Another example of stall and delay being ISP SOP

[Tango7]

Well, they removed their previous page about how no permits would be offered sooner than September 2014, which sadly I did not get a capture of.

 

But I did this:

 

http://i44.tinypic.com/2po4jsy.png

 

That's right - the full 60 days as allowed by Statute, and not a moment sooner. Surprised they didn't include "At 2:23 pm"

 

So much for any hope of expediency on their part. Shame we couldn't hold them to the original enacting date of May 31.

 

I know the State prowls sites like this, as the aforementioned language disappeared after being posted in enough places.

 

Say hi to Codefendant Grau...

[Tango7]

Since I now cannot edit my own post, even thought the edit button is available and I'm in the editing screen, I'll add it as a new post:

 

For those who can't make it out it says:

 

On September 7, 2013, the ISP will begin approval of certified firearms instructors and firearm training courses. A registry of approved instructors and courses will be available on the ISP webpage.

[vezpa]

You are acting like you are shocked by this?

 

.

[C0untZer0]

Hopefully Mary Shepard wins her lawsuit against Illinois for still violating her rights.

 

I bet once a judge declare that the state must allow people to carry - the ISP will be able to issue permits much more quickly.

[xd9subcompact]

On the other hand, they don't say they are waiting till the last day to begin accepting applications. instead they say they will do that by that date, which is an accurate statement. "How does a citizen apply for an Illinois Concealed Carry License?

 

The ISP will make applications available to the public by January 5, 2014. The ISP intends to have applications available via the ISP webpage."

[TFC]

They waited until the last minute to do everything else, why not this?

[Spclpps]

Well, they removed their previous page about how no permits would be offered sooner than September 2014, which sadly I did not get a capture of.

 

But I did this:

 

http://i44.tinypic.com/2po4jsy.png

 

That's right - the full 60 days as allowed by Statute, and not a moment sooner. Surprised they didn't include "At 2:23 pm"

 

So much for any hope of expediency on their part. Shame we couldn't hold them to the original enacting date of May 31.

 

I know the State prowls sites like this, as the aforementioned language disappeared after being posted in enough places.

 

Say hi to Codefendant Grau...

 

By chance I happened to have dinner last week with an ISP trooper friend that is familiar with what is going on with this entire process and I was told the ISP " is lost in the weeds" on this entire process and not to expect anything early.

I know NONE of us are surprised by this.

[Tango7]

You are acting like you are shocked by this?

 

.

 

As someone born and bred here? Not at all.

 

Just providing some additional documentation should it be needed in a court to show the lack of willingness to abide by the decision of the Court. Kind of like the recent explanation of just how "voluntary" the creation and adoption of 183 was.

[McCroskey]

These guys can't even complete FOIDs in a timely manner, violating the state's own laws in the process. More bureaucracy and paperwork for them will be even slower.

[Lou]

You notice the phrasing "Begin approval"

 

In Illinois politician language that means they will approve one and only one instructor whose classes will be filled with people whose last name is Madigan, Daley, Cullerton, Hynes, Burke, Preckwinkles etc."

 

That will meet the letter of the law.

[BigRat]

On September 7, 2013, the ISP will begin approval of certified firearms instructors and firearm training courses. A registry of approved instructors and courses will be available on the ISP webpage.

 

 

I'm confused. So classes and instructors will start to be approved on September 7th of this year. I'm assuming classes and applications would soon follow. But nobody would actually get a permit till September of 2014? Xd9 posted, applications available in January 14. January till September is 9 months, thats nuts!

 

BigRat

[TTIN]

You notice the phrasing "Begin approval"

 

In Illinois politician language that means they will approve one and only one instructor whose classes will be filled with people whose last name is Madigan, Daley, Cullerton, Hynes, Burke, Preckwinkles etc."

 

That will meet the letter of the law.

I noticed. I thought they had to have it all hammered out in 60 days, not "begin to approve". I know, this is Illinois and not a damned thing will be done about it.

[fugawee]

Hopefully those in the know will see this

and perhaps use it in the upcoming Mary Sheppard hearing

appeal thing.

It SHOWS that the intent of the ISP

on the implementation of the CCW process.

[Tango7]

Hopefully those in the know will see this

and perhaps use it in the upcoming Mary Sheppard hearing

appeal thing.

It SHOWS that the intent of the ISP

on the implementation of the CCW process.

 

That's my hope.

 

As I mentioned in the OP, I know the ISP lurks on sites like this, and I have no doubt the change we saw in the other language was due to someone realizing it could be used against them - thus being struck from the site.

 

That's why the first thing I remembered to do was to grab a screen shot. Deny that.

[vezpa]

Todd V seems to have faith in the ISP. I don't.

 

Fool me once........................................................

.

[largefarva]

You notice the phrasing "Begin approval"

 

In Illinois politician language that means they will approve one and only one instructor whose classes will be filled with people whose last name is Madigan, Daley, Cullerton, Hynes, Burke, Preckwinkles etc."

 

That will meet the letter of the law.

I noticed. I thought they had to have it all hammered out in 60 days, not "begin to approve". I know, this is Illinois and not a damned thing will be done about it.

 

That's the way I understood it as well. I was also under the impression that the ISP were well on their way to having the training requirements and such figured out. I guess I was wrong.

[patriot1776]

Remember Illinois does not have CCW until someone has a permit in hand , they know that all to well.

[Glock23]

I noticed. I thought they had to have it all hammered out in 60 days, not "begin to approve". I know, this is Illinois and not a damned thing will be done about it.

The bill/law says, "Within 60 days of the effective date of this Act, the Department shall begin approval of firearm training courses..."

 

They're just doing what the law says they have to do.

[sctman800]

I noticed. I thought they had to have it all hammered out in 60 days, not "begin to approve". I know, this is Illinois and not a damned thing will be done about it.

The bill/law says, "Within 60 days of the effective date of this Act, the Department shall begin approval of firearm training courses..."

 

They're just doing what the law says they have to do.

 

 

Heaven forbid they would ever do anything extra or try to speed things along. Never expect anything except the absolute minimum or as in the case of the FOID the absolute minimum they can get away with. Jim.

[wtr100]

while the ISP does indeed suck I look at ti this way if they say it'll be ready by Sep of 14 and cards hit the street by Jul of 14 it's good. If they say Jul of 14 and it's Sep we're popping the covers on p-mags

 

I doubt they'll want to run up against the absolute drop dead date but the government moves at the speed it moves

[Zia Son]

If only there were 49 other State Police Departments they call and ask. Oh wait, there are...

[jagt48]

I noticed. I thought they had to have it all hammered out in 60 days, not "begin to approve". I know, this is Illinois and not a damned thing will be done about it.

The bill/law says, "Within 60 days of the effective date of this Act, the Department shall begin approval of firearm training courses..."

 

They're just doing what the law says they have to do.

 

 

Heaven forbid they would ever do anything extra or try to speed things along. Never expect anything except the absolute minimum or as in the case of the FOID the absolute minimum they can get away with. Jim.

 

Why would you expect anything different? I am not trying to defend them, but when we have a job to do at work and we tell the customer that it will be four months, the only reason we try to get it out in three is because there is the possibility that they will just take their business elsewhere. Where else are you going to go for a license? The ISP is the only game in town. It is dumb and I wish that they would just hurry up, but they were given a certain amount of time and they are going to use it. Plus they get their direction from Quinn, and we all know how he feels about CC.

[TkoKid]

I look at it this way.... that is more fuel for the fire for the sheppard case.... they are OBVIOUSLY stalling as long as they can and continuing to deny us our rights.... This is yet another bullet for the sheppard lawyers to fire at the judges

[Smittyp83]

So they have a specific time frame for when they have to BEGIN approving training instructors and classes, but they have no time frame in which they have to actually APPROVE any training instructors or classes? What's to stop them from coming back in another 90 days and saying, "Sorry, we were not able to find any instructors that we could "approve" to teach the classes"????

[Hatchet]

So they have a specific time frame for when they have to BEGIN approving training instructors and classes, but they have no time frame in which they have to actually APPROVE any training instructors or classes? What's to stop them from coming back in another 90 days and saying, "Sorry, we were not able to find any instructors that we could "approve" to teach the classes"????

 

My guess is Todd.

[wtr100]

I look at it this way.... that is more fuel for the fire for the sheppard case.... they are OBVIOUSLY stalling as long as they can and continuing to deny us our rights.... This is yet another bullet for the sheppard lawyers to fire at the judges

 

please to not shoot at judges - they take a dim view of this

[skinnyb82]

Seconded. Stiehl is NOT slow rolling this. In fact, if you know anything about ILSD you'd know that this is FAST...VERY fast. Normally it'd take a few months but one case I saw....the judge took a year to rule on one motion. it's way understaffed, and I mean judges and clerks as well as other employees. Not easy to recruit people for jobs in East St. Louis. The judges usually don't even schedule status hearings. They just rule on stuff whenever they feel like it.

 

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2

 

 

[TkoKid]

I look at it this way.... that is more fuel for the fire for the sheppard case.... they are OBVIOUSLY stalling as long as they can and continuing to deny us our rights.... This is yet another bullet for the sheppard lawyers to fire at the judges

 

please to not shoot at judges - they take a dim view of this

 

I see the purple. Lol

 

Skinny, I wasn't saying the judges were being slow... I was saying that it clearly showed how the state is trying to drag the process out to keep from having to issue permits. The bullet is our side showing how the state is trying to continue stalling. It was a meta fore. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Nothing intended at the judges response time.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[skinnyb82]

The judges are slow though because of the huge case loads. There's only a handful of judges down there as opposed to the two dozen or so up in the Northern District, Eastern Division. And ILSD gets a lot of removal petitions under 28 USC § 1441 from state courts because plaintiffs forum shop down in St. Clair and Madison Counties. Toxic tort litigation asking for eight or nine figute judgments. Defendants can file petitions for removal to federal court. The judges down in St. Clair and Madison Counties are corrupt...one is being investigated by the FBI for his connection with another judge who OD'd on coke and his ties to a process server who was caught dealing coke. It's so messed up. State Farm is tied up in a civil RICO suit in ILSD for allegedly financing a judge's successful run at the IL Supreme Court in exchange for him nullifying a civil judgment against them.

 

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2