When we talk about the future of the Second Amendment, it is correct to note that the suburbs could be decisive. But there is another area which could be ripe for Second Amendment supporters to make gains – and which could help offset any gains made by former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg and other anti-Second Amendment extremists.
That place? Chicago.
Well, to be honest, we’re not just talking Chicago. Baltimore, Philadelphia, Miami, New York City, Los Angeles, New Orleans. Just about any major urban center of the United States is very ripe for Second Amendment supporters. It may be the most significant vulnerability Bloomberg has.
Here’s why: Many of the major cities have crime problems. Chicago and Baltimore have notoriously high murder rates. Both towns also tend to tilt state-wide races in favor of candidates who oppose our right to keep and bear arms. Philadelphia, while not as notorious, has had 333 murders as of December 18 of this year, higher than Baltimore’s total of 298 so far.
Violent crime is one issue that Second Amendment supporters need to address. While the mass shootings draw media attention, most murders happen one at a time, to say nothing of other violent crimes. Guess who the high rate of violent crime in those cities is blamed on? Not the politicians who have presided over the decline of great cities like Philadelphia, Detroit, Baltimore, and Chicago. It is law-abiding Americans who support the Second Amendment who get the blame.
The good news is that we know what works. You get tough on the violent criminals and put them away for a long time. When you look at 18 USC 924, there are some provisions that are so rarely used, it should be scandalous. Caught with a gun while dealing drugs? That’s a five-year mandatory minimum under 18 USC 924(c). For a career criminal (three violent felony or drug-related convictions) caught with a gun, 18 USC 924(e) provides for a 15-year mandatory minimum.
by Harold Hutchison