2071 replies to this topic

[Molly B.]

mrpapageorgio, on 25 July 2012 - 01:47 PM, said:

^ That "it's for the children" reminded me of a song that always stuck in my head as a kid from Lamb Chop. It goes "This is the song that doesn't end, yes it goes on and on my friend. Some people, started singing it not knowing what it was, and they'll continue singing it forever just because..." and it repeats. I think it applies to Chicago politics very well in this situation.

LOL - thank you, it takes YEARS to get that song out of my head!

[Ashdump]

GarandFan, on 24 July 2012 - 08:58 PM, said:

I am cautiously optimistic, too.  And I say that because generally, the writing is on the wall for Illinois and the right to bear arms.  These states (Illinois and various discretionary-issue states) can deny a specifically and explicitly enumerated right for only so long ... eventually, the courts will affirm the reality that we have the right to carry arms just as we have the right to own them.

So, I am cautiously optimistic in anticipation of this pending 7th circuit decision.

I share your views on this, GF!

[ilphil]

Molly B., on 25 July 2012 - 06:18 PM, said:

mrpapageorgio, on 25 July 2012 - 01:47 PM, said:

^ That "it's for the children" reminded me of a song that always stuck in my head as a kid from Lamb Chop. It goes "This is the song that doesn't end, yes it goes on and on my friend. Some people, started singing it not knowing what it was, and they'll continue singing it forever just because..." and it repeats. I think it applies to Chicago politics very well in this situation.

LOL - thank you, it takes YEARS to get that song out of my head!

OMG...my daughter loved that song when she was little. I get the shivers just thinking about it.

[TFC]

[TyGuy]

Where's the mint jelly?

[Bimmer]

Awesome TFC!

[frankw438]

TyGuy, on 25 July 2012 - 10:10 PM, said:

Where's the mint jelly?

Or tzatziki sauce...

[boomersand]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA  that just made my day!

[colt-45]

any day know we will get a ruling.

[TyGuy]

I sure hope so.  The 8th was two weeks from yesterday.....

[drdoom]

So one more week?

[KingWalleye]

Two more looong weeks

[papa]

tick tock....tick tock.....tick tock.....

[moon]

so here is a q for everyone.  Assume the ruling comes back in our favor...now what?  How many long years until we can actually carry?  For example, would the state need extra resources, new processes, new approvals, etc, etc, etc?  So if the ruling is in our favor what would be the next thing and how soon, realistically would we be able to carry?  Is this another multi year ordeal?  Or can we use our FOID and/or out of state carry permit as a valid carry ID?  

[Blackhawk067]

Does the 7th Circuit HAVE to make a decision by the 8th or is that a date that they were HOPING to have a decision by?

[Tvandermyde]

they could take longer. but that is the scheduled end of their "session" and the Chief judge inhis order denying extra time for the state said he wanted it done this session.

but who knows. we waited 9 months for the trial court.

[Chiburbian]

moon, on 26 July 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

so here is a q for everyone.  Assume the ruling comes back in our favor...now what?

There are a couple scenarios.  Paraphrasing what I was told:

We win, they don't appeal- UUW is thrown out, likely with a grace period, legislature is forced to craft a carry law or else no permit required.

We win, they appeal- we are stuck playing legal games while it works it's way through the courts.  Could take years.

We lose, we appeal-  we work the case to the supreme court.  Could be voted in within a year.  (we are in drivers seat as far as speed of case, from what I understand)

Past that, I will let Todd and Valinda add to the discussion.

[C0untZer0]

Does the 7th Circuit HAVE to make a decision by the 8th or is that a date that they were HOPING to have a decision by?


No - but the 7th is know as the "Rocket Docket"

I think well get a decision by the 8th, less than 2 weeks now

[scough]

The likely scenario is we win, they appeal or it gets remained back.  Either way, I'd erase any thoughts that in two weeks, we'll be carrying. that just ain't happening.

If we've learned anything, the Gun Grabbing Liberal Machine running Illinois doesn't care about wasting enormous amounts of taxpayers money to do everything they can to fight this. Ultimately, they are hoping Obama gets to shift the SCOTUS and perminently settle this thing in their favor. As such, they will do everything in their power to string this out as long as they can.

My .02 fwiw.

[Hatchet]

Next friday we get it. Emergency session in the capital monday to pass a law...

[lockman]

Chiburbian, on 26 July 2012 - 11:03 AM, said:

moon, on 26 July 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

so here is a q for everyone.  Assume the ruling comes back in our favor...now what?

There are a couple scenarios.  Paraphrasing what I was told:

We win, they don't appeal- UUW is thrown out, likely with a grace period, legislature is forced to craft a carry law or else no permit required.

We win, they appeal- we are stuck playing legal games while it works it's way through the courts.  Could take years.

We lose, we appeal-  we work the case to the supreme court.  Could be voted in within a year.  (we are in drivers seat as far as speed of case, from what I understand)

Past that, I will let Todd and Valinda add to the discussion.

The only grace period would be the time from the announcement to the date the order is entered. If it is struck down, enforcement of it will not be possible. Any such court ordered grace period would in essence state the statute is unconstitutional but we will authorize enforcement of it it for XX more days! Which also is preposterous in light of persons convicted solely on an AGG UUW  without any other criminal violation such as felon in possession,  robbery, murder or unlawful discharge, those convictions are ripe for challenge.

[Gray Peterson]

Tvandermyde, on 26 July 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

they could take longer. but that is the scheduled end of their "session" and the Chief judge inhis order denying extra time for the state said he wanted it done this session.

but who knows. we waited 9 months for the trial court.

The judge waited 9 months because there was a pending carry case in the 7th circuit called Gonzalez v. Village of West Milwaukee.  7th circuit heard the case in late 2010, but they were aware of the state murder charges which would have eliminated his 2A standing.  He was convicted, so Judge Sykes wrote an opinion which had no real 2A content.

The Gonzalez case came out 2/2/12.  The Moore opinion came out 2/3.  Coincidence? No.   It doesn't take 9 months for a preliminary injunction decision, anywhere.

[moon]

Chiburbian, on 26 July 2012 - 11:03 AM, said:

moon, on 26 July 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

so here is a q for everyone.  Assume the ruling comes back in our favor...now what?

...legislature is forced to craft a carry law or else no permit required....

So if "legislature is forced" does this then end up like all other carry bills?  Stuck in Springfield never being called to the floor for a vote?

I like the no permit required.  Does anyone think this could ever happen?  I tend to think that even if this goes our way it could be many more years before any illinoisan will be able to carry.  Just my 2 cents.  

On a separate note, is there any organization (within IL) that is a pro gun group that actually goes out to try and educate the masses who are not gun savvy or are anti-gun.  I'm not talking press releases or tv...I'm talking door to door, posting flyers, talking to people, educating the uneducated.

[mstrat]

moon, on 26 July 2012 - 11:59 AM, said:

So if "legislature is forced" does this then end up like all other carry bills?  Stuck in Springfield never being called to the floor for a vote?

They won't technically be forced.  Instead, to maintain the maximum level of control - as we all know our IL legislation is keen to do - they will choose to work hard and fast to enact RTC legislation in order to provide more restrictions in light of the UUW law being tossed out.

Edit: more specifically, if you were to scratch out the UUW law... what's left of IL legislation would allow anyone with a FOID card to carry firearms both open or concealed.  It's in our best interest to block ANY followup legislation if the UUW was thrown out.    But political reasons make that unlikely, in my guesstimation.

Quote

On a separate note, is there any organization (within IL) that is a pro gun group that actually goes out to try and educate the masses who are not gun savvy or are anti-gun.  I'm not talking press releases or tv...I'm talking door to door, posting flyers, talking to people, educating the uneducated.

I've long maintained that educating the masses is our best course of action in IL, especially in the Chicago area.  Most people, even those who think they're anti-gun, really aren't once they get a bit of education.  

It's extremely common for people in the Chicago area to say "Wow, really IL is the only state to ban carrying?  I just assumed all states except texas did!"
We've been indoctrinated to think guns are either hunting rifles or evil, rare things that only criminals have.

That's why I created ProtectIllinois.org   It's meant to be shared with people who aren't aware of IL's unique situation, or who are on the fence about firearms.  I.e. the general population.  So share it with everyone you know, especially those who aren't firearms enthusiasts.

Edited by mstrat, 26 July 2012 - 12:11 PM.

[stm]

moon, on 26 July 2012 - 11:59 AM, said:

On a separate note, is there any organization (within IL) that is a pro gun group that actually goes out to try and educate the masses who are not gun savvy or are anti-gun.  I'm not talking press releases or tv...I'm talking door to door, posting flyers, talking to people, educating the uneducated.

I think these people do a good job educating the public :

http://illinoiscarry...hp?showforum=18

[moon]

Thanks for the feed back.  I know there are a few places that educate but I guess what I would like to see would be something akin to (Don't mean to offend anyone) religious groups who go door to door; or like people who post wanted ads at the supermarket; or political volunteers who post signs on corners and lots.  Cook county and Chicago could use this.  Simply, we are out resourced when you compare all the negative portrails of guns on the news.  News almost always sides with antigun agendas. You can tell by the line of questions they ask.

Edited by moon, 26 July 2012 - 12:31 PM.

[Buzzard]

stm, on 26 July 2012 - 12:15 PM, said:

moon, on 26 July 2012 - 11:59 AM, said:

On a separate note, is there any organization (within IL) that is a pro gun group that actually goes out to try and educate the masses who are not gun savvy or are anti-gun.  I'm not talking press releases or tv...I'm talking door to door, posting flyers, talking to people, educating the uneducated.

I think these people do a good job educating the public :

http://illinoiscarry...hp?showforum=18

...and member 'stm' gets a gold star for the above post!!

So you see Moon? YOU are a member of that very organization! We don't know where you live, but if you would like to organize a Town Hall Meeting in your area, send MollyB a PM and you'll be on your way. They really aren't too hard to arrange! Anyone can do it!

[GarandFan]

What's this about the rumor ... that Posner is indeed writing this opinion, but because he believes Heller was wrongly decided is going to hold its release until after the election in the hope that another Obama administration would be able to replace either Thomas or Scalia ... which would allow the SCOTUS to revisit Heller and rule that bearing arms can only be tied to membership in a regulated militia, and thus moot all these carry cases coming up through the courts?



;-)  

Sorry, could not resist.  I know people are going nuts in anticipation of this opinion ... so I thought I'd lighten things up a bit.  :-)

[Hatchet]

Garand.... I should block you for doing that to me...

[Bud]

While GarandFan is only funning, what is not funny is that if Obama gets back in, he will nominate another supreme court Justice and maybe as many as three. If the democrats still own the Senate, we are toast, FOREVER.