URGENT: Action needed NOW in Illinois

Status
Not open for further replies.
what address do you want the 53' box truck full of Mallox sent to?
 
Haha. This keeps up I'll have to name my ulcers.

Rumor from the Capitol is we rattled their cages HARD this morning. Between the NRA-ILA, ISRA, Illinois Carry, and grassroots efforts thousands of calls and e-mails all hit Springfield in a short period of time.

They certainly know that we aren't asleep anymore.

Whether they care... that's what remains to be seen.
 
They can't maintain their majority without the downstate Democrats. And it's starting to look like any downstate Democrat who votes for any of this is going to be prime picking on election day.

Imagine Illinois without Mike Madigan in the speaker's chair....I like the sound of that but I don't think the machine does....The want to take our guns...but they want to stay in power more....
 
Illinois without Mike Madigan in the speaker's chair? Things might actually get accomplished for a change.

I have absolutely zero respect for him. None whatsoever. And it's not only due to the gun rights thing. He is an all-around turd of a politician.

One thing to keep in mind, without those downstate Democrats being on our side, we'd be lost in a sea of anti-gun legislation. So when they DO vote for us, we have to thank them by voting for them.
 
Without the downstate Democrats we would be a Brady A+ state. Illinois would make New York, New Jersey and California look 2d Amendment paradises.

I voted for Kurt Grandberg against republican opponents until he decided to retire simply because of his pro 2A stand. His position as Majority Whip stopped a lot of the insanity.
 
The problem is a lot of these people get elected in the off-year elections. When there's a big presidential election you see massive voter turnout - better than 65% in Tazewell county, and over 60% across the state. But in the off years (when a lot of representative seats change hands) you only see 17-22% voter turnout, state wide.

If 50% of the registered voters are gun owners, and we can get 50% of those to get off their lazy butts and vote, we would (cumulatively) amount to 25% of the general election vote.

With state averages in the 17-22% range, we'd DESTROY the anti-gunners in most places. We'd still get our butts handed to us in counties that restrict firearms extensively, Cook, etc.. but if we could gain enough of the districts to override a governor veto, it would be smooth sailing.

It's just a matter of statistics, and getting people to take the time to check a few boxes.
 
More responses.

Here's my rep's response:

Amendment II: 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.
Thank you for your communication regarding gun legislation. As you know, I am opposed to any legislation that I believe infringes on the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.
Sincerely,
Rich Brauer
State Representative
87th District

Another:

Thank you for contacting me with your support in defending the Second Amendment.
I want you to know that I stand with you in this fight to protect one of our most fundamental rights as Americans. The right to private ownership of firearms was enshrined in the Bill of Rights by our Founding Fathers, and we honor them every day by standing up in defense of that right.
The House of Representatives was recently engaged in another round of farcical political theater, a "Weekly Order of Business" to debate amendments to a Chicago-style gun ban. The House engaged in this charade twice in previous weeks, once on concealed carry and once on pensions. It became clear very early on in this show that these were not serious amendments, or even serious discussions.
These charades were nothing but political publicity stunts designed to give anti-Second Amendment Representatives political cover, and to make those of us who stand up for the constitution look like extremists. It was a false debate providing false choices. Accordingly, the members of the House Republican caucus decided not to participate. We believe that issues of crime and our state's financial future deserve to be taken seriously - more seriously than the Chicago politicians who put on these shows are taking them. Unfortunately, as the minority in the House, our caucus sometimes has to resort to unconventional strategies to make our voices heard - and that is what we did by withholding our votes.
We stand ready to work with any member from either side of the aisle in either chamber who wants to get serious about solving these problems. I want to thank you again for making your voice heard. Together we can enact a sensible concealed carry law and protect our Second Amendment rights and our freedoms.
Sincerely,

Tim Schmitz
State Representative - District 65

And a non-commital.

March 14, 2013

Dear Mr. Lawrence:

Thank you for contacting me. I understand your concern and at this time I am looking into this issue and appreciate hearing your viewpoint.
Thank you, once again, for your concern on this important issue. If you have additional thoughts you’d like to share, or if I can ever be of assistance to you, please contact me at (217) 877-9636 or [email protected].

Best regards,

Sue Scherer
State Representative – 96th District
 
This is much different than the Colorado mag cap / mag ban fight.

The Chicago democratic machine is basically making exploratory attacks, then they analyze where they failed to re-formulate a plan, shore up their weaknesses - apply pressure to reps who might go either way. The speaker of the house and one of the top dogs in the Illinois dem party then gets out the carrots and the stick and applies either as necesary.

If their attack had worked this afternoon, they would have forged ahead in making the mag cap / mag ban a poison pill to the CCW law, and they would also have tried to just push ahead with it as it's own law...

It is maddening fighting this fight with them because the Second Amendment and right-to-self-defense advocates have to win each and every time - the gun grabbers only have to win once.
 
Yeah, this isn't at all like New York or Colorado, that just blitzed something right through.

We're being attacked over.. and over.. and over.. and over again.

Each time they try to sneak something through (always at the last minute), it gets more difficult to motivate people to pick up the phones, or send e-mail, to say the same thing over and over again.

One would have hoped that after the fantastic showing we had at iGOLD this year the anti-gunners would throw in the towel. I know.. I know.. wishful thinking. :)

Latest word leaked from anti-gun staffers is the Chicago Machine is seriously considering poisoning ALL concealed carry bills. Heck, they just did that with Amendment 40 on 1156 (by introducing a requirement to keep guns unloaded / locked at home, they guarantee a Heller-based dismissal if it does get signed to law).

Why they'd poison their own bill is beyond me. It's almost like they're trying to think of 99 different ways to flip the 7th circuit the bird before the deadline hits.

One thing is for sure, they're testing ALL of the waters to see if they have ANY leverage to get a strong shall-issue bill watered down to their taste.

Unfortunately it means they're attacking across the board from every conceivable angle. Million dollar insurance policies. Ridiculous storage requirements. Bans on transporting any firearms in vehicles. And so on.

They're throwing every idea, regardless of how stupid, at the wall to see if anything sticks.
 
From Rep Tim Schmitz:

Thank you for contacting me with your support in defending the Second Amendment.

I want you to know that I stand with you in this fight to protect one of our most fundamental rights as Americans. The right to private ownership of firearms was enshrined in the Bill of Rights by our Founding Fathers, and we honor them every day by standing up in defense of that right.

The House of Representatives was recently engaged in another round of farcical political theater, a "Weekly Order of Business" to debate amendments to a Chicago-style gun ban. The House engaged in this charade twice in previous weeks, once on concealed carry and once on pensions. It became clear very early on in this show that these were not serious amendments, or even serious discussions.

These charades were nothing but political publicity stunts designed to give anti-Second Amendment Representatives political cover, and to make those of us who stand up for the constitution look like extremists. It was a false debate providing false choices. Accordingly, the members of the House Republican caucus decided not to participate. We believe that issues of crime and our state's financial future deserve to be taken seriously - more seriously than the Chicago politicians who put on these shows are taking them. Unfortunately, as the minority in the House, our caucus sometimes has to resort to unconventional strategies to make our voices heard - and that is what we did by withholding our votes.

We stand ready to work with any member from either side of the aisle in either chamber who wants to get serious about solving these problems. I want to thank you again for making your voice heard. Together we can enact a sensible concealed carry law and protect our Second Amendment rights and our freedoms.

Sincerely,

Tim Schmitz
State Representative - District 65
 
Update From Todd Vandermyde sent via ISRA:

Springfield Report -
Message from NRA Lobbyist Todd Vandermyde, 3/14/2013:

Earlier today, we were told by more than one legislator that leadership was trying to bring back the magazine ban for a vote today.

Evidently they are having a hard time finding the last 3 votes to pass their confiscation bill. This afternoon reports are coming in about gun owners lighting up the phone lines in opposition to the magazine ban.

The House adjourned this afternoon without taking up the magazine ban, but will be back tomorrow morning. Your calls are having an impact and please keep it up. Your work today bought us more time in this fight to keep them from getting the votes to pass their latest attack on the Second Amendment.
 
Ok. This is funny.

From: Sandra Pihos [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 11:34 AM
To: Trenton XXXXXXXXXX
Subject: Re: Magazine Ban

Dear Trenton,

Thank you for your email concerning Alzheimer's disease. Please read the
attached letter from me that provides additional details.

Sandy Pihos

Attached: Gun Legislation March 15 2013.pdf

Uhh....
 
OK she re-sent it with the correct message body. :)

The PDF attachment reads:

Dear Constituent,
Thank you for your recent correspondence concerning gun legislation. State Representative Brandon Phelps filed House Bill 997 addressing conceal and carry of firearms. Currently it is held on the Calendar Order of Second Reading and eight amendments have been filed on the bill. No vote has been taken.
I did vote “yes” for the Conceal and Carry Legislation, House Bill 148, in 2011 that Representative Brandon Phelps carried, which failed. According to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, state lawmakers, who have been divided as to whether to legalize the conceal carry of weapons, now have until June 8, 2013, to create a law to uphold conceal and carry. If the General Assembly does not adopt a conceal and carry law they may end up with no authority in the matter because the Federal Appeals Court threw out the state’s concealed gun ban.
House Speaker Madigan filed House Bill 1155 now containing 44 amendments. The House has spent many hours and had much debate considering a variety of these amendments, which were filed by many different sponsors. These amendments created what would be considered restrictions on where an individual would be permitted to carry a concealed weapon. House Bill 997 offered by Representative Brandon Phelps is the 27th Amendment and was passed with my “yes” vote. This amendment is the Illinois State Rifle Association’s original comprehensive proposal. Because many of the provisions conflict with Amendment 27, those conflicts will have to be negotiated and reconciled. This bill has been placed on the Calendar for Second Reading with further discussions forthcoming.
Speaker Madigan also has House Bill 1156, with 11 amendments, which is considered by many to be an assault weapons ban. I voted “no” on Amendment 10 which proposed firearm magazine bans and firearm capacity bans. The House Bill 1156 is being held on the Calendar Order of Second Reading. I ultimately believe that some version of House Bill 997 will be passed and I know Representative Phelps is willing to work with the opponents to make that happen. I have no idea what Speaker Madigan’s intent is by making both of these bills a multiple choice task.
Please know that your viewpoint is extremely important to me and I am always pleased to hear from the constituents that I represent. I promise to perform due diligence on any conversation bringing conceal and carry legislation to a final resolution. It would be helpful if you always include your address and telephone number in future correspondence so that I may contact you proactively to discuss the information, if necessary.
Best regards,
Sandy Pihos
 
Tom Cross:

Thank you for your recent e-mail in support of Second Amendment rights and opposition to gun control measures introduced in Springfield.
As a FOID card holder and advocate of responsible firearms use, I will continue to support the rights of law-abiding Illinois gun owners. We will also continue to oppose the efforts of Chicago politicians to infringe upon those rights.
Thank you again for your e-mail on this very important issue. I appreciate you taking the time to share your views. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.
Rep. Tom Cross
 
Marty Moylan

Dear Trenton,

Thank you for taking the time to write to my office regarding this important issue. I assure you, that as your State Representative, maintaining a safe environment for Illinois families to live and work will always be my top priority.

As with any issue, I want to make sure that I receive input from all stakeholders before casting my vote. From the police chiefs to local residents, it’s imperative that I gather as much information before deciding how to vote. I am supporter of the 2nd Amendment, and believe that any legislation needs to protect the right to bear arms, but also works to keep our communities and streets safer.

While the 2nd Amendment makes it clear that individuals have the right to keep and bear arms, there are a number of common sense proposals on the table to ensure firearms are being kept out of the hands of convicted felons, and the mentally ill.

Therefore, while the House of Representatives have yet to address this issue, I will continue to closely analyze the debate going forward, to ensure the concerns you raised in your letter are taken into account. I encourage you to continue to stay engaged as well, and pass on any ideas that you may have.

Respectfully,

Marty Moylan
State Representative
55th District
 
I just got the same email only it had my name on it instead of yours this time. ;)

Got this reply from Tom Cross:

Thank you for your recent e-mail in support of Second Amendment rights and opposition to gun control measures introduced in Springfield.

As a FOID card holder and advocate of responsible firearms use, I will continue to support the rights of law-abiding Illinois gun owners. We will also continue to oppose the efforts of Chicago politicians to infringe upon those rights.

Thank you again for your e-mail on this very important issue. I appreciate you taking the time to share your views. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.

Rep. Tom Cross

And this from Josh Harms:

Thank you for contacting my office in regards to 2nd Amendment Rights. Just like most people in the 106th District, I was raised with firearms in the house and I was taught how to respect and handle them; lessons that I am passing down to my children. I believe whole heartedly that everyone has a right to protect themselves, their families, and their property. I also believe that the right to self-defense does not end at your front door which is why I will be supporting legislation to allow for the legal carrying of firearms in Illinois. Gun control measures have failed to protect citizens time and time again and I will not support any attempts to ban firearms or place limits on the amount of ammunition a magazine can hold. I will do my best to keep you informed as legislation progresses through the General Assembly. Again, thank you for contacting my office and please continue to do so in the future.

Best Wishes,

Josh Harms

State Representative - District 106

State Representative Josh Harms
District Office
342 W. Walnut
Watseka, Illinois 60970
815-432-0106
Springfield Office
208 - N Stratton Bldg.
Springfield, Illinois 62706
217-558-1039
 
Tvandermyde, on 15 March 2013 - 10:45 AM, said:
Looks like no gun stuff today
 
And for those of you who think the reps themselves don't read these:

Me, to Sandra Pihos:

Thank you Sandra. And… you guys are really cracking me up today.

SINGING?!!!

What the heck did they put in the House Coffee this morning?!

-Trent​

Sandra Pihos to me:

So glad you are watching! On a legislator's "first" bill, many crazy thing happen! Since I don't drink coffee, I don't think my voice was up to par.

Thanks, you made me smile,
Sandy
 
Rep Davismeyer

Thank you for taking the time to contact me with regards to gun control issues.
I am happy to be a co-sponsor of HB997, which was noted to be THE conceal and carry bill following the 7th Circuit Court decision and again following the refusal of Attorney General Lisa Madigan's appeal of that decision.
Unfortunately, with the large amount of support for this legislation, from Republicans and Democrats alike, the Speaker of the House Michael Madigan feels the need to push his own agenda through the use of shell bills and amendments. It is my belief that this will be used to force "assault weapon" bans while pushing minimal rights for conceal and carry.
While it is apparent that the Madigan family is intent on taking away your gun rights, you can rest assured that I am not willing to give up rights in order to "receive" rights that are protected by law and required by court order.
I will work hard to protect both the U.S. Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Illinois, which includes the 2nd Amendment and Section 22 of the Illinois Bill of Rights, both of which state our right to "keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".
Again, thank you for contacting me. I look forward to hearing from you in the future.
Sincerely,

C.D. Davidsmeyer
State Representative - District 100
 
Mike Unes is my rep. He's usually pretty good about getting back with me, but not yesterday.

I really like Josh harms reply also!

Glad to see that they "say" no gun stuff today.
 
You shouldn't have anything to worry about with Unes, he's on our side. :)

To a particularly anti-gun representative, I sent this. It was about the hardest language I felt I could use, while maintaining a level of civility.

You bring up "common-sense" legislation. I also believe in "common-sense" legislation - in fact, that's what all legislation should be.

However, please make sure “common-sense” legislation does NOT restrict my rights, as a law abiding citizen, to continue to own what I own right now, or to collect things I am entitled to collect as a Federally Licensed Curio and Relics Holder.

Currently there are NO exemptions in any proposed bills for bona-fide firearms collectors – by default, this legislation would make me a criminal (I will not surrender or sell my collection).

Turning honest, hard-working, law abiding citizens in to felonious criminals through statutory offenses is the most despicable form of Tyranny and oppression I have ever heard of in the United States.

Thus, I would have no choice but to take what I contribute to the economy (a pretty sizable amount) OUT of the State of Illinois, permanently. I would relocate my employees, and THEIR revenue would leave the state. Of course my 5 children would go with; along with all of the tuition and taxes THEY would contribute in years to come.

While *I* would be peaceful and move, it is likely that there are many individuals who would neither move, nor be peaceful, faced with waking up to find that their Government has declared them criminals for no good reason.

Something to consider - Insurrections can, and have, started over things like this.

-Trent

(I keep bringing up the C&R thing to maintain a level of "The Federal Government SAYS so".... and if you ever looked at what is allowed under a C&R license, you'd understand why I am pushing this angle. There's artillery pieces on that list. As well as just about every military weapon named, which has been used in a theater of war.)
 
Oh, don't get me wrong. I know Unes is on the right side of this. My emails and calls to him are usually more of a thank you and keep up the good fight sort. He's usually good about responding and filling me in on what's going on.
 
Oh definitely, it's a good thing on many levels. A thankless job, sucks (I deal with that every single day!).

That, and it lets them know we're watching. :)
 
Madigan's response to the SEC charging Illinois with fraud for lying about the state of the pensions in their bond solicitations was: "We are paying the bondholders and we are paying the interest - there are no victims"

So I wonder if he would accept "my so called assault rifle or standard capacity magazine didn't shoot anyone so there was no victim, how can there be a crime?" as a defense. I think not.....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top