Jump to content


Supporting Team I
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

188 profile views

hceuterpe's Achievements


Member (3/24)

  1. 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...
  2. 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...
  3. Tbh and putting on my Cyber security hat (because that's my day job) the admins would be doing the userbase a favor by not re-enabling Tapatalk. I quit using it years ago over concerns I had with its security. I believe it behaves as an aggregator for the various forums. So it doesn't surprise me it's erroneously popping up browser user agents (in this case Firefox) that members don't recognize that in turn get sent as email notifications for new sign alerts. Do a Google search over this and you'll find countless announcements of forums blocking Tapatalk over security concerns such as this. Besides the browser mobile UI after the IC update seems pretty good.
  4. DId the counselor only do outpatient? If they're actually PsyD or MD and did rounds in the in-patient wing I could see a really remote chance, but they're not supposed to report outpatient treatment so long as it's not court ordered, and they didn't deem you to be clear and present danger. Tbh you might as well apply. Because either you get extremely unlucky and find out they screwed up (by reported incorrectly) and your FOID gets revoked when you apply for a CCL. Or later down the line you try to renew your FOID, and they find that info and it gets revoked. It sounds like you're about up for the renewal or close to it anyways. Also for what it's worth apparently back before the CCL law, the mental health reporting was really spotty with a lot of facilities. While ultimately you shouldn't have been reported, that further helps you I guess...
  5. The order goes like this in terms of trust level: USPS mail, email, calls,texts. The latter two significantly easier to spoof and therefore subject to scams vs the first two (and arguably so much it's bordering on becoming useless forms of communication due to the incessant levels of abuse for them). In terms of actually getting notice to providing information such as a DL, my recommendation is that unless it's physical mail (and possibly you actually explicitly consenting to email communication for a very specific use case such as with registration renewal), assume the notice is a scam.
  6. The judge's name is Mary, not a "he". Rowland also appears to be a democratic (or at least democrat favored) appointment. Not surprised this would happen but she is clearly not 2A friendly.
  7. Hey Flynn beat me to it! The way I read it. The ruling more specifically states that the community caretaking exception (which originally was ruled in relation to vehicles) of the 4th amendment, does not reasonably extend to private homes. And that a warrant is necessary. Honestly I'm actually a bit shocked of the unanimous 9-0 ruling. I wasn't expecting it would happen in the slightest.. Definitely thought there would be at least one justice dissenting.
  8. 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...
  9. Wait a second... “Excluding so many people from the process of deciding to file for bankruptcy, including the vast majority of the board of directors, the chief financial officer, and the general counsel, is nothing less than shocking,” the judge added. WTH...
  10. Seems like you've experienced firsthand one of the most unconstitutional laws the state has to offer. Due process need not apply to this law... The FOID law itself states clear and present danger reporting from LEO needs to be demonstrated behavior. This is in contrast to communicated to specifically psychiatrist, psychologist, etc. So unless you said something specifically to the cop that the cop didn't like, they didn't have grounds to report it. The problem is that report is purely circumstantial in nature and confidential. Seems the ISP also accepts the information unconditionally so they likely won't believe you regardless of whether or not you try to get the local PD to retract it. You're probably best off finding an attorney that specializes in FOID appeals. I wouldn't even bother contacting the police chief before then. The 5 years minimum is bogus. You'll want to get the evaluation from Someone else anyways. Finally in case you haven't figured it out: The cops aren't your friends. The less you say to them. The better off you are.
  11. I'm going to throw out the female gender card here, and say your story sounds like a scene in a nature documentary I've watched before, of two male ungulates butting heads trying to show whose boss. As the saying goes: Cooler heads prevail. They have car insurance, you have car insurance, it's just damage to a car that be repaired. it's not like the two guys tried stealing your baby or something of that nature...
  12. This line alone, was all you needed to say. I've heard of so many instances in attempts of firearms restrictions, (attempts) restraining orders, etc over messy divorces, that I long lost count. It's even worse in IL, due to the subjective, adversarial nature of these instances, along with the overall lack of due process that affect both your FOID and CCL eligibility. Yep, it's sad but police, prosecutors and judges give way to much credibility to spited and evengeful spouses or significant others many times and run with only one side of the story as fact, void of any due process. So I think red flag laws are bogus, but it's even worse in IL, because the polices' very subjective view of you alone is enough for their to deny something like a CCL, or even a FOID. At least most of the red flag laws at least have some element due process involved. The police objections do not.
  13. This line alone, was all you needed to say. I've heard of so many instances in attempts of firearms restrictions, (attempts) restraining orders, etc over messy divorces, that I long lost count. It's even worse in IL, due to the subjective, adversarial nature of these instances, along with the overall lack of due process that affect both your FOID and CCL eligibility.
  14. I hate to throw out a dose of realism, but beyond being frustrated what exactly would you be willing to sue over and the damages you're seeking? There are already multiple lawsuits filed related to the delays that have been dragging along for months if not years. Yeah it's absolutely crap. But the state is not exactly amateurs at playing the legal game. Best case scenario legal action would drag out in court for years, before you'd see a favorable ruling. If you're specifically wanting to address concerns of the March To August timeframe and not from even before, I can assure you you will likely be disappointed because the state would definitely have a very strong defense using the COVID-19 restrictions.
  • Create New...