Chicago man explains challenge of city's handgun ban ...

[spin]

Otis McDonald doesn't care what you think.

You can accuse the black inner-city grandfather of betraying Chicago neighborhoods overrun by thugs with guns.

Go ahead, call him a pawn of wealthy, white gun-nuts suing to lift the city's handgun ban.

But the 76-year-old Morgan Park man who has become the face of one of the most important Second Amendment lawsuits in history wants you to know this: He is not a ''showpiece'' for the pro-gun lobby in the landmark case that could overturn Chicago's handgun ban. The case is set to come before the U.S. Supreme Court today.

''It doesn't matter what anyone's motives were for picking me for this,'' McDonald said. ''I have my own motives, and they are so compelling and so heavy that to me this is worthy of my effort.''

The liberal South Side Democrat said he put himself in the spotlight over the right to pack a pistol because he's living on a block where the bad guys with guns have him outnumbered and overpowered.

Drug-dealing neighborhood punks have broken into McDonald's house. They've wielded pistols steps from his front porch. They've threatened to ''put him down.''

McDonald is convinced that being allowed to carry a pistol would eliminate the advantage bad guys have had over him for too long. He won't change his mind.

****snip***

McDonald said it's impossible for Mayor Daley or any other politician backing the gun ban to know what it's like to live unarmed on a block where bad guys are packing guns and willing to shoot.

''I wish I could get Mayor Daley to feel what I feel and see what I see,'' McDonald said. ''Maybe he could come here and spend the night, especially during the summer, and listen to what I listen to out my window. If he could, and he was open to that, he would see what's really going on in his city ... and maybe he would understand where I'm coming from.''


http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/2078097,CST%1ENWS%1Eguns02.article

[paulsby]

1. a civil rights advocate for a just cause

and those who oppose him are on the wrong side of the struggle to expand civil rights

[armueller2001]

2. According to anti-rights people

this elderly gentleman is just a loose cannon waiting to snap any moment and mow down a shopping mall full of people. There is no way he should be trusted with a handgun, even though we trust him driving in a big steel death machine in store parking lots, just a few feet away from children.

He doesn't NEED a handgun to protect himself. He should just learn karate and if a young man or group of young men break into his home, he should just engage in hand to hand combat with them.

[MidwestTransplant]

3. It's a shame the police can't keep the Chicago neighborhoods safe but they definitely can't.

[Statistical]

4. "''I wish I could get Mayor Daley to feel what I feel and see what I see,''

''Maybe he could come here and spend the night, especially during the summer, and listen to what I listen to out my window. If he could, and he was open to that, he would see what's really going on in his city ... and maybe he would understand where I'm coming from.''


I would love to see that. Daley with his $5,000 suits, armored limos, and private army (security guards) has no reason to respect the 2nd. The prohibition on guns doesn't affect him or his private army. Hell the taxpayers even pay for HIS security.

It is people like McDonald who Daley tyranny infringes upon.

In Chicago the politicians have guns, the Police have guns, the criminals have guns.
The only people who DON'T have guns are the unconnected law abiding "nobodies".

[east texas lib]

5. ...The only people who DON'T have guns are the unconnected law abiding "nobodies".

This is what the antis have in store for all of us (except of course the elites like Daley and others that are beyond the anti's power).

[DissedByBush]

6. 'tis a Democrat fighting for our rights!

"The liberal South Side Democrat "

That part is not often reported.

"I wish I could get Mayor Daley to feel what I feel and see what I see,"

Daley and the other antis are probably thinking "If your street were so dangerous you'd be dead already, so your self-protection argument is wrong."