Jump to content

Gamma

Members
  • Posts

    119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Gamma's Achievements

Member

Member (22/24)

  1. With the interest in suppressors these days (outside Illinois that is) they'd be printing money to come out with a modernized version of the P9, with a double stack magazine, modern trigger action and controls, etc.
  2. I was really thinking about a Shield Plus, Smith finally put a reasonable trigger on a handgun for a change. But inability to find any spare magazines has left me waiting... now this comes along to muddy the waters, wish there was more information and an ETA on it.
  3. It'd be easier if people actually knew what to do. Apply for FOID and CCL at the same time, then only one wait, and if she did fingerprints it would likely be faster than just applying for FOID.
  4. How much you wanna bet the judge has at least one of them? Firearm intersectionality
  5. The lefties really can't let that one go, they will never stop trying to relitigate Heller.
  6. Since you applied separately the applications appear to be handled separately. At one time they wouldn't even start processing the CCL until the FOID was issued, which is why it's always recommended to apply for both simultaneously. Their IT workflow leaves a lot to be desired.
  7. Yes, it should be. No, it shouldn't be. It shouldn't be possible for this to happen at all without proper notice and a chance to be heard (preferably both informally and formally) BEFORE it's revoked. AFAIC this should be a critical legislative priority. If we're not going to get rid of the system, the system has to treat people fairly and with due process.
  8. Following the law isn't circumventing the law. Just because someone follows the law to reach an outcome that was unanticipated by the legislature... well, that's the legislatures problem. Getting a CCL allows you to "circumvent" the law banning carry of firearms, doesn't it?
  9. Yes. Sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
  10. Even presuming that's true, which decades of experience indicate it's not, that's not the goal of the political leadership. The goal of the political leadership is to make it as hard as possible for the good guys, while minimally affecting bad guys. Imposing draconian restrictions which do nothing for public safety are a feature, not a bug. Without public safety being endangered, there is no imperative to maintain or increase their power and restrictions. The multiple redundancies and repetitive effort and delay are a feature not a bug.
  11. No AW ban or other restrictions on your pistol. As mentioned, no expiration date on the training, but might be best to give it a couple years before working it into the calendar.
  12. I facepalmed when reading the IL AG's filing in one of the cases, that defined the police power as being the Illinois State Police.
  13. One small thing that folks can do to support SAF, is they are on the list for charitable contributions with the amazon smile. If you shop amazon anyway, might as well send that little bit to SAF.
×
×
  • Create New...