Jump to content

CBS Report - Bill To Stop Illegal Gun Ownership In Illinois


InterestedBystander
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think this is SB0568 Fix The FOID Act

 

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2021/03/26/bill-to-stop-illegal-gun-ownership-in-illinois-could-become-closer-to-becoming-a-law/

 

CHICAGO (CBS) A bill to stop illegal gun ownership in Illinois could be closer to becoming law.

 

Just a few hours ago, its sponsor explained the bill does four important things.

 

It insures we do background checks, it ensure we obtain finger prints, it ensures were are giving the Illinois State Police the ability to take the guns of folks that shouldnt have them and it makes sure that were getting funding, life-saving mental health funding, to the communities that have been most impacted by gun violence , Sen. Ram Villivalam said. The time to act is now.

 

The senator says he has 25 co-sponsors in the state Senate and needs five more to sign on.

Edited by InterestedBystander
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, I'm sure all the illegal gun owners will say "Darn, I can't break that law, you won!" and like that illegal guns will disappear from Illinois.

 

I think they should give the law a 90 day trial, if all the illegal guns disappear keep it, but if they don't revoke the law and ban any similar laws and make every sponsor/co-sponsor wear a dunce hat on the Senate/House floor until they are no longer an elected official.

Edited by Flynn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It insures we do background checks, it ensure we obtain finger prints, it ensures were are giving the Illinois State Police the ability to take the guns of folks that shouldnt have them and it makes sure that were getting funding, life-saving mental health funding, to the communities that have been most impacted by gun violence , blah blah blah

 

 

I've never been fingerprinted for anything and I'm not about to start now. I'm not a criminal.

 

Thanks but no thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It insures we do background checks, it ensure we obtain finger prints, it ensures were are giving the Illinois State Police the ability to take the guns of folks that shouldnt have them and it makes sure that were getting funding, life-saving mental health funding, to the communities that have been most impacted by gun violence , blah blah blah

 

 

I've never been fingerprinted for anything and I'm not about to start now. I'm not a criminal.

 

I've been printed numerous times, FL CC, IL CC, CPD/Media ID and more.

 

I've never been a criminal and I'm not ever gonna start. There seem to be advantages to being in the system, or perhaps I'm just lucky. My NICS always comes back instantly. I never have problems when I need to work at presidential events, visiting the FBI or even the rare interview in the White House... stuff where I need to be vetted.

 

It would be great if finger prints are not ever a requirement, but I don't see it as a big deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was printed for the first time when I worked for UPS back in my college days. Since then I've submitted them many times, including for multiple CCW licences, in IL and other states.

 

If you're worried about big brother finding you, don't. They already have your facial recognition features from your ID/DL/FOID pictures.

 

As long as people are afraid to submit fingerprints, lawmakers delight in passing these kind of laws. I guarantee they can put you away for life without your fingerprints if they can prove you did it without them.

 

Fingerprints are a dinosaur compared to ways you can be identified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If fingerprints are such a dinosaur, why do we need to provide them then? Why make it more restrictive at all? Your making a "If you have nothing to hide" argument.

Sure, in all practical sense and purpose the government having your finger prints it is not a big deal, but why should we have to jump through hoops? Why should the process be made more complicated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will stick to the same reasoning I have for a long time, if fingerprints are a nothingburger and no big deal, then no one should argue or resist mandating them to exercise other rights like the 1st and 15th either, right?

 

Rights should be treated equally IMO, the minute one right requires hoops and hurdles while the others don't that right is no longer a right but a privilege.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If fingerprints are such a dinosaur, why do we need to provide them then? ...

Bureaucratic hoops. Vested interests. Direct revenue. Security theater. Virtue signaling.

 

5 concepts, 10 words Quintuple BINGO!!!!! A+++++

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If fingerprints are such a dinosaur, why do we need to provide them then? Why make it more restrictive at all? Your making a "If you have nothing to hide" argument.

Sure, in all practical sense and purpose the government having your finger prints it is not a big deal, but why should we have to jump through hoops? Why should the process be made more complicated?

 

The anti second amendment lawmakers want to make it harder to become a legal gun owner. I bet they want to require live-scan finger printing which is more expensive that paper card fingerprinting, most likely has to be done during day time hours and may require you to drive to another county.

Edited by junglebob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happens with someone like me? Whether it is because of a lifetime of farm work, advancing age, or the interferon I took for 29 years as a result of having MS, I have no discernible fingerprints.

 

Open a biometric gun safe? Not this guy.

 

The last time they tried to take them, I was told I have "incompetent fingerprints(?)".

 

I think, at 64 with a squeaky-clean record, they have more than enough info to know who and what I am, by now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

They want us to provide finger prints to be a gun owner but a picture ID requirement to vote is a requirement Illinois can't have.

But you can register to vote and vote on the same day.

In fact, it's a manufactured right.

 

A vote doesn't ricochet off the floor and kill a bystander.

Some people can not and should not have guns.

 

Voting and guns are not the same.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

They want us to provide finger prints to be a gun owner but a picture ID requirement to vote is a requirement Illinois can't have.

But you can register to vote and vote on the same day.

In fact, it's a manufactured right.

 

A vote doesn't ricochet off the floor and kill a bystander.

Some people can not and should not have guns.

 

Voting and guns are not the same.

 

 

 

A vote can destroy a country. Which is more deadly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

But you can register to vote and vote on the same day.

In fact, it's a manufactured right.

 

A vote doesn't ricochet off the floor and kill a bystander.

Some people can not and should not have guns.

 

Voting and guns are not the same.

 

A vote can destroy a country. Which is more deadly?

 

 

The gun is more deadly... the vote takes far more time to destroy anything with many options, including guns, along the way.

 

A gun can be instantaneously deadly.

Anyone who is not aware of that probably shouldn't have a gun.

Exceptions granted for the sake of discussion.

 

I would prefer that all who have and use guns would use them properly, always. That is less realistic than ending "gun violence" by eliminating all guns, or even by preventing unfit individuals from "illegally" having guns. Neither will ever happen. We will compromise somewhere in between. For those who might think "never compromise"... that is the code of humanity. We exist cooperatively, as best we can.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no 'gun' law that will prevent bad people from doing awful things with a gun. The best we can do is make it possible for all people to protect themselves when bad people intend to do harm. Putting hurdles up for the good people only serves the intent of the bad people.

"If violent crime is to be curbed, it is only the intended victim who can do it. The felon does not fear the police, and he fears neither judge nor jury. Therefore what he must be taught to fear is his victim." Jeff Cooper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

A vote doesn't ricochet off the floor and kill a bystander.

Some people can not and should not have guns.

 

Voting and guns are not the same.

 

A vote can destroy a country. Which is more deadly?

 

 

The gun is more deadly... the vote takes far more time to destroy anything with many options, including guns, along the way.

 

A gun can be instantaneously deadly.

Anyone who is not aware of that probably shouldn't have a gun.

Exceptions granted for the sake of discussion.

 

I would prefer that all who have and use guns would use them properly, always. That is less realistic than ending "gun violence" by eliminating all guns, or even by preventing unfit individuals from "illegally" having guns. Neither will ever happen. We will compromise somewhere in between. For those who might think "never compromise"... that is the code of humanity. We exist cooperatively, as best we can.

 

 

 

It's amazing that when Liberals want to push an agenda, it's always "Compromise" or "Common Sense", usually laced with a lot of disgusting threats and imagery. However, when Conservatives want to preserve constitutional rights for lawful citizens, we are racist, bible thumping, gun toting extremists, that accept and even encourage mass shooters. The image Democrats try to portray of us lawful gun owners is disgusting.

 

The reality is, if some forms of free speech is inappropriate and is not protected, it seems reasonable that some folks should not have guns. I buy that. However, the fact is, your Democratic idols refuse to uphold the EXISTING frigging laws and prosecute those that break them. Time and time again, inner city shooters are put right back on the streets - WHY?? Also, straw buyers for Gangs who supply big numbers of unlawful weapons get caught red handed and they get their hands slapped and cut free. WHY?? Instead, they are more focused on creating new laws that will primarily only effect LAWFUL gun owners. The fact is, the VAST Majority of Gun Criminals are aligned with, and are themselves, inner city Democratic voters. The reason Democrats will not uphold the law is they prefer not to prosecute their own voter base. Simply enforcing the existing laws will have far more impact than any new law under discussion.

 

I could go on and on about how Democrats corrupt and bastardize pretty much everything they are involved with, but the reality is, until the EXISTING LAWS that are focused on CRIMINALS are UPHELD and PROSECTED to the FULL extent of the law, there is no DAMN way I am going to stand down against DEMOCRATS looking to make law abiding citizens into criminals. That entire Democratic logic is revolting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The gun is more deadly... the vote takes far more time to destroy anything with many options, including guns, along the way.

 

A gun can be instantaneously deadly.

Anyone who is not aware of that probably shouldn't have a gun.

Exceptions granted for the sake of discussion.

 

I would prefer that all who have and use guns would use them properly, always. That is less realistic than ending "gun violence" by eliminating all guns, or even by preventing unfit individuals from "illegally" having guns. Neither will ever happen. We will compromise somewhere in between. For those who might think "never compromise"... that is the code of humanity. We exist cooperatively, as best we can.

In the end though the vote can kill far more people. Gov. Cuomo arguable killed as many as 15,000 nursing home residents with a stroke of a pen. No serial killer, mad bomber, or mass shooter could ever hope to match that record without being empowered by votes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You SoundGuy, should be ashamed with trying to push and justify that propaganda here.

 

 

 

MrMagloo,

 

I have no idols, Democratic or others. Not even silly sports guys, though I sometimes enjoy sports.

I am pushing no agenda, liberal or conservative.

What Molly wrote a couple notes ago is true. I agree completely.

 

If you look at ancient topics here you would see I agree with much of what you are saying... that woman from Palatine who bought 8 identical Glocks, some found in the possession of a known bad guy in Hoffman Estates a few years ago, should still be serving time. There's no reason for me to further enumerate.

 

Compromise and cooperation are not bad words, concepts or ideals. In the search for a solution to any problems, compromise or rather, cooperation, is in order.

 

What is your solution? I don't have one right now.

 

Re: new gun measures in Illinois... sometimes, the best thing to do is nothing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The gun is more deadly... the vote takes far more time to destroy anything with many options, including guns, along the way.

 

A gun can be instantaneously deadly.

Anyone who is not aware of that probably shouldn't have a gun.

Exceptions granted for the sake of discussion.

 

I would prefer that all who have and use guns would use them properly, always. That is less realistic than ending "gun violence" by eliminating all guns, or even by preventing unfit individuals from "illegally" having guns. Neither will ever happen. We will compromise somewhere in between. For those who might think "never compromise"... that is the code of humanity. We exist cooperatively, as best we can.

In the end though the vote can kill far more people. Gov. Cuomo arguable killed as many as 15,000 nursing home residents with a stroke of a pen. No serial killer, mad bomber, or mass shooter could ever hope to match that record without being empowered by votes

 

That's like saying President Trump killed 550,000 people... neither are true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You SoundGuy, should be ashamed with trying to push and justify that propaganda here.

 

 

 

MrMagloo,

 

I have no idols, Democratic or others. Not even silly sports guys, though I sometimes enjoy sports.

I am pushing no agenda, liberal or conservative.

What Molly wrote a couple notes ago is true. I agree completely.

 

If you look at ancient topics here you would see I agree with much of what you are saying... that woman from Palatine who bought 8 identical Glocks, some found in the possession of a known bad guy in Hoffman Estates a few years ago, should still be serving time. There's no reason for me to further enumerate.

 

Compromise and cooperation are not bad words, concepts or ideals. In the search for a solution to any problems, compromise or rather, cooperation, is in order.

 

What is your solution? I don't have one right now.

 

Re: new gun measures in Illinois... sometimes, the best thing to do is nothing.

 

My solution, STOP Voting for Corrupt Parties who selectively enforce the laws to support their political agenda.

 

That right there would SOLVE a good portion of the gun crime issues across America. If the Conservatives were to take over the crime plagued and corrupt inner cities and allow them to hold CRIMINALS of all types accountable, I guaranty the violent crime rate in Chiraq would be cut in half within 6 months.

 

But you'd rather keep things the same, 'do nothing', and endure the constant threats from the same folks who have created the problem in the first place? Worse keep voting for them?

 

I don't think I will ever understand your thinking. You will gladly sacrifice thousands of innocent children every year, and do nothing?

 

Speaks volumes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

In the end though the vote can kill far more people. Gov. Cuomo arguable killed as many as 15,000 nursing home residents with a stroke of a pen. No serial killer, mad bomber, or mass shooter could ever hope to match that record without being empowered by votes

That's like saying President Trump killed 550,000 people... neither are true.

 

Its safe to say that more died than would have had nursing homes been allowed to refuse Covid patients, and I'd wager its still a significantly higher number than any unelected person has ever killed with a gun. But feel free to substitute any genocide by an elected government that you prefer, I'm not usually one to go here, but Hitler was voted in legally
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...