InterestedBystander Posted January 13, 2020 at 02:13 AM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 02:13 AM Dont expect it to go anywhere, but filed 1/10/2020 http://ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=4067&GAID=15&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=122956&SessionID=108&GA=101 House SponsorsRep. John M. Cabello Synopsis As IntroducedRepeals the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act. Amends various Acts to make conforming changes. Effective January 1, 2021. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomKoz Posted January 13, 2020 at 03:44 AM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 03:44 AM Unfortunately a waste of paper ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCroskey Posted January 13, 2020 at 03:55 AM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 03:55 AM Doesn't hurt to try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdDinIL Posted January 13, 2020 at 04:04 AM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 04:04 AM Tin foil theory: Bill passes both houses, Governor Pritzker guts it with an amendatory veto, both chambers approve the changes, we're SOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo69 Posted January 13, 2020 at 06:18 AM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 06:18 AM Piece of S!$T Illinois politicians Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Posted January 13, 2020 at 02:02 PM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 02:02 PM Doesn't hurt to try.^^^This^^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingcreek Posted January 13, 2020 at 03:27 PM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 03:27 PM Put it on the shelf next to the bill that gives every household a magic unicorn that poops ice cream when you twist its tail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defaultdotxbe Posted January 13, 2020 at 03:30 PM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 03:30 PM Tin foil theory: Bill passes both houses, Governor Pritzker guts it with an amendatory veto, both chambers approve the changes, we're SOL.Synopsis As Amended:Repeals the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act. Amends various Acts to make conforming changes. Effective January 1, 2021. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted January 13, 2020 at 04:32 PM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 04:32 PM Is this different than his HB3818 Firearm Owners ID Act - Repeal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raymond963 Posted January 13, 2020 at 04:32 PM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 04:32 PM I could only see this passing if it meant that, since a FOID is required to obtain and keep a CCL, and you could no longer have a FOID, then you also could no longer have a CCL and carry would become illegal again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockman Posted January 13, 2020 at 05:54 PM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 05:54 PM (430 ILCS 65/16) (from Ch. 38, par. 83-16)Sec. 16. When 2% of the number of registered voters in the State desire to pass upon the question of whether the General Assembly should repeal this Act regulating the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, they shall, at least 78 days before a regular election to be held throughout the State, file in the office of the State Board of Elections, a petition directed to the Board in accordance with the general election law. The petition shall be composed of county petitions from each of the counties throughout the State and each county petition shall contain the signatures of at least 2% of the number of registered voters in the county. The petition shall request that the question "Should the General Assembly repeal the Act entitled 'An Act relating to the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, to provide a penalty for the violation thereof and to make an appropriation in connection therewith,' approved August 3, 1967, as amended?" be submitted to the voters of the State at the next ensuing State-wide election at which such question may be acted upon.(Source: P.A. 81-1489.) (430 ILCS 65/16.1) (from Ch. 38, par. 83-16.1)Sec. 16.1. A petition for the submission of the proposition shall be in substantially the following form:To the State Board of Elections,The undersigned, residents and registered voters of the State of Illinois, respectfully petition that you cause to be submitted, in the manner provided by the general election law to the voters of the State of Illinois, at the next State-wide election, the proposition "Should the General Assembly repeal an Act entitled 'An Act relating to the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, to provide a penalty for the violation thereof and to make an appropriation in connection therewith', approved August 3, 1967, as amended?" Such petition shall conform to the requirements of the general election law. The Board shall certify the question to the proper election officials who shall submit the question at an election in accordance with the general election law. Upon request of any citizen for a reproduced copy of the petition and paying or tendering to the State Board of Elections the costs of making the copy, the Board shall immediately make, or cause to be made a reproduced copy of such petition. The Board shall also deliver to such person his official certification that such copy is a true copy of the original, stating the day when such original was filed in its office.(Source: P.A. 81-1489.) (430 ILCS 65/16-3) (from Ch. 38, par. 83-16.3)Sec. 16-3. The Secretary of State shall cause the question to be plainly printed upon separate ballots as follows: Should the General Assembly repeal the Actentitled "An Act relating to the acquisition, YESpossession and transfer of firearms andfirearm ammunition, to provide a penalty for the violation thereof and to make anappropriation in connection therewith", NOapproved August 3, 1967, as amended? (Source: P.A. 77-1819.) Bolding is mine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoRonin70 Posted January 13, 2020 at 06:15 PM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 06:15 PM (430 ILCS 65/16) (from Ch. 38, par. 83-16)Sec. 16. When 2% of the number of registered voters in the State desire to pass upon the question of whether the General Assembly should repeal this Act regulating the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, they shall, at least 78 days before a regular election to be held throughout the State, file in the office of the State Board of Elections, a petition directed to the Board in accordance with the general election law. The petition shall be composed of county petitions from each of the counties throughout the State and each county petition shall contain the signatures of at least 2% of the number of registered voters in the county. The petition shall request that the question "Should the General Assembly repeal the Act entitled 'An Act relating to the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, to provide a penalty for the violation thereof and to make an appropriation in connection therewith,' approved August 3, 1967, as amended?" be submitted to the voters of the State at the next ensuing State-wide election at which such question may be acted upon.(Source: P.A. 81-1489.) (430 ILCS 65/16.1) (from Ch. 38, par. 83-16.1)Sec. 16.1. A petition for the submission of the proposition shall be in substantially the following form:To the State Board of Elections,The undersigned, residents and registered voters of the State of Illinois, respectfully petition that you cause to be submitted, in the manner provided by the general election law to the voters of the State of Illinois, at the next State-wide election, the proposition "Should the General Assembly repeal an Act entitled 'An Act relating to the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, to provide a penalty for the violation thereof and to make an appropriation in connection therewith', approved August 3, 1967, as amended?" Such petition shall conform to the requirements of the general election law. The Board shall certify the question to the proper election officials who shall submit the question at an election in accordance with the general election law. Upon request of any citizen for a reproduced copy of the petition and paying or tendering to the State Board of Elections the costs of making the copy, the Board shall immediately make, or cause to be made a reproduced copy of such petition. The Board shall also deliver to such person his official certification that such copy is a true copy of the original, stating the day when such original was filed in its office.(Source: P.A. 81-1489.) (430 ILCS 65/16-3) (from Ch. 38, par. 83-16.3)Sec. 16-3. The Secretary of State shall cause the question to be plainly printed upon separate ballots as follows: Should the General Assembly repeal the Actentitled "An Act relating to the acquisition, YESpossession and transfer of firearms andfirearm ammunition, to provide a penalty for the violation thereof and to make anappropriation in connection therewith", NOapproved August 3, 1967, as amended? (Source: P.A. 77-1819.) Bolding is mine I'm pretty sure FOID card holders in this state represent more than 2 percent of the voters. Given that it's well over 2 million, that's about 15 percent or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmallie Posted January 13, 2020 at 07:59 PM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 07:59 PM Even if repealed by ballot, what's to prevent them from passing another bill within a week? Maybe one that's worse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FF1984 Posted January 13, 2020 at 08:20 PM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 08:20 PM Even if repealed by ballot, what's to prevent them from passing another bill within a week? Maybe one that's worse? Optics. If they pass another bill the same as or worse than the law the voters just nixed, they appear dictatorial. Not saying they wouldn't do it...it is Illinois after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defaultdotxbe Posted January 13, 2020 at 08:35 PM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 08:35 PM Even if repealed by ballot, what's to prevent them from passing another bill within a week? Maybe one that's worse? Optics. If they pass another bill the same as or worse than the law the voters just nixed, they appear dictatorial. Not saying they wouldn't do it...it is Illinois after all. They'd quietly amend the FOID act to remove the ballot repeal clause before it ever went to an actual vote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragsbo Posted January 13, 2020 at 09:17 PM Share Posted January 13, 2020 at 09:17 PM While I fully agree with the bill, I think the only way the FOID is going anywhere is through the courts throwing it out as unconstitutional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooter Posted January 15, 2020 at 09:07 PM Share Posted January 15, 2020 at 09:07 PM Foid as much as we detest it has actually been useful to our side....if dems could step back they probably themselves would repeal...one thing i am fully on board is a ccw should suffice for the foid...requirement on both is simply idiotic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bitter Clinger Posted January 16, 2020 at 04:46 PM Share Posted January 16, 2020 at 04:46 PM Whether it's useful or not, it's unconstitutional and therefore void. It needs to be repealed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmagloo Posted January 16, 2020 at 06:25 PM Share Posted January 16, 2020 at 06:25 PM Foid as much as we detest it has actually been useful to our side....if dems could step back they probably themselves would repeal...one thing i am fully on board is a ccw should suffice for the foid...requirement on both is simply idiotic Not following... Please explain how you think the FOID is positive to Illinois Gun owners? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defaultdotxbe Posted January 16, 2020 at 06:45 PM Share Posted January 16, 2020 at 06:45 PM Foid as much as we detest it has actually been useful to our side....if dems could step back they probably themselves would repeal...one thing i am fully on board is a ccw should suffice for the foid...requirement on both is simply idiotic Not following... Please explain how you think the FOID is positive to Illinois Gun owners? We got a slightly less crappy UBC law than other states (not that they intend to leave it that way) That's pretty much all I can think of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flingarrows Posted January 17, 2020 at 02:24 AM Share Posted January 17, 2020 at 02:24 AM Foid as much as we detest it has actually been useful to our side....if dems could step back they probably themselves would repeal...one thing i am fully on board is a ccw should suffice for the foid...requirement on both is simply idiotic Not following... Please explain how you think the FOID is positive to Illinois Gun owners? We got a slightly less crappy UBC law than other states (not that they intend to leave it that way) That's pretty much all I can think of I could be an anomaly, but my experience in Indiana is much better than in Illinois. I have yet to be delayed on a purchase or transfer - which was my norm in Illinois. But it could just be an anomaly. .. If comparing NY, NJ, or Ca, I’m with ya 100% Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
defaultdotxbe Posted January 17, 2020 at 02:46 PM Share Posted January 17, 2020 at 02:46 PM Foid as much as we detest it has actually been useful to our side....if dems could step back they probably themselves would repeal...one thing i am fully on board is a ccw should suffice for the foid...requirement on both is simply idiotic Not following... Please explain how you think the FOID is positive to Illinois Gun owners? We got a slightly less crappy UBC law than other states (not that they intend to leave it that way) That's pretty much all I can think ofI could be an anomaly, but my experience in Indiana is much better than in Illinois. I have yet to be delayed on a purchase or transfer - which was my norm in Illinois. But it could just be an anomaly. .. If comparing NY, NJ, or Ca, I’m with ya 100% Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk I was referring to the person-to-person FOID verification (as opposed to the usual UBC of having to go through a FFL all the time) But yes, its only advantage is compared to other states with with the full 4473 UBC law, its still a downgrade from states like IN, although I'm 100% positive IL would have the CA-style UBC now if it didn't already have the FOID Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.