He had a valid firearms owner identification card

[MichaelHarris]

"A man who fired on a Chicago subway train as it pulled into a business district station used an assault rifle, Chicago Police Superintendent Gerry McCarthy said Thursday....the weapon he used was stolen from Indiana, McCarthy said. "

Responsible gun owner gone bad I guess, using one of those weapons that don't get used very often....again.

[virginia mountainman]

1. Hum...

Just another showing of how ineffective background checks really are...

[Duckhunter935]

2. well first

I assume it was not an "assault Rifle" but a semi-automatic rifle. Must not have been a responsible gun owner if he stole the rifle. He just did not have any flags present during the background check.

And they are not used very often is correct.

[DonP]

3. Couldn't post a copy of his NRA member card yet?

The rest of the story ...

"The man under arrest has a string of arrests on his record for theft, trespassing, mob action, public drinking and possession of ammunition, according to court records."

Let's see, so called "assault weapons" are already illegal in Chicago and Cook County, it's a felony to carry a weapon of any kind on public transportation, even with a CC permit and the rifle was stolen to begin with. Another moment of pride for all the Gun Free Zone fans, "But, but, but, they have no guns allowed signs at every Blue Line station".

Yeah, he sounds just like a model citizen. But it's a great example of how useless FOID cards as gun control are, thanks for pointing that out.

But it obviously gives mindless fans of gun control so much joy to find criminals in news stories and try and equate them with law abiding gun owners, who are we to throw a wet blanket on their rare opportunities for celebration.

Keep trying, maybe someday you'll find a relevant story.

[BigAlanMac]

7. Here's the original AP story:

http://news.yahoo.com/police-shots-fired-commuter-train-chicago-173957921.html

It doesn't mention the perp's record. How about a link to that quote, please.

EDIT: Never mind, I found it.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-police-make-arrest-after-report-of-shots-filed-at-cta-station-20141009-story.html

[oneshooter]

4. it would be a big help if you posted the url of the article.

Otherwise it never happened.

[MichaelHarris]

8. here ya go

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-police-make-arrest-after-report-of-shots-filed-at-cta-station-20141009-story.html

[pablo_marmol]

5. You keep (feebly) attempting to mislead.......

.......and we'll keep playing it straight.

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/

[jimmy the one]

10. El Nada, misleads

Pablo: You keep (feebly) attempting to mislead......and we'll keep playing it straight.

Wrong on both counts; it's you above who tries to mislead, citing pew as proof.
Read what pew has to say overall:
"your' pew link: National rates of gun homicide and other violent gun crimes are strikingly lower now than during their peak in the mid-1990s, paralleling a general decline in violent crime, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of government data. Beneath the long-term trend, though, are big differences by decade: Violence plunged through the 1990s, but has declined less dramatically since 2000.

'my' pew link: The Pew Research Center has tracked gun ownership since 1993, and our surveys largely confirm the {GSS} General Social Survey trend. In our Dec1993 survey, 45% reported having a gun in their household; in early 1994, the GSS found 44% saying they had a gun in their home. A Jan2013 Pew survey found 33% saying they had a gun, rifle or pistol in their home, as did 34% in the 2012 wave of {GSS}. http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/12/section-3-gun-ownership-trends-and-demographics/ --- pg4;

So duh, el nada, now we see a real 'contributing reason' to the decline in violent crime & gun homicide rates from mid 90's to now, rates which have been declining along with a corresponding decline in gun ownership rates (both in the household as well as personal).

daily kos: in line with other surveys, {Pew} report that the number of people living in households with guns and the number of gun owners is declining over the last twenty years, and currently 33% of homes have a firearm in the house, but only 24% personally own a firearm.. that means the average gun owner has over 4 firearms each.. the highest rate of gun ownership is older white males -Roughly three-quarters (74%) of gun owners are men, and 82% are white. Taken together, 61% of adults who own guns are white men. Nationwide, white men make up only 32% of the U.S. adult population.

[jimmy the one]

11. really neat picture graph (takeII)

Pablo's link, via pew: Violence plunged through the 1990s, but has declined less dramatically since 2000.

Observe how gun ownership rates also 'plunged through the 90's', along with the plunging violent crime & gun homicide rates. Then observe how gun ownership stabilized about year 2000, & then declined only slightly to now, along with the smaller decline in violent crime rates. CAN'T YOU PEOPLE SEE WHAT REALLY TRANSPIRED????



The Pew Research Center has tracked gun ownership since 1993, and our {PEW} surveys largely confirm the {GSS} General Social Survey trend. In our Dec1993 survey, 45% reported having a gun in their household; in early 1994, the GSS found 44% saying they had a gun in their home. A Jan2013 Pew survey found 33% saying they had a gun, rifle or pistol in their home, as did 34% in the 2012 wave of {GSS}. http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/12/section-3-gun-ownership-trends-and-demographics/ --- pg4;

[NYC_SKP]

12. What business of mine is it if someone wants to keep a gun in their home?

Even if that increases the chances of an unintentional discharge.

Would you be OK with the government stripping you of your bleach, matches, lighter fluid, artificial sweeteners.

Give it a break and let people be.

[GGJohn]

20. And those graphs could be interpreted to mean

that more and more people aren't willing to admit they have firearms in their homes.
Can you prove otherwise?

[friendly_iconoclast]

24. "Correlation = causation" *only* when certain posters deem it so, GGJ

The ones with the 'correct' position, of course...

[acalix]

13. Correlation and causation. Which one?

Take a look at this: http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

Notice how all violent crime declined? Vehicle thefts, property crimes, burglary, etc.

Are you saying declining gun ownership caused people to steal less vehicles, commit less property crimes and burglarize less residences and business? Did you forget that non-gun homicides also declined around 25% during that period as well? According to Jimmy, because gun ownership declined less people murdered each other with knives. lolwut?

I can easily say increasing gun ownership decreases murder rates.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/gun-ownership-surges-to-39-ending-4-decade-slump/article/2541876

The YouGov poll put gun ownership at 39% in 2013. This was the same year people bought a lot more guns because of the scare.

So what happened in 2013?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/01/the-year-in-murder-2013-marks-a-historic-low-for-many-cities.html

[friendly_iconoclast]

14. The OP posts a strawman, and his defender conflates correlation with causation

Gun control advocacy always was intellectually dodgy, now it's devolved further to
Roger Ailes-levels of chicanery and outright fraud

[jimmy the one]

18. an iconic job description

icon: The OP posts a strawman, and his defender conflates correlation with causation

I did not, but the hypothesis cannot dismiss a contributing causative relationship, regardless how you misinterpret the correlation/causation tenet.
A rough correlation exists from 1993 on between falling gun ownership rates & falling violent crime. And thank you for acknowledging a correlation. Remember, correlation does not necessarily prove causation, but it does not disprove it either. Often causation is linked with correlation.

what I prefaced with to pablo: .. now we see a real 'contributing reason' to the decline in violent crime & gun homicide rates from mid 90's to now, rates which have been declining along with a corresponding decline in gun ownership rates (both in the household as well as personal).

icon: Gun control advocacy always was intellectually dodgy, now it's devolved further to
Roger Ailes-levels of chicanery and outright fraud

Should I present the numerous times the past couple years that you've been caught posting inaccurate claims & bogus 'facts', after which you clammed up tighter than an oyster in the sea?
Your own accusations, such as above, far more often are rooted in ad hominem, or just subjective opinion.
Chicanery & fraud belong in your job description, not mine.

[friendly_iconoclast]

22. "Should I present the numerous times the past couple years that you've been caught...?"

Yes, you should. With links. *And* with third-party confirmation of these purported
"inaccurate claims & bogus 'facts'", as you are quite willing when confronted to
simply declare that you have 'proved' your point (to your own satisfaction, at least).

I have forborn noting that this is a technique used by those who dwell under
overpasses/trail a fishing line slowly behind a boat- but I'm saying it now

You are far from the first poster to do so, and doubtless not the last.

That which is claimed without evidence can be likewise dismissed...

[friendly_iconoclast]

29. Typical-when asked for documentation, the poster disappeared...

[jimmy the one]

35. another foot stick

icon: Typical-when asked for documentation, the poster disappeared...

I haven't disappeared after a week, more nonsense from you; I don't post every day, just weekly, thus you have managed a faux pas again, to add to the ones I've posted at the bottom of this thread, to support my previous contention about you being error prone.

[jimmy the one]

16. crime down, so is gun ownership

acalix; The YouGov poll put gun ownership at 39% in 2013. This was the same year people bought a lot more guns because of the scare.

You cite one poll as proof of a 'surge' in HH gun ownership, with a moe of 3% putting it in range of gss' result of 34% in 2012 -- as proof of what?

Your yougov poll: A 24% personally own a gun ....
B 15% don't personally but someone in HH owns gun
C 56% No gun in HH .... D not sure 4%http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/tkzv4c1e8v/econTabReport.pdf

So the yougov survey is in line with gss personal gun ownership rate of low 20's, & within GSS moe for HH gun ownership rate in mid 30's.

Crime is down -- and so is gun ownership July 23, 2012 By Lauter .. three important trends to keep in mind: Criminal violence in America has dropped to levels not seen in more than a generation, the percentage of Americans owning guns is down and public support for gun control measures has plummeted as well.
.. the percentage of Americans who report owning a pistol or shotgun, the weapons most often used in crime, is now down to 1 in 5, about half what it was in the 1970s. Of course, hardened criminals aren’t likely to respond to the GSS survey, so there’s probably some under-reporting going on. But that was true 30 or 40 years ago, too, and isn’t likely to have affected the overall trend.
The major point is that the American “culture of gun ownership” has been strikingly on the wane for the past generation. A similar decline has taken place in the number of Americans who hunt, now about 5% of the population. With a decline in the percentage of Americans who own guns and the percentage who hunt, one might have expected support for gun control to go up. http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/23/news/la-pn-crime-is-down-and-so-is-gun-ownership-20120722

And we rehash the same issue from the other thread: (jto): Note how the percentage of firearms involved in homicides decreased from 1993 thru 2000, from approx. 71% down to 64%, about a 10% decline, statistically significant. This is the same time period that household & personal firearm ownership declined 20 -30% accd'g to GSS, gallup, & Pew.
From 2002 thru 2011 the FA% remained fairly level, avg'g about 68%, an avg decline from 1993/4 of about 5%, not that statistically significant except that, if so, one would've expected a fluctuation above the 1993/4 rate, and there wasn't any.
Percent of violence {homicide} involving a firearm, 1993–2011
1993 .. 71.2 % 1994 ...71.4
1995 ...69.0
1996 ...68.0
1997 ...68.0
1998 ...65.9
1999 ...64.1
2000 ...64.4 .. 2001 ...55.9 ... scratch, 9/11 included ~3,000
2002 ...67.1 2003 ...67.2 2004 ...67.0 2005 ...68.2 2006 ...68.9
2007 ...68.8 2008 ...68.3 2009 ...68.4 2010 ...68.1
2011c ..69.6 http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172151328

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

17. Figures lie...

...and liars figure.

Just saying...

[jimmy the one]

19. a witty saying does not prove causation

discontent: Figures lie......and liars figure.

Thanks for the silly platitude; they appear to be your specialty, your forte'.

Here's my counter, from Voltaire:
A witty saying, proves nothing.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

21. JTO/Voltaire: A witty saying, proves nothing.

Neither do statistics in general.

[acalix]

23. And gun homicide percentages are rising again

And according to you gun ownership is not increasing.

That means the decline didn't cause the drop in violent crime.

You cannot have it both ways Jimmy.

Once again non-gun homicides and crime declined heavily during the same period.

[pablo_marmol]

26. Sorry, Mr. Zero, but your contention that gun ownership is down

is nothing but bollocks. You can lie all you want, but the rate at which new gun owners are being trained, and new ranges are being built tells the truth.

So like the author of the OP, you can continue to prevaricate -- you'll be doing so to no avail.

[pablo_marmol]

27. Should have pointed out that the misleading I was referring

to was the OP's contribution to the hapless google-dumps we experience which (feebly) attempt to reinforce the false "epidemic of gun violence" assertion.

[Straw Man]

6. Again?

Last edited Fri Oct 10, 2014, 12:07 PM - Edit history (1)

Responsible gun owner gone bad I guess, using one of those weapons that don't get used very often....again.

Long guns account for fewer homicides per year than do hands, fists, and feet. That's according to the FBI.

How many times does it have to be said? "Data" is not the plural of "anecdote."

[friendly_iconoclast]

9. The bigots that learn to couch their language and stick to logical fallacies...

...are the ones that last around here. The frothing-at-the-mouth sorts that are unable to
keep it under control are the ones that flame out or get PPR'd.

[Eleanors38]

15. I see why a LOT of DUers want gunz out if GD.

Pheww!

[pablo_marmol]

25. !!!

Last edited Mon Oct 20, 2014, 11:14 PM - Edit history (1)

ETA: Can't have it both ways, Mikey & Jimmy. (Can't assail the RW for behavior you engage in yourself!)

[benEzra]

28. Illinois reported 509 murders in 2012, per the FBI; *4* involved any type of rifle.

Scaremongerers will scaremonger. That doesn't change the fact that rifles are consistently the least misused of all weapons.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/20tabledatadecpdf

[DonP]

30. Apparently it was a Hi Point 9mm carbine and his FOID was revoked months ago

Sheriff Tom Dart never got around to confiscating his FOID during any of this guys several arrests for misdemeanors.

As usual, McCarthy (AKA "McStreetlights" for his drunken shooting of streetlights as a cop in NJ) was wrong about pretty much everything but couldn't wait for the actual facts before jumping in front of a camera. FYI 60 rounds of 9mm ammo is one faily small box and one loaded magazine.

From what they have released, the guy was on something and was shooting at the train tracks and train, nobody specifically. But with Chicago's track record of prosecuting gun related crimes, he'll most likely be back out on the street in 30 to 60 days max and they'll probably forget to take his FOID card again.

The gun was illegal, the guy having it in his possession was illegal, guns on public transportation (CTA property) are illegal, even with a CC license and of course shooting it in city limits is illegal. Maybe another law to make it more illegal will help?

Also still waiting for the concealed carry bloodbath we've been promised by McStreetlights, Dart and their ilk.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

31. I heard Chicago once arrested a woman for...

...writing a bunch of bad checks. She made bail the same day thou, by personal check, of course.

[DonP]

32. The Chicago area courts have the worst record for gun related prosecutions in the country

They keep passing these inane laws and then never get around to actually enforcing them.

IIRC, last year they had a grand total of 38 prosecutions for all gun related violations from straw purchases to UUW (Unlawful Use of a Weapon). Anita Alvarez, the County States Attorney and her crew have a track record of pleading out gun charges to a slap on the wrist like Boot Camp, like the 2 thugs that shot and killed Hadiya Pendleton right after the President's second inaugural.

That's why we all laughed at the idea of banning concealed carry on public transportation where you might need it the most.

Then a month later, a couple of local gang members that must have seen a history book in a window somewhere once, realized that Jesse James had a great idea. Rob the trains between stations with guns, take the wallets, watches, laptops and I-Phones, get off at the next stop and disappear into the crowd with a pillow case full of $$$ stuff.

They hit three of the major CTA train lines this summer. The cops expect them back around the holidays when people are carrying money for shopping.

Bailing herself out with a bad check for writing bad checks fits the mold perfectly for this place. Probably an alderman's daughter or a member of Daley's family. Hell, Daley's nephew (Vanecko) just got away with killing a guy on the street with a slap on the wrist and a fine.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

33. IMHO...

...a good barometer of effective government is the ratio of punishments versus plea bargains for offenders. Making restrictive laws only to use them as tools to plea bargain for fines and/or supervision fees is simply a stealth tax. Like those areas where speed limits change from 45 to 25 and aren't well marked but are heavily patrolled.

Ratios reveal a lot about an area. I've heard opinions relating an area's civility to the teeth-to-tattoo ratio.

[jimmy the one]

34. chicanery & outright fraud

friendly icon, to me: Yes, you should {..present numerous times -icon's- been wrong}. With links.

Fine. You posted Houston & Chicago total violent crime for 6 month jan-jun2013, and called them rates:

1) icon Jul 11, 2014: Houston has far fewer gun laws, and lesser rates of robbery and murder...HOUSTON 2,177,273
Murder 105 Aggravated Assault 5,087 Robbery 4,612
CHICAGO 2,708,382 Murder 179 Aggravated Assault 5,074 Robbery 5,416

I replied: Putting those figures in relative terms of crime 'rates' per population:
crime .... .Houston ....... Chicago
murder .. 4.82 .... .... 6.6
aggrasslt.. 233.6 .... 187.3
robbery: ... 211.8 .... 200
.. you corroborated quite nicely my point, that Houston is on a per capita par with violent crime in Chicago. It actually is more violent crime prone in Houston than chicago, since there are far more robberies & aggravated assaults than murders.
Edit to add property crime & rates:
Chicago 53,807 = 1.98 prop crimes/100k
Houston 51,707 = 2.375 prop crimes/100k ----- did you have a point icon?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=149262 --- at very bottom as of 10/25/14.

2) icon, Oct 28, 2012, understating Houston's murder rate wrt Chicago - try 2/3 for 2011, icon: While similarly-sized Houston (in gun-friendly Texas) has about 1/3 the murder rate {as Chicago}.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=82519

3) icon here claims Chicago crime rates are higher than Houston in all categories but aggr asslt, but his link does not prove that whatsoever, it provides only data for Houston (presume 2011):
icon: Dec 8, 2012,Compare Chicago to Houston, the nearest city in size; it's not a bit flattering to Chi-town: From the FBI, via the Houston Chronicle, rates are per 100,000. Chicago is higher in all categories save aggravated assault:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/111518996/FBI-crime-29p-c Murder 9, Robbery 376, Aggravated assault 554 http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=90806

Wiki contradicts icon:
city... popu .. tot violcr-rate..murd..rape.. robb ..aggraslt.. propcr.. burg... larceny.. autothft
Chicago: 2,708,382 ..N/A .....18.5... N/A ..497.6 ..453.1 ..4,152.5.. 839.9 ..2,684.9.. 627.7
Houston: 2,177,273 ..992.5 ..10.0 ..30.5 ..431.0 ..521.0 ..4,945.5 ..1,223.1 ..3,122.2 ..600.3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate

[jimmy the one]

36. 3rd party confirmation? for you?

icon: Yes, you should. With links. *And* with third-party confirmation of these purported "inaccurate claims & bogus 'facts'", as you are quite willing when confronted to simply declare that you have 'proved' your point (to your own satisfaction, at least).

You know, I have met sleazy punks I have more respect for. I don't think I've ever 'declared' or phrased it I 'proved my point', I prefer to disprove gunnut propaganda & 2nd amendment mythology when it comes from pro gun posters on this board.
I take pains to usually provide valid links & credible sources to back up my posts, whereas your links half the time prove to be irrelevant, inapplicable, or half assed (as per my post 34).
You hide behind the curtain of internet safety & anonymity & take baseless cheap shots at gun control posters quite frequently, such as:

icon: I have forborn noting that this is a technique used by those who dwell under overpasses/trail a fishing line slowly behind a boat- but I'm saying it now

Pathetic & lame ad hominem from 'friendly' icon.
I'll have more of icon's inaccurate claims & bogus facts in due time, but am pressed for time today, so the 3 above will serve as an appetizer.

[friendly_iconoclast]

37. I'm happy that you feel you've proved ...something

And take heart- I'll not alert on your posts. I take the attitude posts such as this
should be treated as one of your other interlocutors declared:
"I believe in letting stupidity stand for all to see"

Personally, I get more happiness being on the correct side of the issue than
from pulling a 'George Aiken' and simply declaring that I've won

[friendly_iconoclast]

38. "I don't think I've ever 'declared' or phrased it I 'proved my point'"

How quickly you've forgotten:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172154244#post26

I've proven what I originally wrote

May we assume your other posts are of similar accuracy?

[jimmy the one]

39. iconic loser

icon challenged my claim that: "I don't think I've ever 'declared' or phrased it I 'proved my point'".

Then the icon posts where I claimed: I've proven what I originally wrote, and icon evidently thinks he's contradicted me, when he hasn't, for two reasons. I didn't just contend I proved my point just 'on my sayso' without due facts , and 'what I originally wrote' is not the same as 'my point', except in the subjective sense. So icon loses, again.
In context, here is how I wrote it, & readers can see that substantive argumentation was provided to back it up. In other words, I actually did prove what I originally wrote, & all da gunnuts shut up after it too:

I've proven what I originally wrote, that DC is/was a may issue jurisdiction, & was not 'prohibited' concealed carry. When a judge or sheriff or panel has discretion to allow concealed carry or not, that is the basis of what may issue is. And that, is what DC had prior to summer2014.

icon: May we assume your other posts are of similar accuracy?

You betcha, you haven't successfully rebutted anything. ufos.

[Straw Man]

40. Come again?

I didn't just contend I proved my point just 'on my sayso' without due facts , and 'what I originally wrote' is not the same as 'my point', except in the subjective sense.

So what you "originally wrote" was not your "point"? Then what, pray tell, was it? Your non-point?

[friendly_iconoclast]

41. It's a waste of time trying to parse bafflegab