Chicago Gun Ban

A federal judge Monday overturned Chicago’s ban on handgun sales and transfers within the city. The ordinance, passed by the city council in 2010, “goes too far in outright banning legal buyers and legal dealers from engaging in lawful acquisitions and lawful sales of firearm,” US District Court Judge Edmond E. Chang wrote. The law outlawed gun shops and prohibited gun owners from taking firearms outside their homes. RT’s Ameera David talks to investigative journalist Ben Swann about what the ruling means for Second Amendment rights going forward.

The following two tabs change content below.
Profile photo of Ben Swann
Ben Swann is an investigative journalist working tirelessly to dissolve the left/right paradigm prevalent in most mainstream media narratives. As a news reporter and anchor in the earlier days of his career, he has gained a wealth of experience while earning two Emmy Awards and two Edward R. Murrow awards. In addition to heading the Truth In Media Project, Ben is the prime anchor at WGCL-TV in Atlanta, GA. He can be seen anchoring live at 4 p.m., 5:30 p.m., 6 p.m., and 11 p.m. EST, Monday through Friday. A stream is available at

Reality Check: Donald Trump May Be RIGHT on Birthright Citizenship!

Enter to win $500 of Gold or Silver from Anthem Vault!

Enter below or CLICK HERE for more details.

"Like" Ben Swann on Facebook
  • Hope101

    Excellent interview Ben. If you have 100 gun deaths; those deaths can occur as a result of only one gun. It does not require 100 guns. We certainly should attempt to reduce murderers and look at what causes them.

  • JovanGaltic

    Bravo Ben! Awesome interview.

  • LetsTryLibertyAgain

    The powers that be often wag the dog with “It’s for the children.” I want what’s best for children, but it’s not the anti-gun agenda, that’s for sure. The high profile mass school shootings are a very small part of the gun death statistics every year, and these tragedies happen in gun free school zones, aka victim disarmament zones. Sadly, there are many children killed by guns in Chicago every year, but most of them are killed by illegal guns in the hands of rival drug gangs. Making more guns illegal isn’t going to prevent this because the guns used to kill kids in these gun free “safe cities” are already illegal. The proposed laws would not help the problem. And the gun death statistics are horribly skewed, on purpose. For the sake of their studies, “children” can be up to 26 years old. Many of the “children” are, you guessed it, 20-something drug dealers. And suicides are listed as gun deaths when comparing with other countries. Yes, the US has more guns per capita than most countries, so naturally more suicides will be performed with guns, but the presentation of the numbers is designed to fool us into thinking these are violent armed robberies.

  • Randy Dixon

    As a former Cop I’d rather see everyone armed, than one murderous criminal armed and everyone dead.

  • buff24seven

    dam Benn you nailed that interview bro.

  • Stephanie Snyder Staker

    Ben, this was an excellent interview with RT. Another city where strict gun laws are not working is Oakland, California. As in Chicago, Oakland has a lot of street gangs, drugs, unemployment, etc. There is no one simple answer to the violence in these cities. How I wish there were! Putting the blame on guns is just one example of “simple answers”. If there were no guns, there would still be violence: murder, rape, robbery, etc. As a society, we really would like to point to one “bad guy” but it just isn’t so.

  • Tom Adams

    They are not Constitutional Rights. They are unalienable human rights endowed by our creator. The Bill of Rights just outlines some of these unalienable human rights.

  • Paul

    Liberals will even include people who protect themselves with a gun in the violence statistics. Like Ben said and he’s right unconstitutional laws shouldn’t be passed “for the greater good”. I would take it a step further by saying laws are a negative and curtailing a God given right in any way means you don’t have it, it means that the liability is now on the law abiding citizen. A criminal that murders someone is the liable person to be punished not before only after the fact. That’s another reason why liberals don’t like the bill of rights, it’s because it’s things that they can’t do to you.

  • ramd
  • tzakrajsek


    You articulated your points so well and kept focus on the bigger picture. I really wish we could have more conversations in the media about why people are getting violent in the first place, to help the underlying human issues.


  • Ory Browne

    It seems obvious to me but it has not been mentioned. So, I ask, are criminals, who shoot or kill others or commit crimes using guns, using guns they purchased in local gun stores? If a study was used to determine that criminals are purchasing their guns legally then local gun shops would therefore be the problem. If the criminals are acquiring guns illegally then the problem is illegal guns and it would be completely UNFAIR to have a well armed criminal population against law abiding citizens who do not have access to guns. In all fairness, I am not a supporter of a nation of guns. I am also not a supporter of stupidity. So first things first, clean up the streets of illegal guns and the criminals who are using them and then there will be a sounder argument against legal ownership or at least an argument for stricter laws for guns. Are there other ways of looking at this topic that is not addressed here?

    • David Curr

      It’s just not that complicated. Law passed in 2010. Were gun crimes in Chicago reduced between then and now or not? So now you do some research find the answer, that suits you, and “hey presto” you have an opinion.

      • Ory Browne

        David: Your cynicism is affecting your clarity. Are you saying something about opinions in general or specifically my opinion? Or is your approach more Eastern philosophy where you find the use of words to be on a material plane and limiting to solve real issues of the things that really matter? Either way, I sincerely just didn’t understand what you are trying to say.