Tip

An observation based upon Election Night coverage on the various media outlets. All night long they kept putting up map, after map, after map showing massive red swaths. These display were always accompanied with the observation that “land doesn’t vote”. To that end I’d remind one of the comments of James Madison who stated: The right of suffrage is a fundamental Article in Republican Constitutions. The regulation of it is, at the same time, a task of peculiar delicacy. Allow the right [to vote] exclusively to property [owners], and the rights of persons may be oppressed... . Extend it equally to all, and the rights of property [owners] ...may be overruled by a majority without property.... In order to try and protect the rights of the non-landowners the Founding Fathers left the issue of voting to the individual states, which in turn, led to some distinctly unfair voting practices. Practices that led to the first issue cited by Madison, whereby property owners were given too big a piece of the voting puzzle to the detriment of non-owners. After a period of time voting rights swung in such a way that the non-owners were as equally enfranchised owners. Unfortunately, we now appear to have swung to the exact opposite position as commented by Madison. What was clearly being illustrated in the commentary of “land doesn’t vote” was the, equally clear statement that “landowners don’t count”, that they have been completely disenfranchised by the non-owners. The vote of the landowners is now being massively overwhelmed by the vote of the non-owners. So what’s the solution? Our Founding Fathers foretold the need to protect the minority from being overwhelmed by the majority in the establishment of the Electoral College at the Federal layer. A mechanism whereby the minority is protected, to an extent, and guaranteed at least a say in the governance of our land. It works well. Perhaps it’s time now to push that same mechanism downward another layer - from the Federal layer to the State layer - in order to protect the minority (in this case landowners, or perhaps more specifically rural America) from being overwhelmed by the majority (specifically Urban concentrations).

Forcible felony also includes kidnapping and aggravated kidnapping…. The argument might be made that the carjacking was an attempted kidnapping, especially if others (juveniles?) were in the car….

No, the interesting part is “expanded gun rights” — the ruling didn’t expand anything — affirmed them yes, expanded them no…..

The problem with a lot of these arguments is that there is only one right the U.S. Constitution declares “cannot be infringed”…. 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️

We’ll dOwnstate — haven’t seen ads for either. Apparently Bailey EXPECTS us to vote for him and JB KNOWS we ain’t gonna vote for him…..

Eddie Eagle week in Grade School. NRA Hunter Safety Week in Junior High. NRA Pistol Week in High School.

Hades, there’s folks on here who claim to be “staunch 2A advocates” who are convinced D is the way to go. Supposedly intelligent people who cannot seem to grasp that “2A advocate” and “Democrat” are mutually exclusive terms. 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️

So you base your vote on who you think will win regardless of their stance on issues?? How sad.

An adult is an adult — PERIOD. There are tons of examples of folks (of ALL ages) incapable of being “responsible” adults. Doesn’t change the fact that they are indeed adults. If you are an adult you are (and should be) entitled to all the rights and privileges of being an adult — until such time as you surrender some of those through your adjudicated actions.

Is your FOID actually renewing, or is it simply auto-extending the expiration to co-incide with your FOID. Does anyone in this situation actually see a FOID expiration well past CCL expiration??? Or do you all see them being the same date?

Reading all of this I feel so damn lucky to have actual physical cards in hand that expire in 2031 (FOID) and 2024 (CCL)…. ETA: here’s hoping that when these expire renewals are no longer necessary, at least certainly for FOID, and hopefully for CCL….

Serious Question because I’m old and don’t always remember details…. Didn’t Illinois Supreme Court rule that FOID was not required to possess firearms within one’s home? If so, then even if FOID is revoked, isn’t it still legal to possess firearms within one’s home since the FOID isn’t required to do so? Or is that Illinois Supreme Court case still pending or one of those fancy rulings that only applies to specific folks owning the super secret decoder rings?

Perhaps another question is: If a soldier cannot be compelled to obey an unlawful order can a law enforcement officer be compelled to enforce an unconstitutional law??

Words should fail. With respect to semi-automatic rifles there’s this for historical context,,,,, A hundred and fifteen years ago, in 1907, our great grandparents were first able to buy the rifle pictured below. The semi-auto Winchester Model 1907. This is a gun they could buy from a Sears catalogue and have delivered via US Post. It was/is a semi-automatic, high powered centerfire rifle, with a detachable, high capacity magazine. About 400,000 of these semi-automatic rifles were produced before WW2. Civilians had hundreds of thousands of these over those 40 years, all the while US soldiers were still being issued old fashioned bolt action rifles. The 1907 fired just as fast as an AR15 or AK47 and the bullet (.351 Winchester) was actually larger than those fired by the more modern looking weapons.. The ONLY FUNCTIONAL difference between the 1907 and a controversial and much feared AR15 is the modern black plastic stock. The semi auto rifle was not a weapon of war. The government MADE IT a weapon of war 40 years after civilians had them.