Chicago Tribune Attempts To Scare City Into Hiring More Police ...

 ... by raising the specter of people defending themselves. The editorial from the Tribune's Editorial Board is entitled: "Potential victims are shooting back. This should raise alarms for Chicago public officials." The Board chastises Chicago officials for letting criminals loose and not hiring enough police to keep crime down because "[w]hen a large slice of the public believes that crime is out of hand and most offenses go unpunished, some people inevitably take the law into their own hands." And by "take the law into their own hands," the Board means the peasants exercising their right to self-defense. Because apparently, in the minds of the Board members, crime victims are supposed to lay back and enjoy it so long as there is a chance the criminal might be apprehended later.

    The Board writes with concern:

Worryingly, we’re seeing more signs of that phenomenon in Chicago, with three separate episodes over the last weekend in which would-be victims proved to be both armed and willing to fire at their assailants. Four people who police said were attacking these concealed carry holders were shot and wounded, all of them critically, according to a report by Block Club Chicago.

I think its funny that the Board had to turn to a source outside their newspaper to get the news. But, back to the subject, the Board summarizes their concern: "Here’s the situation: People who go through a relatively minimal process can legally defend themselves in their homes or even on the city streets with a gun. More and more of them are doing just that."

    Oh no, we can't let the peasantry be armed! 

    Realizing how bad that sounds, the Board attempts to obfuscate its position by shifting their ire to City officials:

    This is not to pass judgment on those who for their own protection go through the steps necessary to get a concealed carry permit and then take advantage of the legal rights that license gives them.

    It is to say that it’s the job of the mayor, the Police Department, the Cook County state’s attorney’s office, judges and all involved in the criminal justice system to make it so that those prone to crime feel there’s a decent chance they will be caught, prosecuted and punished if they commit those acts. For several years now, it’s fair to say, the risk-reward calculation has been far too heavily weighted toward the reward side for street criminals in Chicago.

    Chicagoans considering whether to purchase a gun and get a license to carry and use it aren’t likely to be dissuaded from doing so when, for example, the Cook County state’s attorney says she favors simply not prosecuting those accused of gun offenses when illegal guns are discovered during a police stop of a car for a minor violation. They can be pardoned if the thought occurring to them when reading stories about that prosecutorial policy is that they better get a gun because those tasked with combating the scourge of illegal firearms say they won’t take action when they get the opportunity.

In other words, they are saying its okay for an innocent to lose his or her life or be raped because they lack the arms to defends themselves so long as there is a decent chance the criminal will be caught and punished. 

    After some more recriminations against the city officials and noting the sharp increase in violent crimes over the past several years, the Board returns to its original theme that if it is a choice between people owning firearms or cops making arrests, the City should make arrests:

Surely, our public officials, no matter what side of the criminal-justice-reform divide they’re on, can agree that the growing risks of more ordinary citizens taking responsibility for their own safety at the point of a gun isn’t a healthy development. They ought to think of an ordinary Chicagoan, maybe right now mulling whether it’s a good idea to carry a firearm as they head to the store, and prove to them there is no need. For crime in this city won’t be allowed to pay.