Jump to content

Shepard update 7/27 -- dismissed as moot


Recommended Posts

Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given

Actually there is a deadline. They must approve curriculum by today otherwise they will be in violation of the mandate contained in the FCCA.

That's what I was thinking when I asked. I looked on ISP website and did not see a list of instructores. There was a search box if you knew a last name.

 

They've approved instructors but no classes that I know of.

Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
That's what I was thinking when I asked. I looked on ISP website and did not see a list of instructores. There was a search box if you knew a last name.

Click search on a blank box and it will list the 7 approved so far.

Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given

Actually there is a deadline. They must approve curriculum by today otherwise they will be in violation of the mandate contained in the FCCA.

they approved a few instructors but without approving a curriculum they are in violation of the act and are making it easier to get a permanent injunction against enforcement of UUW but such a injunction could be worded to allow open carry of all firearms by anyone 18 or older with valid FOID card. The reason why the 7th may choose to make a ruling allowing open carry for those 18 years old and older would prevent a future right to bear arms lawsuit involving 18-20 year olds.
Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given

So as of right now the ISP is already in violation of the FCCA??

 

As far as many of us are concerned and how many read the law, yes the ISP is already failing to follow the law and has failed it's first mandated deadline...

Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given

Actually I'm glad. Makes our case a lot stronger for the orals on 10-3.

 

yes, this is good

 

"law" what is "law"

 

Is not the ILSP and entire state in violation of "law" when it comes to the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Does "law" really matter when it can be broken, ignored, or repealed without recourse?

 

black and white statements and dates are much easier to argue are being violated than e.g. the wording of the 2nd amendment

Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
The only recourse we have with the ISP not meeting FCCA is a Writ of Mandamus, I believe. I think anyone seeking curriculum approval would have standing. FYI IANAL.
Link to comment

Problem is a mandamus proceeding take too long and you can bet the farm (no pun intended heh) that the ISP would just approve the petitioner's curriculum. The petitioner then lacks standing and poof, no writ.

 

I think it's best we just let them do what they're doing because, if everyone recalls Stiehl's memorandum and order dismissing the case, he plainly stated that one of the reasons for dismissing the case is that he believed that the ISP will follow the deadlines in the law. Well, yeah heh trust the ISP and State when they say they'll do something, I would never buy into that. Just let them keep screwing around and not follow the law as it's written, just like the FOID card debacle, and when orals come around even if the ISP has approved curriculum it'll still be past the mandated deadline.

 

What slays me is that their boss is a defendant in two active cases and they're still doing this. You couldn't make this up, it's so unreal.

 

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given

So as of right now the ISP is already in violation of the FCCA??

 

As far as many of us are concerned and how many read the law, yes the ISP is already failing to follow the law and has failed it's first mandated deadline...

The ISP was supposed to have a complete list of approved instructors as well as an approved curriculum before the deadline. 7 instructors is not a complete list of instructors. A child turning in a test with 7 out of 500 questions answered is not a completed test.
Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given

So as of right now the ISP is already in violation of the FCCA??

 

As far as many of us are concerned and how many read the law, yes the ISP is already failing to follow the law and has failed it's first mandated deadline...

The ISP was supposed to have a complete list of approved instructors as well as an approved curriculum before the deadline. 7 instructors is not a complete list of instructors. A child turning in a test with 7 out of 500 questions answered is not a completed test.

 

I agree but the ISP is under the impression that they just had to 'start' doing something not actually complete the task... Thus the fact that they didn't even try to approve any curriculum since they 'started' the instructor approval before the deadline...

 

To me the law is clear in the wording, and I hope that the ISPs continued and willful neglect to follow the written law as written in regards to FOID and FCCA comes back to smack them in the oral hearings hard... I think it's important to remember that FOID is 100% relevant as well as you need both to exercise the 2nd in this State, so the delay in FOID is also a delay in FCCA and part of the bigger picture...

 

IMO the ISP just blew it, I can't imagine the courts will ignore such an easy timeline mandate being missed...

Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given

black and white statements and dates are much easier to argue are being violated than e.g. the wording of the 2nd amendment

 

I didn't mean only the second ammendment, but just in case:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Seems fairly black and white to me, but then again I'm not a lawyer, nor am I a politician trying to parse words to screw over the little guy.

Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Again, I'll hit my goto example: Japanese internment during WWII. Presidential, congressional, and supreme court approved this "law". Does something merely being legal make it right? I'd say no. It's a tricky issue for certain, but never confuse legal with good or right.
Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Ty, the 'grey areas' are already there though, restricting someones right to carry a loaded gun in a courtroom or the president's house for example are reasonable restrictions. Whereas "such and such must be made available by January 3rd at 2:31 am" is pretty hard to hack apart into "reasonableness", it's either available or not
Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given

black and white statements and dates are much easier to argue are being violated than e.g. the wording of the 2nd amendment

 

I didn't mean only the second ammendment, but just in case:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Seems fairly black and white to me, but then again I'm not a lawyer, nor am I a politician trying to parse words to screw over the little guy.

The problem with this is the 1903 Militia Act. It clearly defined somebody that could be in a militia is a male between the ages of 17-45 and not serving in the military. Imo, you need to the 14th Amendment to the 2nd Amendment.
Link to comment

It's one thing to go into orals on 10-3 and argue the 2nd amendment again.

 

It's another to walk in, saying that further delays are in violation of 7th's opinion, and preempt the state's argument of "obviously the court did not expect a fully formed system to just appear magically and some strict timelines were already written into the law..." by showing that while they approved 7 instructors by the 60 day deadline NO COURSES were approved or listed to even take:

Section 75. Applicant firearm training.

(a) Within 60 days of the effective date of this Act, the

Department shall begin approval of firearm training courses and

shall make a list of approved courses available on the

Department's website.

 

"your honor... The state says this is not a delay and they are not in violation. One of their arguments as that the state needs some time to implement, yet are not even following the law as written? Should the state be allowed to say they are approving courses or have started approving courses by the legislated date but just have not completed it? what if they dont complete the process for another 60 days? or 120? or 365? are not they not violating the rights of the plaintiffs? "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given

Ty, the 'grey areas' are already there though, restricting someones right to carry a loaded gun in a courtroom or the president's house for example are reasonable restrictions. Whereas "such and such must be made available by January 3rd at 2:31 am" is pretty hard to hack apart into "reasonableness", it's either available or not

 

They should still have to establish that as fact, and if challenged the burden of proof should fall squarely on the governments shoulders.

Link to comment

I don't know what to think anymore. The FCCA clearly stated the ISP shall issue a list of approved instructors and courses on their website beginning sept. 7. Instructors have begun but now we're beig told that ISP is not going to be releasing any courses and it will be taken care if in a trailer bill this fall(see bobbapunk thread in right to carry). That's a bit too late for orals, yet we are being told that ISP is doing all they can and we should lay off of them.

 

This is IL, they have never complied with anything 2nd amendment related sans a court ruling. Had the 7th not ruled, we would be awaiting a new HB this fall session, that's neither here nor there as we have what we have. But do we? We have instructors who can't instruct, curriculum that can't be taught, students who can't learn and grandfathered hours that cannot be accepted in fear of liability issues.

 

My only hope is that the 7th doesn't accept the excuses and boo hooing that Madigan and the ISP are going to go into the orals with. If this case somehow gets closed without any further actions going for our side we're screwed. If you think it's a cluster bleep now, if that happens it will only get worse.

 

I feel the biggest slow down for the instructor certification delay is the fear of more FOID lawsuits for those delays. If they show their hand on just how fast things can be done they're screwed.

 

Sorry for the rant, but it seems this is the only place we're allowed to air frustrations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
You didn't see this coming? Come on folks, it's Illinois. They will only give us back our rights if they are dragged kicking and screaming. Without any penalties in the law they will stall, evade, and generally be a nuisance. I suggest doing what you can to get certified and then just relaxing and waiting. Waiting every day for them to get their act together will only give you an ulcer. We'll get it eventually.......eventually.
Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given

You didn't see this coming? Come on folks, it's Illinois. They will only give us back our rights if they are dragged kicking and screaming. Without any penalties in the law they will stall, evade, and generally be a nuisance. I suggest doing what you can to get certified and then just relaxing and waiting. Waiting every day for them to get their act together will only give you an ulcer. We'll get it eventually.......eventually.

 

I've been saying it from day 1, never expected anything less. This is all Mike Madigans doing and unless we can take the house back in '14 we'll still be at the mercy of Mr. Speaker. Anyone really think he'll let pro trailer bills get called to the floor? That's for another thread, but IL will be IL forevermore.

Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Without any penalties in the law they will stall, evade, and generally be a nuisance.

 

Yeah imagine if our legislatures actually had the convictions to put some bite into the laws they pass holding the State accountable... They have no problem passing law after law making ordinary people felons, but refuse to hold themselves accountable for anything...

Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given
Hidden by Molly B., September 30, 2013 at 01:20 AM - No reason given

You didn't see this coming? Come on folks, it's Illinois. They will only give us back our rights if they are dragged kicking and screaming. Without any penalties in the law they will stall, evade, and generally be a nuisance. I suggest doing what you can to get certified and then just relaxing and waiting. Waiting every day for them to get their act together will only give you an ulcer. We'll get it eventually.......eventually.

 

I've been saying it from day 1, never expected anything less. This is all Mike Madigans doing and unless we can take the house back in '14 we'll still be at the mercy of Mr. Speaker. Anyone really think he'll let pro trailer bills get called to the floor? That's for another thread, but IL will be IL forevermore.

 

Whether he allows them to the floor or not could be moot shortly. I can't imagine that the 7th would allow the state to continue to play games on this.

 

Oral arguments on 10/3. Man I wish I could be there, it's sure to be interesting. LOL

Link to comment

Hopefully Skinnyb is able to attend, I'm sure his breakdown and interpretation will prove invaluable to us who cannot.

 

I really think this is our last shot at stopping the games being played. It won't end all the nonsense, but it will end the charades as to what Posner and the rest of the 7th handed down 9 months ago. They've plate games from the beginning, waiting until the last day of each and every deadline to seek the next stall and extension. It continues to this day and will not stop until they are forced to by court order. LRS is a multimillion dollar business who's been around A long time, I'm sure they are capable of the task at hand.

 

I know there has been a lot of negativity, but looking back, how wrong have we naysayers actually been? I believe in Todd, Molly and all the rest of the lead crew here, I believe they were as duped as us when 997 lost its votes. But, I still don't believe in the ISP or anyone else in the higher ranks of IL to be truthful and sincere in the implementation of concealed carry. It starts at the top and that's the governor and his minions, if the 7th fails to see this we're doomed until another case can make its way through the ranks.

 

I can't wait until deer season starts, at least I know that date lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah this needs to be solved....now, not with some trailer bill next session. The law states very clearly (to me, not the ISP apparently) that the ISP approves curriculum and that it had 60 days to approve instructors not to begin doing its job and approving instructors (50some days of the ISP sitting on its thumbs). Until they decide to do their jobs, or more likely the Court tells them to do their jobs and in the mean time, well I'm crossing my fingers and hoping the Court pulls a 180 and grants the injunction that would result in FOID carry under the FCCA since that's the only real remedy available. More "we're going as fast as we can" and the Court deferring to the state will just result in more crap being flung our way. They gave the state A LOT of rope by granting the total 210 day stay, now that the state has all but hanged itself, I hope CA7 pulls that lever and opens the trap door.

 

As far as orals are concerned, I fully intend on attending, sitting in the gallery with my portfolio and taking notes hehe. Unless, of course, something comes up like that pesky thing...work, I think that's what it's called. Already have the Thursday and Friday off since I'm planning on making a weekend outta it anyway, visit some old friends, hopefully grab lunch with a few fellow IC members. I've just gotta figure out a gameplan, as I know how to get to several burbs with Metra stations but it really doesn't matter as far as I can remember. Last time I was on the Metra or the El was back in 2008, got on in Lombard, remember having to walk a ways to get to the red line.

 

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...