STNG reports a man riding a bicycle was shot when the gun he was carrying accidentally discharged early Tuesday in the Rogers Park neighborhood on the North Side, police said. The man was riding a bicycle in the 1500 block of West North Shore Avenue when the gun he was carrying, possibly in his waistband, discharged about 12:30 a.m., according to a Rogers Park District police lieutenant.
The man suffered a gunshot wound to the leg and was taken to St. Francis Hospital in Evanston in good condition, according to the lieutenant. The man could be charged for carrying a gun, the lieutenant said.
BLOGNOTES: "Could be charged?" Just because the reckless, gun-toting biker only shot himself. Charge him. Carrying a concealed weapon. Unlawful use of weapon. Unlawful discharge of said weapon. No questions asked.
24 comments:
Here we get an idea of the ramifications of widespread gun ownership among citizens ill equipped by training or temperement to own a firearm.
It's documented that more people kill or injure themselves with their own weapons than ever use them to defend themselves. When the need for self-defense does arise, such is in a home invasion, carjacking, or street mugging, the gun owner is almost never able to get near his weapon. It is in a gun safe, or the other room, or unloaded. If it loaded and readily accessible, then it is a danger to the household children that way more than offsets any defensive value it may have.
And was this cyclist a legitimate citizen, or was he one of the growing number of muggers and robbers who are roving the city on bikes in search of victims?
wonder how that will go over with the homies. i shot myself, haw haw haw.
Three statutory codes regulate the possession, transfer, and transportation of firearms- the Criminal Code, the Wildlife Code, and the Firearm Owner's Identification Act. Under Unlawful Use of Weapons (UUW) in the Criminal Code, persons who have been issued a valid FOID card may transport a firearm anywhere in their vehicle or on their person as long as the firearm is unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container. Firearms that are not immediately accessible or are broken down in a non-functioning state may also be carried or transported under the Criminal Code. The Wildlife Code, however, is more restrictive. It requires that all firearms transported in or on any vehicle be unloaded and in a case. Because of this, it is recommended that, in order to be in compliance with all statutes, all firearms be transported:
1. Unloaded and,
2. Enclosed in a case, and
3. By persons who have a valid FOID card.
Source: Illinois State Police titled "Transport Your Gun Legally"
The possibility that there might be a firearm in said household is a deterrent. When citizens cannot arm themselves, the criminals have all of the advantage because they don't obey laws.
What sort of bicycle was he riding?
The fact that there might be a firearm in the house might also work as an ATTRACTANT to a housebreaker.
People who won't bother with a solid-core double-deadbolt-locked door on a second story apt might go to extraordinary effort to get their hands on such a thing as a firearm. Years ago, in another city, I heard of breakins among many people who were never bothered till they obtained a weapon, which they displayed a little too publicly.
The firearms thing is very much a matter of the context you dwell in. They are a necessity for a rural householder with lifestock and farm equipment to protect, in an area with sparse law enforcement. You are very vulnerable when you live in a house isolated in the middle of nowhere, far from help. I wouldn't want to be too far out on the interstate without one, either.
However, urban life is different, and the authorities have good reason for regulating the things. First of all, this area is so densely populated that if you fired to "protect", you would take a good chance of sending a bullet through the window across the street and into the lungs of the innocent old man seated within, rather than your assailant. Worse, your assailant might have the advantage of surprise (usually the case with a mugging) and pick the thing right off you and use it on you.
This would surely have been my fate had I been armed when a mugger grabbed me from behind as I teetered down a dark street laden with 40 lbs of groceries one hot St. Louis night long ago. I was lucky all he had was a knife, because he was clearly trying to kill me but I threw everything down and struggled like a maniac to get clear, buying myself enough time for a neighbor to step onto the terrace across the street and see us.
If I'd had a gun for him to use on me, I'd have been killed then and there.
Chicago gun laws are silly. Bad guys have guns; good guys, by and large, don't. Bad guys don't care about FOID cards or following rules. Do we really think that by outlawing guns that bad guys will cease to possess them? Anyway, unless one has a carry permit, which is not easy to get in Chicago, this cyclist wasn't legally packing.
Too bad the cyclist didn't shoot himself in the balls. It really pisses me off that I follow the rules but many of our neightbors do not.
Its not that easy. Arresting the idiot would involve a guard detail if admitted to the hospital. Its better to wait till he gets released, and even then, it probably means frequent trips by the wagon to the hospital to get the puke treated.
Police Cannot Protect And Are Not Required To Protect Every Individual
The courts have consistently ruled that the police do not have an obligation to protect individuals, only the public in general. For example, in Warren v. D.C. the court stated "courts have without exception concluded that when a municipality or other governmental entity undertakes to furnish police services, it assumes a duty only to the public at large and not to individual members of the community."
Former Florida Attorney General Jim Smith told Florida legislators that police responded to only about 200,000 of 700,000 calls for help (28.57%) to Dade County authorities. Smith was asked why so many citizens in Dade County were buying guns and he said, "They damn well better, they've got to protect themselves."
The Department of Justice found that in 1989, there were 168,881 crimes of violence which were not responded to by police within 1 hour.
Currently, there are about 150,000 police officers on duty at any one time to protect a population of more than 250 million Americans or almost 1,700 citizens per officer
Criminals Fear Armed Citizens More Than The Police
In 1985, the National Institute for Justice reported that:
60% of felons polled agreed that "a criminal is not going to mess around with a victim he knows is armed with a gun."
57% of felons polled agreed that "criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are about running into the police."
74% of felons polled agreed that "one reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot during the crime."
Kennesaw, GA. In 1982, this suburb of Atlanta passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one weapon in the house. The residential burglary rate subsequently dropped 89% in Kennesaw, compared to the modest 10.4% drop in Georgia as a whole.
Ten years later (1991), the residential burglary rate in Kennesaw was still 72% lower than it had been in 1981, before the law was passed.
Orlando, FL. In 1966-67, the media highly publicized a safety course which taught Orlando women how to use guns. The result: Orlando's rape rate dropped 88% in 1967, whereas the rape rate remained constant in the rest of Florida and the nation.
Rich Daley says "guns kill and should be banned, common sense". Are you trying to tell us that he is wrong? Next thing your going to say is the constitution guarentees the right to bear arms. Then why hasn't Daley and all the other politicos been tried for treason? Our leaders are the most corrupt, self-serving anti-constitutionists this side of Moscow!
What a knuckle-head. Too bad he didn't shoot off his own balls.
ChipBagg said...
What a knuckle-head. Too bad he didn't shoot off his own balls.
3:07 PM
We have a winner.....Thats where he shot himself....or so I hear...
i prefer he would have killed himself. one fewer pos to worry us.
chippbagg is back- yay!
There are several reasons why he may not have been charged with UUW. Was a gun recovered, was he permitted to carry a gun? Those are just a couple of reasons why he may not have been charged.
As far as the need for the average citizen to carry a firearm, I say the more the merrier. A well trained, licensed citizen should not be denied the right of self defense. Ever wonder who actually has all the firearms here in Chicago? That's right, the criminal. Because they don't care about Chicago's archaic gun laws. They will carry and use a gun against a citizen who obeys the law. And criminals love it when their victims are unarmed having been denied the right of self defense.
Some here speak of the gun being more of a handicap then a deterent. That's probably because they weren't trained properly. They go out, buy a handgun and hide it somewhere in the home where it doesn't do them any good. Or they break it down when they travel. The gun should and must be available at a moments notice. Northcoast tells a story about how he/she was attacked as he/she walked down the street loaded with 40lbs.of groceries and how he/she would be dead if he/she carried a pisol. While I don't know all the particulars of the case, I wonder if the attack would have even happened if the offender thought that there was at least a 50/50 chance that northcoast was carrying a firearm or wasn't carrying those groceries.
Criminals prey upon the weak, those that can't defend them selves or do not appear to be situationally aware.
No sir, I say that a citizen whose background is devoid of any felony arrest, is trained on the use and operation of a firearm including the legalities of it's use, should be licensed and permitted to carry a firearm as a means of self defense. Or at the very least be allowed to keep one in the home. If you don't believe me, go ask that senior citizen in Ukrainian Village that successfully used a pistol to defend himself against a mugger the other day. Ask him if he regrets carrying a gun and if he thinks he would be alive today if he didn't carry it.
I've listened to a police scanner for about 7 years now. Before Rogers Park, I was down near Lincoln Park. This kind of thing happens more often than you'ld think.
When I listened to the 23rd District and this would happen, or gangbangers would be fighting each other and someone would get hurt... one cop would come on and say, "Bless his heart..."
That about sums it up.
OF COURSE it wouldn't have happened if I hadn't been carrying those groceries. Had I not been laden with stuff, I'd been more alert and would have headed it off, as I did numerous almost-assaults in that city.
Which is exactly my point.
I mean, am I not supposed to live a normal life- carry groceries, or be a mother with a young kid, or a person with a disability or a leg in a cast?
Sorry, but my idea of civil life does not include walking around at all times with a weapon at the ready.
When you feel you must do this to live, your society has come apart totally. When police don't respond to a call, or worse, the governing powers let the civic climate deteriorate to the point where the police cannot provide all round protection, then we have to consider just what we have done to create such an environment.
necessity for a rural householder?
nooooo......certainly not for protection. living in the sticks makes it too hard for criminals to do much of anything because it's too inconvenient to get to and fro.
urbanvilles are much more conducive to crime due to the target-rich environment.
look into the history of cities from as far back as you choose, and you'll naturally find crime as a 'byproduct' of cramped living quarters
...if you outlaw bicycles, only outlaws will have bicycles...wait thats not what i'm trying to get at here
Someone should compare the number of handgun deaths and injuries in Chicago before and after 1983, when Jane imposed the ban (I think it was '83.)
Perhaps, our brilliant alderman might be able to better determine whether banning handguns had any significant affect on gun violence in our City limits. If so, then for those who really want to possess, either join Chicago's Finest, risk a conviction, or find another form of lawful protection (pitbull, anyone?). Rough Rough.
chicago and d.c. have strict handgun laws
"Chicago 599
Chicago is America's murder capital. The homicides are down from 648 a year earlier and 665 in 2001. It's the first time since 1967 that the total has dipped below 600.
The nation's third-largest city still outpaced all others for the second time in three years. New York, with about three times the population, ended the year with 596 homicides. Los Angeles, which had the most murders in 2002 at 658, wound up with about 100 fewer than Chicago last year."
"Crime in Washington, D.C., peaked in the early 1990s, when it was known as the murder capital of the United States. Crime rates have since declined substantially as gentrification has spread across many parts of the city.
At the peak of the violent crime wave in the early 1990s, Washington, D.C., was known as the murder capital[1] of the United States. Homicides peaked in 1991 at 482."
Big Daddy said...
There are several reasons why he may not have been charged with UUW. Was a gun recovered, was he permitted to carry a gun? Those are just a couple of reasons why he may not have been charged.
A rusty revolver was found, and no he did not have a "permit". Was charged with UUW, but still in the hospital.
When I listened to the 23rd District and this would happen, or gangbangers would be fighting each other and someone would get hurt... one cop would come on and say, "Bless his heart..."
A police officer friend who has worked in the city for several years has made similar comments. When one of the thugs gets killed, he says "ah, one less..."
Chicago is "murder capital" based only on the raw number of murders.
St. Louis, Detroit, Washington D.C., Atlanta, New Orleans, all have much higher RATES per 100,000.
Chicago had 448 murders in 2005, with a pop. of 2,873,000.
St. Louis had 131 murders with a pop. of 331,000.
Chicago, about 16 murders per 100,000.
St. Louis, about 37 murders per 100,000. St. Louis' murder rate has always been twice that of Chicago. St. Louis also has a much higher high school dropout rate and much larger fraction of the population on welfare.
New Orleans before the flood, about 56 per 100,000.
Gary, In, about 67 per 100,000- the worst in the country.
NYC, about 12 per 100,000, and an actual number lower than Chicago.
St. Louis and Detroit have vied for the spot as the Nation's Most Dangerous City for about 40 years. St. Louis currently holds the title, and MO's new, lax gun laws that permit conceal/carry aren't helping. The murder rate has increased while that in other cities has dropped a little. The worst part is that now the police there are nervous wrecks and are shooting people with cellphones in their hands on the assumption that the phone is a weapon. One guy answered his door to the police with his phone in hand and they blew him away, assuming it was a weapon.
Post a Comment