Bird76Mojo

This guy is a snake. Mark my words.

Very nice Steve.. Well put together.

A.I. will do that in time.. Whether they allow it or not.

Illinois sheriffs to Pigster

All of these sheriff office statements are meaningless drivel until they actively prevent ISP raids based on the AWB terms. It's truly a soft stance, and many sheriffs included language in their statements to the effect of "we'll use this law to make sure other charges stick"

He's grandstanding to impress his mentor Klaus Schwab. He has to do his best to convey confidence in his tyrannical power abuses to make his puppet masters happy.

Passing a law allowing us to legally own suppressors has zero to do with preemption on firearms and transportation of them. The anti's are ALWAYS going to attempt to repeal everything we manage to get passed in our favor, regardless of new laws being passed. There is zero basis for the state to repeal anything to do with conceal carry legislation, because it has went well for the citizens of Illinois. It has been quiet on that front where citizens carrying concealed arms is concerned. Any bill to repeal it would have little public support, other than the normal anti's that we always fight on this. Every single legislative session the anti's constantly try to ram through numerous bills to erode our right to bear arms in Illinois. It baffles me why the members here, or any Illinois citizens for that matter, wouldn't want to FLOOD the state capitol with bills trying to further our rights. Overwhelm them the same as they do to our side. Make our voice loud and clear with as many bills as possible. Get them passed, and then work on trying to amend them in our favor yet again. It sure seems like IllinoisCarry, and especially Molly's response, is attempting to herd the masses down the same path as the ISRA as of late. It's fine though. Keep on explaining to everyone why you simply capitulate to these anti's. You're getting good at it. You all must be well-versed in that NRA handbook.

Not sorry, but I and many others will be supporting this. You gain ground when and where you can, then you take the results and data from those wins and apply them to crafting new state laws that benefit us all. Remaining neutral on this is spineless and does nothing to further our rights. IllinoisCarry is leading people in the wrong direction here.

These private transfer changes are complete BS.

Why waste your time turning them in? Just leave while you can. Let them be outraged. Let them threaten a new citizen of another state. Nothing will come of it.

Just allow citizens to run basic background checks on existing state IDs and drivers licenses, the check would not have to give details just a yes/no confirmation for things like firearm purchases, voting or to see if the person is say a registered sex offender heck use it for alchohol and smoking verification as well to confirm the ID is legit and not fake. Sounds great! Let's just do away with privacy rights altogether..

In my younger years I went through the court system for multiple violations for several different things. What can I say? I was a heck raiser. At one point I went through "court supervision" which sounds much the same as what you describe. If you complete it without any other violations then it comes off of your record after completion. After completion it never affected my future FOID card which I got years later. Of course, it's a different world now so your results will vary... The best thing you can do would be to sit down with legal counsel and figure this out. That's my advise..

I've never read a longer piece based on backwards, circular logic in all my life. Just wow. "But as amicus Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence demonstrated in its brief, “[t]he weight of empirical evidence shows that licensing laws like Illinois’ are likely to be highly effective at reducing gun homicides and suicides and at decreasing gun purchases by criminals.” I would argue that since the FOID act was put in place, criminal violence using illegal firearms has only risen. "In sum, if the Second Amendment allows prohibitions on gun possession and ownership by felons, minors, the mentally ill, and other presumptively risky people — which both this Court and the United States Supreme Court have held that it does" ...and that's where you're wrong bud. The 2nd Amendment allows no such thing. It's right there, clearly written. THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE (ALL PEOPLE) TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS (ALL ARMS) SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Anything to the contrary is nothing more than a modern judges' opinion/ruling. Otherwise, the 2nd Amendment would've included the language pertaining to felons, mentally ill, etc..

If you live in Effingham county, why even worry about a FOID card since the local police have sworn to ignore the FOID requirement..

To my understanding the police chief has also been a supporter of the sanctuary county movement starting in Effingham. Any evidence to the contrary?

I posted it because the "other side" will try to use this in any way they can against the sanctuary counties, since that's the county it all started in. Especially because the Effingham police chief was so vocal in supporting the sanctuary county movement. I see it as a "sanctuary county" related issue and thought others might like to know about it.

It seems like there's some unrest in the county that started this all. The police seem to be breaking ranks to out their chief. https://www.effinghamdailynews.com/news/local_news/officers-telecommunicators-vote-no-confidence-in-effingham-police-chief/article_c8945579-3633-5ed2-bea9-26e6b2c65743.html http://www.thexradio.com/news/78-local-news/39082-effingham-police-officers-and-telecommunicators-vote-no-confidence-in-police-chief https://www.effinghamdailynews.com/news/local_news/billboard-calls-for-support-of-police-chief/article_80dcf414-7fa4-5515-99ba-9dfc6d954add.html

When is the deadline? Someone drop the ball?

It's just a matter of time until a game warden catches someone without their FOID in Effingham. No county resolution will help them with that.. I applaud their idea but it seems pretty toothless.

There seems to be a staggering amount of helots in this thread.. Glad to pay those fines.. Happy about an ever increasing amount of nanny laws.. I prefer complete freedom myself, and I don't mind being held 100% responsible for any damage or harm I may cause with my reckless behavior or actions, but I don't need a squad of glorified revenue generators to assure that I stay in line.. As if laws really stop anything. The slavery mindset is real.

To my knowledge, according to state law you have 500ft after a posted speed limit sign to reduce your speed to the required limit.. I have a close friend that has used this tactic in court to get his ticket dropped. However, proving you did reduce your speed in that 500ft or were ticketed within that 500ft can be difficult in a system where you are guilty until proven innocent.

Let's face it. Reckless driving is an easy ticket to get. Often charges like this are completely left to the discretion of the officer. I built a little (compact) hotrod truck with a V8 in it, and I enjoy driving it a little wild from time to time. I don't endanger others by any stretch of the imagination, but I could be given a reckless driving ticket for giving it a little gas while turning a corner and the rear end kicks out in a small slide.. I obviously don't do this kind of thing around other vehicles but all it would take would be an officer to be tucked behind a sign, etc.. The days of having fun in a vehicle are long gone with everyone being so strict and creating new laws/offenses daily..

There's no reason to attack anyone here or make assumptions. A person has had their right to defend themselves taken away by what is essentially "fine print" in a document. Similar things could happen to any of us if we aren't paying attention.

This thread sounds like a job for...

The FOID process won't fall.. There's too much prior legal precedent that allows states to enact such nonsense.