Jump to content

vito

Members
  • Posts

    2,422
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
    Rockford, IL
  • Interests
    Motorcycling, bicycling, shooting

Recent Profile Visitors

583 profile views

vito's Achievements

Member

Member (22/24)

  1. I know that this topic has been raised before, but I am wondering about the status of this ban. I haven't read about any arrests for legally licensed carriers who were arrested or had their guns confiscated due to having a laser on them. Maybe that's because not so many people have lasers on their carry guns, or maybe because it is not an ordinance being enforced. Can anyone educate me on this issue?
  2. I have no idea what the 2A position is of the bank that I use, PNC. But the branch that I use is not posted. I have been pleased with the customer service, and more importantly, have been successfully using their online banking system for many years and would hate to have to learn a new system. My only gripe is that they used to have many more branches but have consolidated into fewer locations in the city where I live.
  3. It may sound callous but the death of any anti-2A activist is a good thing for freedom and liberty. The Left, i.e., Democrats, ultimate goal is the outlawing of privately owned firearms, period. Repeal of the 2A and/or increasingly onerous restrictions on law abiding gun owners is the Holy Grail for the Left, so compromise of any kind is just a moving of the chains closer to the goal line. The leaders of the anti-2A movement and those that fund this movement are our enemies, not colleagues with whom we have academic disagreements. I would cheer if I read of George Soros dropping dead, or being murdered, or being diagnosed with a fatal illness. Our Founding Fathers did not include the 2A in the Bill of Rights so that we were protected against anti-hunting zealots, or even just to preserve our ability to defend ourselves and our families. They specifically empowered the People to have the ability to change a tyrannical government. Those seeking to deprive us of our right to keep and bear arms want to be free to impose any and all tyranny that they desire upon the People. When one of their activists dies, from any means, it is small victory for us.
  4. I live in Rockford and very rarely have seen a store posted. But where it is posted, I make sure I do not carry a Beretta.
  5. Traveling on public transportation in Chicago is a totally unacceptable risk for me. If I did not have a car to drive I would rent one rather than take public transport. I spent a good amount of time earlier this fall on the West Coast, in CA, OR and WA. In none of those states could I carry legally, and while I was not in any particularly dangerous places I still felt vulnerable. To be on Chicago public transit, which seems especially vulnerable to violence, and to be unarmed would be a worse alternative than to risk not sticking to the letter of the law.
  6. I venture into Chicago very, very rarely. My wife enjoys an occasional visit to the Art Institute, where we have been members for many years. When we go there, I park immediately adjacent to the museum in the underground parking, always finding a handicapped parking spot right next to the stairs leading to the street level. Other than for that museum, I can't even recall going into Chicago except for this recent trip to see the Van Gogh Experience. Personally I would find it intolerable to live in that city and put up with the restrictions on my 2nd Amendment rights every day and almost everywhere, on top of the crime, high costs, heavy traffic, ridiculous property taxes, etc. I assume that there are many here that on occasion ignore some of the "posted" restrictions on the basis of "concealed means concealed" and "better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6". I am not encouraging or endorsing ANY illegal behavior, but it appears that sometimes common self preservation sense and Illinois law are in direct conflict with each other. Enough said on that subject.
  7. The car involved is an SUV without a trunk. The glove box does not have a lock. Keeping a small safe under the seat, with a steel cable attaching it to the seat frame is a good idea that I will implement.
  8. My wife and I went into Chicago today, something frankly that I try to avoid doing. But we had tickets for a venue that my wife wanted to go to. We parked in a "Valet Parking Only" lot near the venue, obviously leaving my car key with the valet, then proceeded to the venue itself. Of course I was armed, and concealed. At the entrance to the venue I saw that they were wanding everyone that was entering, so I returned to the parking garage, and asked the attendant for my key so that I could "retrieve something that I had left in the car". Obviously I was not about to inform him that what I was doing in fact was putting my gun into the car. The key was in the garage lockbox and all the parked cars were left unlocked. So I proceeded to my car, and without risk of being observed removed my holstered gun and put in under the rear seat so as to be out of sight and not likely to come to the attention of the valet when I returned later to have them drive my car out to me. Leaving a gun in an unlocked car, even in a closed garage where only the valets had ready access to the cars made me quite uncomfortable, but I felt that I had little choice. I returned to the venue and the rest of the visit went without incident, as did my return to my car and checking that my gun was right where I left it. I guess I should have called this particular place before ever leaving my home to ask if it was posted, at which time I probably would have been told that it is posted, and that all people entering would be subject to a metal detecting wand. I think I will do this for any future visits to Chicago where I am going to a specific location, although coming to that city unarmed for the day is not a good choice, in my opinion. But having my wife go by herself, and unarmed as she does not carry, ever, is a worse option for me.
  9. So if I come upon a thief stealing my car, and when I yell freeze he starts to reach under his shirt, I would likely believe my life is in imminent danger and have to use my firearm. If he raises his hands and backs away, providing no threat or potential threat to me, and starts to walk away, I am legally helpless to do much to detain him unless I chose to try to do so without the use of deadly force coming into play. Not likely that I, as a man of 78 with my share of physical limitations, would try to physically grapple with the thief, so I guess I would have to let him walk on his merry way. I would then call the police who would tell me to come in the next day and file a report at the police station, after which they will do nothing to apprehend the thief. Pitiful situation we have found ourselves in. The car is the modern equivalent of the horse of yesteryear, and many places treated stealing a horse as a capital offense. The good old days.
  10. I read the statutes and it still is not clear to me whether or not a person would be justified in using force, or deadly force, to protect their own property. As I read it, such force is lawful if needed to prevent a forcible felony. Does this mean that if I heard someone trying to break into and steal my car in the middle of the night, that I could confront such a thief and if he fails to stop the attempt, use force to keep him from completing the theft? The same for hearing and then seeing someone who broke into my garage or storage shed or similar structure, about to carry off some of my property? If I confront such a thief with gun in hand, am I going to likely be in trouble if that thief just decides to walk away? If he fails to stop in his attempted theft and I shoot him to stop the theft, how likely is it that I will be in deep trouble? I know that if a person can make a convincing argument that when stopping a thief the situation became one where the homeowner had a reasonable fear for his or her life or well being, then deadly force is legitimate, but my question revolves around defense of property when there is no direct theft of personal harm. I am not looking for definitive legal advice here, just the opinions and thoughts of those who may have dealt with such issues and are more personally knowledgeable than I am on the subject.
  11. He'll end up as a paid contributor to one of the Leftwing networks where they can present him as a "reasonable" Republican and former member of Congress. He will put on a serious face when he badmouths President Trump, treats the minor riot of January 6th as if it were really an attempted coup, and probably praise Creepy Joe as a President trying to unite us. At one time I supported him, but the moment he turned on President Trump, the President who did more to put this country back on the right path than any other in my lifetime of 78 years (yes, more that Ronald Reagan) I no longer could stand this traitor to America.
  12. I'm there, I do the ruger society website and know many on rugerforums, I can try to help.

    David

     

  13. Nice, heartwarming news. Thanks for sharing! Just a shame that he only eliminated one of the two thugs.
  14. What sort of idiot leaves the keys in the car while loading groceries? But I agree that it would be ideal if deadly force were legally able to be used to prevent property theft or to try to recover stolen property.
×
×
  • Create New...