Jump to content

Teufel Hunden

Members
  • Posts

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Teufel Hunden's Achievements

Member

Member (11/24)

  1. Is this the place where I point out that if someone has a FOID, then they are passing a nightly background check. If the FOID is active, running another background check accomplishes nothing. It's almost as if the state is using the additional check as an unnecessary impediment to lawful gun ownership.
  2. Des Plaines. It's home rule and the code is silent on the topic. It's not enough to be Home Rule and not have a law against it. Des Plaines has to specifically preempt any Cook County ordinances. Home Rule cities have the ability to ignore County laws, but it doesn't happen automatically.
  3. If you of all people are left wondering what the announcement is... I become more than a little skeptical of the value/knowledge that will be shared in this announcement.
  4. Because it's working so well in Illinois. In spite of running a background check on lawful gunowners every night, Illinois is among the worst states for murder and non-negligent homicide. It's almost as if laws restraining legal ownership of firearms is ineffective against criminals...
  5. Anyone else shocked that the ISP seemingly drug their feet five years ago to prolong the time it took to get the license and now are seemingly processing them in a time and manner that screws over license holders again by "stealing" three months of licensure? What is the justification for not using a renewal date concurrent with the expiration of the original license?
  6. I keep my FOID in a forward at home. Risk management. If my wallet goes missing for whatever reason I prefer to not lose both the FOID and FCCL. If a police officer is intent on taking me to the station, it is going to happen whether I have my FOID in my possession or not. When I think about this type of situation, I take care of myself and stay within the law, I don't alter my actions because someone else may be an idiot. I find this whole business of society having to cater to the lowest common denomenator distasteful. I simply recognize that there is no shortage of idiots out there and take care of my own businesses.
  7. Is Trame's securement truly: "I can't say that the license shouldn't be issued, but I can't say that it should, either. So I denied it. I'm not sure what the rules are.". WTH? Unless Trame can provide definitive proof that an applicant does not qualify, shouldn't she be required to issue the license? The ISP is part of the executive branch in Illinois. It is disappointing that this type of thing is still going on with a ® in the governor's mansion.
  8. Reckless driving can be a felony, it depends on the state. Speeding tickets or other moving violations have no impact on your credit score.
  9. Applied: 1/18/2014 Prints: Yes Active: 3/22/2014 Postmark: 3/22/2014 Received: 3/26/2014 Location: Cook County
  10. I've read through this entire thread and I've yet to see anyone make the following point. Forgive me if I missed it, the conversation does span 9 pages now. I've seen people reference their own opinions, the intent of WalMart, the intent of ISP and the intent of the Legislature. Frankly, none of these things matter. What a judge interprets the law to say matters. That has the force of law. People are arrested every day by officers only to later have the charges dropped. People go to trial and beat criminal charges. Occasionally, innocent people are convicted of crimes they should not be. Clearly the best outcome for someone is to not be arrested or charged in the first place. While the chances of being arrested, charged and convicted in this situation may be small, the ramifications of such a conviction are enormous. Why would anyone decide to take that risk instead of just speaking with WalMart representatives about their concerns? I don't doubt that criminalizing concealed carry for their customers is NOT the intention of Illinois WalMarts. It has been well documented that WalMart can accomplish their intended goal in a manner that ensures no risk of criminal prosecution for their customers. There isn't a prohibitive cost associated with changing the signs that have gone up. it seems logical to bring this to the attention of WalMart and give them a chance to make a change. Changing the sign is a much better outcome than requiring someone to eventually spend the time, money and resources on beating a criminal charge. Edited because I fat fingered my phone.
×
×
  • Create New...