268 replies to this topic

[zukeeper]

TyGuy, on 21 March 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

I see the county by county approach (supplementing the work going on in the GA and in the courts) as valid.  What if this time next year it was every county but 2 or 3 in Illinois that had CCW?  That's an even stronger statement about it than "49 states can't be wrong" as it would be "49 and 7/8th states can't be wrong."  Then when Cook finally sees the proverbial writting on the wall the GA could fix the patchwork system by making a statewide preemptive law.

IDK, I am not any sort of expert in this stuff, but I applaud the people of Pike County for passing something that the overwhelming majority of them want.

I agree very much with this !!

I am not ainti chicago neither , as a member of ABATE I am very greatful of their support for motorcycle rights, but as far as guns, year after year , decade after decade the anti gun people are voted in and supported. maybe the majority of people who live in Chicago simply do not want them there ?? I don't know , do not live there...just a thought

Edited by zukeeper, 21 March 2012 - 09:55 AM.

[Patriots & Tyrants]

A county by county CCW license would be disastrous in this state. I don't think any of us are good enough to know EXACTLY where all "local" borders are of all surrounding counties.
The only easy one where I live is North of Lake Cook Rd. is Lake County; with the "cook county bulge"(Out towards the airport, Barrington etc) who exactly knows every spot where cook county creeps into what one might assume is DuPage or Kane county. On this side of the line I am legal, on this side I am a felon. That’s a bad idea. You guys downstate have it a little easier because most of your counties are more or less square, up here it gets a little complicated.

Also, what if Champaign county has X rules but Sangamon and Y and your permit ends up only being valid in your county? Its a patchwork that puts undue burden on gun owners. What is going to happen when people from Indiana and non-cook Illinois start getting arrested going to pick people up at the airport or out for a night on the town in Chicago. In the long run, this is a bad for gun owners.


I think a state wide CCW law with pre-emption of local restrictions is the one and only way to go. Then if we can get reciprocity from Indiana, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri and Kentucky we would really be 110% squared away. If we pass a law that leaves even ONE gun owner in Chicago high, dry and unable to conceal carry we are failing in our support of the second amendment and the rights of the people to defend themselves.

Edited by Patriots & Tyrants, 21 March 2012 - 10:09 AM.

[kurt555gs]

Wrong Chris. The actual wording In law is "at least equal to". No where is " more strict, or stricter " used. And case law says "at least equal to" means "equal to". Not "stricter".

Really!

* Carthago delenda est *

[TyGuy]

I agree that statewide preempted CCW (or, cough OCW) is the way to go, but I see the county by county approach a way to put pressure on the holdouts.  I could be wrong, but that's my opinion, and like everyone else, I am allowed to have one.

[Drylok]

Fellas we are only 3 votes shy from state wide pre-empt, just sit tight. You know how much of a CF it is just traveling from state to state and keeping track of reciprocity, where you can or can't carry depending on the state, duty to inform or not depending on the state. Now imagine that all varrying from county to county in one state. EPIC CF, we're almost there just be patient.

[Patriots & Tyrants]

TyGuy, on 21 March 2012 - 10:13 AM, said:

I agree that statewide preempted CCW (or, cough OCW) is the way to go, but I see the county by county approach a way to put pressure on the holdouts.  I could be wrong, but that's my opinion, and like everyone else, I am allowed to have one.

I think if anything a patchwork system would only strength the Democratic party and by Extension the Chicago Democrats. It would remove an issue that has/is causing a lot of friction between Chicago dems and dems from elsewhere in the state. Remove the issue, means less friction, more cohesion and everything that goes along with that. Jesse Jackson Jr. can say he is keeping "guns off the streets" while Lisa Dugan can say she supports local right to carry and the second amendment.  At the same time it removes a valuable tool that can unite "Down State" and "Up State" Republicans, because the downstate constituency will be satisfied while those in Cook, Dupage, Will, Kane and perhaps Lake county will still be denied the right.

It does on the other hand strengthen a court case, which would without a doubt end up in the supreme court about localities/counties banning concealed carry.


@ Drylok: I thought they had 70 votes supposidly, and we needed 71 to pass. Did something change?

Edited by Patriots & Tyrants, 21 March 2012 - 10:49 AM.

[TyGuy]

So "49 states can't be wrong" is ok but "49 states and 90 uut of 102 counties can't be wrong" or "49 states and 101 out of 102 counties can't be wrong" isn't?  Seems to show strength on our side, but again everyone will have a different opinion.

Am I saying let's forget the GA?  NOPE, but I like people using the government to affect change that they want, well, that 85% of them want anyway.  Is that not Democracy?  (I know I know the US isn't a democracry, but I like it!)

[Drylok]

Well I'm just going by the votes on 148 last May. I think Phelps or somebody did say at IGOLD that they think we're around 69 or 70.

[Drylok]

TyGuy, on 21 March 2012 - 10:51 AM, said:

So "49 states can't be wrong" is ok but "49 states and 90 uut of 102 counties can't be wrong" or "49 states and 101 out of 102 counties can't be wrong" isn't?  Seems to show strength on our side, but again everyone will have a different opinion.

Am I saying let's forget the GA?  NOPE, but I like people using the government to affect change that they want, well, that 85% of them want anyway.  Is that not Democracy?  (I know I know the US isn't a democracry, but I like it!)

Door swings both ways. The only problem with a democracy is that 51% of the people can take away the rights of the other 49%. I am absolutely positive that anything less than state wide pre-empt shall issue will only slow us down, waaaaaay down. The ball is in our court, the pendum is swinging in our favor, the momentum is with us so what is it they say, once more into the breach dear friends.

[TyGuy]

Ok, I'm out.  I've already stated that I think the county by county thing strengthens us.  You can disagree.  That's fine.  I don't care to discuss it anymore.  I have my hands full arguing the merits of stand your ground laws with my hoplophobe friends in light of the Florida shooting.

Good day sir.  

[Tvandermyde]

You guys are confusing local politics with the law. The AG can shut this down, and it doen't matter politcally as she can win without Pike.

And 101 different standards, rules, recoprocity agreements is a disaster. We areplayig for the end game, not somethingthat cuts us off at the knees.

County by county gives us no leverage, it takes it away.

Sara Brady should be givig the authors of this an award.

[snubjob]

zukeeper, on 21 March 2012 - 09:23 AM, said:

Tvandermyde, on 21 March 2012 - 07:04 AM, said:

Davey, on 21 March 2012 - 12:14 AM, said:

I don't understand.  What would stop IL state police from arresting someone and Madigan going after a prosecution?

Nothing. Actually, if she wanted to, she could file for an injunction against the County ordinance and would likely win.

This also creates a SNAFU situation. IF the Chicago guys buy into this, then they will say no need for a statewide carry law, pass your own county by county. And we then have 101 different carry ordinances. a giant CF. This is another example of someone wanting it in their backyard and willing to throw everyone else under the bus for their shortsighted self interests.

This doesn't help the cause it creates more problems for it. I can think of a dozen ways for the antis to use this against HB-148 to try and kill the bill. It also lays into the hands of the Chicago/Cook County types wanting a carve out.

I think you would be surprised at the amount of people that would accept county by county at this point. I'm pretty sure they would have the ablility to allign their laws together so it wouldn't be a patchwork. I'd hate to think some people would throw Illinois under that same bus for the sake of Chicago

But yet that is exactly what is happening and will continue to happen. 2 or 3 counties in this state dictate the rules to the other 99. That is chicago throwin the rest of  illinois under the bus. And those that are willing to let it continue to happen are not properly representing the people who either pay their wages, and or, elect them to office. There are many, many statutes in illinois that apply to cook county and the city of chicago ONLY. This is because the machine wants it that way. They want things their way in cook county. THEY are the ones setting themselves apart from the rest of the state. And to say that the rest of the state can't have anything if it doesn't include chicago, is just plain bull. It is known that even if a concealed carry bill was to pass the legislature, that it will take years to get cook county to actually abide by it. So why not let the rest of the state get on with business. And i don't agree that there aren't enough votes for this to happen.

[Drylok]

TyGuy, on 21 March 2012 - 11:03 AM, said:

Ok, I'm out.  I've already stated that I think the county by county thing strengthens us.  You can disagree.  That's fine.  I don't care to discuss it anymore.  I have my hands full arguing the merits of stand your ground laws with my hoplophobe friends in light of the Florida shooting.

Good day sir.  

It's all good brother, emotions are high is all.

[papa]

dmefford, on 20 March 2012 - 09:12 PM, said:

I would like to inform the Illinois Carry board that Pike County now has Constitutional Carry of Arms. The referendum passed by 85%...

We now effectively have Constitutional Carry and we will carry. The Sheriff will not be fighting this. The States Attorney will not be fighting this...

Huge turn out for this vote!!!!!

Who's next?????

Regards, Drd

Dr d , I seem to be confused a bit. Happens a lot of late ! You say , and different articles say , " constitutional carry " yet the sheriff says that " we will have to decide what type of licensing we will use " and others are talking about a license to carry in Pike .

My question is .... is this a licensed carry referendum or is it a true constitutional carry referendum? There is a world of difference in the two versions.

[TyGuy]

Drylok, I'm not upset at all.  We can disagree.  I thought this might give us leverage, but I'll trust Todd's call on it.  I still think it's cool for a voter referendum to pass with such support.   It's all good man!

I said good day!

[Drylok]

TyGuy, on 21 March 2012 - 12:24 PM, said:

Drylok, I'm not upset at all.  We can disagree.  I thought this might give us leverage, but I'll trust Todd's call on it.  I still think it's cool for a voter referendum to pass with such support.   It's all good man!

I said good day!

That it's good for the peoples voice to be heard via a referendum is something we can definately agree on. It's just that it doesn't give leverage it does the opposite. We've talked, you know how I feel in my heart of hearts

[vezpa]

Tvandermyde, on 21 March 2012 - 07:04 AM, said:

Davey, on 21 March 2012 - 12:14 AM, said:

I don't understand.  What would stop IL state police from arresting someone and Madigan going after a prosecution?

Nothing. Actually, if she wanted to, she could file for an injunction against the County ordinance and would likely win.

This also creates a SNAFU situation. IF the Chicago guys buy into this, then they will say no need for a statewide carry law, pass your own county by county. And we then have 101 different carry ordinances. a giant CF. This is another example of someone wanting it in their backyard and willing to throw everyone else under the bus for their shortsighted self interests.

This doesn't help the cause it creates more problems for it. I can think of a dozen ways for the antis to use this against HB-148 to try and kill the bill. It also lays into the hands of the Chicago/Cook County types wanting a carve out.

This is exactly what I thought would become of this as I posted in the other thread, Thanks Todd for proving me correct.

[vezpa]

TyGuy, on 21 March 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

What if this time next year it was every county but 2 or 3 in Illinois that had CCW?

That's how many it took for our Governor to win the election LMFAO X 100000000000000000000000 !!!!  

[TyGuy]

Woah, you're right!

Edited by TyGuy, 21 March 2012 - 01:47 PM.

[dmefford]

Drylok, on 21 March 2012 - 12:38 PM, said:

TyGuy, on 21 March 2012 - 12:24 PM, said:

Drylok, I'm not upset at all. We can disagree. I thought this might give us leverage, but I'll trust Todd's call on it. I still think it's cool for a voter referendum to pass with such support. It's all good man!

I said good day!

That it's good for the peoples voice to be heard via a referendum is something we can definately agree on. It's just that it doesn't give leverage it does the opposite. We've talked, you know how I feel in my heart of hearts

I think the important thing right is to relax and let the folks within the Democrat party work on the last three votes... Let Moore and Shepard do their thing... and let the People express their opinion through the county thing... It will all come together at the end. Probably the most significant thing is the message that an 85% vote is going to send. Our Democrat sheriff and our Democrat States Attorney have got to be putting some serious pressure on within their party. Also John Sullivan (D) is really squawking to the Machine to get this thing CCW passed. Pressure is building from all sides including 49 States... Let's let the whole process keep playing out. It doesn't hurt to speculate but keep it calm.....

Regards, Drd

[kurt555gs]

Has anyone heard Lisa Madigan's reaction to this? I think this is the straw that broke the camels back, and far more important than anyone here seems to think. It is indicative of the feelings state wide.

Lisa sending the ISP to Pittsfield on order to arrest people will be a time bomb of emotions.

I think Illinois citizens are tired of waiting.

It also amuses me to think both the NRA/ISRA and the Brady's and their ilk are spitting mad because this Pike county thing isn't in their plans, and they don't have control over the outcome.

Hopefully losing control on both sides of the 2a movement will scare the major players enough to pass statewide carry legislation before this citizen led constitutional carry things spreads state wide, and they both are out of the loop.

Edited by kurt555gs, 21 March 2012 - 03:59 PM.

[Uncle Harley]

what nobody is realizing is, If the sheriff speculated correctly, There were ALOT of people Carrying in Pike county today, and there is no blood running in the street! AND NO ARRESTS!

[dmefford]

Just to bring everyone up to speed - as you may have guessed this ordinance has created a real stir... The States Attorney is working on a press release now.

He is in a difficult position for a number of reasons but understand he is not against Con Carry or CCW or any of that. He is, however in a position not having a definitive court decision or an Attorney General decision to help him know which way to go. Now he may end up popping bubbles but at least we will know what direction he is going to take and can act accordingly based a written statement.

I am guessing that he will tend to go the statist route until a decision from a higher court is made...... So hold the line for now and more will be forth coming when I get it........

Regards, Drd...

[dmefford]

Uncle Harley, on 21 March 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

what nobody is realizing is, If the sheriff speculated correctly, There were ALOT of people Carrying in Pike county today, and there is no blood running in the street! AND NO ARRESTS!

Right. . . We do have a good sheriff and our States Attorney is not the enemy.... Drd

[TFC]

Here's my point. What does the state do when it has let's say 70 counties that pass similar ordinances?

[vezpa]

TFC, on 21 March 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

Here's my point. What does the state do when it has let's say 70 counties that pass similar ordinances?

Nothing unfortunately,

Chicago and Cook county will decide any "official" CCW laws or regulations in this state.

[Uncle Harley]

what will happed if ISP arrest you?

They arrest you and take you to county lockup, where you get released without bail and your case gets tossed out on some technicality

Edited by Uncle Harley, 21 March 2012 - 05:56 PM.

[vezpa]

Uncle Harley, on 21 March 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

what will happed if ISP arrest you?

They arrest you and take you to county lockup, where you get released without bail and your case gets tossed out on some technicality

I sure wouldn't want to be the guinea pig.  With my luck the trooper would deliberately take me to the next county.

[snubjob]

vezpa, on 21 March 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

TFC, on 21 March 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

Here's my point. What does the state do when it has let's say 70 counties that pass similar ordinances?

Nothing unfortunately,

Chicago and Cook county will decide any "official" CCW laws or regulations in this state.

Yup. Some just can't seem to get this thru their heads though it seems.

[Gary]

Without arguing for or against the ballot initiative in Pike County, I find it interesting in light of the opinion that the State's Attorney in Madison County just recently released to the public.