Illinois Gunman Illegally Armed, So Media Demands More Gun Control

Law enforcement personnel gather near the scene of a shooting at the Henry Pratt company in an industrial park in Aurora, Ill., on Friday. | Bev Horne/Daily Herald via AP
Law enforcement personnel gather near the scene of a shooting at the Henry Pratt company in an industrial park in Aurora, Ill., on Friday. | Bev Horne/Daily Herald via AP, photo from Chicago Sun-Times

U.S.A.-( In the aftermath of a workplace shooting in the Chicago suburb of Aurora that claimed five lives, by a man who could not legally have a firearm, the Chicago Sun-Times reacted predictably by demanding in an editorial legislation to “require background checks on gun sales and almost all gun transfers.”

The newspaper identified the killer as Gary Martin, 45, who had just been dismissed from his job at the facility where he immediately opened fire. He reportedly was armed with a .40-caliber Smith & Wesson handgun that he should not have had; one that he apparently purchased legally during a brief period several years ago, and did not surrender voluntarily when ordered to.

The Sun-Times acknowledged that, “Martin had been convicted of a felony that should have prohibited him from possessing a weapon, according to the Aurora Police. He stabbed a woman in Mississippi in 1995, and he’d been arrested by the Aurora Police six times since then, including for violating an order of protection.

“But,” the editorial continued, “the police said, Martin’s assault conviction might not have popped up on a criminal background check in 2014 when he was granted a Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) card — and sold a gun.”

According to the Chicago Tribune and CNN, Martin’s past caught up with him when he applied for an Illinois concealed carry permit, “shortly after purchasing the gun, according to police.”

At that point, the Tribune reported, the permit application was denied and his FOID Card was revoked by the state police.

But he still had the pistol, and police are investigating why.

To read the Sun-Times’ editorial perspective, “the gun lobby’s servants in Washington would tell you that more rigorous background checks are unnecessary.”

Perhaps the Sun-Times editorial board should read the Tribune’s news columns or even their own. The existing system caught Martin. The law worked, but the authorities apparently failed to make sure this man was disarmed. That’s not the fault of some mythical “gun lobby servants in Washington.”

Martin, the Tribune noted, “was in illegal possession of the gun used in the attack.” The Sun-Times would penalize every law-abiding gun owner in Illinois, if not the nation, because of it.

“In the last several months,” the Sun-Times editorial added, “Illinois has passed three bills to help keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, but such laws come at a snail’s pace. And they rarely come along at all in Congress.”

What the newspaper seems to overlook is that all the strict gun laws already in effect in Illinois have not prevented Chicago street thugs from shooting one another, or innocent bystanders. The law didn’t prevent Martin from retaining his gun because apparently it wasn’t enforced, so when Second Amendment advocates insist that current laws should be enforced before passing new ones, maybe the Sun-Times should listen.

Chicago’s body count has declined over the past couple of years for sure, but last year saw a reported 561 people slain in the Windy City, which is a higher number than some entire states report. So the Sun-Times’ plea for more rigorous gun control laws seems designed to spread the blame rather than narrow the responsibility down to local authorities and the man who pulled the trigger.

An estimated 100 million American gun owners, including some 17.5 million people who are licensed to carry, didn’t hurt anybody in Aurora. But the Sun-Times editorial ignores that in favor of increased restrictions on the exercise of a fundamental right by millions of citizens.

“There is so much more we can do,” the newspaper says, insisting that every part of the nation needs to be more like big cities. “And until we own up to it, there will be no peace.”

Levelheaded firearms owners and rights activists could easily reply that there was “so much more” that could have been done, such as making sure that Martin was disarmed when his criminal past was revealed. It wasn’t the so-called “gun lobby” that dropped the ball on that, but Illinois authorities.

To paraphrase the last line in the Sun-Times editorial, “And until we own up to it, there will be no credibility.”

About Dave WorkmanDave Workman

Dave Workman is a senior editor at and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Robert Lucas

Criminals supporting Criminals, 20,000+ firearms laws already on the books, and now they want more, That makes sense. NOT. Instead of enforcing the laws already on the books, it is quite obvious that they have once again failed in this specific situation. Then Again I really don’t expect much from the “D” and “F” students who are steering this ship. Socialism>Communism>Gun Control=Disarmament=Extermination… The Impoverished Deadly Agenda…As history has proven…. “Seemingly Utopian pacifists are free to profess their love of a weapon-free world, but they must start by disarming the evil, criminal and tyrannical. Disarming the public is a vent for… Read more »


Someone illegally obtained a gun therefore they want more gun laws. What ppl didn’t apparently get is that ppl that want a gun is going to get a gun while others hand theirs over like nice little sheep. Probably the same ppl that think our justice system puts innocents above getting a conviction.


How could he legally purchase a firearm? He had to lie on question 11c of the Form 4473. That in itself is a felony under Federal law. BATF didn’t bother to flag it or follow up on it? Who’s at fault?


..may be punished if the criminal is not in a dhimmi-rat enclave like crook county, il….


sp the snooze paper says he should have had his gun taken away when he was denied his Mother May I Card to carry. to which I say WRONGGG!!!! Anyone else catch this bit here: He had been CONVICTED of a felony assault. THAT is a disqualifyiung event. THAT should have been entered into the NICS database so he nevr could haev bought the Glock. One more case PROVING that the present background check system” is failed. Like the two Air Force desk jockeys that FAILED to report the mulitple disquoaifying records of the guy who shot up the church… Read more »


i want the same rights as con-gress, dhimmi-crats, illegals, muslims, thugs, etc. they don’t have to comply with anything.


and felons, like in s**t-cago


Ironic, the very bureaucracy that meserably failed wants more gun control by the very bureaucracy that meserably failed!




d-suckers want to pass more lawyer-drivel, then they (alone) can be the test or pilot group affected by their own manure for 10 years or so. after that period, an independent citizen group can evaluate the results, and determine whether it it will allowed to be applicable/infect anyone else. otherwise, FU.

dava golino

they will not stop until we are like the EU controlled UK. It is a shame no leader will call it what it is. it is a take over of this country by a foreign group of Zionist bankers that want a dumb simple controllable nondescript race of idiots. the same ones want to do away with our borders, religion, history and internal combustion engines, HELL, they are after cow farts and want to tax rainfall. Think about it, Why is it that the only thing getting done in America is the BS, NATO CRAP Against Russia and the disarming… Read more »


Did the authorities know the murderer had the gun? How? A gun registry? I am against a gun registry. However, how would authorities disarm a felon without a registry?

Virgil Ferguson

If law enforcement ( FBI in particular ) were doing their job, he wouldn’t have been able to buy the gun to start with . We don’t need more laws ——-we need ;law enforcement to do their part .

Michael J

Adding more laws is a sure way law abiding citizens will lose their rights. The left knows this and are waiting for the next carnage to add some more.

Don Harris

Two guys are in a back alley on the south side of Chicago,one says I wont to buy a gun (so I can rob a store,shoot someone and do a car jacking) do you know where I could get one? The other guy pulls out 10 forms and says fill these out give me ID, drivers lic numbe,r your mom’s name your dad’s name if you know it and what country you were born in. I’ll do back ground check on you and you can get back with me in 30 days. Now how many think that a deal like… Read more »

Bill B.

To Earl and all:

When scrolling through some pictures of the aftermath of this shooting that accompanied a CNN online article, one was very telling. The pic showed one of the entrances to the factory. There, like on so many other doors was a sticker. It was a silhouette of a handgun in black with the red circle and hash mark. It was another no gun zone!


Need more no gun stickers since he ignored the one on the front door.


Some one tell me how adding more laws are going to stop someone from getting a gun when they already do? The people making the laws have their heads so far up they see light!


to stop adding “laws”, they would have to acknowledge their own worthless existence – can’t do that, need a way to harvest taxpayer $$$


Anyone notice the glaring reality that all of the victims and any witnesses to this shooting were UNARMED and had few options other than cowering in fear until the police arrived?


Only a Democrat would think you can stop a law-breaker with more laws! Double Down of Disaster…the Democrat motto…


I have long contended that many Americans would trade the entire Bill of Rights for three square meals a day and two week paid vacation annually. Just emember that whatever the subject, the operative word is “control.”

T Heether

Another case of laws not being enforced. This is the responsibility of the lawmakers and those charged with enforcing those laws. Passing more laws makes no sense at all if those responsible for enforcing the laws don’t do their job.

We don’t have a gun problem in America. We have a mental and moral problem in America. The shock and outrage should be aimed at the fact that people think it’s okay to murder, not that they used a particular tool to do it.

Roy D.

The most salient sentence written in the quoted editorial is the second to last sentence: “Death by gun in a violence-prone culture is America’s real national emergency.” And we know that the “violence-prone culture” is that of “urban Blacks.” But everyone will continue to dance around the elephant in the room.

Wallace Curry

When existing restrictive, and mostly unconstitutional, gun laws DO NOT work and are ignored by criminals and the legal system, who in their right mind actually believes that more will work. Typical thinking by political hacks who also believe that taxing businesses out of existence will solve poverty and joblessness.

Crazy 1

The existing laws are not enforced fully and when they are the criminals are not punished properly. It all depends on who you are and the money. If you do not believe, just look at Anthony Weenie.


I believe the expression is ‘STUPID IS AS STUPID DOES’. The laws on the books don’t work (or are not enforced) so lets put some more laws on the books!

Mensa Graham

Isn't what the media is doing the definition of insanity?

Mark R

Why do people posting on this and other sites believe/expect law-makers to “come to their senses” or have a reasonable solution to gun violence? They NEVER will. NEVER! Politicians of BOTH parties are tied to an agenda. That agenda is to steal our guns, ignoring the 2nd A. It no longer matters what is in the Constitution. As GWB famously said, “It’s just a damn piece of paper.” Taking away our guns renders us another population who will fall to socialism/communism/totalitarianism. ALL politicians are traitors. Wake up! 2/3 rds are former lawyers who lie, manipulate and steal. In fact, in… Read more »

Concerned citizen

Both Johnson and Nixon hated guns and gun owners. Johnson passed the. ’68 gun control act and Nixon passed by executive order many secret anti- American laws including seizing your bank account claiming national emergency.

Charles Goff

Another Shooting and the Media will keep on squawking, and Illinois will maintain it’s same Gun Laws and the people of Illinois will continue to suffer, until The Socialist Government is booted out of office.

Jame McCoy

Who cares what the Media wants all they do is Lie I wish we could get rid of the news all together and replace the news with cartoons


When YOUR city decides to enforce existing laws, then (and only then) will illegal gun ownership and illegal gun use decline.

You mental-giant Democrats should consider the fact that criminal do not obey laws. Criminal activity is not prevented by laws, it is only punished according to laws, after the illegal occurrence – and even that only happens when laws are actually enforced.

If current law is not enforced… what the hell would make you think that new laws would magically be enforced??

Joe Liberty

And then there is the fact he was a democrat. We don’t need gun control. We need leftist control. Do that and gun crimes fall 98%.


And then there is the fact he was a democrat….98% of all gun crimes are leftist. We don’t need gun control We need leftist control.


Government, in this case the inept Illinois State Police, fails again. What do the sheep want? More government. No critical thinking skills just mindless mouthing for more gun control.

Green Mtn. Boy

The left if nothing else is stupid,so they want to double down on stupid to prove it.