Jump to content

RonOglesby - Now in Texas

Members
  • Posts

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
    Central Texas
  • Interests
    Lifting, firearms, golf carts cars and trucks that have enough power to do something stupid in.
    Ex-mil, computer geek, Bears fans.

RonOglesby - Now in Texas's Achievements

Member

Member (21/24)

  1. My problem with your post above is: "It needs to be reviewed by one more person" coupled with: "resolved in four to six weeks" Think about that. If I needed one more person to review my state tax form and told the state to hold on 4-6 weeks, do you think I would get any slack when I didn't pay them quickly? I hope this works out in your favor, and quickly!
  2. Seems they are getting better (speedier) on ones with prints. I didnt submit prints, put in my app in late January and still under review.. I expect any day now. but who knows.
  3. You're Famous: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/03/foghorn/first-5000-carry-licenses-mailed-in-illinois/#more-300675
  4. While I think NJ and even maryland's regimes are unconstitutional, I actually think we are better with a Hawaii or DC type case going to scotus. the supremes generally frown on flat bans. Its really a yes or no question vs something with fees or specific criteria. A flat ban (Chicago and DC) are what have brought us this far. I really believe SCOTUS would have rather had OUR case. Others are squishy. The D.C. case is sickening. Everything seems to drag there for years. Wasnt there a gun case some judge had with no movement for like 2 years that the chief judge/justice had to literally take from him and re-assign? Justice delayed huh?
  5. In their decision, CA4 placed the Second Amendment into some non-core-right-limbo, undeserving of strict scrutiny. I certainly hope that there are at least 5 judges at the Supreme Court who will take the Woollard case - just for that reason alone. Courts can't shuffle the amendments around and put some in the "core" pile while putting others in the "non-core" pile to suit their predilection for judicial activism. . I sure do love reading Gura's stuff.
  6. We're not. New Jersey has one though it is not called the FOID. And of course in Jersey you have to get a specific permit just own a handgun... and its a permit FOR EACH HANDGUN YOU BUY... think of that. Of course the first time you fill it out its almost like an NFA item, you have to have the local Chief sign off on your application, have to supply info on where you work, live, your bosses name and numbers, etc... Very invasive and I dont see how it stand post Heller.
  7. This whole rambling response reads like "we are not the rest of illinois suburban dwellers and we are different!" Also "you dont understand that we have gangs! and we have to be able to arrest anyone with a gun!!!" This was great: "Chicago has shown that preemptive stop and frisk is most effective when no form of carrying is allowed, and that aggressive enforcement of restrictive carry laws drives down firearms activity in urban streets. " Yeah, we like to frisk and take weapons and make arrests. If you say they can have a gun outside their house they may be LAW ABIDING!!! we cant have that. We must have a crime to arrest them for!
  8. Well there will have to be a study! Which we know takes a year or more, then time to implement, etc. The funny thing is even if they pass the law by that date, it takes time to setup a licensing apparatus, people to staff it, forms to design, training, websites, etc. It generally takes months. So basically as of 6 months from today the AUUW and UUW laws are void, but if you cant get a license to carry because Illinois takes a year to do anything and then it takes 60 or 90 days to get your license (best case as FOIDs take that long now). Basically there is some crap going down 6 months from now. No way Illinois can pass and implement an actual CCW process and system in this time frame.
  9. This can't be said enough or screamed loud enough. There will be an opposition bill I am sure of it. Todd will keep us informed but we have to keep neighbors informed and get others involved in calling and emailing their reps. WE CANNOT ALLOW A NY or CALI TYPE CARRY!
  10. I have already sent a long email to my reps, and called both offices. In the email I actually noted the ruling today and the 180 day deadline and quoted the final paragraph from Judge Posner. I finally wrapped up explaining that we have spent enough money in a broke state fighting lawsuits over this and its time to pass a bill or just let me carry w/ my FOID.... Light the fire under under your reps!!!
  11. Oh they did!. If you listen to the Orals the guy representing the state argued that there was not a complete ban on carry. he argued you could carry on your property or others property with permission., in your home, or even if you case it and unload it! They argued it wasnt ban. He actually said this is not a ban, we are just regulating where people carry. I was floored when he did it. But I think it went that way since Mr Gura opened with his argument stating this is all about how Illinois has a ban and does not simply regulate time, place, and manner.
  12. I think it is a good decision but it makes for a circuit split. I don't see how SCOTUS can ignore that by refusing to hear an appeal on it. What that means to us as a practical matter is just a guess at this point. Where's the split? Here they ruled on a complete ban. No recourse, no ability to carry at all in any way in any place. Other rulings have been about places that had a permit system and required "good cause" or some other non-sense. I dont see the split, but then again I am not a lawyer.
  13. Anyone see a copy of the ruling. Would love to read it. I mean this is of the variety of "2A in the HOME", but would be interesting to read anyway.
×
×
  • Create New...