "because you fear crimes against you."

Burnett reports that permit-holders in 1999 were 5.7 times less likely to be arrested for violent crimes than those without permits. They were 14 times less likely to be arrested for nonviolent offenses. And they were 28 percent less likely to be arrested for murder.

Source: Benjamin Kepple, "Texas' Gun-Totin' Ways Hit by Gore, But Data Show Violent Crime Falling," Investor's Business Daily, October 13, 2000.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=9367
 
Top