Jump to content

Don Gwinn

Moderator
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Don Gwinn

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.sangamoncorifleassociation.org
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Virden, IL (Demuzio/Hannig/Phil Hare)

Don Gwinn's Achievements

Member

Member (22/24)

  1. OK, David, in reading through the FOID act at www.ilga.gov , it looks like the relevant requirements are here. You must submit evidence that you are not one of a long list of things, but look at numbers 6 and 11: Unfortunately, Wikipedia says a 1L is a "non-immigrant" visa--I'm guessing that's legalese for a short-term, work-based visa that doesn't imply intent to become a long-term resident or a citizen. I would not be at all surprised if there were some loophole I'm not seeing, nor would it surprise me if you could avoid the whole issue by moving to Wisconsin or Indiana. Sorry I couldn't be the bearer of better news.
  2. I have no idea. I'll be glad to look into it, but I'm no expert, either. When an Illinois citizen has trouble getting a FOID, we generally call our state representative or senator's office and ask them to make inquiries. You might try that next unless someone can confirm that you're out of luck. If they're just blowing smoke or not sure of the law, a phone call from a rep's office usually gets things moving. Again, I don't know, but if it IS legal to issue you the FOID, it's entirely possible that someone refused out of simple ignorance.
  3. Josh Blackman has a very good point-by-point analysis up at his blog now: http://joshblackman.com/blog/?p=7500 Well worth reading.
  4. The decision is today's news, the ordinance is yesterday's. If you're looking at a newspaper, no surprise that they aren't as up to date as they should be. Just from my quick browsing of the ordinance, I see some stumbling blocks: 1. Outdoor and mobile ranges totally prohibited--I thought Ezell had a plaintiff who wanted to bring in a mobile range? Am I wrong? I know the ISRA wanted to do that . . . I think. 2. Ranges not only limited to manufacturing zones, but within those zones, prohibited within 1000 feet of residential zones. The most popular indoor range in Springfield might have trouble meeting that standard, and it's located in an industrial park on the edge of town. 3. Ranges prohibited within 1000 feet of all the places already mentioned: schools, day-care facilities, libraries (no, really) and places of worship (I'm not making this up) retail liquor sellers (in the manufacturing zone, I guess?) and "children's activities facilities" (I looked that one up, it includes tumbling centers, dance schools, martial-arts schools, pools, climbing centers, arts and crafts places . . . anywhere kids do anything for fun or education that isn't a school or a day-care facility, basically.) 4. Ranges prohibited from allowing anyone under 18 to enter the facilities for any reason. Your 12-year-old can't sit at the ammo counter and have a coke while you shoot, even if she never touches a firearm or ammunition. Your ten-year-old can't even come in with you and use the bathroom if the family drops you off to go shooting. As for taking your kids shooting as a family activity . . . well, in Chicago, it isn't one. 5. Ranges prohibited from "providing" firearms to patrons other than for the 1-hour CFP training course. I'm no lawyer, but it looks like that could be read so that they certainly can't sell firearms on the premises (even though they need an FFL to run the range) nor could they rent them or even simply provide a firearm for someone taking an NRA safety course, for instance. Basically, you can't even touch a gun even in this commercial range setting unless you have a CFP for it or you're there with a friend who does, and forget about trying out different firearms, as is common in other places. It's not The Chicago Way. 6. Ranges required to use an approved (by Supt. McCarthy's office) safety plan that includes video surveillance inside and out, with all video surveillance archived for 30 days and "made available to members of the police department." This may be boilerplate, but it caught my eye. The words "court order" and "warrant" are conspicuously absent. It reads, to me, as if they're required to keep 30 days of their own surveillance and allow Chicago police officers to come in and view whatever they want at their discretion. I don't know whether other places have required anything like this, or if other businesses have similar licensing requirements, but it jumps right out at me.
×
×
  • Create New...