Twenty-four Chicago Public Schools students died from gun violence in between January and April. That equals the total number killed throughout the entire previous school year. 

Chicago legislators passionately urge their peers from across the state to approve stronger gun control measures, but the debate typically triggers emotional responses about such issues as race, culture and, most of all, politics. 

While valid, the arguments often are formulaic, the vote usually predictable. 

Supporters of gun control, mostly Democrats with some suburban Chicago Republicans as exceptions, argue downstate lawmakers need to understand that guns continue to fall into the wrong hands and contribute to senseless killings of innocent children and young adults. 

During an April floor debate about a measure that would limit individuals to buying one gun a month, Democratic Rep. Deborah Graham from Chicago stressed: “We understand that we live in two parts of the state, and I understand that you teach your children how to hunt and handle handguns. We don't have that same opportunity in the city. We face an epidemic that is growing so wildly that we're here asking you for your support.” 

Opponents, most often Republicans and conservative Democrats from districts outside Chicago, say their city counterparts need to understand that more gun control could violate constitutional rights and further burden law-abiding citizens who legally collect guns or use them for sport. 

“This is an issue of personal rights,” said Rep. Mike Bost, a Murphysboro Republican, in response to Graham during the same floor debate. “The legislature, though well-intended, has already admitted that handguns are already illegal in Chicago. This is not going to change that. All it does is infringe on those people I represent.” 

Despite passion expressed by people on both sides of the issue, the polarizing debates often lack widespread willing-ness to compromise so they can find solutions that would work in such a diverse state. 

The debate pits north vs. south, rural vs. urban, Republican vs. Democrat. In an election year, candidates and incumbents rally for or against gun control to appease their voter bases. 

The Chicago suburbs, however, are a focal point for gun control advocates who believe the regions have potential to swing in favor of their cause. 

A March 2007 survey by the Evanston-based Illinois Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence shows strong support for various forms of gun control from voters surveyed in Chicago's eastern suburbs, covering portions of Cook, DuPage, Kane and Will counties.   

The campaign, which is a project of the Legal Community Against Violence in California and Illinois, called voters in four state Senate districts that are represented by legislators who typically vote against gun control. The group believes those districts are changing in population trends, says legal director Nina Vinik. The survey picked areas where there might be an upswing in support. 

Some questions specifically asked about proposed legislation, including, “Should the state limit the number of handguns an individual can purchase to one handgun per month?” About 55 percent of the 603 respondents indicated strong support, while 18 percent said they strongly opposed and 17 percent said they somewhat supported the idea. 

The goal, Vinik says, is to activate the people who indicated support so that they don't just say “yes” to more gun control in a telephone poll, but they actively communicate their support to legislators. 

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence takes it a step further. The national gun control advocacy group based in Washington, D.C., gets involved in elections and uses public pressure in hopes of swaying candidates or incumbents to support gun control. For instance, the campaign mailed postcards last month to the Lake County district of Rep. Sandy Cole, a Grayslake Republican, with a picture of a gun and a target imposed over a group of children. The message said, “Your state representative, Sandy Cole, voted against background checks on all handgun sales [HB 758],” and then included Cole's office phone number. 

The measure would require background checks for all private handgun sales. 

Currently, when a person buys a gun at a licensed dealer, the transaction automatically triggers a background check. But if an individual with a firearm owner's identification card buys a gun from another private citizen who holds a FOID ? card, no check is required. The legislation would mandate the two individuals to go to a licensed dealer so that the transaction   triggers a background check. 

Jennifer Bishop, program director for victims and survivors for the Brady Campaign, says Cole indicated in a questionnaire that she would support such measures and voted for previous efforts, but then she voted against the proposal this spring. 

Cole says she doesn't vote strictly with the National Rifle Association, a major lobbying group that supports gun rights and is active in political campaigns. Nor does she vote strictly in line with the Brady Campaign issues. She says she voted against background checks for private handgun sales because it's redundant; people who have FOID cards, which is required for any legal sale, already have gone through background checks. 

The Brady Campaign disagrees, saying state law only requires a background check every 10 years, which changed from five years on June 1. That leaves plenty of time for gun owners to do something illegal that would revoke their cards, Bishop says. 

She adds that the group narrowed its campaign efforts to about 10 legislators who represent districts where voters indicated support for such gun control measures. “[Cole] and others may not have really looked into it. They may not have really understood that this is something for which there is significant, widespread, high-profile support.” 

Cole says after her constituents understand the laws already on the books, they want those enforced before adding new ones. She adds that the Brady Campaign is only targeting Republicans, many in the Chicago suburbs, who voted against this measure. But it's not mentioning more than a dozen Democrats, who all represent districts south of Cook County, who also voted no. 

Cole says the politics of an election year creates the hype. 

“This bill was just used. They didn't have the votes to pass it. It was used to become the political campaign fodder that it became.” 

The sponsor, Democratic Rep. Harry Osterman of Chicago, however, has tried for two years to advance the measure, which narrowly failed in the House twice last year and again this year, with 58 voting yes and 58 voting no. It needs 60 to pass to the other chamber. 

The votes were so close for the one-gun-a-month and for the background checks proposals that they might come back before year's end, but they would need a higher number of votes to pass. 

Lawmakers also are considering other gun control measures, including one that would ban semi-automatic weapons [HB 4357]. It stalled in the House this year and in the Senate last year. 

The House approved a measure that would punish parents or adults who own guns and fail to prevent their children who have a history of violence from gaining access. HB 5191 awaited Senate action as of mid-May. 

A House committee rejected a separate measure that would have laser-encoded ammunition to help investigate crimes [HB 4259] after officials from an East Alton ammunition plant said they would have to close it and relocate 1,700 jobs out of state. 

Gov. Rod Blagojevich also introduced a statewide effort to reduce teen violence by investing in community services that help 20,000 teens get jobs and stay active in and out of school. He also would dedicate $100 million for school construction, yet the funding depends on a capital plan for the entire state. That deal has been tied up with the General Assembly for years, leaving little hope that the money would come through anytime soon. 

The effort, called Community Investment Works, is part of a comprehensive approach, says Rebecca Rausch, a governor's spokeswoman. “Kids need economic opportunity, constructive self-esteem building, after-school and community-based programming,” she wrote in an e-mail, “and their communities deserve regular infrastructure investment.” 

The governor, however, cut more than $6 million from the most recent budget for Operation CeaseFire, a violence prevention project in “hot spots” throughout the state. A study out of Northwestern University in Evanston last month shows that the number of shootings dropped between 16 percent and 34 percent in four Chicago neighborhoods with CeaseFire programs. Many of the positive effects were “immediate and permanent,” according to the report. 

It did note that overall crime rates dropped in Chicago at the same time researchers evaluated the program. 

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley also recently announced $1.5 million of city funds to offer summer jobs to 1,000 teens from areas with high crime rates. And he urges community groups and law enforcement, as well as parents, to step up and guide children away from gangs. 

While gun control debates in Springfield generate numerous votes, news stories and material for political campaigns, they offer little evidence that the legislation in question actually would work. 

Lawmakers have a plethora of reports to consider. While none provides a sole solution, they all offer food for thought beyond formulaic and political arguments so often used. 

Despite passion expressed by people on both sides of the issue, the polarizing debates often lack widespread willingness to compromise so they can find solutions that would work in such a diverse state.

Bethany Jaeger can be reached at capitolbureau@aol.com.

Illinois Issues, June 2008