Jump to content

crufflesmuth

Members
  • Posts

    386
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

897 profile views

crufflesmuth's Achievements

Member

Member (8/24)

  1. Second on this reducing "gun" people. I am not much a fan of the NRA, but I do believe there should not be any bans on where people get their training from - as long as it's accredited. The last people to receive training from are law enforcement. They have unions, qualified immunity and endless pockets for lawyers: not many outside that have this. It's a different mindset and mentality. They are setting people up for failure with this.
  2. This is Illinois so I cannot fault the people too much. The typical voter is having a problem reconciling their political fashion with their reality. You cannot vote for socialist progressives on a Democratic ticket and expect that crowd not to ban guns - as Pritzker, Welch and MDA did. That the typical voter does not understand the process and how the law works is astounding. Yet: here we are. If they have not charged anyone with violation of the law - perhaps we are getting close: whether that is Devore or other pending litigation.
  3. So they prevail: it means nobody will have qualified immunity. So you have people that get declared "peace" officers, much like Chicago aldermen/women did. They might satisfy the possession requirements but then you have a potential chance for the state legislature to magically change that. It is disappointing to see the core second amendment right disregarded like this. I understand why; in lawfare you have to pull out the stops that hit hardest and fastest. If they win - I do not know too much about the case law. I would presume the state legislature could just re-write the police powers portion so it would only apply to actual peace officers. They could do that and moot most of this. Very interesting.
  4. There is no failure to "register", there is disclosure through filing an affidavit and there could potentially be not just self-incrimination, but ambiguity as well. State Attorneys have a wide range of discretion on whether or not to prosecute, so it's not purely self-incrimination. When the Governor comments the registry is, or will be working the way it "should" what he really means is himself and other public officials in addition to the Illinois State Police will, through qualified immunity: lie at will continuously to members of the public, whether in printed, written or oral form. They do not care. The reality is Don Harmon, Emmanuel Welch and other members of the progressive caucus did not have patience. They rammed this legislation through. The Deadline is still January 1st, 2024. Anyone who says otherwise is flat out lying. In a sense, the governor is right: the registry will work the way it should be: if you disclose/register through affidavit after January 1st, 2024 you could possibly face criminal sanctions and serious prison time. It's not worth it. Don't do it. Those who have qualified immunity not only can lie with impunity, they face no real consequence whether financially or otherwise even if they're caught through deprivation of civil rights. The Illinois State Police at minimum should have taken the "disclosure" option from the FOID portal down at this point. The governor does not care. The people who drafted and passed this law, do not care. Neither do most of the state police. The object is enforcing the law even if that means putting people in prison.
  5. The better question to ask July Morrison: when is your shell-bill creating additional FOID revocation circumstances going to hit the legislative assembly? This is vindictive and is an afront to working class people from July Morrison. So an individual gets red-flagged, now they're less likely to show up to court and more likely to have further financial burden: has July Morrison purchased Uber stock? does she Uber? because this proposal seems to benefit the ride share industry. I would not put it past July Morrison to introduce an additional shell bill which adds additional circumstances for when, where and how a FOID card can be revoked. Disclosed an "assault weapon"? if you don't turn it over before your next renewal, you could very well lose your driver's license. Which reminds me: when do the FOID endorsements for "disclosed" weapons expire? if the cards cannot have dates printed on them, what makes anyone think a "disclosure" is printed on them?
  6. If you look at """assault weapon""" bans, you leave with the understanding that politicians are establishing class in American culture. What progressive, left-wing politicians want is a system where it's so legally complicated that you can carry a handgun for transportation to the range. A system where using a concealed weapon is pointless because of all the "sensitive" places. Add their "taxes" to where the culture is nonexistent or not mainstream. They never wanted the police disarmed, especially their private security. They want a system where you are easily abused and going through endless motions in court, spending more money and having to make difficult decisions so you are not bankrupt. That is their vision. That is why they hate the AR-15, a magazine of more than 10 rounds. Gun owners and citizens need to be empowered, educated and hold a strict-line in the sand. We are no longer ignorant citizens listening to lies from neighborhood police in the 1960's.
  7. 1. People like Welch; Harmon; Moms Demand Action. They do not hate anyone, per se. They believe they are right. If they hate anything, it's the power the AR-15 gives the average citizen over a police officer. The AR-15 is more powerful than a lawyer suing for false arrest, violation of civil rights, etc. 2. It's not about benevolence. Whether the law makes sense. Whether you can or cannot understand it does not matter. To them, it's about passing another law to end "violence" or secure more political and social clout. The law does not give mercy, patience or grace. Either people elect politicians that do not want to ban these firearms or more will be banned. 3. The police and government do not have your interest at heart. Even the most friendly, down-to-earth police officer has one order: establish preponderance, lead with the question (lie), arrest and charge. That does not change when they are testifying in court either. 4. The gun community needs to start having standards. Reward good police. Ostracize the bad ones. That includes politicians as well. 5. People need to stop using their language and logic. Becoming a felon? only when you have been through the trial process. Law-abiding? only until they change your constitution and the laws, so that you are something different. 6. The days of enjoying progressive left-wing politics are over. If people continue to vote for these type of politicians, there will be a different culture in place than what currently exists.
  8. ISP is clearly lying to the public and gun owners. Under current Supreme Court precedent and doctrine they may do so. Short of another lawsuit, they may continue to claim, late registrations are accepted..and they are..but you will be prosecuted. The ISP is outright lying. If you register a machine-gun with BATFE, they deny and disapprove, for instance. We have come so far since January 1st. Struggling gun shops. Owners and individuals melting down that AR-15's were single shot and not machine-guns. Our community at large needs to accept sometimes, the police are not all on your side. The numbers from Maxons and ISP estimate seem nuanced. ISP's administrative powers are very broad but they are not broad enough to negate this law. For as much as I appreciate Welch's grape juice and Don Harmon's coaxal nonsense, this law is very clear to anyone where prohibition starts and ends. I can appreciate individual efforts of officers but this is the biggest straw to break the backs of everyone. Even if you agree with the ban, you should at least also agree ISP and JCAR should close the disclosure feature and clarify NO registration/disclosure is permitted by law after January 1st, 2024. Perhaps July Morrison can assist them on this matter, she's done such a great job with her current proposal.
  9. HB5471 Enrolled - 95 - LRB102 24372 BMS 33606 b 1 on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 2 102nd General Assembly, it is unlawful for any person within 3 this State to knowingly manufacture, deliver, sell, import, or 4 purchase or cause to be manufactured, delivered, sold, 5 imported, or purchased by another, an "assault weapon", assault 6 weapon attachment, .50 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber 7 cartridge. 8 (c) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (d), 9 beginning January 1, 2024, it is unlawful for any person 10 within this State to knowingly possess an "assault weapon", 11 "assault weapon" attachment, .50 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber 12 cartridge. 13 (d) This Section does not apply to a person's possession 14 of an "assault weapon", "assault weapon" attachment, .50 caliber 15 rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge device if the person lawfully 16 possessed that "assault weapon", "assault weapon" attachment, .50 17 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge prohibited by 18 subsection (c) of this Section, if the person has provided in 19 an endorsement affidavit, prior to January 1, 2024, under oath 20 or affirmation and in the form and manner prescribed by the 21 Illinois State Police, no later than October 1, 2023: 22 (1) the affiant's Firearm Owner's Identification Card 23 number; 24 (2) an affirmation that the affiant: (i) possessed an 25 "assault weapon", "assault weapon" attachment, .50 caliber 26 rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge before the effective date HB5471 Enrolled - 96 - LRB102 24372 BMS 33606 b
  10. The law says any possessor or person has until January 1st, 2024. There are no exceptions. There are no "outs." The State Police cannot emergency write their way out of an already enacted law. Only the Illinois Legislature and governor could extend the registration period, which has ended. The best decision anyone could make at this point would be not filing an affidavit/disclosure and securing any item in a locked gun safe, or moving the items outside the state if they did not already do so.
  11. The Illinois State Police are qualified to lie and everything published on their website reflects this. They are not in the business of being truthful and accurate. Their first order is enforcing the law which means spreading preponderance cues (their published FAQ) so they can obtain their probable cause, which eventually leads to arresting and charging people under this act. State Police lie and will continue to do so: whether that is false statistics or similar published "guidance" through an FAQ, if you could even call it that. They are lying about everything: the numbers, FAQ...everything. If I am an FFL, I am looking at legal advice from attorneys licensed to practice in this state, who have incentive to be truthful - not police - who lie continuously about everything regarding this act and the weapons banned by it..
  12. As of this afternoon, the disclosure option for Protect Illinois Communities Act is still open for weapons, attachments and accessories. They are either openly violating the law (state police / JCAR ) or have set a honeypot trap. If you did not "disclose" / "register" by January 1st of this year, do NOT use the disclose option as the time has passed and you could be inviting enforcement of the statute.
  13. This issue has languished since that time and persists. When Protect Illinois Communities Act did not exist, there were instances where CPD and other departments arrested someone for possession of an "assault" weapon, when the weapon in question was a handgun. The difference between the aftermath of the 2013 FCCL Act and PICA is that, with the FCCL, issues like "printing" or brief exposure of a firearm - there was already preexistent criminal legal theory to compensate potential deficiencies. That sort of exists with PICA, but with the pre-trial process. The law enables police a broad array of potential charges, to charge gun owners with. Just like DUI laws and training. You can be arrested and charged with a DUI, with having zero alcohol and drugs due to other factors, preponderance cues: you crossed lanes without signaling, or you crossed lanes abruptly. It's that calculus that could potentially be applied to charging individuals under PICA. JCAR's guidelines don't make application fair better. If I have a Glock 26 with a Glock 19 magazine, which extends beyond the grip, will the average street cop in suburban Cook and similar know the difference? I doubt it. Individuals might be 100% right on the law, but their lives and time have the potential to be upended by zealous police who will face pressure to make arrests to satisfy department quotas and political ends of the county sheriff and the like.
  14. The black letter of the law does not exempt a person from law enforcement harassing them. An officer could claim a barrel was threaded or similar, make an arrest and then cite that person. It has not been done but it could be. They have that ability now with this act. It would be stupid of them. But they do have that ability. That is the unspoken intent of this law: to discourage firearm ownership and lawful carry.
×
×
  • Create New...