181 replies to this topic

[kurt555gs]

It looks like giving away the store on HB148 wasn't enough to please and placate the anti civil rights crowd. They want NOTHING. Giving in to the last ditch "24 hours of training" would have gotten exactly the same result. The 2 court cases won't give us anything until SCOTUS rules on them several years from now, and prolly with a new Obama appointed justice to change the balance.

Fanny Pack Carry is legal in most of Illinois, and it's time we stop cowering and put real effort into making maps, and GPS cell phone apps to guide us where it is prohibited.

It's time to put police, and states attorneys that just don't like it on notice, that it is legal, and we as a community will not tolerate them not following the law by threatening arrest.

We may not be able to overcome Speaker Madigan's control of the House, but we have more than 60 votes to stop shenanigans.

It's time to push the limits of Fanny Pack Carry. Past time.

[Helpdesk9]

kurt555gs, on 03 June 2012 - 09:46 AM, said:

Fanny Pack Carry is legal in most of Illinois, and it's time we stop cowering and put real effort into making maps, and GPS cell phone apps to guide us where it is prohibited.

It's time to push the limits of Fanny Pack Carry. Past time.

I have a friend who can do app development
Sent from my MB855 using Tapatalk 2

[JackTripper]

Big problem with this is not everyone has the $30,000 - $40,000 to mount a defense.
I don't think NFA/SAF/ISRA would pop in to help someone caught up in this.

[kurt555gs]

JackTripper, on 03 June 2012 - 10:00 AM, said:

Big problem with this is not everyone has the $30,000 - $40,000 to mount a defense.
I don't think NFA/SAF/ISRA would pop in to help someone caught up in this.

Maybe it is time that we, the members demand they do, Jack. If we follow the law, why should we be bullied by those in power that don't!

Isn't that what our organizations should be doing. Using their collective power to support LAW ABIDING gun owners? I see no excuse for them not to. If they won't, maybe they need some fixing in leadership.

Edited by kurt555gs, 03 June 2012 - 10:07 AM.

[GarandFan]

Kurt ... none of the main second amendment organizations, be they NRA, ISRA, or Illinois Carry, are going to get on board with promoting "fanny pack" carry.  You know that.  If you choose to fanny pack carry, that will be your own decision (and if so, it's my humble recommendation that you do so discretely).

You've been on this board since fall of 2009.  You know we have been down this road before.  There is no need to go down it AGAIN, even since once more the IL legislature failed to pass a carry bill.

[JackTripper]

NFA = NRA

[Tvandermyde]

the Grayhound Bus case has gotten my attention. If Cook continues to want to flaunt the Diggins case, then next session it will be time to "define" case or container as the Court has done. My version is short of a paper bag, it is a case.

and we are going to make them prove you don't get the exemption, not that you are entitled to it.

[RandyP]

We all get to pick and choose our battles and battle grounds. I do not FP carry, nor do I suggest anyone else opt for that 'relatively' legal option.

Yes,there are statutes that you and your lawyer can bring forth to the Judge AFTER your arrest to attest to that 'legality', but yer keester was still thrown in the slammer with all the attendant consequences to you, your family, your job, your future etc.

As to Illinois remaining the sole holdout to Carry? It is not even newsworthy IMHO. Hard working folks on our side truly worked very hard. Madigan barely lifted a ringed pinky finger and stopped those efforts, just as he will stop or stall anything down the road.

[Yas]

Gun shops have been providing cardboard box's  when firearms sold aren't with some form of factory case. I got a rifle a few weeks ago and walked out of a shop in a plain brown (unmarked in any way) cardboard box.   It wasn't marked Firearm container or Gun case.  Taped shut with clear boxing tape , not one latch, hinge , No child proof trigger lock on it. The bolt wasn't even pulled from the rifle.



So where was the State Trooper or County Sheriff waiting for me to exit the building and slap the cuffs on me?   Todd's right on getting this B/S tossed out. The definition is used after the fact as a additional charge to slap at someone thats been arrested to pad the bill.

I regularly travel around with a maxpedition (Shoot me first bag) mainly carrying a camera along with some tools and a spray bottle or two of kitchen condiments in aerosol form and the only people that get nervous around me are bank guards.   I've had no issues with LEO's.

[kurt555gs]

GarandFan, if the NRA/ISRA won't defend gun owners that abide by the laws we have, aka Fanny Pack Carry, why would you expect them to help in any matter?

If police or a states attorney can bully firearms owners that follow the law with impunity, and our organizations allow this, what are they for?

As members we need to demand they support us when we follow the law. Period.

* Carthago Delenda Est *

[THE KING]

TO ALL

IMHO this should not be called Fanny Pack Carry.

This is fanny pack TRANSPORT.

Carrying = Illegal
Transport = LEGAL

[soundguy]

THE KING, on 03 June 2012 - 11:04 AM, said:

TO ALL

IMHO this should not be called Fanny Pack Carry.

This is fanny pack TRANSPORT.

Carrying = Illegal
Transport = LEGAL

Thank you TK.

[GarandFan]

Kurt:

Because if you consider the legislative history of gun transport laws in Illinois, they were not established in the spirit of carrying firearms in public for the purpose of self-defense.  Spirit of the law means something.  Fanny-pack transport is something you might choose to do quietly and discretely, until the state (finally) provides the basis for lawful defensive carry, or repeals their laws against doing so.  Whether the gun orgs would choose to defend you or others who were charged or prosecuted for fanny-pack carry/transport is something you'd have to ask them.  But I don't think they are going to go promoting the practice as a substitute for real defensive carry.  And another thing ... for you to sit there making "demands" of what they do or don't do, and then consider them your enemies because they choose not to endorse fanny-pack carry ... that is not the way to approach the issue.  The way to approach it is to write out well-written letters, putting the question to those orgs.  Otherwise, you just come across as another of the countless and naive keyboard commandos.

[Mr. Fife]

Forget fanny packing. Everybody grab your fishing pole and head to Navy pier for some legal open carry fishing!

[willxjcherokee]

I only have one hope left.
That the court cases go in our favor..

[Tvandermyde]

Mr. Fife, dont forget about 21-6 unlawful possession on public land...navy peir is public land

[kurt555gs]

GarandFan, you stated "Because if you consider the legislative history of gun transport laws in Illinois, they were not established in the spirit of carrying firearms in public for the purpose of self-defense."

​The UUW and AG UUW in plain reading don't mention this. If the "spirit" means something, they need to change the actual law. There is no ambiguity. Diggins, in the opinion affirmed the intent of the court.

This is not just about Fanny Pack Carry, it is about our rights organizations preventing the arbitrary abuse of power by police and off the wall states attorneys.

We should not cower when we obey the law as written.  Don't try to sidetrack this with talk that Fanny Pack Carry is a replacement for an actual concealed carry law. It isn't. But it is what we have now. To quote another website, " A right unexercised, is a right lost".

[papa]

I have what may be a silly question. If a person were legally fanny pack transporting and wasn't in a school , federal building , or other place where firearms were illegal ,  and was arrested , couldn't he file a 1983 suit ?

A police officer would have no more legal authority to search your fanny pack , or any other type bag one might utilize , than he would your car trunk without good cause.  Just thinking something illegal might be in the bag isn't " just cause " for an officer to stop you and conduct a search.

[TyGuy]

I've been doing it for years.  Ys I might have a court battle, but I have accepted the risk,  make your own decision.

[Patriots & Tyrants]

I think we need some empty holster protests with 100k plus in the loop. That would get someones attention.

[vezpa]

I agree that fanny pack carry needs to become a viable option.  I hate to say it, but I wish someone would get arrested for this so a huge case could be built and go to court to once again put Illinois in it's place.

Edited by vezpa, 03 June 2012 - 01:35 PM.

[vezpa]

Tvandermyde, on 03 June 2012 - 12:58 PM, said:

Mr. Fife, dont forget about 21-6 unlawful possession on public land...navy peir is public land

Well what if we rent a barge and all open carry floating 10 feet from Navy pier on the barge so everyone can see?  

If I launched my boat in Indiana and rode into Oak street beach and was floating out there anchored(never touching land) , what are the laws regarding me carrying in my boat?

Edited by vezpa, 03 June 2012 - 01:44 PM.

[billzfx4]

Patriots & Tyrants, on 03 June 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

I think we need some empty holster protests with 100k plus in the loop. That would get someones attention.

If we could get even close to 100k gun owners in one place at one time, we would have had a carry law many years ago.

Edited by billzfx4, 03 June 2012 - 01:58 PM.

[3ddiver]

billzfx4, on 03 June 2012 - 01:55 PM, said:

Patriots & Tyrants, on 03 June 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

I think we need some empty holster protests with 100k plus in the loop. That would get someones attention.

If we could get even close to 100k gun owners in one place at one time, we would have had a carry law many years ago.

Amen to that. While the turn out at the IGOLDs is impressive looking when you break it down and look at the number of gun owners in Illinois it is pathetic.

[TyGuy]

Especially when the media is obsessed with showing 50 people protesting textbooks in Chicago.

[Gray Peterson]

kurt555gs, on 03 June 2012 - 09:46 AM, said:

It looks like giving away the store on HB148 wasn't enough to please and placate the anti civil rights crowd. They want NOTHING. Giving in to the last ditch "24 hours of training" would have gotten exactly the same result. The 2 court cases won't give us anything until SCOTUS rules on them several years from now, and prolly with a new Obama appointed justice to change the balance.

The underlined is utterly and absolutely false, and again shows an ignorance of the appellate judicial process.  A ruling in the 7th Circuit will occur by August 8th, and when it's appealed upwards to SCOTUS, and cert is granted (a cert grant is a 100 percent certainty if we are appealing, less so if the state does from a loss), it will be heard in the SCOTUS term starting this year in October.  Per SCOTUS rules and custom for "high profile" cases, we will have a ruling by June 24th, 2013.

[Gray Peterson]

Also, the "Six Seconds to Safety" method here is not a true substitute for carry, especially while trying to do so in view of an upraised knife from a criminal.  The Tueller Principle states that if a criminal is within 21 feet, they have the capability to rush you and stop you before you can get a gun out of holster.   You add 5 or 6 more seconds out, you'll be bled out and quite dead.

Fanny Pack Transport, or as it was otherwise called before, "Six Seconds to Safety", is an unserious solution for self defensive carry.  It's clown shoes.  At least the handgun UOC in California, you could load in a second or two and MAY have a chance.  6 seconds, the criminal now has a free gun after stabbing you in the lungs, heart, and liver.

Also, your estate may be subject to lawsuit if that gun is used by said criminal to shoot another.   That means if you have an owned house with no mortgage, victims of being shot by YOUR gun after you are dead will target your estate and leave your family destitute, whether the victims win or not.

Let me make it clear here, since someone may get pissed off with my assertion and demand proof: I stated whether the victims win or not.   That means even if it's a losing case, it's another 10-25K out of your family budget for lawyers after burying or cremating you.

Edited by Gray Peterson, 03 June 2012 - 04:36 PM.

[ishmo]

vezpa, on 03 June 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

I agree that fanny pack carry needs to become a viable option.  I hate to say it, but I wish someone would get arrested for this so a huge case could be built and go to court to once again put Illinois in it's place.

Any reason you can't be the test case since you think it's such a hot idea?

[Gray Peterson]

vezpa, on 03 June 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:

I agree that fanny pack carry needs to become a viable option.  I hate to say it, but I wish someone would get arrested for this so a huge case could be built and go to court to once again put Illinois in it's place.

Not correct.   Using criminal law to "put a state in it's place" is not a good situation.   First, you would be arguing to a STATE court in an very anti-gun urban area that fanny pack transport is legal.    You would not be able to access the federal courts for a habeas corpus petition is because the federal district court, which all three federal district courts in Illinois have ruled against us on the carry outside of the home issue, will reject for lack of a federal constitutional question.  The 7th Circuit already HAS a carry case already in, the actual carry that we want.

We will have a decision on carry from the 7th Circuit by August 8th.    That is the CARRY that we speak of, not this BS "Six Seconds to Safety" crap that is not actually carry.

The reason for this sudden antsy stuff is because of the false narrative that it will take several years to get a carry decision.  This is absolutely, provably false.

[output]

Gary is spot on IMO. Thanks Sir.