Tango7

Maybe I'm missing your point. I understand that they said that transfers where the FTIP has been performed will be allowed. I'm not disputing that as it's plainly written (unlike most of this dreck). What I'm saying is that, under Hurtado, and the advice previously offered by the ISP, before this Pile Of Shavings law was enacted, a transfer was deemed to have started when the buyer and seller agreed to the sale. While an FTIP had to be performed before the sale concluded and the firearm was transferred, the performance of the FTIP had no bearing on when the transfer began. With the passage of this dreck, any verbal sales, or layaways that had not yet had the FTIP performed were null and void.

Because the elites are still upset - not just about having to recognize our right to an effective means of self defense allowed in 49 other states to varying degrees, but because they couldn't hide their dirty laundry behind the robes of a political crony. Well, that and the fact that their only "justifications" were "we can", "it's not nonsensical" and "it might make people safer".

👋 Make that two (at least)

I've made the same argument about the pension crisis, which actually dates back to 1917. Around 2010 the state required local pension fund members to attend 32 hour classes on finance and made us fiduciaries that were personally liable for the results of our decisions... but the state, county and local officials that actually set the tax levies and authorize the transfer of funds are required exactly 0 hours of training. and can vote in favor of 3-5 having a positive result without fear of legal repercussions.

Well, the state has a history of using shell bills, surprise sponsors, suspending rules and expediting matters - when it suits them. Look at the FCCA. Despite having 2 weeks after Raoul's original bill, and 68 Legislative days (wish I could work that few days and still get paid), they waited until the very last day of the legislative calendar. As i mention to my students: On May 31st, HB 183 receives 3 additional Senate Amendments, and has all 3 of Senator Raoul’s withdrawn. It also has no less than 91 separate actions happen, including: being sent between Executive and Assignment committees a half dozen times having a “recall for 2nd reading” in the Senate Having the third reading and passing (45-12-1) Being sent to the House for concurrence Being voted on in the House and passing (89-28-0) All in a single day

While IANAL, I happened to notice this in the law: This seems to say that only transfers which had been approved by ISP will be allowed, and yet, the ISP, following the Court's direction in Hurtado, offers this on their website: Given that the dealer isn't required to confirm eligibility until the actual transfer, doesn't the law disenfranchise people who had guns on layaway, whether formal or informal, who had not yet had their FTIPS performed?

Agreed. Follow Ronnie's example.

FWIW, remember that Princess Madigan spent our tax money issuing "legal" notices to hundreds of out-of-state vendors ordering them to comply with the FOID recording requirement, and threatening legal action if they didn't. A lesson from the Daley family - easy to pay for the jackboots - and even the eventual settlement after the conduct is found to be unconstitutional - from the bottomless taxpayer purse.

I'm actually surprised they offered a version that didn't have it included already. That was a clause that Acevedo and Munoz - both sworn officers earning pension time on the Legislative payroll - included in all their bills.

As I wrote to Dick Turban when he used the phrase a few years ago - "You refer to my semiautomatic rifles as a "weapon of war". Abide by the Oath you swore and it will never become one."

The email service that lets people know about severe weather or police, military or firefighter duty deaths (why I originally subscribed). Since JB Pritzker took over? It's become the district version of Pravda - occasional news but mostly dreck like this: <indent>Illinois e-News Release FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Tuesday, January 10, 2023 CONTACT GovernorsOffice(@)illinois.gov Gov. Pritzker Signs Legislation Banning Assault Weapons and Sale of High-Capacity Magazines Illinois Becomes Ninth State to Institute Assault Weapons Ban SPRINGFIELD – Standing alongside lawmakers and gun control activists, Governor Pritzker signed the Protect Illinois Communities Act banning the sale and distribution of assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, and switches in Illinois, effective immediately. “For the past four years, my administration and my colleagues in the State Capitol have been battling the powerful forces of the NRA to enshrine the strongest and most effective gun violence legislation that we possibly can,” said Gov. JB Pritzker. “I couldn’t be prouder to say that we got it done. And we will keep fighting — bill by bill, vote by vote, and protest by protest — to ensure that future generations only hear about massacres like Highland Park, Sandy Hook, and Uvalde in their textbooks.” “Gun violence anywhere is a threat to wellbeing everywhere. In Illinois, lawmakers, advocates, and gun violence survivors stood together and worked for decisive, protective change,” said Lt. Governor Juliana Stratton. “Thank you, Governor Pritzker, for your steadfast leadership on this issue. Illinois is proud to do the work and to pass one of the strongest pieces of legislation in the country to make communities safer. Gun violence is not our normal, and it never will be.” “From ending the sale of assault rifles to stopping the tidal wave of guns flooding into Illinois from surrounding states, the Protect Illinois Communities Act is one of the strongest gun safety laws in the nation,” said House Speaker Emanuel "Chris" Welch. “This legislation is the culmination of months of negotiations between advocacy organizations, law enforcement, state leaders, and stakeholders from across the state. We know that gun violence is an epidemic and an overwhelming majority of Illinoisans agree that the time for common-sense reform is now. Delivering on this promise - the promise to remove these weapons of war from our parks, our schools, our movie theatres, churches, and communities throughout Illinois - will remain one of my proudest achievements as Speaker of the House.” “I have spent my career working to protect people from the growing plague of gun violence that touches every corner of our state,” said Senate President Don Harmon. “This new law begins the pushback against weapons whose only intent is to eviscerate other human beings. I am proud to have worked on it and even prouder to see it signed into law.” “Our state demanded firearm reform to reduce gun violence, and the legislature stepped up and delivered one of the strongest bills in the nation, one that can serve as a model for states,” said state Rep. Bob Morgan (D-Deerfield) “I thank Gov. Pritzker, Senate President Harmon, Speaker Welch, and the countless survivors and family members who sat with us, shared their stories, and refused to give up until they got the change we all needed.” “Illinois joins other states with the strongest assault weapons ban in the nation sending the message that lives are valued over guns,” said state Rep. La Shawn K. Ford (D-Chicago). “Doctors, victims, advocates, and survivors sent a strong message and the General Assembly and the Governor took action.” “Today, Illinois took a stand against the senseless barrage of gun violence that has plagued our state for far too long. The Protect Illinois Communities Act will undoubtedly save many lives and lead to safer streets, schools, and communities at large,” said state Rep. Maura Hirschauer (D-Batavia). “In honor of the lives lost and changed by gun violence, we must not grow complacent. Let today's legislative action be the first of many as we work to end gun violence once and for all.” “This moment is the result of the dedication and leadership of hundreds of survivors, advocates and organizations that lent their voice to this fight to help enact what is now one of the strongest pieces of gun safety legislation in the country,” said Protect Illinois Communities Chair and President Becky Carroll. “We are ever grateful to Governor JB Pritzker for his unwavering commitment to this issue, and signing the Protect Illinois Communities Act into law, and to Speaker Chris Welch, Senate President Don Harmon, and Representative Bob Morgan for their leadership on making this historic day possible. We were fortunate to join forces with leading organizations here at home and from across the country, including Brady, Everytown, Giffords, Gun Violence Prevention PAC, and others, to take real action on preventing gun violence in our communities and saving lives.” “This lifesaving package will go a long way toward getting assault weapons and high-capacity magazines off the streets, keeping guns away from people in crisis through red flag laws, and holding illegal gun traffickers accountable for taking advantage of weak laws in neighboring states,” said Everytown President John Feinblatt. “This victory was made possible by Illinois Moms Demand Action volunteers, who were a vocal presence in Springfield. Everytown is grateful to Governor Pritzker, Representative Morgan, Speaker Welch, President Harmon and their colleagues for honoring the victims and survivors of gun violence with action.” “Today, Illinois took a major step in better protecting families and communities, and ensuring that tragedies such as Highland Park never happen again,” said Brady President Kris Brown. “We have the power to prevent these uniquely American tragedies, and a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines is a critical step towards that future. Our movement will continue until the sale of assault weapons is banned everywhere in the U.S. With this new law, the people of Illinois have shown why they are a leader of gun safety laws. Brady thanks Governor Pritzker, Representative Morgan, Speaker Welch, President Harmon, the entire legislature, GPAC and Protect Illinois Communities, as well as the countless advocates and survivors who persisted in getting this passed.” “On July 4 in Highland Park, a day of celebration turned into a nightmare after a shooter opened fire on parade watchers, killing seven people and injuring 48. Assault weapons are built to kill and injure quickly and efficiently,” said Former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. “Our communities deserve safety and security. I applaud Illinois leaders Representative Bob Morgan, Speaker Chris Welch, President Don Harmon, and Governor J.B. Pritzker for having the courage to act to remove these weapons of war from our streets.” House Bill 5471 also caps sales of high-capacity ammunition magazines, bans “switches” that convert legal handguns into assault weapons, and extends the ability of courts to prevent dangerous individuals from possessing a gun through firearm restraining orders. The new law also requires existing owners of semi-automatic rifles to register their ownership, ensuring that law enforcement knows the location of these weapons of war and who to hold accountable if they fall into the wrong hands. Governor Pritzker has also signed legislation to ban unserialized, privately made “ghost guns,” the first Midwestern state to do so (HB 4383). In 2021, Governor Pritzker signed legislation expanding background checks on all gun sales in Illinois and modernizing and strengthening the Firearm Owners Identification Card System (HB 562). Additionally, Governor Pritzker signed legislation (SB 337) to combat the scourge of illegal gun trafficking, making Illinois the 16th state to require gun dealers to be certified by the state after more than a decade of work. Governor Pritzker's Reimagine Public Safety Act also established the first ever Office of Firearm Violence Prevention, providing a historic investment in community-based violence prevention for the communities most affected by firearm violence. House Bill 5471 also codifies the Illinois State Police’s internet-based system for reporting stolen firearms and enhances security around certain gun transfers by requiring such exchanges taking place after July 1, 2023 to be filed with a federally licensed firearms dealer and extending the record-keeping time from 10 to 20 years. This legislation is effective immediately. To unsubscribe or modify your subscription click the following link</indent>

Wait... the same agency that has repeatedly refused to define terms or clarify the law because they're an enforcement agency, not attorneys, and such information would be considered legal advice? We're gonna be waiting a while for anything that isn't like their "guide to transporting firearms"... and it will probably be just as inaccurate towards the restrictive side.

A reminder to those who lump street cops with the brass: until recently, you did not have to be an Illinois police officer to be appointed Police Chief or elected Sheriff. In fact, if you currently occupy the office you can still fill the position without being certified , say, like a lawyer turned legislator turned administrative assistant who magically became Sheriff <cough> sorry, feels like I've got a DART in my throat <cough>. If an appointee goes against his appointer, he or she will be out of a job. In the case of certain Sheriffs of metropolitan counties with a population greater than 5 million (as if), he'd lose his campaign money and apparatus (D)a state committee currently provides. There have been several times where Illinois Law Enforcement has stood with the citizenry. Despite the bluster of Superintendent Garry "Streetlights" McCarthy (also not an IL LEO) about officers shooting CCW holders, within days of HS183 becoming law, the CPD administration issued a Special Order instructing officers about the new reality of CCW in IL, as well as reversing a long-standing policy of confiscating firearms not used in firearms crimes as "evidence" (which required at least a trip to CPD HQ during business hours, and sometimes a court-issued "no, there really is no case" order) and instead listing them as "found property" which could be recovered at the local district.

A resident should also file a complaint with the ILAG about their violation of the Open Meetings Act. They were apparently shielding the discussion of the proposed ordinance under the "security measures" exemption and the public meeting was the first time they admitted to it.

I was able to download my Instructor creds in PDF and submitted them that way. They were accepted.

Well, maybe when the left says "give up _____, and then we'll leave you alone" this time they really mean it. They crossed their heart and swore to die!

Happy to help! It was a surprise to me. I'd found it actually searching the Tribune archives and noticed a story bemoaning the "weapons law". Diving into the webhole I was able to find the law, although I haven't been able to find the actual repeal of it yet. So it seems Nitti's "I got a permit" reply in "the Untouchables" might have been accurate - but only before 1924.

Not many people know, but the FCCA is the 2nd time we've had CCW here. The first time was from 1919 to 1924, thanks to Senator Frank Sadler (R) Chicago, and the Act that bore his name - Senate Bill 88 in 1919. The law as it existed: After non-stop propaganda by the Chicago Media, it was repealed by Elmer Schnackenberg, a progressive Chicago (R) who was the majority leader at the time. He later became a Federal Judge. Google Books Link - PAge 635: https://books.google.com/books?id=xplCAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA613&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false

Applied.

So quote me. Obviously I did. I'm sorry if my use of your own words offends you. Ad in a bunch horse apples that I never said or implied. You're the one that quoted (in summary not verbatim) a celebrated hater of the RKBA. I simply offered "solutions" that Beta and company have suggested. If you support Beta in this issue, it seems fairly obvious you'd support his ideas on this issue. If you were truly concerned about being specific to his comments about Abbott, perhaps you should have distanced yourself from a known anti-RKBA politician and offered alternatives. Instead, you acted like a governor in a state that allows bills to become law without his signature. At election time you go to people who supported the issue and boast about not vetoing it, then run to opponents and tell them you didn't sign it into law, please vote for me. Then put the site down at the end. I wasn't putting the site down at all... I was wondering why an apparent supporter of Beta and his anti-2A stance would bother participating here. This is almost a good passive aggressive rant ! All I did was quote you, and, lacking any clear differentiation, identified the points supported by your hero on this matter. If I was mistaken your reply would have been the perfect time to define exactly how you disagree with issues like Beta's repeated calls for government confiscations of civilian firearms. Instead, you focused on me. Others might feel honored that they were the focus, but all I see is sidestepping and failing to specify any difference in your stance and that of Mister "heck, yes, we're going to take your AR-15, your AK-47". It wasn't until you responded to mauserme that you offered "I did not say nor did I imply that O'Rourke's idea's/opinions on how to fix the issues were the correct way to do it" - and then offer "How about doing something to insure they will live long enough to have there own children" which mauserme even called out as undefined. What's next - claim to be "a diehard supporter of the 2A" without clarifying what that means to you (or anyone else)? If it seems to be passive aggressive, perhaps it's for a lack of name calling and insults. Besides being against the CoC here, in my years defending the issue in person, in ink (back in the day) and online, aggressive behavior is most often utilized by hoplophobes and statists who don't have facts and statistics to support their position, or can't actually debate the issue past the propaganda points without resorting to ad hominems (personal attacks). True passive aggression is refusing to clarify your opinion, then being offended and claiming your position was misrepresented.

So - with very little verifiable information about the full scope of this incident, what should be done that would prevent another tragedy? From what I've seen his family apparently thought he was an angel who was incapable of violence. Waiting periods? After all, there are only so many Bonnie Elmasris and Carol Bownes in the world, and it's not like these criminals have any history of planning their adventure of evil for longer then 10 days. Bans of magazines over 10 rounds - because they've never been used in a shooting event? {/sarc} Raise the age for all firearms to 21? Fine, as long as you raise the age to vote, sign contracts, engage in intimate relations and get an abortion to that. (funny how those would be "infringements" the hoplophobe side cares about) Should we ban all guns for the children? Because that's what El Hispanico Falso would suggest - with maybe a small cutout for hunting rifles and shotguns holding 3 rounds or less and 20 rounds or less of ammo (after a psychological screening, paying for a license and allowing police to enter your home without a warrant at any time) - for The Children™, of course. I thought this was a pro-RKBA site.

Of course this will work - until the majority of offenders using "ghost guns" in crimes are found to be under the purview of one legislative caucus or another. Then strict enforcement will be deemed to be offensive and bias-driven, and we'll wind up with yet another selectively prosecuted law that's only used to charge deplorables. “Our government teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.” Justice Brandeis in Olmstead v. U.S., 277 U.S. 438, 485 (1928).

BTW, I actually worked with a guy who was a victim of this scheme. Years ago, he stopped off at a gas station on the south side after going hunting at the DPCA. He squealed his tires and got lit up by CPD. When asked if he had any guns in the vehicle he replied truthfully that he did, he presented his FOID and informed them he had an unloaded shotgun in a case in the bed of his truck. They seized the shotgun and charged him with possession of an unregistered firearm, even though his DL and FOID clearly indicated he was a resident of a community 28 miles north of the border of Chicago, and as a non-resident you could not register firearms in Chicago. Long story short the Corporate Counsel offered to drop the charge if he surrendered the shotgun, and his attorney uncle said it wasn't worth paying more for a lawyer than the shotgun was worth. Needless to say they weren't nearly as opinionated about RKBA as most of us here. So his charge got dropped, and his shotgun became just another firearm to put on the press table as a "gun taken off the street" by (D)a machine.

Did you know that our current CCW law started out as HB 183 - a bill about signs concerning fees at ATM's? (D)a machine poison pilled Phelp's Family and Personal Protection Act (HB 997) with 8 amendments (including a 40 hour training requirement) to the point it was unsalvageable less than two months after the Moore decision. And despite rules that prohibit fast tracking bills into law, they had HB 183 perform over 91 separate actions between both bodies on a single day...

So I've been tracking this topic to provide as updated a curriculum as I can. The only change in prohibited areas that made it to Public Act level was the removal of "Riverboat" and addition of "Illinois" to Section 16: (16) Any building, real property, or parking area under the control of a gaming facility licensed under the Illinois Riverboat Gambling Act or the Illinois Horse Racing Act of 1975, including an inter-track wagering location licensee. So what will happen to visitors to the CCFP? Also, will this make the slot shops prohibited places? I think they're covered under the Video Gaming Act, but figured I'd ask.