Jump to content

dmefford

Members
  • Posts

    273
  • Joined

  • Last visited

dmefford's Achievements

Member

Member (6/24)

  1. They will not be able to completely ban all forms of public carry... You can bet that will not stop King Rahm...! Regards, Drd...
  2. Here is the video footage from the KHQA interview after editing... It was on the 6 o'clock news... http://www.connecttr...62#.UMlB13cyGSp [Edited to add] I should say that I arranged for the reporter to visit with Sheriff Petty. Just so happened our resident game warden was present as well and they took her out shooting... Regards, Drd...
  3. One other step is to stir up lots of debate until the time frame passes...! Then we will have defacto concarry... Regards, Drd...
  4. Yeah! We were expecting a ruling at any time! Oh yeah... I love it... Hope I can link to it from my blog... [EDIT] My comment refers to the countdown time clock... Regards, Drd...
  5. Perhaps I should say that I have been contacted by KHQA TV again for comments. Also I have had some interviews with newspapers on the recent opinion. In essence I have stated what I have stated all along. Illinois has a complete ban on a fundamental right to keep AND BEAR arms. In essence my spiel is as follows... perhaps some suggestions from this group might add to my thoughts. My comments: This decision has absolutely nothing to do with concealed carry. It has everything to do with removing a complete ban of the right to “bear” arms "ready-to-use" in the public way. Presently in Illinois there is a complete ban on a fundamental right bear arms that are loaded and ready-to-use in the public way. That has been removed and left to the legislature to decide in what “reasonable” manner they will “allow” the “bearing” or carrying of firearms ready-to-use. There may also be some restriction allowed for so called “sensitive” places such as schools. I repeat the decision made NO DISTINCTION as to whether the form of carry was open or concealed that I could see. In my opinion the phraseology of the second amendment is clear, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” It says, “shall not be infringed.” The phrase "shall not be infringed" was not dealt with in any meaningful way in this decision. It never ceases to amaze me how you can educate the common sense right out of man and they can come up with such a load of hogwash from something as simple as, “shall not be infringed!” As to the order of the court it says nothing about review by the court of any legislation in 180 days. The order will take affect regardless of anything the legislature passes or fails to pass. If the new law is onerous and oppressive and unconstitutional the whole thing starts again… from scratch…! Never underestimate the Chicago Machine when it gets into full press mode. I like the comment the justices made in Ezzel v. City of Chicago: "...Chicago is thumbing its municipal nose at the Supreme Court." Nevertheless we will celebrate this day and a battle won but will not forget that the war for Liberty continues unabated... It must be won one battle at a time... Regards, Drd
  6. I don't know you Cam, but I would recommend that you not move back to this state. We have won another battle but the war "ain't" over yet... You will be one of the legal non-resident who can buy guns and ammo in Illinois without a FOID card. Our FOID card stuff is not over with yet, although just as unconstitutional as the UUW. Best wishes to you, Drd
  7. They can STILL charge you with UUW/AggUUW! That's what the "180 day" is in the ruling. Nothing changes until the Illinois Legislature passes a bill that's "effective immediately" and Gov. Quinn signs it. Either that or 180 days pass with nothing out of the Capital. Yes they can still charge you... However they would be charging you with an unconstitutional law that is in effect "null and void." Not that that would stop them in many counties. I don't look for it to be an issue in Pike. Regards, Drd
  8. Well this is a great time... Now the Chicago Machine will need to get started on a plan to "thumb the municipal nose" (Ezzel) at the Supreme court and other courts once again. It is up to us to see that that does not happen. We will have to be ready on the phones and to round up 1000s of calls when a bill is crafted... I also noticed the that phrase, "shall not be infringed," was absent from the any of the language of this opinion. At some point we need to emphasize, "shall not be infringed." Regards, Drd...
×
×
  • Create New...