Chicago Pays the NRA… Again!

By Dave Dolbee published on in News

Living a stone’s throw outside of Chicago’s reach, I am continually barraged by Chi-town’s news and politics, but a recent story made living in a red state dominated a blue dot known as Cook County (normally pronounced ‘Kook County’) a bit more enjoyable. Well, that and the fact I live far enough away to enjoy a sufficient geographic buffer to shield me from Czar-like gun laws imposed on the citizens of Chicago (and massive violence that are a result).Tax Dollars

And speaking Czar-like, Chicagoans get to pay an extra tax… actually it is not a tax, but rather a drain on the tax dollars that should be going to enhance worthy items such as Chicago’s education system and police force, but I digress. Whatever you choose to call it, the most recent blame can squarely be placed on Mayor Rahm Emanuel and the City of Chicago’s refusal to recognize Second Amendment rights. It is all really quite simple. A small minority (the legislators of Chicago) continually strive to stomp on the Second Amendment by enacting unconstitutionally restrictive laws against the free exercise, sale, ownership and enjoyment of firearms. Predictably, this raises the ire of free citizens who rally in opposition supported by freedom-loving organizations such as the NRA, SAF, NAGR and a host of others. As a result, the NRA and others file legal challenges—win—and the City of Chicago is ordered to pay their legal fees. Since the government has no money of its own, it all comes from the tax coffers.

Police Making an ArrestThe result? Chicago is rapidly approaching 1,000 shootings since the beginning of 2014. Independence Day weekend yielded something over 100. That is one sad result of unreasoned gun laws. A lack of understanding of the phrase, “Shall not be Infringed” has tallied another $1.5 million in reimbursements to the NRA—and that is only counting Benson v. City of Chicago ($940,000), the challenge to Chicago’s ban on gun sales within the city limits and the landmark ruling in McDonald v. City of Chicago ($600,000). Imagine how many more of the tax payers dollars Chicago has wasted pushing the personal ideology of a few oligarchs?

For those who may have missed the details, Benson v. City of Chicago was consolidated into Illinois Association of Firearm Retailers v. City of Chicago. That case challenged five aspects of Chicago’s law: (1) the ban on any form of carriage; (2) the ban on gun stores; (3) the ban on firing ranges; (4) the ban on self-defense in garages, porches, and yards; and (5) the ban on keeping more than one gun in an operable state.

While reveling in the NRA’s successful championing of the Second Amendment is always an afternoon well spent, please remember the NRA cannot continue the good fight by reimbursement alone. The NRA has a proven record of defending Second Amendment rights—yours and mine—for decades. Let’s all ensure it will be able to continue to do so by contributing to the coffers to secure Second Amendment freedoms for the future.

And if the citizens of Chicago do not enjoy the extra tax burden resulting from their elected leaders assault on the Second Amendment, elections are just around the corner. Just sayin’…

How do you feel about the City of Chicago being a leading ‘donor’ to the NRA? Share your thoughts in the comment section.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Trackback from your site.

The mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, "The Shooter's Log," is to provide information-not opinions-to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (81)

  • Chas.

    |

    I only wish the anti-gun folks had a grasp of history and see what happened when Gun Registration happened in pre-WW2 in Europe, Adolf Hitler went in and confiscated their weapons and over ran the countries without resistance.. “keep a eye on the present regime they are dismantling the Constitution one Amendment at a time.”

    Reply

    • Rick

      |

      They only conveniently ‘remember’ historical events when that event fits into their agenda. Selective memory …..

      Reply

    • Brian P.

      |

      Oh, they DO know this, especially the anti-gun politicians. It’s what they WANT. It’s all about the power. Especially in Chicago it could not be more clear. You look around at 49 other states and see they have laws the opposite of you and experience much less violent crime rates, you have the statistics available to you whenever you want and you STILL will not entertain the fact that you’re wrong? In fact, anytime anyone event attempts to discuss the facts, they are demonized, ridiculed and characterized with statements like, “you must want children to be shot if you against this”.

      It’s not about public safety. If it was, it’s safer everywhere the laws are the opposite of Chicago. So adopt those. No, that would interfere with their plan for total police state control. It’s always been about the control.

      Armed people cannot be made slaves. It’s really no more complicated than that.

      Reply

  • Osito

    |

    I see you did not read Eliot’s Debates. You are completely mistaken. For example, When the Constitution begins “We the people…”, by your assumption of certitude, then it was the people who established a more perfect union. But the Constitution was ratified by 9 states, and not by national vote by the people. Do you know why the wording is inexact? If you had read Eliot’s, then you would know that Gouveneur Morris, the chairman of the Committee on Style had to deviate from Jefferson’s “We the States…” because no one knew which 9 of the 13 colonies would be the first to ratify the Constitution. It is in the committee’s report, as quoted in Eliot’s. Need more evidence? The 5th Amendment provides for takings for the public “use”,,,with just compensation. The Confederation maintained records of the various colonial courts, using the language of the day. It was common to use “use” and “welfare” interchangeably in that context. Eliot’s records no discussion by anyone to differentiate the word “use” from the commonly used “welfare”. I suggest you read what was actually said during the writing of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, along with the state ratification debates instead of relying on wishful thinking.

    Reply

  • T Capehart

    |

    The United States is 3rd in Murders throughout the World. But if you take out Chicago, Detroit, Washington DC, and New Orleans, the United States is 4th from the bottom for Murders. These 4 Cities also have the toughest Gun Control Laws in the United States. The fact that they are also all run by Democrats is not surprising. Their personal power agenda supersedes public safety, constitutional rights, common sense, historical facts, reality, etc. The murder rate is a small price to pay in order to get their agenda crammed through. Collateral damage is a cost they are willing for the citizens to pay after all they all have personal security guards armed to the teeth. In the last 100 years when the citizen’s guns were outlawed and confiscated it has resulted in over 90 million people being murdered by their own governments. I salute the efforts by the NRA to stand up and fight tyranny in every quarter. At least they are willing to fight not like the undocumented Democrats who cross dress as Republican leaders – (Boehner, McCain, McConnell, Cochran, Rove, etc. etc.)

    Reply

    • larry

      |

      Your number for unarmed citizens murdered by their own government is quite low…
      From 1900-1999 it is estimated that 262+ million had died at the hands of their government.
      Refer to The University of Hawaii, Domocide
      Web Page.

      Reply

    • Walt

      |

      Actually, Detroit is slowly getting less bad, possibly due to the current police chief encouraging lawful citizens to get CPLs. Maybe there’s hope for Detroit after all. ( Especially with Kwame out of circulation. )

      Reply

  • PETER ALAN SKROBACK

    |

    Good question. Don’t know the answer though. I don’t remember the particulars of the legislation. It may have been a loophole like pistols firing rifle ammo.

    Reply

  • Chas.

    |

    “Government is not reason; it is not eloquent, it is a force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”
    George Washington

    Reply

  • Chas.

    |

    I live in Massachusetts we already have some of the strictest weapons laws in the country and yet tomorrow the Senate will hear House Bill H.4278 which will grant discretionary provisions to local law enforcement plus a host of other conditions, anyone from Massachusetts contact your Senators and voice opposition, granting anything that violates our Second Amendment rights. (please)

    Reply

  • John Franco

    |

    Until citizens of Mass. open their liberal eyes and realize that the people they have voted into office are legislating them into second class citizens…nothing will change! I live in the unbelievable backwards state of Illinois and we have the same struggles here. Welfare loving, low information voters that want their freebies and are not willing to earn their keep, voting for the socialist democrats. But we cannot give up!

    Reply

  • Chas.

    |

    If we opt for liberty and strict limitations on government, We can fundamentally change that with any single future election. If We choose to grant overreaching power to government in exchange for unrealistic promises of greater security and share of loot taken from our more productive peers, only bloody revolution, massive destruction, and loss of countless lives can change that, and that struggle may fail. that’s not hyperbole, it’s fact. We must preserve the Constitution at all costs!
    (the newly minted coins omit “In God We Trust)

    Reply

  • Osito

    |

    I’m sure those you oppose would agree upon “preserving the Constitution at all costs”. Why not? They feel free to interpret it as a “living document”. Perhaps it isn’t just the Constitution that needs preservation. You need the social and philosophical context of the Framers to boot.

    Reply

    • Mike Hughes

      |

      It is indeed unfortunate that the “social and philosophical context of the Framers” has been ignored. They erroneously believed that their descendants would understand not only what they wrote but the intent of what they wrote in the reasonably short template that they left us to guide us in this new and wonderfully crafted republic that they birthed. Currently we have politicians that have no comprehension of their intent or desire to puzzle it out. Instead we are constricted by 20,000 page “laws” that attempt to replace the freedoms that our founders sought to give us as our inheritance with severe restrictions seeking to mold us into the “common folk” that they, as the descendants of the very elitists that the founders fled, want to force us be, to serve them as their vassals

      Reply

  • chas.

    |

    I don’t know how many people have taken the oath “protect the constitution against all enemies foreign or domestic” I did in 1966 and stand firm all amendments since 1776, 238 years have worked just fine. if it ain’t broke don’t fix it…

    Reply

Leave a comment

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.


five + 9 =