268 replies to this topic

[Ranger]

Dan:  I admire your activism and determination.  I believe it would be helpful though to gain a thorough understanding of the state structure and laws.  Then work closely with Todd, Molly and the other association leaders / representatives on how to best accomplish our shared goals.  We all want the same basic thing so we should all work together collectively on how to best achieve it.

[dmefford]

Well here is some corn for the grist mill..... Pike County Constitutional Carry of Arms makes the Quincy KHQA television...

You can read about it and view the topic here. I would like to encourage everybody that can and will, to make some good comments about this article. I think we may be winning this TV station over... A lot viewing of this article and making it popular will help them to do more on our topics...

Regards, Drd

Edited by dmefford, 06 March 2012 - 11:02 PM.

[dmefford]

Here is the raw video from the interview. I will try to post the "Nightly News" broadcast when I can get it lined out... Regards, Drd

[url="]

[kurt555gs]

Ranger, on 28 December 2011 - 09:29 AM, said:

Dan:  I admire your activism and determination.  I believe it would be helpful though to gain a thorough understanding of the state structure and laws.  Then work closely with Todd, Molly and the other association leaders / representatives on how to best accomplish our shared goals.  We all want the same basic thing so we should all work together collectively on how to best achieve it.

Oh? Like not push open carry in non home rule areas? Something that would pass with 60 votes? So don't do anything that's not on the "agenda"? Really?


* Carthago delenda est *

[junglebob]

dmefford, on 24 August 2011 - 03:18 PM, said:

As to the patchwork deal........ The first anyone heard about this was one week ago today. Today we have tabulated over the required number of signatures to put it on the ballot. Many people haven't even read the paper yet. We should have a thousand in the next week. Those same people will take anyone and everyone to the polls next March. At worst if it didn't pass the 2A still rules. Remember this is just a simple restatement of the 2A with clarification. There is no NEW law.

No one has given any other reason than patchwork that would have any negative legal effect. It just didn't pass that is all. Everything remains the same.

Regards, Dan

I think the biggest problem is if it doesn't pass the anti-carry people will use it as justification for voting against license to carry.  A recent poll done by the Paul Simon Policy Institute in Southern Illinois showed the majority of people polled supported license to carry.  
In Missouri a referendum on license to carry was on the ballot and it was defeated and set back their getting license to carry.  Civil rights issues shouldn't be on a ballot.  What happens if it passes in Pike Couty and someone puts it on the ballot in Cook County?  They then spend money on "blood in the streets" ads that scare people into opposing it by a huge margin. Of course then the numbers showing this huge percentage of Cook County residents opposed the referendum are then used to sway legislatures to vote against license to carry.

[junglebob]

dmefford, on 24 August 2011 - 03:18 PM, said:

As to the patchwork deal........ The first anyone heard about this was one week ago today. Today we have tabulated over the required number of signatures to put it on the ballot. Many people haven't even read the paper yet. We should have a thousand in the next week. Those same people will take anyone and everyone to the polls next March. At worst if it didn't pass the 2A still rules. Remember this is just a simple restatement of the 2A with clarification. There is no NEW law.

No one has given any other reason than patchwork that would have any negative legal effect. It just didn't pass that is all. Everything remains the same.

Regards, Dan

I can see a couple problems with having this referendum on the ballot.  You shouldn't have a referendum for a civil right, of course we shouldn't have to ask for permission from the state either.  Maybe like the civil rights act the government may need to pass a law recognizing the civil right we have to self defense, even though it is in the inherent and the right to bear arms is in the constitution.  If this resolution fails I am sure the anti license to carry legislatures will use it as proof that most Illinoisans, even outside Cook County don't support it.  Also what if someone decided to put it on the Cook County ballot and then runs a "blood in the streets" ad campaign to make sure a very large majority opposes it and then uses this against license to carry legislation? Missouri had a referendum on license to carry on a state wide ballot before they passed license to carry it lost and set back license to carry a couple years at least.  There could be unintended consequences to a Pike County referendum.

Woops, I thought my first post didn't take and I posted again.

Edited by junglebob, 12 March 2012 - 07:46 AM.

[junglebob]

dmefford, on 11 March 2012 - 10:32 PM, said:

Here is the raw video from the interview. I will try to post the "Nightly News" broadcast when I can get it lined out... Regards, Drd

[url="]

I just watched the interview.  I do like how the doctor mentioned how state law can't supercede the constitution.  He gave a good example of "shall not be infringed" mentioning someone who has a restraining order from going on someones property.  He says does that mean you can go on the property one inch or to the front door of the house or just step inside the house?  He says Illinois thinks they can just infringe a little on our second amendment rights.

If this passes someone will get arrested by the state police for UUW and Lisa Madigan will prosecute him and we'll have another case to go to the courts for appeal.

[Sigma]

I dont even know what to say.
But I like to think about The judges that gave us the Ezell decision will have our guys standing in front of them probably this year.

[dmefford]

Sigma, on 12 March 2012 - 04:24 PM, said:

I dont even know what to say.
But I like to think about The judges that gave us the Ezell decision will have our guys standing in front of them probably this year.

I hate to get my hopes up... but I feel the same way. The judges that gave us Ezzel will hopefully give us, "Moore" and "Shepard."

Regards, Danl

[kurt555gs]

I wonder why some forward thinking home rule unit of government doesn't allow carry in their jurisdiction? That would be interesting.

* Carthago delenda est *

[Bud]

kurt555gs, on 14 March 2012 - 11:56 AM, said:

I wonder why some forward thinking home rule unit of government doesn't allow carry in their jurisdiction? That would be interesting.

* Carthago delenda est *

Because they can't. A Home Rule entity can make a law that is stricter then State law, but not less then State law.

[dmefford]

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

Edited by dmefford, 20 March 2012 - 10:19 PM.

[Hawk44]

I found this interesting that they were able to put this on the ballot, I will be looking forward to how it all turns out.

PITTSFIELD, Ill. — Pike County voters sent a message Tuesday in favor of gun rights.

A question on Tuesday's primary ballot asked whether the county should adopt a constitutional carry of arms ordinance — and the answer was resoundingly yes. With 76 percent of the vote counted, 85 percent of voters approved the measure.






Read about it here:

http://www.whig.com/...carry-ordinance

[TFC]

It may not be binding (at the moment,) but it does send a strong message.
Would make for an interesting court challenge to home rule... for good or bad...

[kurt555gs]

Actually Budman you are wrong. I will explain when not on my phone and can type at length.

* Carthago delenda est *

[pyre400]

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

I would like to inform the 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

http://www.wgem.com/...carry-ordinance

Quote

Posted: Mar 20, 2012 9:34 PM CDT Updated: Mar 20, 2012 9:42 PM CDT    By DEBORAH GERTZ HUSAR
Herald-Whig Staff Writer

PITTSFIELD, Ill. — Pike County voters sent a message Tuesday in favor of gun rights.

A question on Tuesday's primary ballot asked whether the county should adopt a constitutional carry of arms ordinance — and the answer was resoundingly yes. With 76 percent of the vote counted, 85 percent of voters approved the measure.

Pittsfield chiropractor Dan Mefford spearheaded the ballot issue which he said had wide support from Democrats, Republicans and independent voters.

Winning voter approval was key in sending what Mefford called "a strong message" to people outside Pike County.

The courts ultimately will decide on the proposed ordinance stating "the people have an individual and fundamental right to keep and bear arms free of infringement by any local, state or federal government; and further, that the method or manner of possession, carrying or transporting said arms shall not be infringed."

Mefford argues that it's already law in the land with the Second Amendment and its promise that the right of the people to keep and bear arms should not be infringed.

Pike County's proposal takes it a step further by saying the right cannot be infringed by any local, state or federal agents or government agents.

"Shall not be infringed is a pretty simple phrase," Mefford said before the election.

The Pike County Board meets Monday night but may not be ready to discuss the ordinance. "We will need to do something and take an active role," Board Chairman Andy Borrowman said.

"There's going to have to be discussion on how we go about licensing or whatever we go through," Borrowman said. "The sheriff, I would say, would have a big stake in the process. We could also try to enlist the help of PASA Park to maybe do something. We're going to have to decide what sort of a process we use."

The ordinance, as proposed, excludes all individuals prohibited from possessing firearms under federal laws, minors and those under any intoxicating influence exceeding standards of the Illinois Motor Vehicle code.

Organizers gathered more than 1,300 signatures on the petition, well above the 528 required, to put the issue on the ballot.

Mefford hopes to see the issue spread statewide, and he expects that will have to happen county by county.

The constitutional carry initiative follows a 2009 drive, spearheaded by then-Pike County Board member Mark Mountain, against new gun laws and for a conceal-carry law in Illinois. Dubbed Pro2A, it swept through the state, winning support from 90 of the state's 102 counties. In May, the County Board endorsed a Brown County push for a conceal-carry law in Illinois.

The effort taps into a growing frustration with what many consider encroachment on constitutional rights, especially Second Amendment rights.

Forty-nine states have legal carry of some sort, and eight have constitutional carry allowing people to carry in any manner or method as long as they don't intimidate another person.

— dhusar@whig.com/221-3379

Should be interesting, Dr D.

[Molly B.]

Congratulations on getting this passed.  It will be very interesting to see how this plays out.

[bersa380]

I would think that this could only help us in the legislature.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk

[dmefford]

Remember the Sheriff, the States Attorney, and judges are elected officials...... When you have 85% of the people vote in favor, what are they gonna do...? They will abide by this ordinance... The sheriff stated that he expects people to carry tomorrow. They can't throw them all in jail.... Jail is too small He has had tons of calls to his office....

Like he said this is a landslide that crosses all party boundaries.......!! They will get their donkeys and elephants handed to them if they buck this... The PEOPLE have spoken. One of the largest primary turnouts in history in Pike!

Welcome to Pike County!!!

I have several other counties that are wanting to get started. The "Big City" counties need to go last I would say!!! Start with the rural counties.......

This is now the law of Pike:

NOW THEREFORE BE IT ENACTED as the law of Pike County, Illinois, that the people have an individual and fundamental right to keep and bear arms free of infringement by any local, state, or federal government; AND FURTHER, that the method or manner of possessing, carrying, or transporting said arms shall not be infringed. THIS ORDINANCE SHALL EXCLUDE: all individuals who are prohibited from possessing firearms under the laws of the United States, prohibited minors, and those under any intoxicating influence exceeding the standards of the Illinois Motor Vehicle Code. Upon passage this ordinance shall be in full force and effect.

Regards, DrD

Edited by dmefford, 20 March 2012 - 10:30 PM.

[Uncle Harley]

were is everyone that was bashing the guy to put it on the ballot now? LOL you guys are right, this can only be good for us, but "the bashers" I'll call them had a very VALID point to. You don't put rights up for a vote, unless you are willing to give them up. What IF it went the other way?

[Uncle Harley]

dmefford, on 20 March 2012 - 10:29 PM, said:

Remember the Sheriff, the States Attorney, and judges are elected officials...... When you have 85% of the people vote in favor, what are they gonna do...? They will abide by this ordinance... The sheriff stated that he expects people to carry tomorrow. They can't throw them all in jail.... Jail is too small He has had tons of calls to his office....

Like he said this is a landslide that crosses all party boundaries.......!! They will get their donkeys and elephants handed to them if they buck this... The PEOPLE have spoken. One of the largest primary turnouts in history in Pike!

Welcome to Pike County!!!

I have several other counties that are wanting to get started. The "Big City" counties need to go last I would say!!! Start with the rural counties.......

This is now the law of Pike:

NOW THEREFORE BE IT ENACTED as the law of Pike County, Illinois, that the people have an individual and fundamental right to keep and bear arms free of infringement by any local, state, or federal government; AND FURTHER, that the method or manner of possessing, carrying, or transporting said arms shall not be infringed. THIS ORDINANCE SHALL EXCLUDE: all individuals who are prohibited from possessing firearms under the laws of the United States, prohibited minors, and those under any intoxicating influence exceeding the standards of the Illinois Motor Vehicle Code. Upon passage this ordinance shall be in full force and effect.

Regards, DrD

If all this you say is true, ( and there is no doubt in my mind that it is ) then things will SURELY become interesting! Congrats!

[Federal Farmer]

TFC, on 20 March 2012 - 09:38 PM, said:

It may not be binding (at the moment,) but it does send a strong message.
Would make for an interesting court challenge to home rule... for good or bad...

The only challenge to home rule possible is if the County actually implements it and gets sued for violating home rule.  Home rule doesn't allow a County to supercede the authority of the State.  Frankly, I don't see how it is possible for a County or municipality to do so since all their powers flow from the State.

[Uncle Harley]

Federal Farmer, on 20 March 2012 - 10:42 PM, said:

TFC, on 20 March 2012 - 09:38 PM, said:

It may not be binding (at the moment,) but it does send a strong message.
Would make for an interesting court challenge to home rule... for good or bad...

The only challenge to home rule possible is if the County actually implements it and gets sued for violating home rule. Home rule doesn't allow a County to supercede the authority of the State. Frankly, I don't see how it is possible for a County or municipality to do so since all their powers flow from the State.

Did you see the other thread? The sheriff expects people to start carrying tommorow and him nor the states attorney for that county plan to do anything about it. What are they going to do lock up 85% of their county? This is grass roots taking back govt as good as it gets!

[kurt555gs]

I'll bet Lisa Madigan will have her panties in a bunch, so to speak over this.

I wonder if this same law will end up on ballots in the general election or HB5745 will be passed first?

* Carthago delenda est *

[vezpa]

I don't want it on the ballot here in Chicago so they can skew what CCW actually is/means, lie and rig the voting.  I could see their negative publicity adds/stunts for it now.  Also it may be good but it also sends a message that individual counties can do what they want.  That is very bad here in Cook county.  Its either the whole state or nothing.  Constitution rights don't change within the same state because of a zip code, for that matter they shouldn't change anywhere in the USA but that is a whole other fight.

Edited by vezpa, 20 March 2012 - 11:09 PM.

[Uncle Harley]

vezpa, on 20 March 2012 - 11:06 PM, said:

I don't want it on the ballot here in Chicago so they can skew what CCW actually, lie and rig the voting. I could see their negative campaign adds for it now. Also it may be good but it also sends a message that individual counties can do what they want. That is very bad here in Cook county. Its either the whole state or nothing. Constitution rights don't change within the same state because of a zip code, for that matter they shouldn't change anywhere in the USA but that is a whole other fight.

Really? You don't want to do it there ( I don't blame you BTW ) not yet anyways. But you gripe that the rights don't stop at zip codes? So you really think that Pike county shouldn't be able to do this because they had the ballz and the drive to get real results just because you don't have the courage to do the same? Why can't you just be happy for pike county and support the idea maybe this idea will spread like wildfire. What will Cook county do when it's the last county standing?

[dmefford]

Uncle Harley, on 20 March 2012 - 10:40 PM, said:

If all this you say is true, ( and there is no doubt in my mind that it is ) then things will SURELY become interesting! Congrats!

It is all true... It is very difficult to defy 85% of the People at this stage of the game...... I will be speaking at the Quincy Tea Party on May1. They want to get behind it for Adams County. I don't know if that is too big a county or not. Depends on the Sheriff etc.

I have several other counties that are very interested.... It is not that hard to do if you get the People behind you. I feel that the small counties should really get it going first.... Big City folks are fine but, how do I say this nicely, they are not too self reliant. They are used to just calling the cops. Even the town folks in Pittsfield (4500) pick off a coon or a possum out the back door with a .22 and don't sweat it. I killed a nuisance skunk (the skunk stunk) with a .22 in the back yard in the middle of town 12 years or so ago.... No one called the cops or got excited, well till the smell started wafting around, but they were glad to see the skunk gone...

We also have very cooperative newspapers with significant readership. I have laid the ground work for months on Liberty issues with Letters to the Editor. They are all at my Blog. Almost everything there has been printed in the papers. I would suggest similar ground work in other interested counties. Take my stuff rewrite it a little and make it with some local flavor.

Regards, Drd

[milq]

I'm curious to see what little Lisa has to say when she gets wind of it. I must admit I was worried for Pike when it went up for vote, if it had went the other way...who knows.

I'm willing to bet it's all over the media tomorrow though, definitely a hot topic.

[dmefford]

milq, on 20 March 2012 - 11:55 PM, said:

I'm curious to see what little Lisa has to say when she gets wind of it. I must admit I was worried for Pike when it went up for vote, if it had went the other way...who knows.

I'm willing to bet it's all over the media tomorrow though, definitely a hot topic.

She can't come fight every case. And they sure aren't going to win any friends trying to do that. Plus you must remember Illinois has a complete BAN on the public carry of firearms. That is not going to fly in the present court system me thinks... At least in the 7th Circuit. We have a democrat States Attorney and a Democrat Sheriff. Somehow I find it difficult to figure how she is going to get it done.

There is also the jury box... Getting a conviction could be hard. That could really hurt'em....

Where they gonna get a jury from....?

I am just hick country doc. I don't know all the workings of the courts but I do understand what our elected officials understand... They aren't going to win anymore elections if they harass the voters.

[EDIT] We put Sam McCann back in with 91.21% of the vote. Noll (4.05%) didn't even beat Dove (4.74%) in Pike. As soon as Sam started the repeal the FOID card he nailed it!!!!


Regards, DrD

Edited by dmefford, 21 March 2012 - 12:11 AM.

[TFC]

Federal Farmer, on 20 March 2012 - 10:42 PM, said:

TFC, on 20 March 2012 - 09:38 PM, said:

It may not be binding (at the moment,) but it does send a strong message.
Would make for an interesting court challenge to home rule... for good or bad...

The only challenge to home rule possible is if the County actually implements it and gets sued for violating home rule.  Home rule doesn't allow a County to supercede the authority of the State.  Frankly, I don't see how it is possible for a County or municipality to do so since all their powers flow from the State.

Hence the possibility that Illinois home rule could be challenged. It's still the right (and the responsibility) of the people to challenge laws that they see as unjust, even if it is through local government.

I may be selfish, but I'd like to see if a states "power" actually flows only one way.
Do local government have the right to limit the state in the severity of laws?
Constitutionally, no, but the constitution, especially the state constitution can be held to the same standard as the federal. Again, this may be the stuff of a debate between scholars, but the prospect excites me for some reason.