This is pure political theatre which will serve no useful purpose. I can't imagine this guy doing an honest days work. Gun Control in Chicago has failed miserably but he politically can't admit it. If he did and fixed the problem his BFF wouldn't invite him to the WH anymore...
What is never addressed is where the gangbangers - who are responsible for 77% murders in Chicago last year - are getting their guns. Could Chicago politicans not know how they are coming into the city to sell to gangbangers by (for lack of a better word) gun-runners. The ATF should be getting involved with how to stop the sellers.
Gangbangers are not robbing homes of decent lawabiding citizens who have guns for protection or any other reason. They would stick out like a sore thumb just by being in the neighborhoods.
The 77% who commit these murders can't be in the news as they should, Jesse Jackson would be up in arms, bringing in Al Sharpton to set up a protest of blacks being targeted for racism.
Please correct me if I am wrong without name calling.
He knows and hopes you do not that cash goes to the company when the stock is originally sold to the public. All he is doing now is potentially harming the individual investors in the pension funds he has ordered to sell stock. Those individual investors are Chicago citizens. He clearly cares more about his personal agenda than the financial well being of those whom he was elected to serve. Politics before people.
He knows his plan to disarm the law abiding must not be examined directly because it would fail inspection. So, he is doing what he and every other member of his circle of zealots do. They demonize those who disagree with them.
MakeSenseNow,
Which, btw, you're not making any right now, not to mention zealots and demons shouldn't throw stones.
Ironically, Emanuel is taking the right course of action but only by happenstance. If he had any sense of what his or the City's fiduciary responsibility was insofar as protecting the pension assets of retirees, he would look at divesting investments in gun manufacturers anyway, in consideration of potential diminution of stock values due to the unknowns regarding gun control. It should be strictly a financial decision number 1, before he even gets to any political agenda he might have.
Emanuel looks like an idiot, but not for the meaningless rhetoric MakesNoSense spews.
This is funny.... he has some of the toughest gun laws going - and the highest murder rates by guns going on in the city... so does he seriously think any gun manufacture cares about this dude? He will simply drive the business OUT of Chicago... as well as the jobs...
His divestiture strategy is part of the left's attempt to make guns socially unpopular as a first step to making them illegal. But it is a gimmick. Maybe next the Mayor will want to divest from companies that make cigarettes and alcoholic beverages, two other products that cause great harm to the citizens of Chicago.
When discussing abortion rights, we do not use photographs of aborted fetuses because it is unfair to ask an advocate for womens' rights to defend such a horrific mess. Yet when liberals want to attack the Second Amendment, they specifically use massacres to stoke public support. That's just as hypocritical as gun-free zones for some children and armed guard protection for others.
Sad news about the child shot and killed in Chicago.
I hope the law enforcement organizations of Chicago aren't too unhappy when the companies that the Mayor is boycotting choose to return the favor. No firearms manufacturer or seller has an obligation to sell arms to anyone, and that includes law enforcement.
Your choice of Chicago to highlight "gun violence" (more notable than other forms of violence, I suppose) is heavy with irony. Chicago has had some of the most restrictive gun laws in the US for 40 years. Every gun control scheme and restriction ever thought up has been put in force in Chicago, and the burgeoning murder rate only serves to highlight the FACT that in areas with the least private ownership of firearms, violent crime is highest.
All your reporting on Chicago omits the fact that the city is a poster for the failure of gun control. Let responsible private citizens be armed as they are enttitled to be, and watch the crime rate begin to lower, just as it has done all over the US when concealed carry of firearms is legal. Does McDonald v. Chicago, 561 US 3025 (2010) have any meaning to your reporting and editorial staff?
You guys are pathetic as "journalists." Your bias' are obvious, and your omissions of salient facts are only serving to present your audience with a distorted and untrue view of the events in question.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Gun Control in Chicago has failed miserably but he politically can't admit it. If he did and fixed the problem his BFF wouldn't invite him to the WH anymore...
Gangbangers are not robbing homes of decent lawabiding citizens who have guns for protection or any other reason. They would stick out like a sore thumb just by being in the neighborhoods.
The 77% who commit these murders can't be in the news as they should, Jesse Jackson would be up in arms, bringing in Al Sharpton to set up a protest of blacks being targeted for racism.
Please correct me if I am wrong without name calling.
Leave the environment of Illinois.
Leave the environment of Illinois.
He knows his plan to disarm the law abiding must not be examined directly because it would fail inspection. So, he is doing what he and every other member of his circle of zealots do. They demonize those who disagree with them.
Which, btw, you're not making any right now, not to mention zealots and demons shouldn't throw stones.
Ironically, Emanuel is taking the right course of action but only by happenstance. If he had any sense of what his or the City's fiduciary responsibility was insofar as protecting the pension assets of retirees, he would look at divesting investments in gun manufacturers anyway, in consideration of potential diminution of stock values due to the unknowns regarding gun control. It should be strictly a financial decision number 1, before he even gets to any political agenda he might have.
Emanuel looks like an idiot, but not for the meaningless rhetoric MakesNoSense spews.
When discussing abortion rights, we do not use photographs of aborted fetuses because it is unfair to ask an advocate for womens' rights to defend such a horrific mess. Yet when liberals want to attack the Second Amendment, they specifically use massacres to stoke public support. That's just as hypocritical as gun-free zones for some children and armed guard protection for others.
Sad news about the child shot and killed in Chicago.
Too bad the parties can no longer dredge up any candidates with an IQ higher than room temperature....................
Your choice of Chicago to highlight "gun violence" (more notable than other forms of violence, I suppose) is heavy with irony. Chicago has had some of the most restrictive gun laws in the US for 40 years. Every gun control scheme and restriction ever thought up has been put in force in Chicago, and the burgeoning murder rate only serves to highlight the FACT that in areas with the least private ownership of firearms, violent crime is highest.
All your reporting on Chicago omits the fact that the city is a poster for the failure of gun control. Let responsible private citizens be armed as they are enttitled to be, and watch the crime rate begin to lower, just as it has done all over the US when concealed carry of firearms is legal. Does McDonald v. Chicago, 561 US 3025 (2010) have any meaning to your reporting and editorial staff?
You guys are pathetic as "journalists." Your bias' are obvious, and your omissions of salient facts are only serving to present your audience with a distorted and untrue view of the events in question.