80 replies to this topic

[tkroenlein]

the issue is that the anti-gunners are fuming becuase they will be in the trick bag of having to vote against the NICS bill so they will ge pummeled with mail and TV ads sayign they voted against fixing background checks and keeping guns out of the hands of the menatlly ill

You make it sound like the R's finally got one over on the D's.

Here's to hoping we come out on top.

[kwc]

<deleted>

Edited by kwc, 06 December 2017 - 04:35 AM.

[tkroenlein]

Ok I took the time to read 4477. My assessment is this: And???

There is nothing there that changes the requirements to pass an NCIS check. Period. It basically sets up a half hearted audit of state compliance.

Will I take this to get reciprocity? Yep.

Also, while the NCIS system is a net infringement, it is also the basis for a federal appellate court ruling that called into question the validity of waiting periods and restricted sales across state lines.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ILgunguy]

Long time reader, but sorry I don't post much.  I was wondering if you all think that if the national carry bill goes on to become law if we in IL will see more GFZ signs go up at private businesses.  As someone who has talked to a few store owners, and written letters to others, part of my argument that has made a difference is the amount of training IL residents have to get before they are legally allowed to carry.  Yes, I know it is a lot and it is expensive, and I know we can choose to patronize those businesses or not if they post GFZ...but that is not what I am after here.

 

 

I am just wondering if you think we will lose some places that we convinced not to post now that the national CCW bill would allow people from states with less requirements to carry in IL.  I am not saying that the national CCW shouldn't pass...just trying to look down the road a bit and wonder how it will change the landscape within our IL borders.

[OldMarineVet]

deleted

Edited by OldMarineVet, 06 December 2017 - 12:59 PM.

[OldMarineVet]

Long time reader, but sorry I don't post much.  I was wondering if you all think that if the national carry bill goes on to become law if we in IL will see more GFZ signs go up at private businesses.  As someone who has talked to a few store owners, and written letters to others, part of my argument that has made a difference is the amount of training IL residents have to get before they are legally allowed to carry.  Yes, I know it is a lot and it is expensive, and I know we can choose to patronize those businesses or not if they post GFZ...but that is not what I am after here.

 

 

I am just wondering if you think we will lose some places that we convinced not to post now that the national CCW bill would allow people from states with less requirements to carry in IL.  I am not saying that the national CCW shouldn't pass...just trying to look down the road a bit and wonder how it will change the landscape within our IL borders.

Hmm. Interesting such a strong concealed carry supporter as yourself, who has worked with businesses to remove GFZ signs,has not chimed in similar conversations here... Don't be bashful.

 

Based on the my dealings, most of them realize the increased danger they have in a store posted with a GFZ sign.  They know it attracts the criminal predators for crimes in the store and waiting for people returning to their cars in the parking lot. The passage of time continues to support their decisions. The good or evil in ones heart is a much higher priority to them than mandatory training (people still get training, you should know) I'm not anticipating any increase in GFZ's.

Edited by OldMarineVet, 06 December 2017 - 09:42 AM.

[ILgunguy]

>>> Hmm. Interesting such a strong concealed carry supporter as yourself, who has worked with businesses to remove GFZ signs,has not chimed in similar conversations here... Don't be bashful. <<<

 

 

I know.  Man of few words and deep thoughts...

[TomKoz]

Re: increase in GFZ

Point out to the business owner that ...

Tourist (out-of-staters) were not allowed to carry Before reciprocity so the GFZ sign couldn’t stop them from coming into your shop.

But now tourist can and will be carrying, so do you really want to turn away tourist $$$ ?

[BigJim]

Can some explain this portion of H.R. 38:

 

Additionally, the bill specifies that a qualified individual who lawfully carries or possesses a concealed handgun in another state: (1) is not subject to the federal prohibition on possessing a firearm in a school zone, and (2) may carry or possess the concealed handgun in federally owned lands that are open to the public.

[skinnyb82]

Looks like the first one is exempts licensees from gun free school zones act. Second part is...extremely vague. Well unless it's not and it truly means all federal land. Sent from my VS987 using Tapatalk

[Xwing]

 

I am just wondering if you think we will lose some places that we convinced not to post now that the national CCW bill would allow people from states with less requirements to carry in IL.  I am not saying that the national CCW shouldn't pass...just trying to look down the road a bit and wonder how it will change the landscape within our IL borders.

 

Interesting topic.  IMO, no it will not create one more Criminal Protection Zone in Illinois.  The Anti-gunners here already all have their signs up, and we will continue to be able to convince the "neutrals" why it is bad for their business to have such a sign.  (I also spend a lot of time talking to business owners / managers about the signs.  THANK YOU for doing that, as it is vitally important.)

 

We will see GFZ zone signs everywhere in NY, CA and the other states which only allow licenses to the politically connected.  The antis running those states will fall over themselves sending out signs.  But it's still a net gain for gun owners.  Even if 2/3 of the businesses in those states put up signs (and that's a huge stretch, it won't be that much), there will still be 1/3 more businesses that allow carry in those states than there are now...

[FF1984]

Does this in anyway allow them to report people that aren't already prohibited?  I've heard grumblings of unpaid parking tickets can be listed by anti-gun law enforcement as a "fugitive from the law/justice" and get someones name added or a childhood diagnosis of ADD would put one into that system.  

 

I can see the suspicion of rabid gun-grabbers supporting a bill that modifies, in any way, a system that bans peoples from owning guns.  I can't speak lawyer but it'd seem undeserving additions (other than violent felonies/domestic violence) to the system that bars people their rights would lead to wide scale legal challenges.  

[Whitedog]

Looks as if the bill passed Congress. Let's see if it goes as-is through the Senate too.

[Quiet Observer]

Long time reader, but sorry I don't post much.  I was wondering if you all think that if the national carry bill goes on to become law if we in IL will see more GFZ signs go up at private businesses.  As someone who has talked to a few store owners, and written letters to others, part of my argument that has made a difference is the amount of training IL residents have to get before they are legally allowed to carry.  Yes, I know it is a lot and it is expensive, and I know we can choose to patronize those businesses or not if they post GFZ...but that is not what I am after here.

 

 

I am just wondering if you think we will lose some places that we convinced not to post now that the national CCW bill would allow people from states with less requirements to carry in IL.  I am not saying that the national CCW shouldn't pass...just trying to look down the road a bit and wonder how it will change the landscape within our IL borders.

 

I do not believe that it would have much, if any, effort.  A GFZ poster does not want any gun brought into his establishment, regardless of the residence of the carrier, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, New York, etc.  There was even an incident downstate a few years ago, that a restaurant employee insisted that  a police detective leave because his conceal sidearm was briefly exposed.  They care little about background checks or training.  The "evil gun" is the problem.

[MrTriple]

Long time reader, but sorry I don't post much.  I was wondering if you all think that if the national carry bill goes on to become law if we in IL will see more GFZ signs go up at private businesses.  As someone who has talked to a few store owners, and written letters to others, part of my argument that has made a difference is the amount of training IL residents have to get before they are legally allowed to carry.  Yes, I know it is a lot and it is expensive, and I know we can choose to patronize those businesses or not if they post GFZ...but that is not what I am after here.
 
 
I am just wondering if you think we will lose some places that we convinced not to post now that the national CCW bill would allow people from states with less requirements to carry in IL.  I am not saying that the national CCW shouldn't pass...just trying to look down the road a bit and wonder how it will change the landscape within our IL borders.

I highly doubt we'll see more businesses post. Most businesses don't know or don't care, and the ones who do have long since posted. There may be a few, but I suspect they'll be amongst a very tiny minority.

[BShawn]

When is the next action on this?

[Gamma]

Can some explain this portion of H.R. 38:
 
Additionally, the bill specifies that a qualified individual who lawfully carries or possesses a concealed handgun in another state: (1) is not subject to the federal prohibition on possessing a firearm in a school zone, and (2) may carry or possess the concealed handgun in federally owned lands that are open to the public.

The wording of the federal "gun free school zones act" exempts concealed carry licensees, but only those licensed by that particular state. Part 1 would clarify that those carrying under reciprocity/recognition of other licenses are also covered by that exemption. Part 2 allows carry on federal property that has been subject to longstanding misapplication of the federal statute that prohibits possession of firearms for unlawful purposes on federal property, by previous executive determination (backed up by court decisions) that declared that carrying a firearm for self defense was not a "lawful purpose".

[OldMarineVet]

When is the next action on this?

sent pm

[kevinmcc]

Can some explain this portion of H.R. 38:
 
Additionally, the bill specifies that a qualified individual who lawfully carries or possesses a concealed handgun in another state: (1) is not subject to the federal prohibition on possessing a firearm in a school zone, and (2) may carry or possess the concealed handgun in federally owned lands that are open to the public.

Great news for those that hike in national parks. Be nice of be able to conceal carry when hiking not only for weirdos, but also for bears that may decide you look like dinner.

[ILgunguy]

As for carrying in national parks...you mean in states where your permit was not initially recognized, right?  Being able to carry in NP's in states that honor your permit has been allowable for a while.

Edited by ILgunguy, 28 December 2017 - 07:48 AM.

[kevinmcc]

As for carrying in national parks...you mean in states where your permit was not initially recognized, right?  Being able to carry in NP's in states that honor your permit has been allowable for a while.

A lot of nice parks in WA, OR, and CA. Be nice to carry there.