I definitely agree that getting this type of legislation passed at the state level represents some important progress. I (naively) hope that there can be a National movement. In an attempt to offer a positive post, I don’t know anything about CRED in Chicago but based upon this excerpt from an article in The Economist about modest declines in gun violence I think CRED is heroic:
On a hot Wednesday afternoon the office of Chicago cred, a charity run by Arne Duncan, a former secretary of education, is buzzing. In the car park and inside, dozens of workers dressed in bright vests reading “Peacekeeper” mill around. Each morning they meet at the squat building off 103rd Street in Roseland, a neighbourhood on the far South Side, to share information—who is arguing, what fights or gunshots have already been reported, where gangs might be feuding. The workers then spread out into the neighbourhood in an effort to stop shootings before they happen. By 2.30pm the place is quiet.
“In 2019 the murder rate from guns [in the US] was fully 22 times that in the eu. A 25-year opioid epidemic has killed more than 650,000 Americans. But there is more to America’s outlier status than guns and fentanyl. Road deaths, which killed nearly 43,000 people in America last year, are about four times the rate in Germany. Pick almost any type of calamitous death—drowning, fire, work accidents—and America’s relative record looks dire.”
Follow-up excerpt 2 of 2… maybe another book review?
“What can be done? Some big things are politically hard but worth arguing for nonetheless. From serious gun controls to more enlightened drugs policies (less war, more decriminalisation), Congress could make a difference. Liran Einav and Amy Finkelstein, two health economists, argue in a new book for basic universal health insurance financed by income taxes that would bring coverage for the 30m Americans who still lack it—in the hope that one day politicians will be ready to consider them seriously. That would help, too.“
As a USA citizen I’m very concerned about the rapid expansion of assault weapon access and ownership across the country. However, I’m skeptical that a patchwork of state-level laws could result in meaningful progress on a national issue.
Example: 17 yr old Illinois resident Kyle Rittenhouse obtained the AR-15 he used in Kenosha from his sister’s boyfriend, who bought it for him at a hardware store in Ladysmith, WI
are you saying that Illinois, the state I live in, should not have passed the bill? Or that I should focus my very limited attention to other things? Are you worried that this might, in my opinion, almost certainly will, end up before the Supreme Court of the US, which may decide that the ban in unconstitutional? Finally while a patchwork of state level laws might not prevent all or even most the deaths from assault weapons, isn't saving one life, worth the effort?
Don't go back to bed. Hard to believe that anyone would vote against an assault weapons ban. Is that 2nd amendment so immutable that it can't be made to recognize current situations. If supreme court justices won't recognize the problem, we don't need supreme court anymore. Much like Israel..Lloyd
The 2nd amendment is immutable in the sense that the words themself do not change. The meaning of the words change. In the USA's present system of government, nine people get to say what those words means. As you noted in Israel, like most of the governments of the world does not have a constitution. Our constitution is not immutable. It has changed 28 times. It is very hard to change the USA Constitution. Would you prefer that it be easier? If so, what process would you propose for changing it?
Again thank you for responding. I hope you and yours are as well as you can be
Thanks for sharing this good news, Fred! As you know, the Illinois assault-style weapons ban "came about six months after the July 2022 Highland Park, Illinois, shooting." But it "faced immediate lawsuits in state and federal court that argued it violated the Illinois and US constitutions," as CNN reports. https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/11/politics/illinois-assault-weapons-ban/index.html
I am glad that cooler heads prevailed!
I live in New Jersey, where voters don't select judges. But I lived in Pennsylvania from 1985 to 1997, where they do. I have an acquaintance who is a Democratic committeewoman, and at election time she writes a letter in which she offers advice about whom to vote for. Her letter is very helpful in down-ballot races, including for judges, because she is left-wing and I trust her judgment; so I share the letter with my Pennsylvania friends. I wish I knew someone in New Jersey who wrote a similar letter.
Thanks for responding and for a million other things.
I should note that the law suits are not over, This lawsuit did not address the the 2nd amendment claim. There is a a case that is dealing with that but the court has not yer issued an opinion. What ever it decides it will almost certainly be appealed. And what ever the 7th circuit decides, it will almost certainly be appealed to SCOTUS (The Supreme Court of the US)
The issue of voting for judges then falls on your knowing and trusting someone to tell you who to vote for.
In Illinios, I may know some of the judges, I may have appeared before some of them. However I certainly don't know all of them or have any way to tell if I would agree with how they would act as a judge.
Again thanks for everything. I hope you and yours are as well as you can be.
Dear Fred, Thanks for providing this additional information. I should have realized that it was too easy a win!
As to voting for judges, if I lived in Pennsylvania I would absolutely trust the judgment of the Democratic committeewoman I wrote about in my first comment who writes a very detailed voter letter before each election, not just suggesting whom to vote for but explaining why. And, yes, I do trust her judgment.
Also, I have found that there is a great deal of information online about anyone who is running for office, so that is a way to help make a good decision, although of course it's not foolproof, because people do not always do what you might expect them to do. For example, see "These 9 Justices Failed to Vote the Way Their Party Expected": https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/170179
I definitely agree that getting this type of legislation passed at the state level represents some important progress. I (naively) hope that there can be a National movement. In an attempt to offer a positive post, I don’t know anything about CRED in Chicago but based upon this excerpt from an article in The Economist about modest declines in gun violence I think CRED is heroic:
On a hot Wednesday afternoon the office of Chicago cred, a charity run by Arne Duncan, a former secretary of education, is buzzing. In the car park and inside, dozens of workers dressed in bright vests reading “Peacekeeper” mill around. Each morning they meet at the squat building off 103rd Street in Roseland, a neighbourhood on the far South Side, to share information—who is arguing, what fights or gunshots have already been reported, where gangs might be feuding. The workers then spread out into the neighbourhood in an effort to stop shootings before they happen. By 2.30pm the place is quiet.
Follow-up excerpt 1 of 2:
“In 2019 the murder rate from guns [in the US] was fully 22 times that in the eu. A 25-year opioid epidemic has killed more than 650,000 Americans. But there is more to America’s outlier status than guns and fentanyl. Road deaths, which killed nearly 43,000 people in America last year, are about four times the rate in Germany. Pick almost any type of calamitous death—drowning, fire, work accidents—and America’s relative record looks dire.”
Follow-up excerpt 2 of 2… maybe another book review?
“What can be done? Some big things are politically hard but worth arguing for nonetheless. From serious gun controls to more enlightened drugs policies (less war, more decriminalisation), Congress could make a difference. Liran Einav and Amy Finkelstein, two health economists, argue in a new book for basic universal health insurance financed by income taxes that would bring coverage for the 30m Americans who still lack it—in the hope that one day politicians will be ready to consider them seriously. That would help, too.“
As a USA citizen I’m very concerned about the rapid expansion of assault weapon access and ownership across the country. However, I’m skeptical that a patchwork of state-level laws could result in meaningful progress on a national issue.
Example: 17 yr old Illinois resident Kyle Rittenhouse obtained the AR-15 he used in Kenosha from his sister’s boyfriend, who bought it for him at a hardware store in Ladysmith, WI
https://www.westernjournal.com/rittenhouses-friend-still-charged-intentionally-giving-dangerous-weapon-minor-causing-death/
Reference: although published back in 2014 I doubt gun “trafficking” across state borders has been reduced since then
https://www.chicagobusiness.com/Assets/downloads/20151102-Tracing-Guns.pdf
Thanks for the response.
are you saying that Illinois, the state I live in, should not have passed the bill? Or that I should focus my very limited attention to other things? Are you worried that this might, in my opinion, almost certainly will, end up before the Supreme Court of the US, which may decide that the ban in unconstitutional? Finally while a patchwork of state level laws might not prevent all or even most the deaths from assault weapons, isn't saving one life, worth the effort?
Much love
Fred
Don't go back to bed. Hard to believe that anyone would vote against an assault weapons ban. Is that 2nd amendment so immutable that it can't be made to recognize current situations. If supreme court justices won't recognize the problem, we don't need supreme court anymore. Much like Israel..Lloyd
Lloyd
Thanks for responding.
The 2nd amendment is immutable in the sense that the words themself do not change. The meaning of the words change. In the USA's present system of government, nine people get to say what those words means. As you noted in Israel, like most of the governments of the world does not have a constitution. Our constitution is not immutable. It has changed 28 times. It is very hard to change the USA Constitution. Would you prefer that it be easier? If so, what process would you propose for changing it?
Again thank you for responding. I hope you and yours are as well as you can be
Much love
Fred
Thanks for sharing this good news, Fred! As you know, the Illinois assault-style weapons ban "came about six months after the July 2022 Highland Park, Illinois, shooting." But it "faced immediate lawsuits in state and federal court that argued it violated the Illinois and US constitutions," as CNN reports. https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/11/politics/illinois-assault-weapons-ban/index.html
I am glad that cooler heads prevailed!
I live in New Jersey, where voters don't select judges. But I lived in Pennsylvania from 1985 to 1997, where they do. I have an acquaintance who is a Democratic committeewoman, and at election time she writes a letter in which she offers advice about whom to vote for. Her letter is very helpful in down-ballot races, including for judges, because she is left-wing and I trust her judgment; so I share the letter with my Pennsylvania friends. I wish I knew someone in New Jersey who wrote a similar letter.
Thanks again!
Susan
Susan
Thanks for responding and for a million other things.
I should note that the law suits are not over, This lawsuit did not address the the 2nd amendment claim. There is a a case that is dealing with that but the court has not yer issued an opinion. What ever it decides it will almost certainly be appealed. And what ever the 7th circuit decides, it will almost certainly be appealed to SCOTUS (The Supreme Court of the US)
The issue of voting for judges then falls on your knowing and trusting someone to tell you who to vote for.
In Illinios, I may know some of the judges, I may have appeared before some of them. However I certainly don't know all of them or have any way to tell if I would agree with how they would act as a judge.
Again thanks for everything. I hope you and yours are as well as you can be.
Much love
Fred
Dear Fred, Thanks for providing this additional information. I should have realized that it was too easy a win!
As to voting for judges, if I lived in Pennsylvania I would absolutely trust the judgment of the Democratic committeewoman I wrote about in my first comment who writes a very detailed voter letter before each election, not just suggesting whom to vote for but explaining why. And, yes, I do trust her judgment.
Also, I have found that there is a great deal of information online about anyone who is running for office, so that is a way to help make a good decision, although of course it's not foolproof, because people do not always do what you might expect them to do. For example, see "These 9 Justices Failed to Vote the Way Their Party Expected": https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/170179
Thanks again!
Love,
Susan