Objections by counties

[soundguy]

Last I heard 33,000 have applied. I just don't see the total being 400,000 by years end as projected. I am surprised at how few people are applying.

Many people see too much time and money tied up in the requirements to apply.

And the fact that who knows when they'll actually get around to issuing the permits, and too many restrictions, and the obviousness with which the law is full of "gotchas" where they are looking to make examples out of people who carry.

I have always thought that 400,000 is gonna be the ultimate number of permits out there, not the number in the first year. One third of the way thru January, I was #31,000 plus. I saw someone post 41,000 last week. It's probably close to 50,000 now? We won't keep a 10,000 per week rate, but if we did we pass 400,000.

[Gamma]

Here's an idea which might seem crazy on it's face, but this is Illinois we're talking about.

 

Some part (probably very small, but still) of the Cook county objections (maybe other places too) might be corruption/favoritism at work. How? Objections immediately kick the application to the review board. The review board then considers the objections and background check and then either denies the application, or directs the ISP to issue the permit. In this manner, with wheels suitably greased a permit could be issued in a matter of a few days, versus the 30 day minimum and presumably 90 to 120 day nominal time needed for regular permit issue. Hypothetically some connected machine types could already have their permits via this method.

[Stargeezer]

The notion that a neighbor can notify the PD that they think you are insane and that unsupported claim is adequate probable cause for that PD to object to you application strikes me wrong on so many levels I can't list them all. The history of a neighbor ratting on another neighbor to the police is just a few steps short of a evil we fought a world war over. How do these people look in a mirror with a razor in their hand and not do harm to themselves. They can't process a moral center.

[jkdkaliman101]

I would not think that just the one incident may be enough, but 5 over short period of time, my cause the Board to reject.

Documented mental illness aside, I would think that a recommendation to remove someone's constitutional right should be based on arrests, not simply documented incidents.

 

The problem is that we don't use our justice system the way it was intended. We drop charges and allow pleas for lesser offenses, rather than simply making a case and letting the system decide if it's a win or a loss.

correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't it take a conviction to make one ineligible not an arrest or even more than one arrest? I ask because I've been arrested before, more than once... in my younger days but I have never been convicted of any crime. I'm currently "under board review" right now. According to the list of eligibility requirements set forth by the ISP, I should not be denied. I've had no incidents with law enforcement ( other than maybe a traffic ticket) for at least 13 years.

[G214me]

Trying to figure out how LaSalle County has two objections with zero from the sheriff and no municipalities that are clickable showing the number of objections. I see Sandwich has two objections, so I'm guessing that the Sandwich police are objecting against people who don't live in the city limits of Sandwich, probably Lake Holiday residents.

Could it be from the county State's Attorney's office ?

[GlockShooter]

From what I have read, the objections should be due to more recent and serious issues. For example, local LEOs have been called to the same home several times because someone was beating on their spouse. Every time, no one was willing to press charges. No charges, no arrest, no conviction. It wouldn't show up on a background check, but local LEOs would have the incidents documented. They might file an objection and submit what they have to the board based on the nature of the calls.

 

This is speculation on my part. Time will tell.

[Glock23]

I would not think that just the one incident may be enough, but 5 over short period of time, my cause the Board to reject.

Documented mental illness aside, I would think that a recommendation to remove someone's constitutional right should be based on arrests, not simply documented incidents.

 

The problem is that we don't use our justice system the way it was intended. We drop charges and allow pleas for lesser offenses, rather than simply making a case and letting the system decide if it's a win or a loss.

correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't it take a conviction to make one ineligible not an arrest or even more than one arrest? I ask because I've been arrested before, more than once... in my younger days but I have never been convicted of any crime. I'm currently "under board review" right now. According to the list of eligibility requirements set forth by the ISP, I should not be denied. I've had no incidents with law enforcement ( other than maybe a traffic ticket) for at least 13 years.

See post #57. I corrected myself there, as I could no longer edit the original post.

[BadWaterBill]

While working at a large retail store I was handed a credit card that had been stolen.

 

Long story short The rap sheet was long enough to cross over Lake Michigan. All said ARRESTED FOR, not one conviction showing.

 

The Cook County judge found him guilty but it took a year in court.

 

The judge ruled that if he kept his record clean for 6 months from the date of arrest the guilty verdict would be removed.

 

So arrested 987 times with 0 convictions showing proves ?.

 

If you could have seen the 75 year old woman he destroyed to get her cards, well you would leave your lunch and when I saw her the beating was over a month old.

 

Mary Shepard looked better

 

This is the problem with Cook County Sheriff T Dart's own judicial system. Fix that Yard Dart before you are allowed to complain about any CCW Aps.

[Gamma]

Trying to figure out how LaSalle County has two objections with zero from the sheriff and no municipalities that are clickable showing the number of objections. I see Sandwich has two objections, so I'm guessing that the Sandwich police are objecting against people who don't live in the city limits of Sandwich, probably Lake Holiday residents.

Could it be from the county State's Attorney's office ?

Might be a LaSalle county resident who was objected to by an agency in another county.