Jump to content


Photo

Poll: Should Illinois get rid of FOID cards?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
27 replies to this topic

#1 NakPPI

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,210 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 11

Posted 16 February 2012 - 03:37 PM

http://www.560wind.com/

Bottom right corner.

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
Stung by the result of McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010), the City quickly enacted an ordinance that was too clever by half. Recognizing that a complete gun ban would no longer survive Supreme Court review, the City required all gun owners to obtain training that included one hour of live‐range instruction, and then banned all live ranges within City limits. This was not so much a nod to the importance of live‐range training as it was a thumbing of the municipal nose at the Supreme Court.

#2 papa

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,725 posts
  • Joined: 13-December 07

Posted 16 February 2012 - 03:46 PM

Well it's only 92% to 8% in favor of getting rid of the cards.

#3 riversludge

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 249 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 11

Posted 16 February 2012 - 03:48 PM

It doesn't matter what we think, we have been told NO now let the foid card issue die.

#4 Romano For Rep

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 150 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 11

Posted 16 February 2012 - 03:55 PM

It doesn't matter what we think, we have been told NO now let the foid card issue die.

been told no by?

#5 nocaster

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • Joined: 11-February 11

Posted 16 February 2012 - 04:00 PM

Should Illinois get rid of mandatory FOID cards?
No
7%
Yes
93%

#6 scough

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 772 posts
  • Joined: 10-November 11

Posted 16 February 2012 - 04:00 PM

93% Yes! :turned:

Edited by scough, 16 February 2012 - 04:01 PM.


#7 riversludge

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 249 posts
  • Joined: 23-March 11

Posted 16 February 2012 - 04:06 PM


It doesn't matter what we think, we have been told NO now let the foid card issue die.

been told no by?



http://illinoiscarry...01&hl=FOID&st=0

Todd

#8 NakPPI

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,210 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 11

Posted 16 February 2012 - 04:11 PM

It just goes to show the attitude of the electorate doesn't match their legislators...

Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
Stung by the result of McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010), the City quickly enacted an ordinance that was too clever by half. Recognizing that a complete gun ban would no longer survive Supreme Court review, the City required all gun owners to obtain training that included one hour of live‐range instruction, and then banned all live ranges within City limits. This was not so much a nod to the importance of live‐range training as it was a thumbing of the municipal nose at the Supreme Court.

#9 sirflyguy

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,337 posts
  • Joined: 28-September 09

Posted 16 February 2012 - 04:22 PM

I just read the other thread. I certainly didn't see where anyone was told to drop the FOID issue. I did plainly see, though, that there is a plan for it all, including the FOID card. Maybe some don't like the plan, or the order of things in the plan. That is certainly one's right. Golly, I wish we had constitutional carry now, no FOID, no waiting periods, etc. However, that won't happen in IL immediately. It is what it is.
Certified NRA Pistol Instructor
NRA Basic Pistol Instructor
NRA Personal Protection In the Home Instructor
IL FCCA Approved Instructor

#10 Romano For Rep

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 150 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 11

Posted 16 February 2012 - 04:29 PM



It doesn't matter what we think, we have been told NO now let the foid card issue die.

been told no by?



http://illinoiscarry...01&hl=FOID&st=0

Todd



so you want to drop it...or get people elected who will get rid of it?

by saying drop it, means that you are with those who wish to see it stay IMHO. Saying we have to get people with a back bone to stand up and present bills to get rid of it is another thing.

#11 mauserme

    Eliminating the element of surprise one bill at a time.

  • Moderator
  • 8,219 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 09

Posted 16 February 2012 - 04:53 PM

The FOID works for possession and open carry in Michigan. I would like to keep that option until an Illinois Carry Permit makes it moot.
.
.
Link to ILGA House Audio/Video..........Link to ILGA Senate Audio/Video ..........Link to Livestream Blueroom Events Page

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

#12 Rem870

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 480 posts
  • Joined: 26-January 08

Posted 16 February 2012 - 05:03 PM

The FOID is nothing more than a tax for you to have your 2 nd amendment right. You still have to get background checks every time you buy a firearm. I see absolutely no reason to have to have a FOID. If it allowed for us to go in and buy a gun and leave with it right then, that would be another story.

#13 Gary

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 752 posts
  • Joined: 28-April 04

Posted 16 February 2012 - 05:31 PM

The FOID works for possession and open carry in Michigan. I would like to keep that option until an Illinois Carry Permit makes it moot.

If we could get the penalty for UUW or A UUW reduced substanialy, the FOID would become a defacto carry card. I mean really, should the mere possession of anything other than a nuclear weapon be anything more than a petit offense? A jail term should only be applied to an actual act of some kind but mere possession.....?

#14 NakPPI

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 1,210 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 11

Posted 16 February 2012 - 05:47 PM

It's a poll tax, plain and simple. What if we required all of the Occupiers downtown to have "First Amendment ID's?" Would that be ok?
Stung by the result of McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010), the City quickly enacted an ordinance that was too clever by half. Recognizing that a complete gun ban would no longer survive Supreme Court review, the City required all gun owners to obtain training that included one hour of live‐range instruction, and then banned all live ranges within City limits. This was not so much a nod to the importance of live‐range training as it was a thumbing of the municipal nose at the Supreme Court.

#15 mauserme

    Eliminating the element of surprise one bill at a time.

  • Moderator
  • 8,219 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 09

Posted 16 February 2012 - 06:25 PM

Sure it is, and that's not OK.

But one could say the same about a permit based carry system that requires a fee. Unfortunatley, if our solution to the problem is legislative it appears it will be just that, as it has been in so many other states.

An infringement to be sure, but one that provides a small benefit to Michigan travelers as I somtimes am. Thus, I see more logic in trading one infringement for another as opposed to losing the small benefit we currently derive from the FOID.
.
.
Link to ILGA House Audio/Video..........Link to ILGA Senate Audio/Video ..........Link to Livestream Blueroom Events Page

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C.S. Lewis

#16 Lou

    Resident Old Guy

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 10,480 posts
  • Joined: 18-May 04

Posted 16 February 2012 - 06:37 PM

96% yes. ge I thought it would be higher? :turned:

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. -  George Orwell

A gun is like a parachute. If you need one, and don't have one, you'll probably never need one again. 


#17 lockman

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,334 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 06

Posted 16 February 2012 - 07:19 PM

(430 ILCS 65/16) (from Ch. 38, par. 83-16)
Sec. 16. When 2% of the number of registered voters in the State desire to pass upon the question of whether the General Assembly should repeal this Act regulating the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, they shall, at least 78 days before a regular election to be held throughout the State, file in the office of the State Board of Elections, a petition directed to the Board in accordance with the general election law. The petition shall be composed of county petitions from each of the counties throughout the State and each county petition shall contain the signatures of at least 2% of the number of registered voters in the county. The petition shall request that the question "Should the General Assembly repeal the Act entitled 'An Act relating to the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, to provide a penalty for the violation thereof and to make an appropriation in connection therewith,' approved August 3, 1967, as amended?" be submitted to the voters of the State at the next ensuing State-wide election at which such question may be acted upon.
(Source: P.A. 81-1489.)


Go for it! I'll put the petition on my counter.

"We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1776

Life Member NRA, ISRA, CCRKBA & SAF

#18 Gary

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 752 posts
  • Joined: 28-April 04

Posted 16 February 2012 - 08:20 PM

(430 ILCS 65/16) (from Ch. 38, par. 83-16)
Sec. 16. When 2% of the number of registered voters in the State desire to pass upon the question of whether the General Assembly should repeal this Act regulating the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, they shall, at least 78 days before a regular election to be held throughout the State, file in the office of the State Board of Elections, a petition directed to the Board in accordance with the general election law. The petition shall be composed of county petitions from each of the counties throughout the State and each county petition shall contain the signatures of at least 2% of the number of registered voters in the county. The petition shall request that the question "Should the General Assembly repeal the Act entitled 'An Act relating to the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, to provide a penalty for the violation thereof and to make an appropriation in connection therewith,' approved August 3, 1967, as amended?" be submitted to the voters of the State at the next ensuing State-wide election at which such question may be acted upon.
(Source: P.A. 81-1489.)


Go for it! I'll put the petition on my counter.

The problem is thatit requires 2% from EACH of the counties. Noting that Brady carried every county in the state except for three, I can foresee a problem of getting the required 2% in Cook county.

#19 vezpa

    Illinoiscarry.com Funnyman

  • Supporting Members Team
  • 3,684 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 10

Posted 16 February 2012 - 10:01 PM

I think the FOID should stay and become the default CCW Illinois permit when CCW passes. No need for the rest of us to spend any more money on extra permits.
:turned:
Stand Your Ground

#20 Davey

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,173 posts
  • Joined: 02-November 10

Posted 16 February 2012 - 11:31 PM

So say the question gets put on voting ballot and a majority answer in our favor. What would happens next?

#21 Xwing

    Member

  • Members
  • 5,460 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 09

Posted 17 February 2012 - 08:27 AM



It doesn't matter what we think, we have been told NO now let the foid card issue die.

been told no by?



http://illinoiscarry...01&hl=FOID&st=0

Todd

I disagree. No-one said "No. Let's keep the FOID Card forever. We love it". Just that getting rid of it is not a priority at the moment. We should focus on the things that really matter, (such as the fact that Illinois is the only state without CCW).

Any group or organization has limited political capital. Let’s expend it all on getting the right to carry. Later, once that is complete, then we can look at the minor annoyances such as the FOID card.
NRA Lifetime Member
IGOLD 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014
CCW Laws: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)
Posted anti-gun business listing: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)
Illinois Government: (Android), (iPhone/iPad)

#22 stm

    Member

  • Supporting Members Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 973 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 11

Posted 17 February 2012 - 09:38 AM

I disagree. No-one said "No. Let's keep the FOID Card forever. We love it". Just that getting rid of it is not a priority at the moment. We should focus on the things that really matter, (such as the fact that Illinois is the only state without CCW).

Any group or organization has limited political capital. Let’s expend it all on getting the right to carry. Later, once that is complete, then we can look at the minor annoyances such as the FOID card.

Exactly! This is IllinoisCarry, not IllinoisFOIDHaters. We should be focussing all of our efforts into achieving RTC. Anything else is just a distraction and divides energy.

I don't like the FOID anymore than anyone else here. I really dislike the fact that I am one clerical error away from being a felon, just because I didn't get it renewed in time. But that's not why I'm here.

Let's keep our eye on the ball, friends!

yea everyone makes fun of the redneck till the zombies show up. . .


#23 Romano For Rep

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 150 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 11

Posted 17 February 2012 - 03:31 PM


(430 ILCS 65/16) (from Ch. 38, par. 83-16)
Sec. 16. When 2% of the number of registered voters in the State desire to pass upon the question of whether the General Assembly should repeal this Act regulating the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, they shall, at least 78 days before a regular election to be held throughout the State, file in the office of the State Board of Elections, a petition directed to the Board in accordance with the general election law. The petition shall be composed of county petitions from each of the counties throughout the State and each county petition shall contain the signatures of at least 2% of the number of registered voters in the county. The petition shall request that the question "Should the General Assembly repeal the Act entitled 'An Act relating to the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, to provide a penalty for the violation thereof and to make an appropriation in connection therewith,' approved August 3, 1967, as amended?" be submitted to the voters of the State at the next ensuing State-wide election at which such question may be acted upon.
(Source: P.A. 81-1489.)


Go for it! I'll put the petition on my counter.

The problem is thatit requires 2% from EACH of the counties. Noting that Brady carried every county in the state except for three, I can foresee a problem of getting the required 2% in Cook county.



Brady lost by a small margin in Cook County I believe...I know he got a bit more than 2%. :thumbsup:

#24 ishmo

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,603 posts
  • Joined: 14-March 05

Posted 17 February 2012 - 05:01 PM

Brady lost by a small margin in Cook County I believe...I know he got a bit more than 2%. :thumbsup:

Just for the record, Brady lost by 500,000+ in Cook. If he'd lost by a small margin he'd the governor.

#25 dmefford

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 273 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 11

Posted 12 April 2012 - 04:06 AM

Actually, Lockman, may have the answer here... Get this thing on the ballot.... The tricky part as always... remains Chicago..... and their tricky cemetery residents....... I think we could come up with 2% in Pike County :tinfoilhat: Regards, Drd


http://www.ilga.gov/...57&ChapterID=39
(430 ILCS 65/16.1)
(from Ch. 38, par. 83-16.1)
Sec. 16.1. A petition for the submission of the proposition shall be in substantially the following form:
To the State Board of Elections
The undersigned, residents and registered voters of the State of Illinois, respectfully petition that you cause to be submitted, in the manner provided by the general election law to the voters of the State of Illinois, at the next State-wide election, the proposition "Should the General Assembly repeal an Act entitled 'An Act relating to the acquisition, possession and transfer of firearms and firearm ammunition, to provide a penalty for the violation thereof and to make an appropriation in connection therewith', approved August 3, 1967, as amended?"
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
Such petition shall conform to the requirements of the general election law. The Board shall certify the question to the proper election officials who shall submit the question at an election in accordance with the general election law. Upon request of any citizen for a reproduced copy of the petition and paying or tendering to the State Board of Elections the costs of making the copy, the Board shall immediately make, or cause to be made a reproduced copy of such petition. The Board shall also deliver to such person his official certification that such copy is a true copy of the original, stating the day when such original was filed in its office.
(Source: P.A. 81-1489.)
(430 ILCS 65/16-3) (from Ch. 38, par. 83-16.3)
Sec. 16-3. The Secretary of State shall cause the question to be plainly printed upon separate ballots as follows:
--------------------------------------------------------------
Should the General Assembly repeal the Act
entitled "An Act relating to the acquisition, YES
possession and transfer of firearms and
firearm ammunition, to provide a penalty ---------------
for the violation thereof and to make an
appropriation in connection therewith", . NO
approved August 3, 1967, as amended?
--------------------------------------------------------------
(Source: P.A. 77-1819.)


[Edit] Remember this thing will cross the R and the D boundaries... There are tons Democrats who will vote to repeal the FOID card... So you can figure that your support throughout Downstate will come from both sides. Now in Chicago when the Machine starts to roll with all these amazing vote counts they manage to pull off - I don't know what will happen.... We had a positive 85% vote in Pike - I don't know if you could get an overall down state repeal vote or not of say 70%. If you could then there might be a chance over rule Chicago...

The fight has to be "Defeat the Chicago Machine," not the Chicago Democrats... The Chicago Machine is the enemy of Liberty... Many of the People of Chicago hate the Machine as well.

Regards, Drd


Edited by dmefford, 12 April 2012 - 04:20 AM.

Visit my Blog: "Shall Not Be Infringed"

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
--Thomas Jefferson to I. Tiffany, 1819

#26 moparcardave

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,304 posts
  • Joined: 10-January 09

Posted 12 April 2012 - 05:01 AM

Well are there 104,000 honestly constitutional loving folks in Cook county? That's 2% of Cook county. I think you could do it, so many times there are folks who will sign anything when you ask them to sign a petition just to get away from you.
Guns don't kill people, Gun FREE zones kill people!

WHY CARRY A GUN?  Because carrying a Cop would be too heavy.

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
--George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 425-426.

#27 Dilbert

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 149 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 11

Posted 12 April 2012 - 07:03 AM

Correct me if I am wrong. The way I interpret the statute it only defines “county” totals. So 104,000 county residents need to sign the petition. Correct? If so, I have met many people in the suburbs that have fled the city because of crime, the corruption and bureaucracy.

Does anybody know what must be done in order to solicit a political petition? I believe all that needs to be done is inform the village/city hall of your presents in order to get an ID so the residents are assured you are not trying to scam them or casing their homes. Solicitors (Comcast, Xfinity, etc.) approach my home often with a badge that identifies them as legitimate.

May I suggest:

• Ask the IllinoisCarry members if there is anyone that works in marketing. Because we have seen on many occasions it is how the anti’s have worded the questions that provoke the response they want. Most people will not read the entire text of the petition, they want the quick explanation. This is a bipartisan issue. Our opening line needs to be phrased in a way that prompts patriotism, honor, the law-abiding, safety, etc. Only the hard core antis will refuse to sign. The fence sitters will sign if the explanation is pro liberty.
• The train stations shuttle several thousand people down to the city on each train. Maybe a hundred trains per day. If the response from the polls we see is 95%+ in favor, then most people would be willing to sign.
• There is a gun show every week but not during the summer. We would need to move on them right away.
• Focus our attention in the northern suburbs. There are large communities that that hold great distain for the political landscape of Chicago.
• Contact the Illinois Republican Party and ask for a map of the stronghold areas. This may make the task a bit easier.
• There are festivals and community events that draw several thousand people at a time.
• I believe all of the gun & sporting shops would be willing to draw attention to the petition.

If memory serves, I believe commercial solicitation can be banned from all of these areas, but political petitions cannot be restricted.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." Benjamin Franklin, 1759

#28 dmefford

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 273 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 11

Posted 12 April 2012 - 08:39 PM

Correct me if I am wrong. The way I interpret the statute it only defines "county" totals. So 104,000 county residents need to sign the petition.


Dilbert, You will need 104,000 REGISTERED VOTERS, or you will have a problem... But it would be time for the Chicago gun movement to get the job done... if they can't get her done then the jig is up... People could come in from outside and help...

Does anybody know what must be done in order to solicit a political petition? I believe all that needs to be done is inform the village/city hall of your presents in order to get an ID so the residents are assured you are not trying to scam them or casing their homes. Solicitors (Comcast, Xfinity, etc.) approach my home often with a badge that identifies them as legitimate.


Not necessary... Everyone in the state would need identical petitions... The "circulator" must 18, a US Citizen. I suggest the Circulator live close, that way if there is a question you get the "circulator" to show up at a hearing...

Ask the IllinoisCarry members if there is anyone that works in marketing. Because we have seen on many occasions it is how the anti's have worded the questions that provoke the response they want. Most people will not read the entire text of the petition, they want the quick explanation. This is a bipartisan issue. Our opening line needs to be phrased in a way that prompts patriotism, honor, the law-abiding, safety, etc. Only the hard core antis will refuse to sign. The fence sitters will sign if the explanation is pro liberty.


Great idea...... as is the rest of your post, in my opinion.....


Regards, Drd
Visit my Blog: "Shall Not Be Infringed"

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
--Thomas Jefferson to I. Tiffany, 1819