Concealed Carry Referendum Results - 14 counties

[Gary]

From: gary

To: Molly B.

Subject: Jefferson Co. Referendum

 

Molly

I pasted the Illinois Carry notice of the referendum to the Register-News Forum this morning. I don't know what the wording is and that is the key to passage.

Gary

 

From: Molly B. --- IllinoisCarry.com

To: gary

Subject: Jefferson Co. Referendum

 

As I understand this is the wording of the referendum:

Shall the General Assembly enact legislation to permit the carrying of concealed firearms?

 

From: gary

To: Molly B.

Subject: Jefferson Co. Referendum

 

That will pass 64-36.

 

From: gary

To: Molly B. IllinoisCarry.com

Subject: Jefferson Co. Referendum

 

Below is the unofficial final result of the election

With all precincts reporting along with all absentee and “early voting” ballots

 

Concealed firearms in Illinois

 

Yes: 10,007 ----------- 63%

 

No: 5,987-------------- 37%

 

Total: 15994

 

Sorry Molly. I'll try to get the results prediction a little closer next time

[Don Gwinn]

Pretty good. This morning I heard on the news that the referendum passed in Effingham County, but I don't know the margins. I haven't found anything on Greene County yet.

[Molly B.]

Pretty good. This morning I heard on the news that the referendum passed in Effingham County, but I don't know the margins. I haven't found anything on Greene County yet.

Woodford - yes 55%

 

Ogle - yes 53%

 

Crawford - Yes 59%

 

Jasper - Yes 61%

 

Jefferson - Yes 63%

 

Franklin - Yes 71%

 

Saline - Yes 71%

 

Greene - Yes 63%

 

Union - Yes 67%

 

Effingham - Yes 58%

 

McDonough - No 55%

 

LaSalle - No 53%

 

Kendall - No 56%

 

Winnebago - No 51%

[Lou]

10 yes and 4 no.

 

I think every person here needs to point these results out to you state senator and representative.

 

I will be sending those letters out today.

 

Will you?

[Buzzard]

STATE SENATOR FORTY-FIFTH LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT

VOTE FOR NOT MORE THAN 1

MARTY MULCAHEY (DEM). . . . . . . 3,963 25.97

TIM BIVINS (REP) . . . . . . . . 11,294 74.03

 

REP. GENERAL ASSEMBLY

EIGHTY-NINTH REPRESENTATIVE DISTRICT

VOTE FOR NOT MORE THAN 1

WALTER M. JOHNSON (DEM). . . . . . 1,998 29.02

JIM SACIA (REP) . . . . . . . . 4,888 70.98

 

 

My state senator and representative are both in favor of concealed carry and trounced their competition!! What we need to do is call some federal prosecutors and ask them if Blagojevich is paying them under the table to stay in office!

[speedracer815]

I didn't like the wording on the ballot and feel that's why it didn't carry in Winnebago. Much as I hate the idea, it may have turned out differently with wording that included the word "licensing".

[junglebob]

It looks like Saline, Franklin, and Union counties in Southern Illinois might be good counties to work on getting through a county license to carry. Looks like it would have good support 67% voting in favor in Union County. I wonder how it would have done in Jackson county? Not as well I expect only in Jackson, Alexander, Pulaski and Gallatin counties did the majority of the vote go to Obama.

[junglebob]

It looks like Saline, Franklin, and Union counties in Southern Illinois might be good counties to work on getting through a county license to carry. Looks like it would have good support with 67%+ voting in favor, where it was on the ballot. I wonder how it would have done in Jackson county? Not as well I expect, only in Jackson, Alexander, Pulaski,and Gallatin counties did the majority of the vote go to Obama. I think Pulaski and Gallitin have a lot of gun owners. Alexander has Cairo and Jackson county has SIU.

[Kaeghl]

I tend to agree, speed. The wording of the resolution almost guarantee'd a NO vote, because of fear and ignorance. My mother, bless her heart, isn't anti-gun-rights, but is very uncomfortable around guns in general. She trusted my word and what I said when I explained CCW and LTC to her, so she voted for the resolution against her initial response to the idea. So did my aunts, for that matter. It's a pity I don't have 1600 more aunts, eh?

 

The bad part is, it was 'defeated' in Winn Co and now might face an uphill battle when brought up again locally in conversation with office holders. So far, the local Red Star hasn't crowed about how 'sensible and responsible' the sheeple are in 'defeating' anything good for evil g-g-g-guuunnssss.

 

However, it has been brought up. So, now it's time to start the long term task of education, LTE's, watching the breaking news of robberies and crime and hammering it home that LTC is the way to go. I figure for the next election cycle it might take a lot more on-the-ground prep before the resolution is placed on the ballot again, IF we have to go that route.

[SirMatthew]

It looks like Saline, Franklin, and Union counties in Southern Illinois might be good counties to work on getting through a county license to carry. Looks like it would have good support with 67%+ voting in favor, where it was on the ballot. I wonder how it would have done in Jackson county? Not as well I expect, only in Jackson, Alexander, Pulaski,and Gallatin counties did the majority of the vote go to Obama. I think Pulaski and Gallitin have a lot of gun owners. Alexander has Cairo and Jackson county has SIU.

 

Well, I had a long night of Pepto-Bismol, negative emotions, and poor sleep; but it's over now. Still having some lingering disappointment; but that is slowly transforming into new motivation. It is time to take a deep breath, look around at all the changes, and re-evaluate what needs to be done next. Looks like junglebob and a few others beat me to it as they are already looking ahead.

 

I can't keep up on every county, but if you know of some positive changes that have occurred on county boards which are still white or red; let us know so we can try think about trying again with the Pro 2A Resolution in those places. For example, if Champaign reorganizes with a new Chairman we can restart the effort again there.

 

I know it will take some time for reorganization in various government circles, but we should probably start thinking about how we are going to present the Pro2A and CCW referendum results to our leaders. Even with a few white counties the results are overwhelmingly in favor of the 2A, as are the CCW referendum results. Let's not let our leaders hear about these numbers from our opponents who will be using them to justify pre-emptive changes (more gun-control laws!) to suppress and defeat us. Emil Jones is retiring in January and newly-elected or re-elected politicians will step into office with Obama's call for "change" still in their minds. Let's work hard to help bring about some of that positive change we've been wanting for so long.

[TTIN]

It looks like Saline, Franklin, and Union counties in Southern Illinois might be good counties to work on getting through a county license to carry. Looks like it would have good support with 67%+ voting in favor, where it was on the ballot. I wonder how it would have done in Jackson county? Not as well I expect, only in Jackson, Alexander, Pulaski,and Gallatin counties did the majority of the vote go to Obama. I think Pulaski and Gallitin have a lot of gun owners. Alexander has Cairo and Jackson county has SIU.

Bob,at the Franklin Co. referendum meeting,Sen.Forby said that if we need a bill started in the senate,he would be happy to write it.And you know Rep.Bradley will be at it again.

[Buzzard]

I didn't like the wording on the ballot and feel that's why it didn't carry in Winnebago. Much as I hate the idea, it may have turned out differently with wording that included the word "licensing".

Winnebago made a mistake by throwing everything at the wall to see what would stick. In my opinion, they let the horses out of the barn to run wild with the ballot resolution. And I doubt if thirty seconds consideration went into how it was worded. I do commend their desire to promote our cause. But as a few have stated here, we need to keep improving our strategy. And working together, not running wild.

[MARKHOLSTRUM]

tuned out better than I expected....I really wish Winnebego would have passed it but at least they only lost by a very small margin.

[Ol'Coach]

Most, possibly all of us agree about the wording, but that's over and done with.

 

Write it off, and let's get on with better things!

[Buzzard]

Most, possibly all of us agree about the wording, but that's over and done with.

 

Write it off, and let's get on with better things!

 

On this point, I agree. I would suggest a very good thing to do is to better consolidate and organize our efforts by planning and following a strategy. Please let me explain and give you and example.

 

About a year and a half ago Ashdump discovered that the county board of Pike County, Illinois, held a meeting to consider a resolution which would become know as the

Pro Second Amendment resolution. (Pro2A) That thread is now 72 pages long with over 2100 posts that cronicles the Pro2A being passed by 87 of the counties in Illinois. With a little organization, some strategy and two forum threads this is what can be accomplished.

 

Since that time Winnebago county started an effort to bring concealed carry to Illinois. The 'Winnebago County CCW' Subforum has thirty-two threads with innumeral posts and Winnebago county is no closer to enacting a License to Carry law than any other county. The Winnebago County board's multi-pronged plan was to pass three resolutions, hold public forum meetings, and eventually pass a concealed carry law in Winnebago county only. They basically planned to throw everything they could at Springfield and the media to attract some attention. I find it ironic that the Winnebago county ballot referendum didn't pass. Winnebago county asked every county in Illinois to put this on the ballot. Fourteen did. Ten passed. Four did not.

 

Now wait a minute, I know some of you are screaming,

"BUZZARD! Will you PLEASE stop kicking this DEAD HORSE!!

 

What I am trying to do is make my point that we need to use a strategy. We need to plan. Organize. And follow the plan. The Winnebago effort has sent people running in all directions. Some people want a state wide law, some want county by county, some don't care just "gimme somethin!" Some want a Concealed Carry Weapon permit, some want a License to Carry This is not going to work if we can't even agree what it is we want. Think about it.

 

The Pro2A works because we kept it simple. We discussed stategy. We stayed organized. And followed a plan. And it still seems to be working.

 

Comments?

[Molly B.]

You are right Buzz. Keep it simple, keep to the issue of statewide License to Carry.

 

The town hall meetings did a great job of getting the media involved, it educated citizens about the other 48 states and emphasized that Illinois needs to join the rest of the nation. I cannot begin to tell you how many people came up to me in the past few weeks to say they had NO IDEA 48 states have some sort of LTC law in effect - the very next words out of their mouths were, "What is with Illinois???"

 

We have a new legislative session beginning in Jan. 09. All old bills not passed in the 07-08 session will die, new bills will be introduced and trust me one or more of those new bills will be for License to Carry a firearm.

 

Let's continue the effort to educate Illinoisians with town hall meetings, let's get behind the new LTC bill. Simple and goes straight to the issue.

 

Molly B.

[SirMatthew]

On this point, I agree. I would suggest a very good thing to do is to better consolidate and organize our efforts by planning and following a strategy.

 

The Pro2A works because we kept it simple. We discussed stategy. We stayed organized. And followed a plan. And it still seems to be working.

 

Comments?

 

I think a lot has been done by both small/separate group efforts and individuals doing their own thing. This process seemed to work well when working with individual counties, but we are now getting close to advancing things to the state level. I have to agree strategy and organization are more needed at this stage in the game.

 

For my thoughts, I'd like to get some higher level politicians involved in our discussions not only for their support to our cause but for their guidance in creating a strategy to make it happen. I'd also like to see if we can get various petitions or something going which can be useful to our cause. For example, having a single statement signed by the chiefs or sheriffs of 75 Illinois county police forces would add quite a bit of support when we present everything to our leaders. Having another signed by 65 gun shops would make a statement too. (I'm making these numbers up for example only).

 

Should we start a few new threads to contain the post-election regrouping of our thoughts, ideas, and plans as they relate to CCW, Pro2A, and overall strategy in how we are going to progress with a plan to get this info to our leaders?

[speedracer815]

I just got the following email from a formerly very anti-gun friend:

 

"and for your info...i voted yes to allow peeps to carry concealed

weapons. If it wasn't for your stubborness in showing me actual facts

, I never would have voted yes"

 

Score one for me!

[Molly B.]

Should we start a few new threads to contain the post-election regrouping of our thoughts, ideas, and plans as they relate to CCW, Pro2A, and overall strategy in how we are going to progress with a plan to get this info to our leaders?

I think that is a good idea . . . let's pool our ideas.

[Buzzard]

On this point, I agree. I would suggest a very good thing to do is to better consolidate and organize our efforts by planning and following a strategy.

 

The Pro2A works because we kept it simple. We discussed stategy. We stayed organized. And followed a plan. And it still seems to be working.

 

Comments?

 

I think a lot has been done by both small/separate group efforts and individuals doing their own thing. This process seemed to work well when working with individual counties, but we are now getting close to advancing things to the state level. I have to agree strategy and organization are more needed at this stage in the game.

 

For my thoughts, I'd like to get some higher level politicians involved in our discussions not only for their support to our cause but for their guidance in creating a strategy to make it happen. I'd also like to see if we can get various petitions or something going which can be useful to our cause. For example, having a single statement signed by the chiefs or sheriffs of 75 Illinois county police forces would add quite a bit of support when we present everything to our leaders. Having another signed by 65 gun shops would make a statement too. (I'm making these numbers up for example only).

 

Should we start a few new threads to contain the post-election regrouping of our thoughts, ideas, and plans as they relate to CCW, Pro2A, and overall strategy in how we are going to progress with a plan to get this info to our leaders?

I think we need stop calling our goal "concealed carry" and always refer to it as "License to Carry." The reason being is "concealed" sounds sneaky or illegal. We need only to look at how successfully the anti's have used "assault weapon" to demonize semi-auto sporter rifles.

 

Where "License to Carry" long-term planning is concerned, we need to curtail and restrict threads from being started easily. This keeps things simpler, by eliminating numerous threads, needless threads and missed posts due to more threads than are necessary. IMO, this is one reason why the Pro2A has done so well.

 

We need to stay organized. This very thread and discussion should not be here in the "Illinois Politics" forum because it belongs in "concealed carry" forum. It just happened to be started by a new member and we all need time to learn the ropes, correct? (No big thing, Gary.) But it does illustrate how easily an individual, but important post can be missed.

 

---------------------------------------

 

Therefore, for the above reasons, I propose a "Illinois 'License to Carry' Organizational Thread" in the "Concealed Carry Forum. This could be compared to the 'Pro2A resolution' thread. Everything would run through this thread first, where everyone could find it. In this thread we would bring ideas forward. We would then discuss and debate ideas on their merit. This could be our "think tank" where ideas would either be implimented or tossed out. Needless chatter, posting, and joking should be avoided.

 

Comments?

[SirMatthew]

I think we need stop calling our goal "concealed carry" and always refer to it as "License to Carry." The reason being is "concealed" sounds sneaky or illegal. We need only to look at how successfully the anti's have used "assault weapon" to demonize semi-auto sporter rifles.

 

Where "License to Carry" long-term planning is concerned, we need to curtail and restrict threads from being started easily. This keeps things simpler, by eliminating numerous threads, needless threads and missed posts due to more threads than are necessary. IMO, this is one reason why the Pro2A has done so well.

 

We need to stay organized. This very thread and discussion should not be here in the "Illinois Politics" forum because it belongs in "concealed carry" forum. It just happened to be started by a new member and we all need time to learn the ropes, correct? (No big thing, Gary.) But it does illustrate how easily an individual, but important post can be missed.

 

---------------------------------------

 

Therefore, for the above reasons, I propose a "Illinois 'License to Carry' Organizational Thread" in the "Concealed Carry Forum. This could be compared to the 'Pro2A resolution' thread. Everything would run through this thread first, where everyone could find it. In this thread we would bring ideas forward. We would then discuss and debate ideas on their merit. This could be our "think tank" where ideas would either be implimented or tossed out. Needless chatter, posting, and joking should be avoided.

 

Comments?

 

Old habits die hard I think, but LTC is good. The thread idea sounds great.

[Chris]

I think we need stop calling our goal "concealed carry" and always refer to it as "License to Carry." The reason being is "concealed" sounds sneaky or illegal. We need only to look at how successfully the anti's have used "assault weapon" to demonize semi-auto sporter rifles.

 

Where "License to Carry" long-term planning is concerned, we need to curtail and restrict threads from being started easily. This keeps things simpler, by eliminating numerous threads, needless threads and missed posts due to more threads than are necessary. IMO, this is one reason why the Pro2A has done so well.

 

We need to stay organized. This very thread and discussion should not be here in the "Illinois Politics" forum because it belongs in "concealed carry" forum. It just happened to be started by a new member and we all need time to learn the ropes, correct? (No big thing, Gary.) But it does illustrate how easily an individual, but important post can be missed.

 

---------------------------------------

 

Therefore, for the above reasons, I propose a "Illinois 'License to Carry' Organizational Thread" in the "Concealed Carry Forum. This could be compared to the 'Pro2A resolution' thread. Everything would run through this thread first, where everyone could find it. In this thread we would bring ideas forward. We would then discuss and debate ideas on their merit. This could be our "think tank" where ideas would either be implimented or tossed out. Needless chatter, posting, and joking should be avoided.

 

Comments?

 

Old habits die hard I think, but LTC is good. The thread idea sounds great.

 

Concealed Carry is sometimes refereed to as Discreet Carry.

[papa]

My thoughts... My Pa. permit says...... license to carry. Seems to me we should stay with that terminology. I agree that concealed carry could be a bitter pill for some to swallow when they don't understand the issue completely.

Just my .01 worth.

[Buzzard]

Concealed Carry is sometimes refereed to as Discreet Carry.

 

My thoughts... My Pa. permit says...... license to carry. Seems to me we should stay with that terminology. I agree that concealed carry could be a bitter pill for some to swallow when they don't understand the issue completely.

Just my .01 worth.

"License to Carry" makes carrying a firearm sound like driving a car, which is a normal, everyday thing for everybody. If we want the public to start accepting License to Carry, we have to start making them feel more at ease when they hear about it. By not adapting to a common, universally used term it will take longer to train the public to become accustomed to it.

 

Don't forget the lesson we learned from the anti's. They wanted to demonize certain rifles so they started using the term "assault weapon" as often as they could. Just as one would train a dog through voice command, they trained the public through repetition to fear any firearm called an "assault rifle."

 

What we must strive for is to use phrases like:

 

"I support the common practice of License to Carry."

 

" My family would be safer with License to Carry"

 

"Don't you know many states have License to Carry?"

 

"Indiana has had License to Carry for years!"

 

 

As in any training, regular practice and repetition brings rapid retention. The more the public hears it, the sooner they will learn to accept it.

[GWBH]

As in any training, regular practice and repetition brings rapid retention. The more the public hears it, the sooner they will learn to accept it.

 

That is exactly how liberals push their agendas and it works.

 

Indiana permit says - "License to Carry Handgun"

[Buzzard]

As in any training, regular practice and repetition brings rapid retention. The more the public hears it, the sooner they will learn to accept it.

 

That is exactly how liberals push their agendas and it works.

 

Indiana permit says - "License to Carry Handgun"

 

We can tweak the actual permit wording in the legislative stage. Our first hurdle is to train ourselves not to say concealed carry which sounds to the public like carry concealed which they read in the newspaper when dangerous people are arrested. We need to retrain ourselves not to call it concealed carry.

 

Imagine someone asked you,

 

"What's this concealed carrying of guns about?

I thought they arrest people for that, and

now they want to ALLOW it?"

 

It sounds quite commonplace to say,

 

"Oh! you mean being licensed to carry,

like most other states allow folks to do."

[GNHNTN]

I agree, "License To Carry" is probably a better way to state it, simply because concealed carry is our goal and a license to carry is how we are going to achieve said goal. If it wasn't for human nature always wanting to shorten phrases we would simply refer to it as a concealed carry "permit". Kind of hard to shorten the "legal" aspect of LICENSE to Carry.

[junglebob]

Concealed Carry is sometimes refereed to as Discreet Carry.

 

My thoughts... My Pa. permit says...... license to carry. Seems to me we should stay with that terminology. I agree that concealed carry could be a bitter pill for some to swallow when they don't understand the issue completely.

Just my .01 worth.

"License to Carry" makes carrying a firearm sound like driving a car, which is a normal, everyday thing for everybody. If we want the public to start accepting License to Carry, we have to start making them feel more at ease when they hear about it. By not adapting to a common, universally used term it will take longer to train the public to become accustomed to it.

 

Don't forget the lesson we learned from the anti's. They wanted to demonize certain rifles so they started using the term "assault weapon" as often as they could. Just as one would train a dog through voice command, they trained the public through repetition to fear any firearm called an "assault rifle."

 

What we must strive for is to use phrases like:

 

"I support the common practice of License to Carry."

 

" My family would be safer with License to Carry"

 

"Don't you know many states have License to Carry?"

 

"Indiana has had License to Carry for years!"

 

 

As in any training, regular practice and repetition brings rapid retention. The more the public hears it, the sooner they will learn to accept it.

If during the discussions in Winnebago county everyone who was pro-carry had referred to it as license to carry, it might have been put on the ballot that way. I think you have a good suggestion here, I'll have to memorize those phrases for future use.

[Silver Guardian]

I hate to pee on this fire, but if this managed to pass in 10 out of 14 counties. What makes you think that "rewording" things would have changed the outcome? Was the phrasing not uniform across the 14 counties?

[Chris]

I hate to pee on this fire, but if this managed to pass in 10 out of 14 counties. What makes you think that "rewording" things would have changed the outcome? Was the phrasing not uniform across the 14 counties?

 

The phrasing in the question as some one said was similar to if someone had done a referendum in the early 1900s for Woman's Suffrage in this way "Do you think dumb broads should vote?"