The anti-gun left has taken their misguided fight to destroy the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves to the local level. In so doing, they have met heavy resistance from officials in a number of states who refuse to back down, and Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul is not a part of that resistance.
He was quoted by the Illinois News Network saying, “We cannot prosecute and incarcerate our way out of the gun violence impacting many communities across the state.”
This would seem like a pro-2nd Amendment statement on the surface. But what Raoul is really saying is that laws aimed at punishing those who commit crimes using guns are not enough. He apparently believes that gun bans have the magic power to make guns disappear. So, he would rather impose harsh restrictions on gun ownership.
Raoul rose to prominence when he filled the Senate seat Barack Obama left behind after moving on to the White House. Now, as the Illinois state AG, he’s taking Obama style liberalism to the local level.
Like Obama, Raoul has severely misguided ideas about the facts of gun violence and prevention. He says that laws punishing the perpetrators of gun crime are not effective. Yet there are reams of evidence that they are effective.
The 10-20-Life sentencing enhancement put into place in Florida, for example, reduced that state’s gun crime to all-time lows. The provisions of that statute meant offenders who possess a gun while committing a crime get an additional ten years. Gun criminals were given no probation, parole, or plea deals. If the criminal fired the gun while committing a crime, they would get 20 years. And if anyone was hurt by the discharged gun during the commission of the crime, the offender would get between 25 years and life.
Of course, Florida has stood out as an example of (actually) progressive gun laws in recent years with legislation that supports legal gun owners while punishing criminals for crimes. Another great example is the Stand Your Ground law which allows legal gun carriers to resist a violent aggressor and not be legally required to retreat before using deadly force.
By contrast, Illinois has earned a reputation for catching and releasing violent criminals rather than imposing real legal deterrents. Violent home invaders are frequently given probation and set loose on the communities that they have already terrorized.
In one high profile instance, a violent home invader was convicted, given a few months of jail time and released on probation. Just two weeks later, he killed an off duty police officer and wounded another.
In Illinois, convictions for offenders brandishing weapons are not uncommon. What is common is that they go through a revolving prison door, and quickly hit the streets looking for new victims. Now, if you wanted to be cynical about it, you could say that this is being done on purpose so that crime stats can be misused to make gun ownership look like an unmitigated evil.
And this is exactly what Illinois AG Raoul is doing.
The gun control conversation in the Prairie State at the moment is way off the mark. Debates are framed around the fact that gun crime is prosecuted heavily- and that’s the data they cite. But at the same time, the actual punishments are exceedingly light. This makes it possible for Illinois to have both apparently strict gun-crime laws and a high crime stat profile.
This makes it possible for citizens to be fooled and for politicians to pretend to be fooled. But criminals know the truth- that gun crime is not adequately punished.
In other words, what we have here in Mr. Raoul is a state AG who would prefer that law-abiding citizens be deprived of their ability to own guns for self-defense over adequately punishing those who commit crimes using guns.
The formula that he and people like him are prescribing to the rest of the country involve a disarmed law-abiding citizenry that is burdened by a population of prison-hardened, convicted criminals who know they will receive only light punishment for their next crime.
Worse still, permissive gun crime laws make it more likely that younger would-be criminals will get involved in violent crime. The way it works is when the risks are low- would-be criminals take the bet. This is a formula for killing law abiding citizens.
If you were a person in power, and you wanted to kill Americans- you could hardly think of a subtler way to do it.
One correction: Raoul filled Obama’s Illinois Senate seat when Obama went to the U.S. Senate, not his Senate seat when he went to the White House. Otherwise, a good observation on the state of things in the People’s Republic of Illinois.
He doesn’t have a clue like most Democrats!
a large number of offenders are repeat offenders thanks to liberal prosecutors more interested in the TOOLS they chose and cutting deals that let them off with barley if any punishment.
In one instance a judge ON THE SAME DAY sentenced a man that committed premeditated murder to just five years in jail and another man who simply bounced a check to twenty years. All because in the liberal state it happened the politicians consider monetary crimes deserve harsher punishment then murder does unless a gun is involved then they target the GUN instead of the criminal. As if incarcerating the GUN somehow stops the criminal from MAKING, SMUGGLING IN, or STEALING another one from the police/miltary to commit his future crimes.
France, New Zealand , ENGLAND, etc. have all had the same mass killings and yes many times using GUNS THEY ALREADY BANNED NATION WIDE. It has gotten so bad that many of them are moving one to “KNIFE CONTROL” starting with the same LYING PROPAGANDA about the used everyday in some form tool they spread about owning and carrying guns.
This IRREFUTABLY proves that it is not the TOOL criminals abuse/misuse that should be the focus in stopping these crimes but the CRIMINALS themselves.
Remember nearly every serial killer that has been caught has a long history of violent acts that were IGNORED while they were growing up because of the Politically Correct liberal nonsense of blaming anything but the ACTUAL PERSON who did the crime for it.
When Gifford was shot they had JUST RELEASED the criminal a short time before allowing him to KEEP THE GUNS he was illegally using in a place their use was prohibited. Instead of focusing on the fact that the EXISTING law was not enforced (the only thing that would have stopped the crime as he would have been in jail) they demanded NEW LAWS.
That somehow a criminal who had been VIOLENT his entire life while the AUTHORITIES looked the other way for him (because of PC nonsense about minors) would surely suddenly decide to obey as if the existing laws against MURDER and the other laws he violated is somehow not enough proof that he would have simply IGNORED the new law as well if it had existed prior to his crime.
Remember throughout history gun control has been about protecting TYRANTS from those they plan to oppress it has NEVER been about public safety or protecting civilians from crime. If you are not convinced then research the incident from the 70s era where the TYRANT in charge of Native Americans upset about them being taught about CIVIL RIGHTS manipulated events that resulted in the GOVERNMENT attacking UNARMED civilians at a school house. An incident so horrific they even made a movie based on the incident
HE’S RIGHT. WE NEED TO KILL THEM! NO RECETICISM FOR USING WEAPONS IN THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME! PUT $1,000 BOUNTIES ON THE SCALPS OF CRIMINALS!
HE DOES IN NO WAY SPEAK FOR THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. HE SPEAKS FOR THE EXTREME LIBERALS OF CHICAGO. SINCE CHICAGO HAS SO MANY PEOPLE, MANY OUTSIDERS THINK IT IS THE VIEW OF THE WHOLE STATE. QUITE THE OPPOSITE. THE STATE IS ALMOST ENTIRELY REPUBLICAN AND LIBERTARIAN. CHICAGO DESTROYS THE REST OF ILLINOIS’ VALUES AND JUDEO/ CHRISTIAN BELIEFS.