Jump to content


Photo

A interesting landmark: More than 100 FOIDs and 50 concealed carry licenses.


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,974 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 06 June 2019 - 09:57 AM

I keep extremely good records of my self-protection trainees, both for martial arts and firearms training. Today, I got an e-mail from one of the people I taught to shoot telling me that she received her concealed carry license. While I was noting that in my files, I did a quick count and saw that 102 people (out of 110) have gotten a FOID card, and this most recent person is the 51st person to get a concealed carry license, whether in this state or in other states.

 

Now, granted, that number is out of about 3,600 total students over the past 30 years, so it's just a fraction of the people I've taught, but what's notable is that because of who I teach, and these are people who are at the highest risk for being victims of violence, close to 60 of my firearms trainees have used a firearm to protect themselves from harm. That ranges from defensive displays of firearms to actual self-defense shootings.

 

Note that I'm not a "licensed" firearms instructor; I'm just a life-long shooter, military and security veteran, and self-protection instructor who happens to be "the guy" that people in my social orbit turn to (or recommend) for anything related to self-defense. More important is that more than 99 percent of my trainees are either female-identifying or queer/LGBTQIA+.

 

Incidentally, those groups are the fastest-growing segment of firearm ownership and carry licensees.

 

There is a dark side to this, however. The vast majority of my self-protection trainees are disqualified from carrying or even owning firearms, because so many of them have had to seek mental health treatment to help with the psychological trauma of being assaulted or for the adverse effects of society and prejudice against their gender identities.

 

They've essentially had to choose between getting the kind of treatment that might well prevent them from taking their own lives out of despair and pain from what's been done to them, or being able to be allowed to use the most effective means to prevent those sorts of things from happening to them again. It's kind of a sh!t choice they're being forced to make, isn't it?

 

If only the know-nothing legislators trying to pass the idiotically restrictive laws realized that the people they are harming most are the ones who need to be able to protect themselves more than anyone.

 

How's that for irony?

 

 


"A well educated Media, being necessary for the preservation of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed."

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Who gets to keep and read books? The Media? Or is it the People?

 

“One can never underestimate the idiocy of those determined to be offended by things that don't affect their real lives in the slightest.” —Me
 
“Hatred is the sharpest sword; the desire for peace is armor made of willow leaves in the face of an enemy who despises you, as neither alone will stop a strike that is aimed at your neck.” —Samurai proverb
 
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” —Robert Heinlein
 
“I reserve the right to take any action necessary to maintain the equilibrium in which I've chosen to exist.” —Me
 
"It ain't braggin' if you done it." —Will Rogers

 

 InX89li.jpg
 

 
 
 
 


#2 Trevis

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,957 posts
  • Joined: 19-October 07

Posted 06 June 2019 - 10:25 AM

I think that the tent of the right to keep and bear arms needs to be as big and wide as possible. Obviously we need to be responsible with this right, but we cannot afford to try and segment the population based on identity categories thereby alienating people that would be on our side when it comes to the second amendment.

"You know, there are some words I've known since I was a schoolboy: 'With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured...the first thought forbidden...the first freedom denied--chains us all irrevocably.' Those words were uttered by Judge Aaron Satie, as wisdom...and warning. The first time any man's freedom is trodden on, we're all damaged..." - Capt. Jean-Luc Picard

 

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.”

― Lysander SpoonerNo Treason: The Constitution of No Authority

1AApp.jpg


#3 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,974 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 06 June 2019 - 10:54 AM

I think that the tent of the right to keep and bear arms needs to be as big and wide as possible. Obviously we need to be responsible with this right, but we cannot afford to try and segment the population based on identity categories thereby alienating people that would be on our side when it comes to the second amendment.

 

I absolutely agree about including as many people as possible as firearm owners and users. 

 

However, people like me, the archtypical well-off, white, cisgender, heterosexual male with a lot of resources and community standing are NEVER going to be prevented from owning firearms except in a very few cases where we run out of legal remedies to preserve our rights.

 

In contrast, MOST of the people who I teach, because of their medical mental health needs and financial status, are going to be denied this right.

 

Therefore, it is EXTREMELY important that the legislators who trumpet these laws realize that the people who are going to be most excluded from exercising the civil and human right to the most effective means of self-defense are these disadvantaged identity categories.

 

These people, as well, need to be made aware that the politicians who they think are helping them are actually hurting them the most and forcing them to be more vulnerable to harm.


"A well educated Media, being necessary for the preservation of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed."

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Who gets to keep and read books? The Media? Or is it the People?

 

“One can never underestimate the idiocy of those determined to be offended by things that don't affect their real lives in the slightest.” —Me
 
“Hatred is the sharpest sword; the desire for peace is armor made of willow leaves in the face of an enemy who despises you, as neither alone will stop a strike that is aimed at your neck.” —Samurai proverb
 
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” —Robert Heinlein
 
“I reserve the right to take any action necessary to maintain the equilibrium in which I've chosen to exist.” —Me
 
"It ain't braggin' if you done it." —Will Rogers

 

 InX89li.jpg
 

 
 
 
 


#4 RS1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts
  • Joined: 15-January 19

Posted 06 June 2019 - 01:57 PM

I subscribe to the idea of herd immunity in this case. If enough people in a given community are properly trained and armed, then everyone in the community benefits whether they individually are trained and armed or not.

Of course when laws are designed to exclude entire communities, it doesn't work. Lawmakers know this.

#5 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,974 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 07 June 2019 - 12:23 AM

I subscribe to the idea of herd immunity in this case. If enough people in a given community are properly trained and armed, then everyone in the community benefits whether they individually are trained and armed or not.

Of course when laws are designed to exclude entire communities, it doesn't work. Lawmakers know this.

 

So, do you think that the lawmakers who are trying to pass things like Illinois' concealed carry law and the "Fix the FOID" act are actually TRYING to make it so that much of their progressive base—poor people of color, women, and queer folks, which are the ones hit hardest by those pieces of legislation—cannot have and use firearms for self-defense?

 

That seems . . . insane to me. I don't mean that you are insane, but that these politicians would be doing that. Rather, I think that their goal is to try to disarm the stereotypical "gun guys" because that is who they think are actually the threat, but instead they are inadvertently screwing over the very people they claim to be most supportive of.

 

Because, let's face it, middle-class white males will generally be the most unaffected by gun control laws, whereas as I stated above, the mental health and financial strictures that these ill-conceived gun control laws impose are ALWAYS going to much more onerously affect those more "progressive" base groups.

 

It's ironic, and disgusting.


"A well educated Media, being necessary for the preservation of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed."

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Who gets to keep and read books? The Media? Or is it the People?

 

“One can never underestimate the idiocy of those determined to be offended by things that don't affect their real lives in the slightest.” —Me
 
“Hatred is the sharpest sword; the desire for peace is armor made of willow leaves in the face of an enemy who despises you, as neither alone will stop a strike that is aimed at your neck.” —Samurai proverb
 
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” —Robert Heinlein
 
“I reserve the right to take any action necessary to maintain the equilibrium in which I've chosen to exist.” —Me
 
"It ain't braggin' if you done it." —Will Rogers

 

 InX89li.jpg
 

 
 
 
 


#6 Euler

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,831 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 18

Posted 07 June 2019 - 12:44 AM

So, do you think that the lawmakers who are trying to pass things like Illinois' concealed carry law and the "Fix the FOID" act are actually TRYING to make it so that much of their progressive base—poor people of color, women, and queer folks, which are the ones hit hardest by those pieces of legislation—cannot have and use firearms for self-defense?
 
... Rather, I think that their goal is to try to disarm the stereotypical "gun guys" because that is who they think are actually the threat, but instead they are inadvertently screwing over the very people they claim to be most supportive of....


I think they're trying to disarm everyone (except the security guards that they hire to own guns on their behalf), but they vilify the stereotypical gun guys in a culture war, because it's two birds with one stone to them. They think that cops will protect their constituents (at least the ones who can't afford private security), if only they could get rid of the trigger-happy, blue-walled cowboys and reform the inherently racist and homophobic institution of policing itself.
The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.

- Albert Camus, Resistance, Rebellion, and Death, 1960.


#7 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,974 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 07 June 2019 - 01:09 AM

 

So, do you think that the lawmakers who are trying to pass things like Illinois' concealed carry law and the "Fix the FOID" act are actually TRYING to make it so that much of their progressive base—poor people of color, women, and queer folks, which are the ones hit hardest by those pieces of legislation—cannot have and use firearms for self-defense?
 
... Rather, I think that their goal is to try to disarm the stereotypical "gun guys" because that is who they think are actually the threat, but instead they are inadvertently screwing over the very people they claim to be most supportive of....


I think they're trying to disarm everyone (except the security guards that they hire to own guns on their behalf), but they vilify the stereotypical gun guys in a culture war, because it's two birds with one stone to them. They think that cops will protect their constituents (at least the ones who can't afford private security), if only they could get rid of the trigger-happy, blue-walled cowboys and reform the inherently racist and homophobic institution of policing itself.

 

 

That would be news to literally EVERY one of my self-protection trainees and students, almost all of whom don't trust the police in even the slightest amount, because they think (with some justification based on previous experience with being marginalized by law enforcement) that they will either not be taken seriously or be re-traumatized by the investigative/prosecution process.

 

And, as you said, aren't the police racist, homophobic Nazis? And that's who those politicians want protecting their vulnerable constituents? 


"A well educated Media, being necessary for the preservation of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed."

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Who gets to keep and read books? The Media? Or is it the People?

 

“One can never underestimate the idiocy of those determined to be offended by things that don't affect their real lives in the slightest.” —Me
 
“Hatred is the sharpest sword; the desire for peace is armor made of willow leaves in the face of an enemy who despises you, as neither alone will stop a strike that is aimed at your neck.” —Samurai proverb
 
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” —Robert Heinlein
 
“I reserve the right to take any action necessary to maintain the equilibrium in which I've chosen to exist.” —Me
 
"It ain't braggin' if you done it." —Will Rogers

 

 InX89li.jpg
 

 
 
 
 


#8 RS1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 192 posts
  • Joined: 15-January 19

Posted 07 June 2019 - 07:40 AM

I subscribe to the idea of herd immunity in this case. If enough people in a given community are properly trained and armed, then everyone in the community benefits whether they individually are trained and armed or not.
Of course when laws are designed to exclude entire communities, it doesn't work. Lawmakers know this.

 
So, do you think that the lawmakers who are trying to pass things like Illinois' concealed carry law and the "Fix the FOID" act are actually TRYING to make it so that much of their progressive base—poor people of color, women, and queer folks, which are the ones hit hardest by those pieces of legislation—cannot have and use firearms for self-defense?
 
That seems . . . insane to me. I don't mean that you are insane, but that these politicians would be doing that. Rather, I think that their goal is to try to disarm the stereotypical "gun guys" because that is who they think are actually the threat, but instead they are inadvertently screwing over the very people they claim to be most supportive of.
 
Because, let's face it, middle-class white males will generally be the most unaffected by gun control laws, whereas as I stated above, the mental health and financial strictures that these ill-conceived gun control laws impose are ALWAYS going to much more onerously affect those more "progressive" base groups.
 
It's ironic, and disgusting.


It's a vicious cycle. Much of their base looks to the government for protection and support and disarming them makes them more dependent. It drives them closer. It's not the sole intent but it's a nice enough by product that they'll take it.

"Thank you sir, may I have another?"

Look at the load of regressive taxes that just passed. But the message is that the "rich" just got an income tax hike.

#9 MrSmallie

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 35 posts
  • Joined: 02-January 17

Posted 07 June 2019 - 11:26 AM

The primary goal has nothing to do with guns.  The main question being asked is "What will get me the most votes" (and not lose me the support of my party)?  There is some crossover and some individuals who have strong beliefs about particular topics.  But that is secondary for the majority.  



#10 Colt guy

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,426 posts
  • Joined: 13-February 13

Posted 07 June 2019 - 12:57 PM

Maybe you can find some normal thinking Illinois rep to have you testify on the floor of the ILGA somehow. If no one with crdibility speaks....we can just look forward to more denial or rights to poor or otherwise fine people.
Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.

#11 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,974 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 08 June 2019 - 09:03 PM

Maybe you can find some normal thinking Illinois rep to have you testify on the floor of the ILGA somehow. If no one with crdibility speaks....we can just look forward to more denial or rights to poor or otherwise fine people.

 

I live in Chicago; my rep is Jaime M. Andrade, and my state senator is Iris Y. Martinez. Want to give me odds on how likely it would be to have either of them let me speak on this subject?


"A well educated Media, being necessary for the preservation of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed."

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Who gets to keep and read books? The Media? Or is it the People?

 

“One can never underestimate the idiocy of those determined to be offended by things that don't affect their real lives in the slightest.” —Me
 
“Hatred is the sharpest sword; the desire for peace is armor made of willow leaves in the face of an enemy who despises you, as neither alone will stop a strike that is aimed at your neck.” —Samurai proverb
 
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” —Robert Heinlein
 
“I reserve the right to take any action necessary to maintain the equilibrium in which I've chosen to exist.” —Me
 
"It ain't braggin' if you done it." —Will Rogers

 

 InX89li.jpg
 

 
 
 
 


#12 Euler

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,831 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 18

Posted 08 June 2019 - 10:20 PM

... They think that cops will protect their constituents (at least the ones who can't afford private security), if only they could get rid of the trigger-happy, blue-walled cowboys and reform the inherently racist and homophobic institution of policing itself.

 
That would be news to literally EVERY one of my self-protection trainees and students, almost all of whom don't trust the police in even the slightest amount, because they think (with some justification based on previous experience with being marginalized by law enforcement) that they will either not be taken seriously or be re-traumatized by the investigative/prosecution process.
 
And, as you said, aren't the police racist, homophobic Nazis? And that's who those politicians want protecting their vulnerable constituents?


I believe it may surprise them to find out the cops aren't necessarily their tormentors, but it shouldn't be at all surprising that legislators think cops will protect everyone, including LGBTQs, while simultaneously thinking cops are trigger-happy racists. (Obviously cops don't protect anyone, but the do arrest perpetrators of crime.)

I think part of the difficulty is the belief some people have that policing is an inherently bigoted institution and that all cops are either bigots or enablers because they voluntarily chose to participate in policing. Treating people (cops) like they're less than human isn't going to encourage them to treat you like a human, nor will it persuade them to help you by arresting your attacker(s).
The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.

- Albert Camus, Resistance, Rebellion, and Death, 1960.


#13 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,974 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 08 June 2019 - 10:38 PM

 

 

... They think that cops will protect their constituents (at least the ones who can't afford private security), if only they could get rid of the trigger-happy, blue-walled cowboys and reform the inherently racist and homophobic institution of policing itself.

 
That would be news to literally EVERY one of my self-protection trainees and students, almost all of whom don't trust the police in even the slightest amount, because they think (with some justification based on previous experience with being marginalized by law enforcement) that they will either not be taken seriously or be re-traumatized by the investigative/prosecution process.
 
And, as you said, aren't the police racist, homophobic Nazis? And that's who those politicians want protecting their vulnerable constituents?

 


I believe it may surprise them to find out the cops aren't necessarily their tormentors, but it shouldn't be at all surprising that legislators think cops will protect everyone, including LGBTQs, while simultaneously thinking cops are trigger-happy racists. (Obviously cops don't protect anyone, but the do arrest perpetrators of crime.)

I think part of the difficulty is the belief some people have that policing is an inherently bigoted institution and that all cops are either bigots or enablers because they voluntarily chose to participate in policing. Treating people (cops) like they're less than human isn't going to encourage them to treat you like a human, nor will it persuade them to help you by arresting your attacker(s).

 

 

There's definitely truth to both sides of that situation, in my experience. I'm both for police protecting and serving all of the public, but I am unfortunately all too aware that a discouragingly large percentage of interactions with the police are not to the benefit of the queer community. That does breed distrust, and when the victim of a crime doesn't trust the entire organization as a result of those sorts of situations, it prevents the majority of law enforcement, who are indeed well-intentioned, from being able to help those who need it most.

 

But, as you pointed out, the far greater problem is the politicians and their agenda-driven ideology, which causes harm to everyone, public and law enforcement alike.


"A well educated Media, being necessary for the preservation of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed."

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Who gets to keep and read books? The Media? Or is it the People?

 

“One can never underestimate the idiocy of those determined to be offended by things that don't affect their real lives in the slightest.” —Me
 
“Hatred is the sharpest sword; the desire for peace is armor made of willow leaves in the face of an enemy who despises you, as neither alone will stop a strike that is aimed at your neck.” —Samurai proverb
 
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” —Robert Heinlein
 
“I reserve the right to take any action necessary to maintain the equilibrium in which I've chosen to exist.” —Me
 
"It ain't braggin' if you done it." —Will Rogers

 

 InX89li.jpg
 

 
 
 
 


#14 ChicagoRonin70

    The Landlord of the Flies!

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,974 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 14

Posted 10 July 2019 - 12:07 AM

So, an update to the numbers of FOIDs and CCLs (Illinois and otherwise): Another FIVE people have gotten their FOIDS, and another TEN people have gotten their concealed carry licenses, who I have taught to shoot. That means all but three of my trainees have gotten a FOID at one point or another (although not all of them still live in the state, so the number of active FOIDS is only about 55), and 61 people (35 in Illinois) have gotten their concealed carry licenses.

 

Ironically, the motivating factor for many of these people to take the necessary action to get their licenses is the threat of "Fix the FOID" act, which they realized would price them out of getting their initial licenses.

 

Even more ironically is that every single one of them would be classified as far left-wing or progressive.

 

It's amazing how when it's realized that something will make it harder to exercise a right, suddenly it becomes much more pressing to actually do so. 


Edited by ChicagoRonin70, 10 July 2019 - 12:08 AM.

"A well educated Media, being necessary for the preservation of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed."

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Who gets to keep and read books? The Media? Or is it the People?

 

“One can never underestimate the idiocy of those determined to be offended by things that don't affect their real lives in the slightest.” —Me
 
“Hatred is the sharpest sword; the desire for peace is armor made of willow leaves in the face of an enemy who despises you, as neither alone will stop a strike that is aimed at your neck.” —Samurai proverb
 
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” —Robert Heinlein
 
“I reserve the right to take any action necessary to maintain the equilibrium in which I've chosen to exist.” —Me
 
"It ain't braggin' if you done it." —Will Rogers

 

 InX89li.jpg
 

 
 
 
 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users