McHenry County Blog

Did this satirical movie poster inspire a Chicago Tribune headline?

Who could have known that the Chicago Tribune would take on “Chainsaw Jack” Franks and use “Illinois Chain Saw Massacre” in it’s editorial sub-headline?

But there it was.

A whole editorial aimed at the overreach, no, that’s too mild a word for an editorial that uses the words “chop, chop, chop” to describe the Chainsaw Massacrer from Marengo.

“To his credit, State Rep. Jack Franks, the bill’s sponsor, has pulled back his measure for refinement,” the editorial points out.

“Pulled back?”

Franks stirred environmentalists and those who just like to walk along wooded streets to white hot anger.

The McHenry County Conservation District sent a letter.

The Environmental Defenders of McHenry County sent out a blast email.

Think maybe Franks’ office got enough emails to make him realized he had stepped into the Briar Patch?

Hey, a chainsaw could fix that problem, too, right?

The editorial bemoans the vague language in the bill which will allow Com Ed and Ameren to “butcher” some trees and treat others kindly depending on a utility’s “whim” and the “influence of those directly affected.”

See comment under this article of Franks’ throwing his weight around with Com Ed tree trimmers:

Jack Franks Shows Tree Killer Side

The Chicago Tribune's featured editorial on Sunday, March 11, 2012, was about "Chainsaw Jack" Franks' bill to allow Com Ed and Ameren to level every tree within 20 feet of a power line.

“Public relations’ hornets’ next” is used by the Tribune to describe what would happen if the bill passed and wooded suburban streets came under Franks’ chainsaw massacre.

Franks’ (House Bill 3884) will allow clear cutting within 20 fee of a power line, making “thousands of trees into live bait for the chain saw crews.”

No replacements necessary.

The editorial mocks Franks’ attempt to define what trees could be planted under electric power lines as those which would not grow more that 25 feet tall.

“More sawdust,” the editorial writer concludes.

The utility would have to consult the 1,300-page “Manual of Woody Landscape Plants” to figure out if the tree might grow more than 25 feet. To no one’s surprise, the maximum heights vary, depending on local conditions.

Lots of look – alike trees out there, too.

Will an arborist be assigned to every tree trimming crew?

And the new labeling requirement in “Chainsaw Franks’” bill?

A “do not plant under power lines” tag would have to be attached to every tree that might grow more than 25 feet.

Another example of what the Democratic Party is known as the Party of Regulation.

The editorial suggests that chainsaws carry the warning, “Do not apply moving blades to operator’s neck.”

“If Franks needs to build a new chopping block for Illinois trees, we hope a subsequent draft better balances the interests of utilities and nature-lovers,” the editorial concludes.

Plus asking utilities to bury more lines:

“Chain saws down. Shovels Up. Dig.”

= = = = =
Allan Showalter of “Heck of a Guy” blog created the mock movie poster.

Chicago Tribune editorial against allowing people to protect themselves with guns.

Some have said that the vote on whether Illinois residents will cease to be the only people in the country who are not allowed to protect themselves with handguns may be voted upon today.

When I was thinking about running for Governor on the Libertarian Party ticket in 2002, I read the second edition of John Lott’s “More Guns, Less Crime.”

It was chock full of data, plus rebuttals to those who had tried to tear his arguments apart.

I became a believer that people ought to be able to carry handguns, that doing so would lead to a safer society.

Let me give you some common sense reasons why that is true.

Think of serial rapists in Chicago.

When one is on the loose, there is a TV story every night such a guy strikes.

I figure that rapists are basically chickens. They too afraid to ask a woman out on a date, so they take what they want.

But, what if some (even small percentage of) women were armed.

Might such a man fear that he might just pick on the wrong woman?

I think so.

As I have suggested before, if gun control folks really think guns provide no protection, please put a sign outside of your home saying, “No Guns Within.”

Practice what you preach.

Locally, the Democratic Party’s State Representative Jack Franks hasn’t confirmed he will vote for this personal protection bill, horribly misnamed “Concealed Carry” in the beginning by its proponents.  (One of the biggest public relations mistakes I can remember.)

Franks will pander to the same ill-informed public opinion that one of my primary opponents did in the late 1990′s.

The last weekend of the campaign a telephone message like this went out:

“Did you know that Rep. Skinner favors allowing men to carry handguns in the supermarket checkout line?”

Anyone can frame any issue in the negative.  Undoubtedly, the call cost me votes.

But the people in that supermarket checkout line would be not be safer if no one were there to protect them should some nut job decide to try to rob the place, get even with his ex-girlfriend at the register or rob the place.

I think it was 2001 that the State of Michigan passed similar legislation.  That’s where Detroit is.  Used to be a big dangerous city.  I spent the better part of a week there in 1964 and was warned to stay out of certain neighborhoods.

Detroit is in Wayne County.   The Wayne County Sheriff, a Democrat, of course, warned of the horrible things that would happen if the bill were passed.  Shootouts in the streets, etc.

After the bill had been in effect a year, he recanted.

What he had predicted had not occurred.

It hasn’t happened in any of the other 48 states where people are allowed to protect themselves with handguns.  (Wisconsin and Illinois are the two “outliers,” as the Tribune describes them.)

It won’t in Illinois either.

The bill has been limited in order to gain votes.

No guns in schools, universities, churches, casino, racetracks, stadiums, gated amusement parks or the General Assembly.

I guess the just retired state senator who said he was going to carry the gun he started having strapped to his body as an alderman (who can legally carry guns) would have been in violation of the proposal.  And I still remember the Chicago Democrat who, while reaching for his wallet to pay me from Christmas cards he had bought from my then-wife Robin, displayed the handgun under his shoulder.

I guess the massacre at Northern Illinois University, where a retired member of the Armed Services was killed in the front row could not have been prevented had this bill been in effect.  Had the woman been allowed to have a gun there, she probably could have taken the little squirrel out.

Similarly, at Columbine High School the only thing the brave male teacher could do was to throw himself between students and the wannabe OK Corral gunboys.  No change in this law would deter that from happening under this Illinois proposal.

What the Tribune and other proponents just came seem to fathom is that the police cannot always be where we need them when we need them.

What I do know is that the carjackings in Florida stopped after “concealed carry” was enacted.

And, I feel really safe in every Disney World parking lot.

They all have lots of cars with Florida license plates with, I suspect, guns inside.

I was reflecting upon the declining importance of newspaper endorsements recently.

It not just that fewer people are reading newspapers.

And, for those who read the Chicago Tribune, the editorial page is, perhaps significantly, located after the obituary page.

Those reading newspaper content on the internet may be like me.

They may rarely look at the editorials that are posted.

And, if they don’t look, there’s no chance that they can even find out who is endorsed…

Unless the candidate endorsed lets them know.

Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe lots of people read the editorial when they go to read the letters to the editor.

I was reflecting upon the declining importance of newspaper endorsements recently.

It not just that fewer people are reading newspapers.

And, for those who read the Chicago Tribune, the editorial page is, perhaps significantly, located after the obituary page.

Those reading newspaper content on the internet may be like me.

They may rarely look at the editorials that are posted.

And, if they don’t look, there’s no chance that they can even find out who is endorsed…

Unless the candidate endorsed lets them know.

Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe lots of people read the editorial when they go to read the letters to the editor.

Watching the incredible shrinking Tribune was interrupted by a diversion Tuesday.

A color photo showed up in the usually very gray editorial column.

And, as a bonus, the editorial cartoon was in color.

Somehow I doubt that will stem the loss of advertising and circulation, but it was pleasing to my eyes.

Watching the incredible shrinking Tribune was interrupted by a diversion Tuesday.

A color photo showed up in the usually very gray editorial column.

And, as a bonus, the editorial cartoon was in color.

Somehow I doubt that will stem the loss of advertising and circulation, but it was pleasing to my eyes.