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 ...
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!
He is for the gun grabbers, plain and simple....
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
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.
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.”
"Carry your gun - it's a lighter burden than regret."
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?
He is a POS, and will drag this out as long as possible. Make no mistake about that!
Minimum government, maximum freedom.
NRA - Member
GOAL - Member
Comm2A - Member
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
If they all drag their feet, Illinois will end up with Constitutional carry which will be the best for Illinoisians.
Cogito, ergo armatum sum. I think, therefore I am armed. (Don Mann, The Modern Day Gunslinger; the ultimate handgun training manual)
I hope to live to see the day when Tommy guns are legal to carry openly.
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
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
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.