Ridgerunner665
Member
having conflicting laws every mile or two as you drive down the road would be an impossible situation and no better than the current situation.
exactly...
having conflicting laws every mile or two as you drive down the road would be an impossible situation and no better than the current situation.
This is our point. Should the state be denied because of one city or group?
This was successful in NE too.
The first thing the NRA lobbyist said when we called him on this issue was that Carbondale and Peoria had passed laws to keep Concealed out if it passed.
We put feet on the ground and found that indeed Carbondale passed laws to welcome CC and Peoria was supportive also!
Did you know that 90 of the 102 Counties in IL have passed a pro-second amendment resolution in the past couple of years?
The anti-gunners always try to scare pro-gun legislation by speculating on the negatives. That is what I see happening here.
NE passed their CCW without preemption in 06 and are now working on legislation for preemption statewide. Get your foot in the door...Prove it works...Let the courts do their jobs and pull the law into the opt-out communities.
This bill includes reciprocity which would allow carry from visiting states without risking the NOW FELONY! Also, any legal carry person caught in non-carry area is a misdemeanor instead of the NOW FELONY!
Subject to home rule means a simple majority required instead of super majority vote. That doesn't mean that Madigan won't impose a super majority but, if we don't try, they are only speculating. Besides why let him off the hook? Put the thing out there and force their hand.
All we are asking is let the rest of the state have a chance.
Call the NRA...be polite but firm...Ask them to support subject to home rule.
What part of Home Rule Is Enshrined in the Illinois Constitution is so hard for you to understand. There is no way an Illinois court is going to force the home rule municipalities into compliance. Home rule is not just in the legislation laying out how Illinois government works. It's part of the state constitution. Show me one Illinois case where a court forced a home rule unit of government to comply with a state law that specifically gave the home rule government the ability to opt out of. Just show me one case. You can't because there has never been such a case in Illinois.
SECTION 6. POWERS OF HOME RULE UNITS
...
(d) A home rule unit does not have the power
(1) to incur debt payable from ad valorem property tax receipts
maturing more than 40 years from the time it is incurred or
(2) to define and provide for the punishment of a felony.
If Jeff White has been wrong, I haven't seen it. I'm with him 100%
Section 95. Municipal ordinance submission. Within 30 days after the effective date of this Act of the 96th General Assembly, every municipality that enacts an ordinance prohibiting LTC holders from carrying a defensive firearm within its boundaries must submit to the Department of State Police a copy of the ordinance adopted by the municipality that prohibits the carrying of firearms by LTC card holders. The Department of State Police shall compile a list of these municipalities and publish them in a form available to the public free of charge and shall periodically update this compilation in a manner prescribed by the Director of State Police.
Section 905. The Firearm Owners Identification Card Act is amended by changing Section 13.1 as follows:
(430 ILCS 65/13.1) (from Ch. 38, par. 83-13.1)
Sec. 13.1. The provisions of any ordinance enacted by any municipality which requires registration or imposes greater restrictions or limitations on the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms than are imposed by this Act, are not invalidated or affected by this Act, except that an ordinance
of a unit of local government, including a home rule unit, is invalid if it is inconsistent with the Citizen's Self-Defense Act. It is declared to be the policy of this State that the regulation of the right to carry defensive firearms is an exclusive power and function of the State. A home rule unit may not regulate the issuance of permits to carry defensive firearms. This Section is a denial and limitation of home rule powers and functions under subsection (h) of Section 6 of Article VII of the Illinois Constitution. (Source: P.A. 76-1939.)
We only want to get the bill in the state and all the things the NRA is wanting us to wait for can still be continuing on to achieve preemption. This is our Goal...If a bill was passed today with preemption, do you think the Mayor of Chicago would allow it there? NO, the lawsuits would have to begin all over again! I say get him on all fronts now!
I vaguely remember one or two counties in southern IL passing some local rules about disobeying any additional state gun laws. Did that ever go anywhere?
Perhaps some Tea Parties are in order.
Perhaps Illinoisan gun owners need to start sending letters that have "you WILL", rather than "please give us", in them.
What about getting with the local sheriff and county officials...and refuse, as a group, to send ANY tax money to the state? Keep it local for county use...I bet they wouldn't like that.
For the life of me, I don't know how anyone would just as soon have a felony as a misdemeanor!!! But that's just me???
I really don't care what people in other states think. They don't live here, their opinion is immaterial. If they want a voice in what happens here in Illinois they are welcome to move here and join the fight. If they aren't willing to do that, then they need to stay out of our business.
I believe a federal court will make the natural progression from Heller and hold that people have a 2A right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside of their home. A lawsuit was recently filed in California on this exact issue.Do you really think that a federal court would give us CCW? On what grounds?
A lawsuit was filed on CC permit issues in CA, but I am not sure that it will hinge on 2A issues.I believe a federal court will make the natural progression from Heller and hold that people have a 2A right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside of their home. A lawsuit was recently filed in California on this exact issue.
That would be strange since the lawsuit is based on a violation of the 2nd Amendment.I am not sure that it will hinge on 2A issues.
11. The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”
12. The Second Amendment is incorporated as against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, such that Defendants cannot, under color of law, deprive Plaintiffs of their right to keep and bear arms.
13. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of law-abiding individuals to publicly carry operational handguns for self-defense.
14. States retain the ability to regulate the manner of carrying handguns, prohibit the carrying of handguns in specific, narrowly defined sensitive places, prohibit the carrying of arms that are not within the scope of Second Amendment protection, and disqualify specific, particularly dangerous individuals from carrying handguns.
15. States may not completely ban the carrying of handguns for self-defense, deny individuals the right to carry handguns in non-sensitive places, deprive individuals of the right to carry handguns in an arbitrary and capricious manner, or impose regulations on the right to carry handguns that are inconsistent with the Second Amendment.
Really? You do know that there is no legal way to transport a firearm in Carbondale don't you?
14-4-5: UNLAWFUL USE OF WEAPONS:
...
4. Carries or possesses in a vehicle or on or about his person any pistol, revolver, stun gun, or taser or firearm or ballistic knife, except when on his own land or in his own abode or fixed place of business. This subsection shall not apply to or affect transportation of weapons that meet one of the following conditions:
a. Are broken down in a nonfunctioning state; or
b. Are not immediately accessible; or
c. Are unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container by a person who has been issued a valid firearm owner's identification card.