Jump to content


Photo

Criminal reform bill


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#31 ragsbo

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,957 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 05

Posted 14 January 2021 - 06:51 PM

I have heard that it has a provision that would prevent schools from having a police/ resource officer in the building without a bonifide threat. Anyone know if it does? Don't really want to read it myself to see



#32 ragsbo

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,957 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 05

Posted 14 January 2021 - 07:16 PM

I was wrong, it was another bill someone filed.

 

https://wsiltv.com/2...OWcZr1b4iHg0w34



#33 Euler

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,252 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 18

Posted 14 January 2021 - 07:58 PM

I have heard that it has a provision that would prevent schools from having a police/ resource officer in the building without a bonifide threat. Anyone know if it does? Don't really want to read it myself to see


FWIW, since your message prompted me to look, here's the only reference to school officers that I found in bill.

(a) The Board shall develop or approve a course for school resource officers as defined in Section 10-20.68 of the School Code.
...
(c) The Board shall develop a process allowing law enforcement agencies to request a waiver of this training requirement for any specific individual assigned as a school resource officer. Applications for these waivers may be submitted by a local governmental law enforcement agency chief administrator for any officer whose prior training and experience may qualify for a waiver of the training requirement of this subsection (c). The Board may issue a waiver at its discretion, based solely on the prior training and experience of an officer.


So apparently a local PD could previously request less training for school officers, but now any local agency (like the school itself?) can request less training for school officers.

The only other reference I saw regarding schools was

(a) Upon verified petition by the State, the court shall hold a hearing and may deny to determine whether bail should be denied to a defendant pretrial release only if:
...
(6) the defendant is charged with any of these violations under the Criminal Code of 2012 and it is alleged that the defendant's pretrial releases poses a real and present threat to the physical safety of any specifically identifiable person or persons.
...
(G) Section 24-3.3 (unlawful sale or delivery of a firearms on the premises of any school);
...


In other words, there is a list of crimes for which a defendant may be denied pretrial release. Unlawful sale or delivery of a firearms on the premises of any school (as if there's any lawful delivery or sale of firearms at school) is one for which a defendant may or may not be denied pretrial release. For any crime not on the list, the defendant cannot be remanded.
The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.

- Albert Camus, Resistance, Rebellion, and Death, 1960.


#34 snooter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 898 posts
  • Joined: 16-November 07

Posted 14 January 2021 - 08:30 PM

Best to just say i am done.....

#35 mikeyk101

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 217 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 15

Posted 14 January 2021 - 08:36 PM

[quote name="Euler" post="1299789" timestamp="1610675932"][quote name="ragsbo" post="1299782" timestamp="1610671912"]I have heard that it has a provision that would prevent schools from having a police/ resource officer in the building without a bonifide threat. Anyone know if it does? Don't really want to read it myself to see[/quote]FWIW, since your message prompted me to look, here's the only reference to school officers that I found in bill.

I think he means this one:

https://www.ilga.gov...0&SessionID=110

Synopsis As Introduced
Amends the School Code. Provides that law enforcement officers shall not maintain a presence on school grounds unless there exists an imminent threat of danger to students at the school in question or there is reason to believe that urgent and immediate action is necessary to prevent such danger to students. Makes conforming changes. Defines "school grounds". Effective immediately.

Edited by mikeyk101, 14 January 2021 - 08:36 PM.


#36 Euler

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,252 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 18

Posted 14 January 2021 - 09:32 PM

...
I think he means this one:
...


Ragsbo originally meant the criminal reform bill that's the topic. I was already looking when he posted his correction. It's a big bill. It took a while.
The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.

- Albert Camus, Resistance, Rebellion, and Death, 1960.


#37 mikeyk101

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 217 posts
  • Joined: 25-February 15

Posted 14 January 2021 - 10:24 PM

It's crazy. There is no reason, absolutely no reason for an amendment to be that large. There is no way that any of the Representatives or Senators were aware of every provision before they cast their deciding vote. It should be broken down into many much smaller bills so they can be thoroughly understood and easier to comprehend. All you have to do to see this is look at all the statutes that are being affected by just this one amendment. The biggest problem with this stuff is that ignorance of laws isn't a defense. There is no way humanly possible to go through a day without violating at least 1 or 2 laws and probably not be aware that you have done so. This completely defeats the purpose of having laws in the first place. How many laws have been passed that either are already covered by other laws on the books just so a "lawmaker" can take credit or even contradict other laws?

Sorry, rant off...

Edited by mikeyk101, 14 January 2021 - 10:26 PM.


#38 Felixd

  • Members
  • 18 posts
  • Joined: 01-March 19

Posted 15 January 2021 - 09:41 AM

The ramification of this legislation is, following JaBa the Putzs signature, your CCL is far more critical to you than ever before. This is especially important if you live near any of the Socialist Democrat enclaves in Illinois. Local law enforcement will be engaged in catch and release, forced on them by legislation, until they realize the futility and quit. Crime in Cook County, specifically Chicago, will increase rapidly as the States Attorney in that county will not adequately charge criminal offenders. The transition to chaos may take a while, but it will get there.

Dont be like many Ive seen who have the CCL and who do not carry a gun. You need it starting today.

Edited by Felixd, 15 January 2021 - 09:48 AM.


#39 Jeffrey

    Member

  • Members
  • 6,930 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 08

Posted 15 January 2021 - 09:47 AM

[quote name="ragsbo" post="1299782" timestamp="1610671912"]I have heard that it has a provision that would prevent schools from having a police/ resource officer in the building without a bonifide threat. Anyone know if it does? Don't really want to read it myself to see
FWIW, since your message prompted me to look, here's the only reference to school officers that I found in bill.

I think he means this one:

https://www.ilga.gov...0&SessionID=110

Synopsis As Introduced
Amends the School Code. Provides that law enforcement officers shall not maintain a presence on school grounds unless there exists an imminent threat of danger to students at the school in question or there is reason to believe that urgent and immediate action is necessary to prevent such danger to students. Makes conforming changes. Defines "school grounds". Effective immediately.

Words have meanings.  Shall can also mean shall not from what I learned years ago here.  What a s hole of a state we are in.  Lord knows the same maroons that will vote in favor of this bill are also going to vote in favor of more security for themselves after the "insurrection" we had last week.  


...and justice for all

YOUR WALLET, the only place Democrats care to drill

#40 jackinelgin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 10

Posted 15 January 2021 - 11:31 AM

 

 

 

[quote name="ragsbo" post="1299782" timestamp="1610671912"]I have heard that it has a provision that would prevent schools from having a police/ resource officer in the building without a bonifide threat. Anyone know if it does? Don't really want to read it myself to see
FWIW, since your message prompted me to look, here's the only reference to school officers that I found in bill.

I think he means this one:

https://www.ilga.gov...0&SessionID=110
:D
Synopsis As Introduced
Amends the School Code. Provides that law enforcement officers shall not maintain a presence on school grounds unless there exists an imminent threat of danger to students at the school in question or there is reason to believe that urgent and immediate action is necessary to prevent such danger to students. Makes conforming changes. Defines "school grounds". Effective immediately.

Words have meanings.  Shall can also mean shall not from what I learned years ago here.  What a s hole of a state we are in.  Lord knows the same maroons that will vote in favor of this bill are also going to vote in favor of more security for themselves after the "insurrection" we had last week.  

 

Hey-Don't indict all Maroons[Elgin High School Maroon here and oldest grandson is a Robinson HS Maroon]. :D



#41 JTHunter

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,262 posts
  • Joined: 29-November 13

Posted 15 January 2021 - 08:29 PM

Belleville Township H.S. West MAROONS here.


“We, the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.” - - Abraham Lincoln

“Small minds adhere to the letter of the law; great minds dispense Justice.” - - S. C. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes

Life member NAHC, Endowment member NRA

#42 BobPistol

    Member

  • Members
  • 9,728 posts
  • Joined: 24-February 13

Posted 16 January 2021 - 02:04 PM

Remember "shall" means "shall not" for cronies, so a crony gets arrested, they won't get charged.


The Second Amendment of the Constitution protects the rest.

#43 hceuterpe

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 65 posts
  • Joined: 15-April 14

Posted 16 January 2021 - 03:15 PM

News media confused again. Bill to big for them to go and look I guess.

 

Many of the most debated aspects, such as ending qualified immunity for law enforcement, were reduced or removed from the bill following heavy opposition from law enforcement, labor unions, prosecutors and municipal representatives.

 

I'm going to refrain from throwing my two cents in here on qualified immunity itself.   But seeing as how qualified immunity is a legal priniciple that has been ruled by the Supreme Courts in several cases over the years.  I don't see how it's going to stick if the bill looks to diminish this at the state level.  But then again maybe the majority in the state assembly also doesn't care in how it's supposed to work...

In regards to limiting use of force in this bill.  Personally, I think CPD is substantially culpable, compared to the local PD departments in the rest of the state. Just look at how they are handling (or lack thereof) the on-going consent decree.  






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users