Molly B. Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:30 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:30 PM Last week when the senate started to move a carry bill, it put a series of events into motion. While we were trying to find out how many votes our side had, the Senate President was trying to twist arms because he really wanted Raoul’s bill to pass. Let me tell you, going up against a leader in his own chamber is difficult if not impossible when it is a bill they really want passed. We had a couple of down state Senators flipping on us and it looked like we would lose the vote. At the same time the Speaker was working on his bill. He did not want Sen. Cullerton’s bill passing over to the House, because it would complicate matters for his own bill. So he reached over to the Senate and pulled a couple of votes off the bill, ensuring the Senate bill would not pass. Just think about that, the Speaker of the House reached over and killed the Senate President's very own carry bill in his own chamber. That is the kind of power we are up against. Over the next few days a group of legislators worked on a carry bill. We saw the language late Tuesday. We were not thrilled with several components of the bill, to say the least, but the political reality that became very evident is that with the power of the Speaker to kill bills outside his own chamber, there would be no cliff. The Speaker would pass/defeat whichever carry bill he wanted. He has the votes to pass the Cullerton bill through the Senate. It only needs 30 votes and will only require 60 in the House. That bill would allow any home rule unit to adopt extra restrictions like no carrying within 1000 feet of a school. You can use your imagination for what their dream list of restrictions would be. The Governor supports that bill so we know he would sign it. It is may issue and has a host of other problems. We have already seen some downstate senate dems fold. We hear of pending retirements in the House and we know Speaker Madigan stripped the votes we needed to pass 997 off the bill. He is not going to let our carry bill pass no matter what. That is clear. The current bill in the House is statewide, shall issue with preemption. The carrot in all of this is the preemption is not just for carrying. It wipes out all municipal regulations on firearms. Read that again, there will be no more municipal regulations on guns period. The Chicago ordinance – gone. Cook county semi-auto ban gone. No more CFPs or seizing a vehicle because you transported a gun unloaded and enclosed in a case. No more local mag bans, registration or anything. In essence, we cut the heart out of the gun control movement in Illinois. Their jewel of local ordinances and Chicago disappear. Want to own an AR -15 and live in the city, have at it. Want a one in Oak Park or Aurora? Enjoy. It also means that we will not have to be chasing after local city councils over every silly ordinance. So we change the playing field to one where we are largely successful. But it is not without a cost. As the details of the bill come out, some are not going to be happy about the demands of the Speaker. We didn't agree to them but we find ourselves in a position of being able to get something closer to where we would like to be instead of spending the next 20 years trying to undo a truly bad law like the Cullerton proposal. The bill is statewide, shall issue, no carve outs for Chicago or Cook (the lone exception is Cook county forest preserves).Training will be 16 hours. They will recognize or grandfather in up to 8 hours of other training. The 16 includes range time. So if you have other training under your belt, you will need to do the range portion and make up, the additional hours. It does not have to be a single course, you can patch them together. So if you have taken a Florida or Utah course, or even the CFP course, it will count.On the prohibited places we will lose out on public gatherings; municipal parks, playgrounds and mass transit, but you can "fanny pack" transport through any of these. If they want people unloading in public before getting on the CTA, that's crazy but then so be it. We did prevail on restaurant carry, and parking lots, with a "safe harbor" provision for your car anywhere you go. So if you are in your car, it is essentially like being in your home. Looking through the bill it is pretty much the proverbial “The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. Not a total win for everybody but not a total loss by any measure either.
Buckfarrack Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:38 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:38 PM Exactly Molly! I can't understand why some of our members are sooooo against this bill.LETS get it PASSED.When they see there isn't going to be a wild west shoot out on every corner,then we can start fixing problems with the law a lot eaisier than getting the OTHER bill NOW.
handyflyer Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:38 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:38 PM Thank you Molly. It's time for everyone to realize this is as good as it's gonna get. Quit the infighting and support this bill.
Pecker Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:38 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:38 PM Bravo Molly. What would the playing field look like 2 years down the road. Let's say that IL, like every other state realizes, "hey, the sky isn't falling, law abiding citizens can be trusted." If we wanted to remove some of the prohibited places, or change minds on public transportation. What vote numbers would we need then?
dorvinion Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:40 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:40 PM If we wanted to remove some of the prohibited places, or change minds on public transportation. What vote numbers would we need then? 61 in the house, 31 in the senate, provided we have a good governor.
richp Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:41 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:41 PM Hi Molly, Thanks for the helpful explanation. Now please lock this thread so its impact doesn't get diluted. Rich Phillips
chiefjaybob Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:41 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:41 PM I don't care for this bill. Won't go so far as to say I hate it, but it's not what we all wanted. I think we need a dose of reality. This place tends to be an echo chamber and folks here forget there are very powerful people working against us. Someone on another thread suggested we start with this bill and work on improving the things we don't like over time. He was then slammed with a comparison to Obamacare. I feel this is wrong, and unfair. Look at how concealed carry evolved in other states, especially Ohio. We have to keep in mind four very important concessions: NO Cook/Chicago carve out, pre-emption, removal of all local restrictions and shall issue. These are huge. I don't like the fees. I don't like the length of training time. I don't like all the no-carry zones. I don't like the lack of reciprocity. I believe all these issues can be fixed later when the opponents see that the state isn't running red with blood.
StreuB1 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:42 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:42 PM I was waiting and dreading Molly's explaination we all knew was coming. It is making me say...... Fine And thank you for what you have fought for.
Grey Beret Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:42 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:42 PM At some point, when we speak of what is allowed under the law, we will have to make sure we are stating the law as it applies to Permit transport and as it applies to FOID transport. The world of firearms in Illinois is changing -- that much is true no matter what.
mobrules Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM Thank you Molly. I will support this bill. They have to pass it this week in order for it to make it through both houses and to quinn to sign, am I right??
j2dawson Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM Molly, thanks for the detailed explanation. I have already filed a "proponent" witness slip. My biggest concern, as a frequent traveler (pilot and motorcycle rider) is the lack of reciprocity with other states. Living 20 miles from and working in, Missouri, I really wanted reciprocity with them. As it looks now, there is no way MO will recognize an IL permit without reciprocity for their permit holders.
gravyboy77 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM We didn't agree to them but we find ourselves in a position of being able to get something closer to where we would like to be instead of spending the next 20 years trying to undo a truly bad law like the Cullerton proposal. I always figured that a cc law in this state (If it ever happened) would be a completely restricted may issue that we'd be fighting to loosen for years, i never expected a statewide, shall issue with preemption. While I'm perturbed about the 16 hour training and fees, i still think this is way better then anything i ever imagined coming out of this state. I also want to thank you Molly and Todd for all your hard work on this.
AlphaKoncepts aka CGS Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:44 PM Molly in other words, in your personal opinion, this is the very best we are going to get? Take it or Leave it?
AlphaKoncepts aka CGS Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:45 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:45 PM Amendments MUST be filed to clear up some vagueness. The language is way too vague in many aspects and requires clarity. I do not think we prevailed on restaurant carry as you said. 50% revenues? As determined by whom? I have to ask each restaurant manager before I walk in "Are your revenues from alcohol more or less than 50% of your total revenues?" Restaurant carry was big for me, but I would like to see something a little more defined, it's just so vague.
ryr8828 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:46 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:46 PM Molly, thanks for the detailed explanation. I have already filed a "proponent" witness slip. My biggest concern, as a frequent traveler (pilot and motorcycle rider) is the lack of reciprocity with other states. Living 20 miles from and working in, Missouri, I really wanted reciprocity with them. As it looks now, there is no way MO will recognize an IL permit without reciprocity for their permit holders. Get a Florida permit. I'll be keeping mine.
StreuB1 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:46 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:46 PM There are issues with this bill for upstate and downstate citizens. There are though some aspects in there that make this a real jewel and I am not spelling them out. People know where I live and know what I am involvd with so there are some things that severely affect me in a good way. I am more interested in the patchwork idea of training and how my FL and Utah training hours will work in with it.
POAT54 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:47 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:47 PM I am new here, so my opinion may not mean much. First of all Thank you to Molly, Todd and all that do the work. I realize how big preemption is, Instead of fighting with 103 county boards, who know how many "home rule units". We deal with one body of law makers. NO BILL will ever be perfect for everybody. And other states have changed their laws be less restrictive. Get er done. Thank you again.
bigdiogi Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:47 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:47 PM Molly, Thank you for this. I realize politics is the art of the possible. And while I hate parts of this bill, you and Tod have convinced me she's as good as she's gonna get. I'll personally swallow my disappointment and throw my support behind it. I truly love you guys for all the effort and intelligence you bring to this battle. As I've stated elsewhere it is just SO hard to do your fighting by proxy. But I know we could not have finer warriors.
Kylar Stern Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:47 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:47 PM We need to support this Bill!!!
sctman800 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:47 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:47 PM Thank you Molly. As I said in a couple other threads I am not in love with it but also understand the reality of things in this state. I was the eighth person to jouin this forum and at that time would have fallen all over myself to grab this bill. Our near missed have given many, including myself some "false hope" of what we could accomplish. These were still misses and would have continued to be misses as long as Madigan runs the state.My one big concern is Quin using a line item veto to carve out the things that make this somewhat reasonable, then no veto override and we are screwed big time. Jim.
bloval27 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:47 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:47 PM Thank you Molly for explaining this for everyone, this is exactly what I have been thinking this whole time we are up against more than just the anti's here and with those home rule ordinances wiped out thanks to this bill I can truly support it even if it's not everything we wanted, I will say that I am surprised we are even getting this much with all this national attention on this issue and of all places in Illinois. We have to give Phelps our support on this bill, bailing on him and daring to try and bring Kwame's bill before a judge is playing with fire in my mind at any time these judges could say Kwame's is a reasonable bill and then we have nothing to stand on, at least with Phelps bill we have 3 BIG VICTORIES to hang our hats on. Anyone that thought we'd get our way and exactly what we wanted was living in fantasy land, I admire all the people here who dug in and really wanted to get everything they wanted, but we all knew at some point we'd have to make some concessions. As I see it the whole public transportation ban will only stay banned as long as the city and counties can ensure the riders of public transportation are safe if any crime should happen on public transportation after conceal carry bill is passed we'd have reasons to bring it to court to further prove why conceal carry on public transportation is necessary that's how we have to look at this I feel. I hope everyone will start to see after they cool down that this bill while not what we wanted is not as terrible as it really could've been either.
Mack Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:49 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:49 PM Thanks Molly, I can support this bill with the fanny pack work around for public transportation and the parking lot and traveling through provisions. Yes the fees and training are too high, but we can work ourselves to help those who need it. The reality is that as I suspected there is no cliff, a bill will be passed as we don't have the votes to go over the cliff and this is a statewide shall issue bill with preemption. It also wipes out a lot of Chicago and other local ordinances. That is an unexpected gain. I live downstate and given the reality of the politics I have seen lately, this is a better bill than what I thought it would be. Yes, I don't like parts of it at all, but it is still a huge step forward and it will allow my kids to legally have the option of having a firearm to defend themselves.
WindyCityGuy Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:50 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:50 PM If we wanted to remove some of the prohibited places, or change minds on public transportation. What vote numbers would we need then? 61 in the house, 31 in the senate, provided we have a good governor. The same vote that could increase prohibited places...
StreuB1 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:50 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:50 PM I was vocal about all the things I did not like on this bill......after Molly's weighing in on the details and some thought. I filed Proponent on this. I am also interested in the Fanny Pack carry
samal Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:50 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:50 PM In on bill. Tired of games. There will always be p***** off people
Pecker Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:53 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:53 PM I don't care for this bill. Won't go so far as to say I hate it, but it's not what we all wanted. I think we need a dose of reality. This place tends to be an echo chamber and folks here forget there are very powerful people working against us. Someone on another thread suggested we start with this bill and work on improving the things we don't like over time. He was then slammed with a comparison to Obamacare. I feel this is wrong, and unfair. Look at how concealed carry evolved in other states, especially Ohio. We have to keep in mind four very important concessions: NO Cook/Chicago carve out, pre-emption, removal of all local restrictions and shall issue. These are huge. I don't like the fees. I don't like the length of training time. I don't like all the no-carry zones. I don't like the lack of reciprocity. I believe all these issues can be fixed later when the opponents see that the state isn't running red with blood. I think Ohio is a good comparison. Ohio has removed the prohibition on restaurant carry, they've removed the retraining requirement upon renewal. Every year as the opposition realizes their arguments fall flat, more and more rights are restored.
Joebie Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:53 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:53 PM I was vocal about all the things I did not like on this bill......after Molly's weighing in on the details and some thought. I filed Proponent on this. I am also interested in the Fanny Pack carry Hey there is nothing wrong with being vocal on the short comings of this bill, or any bill for that matter. If everyone kept their mouth shut, no one would ever think there was a problem.
wtr100 Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:56 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:56 PM Exactly Molly! I can't understand why some of our members are sooooo against this bill.LETS get it PASSED.When they see there isn't going to be a wild west shoot out on every corner,then we can start fixing problems with the law a lot eaisier than getting the OTHER bill NOW. Thought we we wanted no bad bills - now I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed but this is indeed a bad bill - no carry in parking lots and 16 hours of training? NO BAD BILLS
Dave D Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:56 PM Posted May 23, 2013 at 12:56 PM What does Todd say about this bill?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.