.. and then they tell the Supreme Court to ...

.."F'off"?

Yes, that's what the city of Chicago just did ... 45-0.

Grumbling about a U.S. Supreme Court they say is out of touch with America’s cities, Chicago aldermen voted 45-0 today to approve a rushed-through compromise gun ban.
The law, weaker than the gun ban tossed out Monday but with some even stronger new provisions, allows adults in Chicago to buy one gun a month, 12 a year, but they must pay registration and permit fees and take five hours of training.

Now, this isn't the issue with the article.. it's the "arrogance" of the Chicago Alderman.    Pay really close attention:

The aldermen did not hold back their contempt for the five members of the U.S. Supreme Court who threw out the city’s gun ban Monday.

“No Supreme Court judge could live in my community and come to the same conclusion they did a couple days ago,” Ald. Sharon Denise Dixon (24th) said.

Yes, they could Ms. Dixon.. in fact, how many of those guns in your district were registerred?  Hmm?  How many?    I'm guessing _ZERO_.

“I find it hard to believe that the Supreme Court justices that voted to strike our handgun laws have spent any time in the communities that many of us represent,” Ald. Toni Preckwinkle (4th) said.

“There’s no way if they knew the violence our young people face every day that they could decide this was a reasonable course of action.”

 May I suggest you go read the autobiography for Judge Clarence thomas, Alderman Preckwinkle?    Just take a look at someone who grew up in something that was as bad if not worse situation than kids and adults have today.

Again, how many of those violent situations in Chicago involved guns that were already owned illegally?

Ald. Mary Ann Smith (48th) said that law was written for militias and, “they guaranteed the right to carry around muskets not Uzis.”

Nowhere in the constitution does it say muskets, Ms. Smith..  It's nice to know that communing with the dead is your specialty now.  You do not redefine the terms of the constitution just because you don't like the word.

One Alderman actually shocked me though...

But Ald. Ed Burke (14th) retorted, “We can disagree with the Supreme Court all we want, but … this is the law and we’re going to have to follow it.”

Burke even went so far as to say perhaps the 1982 gun ban he championed earlier in his career went too far.

“I have to confess that back in 1982, when I was chair of the police committee that perhaps I and so many others that voted in favor of this ordinance exhibited too much ardor for the ban and we perhaps we should have been more sensitive to weighing the rights of legitimate citizens to have weapons.”

Who would have thought there'd be a modicum of intelligence in Chicago?  Of course, he voted in favor of both bans....so its' just a "Smidgen" of intelligence not a modicum, which means apparently, he still favors control over civil rights.


Of course,. they decided to ignore statistics that proved they were making a mistake

Gun rights activists point to statistics showing that jurisdictions that allow people to keep guns in their homes see drops in violent crime. But the aldermen unanimously rejected that claim, saying experts who testified before City Council committees this week convinced them that statistic is flawed.

I'm really curious to find out who these "Experts" are?   Anyone really want to guess?

Of course, one particularly vile Alderman had to throw in a jab at those of us who favor liberty and freedom:

“If people bothered to read as opposed to getting their news from the ‘Tea Party Times,’ they would understand and see that there is more harm done by the proliferation of handguns than there is benefit,” said Ald. Freddrenna Lyle (8th).

You knew a tea-party shot had to be coming from this batch of loons   

I'll tell you what Ms. Lyle.. Let it be known that I carry a weapon and that you don't.. and let's see who's more likely to be threatened by criminals shall we?