Illinois

... if you live up there I suggest you call your legislators and remind them that what (doesn't) work for Chicago shouldn't be applied to the whole state.  It's also worth noting the tactics being used by the governor; he's coerced his police chief into making it an "us or them" issue.  This is the governor who travels with a convoy of 20 armed security officers, by the way.

Here's a sample of the idiocy in question:

Law enforcement complains the trading bill will let gun owners trade up to higher-powered weapons without waiting periods that discourage impulsive gun crimes. They also argue communities should have the right to pass strict rules on how weapons must be stored when gun owners are passing through.

Well, when gun owners are driving around their state with their firearms securely stored, unloaded, in a locked case in the trunk, as per the Firearm Owner's Protection Act, it would be kind of nice to know that the 20 little neighborhoods you drove through can't charge you with a crime because you didn't wrap the barrel with a pink ribbon. 

And as for firearm trading -- if someone already has a firearm, are they really going to be deterred from using it due to a waiting period before they can get a higher-powered firearm from a private individual?  Not to mention -- how exactly are they going to enforce this?  As usual, they will rely on the law-abiding gun owners to obey the silly laws and the criminals to break them, resulting in more shootings, resulting in more calls for gun control... at least until someone is smart enough to break the cycle by loosening gun laws.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich called for a ban Tuesday on semi-autos in Illinois and said if lawmakers don`t send him such a measure he will veto legislation he had said he supported to lower the minimum age to obtain a firearm owner`s identification card without parental consent.

Playing bait-and-switch with Constitutional rights is unacceptable.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich on Thursday promised "wholesale vetoes" of several pieces of pro-gun legislation if lawmakers do not pass an assault weapons ban, underscoring the governor's tough new gun-control attitude.

Reacting to Thursday's House passage of a pro-gun measure he had already promised to veto, Blagojevich signaled he is losing patience over lawmakers' refusal to pass some of the gun control measures he supports while they advance a gun-friendly agenda.

The gun legislation passed in the House was inspired by a Wilmette man who shot an intruder in his home, then was charged with violating the city's gun ban. The legislation would allow someone to use self-defense as a legal argument in court.

This guy wants to trade relaxed rules in other areas for a state assault weapons ban. I say no deal. The vote was 90-25 in the house, which is probably veto-proof (depending on how the Senate votes, and whether votes to override a veto change). The Willamette case is an excellent example of why gun control laws put honest citizens in jail.

Last week, the Illinois Senate voted to concur with the House on SB 2165, which seeks to provide an affirmative defense for a gun owner if he uses a firearm prohibited by local ordinance in defense of himself or others. The bill?s fate is now in the hands of Governor Rod Blagojevich (D), who has threatened to veto this common sense measure. Also awaiting a threatened veto is another common sense bill, SB 2386, which seeks to prohibit civil suits against a gun owner who uses a firearm to defend himself or others. Both SB 2165 and SB 2386 passed with enough votes to override the governor?s threatened veto, but you should still call Governor Blagojevich at (217) 782-6830 and urge him to sign SB 2165 and SB 2386, and remind him that both passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.

The NRA is on the case. One of these bills is intended to fix the Willamette situation (that is, a self-defense shooting that ends without charges relating to the shooting, but does charge the justified-shooter with possession of a banned firearm used to save his life).

This past spring, the Illinois General Assembly passed a new bill requiring compulsory mental health screening for children and pregnant women; it was signed into law by Governor Blagojevich. This program will require all pregnant women and children through the age of 18 be tested for mental health needs.

Public forums are now being held in different locations throughout the state and many alarmed parents are attempting to get the word out: get to those forums and voice your opinion. "We're moving toward social training over academic training with this program," says Larry Trainor, a Mt. Prospect parent of four children and a contact for Citizens Commission on Human Rights.

This is extremely scary. Whatever happened to the right to choose your own mental health treatments? To have the right of privacy within your own mind?

There are public forums for this issue. Anyone who lives in Illinois, get your ass to those forums! Even if you're out of school and not planning to become pregnant, it's only a short step from this to mandatory testing for everyone.

Under this new, compulsory mental health law, pregnant women will be screened for depression and following her baby's birth, evaluation would continue for up to one year. Follow up treatment will also be provided under this program. All children ages 0-18 years will be provided screening under this mental health program. "Mental health centers" at schools will handle the process to "ensure appropriate and culturally relevant assessment of young children's social and emotional development with the use of standardized tools."

Can't you just feel the political correctness oooozing out of the program?

The Illinois State Board of Education is the agency targeted with the responsibility to develop appropriate tests that assess both mental health and academic standards. The current task force hosting these statewide public forums is scheduled to send their recommendations to Governor Blagojevich by the end of the summer in accordance with the Act (HB 2900).

Because the Illinois State Board of Education is doing such a good job with the public schools in Illinois, I suppose, we should entrust care of our children's minds into the hands of the state as well. No thanks!

Rep. John Bradley fully expected Gov. Rod Blagojevich to veto legislation that would allow handgun owners to violate municipal handgun bans if they do so in self-defense in their own homes. So it came as no big surprise to Bradley, one of the bill's sponsors in the House of Representatives, when he received word Friday that the governor did just that.

"He had indicated through the press that he would veto the legislation," Bradley said. "We were hoping he would not do that, given the overwhelming support for the bill in both the House and Senate and with the citizens of Illinois." The bill passed the House with a vote of 90-25 and the Senate with a vote of 41-16.

Bradley said he is fairly confident that the veto will be overridden in the fall session. "I would hope, given the public support, that people would stand firm on their votes," he said.

With that many votes, the legislature can override the veto... if they really care about the issue. But they'll be watching the elections to figure out what the people really want them to do, no doubt. If you live in Illinois, you might want to let your elected critters know what that is -- and vote accordingly.

A Republican state senator from Plainfield has made a call for a change in the Illinois Constitution regarding citizens rights when it comes to bearing arms.

Article 1, Section 22 gives residents the right to bear arms, but adds a qualification. The section says "Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

According to transcripts of the 1970 Constitutional Convention, these words were added to the Amendment. Leonard Foster, a delegate to the Convention from the west side of Chicago, stated four times on the convention floor that the language would allow for a total ban on handguns. This speech has been used in Illinois courts to uphold bans on handguns according to Petka.

This is a good sign indeed. We need to take the offensive, and clearly the Illinois state senator wants to do just that.

Geek with a .45 has an alert for Illinois residents about a proposed assault weapons ban covering that state. If you live in Illinois, consider this your militia call-up, so to speak. The minutemen were expected to be ready to fight given a minute's notice; can we do any less while protecting the rights that they won for us?

The geek mentioned that he wasn't sure of the source, so I'll pass that warning along. Anyone who can shed light on the topic, please feel free to leave a comment.

On Wednesday morning, 20 October, IL Attorney General Lisa Madigan will be joined by IL State Senator John Cullerton and IL State Representative Karen May at a press conference during which they will introduce the "2005 ILLINOIS ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN." This proposed legislation will include bans on most, if not all, semiautomatic rifles, shotguns, and handguns. It will also ban black powder rifles and any other firearm having a bore of .50 caliber or greater. The legislation will also require you to turn in your guns to the police or face forced confiscation.

If this is an accurate characterization of the law, it's a remarkably evil piece of legislation.

1. Call Attorney General Madigan's offices at (312) 814-3000 AND (217) 782-1090 and tell the operator to tell Lisa Madigan that you are a law-abiding supporter of the 2nd Amendment and that you resent her attack on your rights.
2. Call Senator John Cullerton's offices at (217) 782-7260 AND (773) 883-0770 and tell the operator that you are a law-abiding supporter of the 2nd Amendment and that you OPPOSE Cullerton's Assault Weapons Ban.
3. Call Representative Karen May's offices at (217) 782-0902 AND (847) 831-5858 and tell the operator that you are a law-abiding supporter of the 2nd Amendment and that you OPPOSE May's Assault Weapons Ban.
4. Pass this alert along to all your friends and tell them to make those phone calls NOW.
5. Please post this alert to any and all Internet bulletin boards that you may belong to.

Let me add one to this list. Don't just call the people introducing the bill. They probably don't care. Call the people who supposedly represent you. They might care.

Over much of the last year, Wilmette village officials did what they could to mobilize support against a bill in Springfield they feared would effectively overturn a local handgun ban. In the week since that bill became law, they have been looking for legal options to prevent its implementation.

The backstory here: an Illinois homeowner shot a burglar with a handgun while living in a particularly annoying Chicago suburb that purports to ban handguns. The shooting was ruled legal, but he was convicted of possessing a handgun in violation of the ban and fined. The legislature passed a law that prohibited using the law to charge someone who used their handgun in self-defense. The governor veto'd it. The legislature overrode the veto.

Now the town's lawyers are claiming that the state law, which was passed specifically to preempt this situation, doesn't apply due to so-called home rule powers. As you may recall, Denver used the same argument recently in order to preserve its own local gun control laws.

Frankly, it doesn't make much sense to me. Any "home rule" authority derives from the authority of the state that grants it, and the state is free to modify or revoke that grant at its whim. That's exactly what the Colorado and Illinois statutes were intended to do. But these townships will grasp at anything they can in order to retain their gun control laws, because they don't really care about whether they have the legal authority, or even if it's the right thing to do.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich is proposing to make it a misdemeanor for businesses to sell violent and sexually explicit video games to minors, a step that other states have tried with little success.

Blagojevich's proposed legislation would prohibit the distribution, sale, rental and availability of mature video games to children younger than 18.

"We're talking about violent games that use realistic depiction of human-on-human violence, video games that include dismemberment and disfigurement, video games where the kids control the process," Blagojevich said Thursday.

I can agree that kids probably should not be playing video games involving such things without conceding any authority to the government for regulating their sale. We have freedom of speech because government cannot be trusted to make these decisions.

Sigh.  This is definitely the big issue that the gun bigots are pushing, after the assault weapons ban expired.  They want this one badly, and they are pushing it in as many states as they think they can get it, plus introducing bills in Congress -- presumably to try to attach to the gun liability protection legislation. 

We need to tell our Congressfolk the same thing we did last year: no compromise on gun control!  If you have not already called your Congressfolk to tell them that this session of Congress, call them.  If you have already called, call them again.  And then send email.  And then write a letter.

Of course, they can't do it without lying:

.50 caliber sniper rifles, powerful enough to shoot down civilian airplanes during takeoff or landing, or taxiing on the runaway from over a mile away.

Even if you could hit an airplane while it was in the air, something that is practically impossible without a computer-guided machine gun and radar, all you would do is produce a few holes.  Passenger aircraft are simply not that fragile.

.50 caliber sniper rifles were designed as battlefield rifles to puncturearmor, attack personnel carriers and fuel tanks, and to be used forassassination due to the rifle's astonishing range and firepower, but areeasier to get in Illinois than a handgun.

Actually, .50 caliber rifles were designed as civilian rifles for long range target shooting.  The military adopted them after their invention.

"It is simply hard to imagine how anyone could be against preventing .50 caliber sniper rifles from falling into the wrong hands," said Thom Mannard, Executive Director of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence.

Somehow, I think that the wrong hands Thom Mannard is referring to includes any hands that aren't attached to a police or military uniform.

Legislation backed by Daley that would limit the number of pistols people can buy and set up a licensing system for gun dealers failed Tuesday in a state Senate committee. 

So, let's see here.  Mayor Daley wants to set up a separate state-level licensing structure for gun dealers.  This will accomplish...

1. Add another hassle to the already long list of hassles already required to become a firearms dealer.
2. Add another fee to gun dealers, increasing the cost of firearms
   
3. Add another paperwork crime to charge "undesirable" dealers with
4. Duplicate the extensive federal licensing system already in place.
5. Create another expensive enforcement beaurocracy.
   
6. All of the above.

Somehow, I just can't work up any enthusiasm for that.

The Senate Judiciary Committee also voted against requiring gun owners to report lost or stolen weapons, part of a broader bill to tighten laws on unlawful use of weapons.

What they actually did was vote against requiring gun owners to report lost or stolen guns within 48 hours or face criminal charges.  In principle, reporting a lost or stolen gun may be a good idea if you are sure you can't recover it yourself; the police may be able to return it to you, or at worst, charge the criminal who stole it.

But there are serious problems with attaching criminal penalties for failure to do so.   Aside from the injustice of throwing someone in jail for failure to file the proper paperwork, how exactly will locking up victims of crime solve anything?  Were they "asking for it"?  Owning guns in a "provocative manner"? 

Many gun bigots argue for registration schemes under two delusions:

1. That firearm registration helps solve crimes
2. That firearms will never be confiscated in the United States

The problem is, both claims are false.  Maryland and New York have each run multi-year programs that required all new, legally-sold guns in the state to be registered along with ballistic "fingerprints".  Neither registration system helped law enforcement.  Maryland's system may be dismantled this year at the request of the police, because it wasted money that could have been spent actually solving crimes.  Illinois has its own registration scheme, the FOID (Firearm Owner's IDentification) card. 

I mention this today because Illinois has just proved that it can happen here.  Specifically, according to the Illinois State Rifle Association:

If passed, HB 2414 would ban the possession of a wide variety of semiautomatic sporting firearms owned by hundreds of thousands of law-abiding Illinois citizens. Under HB 2414, gun owners would have 90 days to surrender their firearms to the police, or face felony prosecution and stiff jail sentences. Any such firearms they surrender would be forfeited without compensation.

Or, as Diane Feinstein once put it, "Mr. and Mrs. Illinois, turn them all in."

This bill is unconstitutional on 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendment grounds at least.   It must not pass. 

Senate Democrats on the Executive Committee hastily approved four gun-control measures Wednesday amid partisan rancor. Another Senate panel already had rejected much of the legislation, and some Republican senators repeatedly expressed disapproval at the work-around tactic. Senate Bills 1330, 1331 and 1332 were approved Wednesday even though the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected identical legislation earlier this session.

Seems to me that this is exactly the sort of tactic that the Democrats in the United States Senate would decry in terms similar to the so-called "nuclear option".  They don't have any problem using such tactics when they are in power, though.

Senate Bill 1332 was the only one of the four gun proposals that had not been previously rejected by the Judiciary Committee. It would mandate that dealers of "concealable firearms" - handguns - be licensed by the state. Violations would be a Class 4 felony, but the legislation would not apply to individual hobbyists buying and selling from their own collections.

Firearm dealers are already federally licensed.  This second, state license will either impose additional, unConstitutional limitations on the right to keep and bear arms, or be little more than a tax on people the Democrats in power don't like.  Neither one is acceptable.

Under SB1332, gun buyers would be limited to purchasing one handgun each 30 days. The legislation is intended to curb the practice of "straw purchasers," where a legally qualified individual buys a gun for someone who is not qualified to make the purchase on his own.

And in the process, create a state-wide registration system.  Oh, never mind... they already have one, in the FOID card.

SB1331 would expand the definition of a "public nuisance" to include gun dealers who do not take "reasonable precautions" to ensure that purchasers do not use their weapons illegally.SB1330 would permit victims of gun crimes to sue anyone who "intentionally or negligently" delivered the gun, ammunition or silencer to an unauthorized buyer, straw purchaser or individual with criminal intent.

This legislation is just begging for lawsuits.  Literally.  Gun bigots in Chicago have already tried suing firearms dealers and manufacturers under existing laws and lost.  Now, they want to change the law and try again.  Unfortunately, it will probably work, if the legislation passes the whole Senate.   Gun owners in Illinois, contact your Senators and stop these bills!

UPDATE: Alphecca has another article that describes full-Senate votes on some, but not all, of the same bills.  It's unclear which article is more recent.  And to clear up any confusion, this is an Illinois issue, not a national issue.

Hopes for passage of a state law to close the gun show loophole faded as the state's largest gun control group pulled its support from the legislation's records-retention provisions.

The bill in question -- SB57 -- requires that all firearm purchases at gun shows be subjected to a criminal background investigation before the sale is allowed to be concluded. The intent of the legislation is to prevent drug lords, terrorists, and gang bangers from obtaining weapons at gun shows.

A second provision of SB57 seeks to protect the privacy and security of lawful firearm owners by requiring the Illinois State Police to destroy records of lawful gun purchases after a 90-day retention period. This provision greatly exceeds the federal record retention period of 24 hours.

This is what I call a deal with the devil.  It's this sort of strategy that got us here in the first place.  If we continue to compromise, and to meet gun bigots "halfway" in some kind of good-faith bargain, we will continue to lose.  Any gun owners in Illinois who understand that should undertake to educate the rest.

Once more, the Fifty Caliber Institute brings us word of two bills in the state legislature that are heading to the floor for a vote.  The NRA reports that gun owners' telephone calls to legislatures have already slowed these bills down -- but slowing them down is not good enough.  They need to be stopped.  

Contact with your elected officials is again needed, if this pointless legislation is to be stopped.  Illinois residents should contact their representatives within the next 48 hours.  A phone call would help greatly, a letter or fax sent by you TODAY would be even better.  Regardless of the means, you MUST contact them once again if you wish to retain your 2nd Amendment rights!                                                                                                                                                                             Even if you've already spoken to them, contact them again.  Tell your elected representatives that you OPPOSE HB1098 and HB2414.

While both bills ban the .50 caliber, HB2414 bans numerous semi-automatic rifles and shotguns as well.  Since most fifty-shooters also own shotguns and rifles of other calibers, HB2414 is doubly offensive to your rights.  Semi-auto bans failed to make a difference in crime at  the federal level.  They won't reduce crime at the state level.  And the fifty-caliber is historically even LESS of a threat, despite what Hollywood says.

Write and call your representatives today!  Since HB2414 also bans numerous other firearms, pass the word to your fellow shooters.  Ask them to contact their legislators as well.  Even if they don't own a fifty rifle, they have a stake in this too.

Contact your Illinois representative by telephone, or use the NRA's contact tool. 

When you do, tell them that you oppose both bills.  Tell them that voting for the bill that only bans the .50 is not an acceptable compromise.  Too many legislators are eager to claim political cover by catering to both sides.  Too many will be tempted to vote against the so-called "assault weapons ban" while voting to ban .50 rifles, and then claim they supported the lesser of two evils to prevent the greater from passing. 

That's the logic that got us where we are today, and it's time to change it.  No compromise.  No surrender.  Shall not be infringed.  That's the message your legislators need to hear from you.

Illinois has decided to close a loophole that doesn't exist.  The governor has signed a law requiring "unlicensed [gun] dealers" to conduct background checks on potential purchasers.  The problem is, there's no such thing as an unlicensed dealer -- either you are a dealer (in which case, you should be federally licensed) or you are a private seller (in which case, you need not be).  There's some question as to where the dividing line between those two categories should be, but if the BATFE thinks you're a dealer and you aren't licensed, they will try to put you in jail.

What this bill really does is require gun buyers to register their intent to purchase a firearm with the police and obtain permission for each purchase.  In short, it's registration.  However, since Illinois already has something they call a Firearm Owner's Identification Card, they already have registration of owners; this is just registering each purchase individually as well.

It's silly, and stupid, and won't do a damn thing to help.  But in terms of the state of liberty in Illinois, it's a salami slice rather than a large bite.

Oh well.

Hat tip to Alphecca.

On Wednesday, Gov. Blagojevich sent a letter to U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft expressing concerns over a federal law that could force Illinois to destroy a database containing 2.15 million records of gun transactions. Authorities use the information to investigate gun trafficking and other crimes.

Last month, California Attorney General Bill Lockyer wrote Ashcroft criticizing the Justice Department for ordering the state to stop using the National Instant Criminal Background Checks System to identify people barred from owning guns.

Blagojevich can express all the concerns he wants. I have concerns, too. I have concerns about why he wants to keep the records of gun purchasers for 10 years. I have concerns about traffic cops issuing speeding tickets and going into paranoid mode when the check comes back to say the honest citizen they pulled over is a gun owner. I have concerns about the government of Illinois deciding they want to require a background check to purchase a printing press -- and then keep the records of those purchases for 10 years.

Illinois lawmakers are considering a measure that would offer a defense to gun-owners charged with breaking local gun laws during a shooting.

The bill would allow the legal argument that it is O.K. to violate local gun restrictions to shoot someone in self-defense.

The measure was approved by a House committee today and now goes to the House floor. It is similar to a bill approved earlier by a Senate committee.

And two IPD officers say they came face to face with Anthony Brown shooting an assault rifle. Brown reportedly shot and wounded IPD officer Linda Jackson. IPDýs Andrew Lamle says, ýHis weapon was far superior to anything we had available to us.ý Not even the everyday weapons officers carry can stand up to the fire power of automatic assault rifles.

This entire article is nothing more than scaremongering. While no one is likely to deny that a rifle bullet is more powerful than a handgun bullet, that comparison overlooks the most important issue in any armed confrontation: both rifle bullets and handgun bullets are powerful enough to kill. The police have their own assault rifles -- and can even buy fully automatic models, unlike most citizens. Having a police agency claim a lack of firepower is absurd.

Mayor Daley is putting gun control back on the table. Capitalizing on Democrats' new control of the Illinois legislature, Daley today will unholster three new statewide gun control proposals that would boost the cost of a firearm owner's ID card, lengthen the wait to buy a handgun and raise the penalty for having a secret gun compartment in a car. He's also resurrecting a measure requiring gunmakers to test-fire their products and record the unique "fingerprint" they leave on bullets.

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley has taken his anti-gun agenda on the road, attempting to pass Chicago-style gun restrictions in the State Legislature. At 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday, March 11, the Senate Judiciary Committee will convene to hear testimony regarding Mayor Daley's anti-gun agenda. The House Judiciary Committee will also hear testimony on Wednesday, March 12, at 8:00 a.m. It is critical that you contact the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the members House Judiciary Committee, urging them to oppose Mayor Daley's anti-gun agenda. You can find contact information by using the "Write Your Representative" tool.

A key Illinois Senate committee on Thursday rejected most of a gun-control package backed by Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, even with his fellow Democrats controlling the panel for the first time in a decade. Two Democrats on the Judiciary Committee joined Republicans in assailing the proposals to fingerprint and photograph people getting firearm owner's cards and to raise fees for those cards. They also assailed proposals which would also have required criminal background checks for purchases at gun shows and limited handgun purchases to one a month. "What right does the state have to tell me how many guns I can buy a month?" asked Todd Vandermyde, a lobbyist for the National Rifle Association.

Not only are there some significant gun control bills still alive in the State House, but Daley and his crowd have managed to push a "GUN BAN" through the State Senate Judiciary Committee. Senate Bill 1195, is a serious "Gun Ban" that makes it a felony to possess a number of semi-automatic firearms by name and/or by features. Many of these firearms are commonly used for hunting or competitive shooting. SB 1195 bans guns that have any one of a list of features including: any gun of caliber .50 or larger (thus banning all 28 gauge or larger shotguns); have a folding or telescoping stock, and the list goes on. In other words your -- M1 Carbines owned by WW II veterans: BANNED, Colt AR-15s: BANNED, your Ruger 10/22: BANNED!

One of the constant costs of freedom is vigilance. Stay aware and tuned to what is happening in the arena of law, the legislature, where our rules for living in a free society are set in order to enjoy life under the rights accorded to us by God and the U.S. Constitution or wake up some day living under some type of totalitarian, communist or other repressive regime where those in power will tell you what to do, how to do it and when it will be done. Yeah, I know, how close are we to that already when considering things such as seat belt, helmet and headlight laws, blaze orange requirements when hunting or bans on leaf burning, just as simple examples.