RGreen1911

Give me one good reason why the pro-carry lobby would allow an onerous and oppressive bill to pass? People seem to be forgetting that this time around, they need OUR votes, we don't need THEIRS. We can sit around and obstruct and not do anything. Then we get constitutional carry in 180 days. If they want to prevent that, it is THEY who have to come ready to play ball and make concessions. We have no reason to negotiate.

This is why the Constitution was written, to prevent ruling by whim or power or intimidation. And on that subject, perhaps many people who assumed that the judges on the 7th Circuit were "in the pocket" of IL/Chicago politicians rather than faithful to their oath of office, owe them an apology... I remember the impugning of the federal judiciary getting pretty out of hand a while back.

Also, I'd like to take a moment to say to everyone who thought I was a numbnuts for thinking there would be a stay of some sort in the case of a favorable ruling: See, e.g., Moore v. Madigan, No. 12-1269 (7th Cir. December 11, 2012).

Wouldnt they then be setting themselves up for many very expensive lawsuits for wrongful arrest and maybe suits for infringing on a constitional right. Yes. That would be a textbook 1983 case, and the fact that the 7th Circuit explicitly held the law unconstitutional would likely be enough to destroy qualify immunity and open the door to personal liability. Can't see why anyone would risk it.

This can't be said enough or screamed loud enough. There will be an opposition bill I am sure of it. Todd will keep us informed but we have to keep neighbors informed and get others involved in calling and emailing their reps. WE CANNOT ALLOW A NY or CALI TYPE CARRY! It would take a f-up of astonishing proportions for a may-issue bill to be passed after this ruling. The pro-carry reps are well aware that the Chicago crowd is now on the defensive, and aren't going to settle for a terrible law. They know that now is the time to go for the jugular. What is the other side going to do? They pretty much have to give in, unless they are willing to accept the inevitability of constitutional carry. No way in heck a may-issue bill gets 71 votes, and even if they try to pass a bill without preemption, the pro-carry lobby will most likely be able to prevent it from getting to 60 votes. It's shall-issue or constitutional carry, pick your poison Chicago Democrats.