ILLINOIS V I C T O R Y

[Neumann]

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

Murders get the headlines, but there are nearly 30,000 felonious assaults, including robbery, each year in Chi-town. The homicides are largely gang related, race-on-race, but assaults are more egalitarian. It will be interesting to see what happens to those rates after 30 or so assailants lose their earthly appeal and 300 or more get their wings clipped.

 

[wildenout]

Though there is a still a slight bump ahead of you guys, I am praying for you! I hope it will pass and I hope that there will finally be a drop in crime so we can rub peoples faces in it. I hope you don't give up, and I hope that you will take full advantage of it when it passes. Congrats, you have earned it! Keep us up to date, and Godspeed.

 

[Silver Dollar]

Though there is a still a slight bump ahead of you guys, I am praying for you! I hope it will pass and I hope that there will finally be a drop in crime so we can rub peoples faces in it. I hope you don't give up, and I hope that you will take full advantage of it when it passes. Congrats, you have earned it! Keep us up to date, and Godspeed.

Let me second that motion. I'd love to rub the noses of the Chicago anti gun guild in the soup when the crime rate drops.

 

[WR Moore]

I'd expect that qual course to be 10 rounds each at 7, 10 and 15 yards. The interesting part will be if there are any timed reloads and what, if any, time limits there might be.

 

[HankG]

Anyone heard if qualification with a sidearm when in the military...shown on DD214...will do away with the need for range qualification?

 

[rasmith3442]

Shall issue vs. may issue

Spent the last three days in Kankakee on business. The guys in my boiler class were thinking that their "beloved" Gov. is going to try to line item the bill to make it may issue vs. shall issue. You fellas from IL may want to contact your legislators to make sure they will over-ride if he tries that.

Interestingly, I have done a lot of business in IL and have some friends from there and it is virtually impossible to find someone from down state (or even the Western 'burbs) who has a good thing to say about Chicago or Cook County.

S/F,

RAS

 

[Badkarma 1]

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.

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.

When the Public Access Division of the Illinois Attorney General's Office ruled that the names of Firearm Owner's Identification Card holders under the Freedom of Information Act, gun owners hit the roof. I admit to not knowing what the problem was. It seemed to me that when the crooks found out where the guns were, they would rob the neighbors' houses instead. I have a FOID card.
The Illinois State Police said that it would fight Lisa Madigan's ruling, but passage of legislation prohibiting the FOID card names being release would avoid a court fight.
Today State Rep. Mike Tryon reports below on House passage of the bill pushed by the Illinois State Rifle Association and the NRA.
Legislators Protect FOID Card Holders' Rights through Passage of HB 3500

Springfield… State Representative Mike Tryon (R-Crystal Lake) joined many of his colleagues on Friday in protecting the privacy rights of Firearm Owner's Identification Card holders across Illinois.
House Bill 3500 adds an exemption to the Illinois Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) protecting the personal information of Firearm Owner's Identification (FOID) Card holders. The bill prohibits State and local governments from publicly releasing the names or other private information of FOID card holders or applicants. HB 3500 passed the Illinois House of Representatives on a vote of 98-12.

Mike Tryon
"This is a major victory for law-abiding gun owners in Illinois," said Tryon, a co-sponsor of the bill. "Those who choose to exercise their second amendment rights are entitled to a certain level of privacy and today's vote helps to ensure that these people's names and personal information may remain confidential."

House Bill 3500 was filed in response to a ruling by Attorney General Lisa Madigan that declared the names of FOID Card holders to be public information that must be disclosed if requested through a FOIA request. The Illinois State Police and the National Rifle Association both opposed Madigan's ruling.
"Releasing the names and addresses of people who have firearms in their homes would make it easy for criminals to target locations where they could steal guns," said Tryon. "Making that list public would also let criminals know which homes they could break into without fear of encountering an individual who protects himself with a gun."
Thanks to HB3500 its not an issue anymore, BUT she did try nonetheless!
Also it seems some county PA'a are letting people carry under the "Constitutional Carry" thing, Madison, Polk, and Randolph couture I believe.
Also July 9th is the deadline, there will be no more extensions! Dale

 

[ispcapt]

When the Public Access Division of the Illinois Attorney General's Office ruled that the names of Firearm Owner's Identification Card holders under the Freedom of Information Act, gun owners hit the roof. I admit to not knowing what the problem was. It seemed to me that when the crooks found out where the guns were, they would rob the neighbors' houses instead. I have a FOID card.
The Illinois State Police said that it would fight Lisa Madigan's ruling, but passage of legislation prohibiting the FOID card names being release would avoid a court fight. (snip)

That is all correct. But it wasn't because the AG was in favor of releasing the info. The AG wasn't "trying" anything. The AG looked at the statute as it was written and could find nothing in the statute which prevented releasing FOID info. That the AG's job - to review statutes at the request of other agencies and give an opinion what the statute means. That's all the AG did in this case. It wasn't because the AG was trying to release the info. That is completely untrue and inaccurate.
The ISP received a FOIA request for FOID holders info. The ISP was opposed to releasing the info but the way the FOIA law was written there was nothing in the statute granting an exemption for that type info. The ISP asked the IL AG for a legal opinion. That is the role of the IL AG in state govt. When an agency has a question about a statute it is one of the IL AG's role to render an interpretation of the way the law is written. The IL AG represents state agencies against suits and as such reviews statutes for agencies to render a defensible position before a suit is filed.
In this case the IL AG looked at the way the statute was written at the time and also saw there was no exemption in the FOIA law to prevent releasing the info. That is not at all the same as saying the AG was in favor of releasing the info. In fact when the opinion was rendered the AG sided with the ISP that their office did not believe the info should be released but the law said differently. The AG was just giving an opinion on the way the law was worded. It was after that opinion that the ISP working with the legislature was able to get the law changed to add the exemption for FOID info.
It was the tin foil hat crew that spread the story because of the opinion that the AG was in favor of releasing the FOID info. That was not the case. These same type knuckleheads don't have a clue about how the law was written. When you're a public servant your personal opinion doesn't matter. What matters is what is written in the law.

 

[Badkarma 1]

Indeed, the ISP to their credit did fight to get the records closed.
As too the rest of it, we'll see how it plays out in the next election! Dale

 

[ispcapt]

Indeed, the ISP to their credit did fight to get the records closed.
As too the rest of it, we'll see how it plays out in the next election! Dale

Just FYI - the IL AG also supported changing the FOIA law.
The IL AG could very well end up the next governor of IL. She's definitely the front runner in the polls right now.
When spreading information it is best to get the facts straight before giving out untruthful and inaccurate information. Spreading inaccurate information only gives support to the other side. If you can't get the info right then it shows people that the teller doesn't know what he's talking about so why should anyone be swayed by their candidate. It does the cause a disservice and actually hurts what we need to do.

 

[Badkarma 1]

Just FYI - the IL AG also supported changing the FOIA law.
The IL AG could very well end up the next governor of IL. She's definitely the front runner in the polls right now.
When spreading information it is best to get the facts straight before giving out untruthful and inaccurate information. Spreading inaccurate information only gives support to the other side. If you can't get the info right then it shows people that the teller doesn't know what he's talking about so why should anyone be swayed by their candidate. It does the cause a disservice and actually hurts what we need to do.

I'm well aware of how dis-information can be destructive, yet I read said articles in the newspapers, not the local bar.
In any event lets hope we get this bill passed, then later amend what's might be wrong with it according to others.
As my grandfather told me once,"There are two sides to every story, its best if you read both and decide for yourself." Dale

 

[ispcapt]

I'm well aware of how dis-information can be destructive, yet I read said articles in the newspapers, not the local bar.
In any event lets hope we get this bill passed, then later amend what's might be wring with it according to others. Dale

I don't know where you read that the AG supported releasing FOID info. You sure didn't read it in any legit newspaper because that was opposite of the AG's stated position and that's not what was reported in newspapers such as the SJ-R.com or the AG's press release.
The FOIA law has already been amended to exclude FOID info. It was changed over a year ago.

 

[Badkarma 1]

I don't know where you read that the AG supported releasing FOID info. You sure didn't read it in any legit newspaper because that was opposite of the AG's stated position and that's not what was reported in newspapers such as the SJ-R.com or the AG's press release.
The FOIA law has already been amended to exclude FOID info. It was changed over a year ago.

Local news, local newspaper!
Let me ask you this then, if the AG wasn't going to release said information to the public, then why did she ask for it in the first place?
And why did the state gov't have to amend the FOIA, to further prevent such an act?
Something here isn't adding up! Dale

 

[ispcapt]

Local news, local newspaper!
Let me ask you this then, if the AG wasn't going to release said information to the public, then why did she ask for it in the first place?
And why did the state gov't have to amend the FOIA, to further prevent such an act?
Something here isn't adding up! Dale

It's not adding up to you because you obviously don't understand how the legal system works.
You didn't read it in any newspaper except some of those rags put out by some of the tin foil hat types. Do a bit more research of the legit newspapers and provide a link to the article that says the AG wanted to release the info. I'll help you out - you won't find it because that is not what the AG said. The AG's press release was clear. The AG did not say they wanted FOID info released. They said there was no legal exemption to withhold the info and as such the info has to be released.
You're showing you don't have a clue about the process and what happened. There's no confusion except you don't understand what goes on. That lack of understanding is why you believe the BS stories by some of the tin foil hat types which is why you don't understand it.
Here's an explanation of how the legal process works. It's simple high school civics.
The ISP is the holder of the FOID info, not the AG. Therefore it wasn't the AG who can release the info. The AG doesn't hold the info to release. The AG doesn't release any FOIA info from any ageny unless the request is for info from the AG's office. FOID info is not in the AG's office.
The ISP was given an FOIA request from the media for the FOID info. All state agencies receive FOIA requests all the time. It's very common. The FOIA statute has specific exemptions that must be met if an agency is going to withhold info. An agency just can't withhold info. It has to follow the exemptions set by the statute.
The IL AG is the attorney for the state of IL and as such represents other state agencies in legal matters. When an agency has a legal question they ask the IL AG for an opinion. The AG then researches the statutes and court rulings and gives an opinion on what a law says and how it is interpreted by the courts.
The ISP did not want to release the info but could find no legal grounds in the FOIA act to withhold it. The ISP asked the AG for such an opinion to determine if there was a court ruling or some interpretation that would allow for the withholding of the FOID info. The AG researched the FOIA statute and court rulings and agreed there was nothing in the FOIA statute or previous court rulings that would allow for the info to not be released. Had the ISP withheld the info anyway, given how the FOIA act was written at the time, the requesting party could have sued and the court would have forced the release of the FOID info because there was no legal exemption to withhold it.
That is no where near saying the "AG wanted to release the info." You have to be able to understand the legal process.

And why did the state gov't have to amend the FOIA, to further prevent such an act?

Yes, exactly. Without amending the FOIA statute, the way the FOIA act was previously written, anyone could file a FOIA request and receive all the FOID info on anyone/everyone in IL. The only way to prevent the release of that info was for the FOIA act to be amended to include such an exemption. The ISP and the AG supported the amended FOIA law.

So when you wrote that the AG wanted to release the info it was untrue and inaccurate. Spreading such info only hurts legitimate gun owner rights because it gives the antis good grounds to show the gun rights people spread lies, are ignorant of the facts, and/or aren't capable of understanding simple language. And in this case they would be right because there are agency documents and press releases which say otherwise.
Facts - they're the only thing that matter. Misinformation only supports the other side. Get the facts.

 

[Badkarma 1]

Then explain this!

Eric Horng
More: Bio, Facebook, Twitter, News Team
March 2, 2011 (CHICAGO) (WLS) -- Should the names of registered gun owners in Illinois be made public? That's the question being debated by the Illinois attorney general and state police.

To buy a gun in Illinois, first you must have an FOID card, short for firearm owners identification. Illinois state police had always kept cardholder names private, but this week, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan's office said the public has a right to that information.

At Illinois Gun Works in Elmwood Park reaction was swift and mostly negative.

"I'm concerned about any information that's on the internet, particularly that I'm owning a firearm," said gun owner Paul McCarthy.

"It's never been anybody's business but the gun owners and the state police," said gun owner Michael LaRose. "There's no reason, no viable reason, for this to be done. It's a privacy issue."

Wednesday, Madigan defended her office's decision to uphold a Freedom of Information Act request that would effectively publicize the names of registered Illinois gun owners.

The request for names by the Associated Press had been rejected by Illinois State Police, which administers the FOID process.

"The federal and state courts that have looked at these issues have said when you apply for some form of a license, that that is public information," said Madigan.

The issue may end up in the courts or the state legislature. Illinois State Police has said it will ask a judge to decide the matter.

And, at least two Republican-sponsored bills in the General Assembly would specifically make FOID information private, citing public safety concerns.

"It is not good policy in the State of Illinois to release the names so that criminals have a heads up as to who may or may not have a firearm in their home to protect themselves," said Sen. Kirk Dillard, (R) Hinsdale.

"My fear is there will be people that will buy guns illegally figuring that, well, nobody will know I have it," said Illinois Gun Works owner Don Mastrianni.

Madigan says the information made public would be limited to name and card expiration date, no addresses, photos or Social Security numbers.

"It's alright with me as long as all my information is not on there, like Social Security card or my house information, nothing like that," said gun buyer Carlos Crespo. "As long as it's just my name and my expiration date, that's fine with me."

It could be some time before any names are released. Wednesday, one of the bills in the General Assembly that would make FOID information private stalled in a House committee. there is another bill, however, working its way through the State Senate.

Granted that was back in 2011, when it originally aired on WLS-TV channel 7 out of Chicago. I suppose these folks were wearing tin foil hats at the time too right?
Ya know its funny, maybe I'm not fully versed in the law as you say, but I do know that invasion of privacy is very illeagal! Dale

 

[HankG]

Local paper intimated that it's all worked out...Quinn will veto the bill and "stand tall" in the eyes of the antigun crowd in the state to help him in his re-election bid. The Legislature will then override his veto since there is enough votes in both the Senate and the House to do it. All votes will be made public so that various constituencies can see how their Senators and Congressmen voted.

 

[flycaster]

Illinois politics can be even more complex, and dirty, than that. How about, say, line item vetoes from Governor Potatohead? Then what happens? And a straight veto doesn't automatically result in an override. Votes can be traded/bought before the override session. This state stinks.
The mayor of Chicago doesn't want carry in his town. Period. He will stomp on a lot of toes first.

Chuck

 

[ispcapt]

Eric Horng (article snipped for briefness)

Show me anywhere in the article where it says the AG wanted to release
FOID info. In fact, the very article you quoted confirmed exactly what I have been saying. Read it closely. Reading comprehension is very important. I know it's difficult to understand when people have limited reading comprehension abilities but the article is written at a very basic reading level.
What does this very line say from the article?
"The federal and state courts that have looked at these issues have said when you apply for some form of a license, that that is public information," said Madigan."
There are some multi-syllable words in that line but most are pretty simple.

Since you don't seem to be able to understand very well here, once again, is what happened. I can't make it any clearer and the very article you quoted also explains it.
The ISP did not want the FOID info released and asked the IL AG to review the FOIA statute and court rulings to see if there was any exemption which would apply. The AG could find none. That's what the line above says. It does not say the AG wanted the info released. It says the AG confirmed the courts and statute would force releasing the info.

Granted that was back in 2011, when it originally aired on WLS-TV channel 7 out of Chicago. I suppose these folks were wearing tin foil hats at the time too right?

The one wearing the tin foil hat is the one who is unable to understand what they're reading. Everything in that 2011 article supports exactly what I was saying and no where does it say the AG was in favor of releasing FOID info.

Ya know its funny, maybe I'm not fully versed in the law as you say, but I do know that invasion of privacy is very illeagal! Dale )

It's not funny. It's sad really. It's obvious you're not at all versed in the law or very good at reading comprehension either. Tin foil hats do that.
So you go ahead and believe whatever fallacies you want to believe. Just don't spread those stories if you really have an interest in defeating anti-gun politicians. People will just use easily to obtain facts to show you're not in touch with the facts of the issue, use of untruths, and misrepresentations. In other words failing to understand the facts and using untruths and misstatements you reinforce the anti-gunners beliefs that we're not gun owners but gun nuts.

 

[Badkarma 1]

"Wednesday, Madigan defended her office's decision to uphold a Freedom of Information Act request that would effectively publicize the names of registered Illinois gun owners." This!
Then why was it that the state House of Representatives had to create HB3500 to keep it from happening?
And, an ISRA representative I showed this too had a good laugh and his remarks were less than charitable.
You asked for a news report, I delivered! So please try a new argument, your current one is getting boring! Dale

 

[Badkarma 1]

ISRA v. Illinois State Police

This suit seeks to keep the Illinois State Police from releasing FOID information.
The ISRA obtained a restraining order that prevents the ISP from releasing the info while the suit proceeds.

Illinois State Rifle Association Secures Temporary Restraining Order Against Release of Firearm Owners' Personal Information

PEORIA, Ill., March 11, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following was released today by the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA):

The ISRA is pleased to announce that it has secured a temporary restraining order against the release of personal information belonging to persons holding Illinois Firearm Owner Identification cards (FOID). The ISRA and four additional plaintiffs filed for the temporary restraining order after Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan announced that her office believes that release of FOID information to the public is proper under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act. The ISRA is very concerned that public release of personal information from the FOID database will jeopardize the safety of law-abiding firearm owners. ...

The entire press release is posted on PRNewswire.

These PDF documents are a matter of public record in this suit:

ISRA Compliant 3/11/2011

Adding extra plaintiffs 4/1/2011

Appearance of ISP's attorneys 4/25/2011: Thompson, Carter

ISP's answer to the complaint, with exhibits 5/13/2011

The attachments are visible on the ISRA website. Dale