“People with terrifying firearms of immense power keep mercilessly hunting the residents of Chicago and Illinois. Scattering and fleeing is not the answer.”

Actually, that is generally the answer. Escape and evasion from the location of a violent occurrence is best practices. Run. Hide. Fight. And all that jazz.

This ‘powerful’ opening graces the top of the Chicago Sun Times, “Lawmakers must make assault weapons bill strong enough to truly curb gun violence” which I assume will be a fair and balanced look at the complexities of firearm inclusive violence and an evidence based entreaty on how to curb the motives that cause it.

Of course making the assault weapons ban that Illinois is brewing up ‘strong’ enough is unlikely to do anything. Just look at the handgun ban era.


Several of Chicago’s worst years for homicide came during the ban, crime dipped in the late 90’s and into the 2000’s along with the trend nationwide, nationally where handguns were just fine, and then spike again for COVID. It’s almost like the ban did nothing to dissuade motives during times of stress and crisis and saved nobody. Weird.

But I’m sure banning those pesky assault weapons which account for a minor fraction of the total homicides will absolutely make this map look better.

Those durned AR-15’s I tell ya.

The state needs to ban the sale of assault weapons, ban the sale of ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds and require existing assault weapons in the state to be registered.” The subheading opines, because apparently a FOID isn’t good enough now. We need a FOIDier FOID! Making everyone who wants to own a gun carry a card that says they’re safe to do so isn’t good enough, do things more absurdly!

The last plan failed miserably due to unenforceable tedium, instead of focusing on causes, we should add more unenforceable tedium to fix it.

Can we just admire the fact that we’ve gone from ‘Poodle Shooter’ to describe the AR-15’s alleged inability to stop a starving third world communist to ‘terrifying firearms of immense power’, like the AR is suddenly a GAU-8 ready to BRRRRRT a city block in the hands of a ne’er-do-well.

After pontificating on the new proposal and saying mass shootings, like that means anything anymore, just to get everyone in the right frame of mind, the Times then gives us this gem.

A strong bill would include measures that make the city’s and state’s streets safer.

Oh, like the SAFE-T act? Which removes cash bail and will put those awaiting trial back into GenPop where they will almost certainly not do anything else bad or escalate the thing they did? Because they only ever did the one crime they were caught doing, nothing else of course.

Granted the SAFE-T act doesn’t let out someone who got picked up for murder or child sex trafficking, the intention is actually something I support. Getting people out of jail who haven’t been convicted of anything and who do not pose a threat to GenPop. I don’t question the intention, merely the implementation.

Most important among the provisions the final bill should include are banning the manufacturing and sale of assault weapons in Illinois, banning the sale of ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds and requiring existing assault weapons in the state to be registered. 

So long Springfield Armory.

Why though?

Many of the shootings in Chicago are committed with firearms that have large capacity magazines that hold 30 or even 50 bullets.]

Define ‘many’ please and also whether or not you have heard of the concept of reloading.

[Police can tell when they show up at the site because the area is littered with shell casings.]

Once again I would like to put forward the concepts of reloading and more than one firearm or shooter.

[High-capacity gun magazines make it easier to kill many people in a hurry.

Which is once again a tired argument not borne out by evidence.

We also see no explanation for how the criminally inclined to misuse current firearms will be compelled to stop by creating a registry. So more than likely the policies inevitable failure will be blamed on the rest of the Midwest. You know, all the neighboring states with lower murder rates.

Among other measures under discussion that we’d like to see in the final bill are prohibiting devices that turn one-shot-per-trigger-pull firearms into fully automatic weapons like machine guns]

Jerry Miculek is soon to be a prohibited device in Illinois.

[; raising eligibility for a state firearm owner’s identification card to 21 for most state residents]

Good luck, Bruen and case law are going to knock that one hard.

[; and extending the duration of a firearm restraining order from six months to one year, including renewed restraining orders.]

With a legal recourse for someone restrained? Do they get their day in court to get their rights back without being convicted of a crime? If they are such a danger why are they free at all? What if they get one of those guns that walk over from Indiana and do crimes with it or something. What if their FOID card didn’t get revoked in time and the cops can be bothered to follow up? What if any of the innumerable tediums that allow weapons to remain in ‘prohibited’ hands because they are not viewed a priority happens?

[ Under what’s called the “red flag law,” restraining orders can be issued to remove guns from the possession of individuals who are a danger to themselves or to others.

But rarely are and with mixed efficacy.

The entire bill must be written in a way that has teeth and impact.]

So something that isn’t a stupid, generalized, and unenforceable prohibition full of easy and legal workarounds making the law nothing better than a nuisance? Maybe locking up the violent and keeping them there?

[ The devil will be in the details, and the hard work of codifying a final bill remains to be done. For example, defining which weapons are categorized as assault weapons must be done carefully.

Why? We know you mean all semi-autos, and if you don’t you’re stupid. You should mean all repeaters too, like revolvers, pumps, and lever guns while you’re at it.

But you don’t. Because you’re either stupid, naïve, or this isn’t about ‘gun crime’ at all.

Up to states to act

And Bruen to keep stopping you.

New legislation to address gun violence nationally is unlikely to get through Congress, even though President Joe Biden is calling for a ban on assault weapons.]

Joe barely knows what room he is in, he cost the Democrats dearly in the mid-terms and the only thing that stopped the feared ‘red-wave’ of Republican victories were MAGA morons who couldn’t be assed to not be blathering only-Trumpers without a decent independent thought to their name. If they had been able to hold their own, Trump backing or otherwise, they’d have cleaned Senate and House, as well as more Governor seats, because Democrats did themselves no favors in looking like they have a handle on things. The only way they stayed is if the alternative looked worse.

Just like Trump won because Clinton was literally the worst option, Democrats weren’t taken wholesale because the Republicans failed miserably to put forward candidates who could say… well… anything remotely articulate that would convince GenPop they had even remotely better ideas.

[ When the new Congress convenes, the House will be majority Republican, which means sensible legislation addressing gun violence is unlikely to go anywhere on the federal level. It’s up to the states to act.

Again, Bruen.

Banning the sale of assault weapons in Illinois and raising the age for getting a state firearm owner identification card to 21 would help prevent shootings such as the July 4 attack on parade-goers in Highland Park.]

Would it? You sure it wouldn’t deny adults a Constitutionally protected right to a firearm, which is among the only reason the federal handgun age is sustainable, because 18-20 year olds can buy rifles and shotguns?

[ Illinois law now sets the age limit at 21, but a parent or legal guardian can grant consent for someone 18 or older; that exception would be eliminated. The only remaining exception would be for those serving in the military.

Oh good, because military members have never committed a mass shooting. Cool.

Nidal Hasan, Fort Hood mass shooter

Oh, yeah. Nevermind.

Whether raising the age would stand up in court remains to be seen. In February, a Texas federal judge threw out a law requiring people to be 21 to carry guns. If Illinois enacts a similar provision, the issue might wind up being settled by the gun-friendly U.S. Supreme Court.

Those pesky gun friendly constitutional rights again. It’s almost like there’s an amendment about it.

As of Thursday evening, there were 40,650 gun deaths this year nationwide, more than the number of Americans who died in action in the Korean War. In Chicago, eight people were killed by gunfire over the long Thanksgiving weekend and at least 30 were injured. Nearly 600 people have been killed in shootings in Chicago so far this year. The casualty toll is beyond description.

You should hold Lightfoot and crew accountable for that, maybe work on some policies that reduce the likelihood that violence is a viable currency or will be tolerated. How’s the homicide clearance rate?

Chicago Police Supt. David Brown has touted the increased number of murders considered “cleared”: 400 in 2021, the most in 19 years, Brown says. Based on the official CPD tally of 797 homicides last year, that’s a clearance rate of just over 50%.

But 199 of those cases were closed “exceptionally,” which means no one was charged. And one in seven cleared cases involved a murder committed more than 10 years ago. – Chicago Sun Times


It is baffling to me that you will present evidence that the police are overwhelmed and using dirty stat padding tricks to get their efficacy to, a still rather abysmal, 50% with only 25% resulting in a charge, and yet still think that a ban will somehow work in the least. Banning murder didn’t work.

Who’s going to enforce it? The cops with their 25% success rate for murder charges?

But new legislation needs to be drawn up whenever it becomes clear loopholes are allowing killings.]

Loophole is just something you don’t like, and ‘allowing killings’ is like saying roads existing ‘allows’ for road deaths. Yes, by the blitheringly simplified idiocy of supposing that existing is taciturn to endorsing, roads cause road deaths, guns cause gun crime, and spoons make people fat.

[ Illinois law has too many loopholes and too many gun violence victims.

I guess? If crime is a loophole in the law?

Illinois law has too many loopholes and too many gun violence victims.

There, I fixed it for you. A overly simple statement that without a plan, of which none is present here, its declaration has no value to add.

Keith Finch
Keith is the former Editor-in-Chief of GAT Marketing Agency, Inc. He got told there was a mountain of other things that needed doing, so he does those now and writes here when he can. editor@gatdaily.com A USMC Infantry Veteran and Small Arms and Artillery Technician, Keith covers the evolving training and technology from across the shooting industry. Teaching since 2009, he covers local concealed carry courses, intermediate and advanced rifle courses, handgun, red dot handgun, bullpups, AKs, and home defense courses for civilians, military client requests, and law enforcement client requests.