Illinois CC Bill Passes With Veto-Proof Majority

This is a discussion on Illinois CC Bill Passes With Veto-Proof Majority within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; That means Illinois--the only state in the union that does not currently allow some form of either concealed or open carry--will soon join all the ...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 44
Like Tree5Likes

Thread: Illinois CC Bill Passes With Veto-Proof Majority

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array peckman28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,079

    Illinois CC Bill Passes With Veto-Proof Majority

    That means Illinois--the only state in the union that does not currently allow some form of either concealed or open carry--will soon join all the other states in allowing citizens to be better prepared to defend their lives and property.
    Concealed Carry Legislation Passes In Illinois with Veto-Proof Majority

    Not perfect, but good news for the people of that state. Congratulations.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,142
    Quote Originally Posted by From the article
    As initially proposed, the bill that passed on May 31 would have superseded local ordinances. But that aspect of the legislation was discarded after Illinois Governor Pat Quinn, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, and Senate Democrats successfully fought it.
    Hopefully that little insanity will be rectified, once they all see how ridiculously cumbersome and impossible to comply with the patchwork quilt of conflicting ordinances will be. And, if there's no prohibition against new ordinances passing, you can bet the first thing every two-bit city council is going to do is pass a whole array of anti-gun criminalizations.

    Anyway. In ~60 days they're required to begin approving training programs/instructors; and within 90 days of applications they're required to approve/deny CHL applications. So, starting in ~5mos, we should start seeing our first lawful carriers in Illinois.

    Hopefully folks will take heavy note of the use-of-force statutes. It'd be nice if the legislature took a hard look at that, as well, within the next few months. Everyone's going to need to come to grips with the simple fact that upstanding citizens are going to be using deadly force against a large number of previously-sacrosanct violent felons within the state. LE and DA's will need to understand that the use-of-force and firearms statutes allow defense of life, and that merely being the one left standing doesn't equate to be guilty of a darned thing. We'll see.

    Congratulations, Illinois citizens!
    atctimmy and QKShooter like this.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array chuckusaret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    SE Florida
    Posts
    1,627
    The good old Gunshine state did it the right way:


    Florida bans local gun control ordinances throughout state.

    Bill: CS/CS/CS/HB 45 (text)

    Sponsored by Rep. Matt Gaetz and signed into law by Gov. Rick Scott, HB45 (The Penalties for Violating Firearms Preemption Law) repeals any and all regulations, policies, and ordinances that violate Florida’s firearms preemption law of 1987 (f.s.790.33)–a law that makes it illegal to pass gun restrictions beyond those enacted by the state legislature. State public officials who attempt to introduce local gun control ordinances incur a $5,000 fine and possible termination. Local municipalities attempting gun control will be sued for up to $100,000 plus court costs.
    84160 and The Old Anglo like this.
    US Army 1953-1977

    ‘‘We, the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.’’
    — Abraham Lincoln

  5. #4
    Senior Member Array DPro.40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    611
    Now I'll spend my money in Illinois. Way to go.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
    Ronald Reagan

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,142
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckusaret View Post
    The good old Gunshine state did it the right way:


    Florida bans local gun control ordinances throughout state.

    Bill: CS/CS/CS/HB 45 (text)

    Sponsored by Rep. Matt Gaetz and signed into law by Gov. Rick Scott, HB45 (The Penalties for Violating Firearms Preemption Law) repeals any and all regulations, policies, and ordinances that violate Florida’s firearms preemption law of 1987 (f.s.790.33)–a law that makes it illegal to pass gun restrictions beyond those enacted by the state legislature. State public officials who attempt to introduce local gun control ordinances incur a $5,000 fine and possible termination. Local municipalities attempting gun control will be sued for up to $100,000 plus court costs.


    IMO, that's still nowhere near enough "teeth" to ensure it won't happen. But it's a good start. Far, far better than many states do. Gotta love a clear and rational approach to things.

    Now, if only each state could implement a similarly clear and heavy-handed state constitution amendment to do the same to oath-breakers making any attempts to defy the state's constitutional BOR or the Constitution's BOR. With similar stout "teeth" and severe penalties, ejection, felony prison time (mandatory prosecution, mandatory sentencing, with similar tough "teeth" for the state's AG who fails to prosecute aggressively). That'd also be a good start.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  7. #6
    Distinguished Member Array chuckusaret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    SE Florida
    Posts
    1,627
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post


    IMO, that's still nowhere near enough "teeth" to ensure it won't happen. But it's a good start. Far, far better than many states do. Gotta love a clear and rational approach to things.

    Now, if only each state could implement a similarly clear and heavy-handed state constitution amendment to do the same to oath-breakers making any attempts to defy the state's constitutional BOR or the Constitution's BOR. With similar stout "teeth" and severe penalties, ejection, felony prison time (mandatory prosecution, mandatory sentencing, with similar tough "teeth" for the state's AG who fails to prosecute aggressively). That'd also be a good start.
    Isn't it odd that all municipality's and county governments met the repeal deadline, as set by the state, of all local gun ordinances that were in conflict with state law and removed all no gun signs that were in conflict.

    Palm Beach County did bring suit against the state, but a Leon county judge Cooper stated in October 2012 that the only possible change would be to strike the removal from office by the Governor. According to the judge it appears to be in conflict with the governors constitutional authority. The suit was filed in December 2011 and has not been heard.

    The county commissioners did catch a lot of flack over the frivolous suit and the waste of taxpayer money. I don't believe any of the commissioners that were party to this remain in office.
    US Army 1953-1977

    ‘‘We, the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.’’
    — Abraham Lincoln

  8. #7
    Senior Member Array RightyLefty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    510
    Quote Originally Posted by DPro.40 View Post
    Now I'll spend my money in Illinois. Way to go.
    You'll will have to leave your gun in your vehicle while you spend that money, unfortunately.

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array SmokinFool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,297
    Glad to see this pass by such a large margin. I'll be anxious to see how it will be implemented.

  10. #9
    VIP Member Array joker1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    3,053
    Quote Originally Posted by DPro.40 View Post
    Now I'll spend my money in Illinois. Way to go.
    I don't know. I'm happy for the good people of Illinois. They have a pretty decent concealed carry law and hopefully they can build on it. Hopefully there will be ample amount of certified instructors and places to get training. Carrying and or transporting a gun in Illinois will be like walking on white hot eggshells in a sea of mouse traps for a while. And let's remember the Illinois legislature was ORDERED to pass concealed carry by a higher court. I realize there may be some legislators that wanted it but the most powerful ones did not. It will be intersting the next couple of years with the streets running red with blood and everyone getting hassled in the Chicago area.
    Last edited by joker1; June 3rd, 2013 at 10:49 AM.
    NRA Life Member


    With great power comes great responsibility.-Stan Lee

  11. #10
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    15,953
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post


    IMO, that's still nowhere near enough "teeth" to ensure it won't happen. But it's a good start. Far, far better than many states do. Gotta love a clear and rational approach to things.
    The state preemption law has existed for several years, but some local municipalities chose to ignore it. Some kept the ordinances on the books but didn't enforce them--unless necessary in their view--others enforced them. When the Gov signed the latest change adding penalties, the local ordinances all came off the books. No local official is willing to risk fines or loss of ego-fulfilling position.
    Retired USAF E-8. Remember: You're being watched!
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array Warrior1256's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Louisville Ky.
    Posts
    666
    I'm very happy for the freedom loving people of Illinois. Took alot of guts, time, and stamina to achieve their goal. My whole hearted CONGRATULATIONS!!!!
    84160 likes this.

  13. #12
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    26,142
    Useful links to several lawsuits in Illinois on carry: ISRA Legal Action Page , which includes links to the Moore v Madigan lawsuit and its initial complaint, briefs and court decisions.


    The court decisions are notable. Excerpts below ...

    The original opinion by the U.S. District Court of Illinois, Springfield, stated that:

    This Court finds that the Illinois “Unlawful Use of Weapons” and “Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon” statutes do not violate Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights. The United States Supreme Court and the Seventh Circuit have recognized only a Second Amendment core individual right to bear arms inside the home. Further, even if this Court recognized a Second Amendment right to bear arms outside of the home and an interference with that right, the statutes nonetheless survive constitutional scrutiny.

    >> The logic apparently being that since infringements have been recognized previously that makes them okay.



    But the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals stated:

    Both Heller and McDonald do say that “the need for defense of self, family, and property is most acute” in the home, id . at 3036 (emphasis added); 554 U.S. at 628, but that doesn’t mean it is not acute outside the home.

    Heller repeatedly invokes a broader Second Amendment right than the right to have a gun in one's home, as when it says that the amendment “guarantee[s] the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.” 554 U.S. at 592. Confrontations are not limited to the home.

    We are disinclined to engage in another round of historical analysis to determine whether eighteenth-century America understood the Second Amendment to include a right to bear guns outside the home. The Supreme Court has decided that the amendment confers a right to bear arms for self-defense, which is as important outside the home as inside.


    >> Huh. A common-sense reading of the language, without burdening itself with historical pleadings either way. Recognizing that "bearing" arms cannot possibly mean just inside the home, that reality demands one's safety is impacted outside the home as inside via bearing arms and it's clear that the right to bear arms extends outside the home.

    >> Caution, though. While we have destroyers and liberty-haters in many of the courts, this one-court verdict could easily evaporate elsewhere, where concise, simple, rational understanding of the language and commonplace meaning could disappear in a tangled, tortuous evaluation to convince themselves otherwise.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  14. #13
    Member Array cjurczak's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    33
    Thank you...there is a lot of work ahead here in Illinois...Also there are still many states where people are unable to obtain CC permits for political reasons...After Obama leaves office I hope to see 50 state reciprocity bills start hitting the federal scene...

  15. #14
    Distinguished Member Array phreddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Spartanburg, SC
    Posts
    1,966
    A step in the right direction but still a long way to go. I would expect Chicago to still ban or effectively ban concel carry through restrictive local laws.

  16. #15
    VIP Member
    Array kentuckycarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    kentucky
    Posts
    2,219
    I see very little here to celebrate. Maybe it's a start, but that's all I see. I live right across the river from Ill-annoy. I have family there and have to cross from the USA to the Republic of Ill-annoy often. I will still have to dis-arm unless I want to give this Commie state $300.00 and take a 16 hour course. There is NO reciprocity with any state. $150.00 for in-state residents meaning some can't afford it. Mass transit is no carry. So the poor in Chicago won't see it worth it nor could they afford it any way.
    It's a joke. There will be a panel of 7 to decide if you get a permit or not, yet they want to call it "shall issue". They're doing no more than pleasing the Federal courts but making it so difficult that many won't find it worth it. Maybe it will improve with age, but for now, I'm not excited about anything. I think it's a slap in the face to Illinois. But, it's just what I expected.

    Ok, I do feel a LITTLE better after finding this.....
    However, McDermott reports that the law does have this provision: “The legislation (Senate Amendment 5 to HB183) does allow CCW [carrying a concealed weapon] holders from other states to transport firearms in their cars while driving through the state, as long as the weapons stay in the vehicle.”
    Prepare for the worst and hope it never happens

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

gun cc veto
,
illinois amendment hb183 self defense
,
illinois cc bill
,
illinois law vetoproff
,
is a permit needed in illinois to concelcarry
,

veto proof majority illinois

,
what in the new illinois cc bill
,
what was in the illinois cc bill
Click on a term to search for related topics.