Evanston aldermen unanimously voted to amend the city's 27-year-old handgun ban last week at a special closed-door meeting in light of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down a similar ban in the District of Columbia.
The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, ruled that laws requiring handguns in homes to be disassembled and outfitted with trigger locks are incompatible with the gun rights accorded under the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment. On June 26th, the day after the ruling's release, the National Rifle Association sued numerous cities that ban the private possession of operative handguns, including Chicago, Morton Grove, Oak Park and Evanston. After weeks of consideration and consultation with the police, Evanston city council members authorized a resolution that would rewrite the ordinance to comply with the Supreme Court ruling.
"No one was particularly happy or anxious to do anything that would change the ordinance," Ald. Edmund Moran (6th) said. "But we're being confronted with this lawsuit and rather than engaging in a protracted fight and spending a lot of money, it would be a better course of action to revise our ordinance in a way that it would make it more legally sustainable."
The final version of the modified ordinance has not yet been released, but Moran said city council members discussed the changes at the closed-door meeting. He explained that although legislation regarding the private possession of handguns will be amended, certain statements in the "extremely narrow" ruling suggest that other aspects of antigun ordinances remain constitutional.
"We are conforming to the court's ruling," he said. "But we are also going to closely examine those statements in particular and try to fashion our amendments accordingly."
Evanston Police Department Chief Richard Eddington said law enforcement officials are waiting to see how drastically the weapons ordinance will change. Under the existing ordinance, police issued 16 handgun ordinance violations and reported 107 incidents involving handguns, according to the Evanston Police Department's 2006 Annual Report. Now with the recent handgun ban amendments, there are concerns over whether a possible increase in the number of weapons might jeopardize community safety.
Spring Break
The DAILY encourages you to share your thoughts on this story. Please help us keep the discussion lively, but civil. Comments that are abusive to others, off-topic or vulgar, or comments that misrepresent someone's identity, will not be tolerated. We reserve the right to delete any comments in violation or to close comment threads on articles.
Please e-mail online@dailynorthwestern.com to flag a comment or for more information.
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 43
DDS -- NRA Life Member
posted 7/17/08 @ 10:57 AM CST
In light of all of the empiracle evidence compiled by Lott, Kleck, and others in recent years about the positive effects on crime statistics that come from ownership of firearms by law abiding citizens, how does any politician still get away with saying that a gun in the hands of a responsible adult constitutes a threat to public safety?
mec
posted 7/17/08 @ 11:31 AM CST
Whether or not this town has a ban on handguns has very little to do with how many handguns are actually there and in use. It only impacts the number of guns held lawfully by the citizens. (Continued…)
Johnk568
posted 7/17/08 @ 11:38 AM CST
To Evanston Politicians,
Do you understand the phrase "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED". each and everyone of you sworn an oath to uphold the constitution of the US, not just parts of it. (Continued…)
James Shook
posted 7/17/08 @ 11:40 AM CST
Honestly, where in the United States can they cite an instance where an increase in the number of weapons "jeopardized community safety?" Quite the opposite is true. (Continued…)
Stu Strickler
posted 7/17/08 @ 11:58 AM CST
Firearm ownership by law abiding citizens has never posed a threat to public safety, anywhere in the United States.
On the other hand, Gun Free Zones have. (Continued…)
DonP
DonP
posted 7/17/08 @ 12:05 PM CST
At least Evanston won't throw millions of taxpayer $ away trying to stall or fight the SCOTUS decision like Chicago's Daley intends to.
No Sara, some regsitration or safe storage plan may be put into effect, but NO aspect of a ban of any kind will be allowed. (Continued…)
Simon
posted 7/17/08 @ 2:07 PM CST
Guns owned by law-abiding citizens are not a problem. It is not difficult to understand. What the Supreme Court has affirmed is the individual right to self defense, something that is everyone's responsibility and is in everyone's best interests. (Continued…)
Preacher1
posted 7/17/08 @ 2:16 PM CST
What I would like for one of these little dictators to tell me is where they get the authority to impose ANY restrictions on our Constitutional RIGHTS. (Continued…)
Kevin
posted 7/17/08 @ 2:44 PM CST
Evanston is doing the right thing. Law-abiding, private citizens posessing firearms are no danger to anyone but the lawless who would molest them. Municipal laws infringing this liberty are in violation of the most basic of laws, that of survival - human beings have an intrinsic, natural right to defend themselves, and posessing the effecient and effective means to do so is critical to the exercise of that right. (Continued…)
ernie
posted 7/17/08 @ 3:07 PM CST
With all the evidence to the contrary, why do these people continue to insist that allowing people to defend themselves will only increase the crime incidence rate in their community. (Continued…)
Post a Comment