Jump to content

Injunction denied as FOID backlog doubles in 18 months


Recommended Posts

Full article at link...

 

https://www.thecentersquare.com/illinois/injunction-denied-as-foid-backlog-doubles-in-18-months/article_1e50c902-ca1d-11eb-9dae-677370fe644b.html

 

...(The Center Square) The persistent delays in issuing Firearm Owners Identification cards in Illinois that has doubled in the last year-and-a-half continues after a federal judge shot down a motion this week seeking to force the state to issue backlogged cards.

 

Illinoisans who want to legally buy or own firearms and ammunition must have a FOID card issued by Illinois State Police. Penalties for not having one when owning a firearm depend on the circumstances, but can range from a misdemeanor to a felony charge with up to three years in prison.

 

Its approaching two years of reports of backlogs in FOID card applications. Some people have been waiting for months, if not more than a year. Back in January 2020, Illinois State Police posted an update on the agency's Facebook page that said it has about "62,000 FOID applications under review which includes new, renewals and changes.

 

 

The backlog problem has more than doubled since, compounded by increased applications during the pandemic, increased urban crime and civil unrest over the past 18 months.

 

From April 2020 through April 2021, Illinois State Police data shows there were a total of 160,452 FOID renewal applications. Of that 103,551 were approved, 271 denied. That leaves nearly 57,000 renewals backlogged.

 

During the pandemic, ISP issued emergency rules to extend expired FOID cards for 18 months after the governors emergency declaration is lifted. That doesnt help new FOID applicants.

 

For the year ending in April, ISP statistics show 332,862 new FOID applications submitted. Of that, 246,551 were approved and 17,354 were denied. That leaves a backlog of nearly 69,000 individuals whose initial applications have not been processed....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The courts are not there to protect us from our bad choices at election time . We vote in a government like Illinois has and we just have to go with the results of those choices. Bad government can do alot of damage that the courts can accept as the constitutional will of the people. We are free to throw it all away if we choose.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The courts are not there to protect us from our bad choices at election time . We vote in a government like Illinois has and we just have to go with the results of those choices. Bad government can do alot of damage that the courts can accept as the constitutional will of the people. We are free to throw it all away if we choose.

Agreed 100%. I've been telling my customers this since Trump "lost" the election. They say its impossible in IL, all I have to say is, "Trump beat the invincible candidate and that can happen again and again in IL." US Illinoisans choose to be failures. Many gun owners in this group, other gun forums, and in the FB gun groups will complain about IL/Cook/Chicago gun laws and still vote in anti-gun candidates. It's mind-boggling...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The courts are not there to protect us from our bad choices at election time . We vote in a government like Illinois has and we just have to go with the results of those choices. Bad government can do alot of damage that the courts can accept as the constitutional will of the people. We are free to throw it all away if we choose.

That is exactly one of the purposes of the judiciary, to be a check on the other two branches and protect us from unconstitutional acts. 50.1% of the people supporting something does not make it constitutional. Having said that, Illinois voters do seem to be enamored of candidates who are authoritarian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Durbin and Ducky supported her appointment. That should tell you everything you need to know. She acknowledged that this is a "burden," "but not enough to render the process unconstitutional." Seriously???

 

I wonder how she would rule if one had to wait a year to obtain voter registration, or wait a year to get a license to engage in a "mostly peaceful protest."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The judge was probably packing when he made the decision. Just a guess. ;)

The judge's name is Mary, not a "he".

 

Rowland also appears to be a democratic (or at least democrat favored) appointment.

 

Not surprised this would happen but she is clearly not 2A friendly.

 

 

Honestly who cares. Another Marxist hack on the bench.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...