.

Area Events to Commemorate Giffords Shooting

Gatherings in Northbrook and Glencoe will educate citizens about gun violence.

Two area events are part of a nationwide campaign against violence to commemorate the shootings a year ago Sunday at a Tucson shopping center that claimed six lives and wounded 12 including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ). 

Gatherings will be held at 1:30 p.m. Sunday at in Glencoe and at 2 p.m. Sunday at in Northbrook. 

At St. Norbert, local clergy and gun violence experts will teach the group about current gun violence, how it affects the community and what can be done to stop it. 

The group at Am Shalom will see and discuss the “The Interrupters,” a film about three former Chicago gang members who now do everything they can to prevent gun violence. The film has been shown at a number of film festivals including Sundance. One of the speakers will be Glencoe Public Safety Director Mike Volling. 

The national candlelight vigil is organized by the Brady Campaign and Too Many Victims. In Chicago, 3,333 children died as a result of gun violence in 2011, according to the organization.

David Greenberg January 09, 2012 at 12:27 AM
That's certainly unfortunate. However, that act wasn't undertaken by law-abiding citizens, rather by criminals, engaged in criminal acts. Those responsible should be brought to trial and charged with the appropriate violations of laws. There's over 20,000 gun-related laws on the books across the country at the State and Federal level - they should be enforced. Baseball bats are but one of many weapons utilized by criminals in criminal acts. In the UK riots - I related where disarmed UK Residents were unable to obtain appropriate Police Protection and because they wished to protect themselves and others against rioters, they ordered aluminum baseball bats from Amazon UK. Does this mean that kids sitting on porches would be subject to attack by baseball bat if 100% of all guns were banned? Perhaps. Perhaps with something else. People have been fighting for millenia - and have used weapons available to them at the time. I'm not trying to be flip - what if the attackers happened to use a bow and arrow? Or if they'd used paint ball guns? Or shrukens (throwing stars)? Or just knives? If I recall correctly, the unfortunate victim was mistaken for someone else - so really, the choice of weapon doesn't seem to make a difference. If those criminals were convinced they wanted to attack someone, they could rush the porch and beat the victim with their hands and feet. The root causes for the violence need to be investigated and solutions posited and implemented.
David Greenberg January 09, 2012 at 12:37 AM
I'm not a fan of it by any stretch of the imagination. I do however enjoy reading and learning. Some of what I read I don't agree with, some I do - but I feel fortunate that in this Country, we have the opportunity to be exposed to ideas that we may not agree with. It wasn't too long ago that our very own HPHS had guns available in it - they taught shooting with rifles in the rifle range down in the basement. It was because they had a Jr. ROTC unit at HPHS. If I remember correctly, they were single bolt-action rifles. That range has since been repurposed as an area for dart boards and some work-out machines. Guns carried by students over 18 on a college campus is a totally different animal than guns carried by students under 18 on a high-school campus. Recall that being over the age of majority, they can already go to war and enter into contracts. I've never said that students in high school should be allowed to carry guns on campus.
Sully January 09, 2012 at 01:54 AM
But David- what is to keep the NRA and gun lobby from demanding ever more liberal or actually, nonexistent, gun laws? Right now individuals with criminal convictions and mentally ill patients can get fire arms without a second thought. Americans on the no-fly "terrorist" list can't board an airplane, but they can get guns. Even those "devil Muslims" right wingers are so afraid of can get guns in the U.S.
David Greenberg January 09, 2012 at 03:58 AM
Instant background checks through the FBI are required for purchasers to buy guns from a licensed dealer. Persons who have certain criminal convictions that prohibit them from possessing firearms are denied, and those adjudged mentally ill are similarly prohibited. However, the data the FBI has isn't perfect - clerks sometimes make mistakes entering things, or sometimes they don't have the data available to them. There are several States (I've forgotten which right now) that don't or haven't provided information regarding mental illness to the FBI. Not all criminal convictions preclude firearm possession - nor should they (e.g.: speeding, non-violent misdemeanors). The "no-fly list" is a secret list, procedures for objecting to one's inclusion on the list aren't promulgated, and in fact, many people on that list shouldn't be on it - they have names similar to someone who IS in fact a criminal, or their name was on it for reasons no one knows-one notable case was Senator Kennedy-he was on the list, and even he had difficulty getting off of it. That list is likely very inaccurate - I wouldn't rely on it for precluding purchases. If the "terrorist" or person on the no-fly list was tried and convicted of certain precluding crimes - they likely wouldn't pass the background check. But I doubt very much they'd be trying to make a purchase that would be flagged anyway - more likely is that they'd have someone "clean" make a straw purchase for them (which is illegal too).
David Greenberg January 09, 2012 at 04:02 AM
I'm not sure what you mean by "non existent" gun laws - do you mean new laws? Honestly, there's nothing to prevent anyone on any side of the issue from proposing new laws. Either side has to then get their respective Congresscritters to support and vote for the law, and needs to have the President sign it. If he doesn't sign it, then the Congress needs to override the veto to get it through. Those are a lot of hoops for any side to go through.
Harry Steindler January 09, 2012 at 04:27 AM
David - just heard about another innocent woman shot dead in Chicago last night, Thank God her assailants weren't wielding Louisville Sluggers. Guns belong at shooting ranges and in police hands (and hunting rifles - not assault weapons in hunters' hands). Find us some Chicago stories of people stopping drive by shootings because good citizens are packing heat. Why don't you write something to convince the hundreds of Chicago students who have been murdered while walking home from school, standing on their porches or sitting in their living rooms that life would be better if everyone had a gun.
David Greenberg January 09, 2012 at 06:01 AM
Having guns in Police hands only is scarier than allowing law-abiding citizens AND police to have them. Again, what's an "assault weapon"? You can hunt with rifles regardless of the cosmetic features. A couple of nights ago in Chicago - someone got robbed on the CTA. A military serviceman happened to be going to work as a security guard, the victim flagged down the serviceman - he went after the criminals, and they pulled a replica gun on him. The serviceman recognized that as a replica, and pulled out his own REAL firearm - he held the crooks at bay until the Police showed up. What might have happened if the serviceman hadn't been there? What might have happened if the victim had her own concealed firearm? McDonald v. Chicago - went to the US Sup Ct. - The Court held that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right, applicable to the States. Mr. McDonald simply wanted to own a firearm to protect himself against the throngs of criminals who kept robbing him in his neighborhood, but Chicago wouldn't issue a permit - so he sued - and won. I'm not responsible for any of those unfortunate victims who were attacked by criminals, nor will I ever assume any responsibility for any of them. The people who should consider themselves responsible are the criminals committing the crimes, and those lawmakers who prevented those victims from having the opportunity to defend themselves in the first place.
David Greenberg January 09, 2012 at 06:08 AM
The claim that guns only belong at shooting ranges and should be stored there would be refuted by persons around the World. What good would a weapon at a shooting range be when needed in an emergency? Is one supposed to say "Excuse me, just a moment. I have to drive to the range to retrieve my weapon?" to a criminal kicking down the door and trying to tie up one's family? Ludicrous concept isn't it? Besides, that regulation STILL wouldn't do anything to prevent criminal acts by criminals - they'd simply ignore the law and store the firearms where they want. Here's another one - some morons decided to throw acid on someone. Now we have a law in IL that requires purchasers of drain cleaners and caustic substances to show ID, and for the retailer to record the ID information, weights, types of substances, etc. Sadly, the law is not going to do anything to prevent criminal acts - those criminals could simply turn to different substances (gasoline anyone?). Rather than restricting the rights of the many because of the actions of the few demented, we ought to simply prosecute those who commit the crimes in the first place. There's a petition to repeal the "Drain Cleaner ID" law: http://www.change.org/petitions/state-of-illinois-legislature-repeal-the-act-restricting-drain-cleaner-and-caustic-chemical-purchases?share_id=TjZoPIlyOG&
Sully January 09, 2012 at 10:58 AM
Mr. Greenberg, would you happen to be an acquaintance of Lennie Jarrett?
Pedro B January 09, 2012 at 03:35 PM
David- Wow, you actually feel that guns have a place on a college campus because the freshman happen to be 18 and can be drafted(?) Have you truly thought this out clearly(?) Please, someone here let me know when you run for school board again. I'll also point out to voters how out of touch your opinions are with the community you live in (clearly!).
David Greenberg January 09, 2012 at 06:36 PM
I'm sorry, but I'm not. Who's that?
David Greenberg January 09, 2012 at 06:43 PM
I didn't say that it was simply because they were 18 and could go to war. I said "Guns carried by students over 18 on a college campus is a totally different animal than guns carried by students under 18 on a high-school campus. Recall that being over the age of majority, they can already go to war and enter into contracts." Persons over the age of 18, whether they're students or not, have different rights accorded to them than minors under the age of 18. One of those rights, in certain States, is the ability to apply for and obtain a concealed weapons permit. There's certain requirements that have to be met to do so, and yes, I can assure you that I've thought about it quite clearly. May we know your thoughts on the matter? Why do you feel it's a bad idea? My opinions are not out of touch with the community. They may be out of touch with some of yours, but that's just one of the benefits of living in the USA - lots of opinions.
Sully January 09, 2012 at 06:51 PM
Lennie Jarrett is head of the Lake County tea party.
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 04:36 AM
"A car's primary purpose is not to kill or maim, but to transport." ========== Huh...so a COP carrying a gun is ONLY out to kill and maim with that gun? Tell us, joker, WHAT does a COP carrry a gun for? I'd say MOST of them use them to STOP BAD GUYS if the need arises. There ya go....CC explained in one sentence.
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 04:41 AM
"The possibility of one's target being armed does not seem to be a deterrent here..." ================================================= Actually your GANG joke analogy is what is getting tired. Gang members are violent thugs who dont care about life...or death....because they are spoiled rotten children who never grew up and now are in adult bodies playing with adult toys. They are NOT relevant to the Concealed carry issue EXCEPT that they PROVE CONCLUSIVELY OUR argument that the LAW ABIDING MUST have a way to defend themselves from these maggots. And friend, a gun serves TWO purposes, NOT one as your fallacy seems to dictate. Guns; - DETER crime for the felon who IS afraid of being shot, and; - STOP crime by physically putting the criminal down in case he's NOT afraid of being shot. COPS understand this fact. Apparently you and Brady cant figure it out.
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 04:43 AM
"Since most gang-related shootings are gang-on-gang, and so many gang-members carry guns, doesn't that really defeat the argument that "arming citizens" will somehow reduce gun violence?" ========================================== Tell this faulty reasoning to these people and MILLIONS like them; Utah Gun Packer Stops Stabbing Spree Gun carrying man ends stabbing spree at Salt Lake grocery store Woman Uses .22 Pistol to Shoot & Kill Invader Gun carrying man ends stabbing spree at Salt Lake grocery store Late-night intruder fatally shot by residents of a North Bend home Armed Business Owner thwarts robbery attempt 78-year-old farmer wounds young intruder before gun jams Okla. mom Sarah McKinley defends her infant sons life from armed intruders Woman kills her returning rapist with shotgun Woman Shoots Would-Be Rapist Cocoa Store Owner Shoots Robber 84-year-old Cincinnati man uses gun to defend himself during home invasion Licensed gunpacker at GAS STATION shoots to defend himself Mom with Ohio concealed handgun license fires gun to ward off sex offender's violent attack Pizza Guy Pulls Gun on Robber Man at ATM Shoots Armed Robbers Woman who shot 12-year-old won't face charges, but boy will Concealed Carry works Gun Owners Busy Shooting Thugs in Toledo It was them or my family Dont bring a knife to a gunfight Appalachian School of Law shooting A principal and his gun Armed 11 year old Girl Defends Home from 3 armed Burglars: Armed Citizen
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 04:48 AM
What would be nice would be to have an intelligent discussion with ANTI gun drones who dont feel the compulsion to keep parroting off mind numbing Brady Camp rhetoric. Ive yet to run across ANY antigun nut who could actually carry on a conversation without the overwhelming, uncontrollable compulsion to start vomiting up idiocy and fallacy directly from the Brady handbook. As David has presented the FBI statistics PROVE OUR Case. Concealed carry has INCREASED. Gun owership has INCREASED. And during that SAME timeframe violent crime has DECREASED. Brady and antigunners in general have proven their own irrelevance. They are going the way of the dinosaur very quickly and most of the reason is that they cant help themselves but resort to fallacy, bogus data and statistics and outright lies.
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 04:54 AM
"your arguments would be better if you would readily admit that guns are designed to kill" ============================= Actually guns are designed to fire a projectile at very high velocities. They are not designed TO kill otherwise they ALL WOULD kill. There are target guns all over this planet that have never and will never take ANY life, animal or otherwise. These tools CAN be used quite effectively in killing or maiming, that is a fact. What they CANNOT do because it is IMPOSSIBLE for them to is commit a violent act. A gun can no more commit a crime than your car or your hairdryer can. Ever see an electrical cord used as a garrote ? Your dryer can be a weapon as easily as any gun can. It DOESNT MATTER what it was designed for. Fertilizer is designed to make plants grow better....and it CAN be used to blow up buildings. The design is irrelevant. The USE is ALL that matters. And friend the REASON we have our reactions that your sort is trying to take guns is very clear. Your Brady nutjob leaders are ALWAYS trying to pass laws to take them away.
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 04:55 AM
Actually guns are designed to fire a projectile at very high velocities. They are not designed TO kill otherwise they ALL WOULD kill. There are target guns all over this planet that have never and will never take ANY life, animal or otherwise. These tools CAN be used quite effectively in killing or maiming, that is a fact. What they CANNOT do because it is IMPOSSIBLE for them to is commit a violent act. A gun can no more commit a crime than your car or your hairdryer can. Ever see an electrical cord used as a garrote ? Your dryer can be a weapon as easily as any gun can. It DOESNT MATTER what it was designed for. Fertilizer is designed to make plants grow better....and it CAN be used to blow up buildings. The design is irrelevant. The USE is ALL that matters.
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 04:57 AM
So youre saying that the man couldnt have hit the gas and drove his car into this child and killed them just as easily? A LOT of parents of dead children who would say you are WRONG.
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 04:59 AM
If you found Davids comments outrageous Id say youre the sort that probably doesnt do much more than parrot off Brady rhetoric when you do actually say something....
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 05:01 AM
High school shooting teams. Guess youve been living in a cave or something? They were never a problem....until you left wing nutjobs said they were...
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 05:07 AM
"Personally I do not want to ever carry one as I do not want to make a decision of life or death for another." ========== NO sane person ever wants to have to make that decision.
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 05:09 AM
"If people want guns, they should be licensed, educated and carry insurance. " =================== So in essence you are a racist. Why? Because there are huge numbers of blacks and minorities who are already beat down by the system. Odds are against them for jobs and opportunities. So lets just make sure they cant defend themselves either by making it financially impossible to do so? The NRA at least wants EVERY law abiding person to have that option.
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 05:11 AM
"just heard about another innocent woman shot dead in Chicago last night, Thank God her assailants weren't wielding Louisville Sluggers." =========== Thank God they didnt pull up in front of her house with a fertilizer filled truck...
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 05:12 AM
"Guns belong at shooting ranges and in police hands (and hunting rifles - not assault weapons in hunters' hands)." ===================================== No...in YOUR opinion thats where they belong. Secondly, tell us what an 'assault' weapon is. I could show you two guns and my guess is you'll pick the one even though its the EXACT SAME GUN as the other with just a different stock. NOT ONE SINGLE DIFFERENCE in how the guns operate.
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 05:14 AM
"Why don't you write something to convince the hundreds of Chicago students who have been murdered while walking home from school, standing on their porches or sitting in their living rooms that life would be better if everyone had a gun." =================== Why dont you write something to convince THESE people that life would be better without guns? http://gunrights.web77.org/heroesofarmedselfdefense.shtml http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen.aspx?pageNum=1 http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/Ohio-CHL-holders-acting-in-self-defense
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 09:18 PM
Wow...you actually think our students should be DEFENSELESS SHEEP when those shooters come in to kill everyone????? Pedro...are YOU a violent criminal? I ask because it seems like you prefer that innocent people be unable to defend themselves. Thats usually how criminals think...
Rusty Shackleford July 03, 2012 at 09:18 PM
Pedro... Wow...you actually think our students should be DEFENSELESS SHEEP when those shooters come in to kill everyone????? Pedro...are YOU a violent criminal? I ask because it seems like you prefer that innocent people be unable to defend themselves. Thats usually how criminals think...
Rusty Shackleford July 05, 2012 at 05:24 PM
Frightening similarities of antigun Brady nuts and murderous felons; 1. They BOTH want you disarmed and helpless. 2. They BOTH tell you thats its better to give the felon whatever they want instead of fighting. One would almost get the impression that they are one and the same...

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something