Jump to content

People v. Mosley Cook Co. AGUUW


Tvandermyde

Recommended Posts

Sorry can someone tell me what this means for us, I'm multitasking so having a hard time reading the details. You can PM me if necessary.

 

As I understand it, it's another judge in another court finding the Ag UUW statute of IL unconstitutional. And this Judge and Court are located in Cook County, the very baliwick of those that would deny us our rights.

 

Another nail in the coffin, another round in the magazine to shoot back with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know... I feel we may be a little spoiled. Having Todd keeping us so informed on these new rulings.

 

I sure hope those nice targets folks at Stop Concealed Carry have somebody to keep them up to speed on this stuff... Although... I guess, for them, this is probably just more bad news... :rofl:

 

They do, us....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe our anti-constitution legislatures can quit playing games with their amendments and get that 997 out there and passed

I hope, but constitutional carry is our fall back position and I am beginning to think it is also theirs. We will have to stand strong and be willing to say "NO".

I think they have been having things their way for so long that they will not consider defeat. A set back maybe but they will keep pushing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but constitutional carry is our fall back position and I am beginning to think it is also theirs.

 

Honestly, I believe that it is their fall back position too. In fact, it may be their primary strategy. They may be counting on the ability to stretch out the fight for awhile by making us have to push through a bunch of local restrictions from community to community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I missing something? It seems like the court was essentially saying that the mere possession of a firearm does not qualify as a crime punishable as a felony. Is that an over reach on my part?

 

Yeah, basically with a hook... He said that they can charge you with either a misdemeanor or a felony with a mandatory 1 year in prison for the exact same crime with no additional qualifiers or circumstances necessary to be charged with a felony over the misdemeanor, thus disproportionate penalties for the same crime and a violation of your 8th Amendment Rights...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if the defendant did have a foid, but the firearm was uncased and loaded, then could it still be a felony but without the mandatory or did the ruling say that the felony charge was unconstitutional?

 

I don't have all the details of what went down or what brought up the charges, and what ifs are not ruled upon only the what dids... Basically he said the law(s) conflicts themselves in penalties and is thus unconstitutional, but the law at the core has already been ruled unconstitutional by the 7th, this just adds ammo as it's now saying that the conflicting penalties part are unconstitutional as well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a google search and can't find a transcript etc of this ruling.

 

 

Does anyone have a link?

 

Also, if the judge ruled " that as to these provisions the aggravated unlawful use of a weapons statute is unconstitutional both on it's face and as applied to the defendant because it cannot be reasonably construed in a manner that would preserve its validity" then the only thing left to charge someone with for carrying a loaded gun on their person is a Class A misdemeanor?

 

In other words the judge struck down the aggravated unlawful use of a weapon statute but not the unlawful use of a weapon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a google search and can't find a transcript etc of this ruling.

 

 

Does anyone have a link?

 

Also, if the judge ruled " that as to these provisions the aggravated unlawful use of a weapons statute is unconstitutional both on it's face and as applied to the defendant because it cannot be reasonably construed in a manner that would preserve its validity" then the only thing left to charge someone with for carrying a loaded gun on their person is a Class A misdemeanor?

 

In other words the judge struck down the aggravated unlawful use of a weapon statute but not the unlawful use of a weapon?

Based on the limited info available, that is the way I read it. Not that I am anxious to test the theory, but that is what it seems to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a google search and can't find a transcript etc of this ruling.

 

 

Does anyone have a link?

 

Also, if the judge ruled " that as to these provisions the aggravated unlawful use of a weapons statute is unconstitutional both on it's face and as applied to the defendant because it cannot be reasonably construed in a manner that would preserve its validity" then the only thing left to charge someone with for carrying a loaded gun on their person is a Class A misdemeanor?

 

In other words the judge struck down the aggravated unlawful use of a weapon statute but not the unlawful use of a weapon?

Based on the limited info available, that is the way I read it. Not that I am anxious to test the theory, but that is what it seems to be.

 

Of course, a Class A Misdemeanor is still punishable by up to 364 days in jail and fines up to $2,500.00 if I remember correctly.

 

So yeah, I won't be testing it either. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

guys, this one might have gotten past me.

 

I don;t remember it, and as described, it sounds as if it was goign after kids carrying guns illegally, but as we all know the rule of unintended consequenses.

 

Still I have been on the phone tonight with some people and this judge just messed up a bunch of peoples plans for HB-2265.

 

I think this gives us even more ability to go in and re-write the law.

 

I'll buy you the box of pens !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...