Grim milestone: Austin shooting 500th homicide in Chicago. How are all those strict Chicagostan gun laws working for you Rahm baby?? As of Dec. 7, Stars and Stripes reports that 212 soldiers have died in combat-related deaths in Afghanistan. The ENTIRE country of Afghanistan is MUCH safer than the CITY of Chicago.

Leave a Reply

15 Comments on "Grim milestone: Austin shooting 500th homicide in Chicago"

Notify of

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
December 30, 2012 6:15 am

FTA:
The city’s latest homicide occurred around 9 p.m. Thursday when Nathaniel T. Jackson, 40, an alleged gang member with a lengthy arrest record, was gunned down outside a store in the Austin neighborhood.

Gee, a gang member? Whoda thunk it?

DefHarryMelon
Member
DefHarryMelon
December 30, 2012 6:54 am

If the city would just make it illegal for felonious gang members to have guns, this wouldn’t have happened.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
December 30, 2012 6:59 am

RIGHT!!! :roll:

flashingscotsman
Member
December 30, 2012 9:55 am

How about making it illegal to provide medical assistance, including first aid, to anyone sporting gang markings or colors?

Progressive Hemrrhoid
Member
Progressive Hemrrhoid
December 29, 2012 7:33 am

Well that pretty much explains why people call the place Shitcargo. The progressive’s paradise, a slum from sea to shining sea.

deepthinker
Member
deepthinker
December 28, 2012 6:36 pm

This proves the saying “When guns are illegal, only criminals will have them”. Information that does not follow the “party line” is going to be ignored and pushed to the back pages.

It is time for the grabbers to face the bold bare faced truth, strict on unenforceable guns laws are just a waste and make law abiding citizens criminals.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
December 28, 2012 10:52 pm

The thing is, that when they try to ban guns, they will be making criminals out of millions of Americans.

danybhoy
Member
danybhoy
December 29, 2012 4:53 am

Hey poppa, that’s the idea.

poppajoe49
Member
poppajoe49
December 29, 2012 6:13 am

Well, if they want a war they can’t win, let them try.

danybhoy
Member
danybhoy
December 30, 2012 11:16 am

Maybe this…

Joe
Member
Joe
December 28, 2012 11:40 pm

It’s easier to arrest you when they make you a criminal with the swipe of a pen.

Sidekick
Member
Sidekick
December 29, 2012 6:13 am

Well, assuming they pay attention to any parts of the Constitution and case law they can’t. Big fu****g assumption, I know.

Article 1 Section 9

…places certain limits on Congress. Certain legal items, such as suspension of habeas corpus, bills of attainder, and ex post facto laws are prohibited. No law can give preference to one state over another; no money can be taken from the treasury except by duly passed law, and no title of nobility, such as Prince or Marquis, will ever be established by the government.

The key is No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

Attainder
attainder n. The loss of all civil rights by a person sentenced for a serious crime. [< OFr. attaindre, to convict] Source: AHD

In the context of the Constitution, a Bill of Attainder is meant to mean a bill that has a negative effect on a single person or group (for example, a fine or term of imprisonment). Originally, a Bill of Attainder sentenced an individual to death, though this detail is no longer required to have an enactment be ruled a Bill of Attainder.

Ex post facto
ex post facto adj. Formulated, enacted, or operating retroactively. [Med Lat., from what is done afterwards] Source: AHD

In U.S. Constitutional Law, the definition of what is ex post facto is more limited. The first definition of what exactly constitutes an ex post facto law is found in Calder v Bull (3 US 386 [1798]), in the opinion of Justice Chase:

“1st. Every law that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal; and punishes such action. 2d. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed. 3d. Every law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed. 4th. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense, in order to convict the offender.”

See, we have nothing to worry about :)

Joe
Member
Joe
December 29, 2012 11:23 pm

“See, we have nothing to worry about :)”

LoL, while a sad tear runs down my cheek. I can’t believe the world we are living in. It’s just pure insanity that these people want to throw the Constitution out the window for free stuff. Totally insane.

danybhoy
Member
danybhoy
December 28, 2012 12:05 pm

So how is that “community” Obama organized? Amazing job that he did back in the murder capital of America.

StrinaM
Member
December 28, 2012 11:54 am

I just posted in the tips the link to the video of Jesse Jackson failing miserably to defend the gun laws in Chicago. Its pretty ridiculous. He basically lays out all the same arguments for less gun control while trying to defend strict gun control.

wpDiscuz