A story from more than 40 years ago can be used to help explain the persistent misleading assertion that the City of Chicago bans guns, yet it has among the worst numbers of gun-related deaths annually.
Let’s go back to the mid-1970s, when all restaurants were required to provide at least one smoke-free area or table in the facility. The idea was to give the non-smoking patrons a respite from the foul odors and health hazards of cigarette smoke in confined quarters.
However well-intentioned, it was a really dumb idea.
One of my favorite eateries back in those days was Lopez Taco House in downtown Albion, where I showed up often on Wednesdays to take advantage of the wet burrito special. While sports editor Chip Mundy and I were chowing down on our favorite dish, I couldn’t help but notice there was one lonely table with a big card on it, stating, “This table is reserved for our non-smoking patrons only.”
While perusing the entire seating inside the restaurant, it became painfully clear that if a non-smoking couple came there to eat, they indeed would have no smoke at their table, but it was perfectly legal for everybody else throughout the eatery to light up.
Therefore, there really was no escape from the smoke, which was the original intent of the law.
Back then, I concluded about the only place non-smokers could get away from smoke was at Albion teacher Jerry Redding’s restaurant in Jackson, which declared itself to be an entirely smoke-free facility. Jerry’s not long afterward went belly up, a victim of being ahead of its time.
Now come constant reminders on Facebook that in Chicago it is illegal to purchase firearms within the city limits, but Chicago has one of the highest gun murder rates in the world. The suggestion is that banning guns, just like a token of banning smoking in restaurants is totally ineffective in stopping the problem.
But I hear tell from many astute observers that Chicago is surrounded by nearby communities with businesses that are more than happy to legally sell guns, and that’s where the inner city folks go to purchase their weapons.
This also reminds me of so many school districts that foolishly declare their facilities to be drug free or gun free. Such prohibitions do almost nothing to curb the scourge. And places that publicly boast of being gun free are almost inviting trouble.
It should shock no one that I have no respect for most politicians. The reason is very simply that I sincerely believe the purposes of government are to solve problems and be a fair referee. Everything else is just window dressing.
Unfortunately, during my somewhat sordid career in community journalism, nearly all of what I’ve seen is politicians do the bidding of their donors who repay them with handsome sums to help them get re-elected.
Journalist Bill Moyers all these years has often called America’s political system nothing more than legalized bribery. He is absolutely correct.
But, as George Carlin so eloquently said more than a decade ago, “Nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care.”
Mr. Young,
Just an FYI:
As I understood it back in the early 90s, drug and gun free school zones, as indicated by the numerous signs, were never meant to indicate that the area was gun or drug free. The posting of the signs allowed the municipality to levee citations at twice the normal penalty if drugs or guns were found to be within the limits of the zone.
Lots of people back then squawked about it as not preventing guns or drugs in the school zone, and clarifications never seemed to sink in when explained, either at school board meetings or city council meetings.
As far as I know, the designation has not changed in its purpose.
Lynn,
You are absolutely right about the idea behind these zones. As I recall, it was state law that allowed for the increased penalties. You are also correct, despite many explanations at BOE and City Council meetings, many chose to not understand the purpose of the signs.
Lindy Anderson
A memory: Mrs. Basura and I were having dinner and refreshments with another couple at the Last Chance Saloon in Grand Rapids some years ago, when smoking was still allowed. A couple with a young child came in and took an adjoining table. While we were eating our meals, the gentleman lit up a cigarette. He held it at full arm’s length, so the smoke wouldn’t bother the child. But his arm’s length put the cigarette in very close proximity to friend, and the smoke wafted up directly into his face. John told the guy about it in rather direct fashion. The guy didn’t want to bother the kid, which was noble, I suppose. After a few more back-and-forth comments, the guy put out his smoke. He looked like he felt he’d been wronged. As the comedian Ron White says, “You can’t fix stupid.”