Illinois passes veto proof CC bill.

Status
Not open for further replies.
SECTION 22. RIGHT TO ARMS
Subject only to the police power, the right of the
individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed.
Click to expand...

It's also proof that lawmakers focus upon the first half of the RKBA in the Illinois constitution and use it to nullify the rest of the right. They certainly hold Illinois citizens in contempt.

There are so many prohibited places that the permit is nearly useless. Carriers must notify home owners upon entry and they can't go anywhere they'd normally take their children.

Frankly, this is a terrible law that violates the state constitution. While Ohio's "system" improved over time, we have no idea what the legislature will do in the future.
 
Ohio is glad to let Illinois keep Chicago. We'll take everything south of Decatur though if you're offering.
 
Ohio has Cleveland....and nobody else will take it, hell, even the residents are leaving it in droves.
 
It can be vetoed. The veto might well be over rode by the legislature though.

Veto proof is a term that is not really true. It just means that it passed the legislature with enough votes that if all those votes hold up in a veto session the veto would be over ridden. Our previous governor (now in prison) vetoed a sort of self defense bill that passed by a so called veto proof margin and the legislature over rode his veto.

It is possible the governor would veto it or use his amendatory veto power.

IIRC, it only requires a bare majority to accept amendatory veto changes.

Who knows what might happen. It only takes one house not being able to muster 3/5 for a complete veto to hold up.
 
Tennessee's shall-issue started off restrictive for the nay-sayers used to the discretionary system (some counties no-issue for all practical puposes). But as the prophesied "rivers of blood in the streets" and "OK Corral gunfights between soccer moms over parking spaces" did not happen, former opponents came around. Restrictions, like mandatory liability insurance, were dropped. I certainly hope the experience of Illinois will be the same.

We still have 4 hours class on self-defense law (written exam, passing score required), 4 hours class on gun safety (written exam, passing score required), qualification score at the firing range, (~$75 to get certified as eligible) then application processing (fingerprints, BG check, etc., another $115). The $180 fees hurt the people who probably need a carry permit more than me--minority home and business owners who must walk and travel in neighborhoods with drug gang activity.

But frankly it beats the discretionary system, based on the whim (or politics) of the sheriff. It is like the driver's license: you qualify and apply, it shall be issued. (What the haitch happened to the gun-controller mantra that guns should be regulated like cars? They always back confiscatory registration taxes and discretionary license schemes, designed to deny not regulate.)

Illinois shall-issue is a step above no-issue. No-issue meant people often decided to carry for self-defense on their own, ending up in gun court. Don B. Kates "Restricting Handguns: Liberal Skeptics Speak Out" has some testimony from Chicago gun judges back when they were allowed discretion to dismiss charges agains non-criminal citizens caught carrying purely for self-defense: practically every gun carry arrest required gross violation of 4th Amendment reasonable search and seizure and it was easy to suppress evidence and dismiss charges. However, boys and girls, with a shall-issue permit system there is no excuse to carry w/o permit.
 
Last edited:
Governor Quinn is just a speed bump in this equation. 60% vote needed in both houses to make it law and to override a veto. Quinn can veto it but with 75% votes in favor in both house and senate it will easily pass over his veto. Too many legislators scared of the court cliff and Madigan and Cullerton are now behind this bill.

The amendatory veto with changes that in theory could be passed by a simple majority won't work. The bills belong to pro-gun CCW advocates in both house and senate and they get to say whether or not they would allow a vote to override or passage with amendatory veto language accepted. There is no way they would allow a vote except for override.

Besides there are enough pro-gun CCW senators and representatives that they couldn't get a majority to vote for accepting the legislation as amended by Quinn. They would all just be ticked they had to come in for special session to vote for an override.
 
Ohio has "Little Chicago."
Click to expand...
Ohio has state preemption of gun laws.

When Mayor Frank Jackson ordered the Cleveland PD to enforce Cleveland's invalid "assault weapons" ban, the police union directed its members to ignore him, lest they be sued as individuals and lose their behinds in civil court.

When the police union orders a legally sanctioned mutiny against gun laws, you KNOW you're not in Chicago.
 
You're both welcome to Chicago - we're still trying to get Phoenix to realize it's NOT Los Angeles...;)
Good luck to IL citizens, and I hope they can get this changed to a better bill, but it's an uphill battle against the Machine. This bill wouldn't even have passed if it wasn't for the 7th Circuit threat looming in the background...imagine Rahm wetting himself at the thought of citizens with lawful Modern Sporting Rifles strolling in his town...legally...
 
We finally get a shall issue concealed carry law here in Illinois. Despite the fact that it is way too restrictive, too expensive, and requires a 16 hour training course, we also have to wait another 180 days for applications to become available by the ISP. We all know how backlogged the ISP is on getting F.O.I.D. cards out in a timely manner so I'm not going to hold my breath on them getting the concealed carry applications out in a timely manner. :banghead:
 
Last edited:
I don't think the other states that passed not-great laws, followed by an incremental improvement, are relevant to Illinois. The Illinois legislature did not choose this, they were FORCED to do it by the appeals court ruling. They passed the bare minimum that they thought would comply with that ruling, kicking and screaming, after stalling as long as they could.

I wouldn't hold my breath that the Chicago-dominated legislature is going to see reason any time soon.
 
316SS said:
I don't think the other states that passed not-great laws, followed by an incremental improvement, are relevant to Illinois. The Illinois legislature did not choose this, they were FORCED to do it by the appeals court ruling. They passed the bare minimum that they thought would comply with that ruling, kicking and screaming, after stalling as long as they could.

I wouldn't hold my breath that the Chicago-dominated legislature is going to see reason any time soon.
Click to expand...
This.
 
Celebrating the passing of this bill, is the same as being happy for the scraps the king tosses to you under his table.
 
Would you guys quit whining?!? This is a big step. You're not going to go from the last holdout against carry to Arizona overnight. We got concealed carry, no AWB and no magazine ban. Big win for Illinois, in my book.
 
My book is the Constitution, I'll accept no less. Compromise in support of anything else, is how the last generation got us in this mess.

Unlike a great many of my friends here locally, that are practically cheering in the streets in some imagined "victory", I've read the entire bill. It is so convoluted and vague, a person will never be sure, at any given moment, is they are 100% legal or not. And this bill is not a true "shall issue", it's a "shall issue, unless pretty much any one objects to you, then your appeal is to a "star chamber" review board, that's meetings are not subject to the Open Meetings Act in Illinois, nor are it's minutes subject to Freedom Of Information Act requests.

And look VERY closely at the privacy waivers you agree to just by applying, even if you're denied.

Sorry folks, we've been had, and far to many people are thanking the very ones that did it.
 
We had nothing for years as we fought for this. Is it perfect, no, but it is still better than NY, NJ, MD, and CA. No mag size restrictions, no ban on hollow point ammo, no Duty to inform, can't get busted for "printing" or accidental exposure, restaurant carry OK, and others. It is a real good starting point.
 
Celebrating the passing of this bill, is the same as being happy for the scraps the king tosses to you under his table.
Click to expand...
Small steps. TX has consistently improved their CHL laws, making improvements virtually every legislative session since the CHL bill initially passed in 1995. You have to start somewhere.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
WV: Constitutional Carry Passes Senate and House and VETO PROOF!
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
RetiredUSNChief
RetiredUSNChief
R
  • Locked
Illinois Concealed Carry 2011
Replies
20
Views
2K
Nanook
Nanook
Speedo66
  • Locked
WV Governor Vetos Gun Bill
Replies
1
Views
547
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
jawman
  • Locked
Illinois Concealed Carry HB 183 passes
Replies
8
Views
914
Blue .45
B
G
  • Locked
Ohio CCW - Passes house 69-28 - going to senate committee
Replies
6
Views
663
gryphon
G
Back
Top