Guns in the bank?

Opinion: Columns

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Print

John Barrett

I don't go into my bank much anymore. With the advent of online banking and ATM machines, I find that I can take care of most of my banking needs without ever setting foot inside the Chase Bank building at Marion and Lake streets. The last time I had reason to enter the actual building, I was surprised to discover that they allow the public to carry concealed guns into the bank. 

No, they don't have a sign that says, "Concealed Carry is Welcome Here." They don't have any sign at all. Because they do not have a sign prohibiting the carrying of concealed guns they — by default — allow such weapons to be carried into their bank.

As I surveyed the quiet, composed, calm interior of the bank, I wondered what would happen if an armed robbery occurred while a customer, who was carrying a concealed gun, were present. 

I'm sure the bank employees have all received specific instructions as to what to do. But what would the armed customer do? The likelihood is that the armed civilian would draw his or her weapon and the resulting exchange of gunfire would pose a danger to customers and employees, far greater than the risk from robber alone. Visions of "Gun Fight at the OK Corral" spring to mind. How about my safety in the middle of the crossfire?

When I asked the employees why the "No Concealed Carry" sign was not displayed, I was told this was a decision made at a corporate level. I contacted the District Manager – 1st Vice President for Consumer Banking at JP Morgan Chase, who confirmed that it was corporate policy to not display the signs at their branch locations "in an effort to stay consistent as a company." While he did not specifically address my concerns about an armed customer, he did assure me that they have well-thought-out plans to deal with any type of robbery "at their branches." The problem remains that those "well-thought-out plans" are not known to the armed customer who may well decide to implement his own plan and exchange gunfire with the robber.

All of this was in my mind when I heard about the recent shooting in a Joliet Food Market. According to reports, two masked men entered the store and one showed a handgun and shots were exchanged. Both men were killed.

This past November, the US Bank branch in the 100 block of North Oak Park Avenue was robbed. The offender displayed a handgun, demanded money and then fled with the cash. In February of 2012 a man robbed the Charter One Bank in Oak Park. According to reports, he displayed a handgun and ordered everyone down on the ground, jumped over the counter, removed money from a cash drawer and fled. No one was injured in either incident.

Large corporations, such as JP Morgan Chase, should allow their branches a certain degree of latitude in this area. Each of their local branches should reflect the values of the local community it serves. They may well have branches in Texas where they allow customers to carry guns because that reflects the local culture. Let the local branch manager make the decision as to what is appropriate for Oak Park.

I don't go into my bank much anymore.

John Barrett, M.D., an Oak Park resident, is the former director of the Trauma Unit at Cook County Hospital in Chicago.

Love the Journal?

Become our partner in independent community journalism

Thanks for turning to Wednesday Journal and RiverForest.com. We love our thousands of digital-only readers. Now though we're asking you to partner up in paying for our reporters and photographers who report this news. It had to happen, right?

On the plus side, we're giving you a simple way, and a better reason, to join in. We're now a non-profit -- Growing Community Media -- so your donation is tax deductible. And signing up for a monthly donation, or making a one-time donation, is fast and easy.

No threats from us. The news will be here. No paywalls or article countdowns. We're counting on an exquisite mix of civic enlightenment and mild shaming. Sort of like public radio.

Claim your bragging rights. Become a digital member.

Donate Now

Reader Comments

75 Comments - Add Your Comment

Note: This page requires you to login with Facebook to comment.

Comment Policy

Charlie Willman  

Posted: January 19th, 2020 9:53 PM

Liberals...

Oak Parker from Oak Park  

Posted: February 3rd, 2015 10:32 PM

LnL, I don't mean any disrespect, but right now you are kinda talking out of your @$$. It isn't your business what I do for a living, nor is that something I publicly advertise.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: February 3rd, 2015 9:30 PM

@ LNL - pulling opinion based data out of your butt? When shooting competitively I ran into a lot of police officers at the ranges and believe me they were only good enough to qualify. Most had other priorities. Our brand of marksmanship was fired at 50 feet indoors and 25 and 50 yards outdoors. That target is damn small at 50 yards, but, with practice you can keep all rounds in the black most of the time. Police officers practice at shorter ranges and concentrate on things like double tap and other skills I do not understand. The police officers gun is a last resort and you should understand the turmoil of expending a round on duty. Those with concealed carry permits have similar restrictions and know when and where to press lethal force as well as the consequences of going rogue.

Lock 'n Load  

Posted: February 3rd, 2015 4:07 PM

OPer, I'm glad you feel so secure in your own gun skills. We don't know your own training or real-life experience in drawing, aiming and firing guns in tense situations. Maybe you're an ex-Seal or FBI agent. But if you're not, you're talking out your fanny by pompously saying that your gun skills are superior to those of law enforcement officers. (Being kicka** at Call of Duty doesn't count, you know.) BTW, even if you're a trained marksman, what about the millions of other Zimmermans out there?

Oak Parker from Oak Park  

Posted: February 2nd, 2015 9:38 PM

I trust myself with my safety and the safety of those around me, not at armed gunmen pointing a gun at everyone. Unfortunately, LE can't be everywhere all the time. And I don't mean anything against LEOs, but I trust my weapons skills way more than I would trust most LEOs' weapon skills.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: February 2nd, 2015 9:01 PM

@ Joe - sorry you didn't say hello. Why is it that NRA members and shooting sports enthusiasts are painted as such monsters? The people who scare the hell out of me are the street thugs with the dead look in their eyes. They are also the ones who strike terror in the hearts of police officers who would rather not wind up dead. In one of our meetings Dr Barrett suggested that he would feel comfortable requiring those who are armed wear a distinctive badge or arm band. He got offended when we suggested a pink triangle or a yellow 6 pointed star.I guess when you believe you hold the moral high ground, unknowns like concealed carry is the thing nightmares are made of.

Joe from South oak park  

Posted: February 2nd, 2015 8:42 PM

You hit the nail on the head as usual Ray. If you are reading this, I've likely passed you on the street, stood with you in line, made small talk, maybe even joked a little. I've been carrying in OP for close to a year and nobody has noticed. I wasn't even thinking much about it. Just an ordinary guy going about his ordinary day.

Joe from South oak park  

Posted: February 2nd, 2015 8:16 PM

must panic over a non existent problem...

Ray Simpson from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: February 2nd, 2015 3:53 PM

@RF Dan And LNL - you guys assume that all concealed carry permit holders are wild eyed crazy nuts! Every day you probably come in contact with a CCL holder or 2. You would never know it because they are trained and know the legal limits of their responsibilities. CCL is not an easy thing to get and it defines what the holder is allowed to do and what he is prohibited from doing. I venture that you cannot identify anyone who carries concealed. Your imagined scenarios are in your heads and lack any reasonable contact with reality. I know, you believe I am irrational - but I have known several CCL holders and I know you would not believe who they are or why they carry.

Lock 'n Load  

Posted: February 2nd, 2015 12:24 PM

John Q., you are clearly a bad*** mo fo! When I'm in the bank, I'm more worried that I haven't screwed up my checkbook register and that my last 3 checks don't come back NSF. But you... you've got your hand in your coat pocket with a twitchy finger on the trigger watching for guys with pantyhose on their faces. But what if they come in while you're facing the teller counting out $20 bills? Do you whip around and start firing or calmly wait for an opening? I'm sure you have it all worked out.

John Q  

Posted: February 2nd, 2015 11:10 AM

RF Dan: You've based your feelings off an assumption the bank robber won't shoot anyone in the bank. I don't care about political snapshot stats. I'm not a gun nut. I'm not an NRA member. If I'm in the bank or anywhere near you...your unrest assured I am armed. You may not mind being held at gunpoint in exchange for your property....I kinda do. If I get the idea someone else has an idea my hand is on a pistol in my pocket. Everyone is in danger, know it or not, till that guy is in handcuffs.

RF Dan  

Posted: February 2nd, 2015 8:47 AM

John Q: At least you did not state some made up NRA stat on how many millions of people are saved every year by armed citizens. I'll take my chances with a bank robber, would prefer an untrained Charles Bronson wanna-be did not decide on whether a robbery ends with just lost $$$ versus a shootout. Banks give up the money and have The Feds takeover, do not need Wyatt Earp to protect Chase's $$, they got lots extra

Bill Doogan  

Posted: February 1st, 2015 11:54 PM

Fran- If there were no restrictions on carry, then lobbyists like Todd Vandermyde would have no job. Since no pro gun bills moved in IL for 30 years, NRA had a body sucking oxygen here to claim they had a state lobbyist. When the Federal court struck down IL's ban on concealed carry, Vandermyde worked hard to load up Rep. Brandon Phelps "good" carry bill with Duty to Inform plus 6 mo or 1 yr. in jail for gun free zones like banks. NRA makes money off bad laws & selling out their membership.

Oak Parker from Oak Park  

Posted: February 1st, 2015 11:01 AM

Just to set the record straight, it is completely legal to own and carry a bazooka. You don't need a liscense or any paperwork. The ammunition for it however is regulated. Does it say anything in the 2nd amendment about being able to posses explosive chemicals?

John Q  

Posted: January 31st, 2015 10:15 PM

I have heard more stories of offenders shot during in progress crimes than I have of innocent bystanders shot accidentally by police and regular citizens combined. I've said on here before. My neighbor shot two men that attempted to rob him AFTER first targeting a young woman inside my complex parking lot. My wife came home shortly after. It could have been her they tried to rob. Of all the robberies in that lot I knew of, none happened after that shooting. Yes. I am glad he shot them.

John Q  

Posted: January 31st, 2015 10:11 PM

violent crimes are interrupted by people carrying guns. Yes there are accidents. There are also automobile accidents due to manufacturing issues people who lose limbs and die in factories that make treats. Loss of limb and life is accepted for making nonessential products but because an innocent bystander MAY BE shot by you're afraid. You are even more afraid of being shot accidentally by a well meaning person than intentionally by someone trying to hurt you and/or deprive you of your property.

John Q  

Posted: January 31st, 2015 9:54 PM

RF Dan: Lock in Load hasn't said much worthy of remembering. He sure ignored my challenge of his assertion that the 2nd Amendment was restricted to militiamen in intention. You guys keep up this "more guns" drivel but no one is arguing for more guns, just that you don't make it so hard for me..a taxpaying, law abiding veteran to have one so I can defend myself against criminals whose guns we cannot get them to put down. You all blatantly turn a blind eye to the fact that every year....

OP Transplant  

Posted: January 31st, 2015 3:59 PM

Dan - I agree that the amend is, and needs to be, interpreted to create sensible law. But it's a big jump from saying that the amend needs to be interpreted, and the amend needs to be interpreted in a way that RF Dan approves of.

RF Dan  

Posted: January 31st, 2015 10:13 AM

OP Trans- yes, does not need my endorsement, but we still have a second amendment and it is ok to have open carrying of loaded bazookas illiegal...so we can have a common sense interpretation of "arms" (ie...no assault rifles) and where those "arms" can be borne (ie..not in public places). Ray - as usual your comments are so far out there, I need not respond..

OP Transplant  

Posted: January 31st, 2015 9:24 AM

Dan-"...the constitution requires interpretation and things change over time in our society." Agreed. Our gun laws DO reflect the current interpretation by the courts. I'd be happy if the 2nd Amend was stricken from the Bill of Rights, but that isn't going to happen anytime soon. Until that happens, self-appointed guardians of public safety deciding who can exercise which Constitutional rights get on my nerves. The validity of the Bill of Rights is not dependent upon RF Dan's endorsement.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 11:07 PM

@RF Dan - as usual - not what I said. My statement was that the people who argue for more control are ignorant of the subject matter. The problems you and others bloviate about are created by a very small percentage of the population. They are the anti-social thugs and felons who want your stuff and are not smart enough to figure out how to work for it. None of the proponents of the second amendment want gun violence - that is your argument. An argument you make time and again with no proof or logical justification. Gun ownership is already a very tightly controlled activity and we accept those regulations. Until we can stand up and admit who is causing the problems and how society has created this under class of individuals, we will never even begin to solve gun violence. The majority of firearms used in crime and illegal violence are back alley cheap throw away guns that cannot be traced or identified. When our legal system removes the problem people from society and starts some punitive enforcement we should see improvement.

Pookie from Oak Park  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 9:11 PM

Dear Look at my Load, Who said it was OK for anyone to carry guns into bars etc. except for you & your straw men? The law is clear on who may carry where. Are you grasping at straws to make up for your paranoia?

RF Dan  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 8:34 PM

Ray - anyone who questions you is ignorant. Right?...LnL made a couple valid points..it's not just thugs that kill people with guns, it's people of all races, all income levels..tied to drug use, drinking, depression, domestic disputes, etc...You think more guns deters desperate people or the most violent criminals? Based on what....what special knowledge do you possess? other than blind following of the NRA edict..guns at all costs

RF Dan  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 8:23 PM

OP Trans - the constitution requires interpretation and things change over time in our society. Which is why I cannot walk around with a bazooka even if I feel that is what I need to defend myself, society has decided to interpret the constitution to define "arms", what most Americans agree with is the thousands of gun deaths each year are unacceptable., so is the answer arming everyone? more guns? that is the question, we can change our interpretation of right to bear arms

Lock 'n Load  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 5:51 PM

Ray, you're better than being Facebook Verified, you're "certifiable," buddy. The gun crazies of your ilk have no idea of the price of gun violence, all in the name of some presumed God-given right (which it isn't). Law-abiding citizens get drunk or desperate or angry every day, and with a gun in their holster they kill people. Putting even more guns on the streets to make us safer is like handing out free donuts and Twinkies to fight obesity. The righty paranoia runs very deep, indeed. Sad.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 5:01 PM

@LNL - not one of the pro-gun commenters have advocated for a shoot em up society. Rather, we argue that people who are totally ignorant of the subject (like you) cannot be allowed to write the rules. We have seen the endless lists of regulations presented by Ken Trainor/Ray Heise that they consider reasonable. Looking into their argument you discover that they are never inconvenienced at all but believe they have the right to inconvenience the rest of. us.

Lock 'n Load  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 3:53 PM

You know what, your arguments are so doggone compelling, I'm joining the God-fearing gun-lovers on this forum! To protect myself, I will now be carrying an M-4 rifle when I take my kids to Chuckie Cheese. (Going into that ball pit is worse than a Viet Cong tunnel in 'Nam.) I'm also mounting a .50 caliber machine gun on my Caravan. If a homeless guy walks by my car at the 290 exit ramp, is he asking for quarters or there to rape my wife? Well, he won't be hungry anymore when he eats my lead!!

OP Transplant  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 1:24 PM

L'nL - You don't really need to continue explaining your opinion; I think it's pretty clear. But, again, so what? You're opposed to something that is clearly and specifically guaranteed as a right by the Constitution. Whether or not citizens should be allowed to exercise Constitutional rights is not a matter of opinion.

Sally Forth from OP  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 12:30 PM

@Lockn'Load, you seem so preoccupied with Citizens United...are you aware that that bastion of progressiveness, the ACLU, supports not only Citizens United, but also the 2nd Amendment in most of its interpretations? I wonder how many OPer's shredded their cards after that....

Wyatt  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 11:30 AM

LnL: If I were intent on robbing a bank (which I'm not,btw) , I'd think twice if I saw the lobby was "full of armed customers." More likely to turn around and find a different bank where no one, including security, is armed.

Got Meds?  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 11:27 AM

John, I am far from a gun nut, but you seem a bit unduly concerned with the topic. I find it rather odd, to be honest with you. So now that you don't go to the bank much anymore, where do you hang? All those stores with the stickers? They make you feel safe? The "bad guys" will obey stickers? I think you have an agenda, my pet, and I'm not buying...

Lock 'n Load  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 11:15 AM

Finally, people are nuts if they think it's not only OK, but a great idea for anyone and everyone to be able to carry guns (concealed or open) into bars (and isn't that combo of alcohol & guns a dandy one!), schools, theaters, grocery stores, hospitals, stadiums, and banks -- which is where this story started. Gee, do you wonder why bank managers would be just a tiny bit skittish about having a lobby full of armed customers as each one walks up to a teller. You'd be safer at a currency exchange.

Lock 'n Load  

Posted: January 30th, 2015 10:35 AM

They were dead wrong on Citizens United, and each time a case comes before a stacked rightie court, gun laws get eroded away. The fact is that states with the weakest gun laws and the most gun ownership also have the highest rates of gun deaths per 100,000 people. (See Alaska's gun death rate of 19.6, quitter-Gov. Palin.) Hawaii is our shining star with 2.7, compared to the US natl avg of 10.6. For reference, the UK's gun death rate is 0.23 per 100K ppl. Your gun 'freedom' is killing us.

John Q  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 10:23 PM

Lock n' Load, unless every able bodied person served in the militia the 2nd Amendment, even in the original context, provided a right to bear arms EVEN to people who never served in the militia and remained in the rear. By the way Pookie...it's not against the law to carry a weapon when that sign is posted, no more than it's illegal to go into 7-11 with no shoes and no shirt. It becomes against the law if you refuse to leave when they tell you to beat it and get lost.

Pookie from Oak Park  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 8:26 PM

Vic, et al, keep in mind that the "Supremes" also ruled in effect that that corporations are people in Citizens United. Lock & Load, so what's your point?

OP Transplant  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 2:25 PM

Lock 'n Load - I'm inclined to agree with you that the 2nd Amend is an anachronism, but so what? Your opinion about whether your neighbors should be allowed to exercise rights guaranteed by the Constitution means nothing. The whole point to having certain rights guaranteed is so that other folks' opinions can't prevent people from doing certain things. That's pretty much what the Bill of Rights is about.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 1:53 PM

Live and let live so long as you live by my rules and my ideology. Our tolerant community is totally intolerant of opposing views. Since the gun grabbers (dreamers) are never requires to sacrifice anything they are free to demand other sacrifice freedoms property and rights. Fairness is never an issue.

Lock 'n Load  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 1:22 PM

Vic, et al, keep in mind that the "Supremes" also ruled in effect that that corporations are people in Citizens United. And to "Oak Parker," I'm happy to stay right where I am my friend.

Oak Parker from Oak Parker  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 12:49 PM

"Guns are not cool" thanks, but it isn't really your decision to tell people what they can and can't have. If you have a problem with legitimate citizens legally owning firearms you are welcome to leave.

Vic from Oak Park  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 12:22 PM

The Supremes made it clear in Heller that Americans have the right to keep and bear arms irregardless of any militia service.

Lock 'n Load  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 11:36 AM

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." That was written in 18th century vernacular. Today it would read: "Since a well-regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The war only ended 10 years before, so this was meant to raise a militia again if we were invaded. The world has changed in 225 years.

Bill from Oak Park  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 9:03 AM

This is a good example of folks in Oak PArk who can;t imagine that anybody would have a policy to contrary to their idea. It's like the Seinfeld episode when Kramer got in trouble because, "He won't wear the ribbon!" I think the message inherent in posting the sign in Chicagoland is we don;t like Illinois gun laws and we don't want to offend customers.

Sally Forth from OP  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 8:50 AM

The author is a medical doctor, so one can assume he is clearly educated and possesses above average (likely highly above average) intelligence. That said, this is one of the sillier, most nonsensical opinion pieces I've ever seen in the WJ, which is saying something based on the fact that Ken Trainor works there. Dr. Barrett, you're a smart guy, but there is clearly something lacking in the wisdom department. Chase reflects my values. They don't reflect yours. So HQ decides. All good. Peace.

Wyatt  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 8:25 AM

Pookie: I don't give a rat's patoot whether criminals carry openly. The point is that I want those criminals to see ME carrying openly so that they are less likely to attempt any criminal activity.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 8:22 AM

@ Muriel - our dreamer friends (Gun controllers) have given the problem group special status since they tend to be mentally ill, anti-social minority gang members and felons. Since they have been given protected status the gun grabbers need to control all of the rest of us to appear to be "doing something" while accomplishing nothing.It is like preventing bad carpentry by taking away all of the hammers. Identify the bad people and put them away for long long sentences."NO EXCEPTIONS!"

muriel schnierow from Oak Park  

Posted: January 29th, 2015 7:48 AM

the 2nd amendment (we are the only industrialized nation to have a rule like that) has a militia interpretation and it makes sense. the gun industry is a 12 billion dollar cash cow and feeds the NRA. Some people should have gun of course. but 2% of the populationUS is psychopathic,30% of jailed felons have that diagnosis. this small number commits the most horrendous of crimes. they need life without parole ,and certainly no access to guns. Gun CONTROL does not mean no guns at all.

Fran Z from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 10:59 PM

Has anyone called you names or insulted you, Pookie? If you disagree with someone's opinion try to respond without making personal attacks. I haven't answered your question because it doesn't make sense. Criminals will act without regard for the law or consider the consequences. Many crimes are linked to the need to feed an addiction. Clearly not capable of thinking clearly. Let's move on.

Pookie from Oak Park  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 9:58 PM

I suspect but can not prove that John Barrett is the owner of a sign company that makes those offendong "No Guns" signs. Here is an article by John Barrett, one year ago to the day, you decide... http://www.oakpark.com/News/Articles/1-28-2014/Do-you-want-guns-with-that%3F/ Boo hoo John, the bank didn't buy your sign. Get over it.

Pookie from Oak Park  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 9:29 PM

Fran Z- How about no? I would rather the field be level in our favor. And as for "we win", please tell us how you fit in to the "we" part because you sound like quite a loser. Wyatt, you seem like a fart smeller so I'll let you answer the question Fran could not. How do you get the criminals to carry, show and wear openly?

Get Real from Oak Park  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 5:58 PM

@bsoudi Yeah, Slate isn't exactly an "unbiased" source. Statistics never lie, but liars use statistics.

bsoudi  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 4:40 PM

Interesting article about this here: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/01/good_guy_with_a_gun_myth_guns_increase_the_risk_of_homicide_accidents_suicide.single.html

Catch-.22  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 4:26 PM

Conceal-Carry guys are not intimidated by those no-guns stickers. The gun is concealed so unless there is a metal detector to back up the sign they will carry. And if they shoot a pistol-waving-bad-guy while ignoring the sign they will more likely be treated as hero than villain. The signs are ineffective.

DonP from Oak Park  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 4:20 PM

According to The Journal of Patient Safety, deaths from medical mistakes are the 3rd leading cause of death in the U.S., resulting in 210,000 to as many as 440,000 deaths per year as of 2014. Those are all preventable, unnecessary deaths. I'm more afraid of this doctor than I am of a law abiding concealed carry permit holder in a bank. Unless of course the good doctor can actually point to examples of concealed carry citizen shooting the place up? Or just keep using his vivid imagination.

Wyatt  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 4:08 PM

Open carry is the only logical solution to this conundrum. Won't be long until the SCOTUS dusts off its Webster's Dictionary and rules that the word "bear" means to carry, show and wear openly.

Bright side  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 3:53 PM

My guess is Chase has done the math and is willing to pay out to innocent customers in the unlikely event of a shootout. You can bet the armed customer will also be sued if they miss the suspect. I'll take lifelong payments from the bank and gun owner. Unless I'm dead.

Fran Z from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 3:40 PM

There is no need for a plan since criminals will just do as they please when it comes to threatening person and property. How about we level the playing field? If the bad guys know there is no one or any way to prevent them to carrying out their evil intentions; they win. When lawabiding citizens are able to show they are ready and willing to fight back. We win. Showing you are openly carrying a weapon will go a long way in preventing crime. It's working in other states.

Unfortunately  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 3:39 PM

@DH and Pookie. In case you haven't figured it out, Fran believes that she is super-clever with her comments. I am personally agnostic on this matter (have never held a gun in my hand, but am semi-empathetic of those who have legally qualified to do so) and appreciate an honest debate. Fran? Too clever by half and is obviously strongly opposed to either open or concealed carry. IMO, she "logically" impairs her argument thru rhetorical immaturity. Yes, she's a troll.

Guns are not cool from Oak Park  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 3:37 PM

If you really think you need to carry a gun in order to live your life to its fullest I really believe you are nuts. It was nice living in Oak Park when guns were illegal. The gun rights folks correctly argue that regulations do not seem to help. I guess we have to do the best option in order to protect innocent people and just ban all guns. Sorry too dangerous. It just seems like we are going backwards to some bad Western movie. Just imagine no guns.

David Hammond from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 3:25 PM

"Lawabiding citizens don't shoot anyone by mistake." That's good to know.

Pookie from Oak Park  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 3:07 PM

Fran, please detail your plan for convincing criminals to not conceal their weapons and wear them openly. Only then can we begin to entertain your silliness and get a real conversation going. Until then, I'm going to suspect that you are just trolling for some fun.

Fran Z from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 2:24 PM

No surrender. Lawabiding citizens have to ready and able to take on bad guys whenever they pose a threat to person or property. We can longer and should not count on law enforcement for protection. If people don't want to see guns carried openly in public; they ought to look away. Lawabiding citizens don't shoot anyone by mistake. Guns are a tool and no one is told they need a permit or a background check or safety training before using a hammer. No restrictions when we carry a tool. No diff.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 2:04 PM

@FranZ - several states have what you are talking about. They call it "Open Carry" and it has far fewer restrictions than "Concealed Carry" In our community the sight of a handgun real, toy or illustration strikes terror in the hearts of the anti-gun dreamers. If you propose open carry they go bonkers - speculating gun fights all over town. I assume they believe that law abiding citizens would shoot each other for fun. So, just keep it hidden and we will tolerate what has become law in all 50 states. There is a great wealth of truth in "Alice in the looking glass"

Fran Z from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 1:22 PM

The only answer is for lawabiding citizens to arm themselves and openly display their weapons. What's the point of conceal and carry if no one knows you are armed and willing to defend if threatened with harm to person or property. The bad guys don't have to deal with background checks, safety training or permits. Why should lawabiding citizens be burdened with such unnecessary legal requirements? No restrictions where you are allowed to display your gun. It's not a concern if people object.

Pookie from Oak Park  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 12:20 PM

Fran Z. - Just assume that everyone around you has a concealed gun under their shirt. Now, that kind of thinking will make the typical Oak Parkers head explode and soil their underpants, but seeing guns worn openly in holsters on people's belts would most likely have the same effect.

Pookie from Oak Park  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 12:07 PM

CC licensees will not break the law and carry past the sign, but a criminal will. Case in point, the US Branch and Charter One Bank that John Barrett mentioned above. John Barrett must think that Oak Parkers are a special kind of stupid when he asks "But what would the armed customer do?", and then fantasizes of the OK Corral. People all over the state and country carry into banks without Wyatt Earp showing up. What makes all of them smarter than those of us in Oak Park?

Steve from Oak Park  

Posted: January 28th, 2015 7:23 AM

Concealed carry everywhere only when the public can carry their weapons in the Senate, House of Representatives and the Supreme Court.

oak park resident from oak park  

Posted: January 27th, 2015 11:06 PM

it hasn't done much harm in all the other states where people are "armed" in banks.... guns don't leap out of holsters and go on rampages... why not focus on the criminals instead of the guns?

Ray Simpson from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 27th, 2015 9:28 PM

@Just Facts - the world seems to break into two camps - the dreamers and the doers . Dreamers are never swayed by facts figures data or real world examples - they just know what is best.In the gun control debate dreamers are sure that the next law, regulation or ordinance will make all of the problems disappear. A wonderful example is the "Universal Background Check" referendum we all endured before the last election. The good residents ( Dreamers) of Oak Park lined up in droves to nod their support for a foolish unworkable idea As usual our liberal ideology prevailed. and the referendum passed We were treated to a couple weeks of end zone ball spiking - and not a word since. What was supposed to happen. I assume that the warm glow of self aggrandizement was the intended goal.

Ray Simpson from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 27th, 2015 9:01 PM

@ OP Res - there was no crossfire, just a crazy lunatic that was listening to those voices in his head. The nice thing about concealed carry is that bad guys have no idea who is armed and who is not. Individuals who have a concealed license have had practical and theoretical training and know how much trouble they face if they go stupid. The guy with a CCL is the last person you should worry about. Those security guards are for the most part window dressing and most are not armed. Author John has spent the greater part of his professional career elbow deep in blood and guts, trying to piece together the remnants of stupid people settling scores the only way they know how. His view of the world is far more graphic than any of us can imagine - so cut him some slack.

Just Facts from oak park  

Posted: January 27th, 2015 8:54 PM

The key fallacy of so-called gun control laws is that such laws do not in fact control guns. They simply disarm law-abiding citizens, while people bent on violence find firearms readily available. If gun control zealots had any respect for facts, they would have discovered this long ago, because there have been too many factual studies over the years to leave any serious doubt about gun control laws being not merely futile but counterproductive. Places and times with the strongest gun control

OP Res 253  

Posted: January 27th, 2015 8:47 PM

I won't go to my bank, and will take this opportunity to throw 'big business' under the bus because of something that never happened outside of my paranoidly delusional mind, because that's the Oak Park way. No doubt parents in Sandy Hook are so pleased to have had a gun free school, in that no children were at risk of being killed in the crossfire.

Fran Z. from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 27th, 2015 6:44 PM

Matt- we would be much safer if the bad guys know that everyone in Illinois has the right, and maybe even a duty, to openly carry a gun whenever and wherever they choose to go. .No limits or restrictions. Enough with this conceal and carry stuff. Proudly display a weapon of choice and let all know your intent to use it to defend your life and protect property and liberty. Police departments must appreciate having law abiding citizens there to handle trouble and provide backup

Matt from Oak Park  

Posted: January 27th, 2015 5:04 PM

If I have to decide between two banks to rob, I'm less likely to take my chances on the one that allows concealed-carry customers. The bank guard isn't going to shoot me, but the concealed carry holder surely is going to think this is his lucky day! Therefore, John, you're a lot safer in this bank than the one down the street.

Fran Z. from Oak Park, Illinois  

Posted: January 27th, 2015 4:31 PM

End all of this confusion and declare weapons can be carried everywhere in Illinois. No restrictions on bringing loaded handguns and rifles onboard buses and trains or into government buildings, courthouses, hospitals, schools, libraries and all the other places currently allowed to ban law abiding citizens from exercising their god given 2nd amendment rights. We have to be able protect ourselves at all times and stop thinking police can doing anything about bad guys with guns.

Matt from Oak Park  

Posted: January 27th, 2015 12:30 PM

yawn. Since Illinois was the last state to allow concealed carry by citizens, these debates have long been settled by the large corporations. Of course they don't want a citizen to start shooting, but they also want to allow carriers the freedom to patronize the bank unencumbered.

Facebook Connect

Answer Book 2019

To view the full print edition of the Wednesday Journal 2019 Answer Book, please click here.

Quick Links

Sign-up to get the latest news updates for Oak Park and River Forest.


            
SubscribeClassified
MultimediaContact us
Submit Letter To The Editor
Place a Classified Ad