Federal Farmer Posted February 10, 2012 at 05:53 AM Posted February 10, 2012 at 05:53 AM NRA is reporting a settlement in this case, which I believe they backed and was argued by attorney Joel Brodsky (who represented me in my suit against Chicago over the SKS registration). Fairfax, Va. – A settlement has been reached in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, between Laferena Batchelor and the City of Chicago. Mr. Batchelor is an 85-year old Chicago resident who filed an application with the Chicago Police Department for a Chicago Firearms Permit (CFP) in May, 2011. The possession of a firearm is prohibited in Chicago without a CFP. On June 14, 2011, Mr. Batchelor's application was denied because of a 1996 city ordinance violation. During that year, Mr. Batchelor was at home and heard a loud noise in his backyard. When he went to see what was happening, he saw that some large stray dogs had broken through his fence and were headed toward him. He had a legally owned firearm and shot into the ground to scare away the dogs in an act of self-defense. However, Mr. Batchelor was cited with violating a city discharge ordinance, fined $50, and his firearm was seized. Mr. Batchelor is a veteran of WWII and the Korean War, and a law-abiding resident of Chicago. He has a Illinois Firearms Owner's Identification (FOID) Card, but the City of Chicago would not let him get a CFP to purchase a firearm because of his previous city ordinance violation. After months of litigation, the City of Chicago agreed that Mr. Batchelor's 1996 ordinance violation should not disqualify him from obtaining a CFP. "This settlement is a victory for the Second Amendment and the self-defense rights of all Chicago residents," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA's Institute for Legislative Action. "Mr. Batchelor is a great American who put his life on the line to defend freedom overseas. The least his country and the City of Chicago can do is respect his constitutional rights here at home."
Davey Posted February 11, 2012 at 04:05 AM Posted February 11, 2012 at 04:05 AM I've wondered a few times what came of this story. Thanks.
gangrel Posted February 11, 2012 at 02:54 PM Posted February 11, 2012 at 02:54 PM Interesting that the City of Chicago is settling a case like this now. I would have expected them to fight this one to the last man. Perhaps they don't want to pay the salary of every pro-2A lawyer in the city after all....
bob Posted February 11, 2012 at 02:58 PM Posted February 11, 2012 at 02:58 PM Interesting that the City of Chicago is settling a case like this now. I would have expected them to fight this one to the last man. Perhaps they don't want to pay the salary of every pro-2A lawyer in the city after all.... It looks like a loser. I can't imagine they want to be losing 2A cases every few months. Not the kind of publicity they want.
TFC Posted February 11, 2012 at 08:57 PM Posted February 11, 2012 at 08:57 PM If the law is still on the books and enforced, then this is no victory.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.