2071 replies to this topic

[rott]

GF...you're mean!  

Bud, just thinking about your scenario makes me want to cry...

[Sigma]

It would be foolish to come this far, fight this hard and vote in a President that could wipe it all away.

[Buzzard]

GarandFan, on 26 July 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

What's this about the rumor ... that Posner is indeed writing this opinion, but because he believes Heller was wrongly decided is going to hold its release until after the election in the hope that another Obama administration would be able to replace either Thomas or Scalia ... which would allow the SCOTUS to revisit Heller and rule that bearing arms can only be tied to membership in a regulated militia, and thus moot all these carry cases coming up through the courts?

Alright Buddy! Just where did you think you were going - typing that??

Never mind...I don't wanna hear it!  I'm charging you with Aggravated Run-On Sentence in excess of two hundred characters.

[laststate2havecarry]

^{This will get remanded to lower court so they can drag it out for years.  Then Obama will be re-elected.  Then the 2nd Amendment dies, so our case no longer matters.
You all watch what will happen now, Obama is already calling for more gun control...before the election, which is astounding.  Seems like a very bad idea politically for him.
On Friday he will be presented with the UN Small Arms Treaty and Obama WILL SIGN IT.
For anyone who is on the fence about what Obama wants to do to our gun rights all they have to do is listen. Obama is telling us what he wants, more gun laws, and to bind us to some phony UN gun grab treaty.
Thats their overall plan, you can bet on it.  I have lived in Illinois long enough to know how it works.   They will stall as long as possible, and then more stalling in another venue. Their key is, can they stall long enough to make our case irrelevant?  The answer is definitely.
Anyone wish to speculate on how Colorado will effect the 7ths opinion now?  If it hasn't been written yet, how does this change the outcome?}

[snubjob]

scough, on 26 July 2012 - 11:16 AM, said:

The likely scenario is we win, they appeal or it gets remained back.  Either way, I'd erase any thoughts that in two weeks, we'll be carrying. that just ain't happening.

If we've learned anything, the Gun Grabbing Liberal Machine running Illinois doesn't care about wasting enormous amounts of taxpayers money to do everything they can to fight this. Ultimately, they are hoping Obama gets to shift the SCOTUS and perminently settle this thing in their favor. As such, they will do everything in their power to string this out as long as they can.

My .02 fwiw.

Yup.

[GarandFan]

LastState:

I recommend you try a little pessimism.  Even if it's somewhat unrealistic, at least it will make you feel better.  Come on ... it's fun!

[Gray Peterson]

You folks are hilarious.  Maryland,  a state that competes with IL & NJ for corruption, just got ordered to issue licenses to carry starting August 7th.

[willxjcherokee]

Gray Peterson, on 26 July 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

You folks are hilarious.  Maryland,  a state that competes with IL & NJ for corruption, just got ordered to issue licenses to carry starting August 7th.

The problem is even with a court ruling I feel the "machine" will kick and scream and postpone everything as much as they can.

[billzfx4]

willxjcherokee, on 26 July 2012 - 04:29 PM, said:

Gray Peterson, on 26 July 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

You folks are hilarious.  Maryland,  a state that competes with IL & NJ for corruption, just got ordered to issue licenses to carry starting August 7th.

The problem is even with a court ruling I feel the "machine" will kick and scream and postpone everything as much as they can.

Sadly, I agree.  Look what happened with the McDonald ruling, Chicago did every thing short of telling SCOTUS to go pound sand.  Yes they paid for it, and are continuing to pay for it.  But hey, it's not THEIR money.

[snubjob]

Gray Peterson, on 26 July 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:

You folks are hilarious.  Maryland,  a state that competes with IL & NJ for corruption, just got ordered to issue licenses to carry starting August 7th.

And that decision is being appealed.

[borgranta]

laststate2havecarry, on 26 July 2012 - 03:39 PM, said:

^{This will get remanded to lower court so they can drag it out for years.  Then Obama will be re-elected.  Then the 2nd Amendment dies, so our case no longer matters.
You all watch what will happen now, Obama is already calling for more gun control...before the election, which is astounding.  Seems like a very bad idea politically for him.
On Friday he will be presented with the UN Small Arms Treaty and Obama WILL SIGN IT.
For anyone who is on the fence about what Obama wants to do to our gun rights all they have to do is listen. Obama is telling us what he wants, more gun laws, and to bind us to some phony UN gun grab treaty.
Thats their overall plan, you can bet on it.  I have lived in Illinois long enough to know how it works.   They will stall as long as possible, and then more stalling in another venue. Their key is, can they stall long enough to make our case irrelevant?  The answer is definitely.
Anyone wish to speculate on how Colorado will effect the 7ths opinion now?  If it hasn't been written yet, how does this change the outcome?}

It will not affect the ruling because the theater was gun free zone.

[vess1]

The Colorado shooting either should have no bearing on their decision or will highlight why people desperately need the ability to defend themselves against threats such as this.    

Sent from my Motorola Electrify using Tapatalk 2

[drdoom]

I agree, let's push OUR legislator to pass NO carry bill, and let the lawsuits begin!

[junglebob]

If the 7th circuit rules that UUW statutes are unconstitutional what could they charge you with if you were found carrying?

[Davey]

junglebob, on 27 July 2012 - 10:17 AM, said:

If the 7th circuit rules that UUW statutes are unconstitutional what could they charge you with if you were found carrying?

Disturbing the peace and whatever other BS they can pull out of their ass.

[junglebob]

Davey, on 27 July 2012 - 11:18 AM, said:

junglebob, on 27 July 2012 - 10:17 AM, said:

If the 7th circuit rules that UUW statutes are unconstitutional what could they charge you with if you were found carrying?

Disturbing the peace and whatever other BS they can pull out of their ass.

Disturbing the peace occured to me, I've heard of folks open carrying charged with that.  Seems far fetched if you are concealed carrying and it stays concealed.  But in Chicago maybe.

[lockman]

When challenged the disturbing the peace generally will not hold up as it usually will not meet all the elements of the crime. Any disturbing the peace statute can can get a conviction when the only element is lawful activity would be considered overly broad.

[Bud]

This is Illinois, there is no "disturbing the peace" but there is Disorderly Conduct(I highlighted what open carriers get charged with)

720 ILCS 5/26-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 26-1)
(Text of Section from P.A. 97-38)
Sec. 26-1. Elements of the Offense.
(a) A person commits disorderly conduct when he knowingly:
(1) Does any act in such unreasonable manner as to
alarm or disturb another and to provoke a breach of the peace; or
(2) Transmits or causes to be transmitted in any
manner to the fire department of any city, town, village or fire protection district a false alarm of fire, knowing at the time of such transmission that there is no reasonable ground for believing that such fire exists; or
(3) Transmits or causes to be transmitted in any
manner to another a false alarm to the effect that a bomb or other explosive of any nature or a container holding poison gas, a deadly biological or chemical contaminant, or radioactive substance is concealed in such place that its explosion or release would endanger human life, knowing at the time of such transmission that there is no reasonable ground for believing that such bomb, explosive or a container holding poison gas, a deadly biological or chemical contaminant, or radioactive substance is concealed in such place; or
(4) Transmits or causes to be transmitted in any
manner to any peace officer, public officer or public employee a report to the effect that an offense will be committed, is being committed, or has been committed, knowing at the time of such transmission that there is no reasonable ground for believing that such an offense will be committed, is being committed, or has been committed; or
(5) Enters upon the property of another and for a
lewd or unlawful purpose deliberately looks into a dwelling on the property through any window or other opening in it; or
(6) While acting as a collection agency as defined in
the "Collection Agency Act" or as an employee of such collection agency, and while attempting to collect an alleged debt, makes a telephone call to the alleged debtor which is designed to harass, annoy or intimidate the alleged debtor; or
(7) Transmits or causes to be transmitted a false
report to the Department of Children and Family Services under Section 4 of the "Abused and Neglected Child Reporting Act"; or
(8) Transmits or causes to be transmitted a false
report to the Department of Public Health under the Nursing Home Care Act, the Specialized Mental Health Rehabilitation Act, or the MR/DD Community Care Act; or
(9) Transmits or causes to be transmitted in any
manner to the police department or fire department of any municipality or fire protection district, or any privately owned and operated ambulance service, a false request for an ambulance, emergency medical technician-ambulance or emergency medical technician-paramedic knowing at the time there is no reasonable ground for believing that such assistance is required; or
(10) Transmits or causes to be transmitted a false
report under Article II of "An Act in relation to victims of violence and abuse", approved September 16, 1984, as amended; or
(11) Transmits or causes to be transmitted a false
report to any public safety agency without the reasonable grounds necessary to believe that transmitting such a report is necessary for the safety and welfare of the public; or
(12) Calls the number "911" for the purpose of making
or transmitting a false alarm or complaint and reporting information when, at the time the call or transmission is made, the person knows there is no reasonable ground for making the call or transmission and further knows that the call or transmission could result in the emergency response of any public safety agency; or
(13) Transmits or causes to be transmitted a threat
of destruction of a school building or school property, or a threat of violence, death, or bodily harm directed against persons at a school, school function, or school event, whether or not school is in session.
( Sentence. A violation of subsection (a)(1) of this Section is a Class C misdemeanor. A violation of subsection (a)(5) or (a)(11) of this Section is a Class A misdemeanor. A violation of subsection (a)(8) or (a)(10) of this Section is a Class B misdemeanor. A violation of subsection (a)(2), (a)(4), (a)(7), (a)(9), (a)(12), or (a)(13) of this Section is a Class 4 felony. A violation of subsection (a)(3) of this Section is a Class 3 felony, for which a fine of not less than $3,000 and no more than $10,000 shall be assessed in addition to any other penalty imposed.
A violation of subsection (a)(6) of this Section is a Business Offense and shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $3,000. A second or subsequent violation of subsection (a)(7) or (a)(11) of this Section is a Class 4 felony. A third or subsequent violation of subsection (a)(5) of this Section is a Class 4 felony.
© In addition to any other sentence that may be imposed, a court shall order any person convicted of disorderly conduct to perform community service for not less than 30 and not more than 120 hours, if community service is available in the jurisdiction and is funded and approved by the county board of the county where the offense was committed. In addition, whenever any person is placed on supervision for an alleged offense under this Section, the supervision shall be conditioned upon the performance of the community service.
This subsection does not apply when the court imposes a sentence of incarceration.
(d) In addition to any other sentence that may be imposed, the court shall order any person convicted of disorderly conduct under paragraph (3) of subsection (a) involving a false alarm of a threat that a bomb or explosive device has been placed in a school to reimburse the unit of government that employs the emergency response officer or officers that were dispatched to the school for the cost of the search for a bomb or explosive device. For the purposes of this Section, "emergency response" means any incident requiring a response by a police officer, a firefighter, a State Fire Marshal employee, or an ambulance.
(Source: P.A. 96-339, eff. 7-1-10; 96-413, eff. 8-13-09; 96-772, eff. 1-1-10; 96-1000, eff. 7-2-10; 96-1261, eff. 1-1-11; 97-38, eff. 6-28-11.)

[TyGuy]

How is there any history of OCers in IL getting charged with DC?  I believe they would be charged with AGUUW.

[NakPPI]

Posner and Williams opinions today... I could be wrong with my speculation that Williams is likely to write this...

[Hatchet]

TyGuy, on 27 July 2012 - 01:34 PM, said:

How is there any history of OCers in IL getting charged with DC?  I believe they would be charged with AGUUW.

I'm sure there are a few people who get it pleaded down to just a DC instead of felony.

[miztic]

NakPPI, on 27 July 2012 - 01:46 PM, said:

Posner and Williams opinions today... I could be wrong with my speculation that Williams is likely to write this...

When were those cases heard?
they have two more weeks, I don't know how long it takes to write an opinion, but two weeks should be enough to get it done?

[TyGuy]

7/11/12
6/6/12
5/23/12
1/17/12
2/16/12
6/6/12
and so on

[TyGuy]

http://www.ca7.uscou.../fdocs/docs.fwx

Click on "Case #" and check the oral arguments date.

[lockman]

When police confront a person lawfully carrying, who is not otherwise engaging in any other unlawful activity and create a scene in public, I question who is actually committing the offense of disorderly conduct.

[lockman]

As for the 7th, get it done.

[TyGuy]

lockman, on 27 July 2012 - 08:17 PM, said:

When police confront a person lawfully carrying, who is not otherwise engaging in any other unlawful activity and create a scene in public, I question who is actually committing the offense of disorderly conduct.

I'll drink to that.

[KingWalleye]

Mike Royko once wrote..."Disorderly conduct is a police officers way of never having to say I was wrong".

[tysonu74]

KingWalleye, on 29 July 2012 - 07:49 AM, said:

Mike Royko once wrote..."Disorderly conduct is a police officers way of never having to say I was wrong".

true

[Bud]

TyGuy, on 27 July 2012 - 01:34 PM, said:

How is there any history of OCers in IL getting charged with DC?  I believe they would be charged with AGUUW.

I was responding to the "disturbing the peace" post, there is no disturbing the peace in Illinois statues