Jump to content

llinois State Rifle Association Demands Legislative Inquiry


Blaster

Recommended Posts

I believe less than 1/4th of the gun owners in this state could meet that 2% requirement. How about getting an online petition going to show our legislators that a FOID Act repeal is possible? Can we use this to push for the LTC to pass before the repeal could be effective?

 

The FOID card has outlived its usefulness (if it ever had any), the federal instant check is every bit as useful for weeding out prohibited persons.

I would sign that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Illinois State Police response to legislative office inquiry about problems with timely FOID card issuance.

 

 

Good Afternoon Jack,

 

This is the response we recieved from our Legislative Contact within the State Police. As always, if you have additional questions, please don't hesitate to give us a call.

 

"Unfortunately the ISP has experienced severe backlogs in the processing of FOID cards. This has most definitely not been done as a means to deprive citizens of their rights to own firearms and is directly resulting from staffing and funding deficiencies. Two additional employees were hired 12/16/08 and recent software changes should allow us to recognize a significant decrease in the backlog in the near future. Please let me know if you have further questions. "

 

Beth C. Goncher

District Director

Representative Tim Schmitz

(630)845-9590

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Illinois State Police response to legislative office inquiry about problems with timely FOID card issuance.

 

 

Good Afternoon Jack,

 

This is the response we recieved from our Legislative Contact within the State Police. As always, if you have additional questions, please don't hesitate to give us a call.

 

"Unfortunately the ISP has experienced severe backlogs in the processing of FOID cards. This has most definitely not been done as a means to deprive citizens of their rights to own firearms and is directly resulting from staffing and funding deficiencies. Two additional employees were hired 12/16/08 and recent software changes should allow us to recognize a significant decrease in the backlog in the near future. Please let me know if you have further questions. "

 

Beth C. Goncher

District Director

Representative Tim Schmitz

(630)845-9590

 

My response would be

 

"Unfortunately I have experienced severe backlogs in my finances. This has most definitely not been done as a means to deprive legistlators of thier means to deny me a firearm and is directly resulting from layoffs, payfreezes, food price, utility costs, and oil price increases. Two additional resumes were posted online and unemployment filing changes should allow me to recognize a significant decrease in the backlog of my finances in the near future. Please let me know if you have any futher means to deny me of anything."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Unfortunately I have experienced severe backlogs in my finances. This has most definitely not been done as a means to deprive legistlators of thier means to deny me a firearm and is directly resulting from layoffs, payfreezes, food price, utility costs, and oil price increases. Two additional resumes were posted online and unemployment filing changes should allow me to recognize a significant decrease in the backlog of my finances in the near future. Please let me know if you have any futher means to deny me of anything."

 

Bravo! We are to accept their explanation, while they in no way, shape, or form would accept that one.

 

Damned double-standards. I've had enough of them.

 

Haven't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're still FOS. This is an E-mail I got from the friend who applied back in Oct.:

 

"So I called the ISP. While going through the prompts I found it interesting that they have a new automated message saying that FOID cards are now taking 56 days to process. Well, I entered the selection saying that it had been more than 56 days and on the voice menu after that it said 30 days. Seems like someone is really behind.

 

I finally got ahold of someone who very quickly asked me for my info. He stuttered out a few lines about an old applications, something to do with the $10 (it sounded more in general than related to me specifically). I got a few rambled lines about how they're behind and that the system is messed up and that they're taking more time because of it. I mentioned that I had put my app in back in Oct and he said it was entered/processed on Nov 21. By my reckoning its still past 60 days and he fed me a generic "you should get it in 7-10 days" bs line. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't they say that about the original 30 days? Ugh.

 

So hopefully I'll have it later this week. I have a feeling that they are letting things get caught up in red tape for a reason."

 

 

It was processed back in Nov and he still hasn't gotten it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe less than 1/4th of the gun owners in this state could meet that 2% requirement. How about getting an online petition going to show our legislators that a FOID Act repeal is possible? Can we use this to push for the LTC to pass before the repeal could be effective?

 

The FOID card has outlived its usefulness (if it ever had any), the federal instant check is every bit as useful for weeding out prohibited persons.

Better re-read that 2% requirement again lockman. It states the petitions shall be filed by county, and each county shall have 2% on it.

Probably not a problem in most of the counties, there will be a handful where it would be very difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The petition shall be composed of county petitions from each of the counties throughout the State and each county petition shall contain the signatures of at least 2% of the number of registered voters in the county.

 

"Most" regrettably isn't going to cut it.

 

I've no doubt it was worded that way intentionally as a failsafe. If it only called for 2% of the overall state population, I suspect the ISRA would have pursued this by now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe less than 1/4th of the gun owners in this state could meet that 2% requirement. How about getting an online petition going to show our legislators that a FOID Act repeal is possible? Can we use this to push for the LTC to pass before the repeal could be effective?

 

The FOID card has outlived its usefulness (if it ever had any), the federal instant check is every bit as useful for weeding out prohibited persons.

Better re-read that 2% requirement again lockman. It states the petitions shall be filed by county, and each county shall have 2% on it.

Probably not a problem in most of the counties, there will be a handful where it would be very difficult.

 

I am not well versed in election and ballot laws so this is more of a question for those that are.

Are there time limit restrictions on the county level acquisition of voter signatures?

Once attained by a county are they good in perpetuity until all the other counties?

Can the county place the question on a referendum?

 

For example: If a county only had 100,000 registered voters and the election had a 30% voter turn out, then if only 7% of the 30,000 voters approve the question that would be 2100, exceeding the 2000 required. That actually sound to simple I must be mistaken somewhere.

 

1.37 million registered voters in Cook County, Est another 1.5 million (can't pin Chicago down on that) in Chicago.

2.87 million, that's 57,400 signatures needed for Cook County. Cook County has 252,000 FOID card holders if only half are registered voters and we can get 1/2 of them to sign. Just a thought.

 

I would not beat the hood for signatures unless I had support that it is feasible to undertake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe less than 1/4th of the gun owners in this state could meet that 2% requirement. How about getting an online petition going to show our legislators that a FOID Act repeal is possible? Can we use this to push for the LTC to pass before the repeal could be effective?

 

The FOID card has outlived its usefulness (if it ever had any), the federal instant check is every bit as useful for weeding out prohibited persons.

Better re-read that 2% requirement again lockman. It states the petitions shall be filed by county, and each county shall have 2% on it.

Probably not a problem in most of the counties, there will be a handful where it would be very difficult.

 

I am not well versed in election and ballot laws so this is more of a question for those that are.

Are there time limit restrictions on the county level acquisition of voter signatures?

Once attained by a county are they good in perpetuity until all the other counties?

Can the county place the question on a referendum?

 

For example: If a county only had 100,000 registered voters and the election had a 30% voter turn out, then if only 7% of the 30,000 voters approve the question that would be 2100, exceeding the 2000 required. That actually sound to simple I must be mistaken somewhere.

 

1.37 million registered voters in Cook County, Est another 1.5 million (can't pin Chicago down on that) in Chicago.

2.87 million, that's 57,400 signatures needed for Cook County. Cook County has 252,000 FOID card holders if only half are registered voters and we can get 1/2 of them to sign. Just a thought.

 

I would not beat the hood for signatures unless I had support that it is feasible to undertake.

I would hazard to guess that of the 252,000 in Cook Cty. that a majroity live outside the city limits of Chicago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hazard to guess that of the 252,000 in Cook Cty. that a majroity live outside the city limits of Chicago.

 

All the easier to get! Cook County is Cook County with or without Chicago.

 

Realistically, does anyone believe an online petition showing support in numbers can hurt the cause? Even if not in a legally recognized county by county format it can show a level of support the general assembly would be hard pressed to ignore.

 

They have similar petitions going in several states for open carry, we should start one for open carry, concealed carry, full firearm preemption and repeal of the FOID act. If some net savvy person could jump in with assistance or a few pointers. Then just push the petition sights with friends, family, fraternal groups and clubs. Post then on some other online forums and throw in an occasional reminder and I believe the results would be surprising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe less than 1/4th of the gun owners in this state could meet that 2% requirement. How about getting an online petition going to show our legislators that a FOID Act repeal is possible? Can we use this to push for the LTC to pass before the repeal could be effective?

 

The FOID card has outlived its usefulness (if it ever had any), the federal instant check is every bit as useful for weeding out prohibited persons.

This reminds me of something I heard about the Texas LTC renewals. I understand they are taking up to 6 months. This seems really strange you've already had a LTC for several years and at renewal time it takes months. Texas however does allow you to carry on your LTC even if your LTC has expired as long as you have sent in your renewal application.

 

Thinking about this renewal problem, I'm glad my wife has her FOID. If my FOID expires all my firearms will be under her care. Does that qualify if she's with me and I'm fanny packing? It would be like Chicago LEOs wives keeping their service handgun with them when they are out of town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear a black helicopter....

 

Gun owning citizen applies to renew FOID.

ISP notes who citizen is and when the FOID expires.

ISP does not renew FOID.

After FOID expires ISP obtains search warrant for guns at citizen's house, garage, cars, etc.

ISP exercises search warrant for guns and confiscates citizen's guns.

Citizen is charged and convicted of felony for illegal possession of guns.

Citizen can no longer own guns.

ISP destroys citizen's guns.

One more citizen gun owner disarmed and x number of guns destroyed.

 

Far fetched???? Ok, I need to put my tinfoil had back on! :fear:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hazard to guess that of the 252,000 in Cook Cty. that a majroity live outside the city limits of Chicago.

 

All the easier to get! Cook County is Cook County with or without Chicago.

 

Realistically, does anyone believe an online petition showing support in numbers can hurt the cause? Even if not in a legally recognized county by county format it can show a level of support the general assembly would be hard pressed to ignore.

 

They have similar petitions going in several states for open carry, we should start one for open carry, concealed carry, full firearm preemption and repeal of the FOID act. If some net savvy person could jump in with assistance or a few pointers. Then just push the petition sights with friends, family, fraternal groups and clubs. Post then on some other online forums and throw in an occasional reminder and I believe the results would be surprising.

 

One thing to remember is that all the petition does is get the question of repealing the FOID to a referendum. The petition does not repeal the FOID itself. I think the chance of passing a repeal by ballot is somewhat low in the political climate of today, but that isn't to say we shouldn't try. At the least it would be some additional leverage to show that there are many voting gun owners and that we will not be trampled upon silently.

 

As far as election law goes, I was just skimming it on westlaw. The election statutes can be found in Chapter 10 Act 5, and the submission of petitions in in Article 28 of that Act. I encourage everyone to take a look at it, specifically the parts about objections to the petition and how long they are valid. It seems that petitions of this sort must be submitted no less than 78 days prior to the election in which the question is to be brought. A petition may or may not specify the election in which it will operate, if it does specify it cannot be more than 1 year. If it does not specify it is to be the next election. I didn't read this section over very carefully, but it seems to me that if we got grassroots support and kept a log of people willing to sign the formal petition, then just worked for 1 year prior to an election to get the formal petition signatures it should be ok. That is, so long as the petition isn't defeated by objectors, though I am not sure what the objection would be because the referendum is set forth by statute.

 

I think setting up a site for this purpose would be a big step in the right direction, if at least to increase the organization of the movement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing that could help the ISP to get in gear is for people to petition the court for redress on the 31st day.

 

(430 ILCS 65/10) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑10)

Sec. 10. (a) Whenever an application for a Firearm Owner's Identification Card is denied, whenever the Department fails to act on an application within 30 days of its receipt, or whenever such a Card is revoked or seized as provided for in Section 8 of this Act, the aggrieved party may appeal to the Director of the Department of State Police for a hearing upon such denial, revocation or seizure, unless the denial, revocation, or seizure was based upon a forcible felony, stalking, aggravated stalking, domestic battery, any violation of the Illinois Controlled Substances Act, the Methamphetamine Control and Community Protection Act, or the Cannabis Control Act that is classified as a Class 2 or greater felony, any felony violation of Article 24 of the Criminal Code of 1961, or any adjudication as a delinquent minor for the commission of an offense that if committed by an adult would be a felony, in which case the aggrieved party may petition the circuit court in writing in the county of his or her residence for a hearing upon such denial, revocation, or seizure.

 

***

 

If the attorney general keeps getting called into court hearings it may prompt some action. To heck with calling your representative for 2 months, just haul the state into court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I contacted the head of the ISRA with a message saying I have the ISP's confession on tape and asking what I could do to help. It's almost a shame that I'm not being personally harmed by this or I would have brought it up when I paid my lawyers office a visit today.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I contacted the head of the ISRA with a message saying I have the ISP's confession on tape and asking what I could do to help. It's almost a shame that I'm not being personally harmed by this or I would have brought it up when I paid my lawyers office a visit today.

 

Good on you for contacting the ISRA. They need to continue hearing from us, and to know that many active members want to help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I contacted the head of the ISRA with a message saying I have the ISP's confession on tape and asking what I could do to help. It's almost a shame that I'm not being personally harmed by this or I would have brought it up when I paid my lawyers office a visit today.

 

Heh. I misread that the first time, and was thinking you had called the ISP and told them you had their confession. I was trying to imagine that conversation :fear:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I contacted the head of the ISRA with a message saying I have the ISP's confession on tape and asking what I could do to help. It's almost a shame that I'm not being personally harmed by this or I would have brought it up when I paid my lawyers office a visit today.

 

Heh. I misread that the first time, and was thinking you had called the ISP

and told them you had their confession.

 

I was trying to imagine that conversation :fear:.

 

LMAO!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic of repealing the FOID Act was discussed several months ago on this forum and it was mentioned then of a possible negative outcome should the act be repealed. I'm bringing it up again just so we can all be aware of what might happen if we are successful getting all these signatures and such. I'm not trying to be depressing as I'd love to see the FOID Act disappear, but what is left behind will be a void in the law which many people will try to fill with something else.

 

As it is now Illinois is only one of two states (I think) which require a FOID-type card and that is reassuring to some anti-gun types. Right now they know ammunition and firearms can only be sold (legally) to those who have a FOID card; meaning those people who have passed a background check, are not felons, have no history of blah blah blah. Of course, the FOID Act is not enough and they want even more restrictions.

 

Without the FOID act in place ammunition and firearms could be sold to anyone of legal age to acquire them, including gang members, felons, the mentally ill, etc. The anti's would be up in arms about this and political leaders will then listen to their demand for more gun-control laws. I dread the thought of our leaders sitting down to hammer out a new set of laws to replace the FOID Act. You know they will slip in all kinds of things which have had trouble getting passed lately, such as magazine bans, registration requirements, mandatory trigger locks, etc. They might even raise the minimum age for purchasing a rifle, prohibit minors from hunting with their fathers, or require all gun owners complete a forty-hour safety course. They could go absolutely nuts!!

 

Try as we might to get rid of the FOID Act and become like Alaska or Vermont, I just don't see it happening in this particular state at this point in time. We simply have too many anti-gun leaders who are working a very well-oiled political machine for their benefit. I think there could and should be an effort to repeal the FOID Act, but I don't believe now is the right time. If and when the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states (which I honestly believe will happen, perhaps sooner than later), the FOID Act can then be repealed without worry of being subject to even more restrictive laws afterwards.

 

I hate being on the defense because it seems like we are just holding ground rather than moving forward, but that is pretty much what we are doing when we are constantly having to resist new gun-control laws. I like the idea of being pro-active and that is why I got involved in promoting the Pro 2A Resolution. I'm not yet sure if that effort will pay off in the end or not, but it didn't hurt our cause either. I think it may be about time to shift attention back to that resolution and push for it to mean something to our newly elected leaders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good work Mr SG - you-da-man!!

 

 

If the FOID Act cannot be implemented by the state, under the guidelines set forth by the state - it should be declared null and void. The burden to meet the required issue date is on the ISP, as designated by the General Assembly. The ISP is breaking the law, I don't care what their excuse is. Do not the citizens not have every right to expect a state agency to obey the law? (with the exception of the governor's office, of course)

If you're speeding, does your excuse somehow nullify the fact that a law was broken?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without the FOID act in place ammunition and firearms could be sold to anyone of legal age to acquire them, including gang members, felons, the mentally ill, etc. The anti's would be up in arms about this and political leaders will then listen to their demand for more gun-control laws. I dread the thought of our leaders sitting down to hammer out a new set of laws to replace the FOID Act. You know they will slip in all kinds of things which have had trouble getting passed lately, such as magazine bans, registration requirements, mandatory trigger locks, etc. They might even raise the minimum age for purchasing a rifle, prohibit minors from hunting with their fathers, or require all gun owners complete a forty-hour safety course. They could go absolutely nuts!!

 

If we are one of only two states with such a system, why will our state fall into total chaos if the law is repealed?

Are Indiana gang members, felons, the mentally ill persons allowed to buy this stuff? [sarcasm]

Instant check means nothing?

 

I do not see a down side other than possibly going nowhere. But at least it is not backwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without the FOID act in place ammunition and firearms could be sold to anyone of legal age to acquire them, including gang members, felons, the mentally ill, etc. The anti's would be up in arms about this and political leaders will then listen to their demand for more gun-control laws. I dread the thought of our leaders sitting down to hammer out a new set of laws to replace the FOID Act. You know they will slip in all kinds of things which have had trouble getting passed lately, such as magazine bans, registration requirements, mandatory trigger locks, etc. They might even raise the minimum age for purchasing a rifle, prohibit minors from hunting with their fathers, or require all gun owners complete a forty-hour safety course. They could go absolutely nuts!!

 

If we are one of only two states with such a system, why will our state fall into total chaos if the law is repealed?

Are Indiana gang members, felons, the mentally ill persons allowed to buy this stuff? [sarcasm]

Instant check means nothing?

 

I do not see a down side other than possibly going nowhere. But at least it is not backwards.

 

Thank you. I was going to mention Indiana (and all the other states that don't have a FOID type system for purchase). Indiana residents can even come here to buy without having to have a FOID. They just have to show ID. ( :fear: Not fair! :thumbsup: )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you. I was going to mention Indiana (and all the other states that don't have a FOID type system for purchase). Indiana residents can even come here to buy without having to have a FOID. They just have to show ID. ( :question: Not fair! :question: )

 

Are you sure about this? It is my understanding of IL law that citizens of neighboring states can purchase long guns and ammunition, but not handguns, and in the case of ammunition only if they have a hunting license in IL.

 

I think the value of organizing the petition is not in actual repeal, I don't think that would be successful. The value is in the large statement it would make and enlisting more supporters.

 

The NICS works just fine here in Mo. You just have to be 21 to buy any ammunition, nothing else. There is no state regulation of firearm sales at point-of-purchase. No mayhem, rape, or pillaging. (Well, maybe some of that in STL city, but no more than EastSTL or SouthSideChicago)

 

Another option is that we could just try to petition for LTC to get on the ballot as an "advisory opinion on public policy", although in IL it would not be binding on the legislature, it could be forced onto the ballot with a petition consisting of 8% of the voters in the preceding gubinatorial election, with the signatures needing to be within 24 months of the election and certified within 6 months of the election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing that could help the ISP to get in gear is for people to petition the court for redress on the 31st day.

 

(430 ILCS 65/10) (from Ch. 38, par. 83‑10)

Sec. 10. (a) Whenever an application for a Firearm Owner's Identification Card is denied, whenever the Department fails to act on an application within 30 days of its receipt, or whenever such a Card is revoked or seized as provided for in Section 8 of this Act, the aggrieved party may appeal to the Director of the Department of State Police for a hearing upon such denial, revocation or seizure, unless the denial, revocation, or seizure was based upon a forcible felony, stalking, aggravated stalking, domestic battery, any violation of the Illinois Controlled Substances Act, the Methamphetamine Control and Community Protection Act, or the Cannabis Control Act that is classified as a Class 2 or greater felony, any felony violation of Article 24 of the Criminal Code of 1961, or any adjudication as a delinquent minor for the commission of an offense that if committed by an adult would be a felony, in which case the aggrieved party may petition the circuit court in writing in the county of his or her residence for a hearing upon such denial, revocation, or seizure.

 

***

 

If the attorney general keeps getting called into court hearings it may prompt some action. To heck with calling your representative for 2 months, just haul the state into court.

I think you missed another good option, as I highlighted above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...