Jump to content


Supporting Team I
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

501 profile views

hceuterpe's Achievements


Member (3/24)

  1. Turns out, it's actually already in the complaint: 40. An AR-15 rifle is an optimal firearm to rely on in a self-defense encounter. Most AR-style firearms are chambered for 5.56x45mm NATO, which is similar to .223 Remington ammunition. This is a relatively inexpensive and common cartridge that is particularly well suited for home-defense purposes because it has sufficient stopping power in the event of a home intrusion, but quickly loses velocity after passing through a target and other objects, thus decreasing the chance that an errant shot will strike an unintended target. Although most pistol rounds have less muzzle velocity than a 5.56x45mm NATO round, they have greater mass, maintain velocity after passing through walls and other objects, and pose substantially greater risks to unintended targets in, or even outside, the home.
  2. Yeah the C&PD is far more egregiously unconstitutional than the FRO ever could be (arguably far more effective in disarming people). Let's not forget the ISP refusing to fulfill FOIA requests for people's own records to aid in appealing--there's even a case pending over this.
  3. Idk wouldn't it be better to counter *all* of their claims and using different points, instead of just throwing Bruen at them?
  4. Couldn't you counter their public safety argument and throw the over penetration testing at them? https://gripknife.com/blog/why-high-powered-556-nato223-ar15-ammo-is-safer-for-home-defense-fbi-overpenetration-testing/ Seems to me that bullets not exiting your house because they missed their target within a house for a self-defense situation, would actually be desirable for public safety purposes. And apparently .223/5.56 rounds are ideal here.
  5. Even better Todd should reply to Bob Morgan and suggest to help by organizing a gun raffle fundraiser, and further suggest the FFLs he represents might be willing to contribute to the prize proceeds. I'm sure Bob would appreciate any help he can get...
  6. There in lies another problem: If due process is strictly a judicial instrument, seems like it's busted as heck when an executive branch agency unconstitutionally gets the power to act like a court? FOID days are numbered. I'd love to hear the state and its goons argue the constitutionality when it's the same group of people decrying that it's unconstitutional to show ID to vote (it's the closest comparison I can currently think of because using the example of requiring drivers licenses is totally flawed)...
  7. Surprised to have not seen this discussion already here. https://casetext.com/case/hart-v-the-ill-state-police https://madisonrecord.com/stories/632954967-supreme-court-will-hear-state-police-appeal-in-foid-case-state-wants-to-keep-wraps-on-applicant-files There are actually two plaintiffs. What I find extra egregious is this snippet: ¶ 27 "[A] court presumes that the General Assembly did not intend absurdity, inconvenience, or injustice in enacting legislation." People v. Casler, 2020 IL 125117, ¶ 24. Here, Burgess states that "it makes absolute sense for the government to keep private names and addresses of FOID card holders" but argues that he already knows his own name, address, and that his FOID card was revoked. Burgess argues that he "just wants to know why" (emphasis in original) in order to seek an appeal of the revocation. We agree. Not sure how you could possibly claim the FOID system and especially appeals procedure affords adequate due process when ISP goes so far as to deny releasing information about your revocation to help you appeal it, on FOIA exemption grounds. And then further fights tooth and nail to appeal to the (IL?) supreme court.
  8. Honestly this all began with the CCL law that provided a means of non-adjudicated foid revocation criteria. It's beyond mind blowing to consider how much power ISP is granted and is acting as a very reaching executive agency, exerting de facto judicial powers and pushing even legislative muscle considering the "emergency" rule that Pritzker most recently somehow magically granted the ISP. Not Sure you can even call it due process when a single agency seemingly has total authority to dictate who they deem *worthy* to exercise their 2A rights. Icing on the cake is the laughable approach they take to indefinitely handling foid appeals, yet will instantly revoke it so easily and quickly. How is it considered affording due process when so many people get their FOID cards revoked suddenly and cannot even determine why and when??
  9. You can kiss your job goodbye if you go the regular route unfortunately is the reality. Honestly you'd be lucky to get your FOID back in 12 months that way. If you're considered LEO, this might be fast enough: https://isp.illinois.gov/TypesOfAppeals/LawEnforcement Still need someone to conduct the forensic psych eval and write a favorable finding. If it's been immediately after your release/discharge that might be difficult. I think the court will just bump it back and say you need to go through the ISP because you didn't exhaust your options with them first. Definitely find a lawyer with a history handling these types of cases, imo especially if your Union lawyer is drawing a blank. There's a user on here that handles both professional licensing matters and food/ccl appeals.
  10. Cop just had to ask the kid "hey come over here real quick, once" . Dead giveaway if they're from Wisconsin...
  11. This form isn't new by any means. I think the most obvious update with this current form is the instructions to email the completed form to the email address listed. Might be other updates...
  12. Don't forget about Anjanette Young in Chicago. CPD busted down her house in a no knock at night, caught her naked and wouldn't let her get dressed for quite some time. They got the wrong house and the guy they were looking for hadn't been living there for over 4 years. Apparently because their CI was useless... No knock warrants really need to end.
  13. Not only that, but instead of the cop obtaining legal counsel on his own or through the union, the city themselves is representing him. Hard to argue there's only a few rotten apples when the city itself is throwing in their legal resources to assist. I've been watching lots of audit videos and getting more familiar with the legalities of cop stops. In particular even for stop and identify states, a cop can't demand/compel you to provide identity on a whim. Only if arrested or detained for reasonable suspicion of a crime. It's not the driver's fault that sizable chunks of your dumpy city is full of crime and prostitutes, let alone being aware of this, as he was out of town. Certainly not justified in violating several of his civil rights. Not to mention the cop losing all impartiality in conducting this stop as a fishing exercise primarily because the driver got lost in a dumpy part of your city--i.e. even if not immediately obvious, let's keep looking unconstitutionally until I find something illegal, or if necessary assumed to be illegal, expired. Not sure anyone can argue that, assumed to be illegal/expired without validating first could ever possibly be construed as reasonable...
  14. Not sure how you could say the interpretation only applies to ownership and to allow requiring permit to carry, considering the 2nd amendment includes "keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." in its language...
  15. The psychologist that I spoke to specializes in FOID evaluations and told me there isn't any point in trying until 5 years have gone by. I have been told to be VERY careful when selecting one to go to as many of them are anti gun to begin with and it's next to impossible to get them to clear you. As for attorneys, I've spoke to a couple but it just seems there aren't very many who really understand the whole thing and maybe that's because ISP makes their own rules as they go along. I actually had one attorney inform me that he may be able to get my IL FOID back but my federal FOID is another issue, I didn't even bother asking him to explain to me what a federal FOID is. I'm also disappointed in the gun groups, seems like one of them would offer some kind of legal assistance or would have filed some sort of class action suit on this. Or at least a suggested list of attorneys and psychologists would be nice. Where is the ACLU? They should be all over the removal of Constitutional rights without due process. It seems to me that I should be able to put a dollar value on the amount of time my rights were unlawfully taken away from me. Funny thing is, this whole ordeal has actually been a testament to the strength of my mental health. If I did have issues, going through this could have pushed me right over the edge. I am compiling information and creating an outline and plan to move forward with meeting with the chief and the officer who wrote the report. It may help me and I don't think it will hurt. I'd still say whoever told you that 5 year minimum is highly suspect and questionable. That particular prohibitor doesn't even have a 5 year period, whereby after the timespan its treated differently...
  • Create New...