Illinois FOID Cards

[Smokewagon]

But that's history now. Why can't Illinois become part of America?

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[rabywk]

I think Illinois would be fine if we would allow the 51st state of Chicago to be formed and then the rest of Illinois would fall under the "normal" category.

[David III]

I think Illinois would be fine if we would allow the 51st state of Chicago to be formed and then the rest of Illinois would fall under the "normal" category.

I agree. The City of Chicago has an entire book of firearm laws that are so strange that they are just incomprehensible. If the rest of the state could break off, it would be a relatively open place, I think.
For example, Chicago law prohibits six calibers of handgun ammunition (but any other calibers are fine) and prohibits laser sighting devices. Who came up with this?
But, as someone else pointed out, until a couple weeks ago, here in Missouri I had to go get permission from the sheriff and pay $10 every time I bought a handgun (with a 7 day wait for the permit). Didn't matter how many times I had done this, it was still the same 7 day wait.
And we had one giant battle to get CCW here because it failed in a statewide vote. Our "Chicago" is St. Louis/Kansas City where there are
Ok, rant over. Sorry about that.....

[SatCong]

Don't know where else to put this, but I had to renew my FOID (Firearms Owners Identification) card in Illinois and something interesting came back in the mail. I had sent in a photo to be included on the new card, but it came back with my driver's license photo on it.

I guess the Illinois State police have tied the FOID database and the DMV database together. This is interesting because Illinois does not have CCW permits. I am guessing that if I get pulled over the LEO will be alerted that I have a FOID card. To me this is disturbing.

If there are any Illinois LEOs on the board can you tell me if this is really happening. I know that the databases are now linked, but want to know if I were to get pulled over, will it show that I have a FOID card?

Thanks

That's one of the reasons I left that state 3 1/2 years ago. Not sorry eather.

[swift]

Whatever legislator invented the FOID thinking it could reduce crime was not thinking very clearly. The math simply does not add up. Someone who would not be able to get a FOID card would already be forbidden from owning firearms. Now lets see, what is more expensive, an illegal gun from the black market or an illegal box of ammo on the black market? Obviously if the criminal can afford the illegal gun the illegal ammo would be small change.

Yet another example of "feel good" laws that make zero sense - kind of like the "we are defenseless" zones we currently have in most of our schools under the "gun free zone" hoopla. Why doesn't anyone that supports "gun free zones" place gun free zone signs on their own front door if they think it is such a good idea? Lets just let all the criminals know that it will be as easy as taking candy from a baby.

Sorry for the long post, just had to let it all out. I feel better now, and I am ready to go buy some additional ammo at my local gun shop - lucky for me it will be without a FOID card. :)

[ispcapt]

Whatever legislator invented the FOID thinking it could reduce crime was not thinking very clearly. The math simply does not add up. Someone who would not be able to get a FOID card would already be forbidden from owning firearms.

You'd be surprised then to see the number of apps rejected every year submitted by people with criminal records, including felonies, who apply for a FOID card. These guys aren't rocket scientists. I guess they figure no one will ever check their names.

[Smokewagon]

Kind of redundant as far as purchasing a firearm. The feds are already on top of that. FOID is a revenue grab, and oppression.

[ispcapt]

The current FOID card is $5 for 5 years. $3 of that goes to conservation. $2 goes to administering the card. It costs over $7 to print and process each card.
$5 in with $3 siphoned off to another fund and $7 cost. My math shows that as a $5 loss for each card issued. About 220,000 cards are issued each year. That comes to about a $1.1 mil loss where the cost has to be picked up by the tax payers. I'm somewhat perplexed as I can't figure out how a $1.1 mil deficit is a revenue grab.

[SatCong]

The current FOID card is $5 for 5 years. $3 of that goes to conservation. $2 goes to administering the card. It costs over $7 to print and process each card.
$5 in with $3 siphoned off to another fund and $7 cost. My math shows that as a $5 loss for each card issued. About 220,000 cards are issued each year. That comes to about a $1.1 mil loss where the cost has to be picked up by the tax payers. I'm somewhat perplexed as I can't figure out how a $1.1 mil deficit is a revenue grab.

They well tax you to make up the lose, you always lose one way or another.

[rabywk]

They well tax you to make up the lose, you always lose one way or another.

I would be willing to pay another $1 a year in taxes to see this go away!

[ispcapt]

They well tax you to make up the lose, you always lose one way or another.

Yup, the difference comes out of taxes, that is true. But the point being the FOID card sure isn't a "revenue grab" when it's a $1.1 mil loss every year.

[Smokewagon]

Oops, then I stand corrected. It's just a waste of tax money and state workers time. Another piece of feel good law. Doesn't accomplish a thing, but ya gotta feel better.

[SatCong]

Yup, the difference comes out of taxes, that is true. But the point being the FOID card sure isn't a "revenue grab" when it's a $1.1 mil loss every year.

At first it was, It was a understood.

[ispcapt]

At first it was, It was a understood.

Even when the FOID card was implemented in 1968 it was a money loser to process. Never was a positive money generator as it cost more to implement than money received from applications.
Such programs are not unusual in government. An agency is given the task of providing a service/duty but not the adequate funding. They're referred to as unfunded mandates. Agencies hate them because the operational funding for such projects have to taken from existing budgets. Therefore what an agency was spending on one project money had to be taken from that fund to pay for operating the unfunded mandated.

[SatCong]

Even when the FOID card was implemented in 1968 it was a money loser to process. Never was a positive money generator as it cost more to implement than money received from applications.
Such programs are not unusual in government. An agency is given the task of providing a service/duty but not the adequate funding. They're referred to as unfunded mandates. Agencies hate them because the operational funding for such projects have to taken from existing budgets. Therefore what an agency was spending on one project money had to be taken from that fund to pay for operating the unfunded mandated.

Yes, But, it also depends who was counting.