Jump to content


Photo

Wilson v. Cook County (Semi-Auto Gun Ban)


  • Please log in to reply
769 replies to this topic

#181 Federal Farmer

    David Lawson

  • Members
  • 9,346 posts
  • Joined: 03-January 07

Posted 25 May 2011 - 03:49 PM

FYI, this morning SCOIL accepted the case!!! :thumbsup:


Congratulations! This is awesome news. Next time you have to beat Todd here! LOL.

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men [and women] stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

--George Orwell

-- Certified something-or-other by various organizations and governmental entities.

#182 JR1987

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 810 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 11

Posted 25 May 2011 - 03:59 PM

Fantastic news indeed! I hope to be hearing more about this soon. While I live in a home rule city, I am a strong opponent of this law.

#183 bob

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,153 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 05

Posted 25 May 2011 - 04:39 PM

FYI, this morning SCOIL accepted the case!!! Posted Image


Under normal circumstances I would bet we lose there. Under Illinois law, the case is a loser.

But, they may not want to be over ridden by federal courts on federal grounds.

Or they may legitimately punt it to the federal courts on the grounds that it is not something there is enough case law for them to determine based on 2A considerations. I suspect they will almost have to do this since there just is not much case law at the federal level on this kind of thing that the court could use to come to a decision.

Unless they decide the law is too vague and that they don't need to rule on other issues and strike the vaguest parts. Then the county can make minor changes to the law and we start all over again. Or if the parst stricken are not that important to the county, they just accept it and do nothing. That would probably be the worst possible decision for us, so I sort of expect that.
bob

Disclaimers: I am not a lawyer, cop, soldier, gunsmith, politician, plumber, electrician, or a professional practitioner of many of the other things I comment on in this forum.

The opinions expressed by this poster do not reflect the official stance of Illinois Carry. Apparently there was some confusion on the part of at least one person that it does, and I want to make things clear that my opinion is my own and that whatever the official stance of IC is or is not at present, it may or may not reflect my own opinion.

http://ilbob.blogspot.com/

#184 Druid

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,222 posts
  • Joined: 08-March 05

Posted 25 May 2011 - 04:46 PM

FYI, this morning SCOIL accepted the case!!! Posted Image


Under normal circumstances I would bet we lose there. Under Illinois law, the case is a loser.

But, they may not want to be over ridden by federal courts on federal grounds.

Or they may legitimately punt it to the federal courts on the grounds that it is not something there is enough case law for them to determine based on 2A considerations. I suspect they will almost have to do this since there just is not much case law at the federal level on this kind of thing that the court could use to come to a decision.

Unless they decide the law is too vague and that they don't need to rule on other issues and strike the vaguest parts. Then the county can make minor changes to the law and we start all over again. That would probably be the worst possible decision for us, so I sort of expect that.


If we do win here, Cook County would have to think very carefully if they want to appeal it to the SCOTUS. They wouldn't want to make things worse for themselves with a loss there.

#185 bob

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,153 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 05

Posted 25 May 2011 - 04:56 PM

If we do win here, Cook County would have to think very carefully if they want to appeal it to the SCOTUS. They wouldn't want to make things worse for themselves with a loss there.


I think it might depend on what grounds the state supreme court finds. If it is on state law, it is over. The federal courts do not rule on matters of state law.

They might be able to appeal if the state supreme court determined it in our favor based on 2A grounds, as that is a federal matter. But, I just don't know if that is the case or not. Maybe someone out there knows for sure on this point and can enlighten us.
bob

Disclaimers: I am not a lawyer, cop, soldier, gunsmith, politician, plumber, electrician, or a professional practitioner of many of the other things I comment on in this forum.

The opinions expressed by this poster do not reflect the official stance of Illinois Carry. Apparently there was some confusion on the part of at least one person that it does, and I want to make things clear that my opinion is my own and that whatever the official stance of IC is or is not at present, it may or may not reflect my own opinion.

http://ilbob.blogspot.com/

#186 Federal Farmer

    David Lawson

  • Members
  • 9,346 posts
  • Joined: 03-January 07

Posted 25 May 2011 - 05:10 PM

If we do win here, Cook County would have to think very carefully if they want to appeal it to the SCOTUS. They wouldn't want to make things worse for themselves with a loss there.


I think it might depend on what grounds the state supreme court finds. If it is on state law, it is over. The federal courts do not rule on matters of state law.

They might be able to appeal if the state supreme court determined it in our favor based on 2A grounds, as that is a federal matter. But, I just don't know if that is the case or not. Maybe someone out there knows for sure on this point and can enlighten us.


I believe Wilson is challenging on 2nd Amendment / 14th Amendment grounds so a loss could be appealed. But, IANAL.

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men [and women] stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

--George Orwell

-- Certified something-or-other by various organizations and governmental entities.

#187 Druid

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,222 posts
  • Joined: 08-March 05

Posted 25 May 2011 - 07:56 PM

FYI, this morning SCOIL accepted the case!!! :thumbsup:


Congratulations! This is awesome news. Next time you have to beat Todd here! LOL.


LoL I was busy earlier and didn't have a chance to check any other threads until now.

#188 bob

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,153 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 05

Posted 25 May 2011 - 08:48 PM

If we do win here, Cook County would have to think very carefully if they want to appeal it to the SCOTUS. They wouldn't want to make things worse for themselves with a loss there.


I think it might depend on what grounds the state supreme court finds. If it is on state law, it is over. The federal courts do not rule on matters of state law.

They might be able to appeal if the state supreme court determined it in our favor based on 2A grounds, as that is a federal matter. But, I just don't know if that is the case or not. Maybe someone out there knows for sure on this point and can enlighten us.


I believe Wilson is challenging on 2nd Amendment / 14th Amendment grounds so a loss could be appealed. But, IANAL.



I don't think it matters what Wilson is alleging as far as federal constitutional issues go, if the state supreme court only rules on the state law aspect of it.

I don't think you could actually appeal any decision of the state court so much as you start a new action in the federal courts, but I might be in error there. In any case, it is a legal difference and not a substantive one to us.

I think the way it works is if the court strikes the law down on grounds of vagueness, we win, and no one has grounds to appeal. You can't appeal a state law to the federal courts that has been struck by the state courts.

I think there have been some cases where localities have had an adverse decision from their own state supreme courts and somehow got it reversed by the federal courts, but I am fairly sure they were all state court rulings based on federal law and the federal courts decided the state courts ruled incorrectly on what federal law meant. I am not sure a locality in Illinois is allowed to bring such an action though.

Notice lots of "I thinks" above, as IANAL and am not sure of some of this stuff.
bob

Disclaimers: I am not a lawyer, cop, soldier, gunsmith, politician, plumber, electrician, or a professional practitioner of many of the other things I comment on in this forum.

The opinions expressed by this poster do not reflect the official stance of Illinois Carry. Apparently there was some confusion on the part of at least one person that it does, and I want to make things clear that my opinion is my own and that whatever the official stance of IC is or is not at present, it may or may not reflect my own opinion.

http://ilbob.blogspot.com/

#189 Druid

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,222 posts
  • Joined: 08-March 05

Posted 25 May 2011 - 10:04 PM

I asked an ISRA attorney what the next steps would be if we won or lost. If we lose, we appeal to SCOTUS, if we win Cook County may appeal to SCOTUS. The case argues a number of issues, from Vagueness to 2nd Amendment rights.

#190 bob

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,153 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 05

Posted 26 May 2011 - 04:41 AM

I asked an ISRA attorney what the next steps would be if we won or lost. If we lose, we appeal to SCOTUS, if we win Cook County may appeal to SCOTUS. The case argues a number of issues, from Vagueness to 2nd Amendment rights.



Maybe when you get a chance you could ask them my question about whether there is an appeal route to either side if it is struck on state law grounds. Is vagueness a state law issue?
bob

Disclaimers: I am not a lawyer, cop, soldier, gunsmith, politician, plumber, electrician, or a professional practitioner of many of the other things I comment on in this forum.

The opinions expressed by this poster do not reflect the official stance of Illinois Carry. Apparently there was some confusion on the part of at least one person that it does, and I want to make things clear that my opinion is my own and that whatever the official stance of IC is or is not at present, it may or may not reflect my own opinion.

http://ilbob.blogspot.com/

#191 Tvandermyde

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,809 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 09

Posted 26 May 2011 - 07:29 AM

The issue before the court now, is how to apply Heller and McDonald, and how does that square with the Cook Ordinance?

How far does the right extend? What guns are covered or protected?
While a 9 mm or .40 caliber bullet may or may not expand, it is an undeniable fact that a .45 caliber bullet will never shrink.
 
my posts are moderated due to some butthurt on the part of IC people not liking my comments at times

#192 Sigma

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,011 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 09

Posted 26 May 2011 - 03:59 PM

If we loose couldnt they rewrite a worst bill like Chicago did thats not so vague?
I think a win would be a ruling that says you cant ban an entire class of weapons commonly used.
Exodus 22:2-3
If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed.

Gun control is not about guns, it's about control. Once they have all the guns, they'll also have complete control.-Abolt

Guns kill people just like beds get girls pregnant.

#193 Tvandermyde

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,809 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 09

Posted 27 May 2011 - 09:42 AM

Dending on what the courts says they could try a new ordinance, but if they do what we want, semi-auto bans go bye bye.

It will be interesting to see who jumps in. I could see this getting as many briefs as Heller
While a 9 mm or .40 caliber bullet may or may not expand, it is an undeniable fact that a .45 caliber bullet will never shrink.
 
my posts are moderated due to some butthurt on the part of IC people not liking my comments at times

#194 JR1987

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 810 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 11

Posted 27 May 2011 - 10:10 AM

I really hope it is done away with. It is a rather silly law and does nothing to protect anyone. Thank God my city is home rule.

#195 Druid

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,222 posts
  • Joined: 08-March 05

Posted 22 June 2011 - 03:41 PM

Just wanted to let people know that we were granted an extension to file our briefs. They are due Aug 1st. The extension was requested so that there was time to

1) Improve and expand the arguments
2) Give others time to file amicus briefs.

Amicus briefs anticipated from:
  • Alan Gura for 2nd amendment foundation
  • NRA will come in with an amicus brielf, not sure who is doing that yet
  • Possibly two or three other organizations who are considering it


#196 GarandFan

    Member

  • Members
  • 11,772 posts
  • Joined: 06-February 07

Posted 22 June 2011 - 06:54 PM

Congratulations, Druid!!


I hope the heck the briefs center on the bright and longstanding line between semi and full auto, that semiautos have been in common use for lawful purposes for more than a century ... and that they are the type of firearm most commonly chosen by Americans for the core purpose of self defense.

You know for sure the defense will try to carve out a special (and purportedly especially dangerous) type of semiauto firearm. There must be a bright line for the court, and that bright line is most obviously centered on the firing mechanism. When they (the defense) starts counting ergonomic doo-dads and accessories such as pistol grips, stocks, and flash suppressors ... things get inane and arbitrary right quick.
"It takes all the running you can do just to keep in the same place."
Lewis Carroll, 1872

#197 colt-45

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,385 posts
  • Joined: 29-April 11

Posted 14 July 2011 - 10:56 AM

http://www.isra.org/cook_county/

#198 colt-45

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,385 posts
  • Joined: 29-April 11

Posted 14 July 2011 - 10:59 AM

can some one tell me what this means?

#199 mikew

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,069 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 04

Posted 14 July 2011 - 11:51 AM

can some one tell me what this means?

That page needs updating, sorry.

#200 Tvandermyde

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,809 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 09

Posted 14 July 2011 - 11:53 AM

old page the case was remanded in light of the McDonald decision and they got it wrong twice. We are now up with a briefing schedule in front of the Supreme court
While a 9 mm or .40 caliber bullet may or may not expand, it is an undeniable fact that a .45 caliber bullet will never shrink.
 
my posts are moderated due to some butthurt on the part of IC people not liking my comments at times

#201 colt-45

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,385 posts
  • Joined: 29-April 11

Posted 14 July 2011 - 12:05 PM

old page the case was remanded in light of the McDonald decision and they got it wrong twice. We are now up with a briefing schedule in front of the Supreme court

ok...thanks todd, didn't know.

#202 JR1987

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 810 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 11

Posted 14 July 2011 - 12:32 PM

Good news, hopefully this goes all the way and overturns this nonsense.

#203 Druid

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,222 posts
  • Joined: 08-March 05

Posted 23 September 2011 - 09:49 AM

No updates here in a long time, and there probably won't be for a little while. The county asked for another continuance. No arguments likely until January.

#204 Sigma

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,011 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 09

Posted 23 September 2011 - 09:52 PM

If they give time for questions tomorrow at the GRPC I will ask about this
Exodus 22:2-3
If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed.

Gun control is not about guns, it's about control. Once they have all the guns, they'll also have complete control.-Abolt

Guns kill people just like beds get girls pregnant.

#205 Howard Roark

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,101 posts
  • Joined: 17-August 09

Posted 28 September 2011 - 01:13 PM

Anybody notice that AR-15 on stage at GRPC in Cook County? ( LOL! ). I imagine the bolt could have been removed or something...
Howard Roark
Yay guns!!! boooo anti-gunners!

#206 GarandFan

    Member

  • Members
  • 11,772 posts
  • Joined: 06-February 07

Posted 28 September 2011 - 01:40 PM

Anybody notice that AR-15 on stage at GRPC in Cook County? ( LOL! ). I imagine the bolt could have been removed or something...


Yes. It was an Armalite National Match. Why would the bolt need removing?

Besides, it gets the anti-panties in a bunch.
"It takes all the running you can do just to keep in the same place."
Lewis Carroll, 1872

#207 Drylok

    Member

  • Members
  • 8,739 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 08

Posted 28 September 2011 - 01:48 PM

Anybody notice that AR-15 on stage at GRPC in Cook County? ( LOL! ). I imagine the bolt could have been removed or something...


Yes. It was an Armalite National Match. Why would the bolt need removing?

Besides, it gets the anti-panties in a bunch.


Isn't illegal to be in possession of ARs in Cook county?
"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks"
-Thomas Jefferson-

Now two flags fly above my land that really sum up how I feel. One is the colors that fly high and proud the red, the white, the blue. The other ones got a rattle snake with a simple statement made, don't tread on me, is what it says and I'll take that to my grave
-Aaron Lewis-

#208 Molly B.

    IllinoisCarry spokesperson

  • Moderator
  • 16,287 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 05

Posted 28 September 2011 - 02:34 PM

It was in the possession of the manufacturer, Mr. Mark Westrom. It was legal.
"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Adams

#209 Sigma

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,011 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 09

Posted 28 September 2011 - 02:50 PM

Howard, you were there and I didnt get to meet you! Drats!
Exodus 22:2-3
If the thief is found breaking in, and he is struck so that he dies, there shall be no guilt for his bloodshed.

Gun control is not about guns, it's about control. Once they have all the guns, they'll also have complete control.-Abolt

Guns kill people just like beds get girls pregnant.

#210 stm

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,971 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 11

Posted 28 September 2011 - 03:10 PM

Anybody notice that AR-15 on stage at GRPC in Cook County? ( LOL! ). I imagine the bolt could have been removed or something...


Yes. It was an Armalite National Match. Why would the bolt need removing?

Besides, it gets the anti-panties in a bunch.

I noticed that in the pics and was kinda scratchin my head about that. Thanks for clarifying things, Molly. I wish I could have made it there, but I had a previous commitment.

I just bought two raffle tickets this week for an Armalite NM rifle from my local club. Keeping my fingers crossed!

yea everyone makes fun of the redneck till the zombies show up. . .





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users