And mostly I agree with them. The litany of ghastly statistics from the Windy City is appalling. There were more than 40 homicides in Chicago in January, on pace to match 2012’s record of more than 500 for the year. The city has 68,000 gang members, four times the number of police. There are 59 gangs with 625 factions, all willing and able to protect their turf with guns. 80% of Chicago’s murders are gang-related. The place is a war zone and a disaster.
Obama wants background checks to keep those nasty guns away from gangs. That’ll work, you bet.
As IBD points out:
On his way to a play date with the world’s most famous golfer, President Obama stops in America’s most violent city to push universal background checks that Chicago’s violent street gangs will totally ignore.
Obama claims that the reason these thugs have guns is because those nasty gun shops in the suburbs keep selling them to gang members. There are several things wrong with that, of course. IBD asks, Well, if that were true, how come crime in the suburbs is so much lower? They could have asked how could gang members obtain guns from gun shops when background checks are already required? This proves that background checks for reining in gun violence by gang members are worthless.
But they do serve another purpose which IBD fails to mention: gun registration through background checks leads inevitably, in a totalitarian society like the one Obama envisions for the US, to gun confiscation. The target isn’t guns in the hands of gang members. The target is guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens who might resist becoming slaves. Too bad IBD didn’t mention that.
IBD also falls off the scaffolding when it proposes this as a solution:
The nation does not in fact face an epidemic of gun violence. No, it faces a chronic problem of urban gang violence in decaying gun-controlled cities like Chicago, which are largely run by liberal Democratic mayors who fail to create jobs and opportunities for their largely fatherless youth.
Is it the mayor’s job, Democrat or not, to “create jobs”? Isn’t that what started this whole downhill slide in the first place: government intervention into places it had no business being? Only free markets create jobs. Mayors should make sure the rules are followed, and then step aside.