Jump to content

davel501

Supporting Team IV
  • Posts

    1,760
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by davel501

  1. That's really only a Tesla problem.
  2. I'm saying knock off the hyperbole and focus on the real objectionable parts. It's not hard to find a cheap lock box that claims to meet the needs of the law. https://www.amazon.com/Portable-Pistols-Fireproof-Combination-Travel/dp/B09ZH6LWSL
  3. Aren't all metal containers fire resistant? Well not magnesium, but you get the idea.
  4. I question whether we should ever be a proponent on anything given that they are so willing to gut and replace everything in a bill with no notice. The witness slips seem to carry forward rather than reset now too.
  5. Police cannot be complainants for disturbing the peace charges in Illinois. Other states, yes, but not Illinois.
  6. The state supreme court appeals directly to SCOTUS so there's a school of thought that you can lose faster in state court and get to SCOTUS faster.
  7. Is it a mass shooting if a casing is found that appears to have been fired by 4 or more guns?
  8. I've got to admit, I did not expect the PSA to do anywhere near as well as it did.
  9. How great would it be if Texas sued Mexico for all the migrants they send up?
  10. (720 ILCS 5/7-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-1) Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person. (a) A person is justified in the use of force against another when and to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or another against such other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a forcible felony. (b) In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this Section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or on behalf of any person acting within the definition of "aggressor" set forth in Section 7-4 of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct. (Source: P.A. 93-832, eff. 7-28- 04.) (720 ILCS 5/2-8) (from Ch. 38, par. 2-8) Sec. 2-8. "Forcible felony". "Forcible felony" means treason, first degree murder, second degree murder, predatory criminal sexual assault of a child, aggravated criminal sexual assault, criminal sexual assault, robbery, burglary, residential burglary, aggravated arson, arson, aggravated kidnaping, kidnaping, aggravated battery resulting in great bodily harm or permanent disability or disfigurement and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual. (Source: P.A. 88-277; 89-428, eff. 12-13-95; 89-462, eff. 5-29-96.)
  11. I could not, for the life of me, figure out that meant until it was next to your profile image.
  12. $49 million for 6 months? He must be the best negotiator ever. I'm going to just leave this here: Controversial ShotSpotter Brandon Johnson has vowed to cancel was already renewed - Chicago Sun-Times (suntimes.com)
  13. Yes, you should get a new combo card. Hold onto that foid with the expiration date in 2031. It makes things easier sometimes.
  14. The officers took unnecessary actions that appear to not be supported by the facts. They overstepped their bounds and deprived the plaintiff of his constitutional rights. It's not a false arrest but it follows the same principles.
  15. Miller is ripe for challenge if you read the history of that case. Talk about a corrupt court, doubt the dems are as brave now.
  16. There are a lot of the enforce the law type Rs. They say stricter penalties for law breakers but somehow don't see themselves as the ones on the wrong side of right.
  17. It is the existing law with stronger penalties. The sponsor is an R.
  18. How many SBSs exist out there as AOWs due to arbitrary ATF rules? Could ask the same for SBRs as pistols. I'll bet there's common use and then some.
  19. I believe they would have been against this kind of mass surveillance. They would have demanded that the people from these neighborhoods step up and not tolerate this garbage. They believed in the right to self defense so I doubt "it's dangerous to speak out" would have carried much weight with them.
  20. I'm wondering if they will file notice of this in Morse v Raoul (IL Suppressor Ban) because it takes out the public good argument that the 7th circuit will want to use to affirm the IL law.
×
×
  • Create New...