Gov. Quinn of IL Continues to Drag His Feet with CC Bill Passed

This is a discussion on Gov. Quinn of IL Continues to Drag His Feet with CC Bill Passed within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Quinn writes stricter rules into concealed carry bill It just really sickens me how he talks about "public safety" while acting like having a loaded ...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 33
Like Tree6Likes

Thread: Gov. Quinn of IL Continues to Drag His Feet with CC Bill Passed

  1. #1
    Member Array ItalianSteel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    350

    Gov. Quinn of IL Continues to Drag His Feet with CC Bill Passed

    Quinn writes stricter rules into concealed carry bill

    It just really sickens me how he talks about "public safety" while acting like having a loaded(OMG!) firearm in a public place (OMG!!) is a detriment to public safety. Such a drama queen about the 2A and gun rights, I can't believe people who swear an oath to the Constitution can be this ridiculous. What's more... he even uses his "constitutional authority" to try and strike down the 2A. Are you serious...?

    The bill already has a veto proof majority, so at this point his changes mean nothing (I hope). I'm not from IL but I wish for everyone to be able to carry in every state. Good luck to you guys over there!

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array Badey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    3,054
    Quote Originally Posted by ItalianSteel View Post
    Quinn writes stricter rules into concealed carry bill

    It just really sickens me how he talks about "public safety" while acting like having a loaded(OMG!) firearm in a public place (OMG!!) is a detriment to public safety. Such a drama queen about the 2A and gun rights, I can't believe people who swear an oath to the Constitution can be this ridiculous. What's more... he even uses his "constitutional authority" to try and strike down the 2A. Are you serious...?

    The bill already has a veto proof majority, so at this point his changes mean nothing (I hope). I'm not from IL but I wish for everyone to be able to carry in every state. Good luck to you guys over there!
    Can someone explain how he has the power to change the bill?
    Though defensive violence will always be a sad necessity in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men -St. Augustine

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array Richard58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Charlotte area of North Carolina
    Posts
    2,069
    He is for the gun grabbers, plain and simple....
    The police are not there to protect you from crime, they are there to arrest the guy after the crime has been committed, assuming they find him. It is your responsibility to protect yourself and your family.

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array Harryball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lansing Mi
    Posts
    7,124
    Quote Originally Posted by Badey View Post
    Can someone explain how he has the power to change the bill?
    Amendatory powers
    Don"t let stupid be your skill set....

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array Badey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    3,054
    I guess I need to do a little more research. I thought changing legislation was only a legislative power
    Though defensive violence will always be a sad necessity in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men -St. Augustine

  7. #6
    Senior Member Array RightyLefty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    515
    Wow this guy is taking this to a whole new level. Not only is he creating a mag capacity limit, but also a mag limit on the number you can carry. The states that have passed mag capacity limits still allow you to carry more than one mag don't they? Also, allowing each municipality to come up with its own carry laws is crazy. It's going to make it so convoluted that it's going to be such pain to carry a weapon that nobody will want to carry one. Oh wait...just the type of environment they want to create and it will probably work.

  8. #7
    Senior Member Array DJC7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    665
    I'm pretty sure his amendments still have to be voted on and he's already gotten some negative feedback from members of his own party so I'm hoping all of this is a moot point. Either way, it's ridiculous.
    ”One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them.”
    ~Thomas Jefferson


    "Carry your gun - it's a lighter burden than regret."
    ~Breda

  9. #8
    Member Array ItalianSteel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    350
    Quote Originally Posted by RightyLefty View Post
    Wow this guy is taking this to a whole new level. Not only is he creating a mag capacity limit, but also a mag limit on the number you can carry. The states that have passed mag capacity limits still allow you to carry more than one mag don't they? Also, allowing each municipality to come up with its own carry laws is crazy. It's going to make it so convoluted that it's going to be such pain to carry a weapon that nobody will want to carry one. Oh wait...just the type of environment they want to create and it will probably work.
    And when you do go through with all the requirements, you'll be hassled by the police and asked, "why are you being difficult?" Yeah, okay.

    I mean how do the politicians rationalize this to themselves? Okay, so they want to prevent someone from "shooting 154 rounds in 5 minutes." Then how about making a "restriction" of carrying only two extra magazines. Sure, still 2A infringing but far more realistic of a "balance" than "no spare mags at all, you got 10 and only one gun, make it count!"

    I mean seriously, even the biggest mall ninjas aren't carrying over 100 rounds on their person. Hell, most officers don't even carry that many. Even with the highest capacity you could get, let's say a Glock 17 with 30 round magazines, so 30+1+30+30. That's still not even in the triple digits and that's a lot of ammo.

    So now they want to say 15+1 with a couple spare mags and a BUG with 7-10 shots is the same as Sandy Hook/Aurora?

  10. #9
    Pro
    Pro is offline
    Member Array Pro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Mass.
    Posts
    328
    He is a POS, and will drag this out as long as possible. Make no mistake about that!
    elmacgyver0 likes this.
    Minimum government, maximum freedom.

    NRA - Member
    GOAL - Member

  11. #10
    Senior Member Array GeorgiaDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,153
    It's probably just another delay tactic. Make changes that won't fly and send it back to be voted on. It takes more time than signing it .
    "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." - Ephesians 2:8-9

    “The purpose of the law is not to prevent a future offense, but to punish the one actually committed” - Ayn Rand

  12. #11
    VIP Member
    Array BenGoodLuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,026
    If they all drag their feet, Illinois will end up with Constitutional carry which will be the best for Illinoisians.
    Ben

    Cogito, ergo armatum sum. I think, therefore I am armed. (Don Mann, The Modern Day Gunslinger; the ultimate handgun training manual)


  13. #12
    Member Array nickndfl's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    124
    I hope to live to see the day when Tommy guns are legal to carry openly.
    blitzburgh likes this.

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array Aceoky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,587
    Quote Originally Posted by DJC7 View Post
    I'm pretty sure his amendments still have to be voted on and he's already gotten some negative feedback from members of his own party so I'm hoping all of this is a moot point. Either way, it's ridiculous.
    State Journal-Register : Governor expected to amend concealed-carry bill

  15. #14
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,657
    From a news story on this:
    "By Greg McCune

    CHICAGO (Reuters) - Illinois Governor Pat Quinn on Tuesday vetoed parts of a concealed-carry gun bill that would
    have allowed the carrying of more than one gun, carrying guns into some places that serve alcohol, and the
    carrying of a partly exposed gun."

    So let's look at this. New Mexico prohibits the concealed carry of more than one gun. Such a law is unusual but not
    off the charts. New Mexico is considered pretty gun friendly.

    Part about not carrying in certain places where alcohol is served, is not unusual at all. It is almost the norm.
    Most folk who post here agree that alcohol and guns don't go together.

    Can't carry a partially exposed gun. Again, that is a fairly normative restriction in many states which
    issue CHLs.

    I don't see anything horrible in vetoing these sections.
    I haven't looked at the bill as a whole so I don't know if it is good or lousy. I'm just commenting on these three
    items.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  16. #15
    Member Array flphotog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Clearwater,FL
    Posts
    315
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    From a news story on this:
    "By Greg McCune

    CHICAGO (Reuters) - Illinois Governor Pat Quinn on Tuesday vetoed parts of a concealed-carry gun bill that would
    have allowed the carrying of more than one gun, carrying guns into some places that serve alcohol, and the
    carrying of a partly exposed gun."

    So let's look at this. New Mexico prohibits the concealed carry of more than one gun. Such a law is unusual but not
    off the charts. New Mexico is considered pretty gun friendly.

    Part about not carrying in certain places where alcohol is served, is not unusual at all. It is almost the norm.
    Most folk who post here agree that alcohol and guns don't go together.

    Can't carry a partially exposed gun. Again, that is a fairly normative restriction in many states which
    issue CHLs.

    I don't see anything horrible in vetoing these sections.
    I haven't looked at the bill as a whole so I don't know if it is good or lousy. I'm just commenting on these three
    items.
    The big thing I disagree with is no carrying in places that serve alcohol, I don't disagree about drinking and carrying but by saying I can't carry in places that serve is absolutely ridiculous, that pretty much says that I can't carry in pretty much any decent restaurant which is crazy. That's how it is now in NC and SC and they are doing their best to do away with that nonsense.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

could illinois end up with constitutional carry on july 10 ?

Click on a term to search for related topics.