8x57 Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:25 PM Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:25 PM I just read the new house carry bill top to bottom. This is by far the best deal we're ever going to get in this state and it would be extremely foolish not to take it. Think about it - Chicago is the 3rd largest city in the country. That's reality. California and New York have #1 and #2 - they would be absolutely thrilled at the prospect of this bill. Think about it, statewide preemption and shall issue. That's huge. Now for some bad details:• The fee is borderline unconstitutional - (maybe this could be the next lawsuit?)• The amount of training is absurd• The list of no-carry places is pretty extensive (but I could still walk down Michigan Avenue and probably find a few shops without no gun signs and there's nothing Chicago will be able to do about it!) But the fact remains that carry permits will be issued, and there are still plenty of places to carry. While it may not happen soon, I'm sure more will eventually be added. Again, there are several other states where they would give their left nut for this good of a bill. Remember this is Illinois after all and we're not going to get Arizona style carry laws overnight. We should definitely take this deal. Especially since I trust TV when he says the legislature will fold rather than going off the cliff. PS: Also, if you read all the way to the bottom, you'll see that the bill's original language (as it came from the Senate) has been included in the new amendment.
Ritte Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:45 PM Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:45 PM I agree. If this is the best we can get for now then lets take it. Just think, no more Chicago Firearm Permit.
BobPistol Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:46 PM Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:46 PM You think the Chicago Machine will let it stay as is? Nope! They will push crony issue and Chicago/Cook Carve out.
mstrat Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:47 PM Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:47 PM No because you're negotiating away any strong position in a lawsuit against the state. Do it right, or let the state make it easy to strike down in court.
Rail Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:50 PM Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:50 PM ^We should be thankful for the 7th Circuit's decision, but relying on the courts long term is not a primary strategy to go by in Illinois. And we also have to think of the long term effects of what's good about this bill. State preemption on ALL gun laws (not just those related to carry) alone is a reason to go with this: the more Chicagoans there are who own and carry guns, the better all Illinoisans are in the long run, because it will politically kill a lot of momentum for gun control in this state. After this passes, we can go back and start working on repealing all those off-limits locations like a lot of shall-issue states are doing now.
Lou Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:54 PM Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:54 PM I've been at this a long time. There are a lot of things I don't like BUT. There are enough good things that I can support it. Take this and fix those parts that are unacceptable later. In the meantime we will be able to protect ourselves.
Bhawk99 Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:56 PM Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:56 PM I just read the new house carry bill top to bottom. This is by far the best deal we're ever going to get in this state and it would be extremely foolish not to take it. Think about it - Chicago is the 3rd largest city in the country. That's reality. California and New York have #1 and #2 - they would be absolutely thrilled at the prospect of this bill. Think about it, statewide preemption and shall issue. That's huge. Now for some bad details:• The fee is borderline unconstitutional - (maybe this could be the next lawsuit?)• The amount of training is absurd• The list of no-carry places is pretty extensive (but I could still walk down Michigan Avenue and probably find a few shops without no gun signs and there's nothing Chicago will be able to do about it!) But the fact remains that carry permits will be issued, and there are still plenty of places to carry. While it may not happen soon, I'm sure more will eventually be added. Again, there are several other states where they would give their left nut for this good of a bill. Remember this is Illinois after all and we're not going to get Arizona style carry laws overnight. We should definitely take this deal. Especially since I trust TV when he says the legislature will fold rather than going off the cliff. PS: Also, if you read all the way to the bottom, you'll see that the bill's original language (as it came from the Senate) has been included in the new amendment. Good post. I agree with everything you said. While this bill is far from perfect it does give us shall issue with preemption. If Brandon, Todd, Molly and the other Leaders here who had access to the inside info on how the negotiations went down all feel that this is the very best deal we can get then I say I happily support this bill.
TyGuy Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:57 PM Posted May 22, 2013 at 11:57 PM I've been at this a long time. There are a lot of things I don't like BUT. There are enough good things that I can support it. Take this and fix those parts that are unacceptable later. In the meantime we will be able to protect ourselves.How will they be fixed? It will require 71 votes to fix any part of the bill cause we ain't getting a 2A friendly governor anytime soon.
Rail Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:00 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:00 AM I've been at this a long time. There are a lot of things I don't like BUT. There are enough good things that I can support it. Take this and fix those parts that are unacceptable later. In the meantime we will be able to protect ourselves.How will they be fixed? It will require 71 votes to fix any part of the bill cause we ain't getting a 2A friendly governor anytime soon. That's not necessarily true. And if it takes 71 votes to pass the bill in the first place, 71 votes to fix it in subsequent years after the public gets used to the idea of people legally packing heat will be a much easier task.
Davey Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:01 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:01 AM (3) developing resolutions, regulations, or policies regarding the storage or maintenance of firearms, which must include designated areas where persons can park vehicles that carry firearms; and GUN PARKING HERE Genius!
TFC Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:03 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:03 AM Any idea of how many schools, parks, government buildings and houses of worship there are in Chicago?Any idea of how much park and forest land Cook County controls?There would be no where you could carry legally in cook county.Example: how many of you know that all 26 miles of Shoreline in Chicago is a state park?Get pulled over on lake shore drive and you're carrying, you're in violation.You can't drive to any south suburb on surface streets without being on County Forest Preserve property.Yes. This bill is one big sellout trap, and it validates the red text in my signature.
CGT Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:04 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:04 AM I will not stand behind any bill unless its blessed by Todd or Molly. This bill has some good and plenty of bad in it. Clintonwww.facebook.com/illinoisrighttocarry
StreuB1 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:05 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:05 AM They can pass whatever they want or not pass whatever they don't. I no longer give a rats behind. It is what it is. I just won't be carrying. I am not going through all that training when I can already shoot far better than someone coming out of that training having never shot before. And on top of it, pay for all that training, all that ammo, all tht range time and then pay the retardedly high price just for the permit. I'll just keep shooting IDPA and begin carrying a darn hatchet or a baseball bat. Now how does that pass constitutional muster? Can someone please tell me how a single mom of 3 in da hood is going to make all that happen please? Because that is not what I call equal availability. Its segregation and its not right and its unconstitutional.
Mikefishshrooms1 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:05 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:05 AM One hundred and fifty bucks plus whatever 16 hours of training costs? I'm guessing total cost to run 500 plus? No military credit, all training is non NRA the way I read it, no reciprocity, 300 bucks for non residents, tons of gun free areas, etc.. I'll guess Todd will want to "tweak" the current language? I'm retired and have been permitted in fla. for 25 years but doubt I'll be able to afford the costs involved with this bill. It's probably ok to start with for most of you guys who are working but I suspect Chicago will immediately start to chip away at it in some form or another? I'm dissappointed at this point, it'll probably pass as is but heck, I could probably move to an adjacent state for not much more expense? I don't know......have to think about it for a while.
Mikefishshrooms1 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:08 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:08 AM They can pass whatever they want or not pass whatever they don't. I no longer give a rats behind. It is what it is. I just won't be carrying. I am not going through all that training when I can already shoot far better than someone coming out of that training having never shot before. And on top of it, pay for all that training, all that ammo, all tht range time and then pay the retardedly high price just for the permit. I'll just keep shooting IDPA and begin carrying a darn hatchet or a baseball bat. Now how does that pass constitutional muster? Can someone please tell me how a single mom of 3 in da hood is going to make all that happen please? Because that is not what I call equal availability. Its segregation and its not right and its unconstitutional.I like the M48 tactical tomahawk, been carrying one for a while.....Legally of course...
StreuB1 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:08 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:08 AM Agree'd Mike. How does my 71yo dad on a fixed income make this happen? Someone tell me, please. ANYONE?!!??!?!?!?! ANYONE?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Rail Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:10 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:10 AM Any idea of how many schools, parks, government buildings and houses of worship there are in Chicago?Any idea of how much park and forest land Cook County controls?There would be no where you could carry legally in cook county.Example: how many of you know that all 26 miles of Shoreline in Chicago is a state park?Get pulled over on lake shore drive and you're carrying, you're in violation.You can't drive to any south suburb on surface streets without being on County Forest Preserve property.Yes. This bill is one big sellout trap, and it validates the red text in my signature. Read subsection c starting on line 17 of page 25. © A licensee shall not be in violation of this Section18 while he or she is traveling along a public right of way that19 touches or crosses any of the premises under subsection (a) of20 this Section if the concealed firearm is carried on his or her21 person in accordance with the provisions of this Act or is22 being transported in a vehicle by the licensee in accordance23 with all other applicable provisions of law.
TyGuy Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:14 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:14 AM To fix this bill: Make signs larger Remove public transport ban Make the restaurants responsible for placing a ban sign if they surpass the 50% clause. If you are carrying in prohibited restaurant that didn't post then you haven't broken the law. I mean who better to know what their last 3 months of receipts are an the establishment themselves. Fixes 1 and 3 are easy. We should ask Phelps to get that done. Fix 2 will be hard, but it's a MUST if the NRA and ISRA are serious about everyone's rights. I don't like many of the other banned places, but I could hold my nose with these fixes.
TFC Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:15 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:15 AM The second you are stopped, (that turn signal that they said you didn't use for example,) you are no longer traveling.That's their out.
flw Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:21 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:21 AM Bill is only going to require more give aways on our part. That I'm sure of. We don't have a clean "Shall issue" its a clear hybrid with local PD input on your permit. It is a privilege which is normal and fine with me I'm just tired of waiting for what is going to be a crappy Christmas. . And all those little words in there DO matter.
Livewire18 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:21 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:21 AM The second you are stopped, (that turn signal that they said you didn't use for example,) you are no longer traveling.That's their out. No because that would be entrapment.
BobPistol Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:25 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:25 AM Take this and fix those parts that are unacceptable later. In the meantime we will be able to protect ourselves. The unacceptable parts will never be fixed. Remember the Illinois "right to bear arms" - that was fixed nicely right? "subject to the police power" - 43 years later, no change.
Rail Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:27 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:27 AM Bill is only going to require more give aways on our part. That I'm sure of. We don't have a clean "Shall issue" its a clear hybrid with local PD input on your permit. There are other shall-issue states that use a similar system: Alabama for one (which was a may-issue state until today). But shall-issue is not may-issue. In may-issue states, the burden of proof is on the applicant to prove a need for carrying a firearm. In this case though, the burden of proof is on law enforcement to prove that an applicant is NOT suited to carry a firearm. Chicago does not have the resources to check over and object in writing to every one of the thousands of city residents who will apply. Does that mean a bunch of people who would normally get a permit in some states will be rejected due to a few arrests? Yes. Does that mean someone with a clean record will be denied for no good reason? No.
TFC Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:34 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:34 AM The second you are stopped, (that turn signal that they said you didn't use for example,) you are no longer traveling.That's their out. No because that would be entrapment. I live in Chicago, not Mayberry.... not Mt. Pilot."Entrapment" happens 6 times a day here and at least twice on Sundays.Who's word will the judge take? A Cook County Machine judge? Take a guess..... go ahead, it's free.
Livewire18 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:40 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:40 AM With that mentality it is no wonder why Chicago is in the position it is now.
cm.stites Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:57 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:57 AM With that mentality it is no wonder why Chicago is in the position it is now.amen and they have a option out of it finally but others would like to sell em out again.
billzfx4 Posted May 23, 2013 at 01:04 AM Posted May 23, 2013 at 01:04 AM I'm not at all happy about this bill, but IF it is passed word for word as it's currently written, I can live with it - for now. If this is just a starting point, and we start negotiating the few good points out of it or allow more bad into it, then there is no way I would support it.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.