NRA-ILA Lobbied Against IL License to Carry Bill

[bob]

I just got home from work and I find this in my email. I am life member. I think I will wait to say anything on this. I am to angry to think straight right now.

I think some reflection from all of us is in order before taking rash actions we might later regret.

 

I am still mad at the NRA/ILA over this issue, but there is plenty of time to think this thing through and remain mad a few days or weeks from now.

[Molly B.]

The best call to arms is going to be the "Freedom Bridages" I'm working on setting up by senate district. We have a targeted list of senate districts that we need to organize in. My goal is to have 500 campaign volunteers with a command structure in place starting in June. We start circulating petitions in August for the 2010 election.

 

If you want to pass RTC we need to win more seats, beat back the anti-gunners in a couple of chanllenges and give the suburban legislators the peace of mind that they can vote with us and still win elections.

 

We don't win many floor votes by the debate or arguements we make. We win them by helping the right people get elected.

 

Get them elected and the lobbying gets easy/

 

Todd

 

This is a great idea and I support it 100%. This is a LONG TERM goal and will take years to implement.

In the meantime our short term goal is a subject to home rule bill - a means to protect as many innocent people as we can.

 

"Be patient and wait until we can change the political landscape or the courts resolve this" - didn't help the 5 women murdered in a dress shop in Tinely Park.

 

I don't see how we can support the idea that we must infringe on everyone's constitutional rights unless we can honor everyone's constitutional rights.

 

Okay Non-Chicagoan, did you bring enough constitutional rights for everyone to have some? Then you better but those constitutional rights back in your locker and leave them there.

[abolt243]

Are there addresses for those 3 NRA leadership people, seems to me letters or faxes would be best. If they had a thousand sheets of paper it would demonstrate our opposition better than 1000 emails that can be deleted.

 

From NRA website:

 

National Rifle Association of America

11250 Waples Mill Road

Fairfax, VA 22030

 

I'm sure it will get to them eventually. I don't know that any other more specific addresses are published.

 

Choose whatever method you're most comfortable with. If you choose to communicate in two or more ways, that's fine too.

 

AB

[GNHNTN]

A fellow from the NRA/ILA actually called me at home this evening and we had a long chat. Which very much surprised me. I never expected he would call. It was an interesting chat. I have a much better understanding of why they are unwilling to actively support the bill now.

 

Without the NRA's active support I do not think any pro-gun bill has much of a chance.

 

Molly seems to have given them the thumb in the eye. Not sure I like that or not. On the one hand, maybe it was a necessary thing. On the other, if they actually have a workable strategy to get state preemption, Molly may have screwed us all out of it, or at least made it much harder. Personally, I do not see any workable strategy to getting statewide preemption at this time.

 

And any court action that would do us any good is a decade or more away from being resolved. I just do not see much of a downside for a non preempted LTC bill. We would need to do some legwork and find all the municipalities that have adopted UUW like ordinances and see whether they are willing to accomodate a LTC. We know Chicago will never agree as long as King Daley is alive and kicking. But my guess is most of the state outside of Cook county would accept it.

 

If you don't mind sir, explain to me why you think this! I don't see how informing the members of the NRA of something the organization (that they donate time and money too) has possibly done to hinder our 2A rights, and asking these members to politely ask them for an explanation is screwing (as you so delicately put it) us out of anything.

[Kenny]

Molly may have screwed us all out of it,

 

Hey Bob Molly doesn't call all the shots by herself, She is simply the IllinoisCarry spokesperson. She has the nasty job of dealing with the media, anti's and now the NRA. I am sure this letter was a collaborative idea with a whole lot of people involved. I think you owe Molly an apology for that statement. I do not want to start in-fighting or anything we need to stay strong together!!!

[GNHNTN]

Molly may have screwed us all out of it,

I think you owe Molly an apology for that statement. I do not want to start in-fighting or anything we need to stay strong together!!!

 

I agree Kenny, I was just curious as to why he felt this way. Not trying to pick a fight, just wondering.

[SirMatthew]

If you've seen the movie Rambo II... Do you remember how you felt when "headquarters" failed to support Rambo in the field? At the end of the movie Rambo made it quite clear how he felt about this kind of treatment. It is precisely what the NRA is doing to us.

 

We foot soldiers are in need of support in this fight and are calling headquarters to get it, only to be told that is not the plan. Headquarters wants us to hold the line without advancing for several years while they pursue a single "all or nothing" strategy. Their strategy offers no guarantees because it is dependent on unpredictable SCOTUS rulings and future election results changing in our favor. It is possible they will win nothing for many years while they pursue everything.

 

Most of us live in this state as defenseless citizens while the NRA is comfortably located elsewhere with LTC rights. The NRA has all the time in the world to pursue an "all or nothing" approach given they are located far from the IL battlefield, but we need it now. Many foot soldiers will get discouraged with this single long-term strategy and give up the fight. I believe we absolutely must have several strategies in place to keep advancing this cause. The NRA can keep pursuing their long-term strategy of preemption, but we need them to have some short-term strategies as well. Battles are won by conquering one small hill after another. Small victories keep soldiers motivated. HB2257 is one many strategies in our play book, one hill of many we need to take in this fight, one of many victories we intend to claim.

 

I don't want to see the NRA relationship with IL be one of those "can't live with them, can't live without them" deals. It is clear we need them fighting with us, but on ALL fronts. Based on many comments left so far, their refusal to aggressively support 2257 is resulting in many members refusing to support the NRA. I honestly can't believe the NRA would think the trade-off is worth it. It's a win/win situation on so many levels if they fully support 2257.

 

I may be speaking prematurely, but so far it appears our emails and calls are not getting the message to them. I hope they change their tune, but if they are not fully supportive in a week then I'd suggest round two. Keep contacting them on a weekly basis until they listen.

[bob]

Molly seems to have given them the thumb in the eye. Not sure I like that or not. On the one hand, maybe it was a necessary thing. On the other, if they actually have a workable strategy to get state preemption, Molly may have screwed us all out of it, or at least made it much harder. Personally, I do not see any workable strategy to getting statewide preemption at this time.

 

If you don't mind sir, explain to me why you think this! I don't see how informing the members of the NRA of something the organization (that they donate time and money too) has possibly done to hinder our 2A rights, and asking these members to politely ask them for an explanation is screwing (a

s you so delicately put it) out of anything.

Politics is a dirty business from the outside looking in. Secrecy is often a required part of the deal. Bringing this kind of rift out in the open may not be a good thing. I suspect whatever strategy the NRA may have had to get a preempted bill anytime soon is going to require substantial revision. I just do not know.

 

My overall impression is that the NRA strategy is to work at getting LTC bills introduced, but not really pushing too hard at getting them passed right now because they are only going to accept and push for something they know is not achievable right now. I think all of us realize that a preempted bill is not going to pass without swapping out some anti legislators for pro legislators. The chance of enough of them being swapped out seems very low.

 

My suspicion is their basic strategy on LTC in Illinois is to wait until the courts deal a death blow to anti carry laws and then start pushing it for real. My guess is we are realistically talking ten to 20 years for that to happen.

 

One thing that I wish they would stop doing is calling it Right To Carry. Its a License To Carry. If it was a right, we would not need a license.

[GarandFan]

Personlly I'm feeling just a little to old to be talked down to.

 

I hear you, but personally, I have a thicker skin than that.

 

Is NRA our enemy? Of course not. They differ from many of us regarding a non-preemptive carry bill. And we will try to figure out how best to proceed.

 

Losing sight of the forest for the trees is a mistake easily made.

[ilphil]

Molly may have screwed us all out of it,

 

Hey Bob Molly doesn't call all the shots by herself, She is simply the IllinoisCarry spokesperson. She has the nasty job of dealing with the media, anti's and now the NRA. I am sure this letter was a collaborative idea with a whole lot of people involved. I think you owe Molly an apology for that statement. I do not want to start in-fighting or anything we need to stay strong together!!!

 

And frankly, if the NRA can't handle members being critical of and questioning their tactics it makes a mockery of their slogan of a few years ago "I am the NRA". While it may be a large organization it is comprised of individuals. Sometimes large organizations need to be reminded of that.

 

Personally, I say thank you to Molly for calling this to our attention.

Her original post was way more polite and diplomatic than I would have been.

Maybe that's why she is our spokesperson and I'm not!!

[mauserme]

The best call to arms is going to be the "Freedom Bridages" I'm working on setting up by senate district. We have a targeted list of senate districts that we need to organize in. My goal is to have 500 campaign volunteers with a command structure in place starting in June. We start circulating petitions in August for the 2010 election.

 

If you want to pass RTC we need to win more seats, beat back the anti-gunners in a couple of chanllenges and give the suburban legislators the peace of mind that they can vote with us and still win elections.

 

We don't win many floor votes by the debate or arguements we make. We win them by helping the right people get elected.

 

Get them elected and the lobbying gets easy/

 

Todd

 

This is a great idea and I support it 100%. This is a LONG TERM goal and will take years to implement.

In the meantime our short term goal is a subject to home rule bill - a means to protect as many innocent people as we can.

 

@NRA

 

Many (most?) of us would like a different political landscape in Illinois, but the reality of our situation is a significant percentage of those wearing an "R" behind their name are not behind our cause. We know this from actual, real world experience, not the political theorizing of a group separated from us by many hundreds of miles.

 

Long term goals are great, but short term achievement is necessary.

[mauserme]

Personlly I'm feeling just a little to old to be talked down to.

 

I hear you, but personally, I have a thicker skin than that.

 

Is NRA our enemy? Of course not. They differ from many of us regarding a non-preemptive carry bill. And we will try to figure out how best to proceed.

 

Losing sight of the forest for the trees is a mistake easily made.

 

 

I'm just suggesting that mutual respect is an approach worth trying.

[bob]

Molly may have screwed us all out of it,

 

Hey Bob Molly doesn't call all the shots by herself, She is simply the IllinoisCarry spokesperson. She has the nasty job of dealing with the media, anti's and now the NRA. I am sure this letter was a collaborative idea with a whole lot of people involved. I think you owe Molly an apology for that statement. I do not want to start in-fighting or anything we need to stay strong together!!!

 

No offense intended. If Molly collaborated with others on the post, then they do indeed share responsibility for whatever downside the post brings us, if any.

 

You have to remember Illinoiscarry has very little political sway compared to the NRA or even the ISRA. Thats just the way it is. Until we manage to put a couple anti politiicans out of office and replace them with solid pro people, we won't mean a whole lot in the political world.

 

Don't make the mistake of thinking the preaching we are doing to the choir here is that big of a deal. Its not insignificant, but in the scheme of things I don't know how big of a deal it really is.

 

Don't you get it? Molly et al, made the same kind of unilateral decision about what is "best" for us as the NRA did that is pissing us all off.

[Thirdpower]

My suspicion is their basic strategy on LTC in Illinois is to wait until the courts deal a death blow to anti carry laws and then start pushing it for real. My guess is we are realistically talking ten to 20 years for that to happen.

 

Exactly. They have no problems w/ letting it take another 10-20 years tacked onto the nearly 20 we've already waited.

 

What's the problem w/ getting limited LTC now? Why are they deliberately sabotaging it?

 

The reasons they've given stink and show that the NRA leadership is out of touch.

 

From the messages I've received and what others have as well, it seems they will continue to act as they see fit, not how their membership sees fit.

[Thirdpower]

Don't you get it? Molly et al, made the same kind of unilateral decision about what is "best" for us as the NRA did that is pissing us all off.

 

horse hocky bob.

 

Molly went by the views of the majority of the Illinois Carry membership. I know I've discussed it w/ her and know that others have as well.

 

I know I've discussed home rule v preemption w/ the NRA and know that others have as well.

 

The NRA did what they felt was 'best' for them. Molly informed us of that.

 

This isn't the world of the cigar filled backroom deals anymore. That's the whole point of this site.

[asfried1]

I just got home from work and I find this in my email. I am life member. I think I will wait to say anything on this. I am to angry to think straight right now.

I think some reflection from all of us is in order before taking rash actions we might later regret.

 

I am still mad at the NRA/ILA over this issue, but there is plenty of time to think this thing through and remain mad a few days or weeks from now.

 

So, I've reflected overnight and here are my thoughts:

 

1. The idea that supporting a non-preemption law would give room to the gun grabbers in other states is idiotic. That would only be true if the NRA used the language of Barak Obama - you know, what works in Texas wouldn't work in New York City, blah blah blah. The appropriate way to state the 2A position would be to say that the NRA supports any law that increases the number of law abiding citizens who can carry firearms legally while opposing any law that decreases the number. As such, it would be nothing at all to say that the NRA supports any LTC law whatsoever in Illinois because absolutely no one can carry in this state currently. It would be equally simple to simultaneously oppose, say, Philadelphia, from instituting a carry ban because that would deprive citizens of their 2A rights. See how easy that would be??

 

2. The idea that they want to protect their members from a "patchwork" of laws is idiotic. By that logic, they should only support a national carry law and oppose all state LTC laws. For example, there are stories on this forum of people being nabbed for unlawful carry as they cross state lines. Why isn't the NRA opposing South Carolina's carry law? In S.C., only people with licenses issued by their state of residence have reciprocity whereas in North Carolina there is no such residency requirement for out of state license holders. It seem that someone could easily screw that up and end up violating S.C. laws thinking that they were similar to those across the state line in N.C. Heck, there are even country roads that fail to demarcate the border between those two states. Therefore, by the NRA's logic, they should oppose any state law that differs from any other. Idiotic and inconsistant.

 

3. The idea that they want to protect their members from a "patchwork" of laws is idiotic for another reason: as it stands now Illinoisans are both deprived of a civil right and prohibited from defending themselves. Is the NRA seriously suggesting that having to figure out a "patchwork" of laws is somehow worse than being defenseless and oppressed? I get that they don't particularly like the idea that Morton Grove might be some sort of carry trap for unsuspecting citizens, but how is leaving them at the mercy of criminals better?

 

4. Even if everything the NRA was saying made sense, how is it acceptable that they lobbied BEHIND OUR BACKS against an LTC bill supported by this and other organizations????? Todd is on this forum. He knew about the position taken by IllinoisCarry and the ISRA. He has engaged in discussions about the pros and cons of the various bills. So someone (quite possibly Todd) owed us the courtesy of a clear statement on the NRA's position. It is completely appalling that the NRA engaged in lobbying against the citizenry of Illinois as we tried to win back our civil rights. Now they are neutral on HB2257? And they should be worked with? Like I wrote in an earlier post, I've got better things to do with my free time than waste my time, money, and enthusiasm on something as important as LTC and then find out that the NRA has been undermining us.

 

Also, on a personal level, I am humiliated to find out that my ultra liberal state senator appears to have been fed anti-LTC talking points by the NRA - talking points she used against me when I met with her personally after IGOLD.

 

Words cannot describe how disgusted I am.

 

I cannot imagine that LTC stands a whisper of a chance in this assembly after this circus. If the NRA makes a real, concerted, resourseful, and public effort to reverse course here (like a prime time TV ad campaign supporting LTC), I might consider getting reengaged. Even then, it's pretty hard to unshoot yourself in the foot. For now, however, I have a family and a career that have priority.

[GNHNTN]

Molly seems to have given them the thumb in the eye. Not sure I like that or not. On the one hand, maybe it was a necessary thing. On the other, if they actually have a workable strategy to get state preemption, Molly may have screwed us all out of it, or at least made it much harder. Personally, I do not see any workable strategy to getting statewide preemption at this time.

 

If you don't mind sir, explain to me why you think this! I don't see how informing the members of the NRA of something the organization (that they donate time and money too) has possibly done to hinder our 2A rights, and asking these members to politely ask them for an explanation is screwing (a

s you so delicately put it) out of anything.

Politics is a dirty business from the outside looking in. Secrecy is often a required part of the deal. Bringing this kind of rift out in the open may not be a good thing. I suspect whatever strategy the NRA may have had to get a preempted bill anytime soon is going to require substantial revision. I just do not know.

 

My overall impression is that the NRA strategy is to work at getting LTC bills introduced, but not really pushing too hard at getting them passed right now because they are only going to accept and push for something they know is not achievable right now. I think all of us realize that a preempted bill is not going to pass without swapping out some anti legislators for pro legislators. The chance of enough of them being swapped out seems very low.

 

My suspicion is their basic strategy on LTC in Illinois is to wait until the courts deal a death blow to anti carry laws and then start pushing it for real. My guess is we are realistically talking ten to 20 years for that to happen.

 

One thing that I wish they would stop doing is calling it Right To Carry. Its a License To Carry. If it was a right, we would not need a license.

 

They have been doing this for 16 years now Bob, the same bill that gets shot down year after year. Now a bill come along that actually has a shot (no pun intended) of getting somewhere and they decide to look the other way? All I want is support and if not that then some kind of explanation other than this crap about how it will show weakness. IMO some kind of victory in this Ultra Liberal Daley run state would only show the true strength of the NRA. Imagine the headline:

AFTER DECADES OF STRUGGLE AGAINST THE CHICAGO MACHINE, THE NRA HELPS THE PEOPLE OF ILLINOIS IN THE FIRST OF A MULTI-STAGE ATTACK TO GAIN BACK THEIR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS

[bob]

So someone (quite possibly Todd) owed us the courtesy of a clear statement of the NRA's position.

Yep. It is really annoying to find that someone you thought was on your side now seems to have been actively working against you. Personally, I am not one who is much for nuances. I don't see how changing their position from against this bill to neutral is a change at all.

 

I would have had more respect for the position if they would have stayed in the against column.

[bob]

This isn't the world of the cigar filled backroom deals anymore. That's the whole point of this site.

Its still Illinois. Nothing has changed as far as how things get done in this state.

 

We might have succeeded in bringing a little light to the situation, but it just means that we won't be allowed in the hallway oustide the cigar filled room next time.

[Thirdpower]

This isn't the world of the cigar filled backroom deals anymore. That's the whole point of this site.

Its still Illinois. Nothing has changed as far as how things get done in this state.

 

We might have succeeded in bringing a little light to the situation, but it just means that we won't be allowed in the hallway oustide the cigar filled room next time.

 

So we should just stay quiet and be good little boys and girls? Do what they tell us to and not complain?

[mauserme]

So, I've reflected overnight and here are my thoughts:

 

...

 

...

Very well put asfried1.

 

May I add a thought of my own?

 

Until this thread I was torn between which approach was better for us - preemption or not. I am now convinced that if preemption was truly the best the NRA would not have felt it necessary to hide their efforts from us. At this point I am committed to a 2257 like bill.

[bob]

Don't you get it? Molly et al, made the same kind of unilateral decision about what is "best" for us as the NRA did that is pissing us all off.

 

horse hocky bob.

 

Molly went by the views of the majority of the Illinois Carry membership. I know I've discussed it w/ her and know that others have as well.

 

I know I've discussed home rule v preemption w/ the NRA and know that others have as well.

 

The NRA did what they felt was 'best' for them. Molly informed us of that.

 

This isn't the world of the cigar filled backroom deals anymore. That's the whole point of this site.

Maybe you can link me to the post where she asked for our opinions on whether she should publically castigate the NRA on this issue. I may have missed it.

[Thirdpower]

Don't you get it? Molly et al, made the same kind of unilateral decision about what is "best" for us as the NRA did that is pissing us all off.

 

horse hocky bob.

 

Molly went by the views of the majority of the Illinois Carry membership. I know I've discussed it w/ her and know that others have as well.

 

I know I've discussed home rule v preemption w/ the NRA and know that others have as well.

 

The NRA did what they felt was 'best' for them. Molly informed us of that.

 

This isn't the world of the cigar filled backroom deals anymore. That's the whole point of this site.

Maybe you can link me to the post where she asked for our opinions on whether she should publically castigate the NRA on this issue. I may have missed it.

 

So publicizing a question on whether she should publicize criticism on this issue?

 

You would rather people remain ignorant? Should we post a poll asking if we should discuss each and every issue before we discuss it?

[BB62]

MollyB,

 

Your note is a great rallying cry for those involved in the effort to bring legal CCW to Illinois, and those involved in bashing the NRA, but some portions of it which reference Ohio are INACCURATE.

 

Ohio's first CCW law was HB 12. The legislature defined it as a "general law", a term used in the state's legal structure to convey preemption.

 

But, various anti-gun city legislators took umbrage and dragged the matter into court, claiming "home rule" authority. Home rule is indeed in Ohio's Constitution, and works as long as the law in question is not in conflict with general laws (among other things).

 

Finally a court case, Clyde (city) vs Ohioans for Concealed Carry, went to the Ohio Supreme Court and the court ruled that Ohio's CCW law was indeed a general law, and as such was preemptive.

 

Yes, a preemption bill was passed (I'm not sure of the timing) that dealt with preemption of state firearm laws in general (striking down local "assault weapon" bans, local registration laws, etc. in favor of statewide legislation, if any), but the decision in the court case was not dependant on the passage of that preemption law - rather the court's decision addressed the generality (or lack thereof) of Ohio's CCW law.

 

Finally, the statement "An imperfect bill that allowed major cities to opt out but did provide a means for license-to-carry to get a foothold in the state..." is out and out FALSE in reference to Ohio. The original bill did nothing of the sort.

 

I've been in this since the days of Ohio's Open Carry "Defense Walks" and know the history.

 

I suggest you read this: http://www.ohioccw.org/content/view/4064/53/

[SirMatthew]

There is another thread on this forum which lists articles about this topic found elsewhere (other forums, blogs, etc.) It's a very interesting read.

 

From what I gathered through some of those outside postings, the NRA knew they were going to be "outed" if they didn't change their position on 2257. Hard-working people were not going to allow the NRA to discreetly oppose 2257 while citizens were working hard to get it passed. The threat of public disclosure worked to get the NRA to move from "opposed" to "neutral". However, that isn't good enough for our intents and purposes.

 

The NRA had to know public knowledge of their position would upset the IL folks, but (for whatever reason) they don't want to get behind 2257. From my readings on this forum it appears a good lot of us had a preference to 2257. Even if not, there is no reason the NRA can't support ALL the LTC bills simultaneously. I'm sure we would have gladly welcomed any one of them if passed into law. The NRA organization position may have cost us LTC this session given the fact we didn't have 71 votes, but we might have been able to get the 60 needed for 2257 with the full support of the NRA.

 

Would it have been better not to "out" the news to the public and let the NRA continue to oppose us behind the scenes? Imagine finding out this news two years later...after we have worked for two years in vain with the NRA working against us...can you imagine how upset we would be then? Getting the NRA to change their position NOW is the only way we can hope to have LTC (through 2257) this session. It might not work at this point (we'll have to wait and see), but at least we'll know they won't be opposing us at the start of the next legislative session.

 

I imagine a lot of people were involved, not just Molly or a couple of others here on this forum. Nevertheless, whoever "outed" the NRA on this issue deserves our thanks. Better to learn about it now than waste our time fighting against the NRA. We need them on our side and outing them seems to be the only way they will reverse their position at this point. Outing them is the only way we would have become involved and could apply pressure to the NRA. Sure, it's embarrassing we have to do this, but it seems like it was a last resort. It had to happen eventually as we will want to know the NRA is supportive of "subject to home rule" bills in the future.

 

Personally, I am thankful to Molly and all the others for letting me know about this. Her posting of this news has allowed me (us) to redirect efforts to a problem that needs to be resolved before other efforts can be effective.

[Smallbore]

The zebra won't change it's stripe. This is a decade old attack against LTC in Illinois. Nothing new here, the players are the same.

 

The NRA is taking the biggest hit in this thread but they are not the main players. NRA-ILA works at the federal level leaving the state associations to battle locally. The local guys call the shots. The NRA will not get involved in "in fighting", but they will support the state's decision.

 

There are other Illinois political issues that influence support aganst LTC. I won't discuss it here.

 

I hate to tell you all, but the current "fanny pack" interpretation and the $10.00 for ten year FOID is considered superior to an expensive tested LTC, preemption or not. I heard this with my own ears from the power on top perhaps a decade ago. Nothing has changed.

 

I support LTC, but Illinois does not currently have an organization to make it happen. Ohians had the right idea.

[abolt243]

Since Molly is out teaching women how to shoot, or attending a meeting regarding our 2A rights, or doing something else besides sitting at home in front of a computer, let me rise to her defense. I'm certain that she was and continues to be in contact with the Ohio Buckeye Firearms Association (sp?) concerning your fight for your carry bill. If she was mis-informed, then so be it. But, the comments re: Ohio law were not made without research.

 

For those of you tending to "bash" Molly for bringing this to light: 16 years of no forward movement while over 20 other states gain LTC is not long enough?? 5 years of the same bills with different numbers getting to third reading with no vote is not enough of doing the same thing and expecting different results?? We haven't had a vote on LTC in IL since 1993. How do we really know where our legislators stand? Talk is cheap, the light on the tally board tells the real tale.

 

We need to know where the NRA stands on this issue before we proceed. We're going to find out.

 

AB

[Johnnybgood]

Okay, slept on it. This lobbying and subsequent statement to members by the NRA representatives feels alot like the Washington stance on the economy. Push through your own agenda and if anyone doesn't like it, give them a pat on the head and tell them "Your not smart enough to know whats best for you. You will understand and appreciate what we are doing later. Just sit there like nice little children and be patient." Patients my glutemous maximus! I would prefer some kind of carry bill NOW. Work out the rest in the courts later.

[Ol'Coach]

...the current "fanny pack" interpretation and the $10.00 for ten year FOID is considered superior to an expensive tested LTC, preemption or not.

 

By whom?

[ACOCHICAGO]

Hello IC Members:

 

As a long time resident born and raised in Chicago, I have a few major concerns and questions regarding bill HB2237 STHR-LTC. It obvious that if this bill gets passed Chicago residents will be left defenseless once again by the state.

 

Questions:

 

How does this bill allow Chicago residents to exercise their 2nd amendment rights where the murder rate was at 510 in 2008, and crime is at an all time high?

 

How many individuals posting here who support HB2237 actually live in Chicago where most likely Chicago will opt out of STHR-LTC?

 

How can Chicago residents be assured that if HB2237 gets passed that there would not be an easing of pressure towards state wide preemption so that ALL citizens, including Chicago, can finally exercise their right to self defense with a firearm?

 

I am trying to understanding the long term view of what the members are trying to accomplish, however, based on what I have read here and in the news, it appears that Chicago residents will once again become sacrificial lambs so that LTC can be achieved in Illinois.