A recently enacted Chicago ordinance targeted nuisance party buses, requiring drivers to call police if inebriated patrons chuck a beer bottle out the window, flash unsuspecting bystanders or smoke marijuana .
But last weekend’s shooting aboard a party bus that left three people hurt in Lakeview — the sixth shooting with injuries in 14 months involving the entertainment vehicles — points to a contradiction in the rules with more violent consequences.Illinois’ concealed carry law stops patrons from bringing firearms into a bar or restaurant that predominantly sells alcohol, but those restrictions don’t apply on a party bus, where passengers supply their own booze. Gun policy experts called party buses a gray area in the law that hasn’t explicitly been addressed. Though many bus companies ban customers from packing on board, little enforcement takes place, according to owners
Source: String of shootings on party buses reveals gray area in regulations
Damn it! Who was the Illinois Concealed Carrier that went stupid? WE DEMAND TO KNOW!
In connection with Sunday’s shooting, Chicago police on Monday arrested 31-year-old Victor Haynes, of Englewood, on two counts of aggravated battery and discharge of a firearm and unlawful use of a weapon by a felon. A judge ordered him held in lieu of $900,000 bond.
I am gonna go on a limb here, but I don’t think Mr. Haynes has an Illinois Concealed Carry license on account of him being a felon. So why is he used as example of the problems Chicago is having with party buses and people with CCLs? Or maybe there is not issue at all since the article does not mention one instance of a person with an Illinois CCL involved in the other five shootings. I contacted the author of the article (Elyssa Cherney) about that “oversight” in producing that important information and this was her response:
As stated in the article, it’s unclear whether any of the people involved in party bus shootings had concealed carry permits.
So why bring the permits into the article? Maybe to add some sizzle and flavor because there are criminals illegally packing guns in Chicago is not news anymore but Law Abiding Citizens is?
The executive director of the National Rifle Association is quoted making that point, and I’d agree with him that its unlikely.
In the article she mentions Richard Pearson, executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association and not Chris W. Cox or Kyle Weaver, both executive directors of the NRA. If she can’t keep track of the people she interviewed in her own piece…
However, the story explores the question of whether explicitly banning weapons on party buses would nudge the business owners to do more thorough checks before boarding. Some of the owners said no.
So again, why bring Concealed Permits to the article if the issues is the apparent lack of responsibility or willingness on the part of the Party Buses’ owners? One word: Clickbait. Armed thugs in Chicago are just a regular thing, like City Hall corruption and nobody gives a damn and uninterested people do not buy papers.
How bad is the article? The Moms Demand link that I screen captured and displayed at the beginning of this post is no longer visible in their timeline. Seriously, when even the Bloomberg Bullshit Machine washes their collective hands, you are in trouble.
Why should party buss drivers have to screen their customers?
What’s the next proposed solution, the TSA, metal detectors, and body frisks at your tavern?
Those stupid party buses have been a rolling hazard for years w/ fights, drugs, guns, hookers, etc. The police hate them. SecondCityCop has had numerous posts on the problems they’ve caused.
I think this is more in line with pushing the narrative to connect Concealed Carriers to be synonymous with Murderer. You can see this desire in the national press every time they try to scare the sheep while talking about national reciprocity in may issue areas or constitutional carry in shall issue areas. There is always some unrelated quip in the story about St Travon of the Blessed Hoodie, or Micheal Dunn, or a link/attribution to the agitprop “Concealed Carry Killers” website. Or they mention a random murder that was recently in the headlines that had nothing to do with law abiding cc’ers in order to connect “murder” with “concealed carry”.
The fact that typing monkeys routinely
and intentionallyfail to mention those murderers were already felons that wouldn’t be able to acquire a permit and would still be illegally carrying/possessing a firearm with cc laws in place is typical bias by omission to advance their narrative.