Skorpius Posted June 22, 2011 at 09:01 PM Posted June 22, 2011 at 09:01 PM http://tinyurl.com/5w9h9pw By Ray Long Clout Street 2:57 p.m. CDT, June 22, 2011 SPRINGFIELD --- Gov. Pat Quinn today stood solidly today behind his opposition to allowing concealed weapons in Illinois even though Wisconsin is on the verge of becoming the 49th state with some form of such a law. “We must ensure the safety of our neighborhoods, and allowing concealed carry does not advance that goal,” Quinn’s office said in a statement. “Our streets need to be safer, and a concealed carry law would put first responders and the public at risk by allowing more weapons – hidden weapons – in public places."But the leading proponent of allowing concealed weapons in Illinois sees the Wisconsin legislature's to approve a concealed carry measure as a boost to his cause. Rep. Brandon Phelps, D-Harrisburg, said Wisconsin will give him momentum for a potential vote when Illinois lawmakers return for the fall session. “It’s embarrassing. We’re the last one,” said Rep. Brandon Phelps, D-Harrisburg. “Every other state tends to believe this is a right, not a privilege, and they have let their law-abiding citizens do it, and I don’t know why we should be any different.” Phelps' legislation failed in the House by six votes in the spring. Phelps said he would consider retooling his legislation, including crafting a proposal that would allow citizens in every county except Cook to carry concealed weapons. “It’s going to be considered even more now because we are the last one,” Phelps said. “We’ve got to do something. We don’t want to leave anybody out, but you know what? We’ve got to start looking at things, and maybe try a different approach.” Sen. Kwame Raoul, D-Chicago, said he is willing to search for a middle ground on the concealed weapons issue. “My belief is that I’m actually open minded,” said Raoul, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. “I tend to think that both sides of the debate need to, in earnest, look at public safety. This notion that, ‘If we allow everybody to carry a gun, the streets are going to be safer,’ I don’t believe that that is the case. The notion that if we do everything to prohibit anybody from having a gun, the streets are going to be safer,’ I don’t believe that either. The truth lies somewhere in between.” “Instead of being a battle,” he added, “there needs to be a discussion and negotiations and a study of what will actually make our streets safer with regards to gun policy.” But Raoul said he does not “buy the garbage” that every state has a law similar to those proposed in Illinois because some are stricter and others are looser. He said proponents are glossing over the differences in state laws when they argue that Illinois stands alone. Raoul said any comparison of state laws also needs to be done in the light of the different characteristics of the states. “You can’t compare Wisconsin to the state of Illinois, as you can’t compare the state of Utah or Idaho or many of those largely rural states with a state like Illinois, which has a metropolis like the city of Chicago, where young people are dying on the streets every day,” Raoul said. In the House, Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie, D-Chicago, is a longtime opponent of concealed weapons proposals and said no one is safer by carrying them. “In fact, by the time they get the gun out, it may well be too late. And to the extent they get the gun out early, they may well be causing pain and harm and damage to a family member,” Currie said. “We have enough mayhem, enough gun violence without the opportunity for people to carry concealed weaponry on their persons,” Currie added. She also opposed any attempt to allow individual counties within Illinois to have different laws. “I just don’t think that it makes sense for anybody to wander the streets with a gun concealed in his or her pocket,” Currie said. Sen. William Haine, D-Alton, is a former state’s attorney from Madison County who passed a proposal several years ago that would have allowed retired police officers and prison officials to carry concealed weapons. The measure, which passed narrowly, received support from then-state Sen. Barack Obama, who was campaigning for U.S. Senate at the time. Haine said he believed the Illinois Senate could pass a concealed weapons proposal but argued the biggest hurdle is in the House. Republican Sen. Larry Bomke, who represents the Springfield area, said he supported having a broader concealed carry law and has sponsored legislation in the Senate to allow judges to carry concealed weapons. “All the other states can’t be wrong and Illinois right,” Bomke said. “I think it’s time we seriously look at passing some form of concealed carry.”
USArmyRet Posted June 22, 2011 at 09:50 PM Posted June 22, 2011 at 09:50 PM "Phelps' legislation failed in the House by six votes in the spring. Phelps said he would consider retooling his legislation, including crafting a proposal that would allow citizens in every county except Cook to carry concealed weapons" Time to move FWD...........instead of standing still and waiting for nothing coming at all.
gravyboy77 Posted June 22, 2011 at 10:03 PM Posted June 22, 2011 at 10:03 PM "Phelps' legislation failed in the House by six votes in the spring. Phelps said he would consider retooling his legislation, including crafting a proposal that would allow citizens in every county except Cook to carry concealed weapons" Time to move FWD...........instead of standing still and waiting for nothing coming at all. I agree, time to get something done.
snubjob Posted June 22, 2011 at 11:20 PM Posted June 22, 2011 at 11:20 PM "Phelps' legislation failed in the House by six votes in the spring. Phelps said he would consider retooling his legislation, including crafting a proposal that would allow citizens in every county except Cook to carry concealed weapons" Time to move FWD...........instead of standing still and waiting for nothing coming at all.I also agree. Even if SCOTUS rules in our favor, we're still lookin at quite a long time before that happens. Then quite a bit more time while the people who run this state [and we ALL know who THAT is] try to stall it in red tape for a couple years. Just as well get the ball rollin now. It's gona be a heck of a struggle to get it the way we want it no matter whether it's started out as may issue or shall issue. Or whether it includes the " LARGE" cities in our state or not.
colt-45 Posted June 22, 2011 at 11:23 PM Posted June 22, 2011 at 11:23 PM boy is this going to open some doors,and my close some to.
vezpa Posted June 22, 2011 at 11:26 PM Posted June 22, 2011 at 11:26 PM “You can’t compare Wisconsin to the state of Illinois, as you can’t compare the state of Utah or Idaho or many of those largely rural states with a state like Illinois, which has a metropolis like the city of Chicago, where young people are dying on the streets every day,” Raoul said. Thats right, compare us against Houston and Phoenix, similar sized cities and further support our cause.
Davey Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:00 AM Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:00 AM Do yo think phelps would try to make it so that those in cook can't get a permit instead of everyone not bein able to carry in cook? I hope so. I live in Kane but work everyday in cook. Overnight shift too. Will have to call phelps tomorrow.
anonymous too Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:04 AM Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:04 AM You cant compare Wisconsin to the state of Illinois, as you cant compare the state of Utah or Idaho or many of those largely rural states with a state like Illinois What the hey!!!! Don't these people look out the window when they drive, or who knows, fly to Springfield. IL is "largely" rural. It boggles the mind.
Lou Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:07 AM Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:07 AM Quinn is an incompetent fool. Flynn-Currie is even worse: she is an unapologetic progressive. When 49 of 50 states go one way why even think that the last one standing has any credible thoughts???
Skorpius Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:24 AM Author Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:24 AM Do yo think phelps would try to make it so that those in cook can't get a permit instead of everyone not bein able to carry in cook? I hope so. I live in Kane but work everyday in cook. Overnight shift too. Will have to call phelps tomorrow. After reading Currie's statement, do you think any of my Chicago "representatives" would even vote for that?
vezpa Posted June 23, 2011 at 01:12 AM Posted June 23, 2011 at 01:12 AM Quinn is an incompetent fool. Flynn-Currie is even worse: she is an unapologetic progressive. When 49 of 50 states go one way why even think that the last one standing has any credible thoughts??? AMEN
ming Posted June 23, 2011 at 01:15 AM Posted June 23, 2011 at 01:15 AM Do yo think phelps would try to make it so that those in cook can't get a permit instead of everyone not bein able to carry in cook? I hope so. I live in Kane but work everyday in cook. Overnight shift too. Will have to call phelps tomorrow. After reading Currie's statement, do you think any of my Chicago "representatives" would even vote for that? That would make no sense at all. Cook county residents can't carry in Cook, but all those from outside the county can come in and carry? I'd like to hear any argument that would attempt to make that sound sensible. I think a more feasible approach would be anyone can get a permit, but carry in Cook is prohibited. I personally think this would be a terrible idea. Once you open the door for one county (or perhaps other localities) to impose a ban others may want to follow. heck, if we're being honest, Cook is probably where CCW is needed most.
Mr. Fife Posted June 23, 2011 at 01:44 AM Posted June 23, 2011 at 01:44 AM Since I live in Cook, would I not be able to carry at all, or just in DuPage, Kane etc.?
Skorpius Posted June 23, 2011 at 01:56 AM Author Posted June 23, 2011 at 01:56 AM Cook would have to have reciprocity agreements with DuPage and Kane, DuPage and Kane would have to have reciprocity agreements with each other. Or, since this is in IL and wherever there is a buck to be made... there will be a fee for each county's license that you want to carry in. Of course, you won't be able to get a Cook CC license unless your name ends with ley, ton, gan, and then we'll have to storm Springfield and occupy the chambers for months on end.
Xwing Posted June 23, 2011 at 03:01 AM Posted June 23, 2011 at 03:01 AM 14 of the largest 20 U.S. cities are in “shall issue” states. The conveniently ignore that and pretend all shall issue states are completely rural. They also ignore the fact that 2 states with higher populations than Illinois are also Shall Issue. Of the top 10 states by population, 7 “shall issue” (including #2), 2 “may issue” and Illinois standing alone as usual.
Ashdump Posted June 23, 2011 at 03:49 AM Posted June 23, 2011 at 03:49 AM 14 of the largest 20 U.S. cities are in "shall issue" states. The conveniently ignore that and pretend all shall issue states are completely rural. They also ignore the fact that 2 states with higher populations than Illinois are also Shall Issue. Of the top 10 states by population, 7 "shall issue" (including #2), 2 "may issue" and Illinois standing alone as usual. I've come to expect nothing less from the incompetent boobs who keep saying this crap. They pull something out of thin air and then keep harping on it.
jon Posted June 23, 2011 at 11:49 AM Posted June 23, 2011 at 11:49 AM The same dumb rhetoric to justify, what they have already decided. It does not make any difference if it makes life safer or not (which it does). If there were no crime of any kind, it still is in the 2nd amendment and should be a right. Many states have the Illinois Chicago scenario, but their large cities do not control the entire state. That is reserved for Illinois. In that sense, you cannot compare it to any other state. Which is why the entire state does not have a RTC law and particpate in a Constitutional Right. Illinois' reputation for political crookedness is unrivaled in America all the way back to Chicago's mobster days. The Constitution applies everywhere in the U.S., including Cook County and the city of Chicago, or should. Just my opinion.
Uncle Harley Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:10 PM Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:10 PM the sole reason the second admendment exists is so our government cant completly control us and I think Chicago fears they will lose control.
bob Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:13 PM Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:13 PM Getting any kind of LTC is far better than none at all IMO. I know there are some like GSL who are willing to wait 5 or more years for the courts to sort things out in the hopes that we will get some kind of LTC decreed by the courts. I fear they are betting on a nag in the KY Derby on that one. Even if we win in court we will likely get something almost totally unusable and it may actually make it harder to get useful LTC because the antis can point to the court decision and crow about how LTC is not needed. I do not see anyway out of continuing to attack the issue legislatively to get an actual useful solution. We got hosed this time around. Or maybe we hosed ourselves, I have not quite decided what happened yet. The next election is barely more than a year away. It is time to help the R party find some politically credible RINOs to run against a few selected D antis and to fund those guys so they have a chance to win, and maybe do a little work on their behalf. But that takes more than cheap slogans, and counterproductive resolutions. I don't think it is likely we can take the house back, but getting a few antis out might be enough. And if it is not enough in 2012, there is 2014, and 2016, and 2018, ... Even if we can't push a few antis out, if we can get the R party to run credible candidates and make it a close enough race, that kind of clout has a power all its own and might lead enough antis to cross over into our column when the next vote comes. Politics is almost never about right and wrong. It is about naked power, and we have enough at our disposal to win this thing if we are willing to do what it actually takes to win. So far, I have not seen the fire in the belly to do that.
lockman Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:47 PM Posted June 23, 2011 at 12:47 PM Even if a Cook County exception passed, it would not survive an equal protection challenge in the federal courts. Pass it now and the courts will correct it in the future.
TyGuy Posted June 23, 2011 at 02:14 PM Posted June 23, 2011 at 02:14 PM Even if a Cook County exception passed, it would not survive an equal protection challenge in the federal courts. Pass it now and the courts will correct it in the future.That's not a bad idea. I hate the idea of leaving Cook County out of it though. Hmmmm, I don't know which is better.
RandyP Posted June 23, 2011 at 02:25 PM Posted June 23, 2011 at 02:25 PM As a Cook County resident (Chicago too sadly) I would have to join the anti side and vehemently fight ANY CCW legislation that excluded us from the party. The 2nd Amendment either applies to ALL of us, or none of us. If we are not in this thing together? Count me out.
highspeed Posted June 23, 2011 at 02:50 PM Posted June 23, 2011 at 02:50 PM My guess it`s just a maneuver by Phelps. By syaing Cook County/ and or Chicago could be exempt, it puts the heat on those boneheads who represent in that area. Of course that also depends if the citizens up there have had their fill or not!!
mstrat Posted June 23, 2011 at 03:03 PM Posted June 23, 2011 at 03:03 PM May issue vs Shall issue. Preemption vs Not. Judicial vs. Legislative approaches. Are we really doing this again?
ming Posted June 23, 2011 at 05:26 PM Posted June 23, 2011 at 05:26 PM May issue vs Shall issue. Preemption vs Not. Judicial vs. Legislative approaches. Are we really doing this again? It does get a little old, doesn't it? Some people are just trying to give me an ulcer.
Federal Farmer Posted June 23, 2011 at 05:30 PM Posted June 23, 2011 at 05:30 PM As a Cook County resident (Chicago too sadly) I would have to join the anti side and vehemently fight ANY CCW legislation that excluded us from the party. The 2nd Amendment either applies to ALL of us, or none of us. If we are not in this thing together? Count me out. So if your ship is sinking do you skip launching the lifeboats because all the passengers can't fit? We are talking about life and death here, literally. Millions could be afforded 'a spot in the lifeboat' while we work to save the rest. I just can't be that cold-hearted.
Runge30 Posted June 23, 2011 at 05:45 PM Posted June 23, 2011 at 05:45 PM Even if a Cook County exception passed, it would not survive an equal protection challenge in the federal courts. Pass it now and the courts will correct it in the future. lockman's got a point, take what we can get now and then change anything else we have to later (i.e cook county exception, locations to carry, etc.)
Beezil Posted June 23, 2011 at 05:58 PM Posted June 23, 2011 at 05:58 PM As a Chicagoan, I would absolutly support a carry bill that excluded chicago(me). ANY step in the right direction is one that should be taken if we can get it.
USArmyRet Posted June 23, 2011 at 06:12 PM Posted June 23, 2011 at 06:12 PM As a Chicagoan, I would absolutly support a carry bill that excluded chicago(me). ANY step in the right direction is one that should be taken if we can get it. You and Mr Spock are in the same league together...............live long and prosper, my friend. :Drunk emoticon:
Skorpius Posted June 23, 2011 at 07:37 PM Author Posted June 23, 2011 at 07:37 PM As a Chicagoan, I would absolutly support a carry bill that excluded chicago(me). ANY step in the right direction is one that should be taken if we can get it. I'm starting to swing that way, myself. Chicago and Cook continue to crap on our rights, anyway. :Drunk emoticon:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.