ILLINOIS V I C T O R Y

HANG IN THERE, vytoland!!

It's hard to envision Chicago residents being allowed to
defend themselves without having to depend on their
local government to protest them. It might just bring
about a re-vitalisation of Chicago, if a little Freedom
shines in. I really feel sorry for those people. Hopefully, the
change will come about sooner than later. S&W should be
helping with the PR! They'll do a land-office business,
if all goes well.
TACC1
 
johngalt said:
How is this better than constitutional carry?
Click to expand...
Don't bet on Constitutional carry.
As far as how the House bill is better? The bill passed by the House eliminates home rule in IL concerning gun laws which means Chicagoland will no longer have registration, assault weapon ban, mag limits, etc. If June 9 comes with no bill and Constitutional carry does go into effect all the home rule laws remain on the books and in effect so Chicagoland and other places will still have all their laws and could pass even more restrictions.
Also, if June 9 comes with no CCW bill passed there are many who believe the AG can file an appeal to the ruling and get a justice to issue a stay until the appeal is heard. That means Constitutional carry would not go into effect and everything would be on hold until the USSC hears the case.
 
ispcapt said:
Don't bet on Constitutional carry.
As far as how the House bill is better? The bill passed by the House eliminates home rule in IL concerning gun laws which means Chicagoland will no longer have registration, assault weapon ban, mag limits, etc. If June 9 comes with no bill and Constitutional carry does go into effect all the home rule laws remain on the books and in effect so Chicagoland and other places will still have all their laws and could pass even more restrictions.
Also, if June 9 comes with no CCW bill passed there are many who believe the AG can file an appeal to the ruling and get a justice to issue a stay until the appeal is heard. That means Constitutional carry would not go into effect and everything would be on hold until the USSC hears the case.
Click to expand...

You could very well be correct about a potential appeal putting constitutional carry on hold.

The guys posting on the IL forum of opencarry.org seem to be pretty disgusted with the bill though. Apparently it has all kinds of onerous restrictions and is worse than a previous bill that was defeated. Plus they think it opens the door for easily making the law worse later, after it is passed.

Normally, I would be in favor of preemption. In most states this would be a good thing. In IL, I'm not convinced. I can't believe Chicago will allow their bans, registration, and other restrictive rules to go away. Since Chicago now runs the state, I suspect that you will find Chicago style restrictions imposed on the entire state, rather than the other way around.

IMHO, Chicago residents need to take responsibility for fixing Chicago's problems instead of pushing it off onto downstate residents.

A question - I know about IL home rule (I used to live in IL 25 years ago). Other than Chicago area, does any other home rule area have additional restrictions? I was from Peoria, back then they didn't. Far as I know, they still don't.
 
Hard to believe that the "DIRTY Chicago Political Machine" will actually issue permits. I hope they do and I hope I am wrong!

Anyway.......Congrats!
 
johngalt said:
The guys posting on the IL forum of opencarry.org seem to be pretty disgusted with the bill though. Apparently it has all kinds of onerous restrictions and is worse than a previous bill that was defeated. Plus they think it opens the door for easily making the law worse later, after it is passed.
Click to expand...
You'll find on that forum and a lot of forums most people have never read the bill and probably aren't bright enough to understand it even if they had read a bill. They just repeat what someone else has told them and they add a bit here and there to the story to where it has no resemblance to fact. Their general opposition is the bill has restrictions where a person can carry, such as government buildings, schools, etc. No different restrictions than a lot of other states have and some are already excluded by federal law as they're federal buildings. If it goes to Constitutional carry any home rule city could pass whatever restrictions they want including placing their own licensing restrictions which could be so restrictive that no one would be able to meet the requirements. With the current House bill home rule would be overridden thru-out the state and no city could place any restrictions and those restrictions currently in place would be voided.

I can't believe Chicago will allow their bans, registration, and other restrictive rules to go away.
Click to expand...
That's why the Senate and gov are opposed to the House bill that just passed. Many of the Chicagoland legislators are wanting something similar to what NY has where NYC has their CCW requirements and the rest of NY has another requirement.

johngalt said:
A question - I know about IL home rule (I used to live in IL 25 years ago). Other than Chicago area, does any other home rule area have additional restrictions? I was from Peoria, back then they didn't. Far as I know, they still don't.
Click to expand...
The last count I heard which was a week or 2 ago was about 225 cities have some type of home rule. Home rule does not apply to just firearm laws but other as well including the ability to implement city taxes. But once a city goes with home rule they have the ability to pass additional firearm laws it's just that not all have chosen to do so at this time. Quite a few have tho. I believe last count was 41 cities and at least Cook Co have passed additional home rule firearm laws. Peoria is one of those.
 
I haven't read the bill, so I'll let others comment on that aspect.

But when the big democrats start pushing a bill in front of a deadline, it's probably not in your best interest. :(


.
 
Surprise, surprise, Lisa has asked for an extension. I guess 180 days wasn't enough.
 
I'd be surprised that the crooks running IL would allow the serfs to practice their Constitutionally recognized rights. Its a lot easier to rob & control an unarmed populace. The people must be really pushing this at ground level. Best wishes to all you guys, I hope you get it done there.
 
The federal court granted Quinn a 30 day extension until July 9 to sign the bill. The court was specific that it would not grant any more extensions.
 
So....July 9th + delay tactics + 180 days for ISP implementation + processing = mid 2014 at best.
 
I lived in Chicago back in the 90's so I know a little bit about how they do business. Hate to be the "glass half empty" guy, but till I see the final product, and whatever stunts the opposition try to pull, I'll hold my congrats in reserve and stay out of Illinois.
 
I agree with most on the forum. I doubt any of those not living in IL will ever be able to legally carry, even while driving through. I suspect it will be an expensive venture for those living in IL to get their training and their permits. But, the state will have complied with the courts.........Chicago will still control the issue.
 
By the time all is said and done and how much time and money I will have to throw down the drain just to get a CCW, I could care less about it. Whenever I go into Chicago, it does not make a difference to me , no little stupid plastic card is going to prevent me from protecting myself. All these stupid gun laws in Illinois and we still have about 11 murders averaging every week in Chicago alone????

Eric
 
Last edited:
Here in Wisconsin, both houses passed similar CCW (and other
freedoms) legislation TWICE only to have the Gov veto it. It took
election of a different minded governor to get it thru and licenses
being handed out.

Keep up the good fight Illinois!

IMHO that murder rate would drop if folks defended themselves with firearms. Urban
residents need this ability the most.

---
Nemo
 
Last edited:
Just a friendly reminder here, Lisa M. wanted to make public all the FOID carriers in the state! Might want to remember that come 2014.
Upside to the currently cussed and discussed bill is the fact that us you've attended a Hunter's Safety course and/or served in the military the required 16 hour course is cut down to 8. Wonder what it'll be if you've done both?
Also curious as too the ISP designed course of fire? According to the local newspaper, its 30 rounds at 7,10,&15 yards. Dale
 
Badkarma 1 said:
Just a friendly reminder here, Lisa M. wanted to make public all the FOID carriers in the state!
Click to expand...
That is not at all accurate. In fact, Lisa Madigan was oppose to releasing FOID info. What you are referring to is the opinion she gave reference IL's FOIA law and a request from news media for FOID info. She reviewed IL's FOIA law as it was written and gave the correct opinion. The way the FOIA law was written at the time it did not exclude FOID records from FOIA.
That's a far cry from saying she "wanted to make public all the FOID carriers in the state!" She didn't. She was only interpreting IL law and her opinion was an accurate interpretation of the law at that time. The law was subsequently changed.
Also curious as too the ISP designed course of fire? According to the local newspaper, its 30 rounds at 7,10,&15 yards. Dale
Click to expand...
Nothing to be curious about. It's explained in the bill. You just have to read it and it will explain the course of fire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

StakeOut
NRA-ILA Newsletter
Replies
0
Views
751
StakeOut
StakeOut
H
Update on debate going on in Illinois over Gun Rights
Replies
9
Views
2K
df53141
df53141
66Park
Illinois concealed carry bill needs your support
Replies
0
Views
990
66Park
66Park
Bratastic007
Thoughts on Freedoms and Firearms
Replies
5
Views
1K
Yeutta
Y
2hawk
Terrific Article on the Mind of an Anti-gunner
Replies
15
Views
3K
wetdog
wetdog

Latest posts

Back
Top