CA? HAHAHAHAHAHA...
phew.. that was a funny one!
This is a discussion on Who is next to go Shall Issue? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; CA? HAHAHAHAHAHA... phew.. that was a funny one!...
CA? HAHAHAHAHAHA...
phew.. that was a funny one!
Georg BüchnerWo die Notwehr aufhört, fängt der Mord an
(Murder begins where self-defense ends)
Well now Hop.... supposedly there is a 4 man, 2 repubilcraps and 2 Democraps that are putting a bill together to bolster and provide better access to 2a for the DC area.
"I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive." - Ronald Reagan
Illinois is a pipe dream. I fully expect SCOTUS to incorporate the 2nd Amendment and apply it to the states, but they won't overturn the Chicago law. They will remand the case to the lower court for reconsideration consistent with the ruling (and the Heller ruling, which will now apply to the states). This will take a couple years I assume. I also expect King Daley to do everything he can to make exercise of the right difficult, expensive and annoying . Remember, this is a guy who now wants the World Court to hear his case against gun manufacturers (the case that US Courts rejected). I expect a high-dollar registration fee, a ban on semi-automatic pistols or at the very least a ban on magazines larger than 8 or 10 rounds, an annual renewal requirement, etc. If you don't live here, you can be excused for not knowing the extent of Daley's unrelenting hostility towards guns, but I (sadly) assure you as long as he is in power, there is zero chance of concealed carry in Illinois - not even "may issue". Illinois shouldn't even be included in the poll.
yeah. what sigfan said. anyone with hope for illinois, abandon it now you're only gonna be disappointed. i used to live there.. and i left for a reason. because of daley. if you oust daley.. then maybe.. maybe there will be some hope. my hope it to see wisconsin do it after iowa.. that way maybe people in illinois will wake up and realize the daley way is not the right way and oust hm out of office.
It was a tie between Connecticut and Delaware for me. I don't know anything about Wisconsin except they don't allow any CC, right? I would think a state that is MAY ISSUE is more likely to become a state that is SHALL ISSUE.
I voted NJ. lolol!Ok it is my home state. I actually just applied for ccw in NJ. I am friends with a local retired Chief of
police. He told me to apply and use him as a reference. I received a phone call from local Pd. said come in, re-fingerprint, fill out mental health auth., and he will get it to the County Superior Court. My finger prints are on file already, so if the Chief in my local town was not going to recomend the approval, there would be NO need for new finger prints! Right??? or am I reading into this tooo much??
S&W M&P 9C
RUGER LCP
S&W 5906
COLT DET. SPEC.
S&W 686-6"
"If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck", Author un-known
"The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree..."
Nunn v. State GA 1848
I choose WI. They were within an inch a few years ago, with a pro-gun governor they will get it.
DE and CT seem to be de facto shall-issues. They can deny permits but have basically decided that they won't unless there's an issue with the applicant. I got a CT permit by mail within 30 days.
I'm afraid the others will be dragged kicking and screaming, as the ones that may have enough votes to get a bill passed like IL and MD have committees headed by rabid anti-gunners who are always in safe districts. They shelve the bills and never have to answer for it, and give cover to others who would pay the price for their vote.
"The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree..."
Nunn v. State GA 1848