City quickly enacts gun measures - Limits to replace gun ban when it is officially struck down

City quickly enacts gun measures - Limits to replace gun ban when it is officially struck down
By Hal Dardick
Copyright © 2010, Chicago Tribune
6:29 p.m. CDT, July 2, 2010
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-city-council-gun-ordinance-20100702,0,5675294.story


Four days after the U.S. Supreme Court gutted Chicago's longtime handgun ban, the City Council enacted new gun-control measures.

Alderman voted 45-0 in favor Friday, even as some of them acknowledged how little the restrictions would do to quell violent crime.

The rush job is aimed at having new handgun restrictions in place before a lower court can enter a final order to formally strike down the city's gun ban.

Get the Chicago Tribune delivered to your home for only $1 a week >>

The ordinance "places reasonable regulations regarding who should and should not be able to possess a handgun in their home for self-defense," Mayor Richard Daley said after the special council meeting. "With this law, we're supporting adults who legitimately want a gun in their home for self-defense. At the same time, we're trying to keep guns out of the hands of gangbangers and drug dealers who only want to terrorize our communities."

Several aldermen, however, said the ordinance is more likely to affect law-abiding gun owners than the thugs causing mayhem on hot weekend nights.

"You cannot legislate criminals. They are going to be criminals no matter what," said Ald. Ed Smith, 28th. "The people who intend to do crime, they are going to do it in whatever manner they can. They are going to get a gun wherever they can, and they are going to use it. They are not going to register their gun."

After making a similar acknowledgement, Ald. Deborah Graham, 29th, issued a plea: "I also would encourage gangbangers who get those guns unlawfully to stop getting them unlawfully. We're going to increase the penalties to make sure our communities are safe."

When the new law takes effect in 10 days, anyone who wants to keep a handgun at home and be on the right side of the law will have to obtain a Chicago firearm permit. That requires taking firearms training and having no convictions for a violent crime, unlawful use of a firearm or two or more charges of driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

Each weapon would have to be registered, and those with permits will be able to register only one weapon each month.

Guns could be kept only in the home, and each permit holder in the home may have only one handgun in readily operable condition at a time. The law does not consider garages, porches or exterior stairs part of a home.

The ordinance bans gun sales, firing ranges and shooting galleries in the city. The ban on sales already faces a potential challenge in federal court, and other aspects are expected to trigger lawsuits. But aldermen said they are ready for those battles.

"I can't imagine why anyone would oppose these reasonable regulations, these reasonable restrictions, but I know there will be those who believe that this right to bear arms is unrestricted and that anyone can have any weapon anywhere at all," Ald. Joe Moore, 49th, told the mayor during the council meeting. "I will stand with you defending this ordinance against the inevitable attacks from the far right wing, and I hope that wisdom and rationality prevail in our court system and that these laws will be upheld."

During the discussion, several aldermen said the 5-4 Supreme Court ruling that effectively tossed out handgun bans in Chicago and Oak Park would not have been made if justices were more familiar with urban violence.

"I think the Supreme Court is wrong, just like they've been wrong before," said Ald. Leslie Hairston, 5th. "They were wrong about segregation. They were wrong about the right to vote. And I think … when we look back years and years ahead, we will see that they were wrong about this as well."

But Ald. Edward Burke, 14th, who in 1982 shepherded the gun ban through the council, said maybe the council got it wrong in the first place.

"Perhaps I and some of the others that voted in favor of this ordinance exhibited too much ardor for the ban, and we perhaps should have been more sensitive to weighing the rights of legitimate citizens to have weapons," Burke said.

hdardick@tribune.com

jbyrne@tribune.com