Jump to content

Possible Vote on HB562


mauserme
 Share

Recommended Posts

"Don't want to accept the transfers, don't get a dealer license." Yep, I could see them doing that. Thanks. (For the insight, but not for the feeling like we're about to get hosed.)

 

"Don't want to verify election integrity, then don't run for office".

Edited by RECarry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So, what happens if HB0562 passes today and no FFL wishes to participate in the whole idiotic sensible and safe transfer process? Is that grounds for a legal challenge, or are we then just stuck conducting all transfers through traditional FFL methods?

As I posted in the other thread, the solution to this from gun control groups will be to mandate FFLs accept this paperwork. And theyll be able to do so, theyll say, through the authority the State now has to license dealers.

 

What if the record given to the FFL includes the seller's name and serial number of the firearm, but is otherwise illegible or incoherent?

 

They've made it quite clear that FFLs will not be held responsible for the accuracy of the record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SO as I read it, to remain lawful under this infringing law, if there are NO FFLs willing to maintain the record, you have to file with the ISP (registry, cough couh). Is that correct?

 

What does it say, if anything about familial transfers?

My interpretation is all transfers, private sell, family hand me downs or inheritances need to be recorded with an FFL.

 

In the advent there is not an FFL or that FFL can no longer retain the records, they/(possibly you) turn it over to the state. Is that ISP or some other entity? Not disclosed.

 

This bill is no good, for the gun owner or seller.

 

I can only imagine how some of our members who support their anti-gun legislators converse.

 

Please oppose HB-562 I don't support it, but rest assured no matter how you vote, you have my vote next election. Smooches....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

SO as I read it, to remain lawful under this infringing law, if there are NO FFLs willing to maintain the record, you have to file with the ISP (registry, cough couh). Is that correct?

 

What does it say, if anything about familial transfers?

 

My interpretation is all transfers, private sell, family hand me downs or inheritances need to be recorded with an FFL.

 

In the advent there is not an FFL or that FFL can no longer retain the records, they/(possibly you) turn it over to the state. Is that ISP or some other entity? Not disclosed.

 

This bill is no good, for the gun owner or seller.

 

I can only imagine how some of our members who support their anti-gun legislators converse.

 

Please oppose HB-562 I don't support it, but rest assured no matter how you vote, you have my vote next election. Smooches....

 

 

Nah, my Rep who's apparently now a RINO compared to last time around will get no further financial support or votes from my family again. I called both his offices and emailed, in addition to slips. He voted Yes on SFA1&2. I had a bad feeling about him this time around when I didn't hear back from him. He use to return calls on a timely basis and always voted our way. I think he's entered the "inner circle" now and will be a typical Illinois Politico based on today's vote. Things change.

I thought the guy sho ran against him was a complete bozo :), looks like I got the wool pulled over my eyes.

 

I don't like to be a downer, but today's result could be just the start of nasty anti 2A stuff to come. My dear wife nursed me through the last few years of multiple surgeries and a near death experience as a result of a terrible infection, compliments of surgery #3. She's made it clear, that she's ready to move to a state with more 2A friendly laws and lower cost of living. It's hard to even think about it, because we're both born and raised here. Ultimately though, it seems the possibility of really leaving Illinois behind is becoming our reality. That makes me sad on many levels.

Anyway, enough of my random musings. Today was rough y'all. Enjoy the rest of the week folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had hoped the disparity pro/con of witness slips might make some moderates think twice about supporting. Unfortunately, I think the ISRA being neutral probably provided them some cover and the antis had some heavy hitters on their side who may contribute or withhold significant campaign contributions based upon their votes.

 

It doesn't bode well for future interactions in Illinois. As I've said for a long time, I think our best chance still lies with SCOTUS rulings. Cross your fingers on those...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter our passion or beliefs, a law passed and in effect is not unconstitutional until the last court appealed to says it is. Whether the FOID or any of this is unconstitutional we will have to see. If I were to guess the courts might force the state to spend the money to make the system work in a timely manner. When it was working it was not a undo burden to me or anyone else I know. Would I like to see it gone? absolutely, but what we think of as an infringement of a basic right may not rise to the level of court nullification. We'll have to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter our passion or beliefs, a law passed and in effect is not unconstitutional until the last court appealed to says it is. Whether the FOID or any of this is unconstitutional we will have to see. If I were to guess the courts might force the state to spend the money to make the system work in a timely manner. When it was working it was not a undo burden to me or anyone else I know. Would I like to see it gone? absolutely, but what we think of as an infringement of a basic right may not rise to the level of court nullification. We'll have to see.

I wonder how the folks who penned to Constitution accomplished their job. Since the Constitution didn't exist until it did, no court had an opportunity to rule anything unconstitutional. There was no groundwork laid for them to follow.

 

I'm thinking it was because they were more visionaries than rules followers.

 

We must also be visionaries if we are to prevail, the same as any oppressed group who has freed themselves from their oppressors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its probably not the time to abandon friends, loyalties. Nor is it time to divide Illinois gun owners.

 

I personally believe the ISRA no longer fits into that defintion for me, as for dividing Illinois gun owners, when were they ever united? If anything this just proved they are not!

 

The ISRA now joins the NRA as an association I will no longer support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, I want no part of this $h!t$how. It just gives ISP another thing to audit. The law, as written, seems simple for FFL Dealers. We're allowed to collect a fee no more than $25 for already privately transferred firearms. Then wait till JCAR gets ahold of it, ISP along w/JCAR have completely rewritten the IL Gun Licensing Act and got rid of non-retail locations and some of the requirements while adding on others. No thank you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Its probably not the time to abandon friends, loyalties. Nor is it time to divide Illinois gun owners.

 

I personally believe the ISRA no longer fits into that defintion for me, as for dividing Illinois gun owners, when were they ever united? If anything this just proved they are not!

 

The ISRA now joins the NRA as an association I will no longer support.

If you support Illinois Carry, you get a cool Supporting Members Team badge!

Edited by soundguy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you support Illinois Carry, you get a cool Supporting Members Team badge!

 

I do support Illinois Carry just anonymously and unconnected to my participation on the forum. Just like every other organization I support I don't desire to wear a virtue signaling badge, hat, pin, sticker or whatever I prefer anonymity in my donations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got this answer to my email to ISRA on HB562. This is the most verbosity I have seen

 

 


XXX,

 

The problem is you have not been told everything about the situation.

 

What people don’t understand is the Governor handed down an edict to the Democratic caucus. He was concerned that it appeared his administration wasn’t doing anything to stop the horrific violent crime rate in Illinois and most notably in Cook County & Chicago. He demanded that they pass either HB1091 or HB562 – one or the other without fail. We knew early on that one of those two bills was going to get passed and the Republicans don’t have enough votes to stop it.

 

The ISRA is a one issue organization, and we base our decisions on what is most appropriate in the long run. Our decisions are not based on animosity toward any group or individual but rather what is in the best interest of the Second Amendment rights of all Illinois firearm owners.

 

Given the political climate surrounding HB1091 and HB562 it was clear a decision had to be made on what would be the best course of action. Those who believe the ISRA should “draw a line in the sand” and say “no” to both bills, have no understanding of the mission of the ISRA – to foster the best possible environment for Illinois firearm owners. Taking a hardline and rejecting both bills simply means the anti-Second Amendment backers of those bills will do whatever they want and the ISRA will not have a seat at the table to try to get the most onerous elements of a bill removed and we did manage to accomplish a few good things.

 

Representative Denyse Stoneback (D-16th District), a cosponsor of HB1091, was adamant about three onerous provisions:

 

  1. It would require mandatory fingerprinting,
  2. There would be an unspecified increase in the cost though rough calculations based on other aspects of the bill, it put the cost of a new FOID card at about $75, and
  3. Applicants would be required to go to a police station to apply.

 

Other particularly undesirable aspects to HB1091 included the “clear and present danger” aspect expanded to include “any act” intended to cause or create a risk… It was dangerously vague with significant negative implications for Illinois firearm owners.

 

The bill would also ban the private sale of firearms with all transactions required to go through an FFL. There were no positive aspects to HB1091 and the ISRA took a negative position on the bill.

 

The controversy alleging the ISRA’s lack of support for Illinois firearm owners was focused on our neutral position on HB562. It was a very carefully considered position and it requires an understanding of the bill’s contents and the ISRA’s long term strategy.

 

One of the most naïve criticisms came from those individuals who either opined that there was no such thing as “backroom deals” or those who thought there should never be any kind of “backroom deals;” everything should be discussed publicly.

 

Otto von Bismarck, former chancellor of Germany, wrote, “The less people know about how sausages and laws are made, the better they’ll sleep at night.” Backroom deals are as old as government itself and an intrinsic thread in the fabric of law making. Backroom deals are essential when you are not the dominant party. Look at the positive points in HB562.

 

First, let us be clear, the ISRA objects to the very concept of a FOID card. The Second Amendment guarantees it is the right of the people to keep and bear arms, period. No FOID cards, no de facto poll tax, nothing that stands between law abiding citizens and acquiring and keeping firearms.

 

The fact is in Illinois we have such impediments and the ISRA’s long term strategy is to have the FOID card declared unconstitutional, but you do not just flip a switch and it goes away. So, the short-term strategy is to do whatever is possible to reduce the negative impact on Illinois firearm owners while implementing a strategy for the ultimate removal of the FOID card which brings us to HB562.

 

Literally hundreds of hours and many meetings were held discussing over a hundred different parts and combinations. In the end, those discussions produced a bill that had several positive elements.

 

  1. The FOID card would automatically renew simultaneously with the CCL renewal.
  2. Ultimately the FOID expiration would be eliminated.
  3. The FOID and CCL would be consolidated into one card.
  4. Ultimately an electronic version of the FOID/CCL would be developed.
  5. A public defender would be added to the appeals board.
  6. The change of address requirement would be eliminated.
  7. No increase in the FOID fee.

 

There were a few other positive aspects but there were also a host of negative aspects the ISRA objected to:

 

  1. Voluntary fingerprinting, changed from mandatory initially, but still objected to by the ISRA because fingerprinting should not be required to exercise a constitutional right.
  2. It allowed for supervision and expungement of misdemeanor offenses if a person failed to identify where the transfer records were maintained by an FFL.
  3. Person to person firearm transfer could either include a NICS at an FFL or through the person-to-person transfer using ISP FOID verification but also included the buyer providing a record of the transfer to an FFL within 10 days.
  4. The seller of a firearm must save the record for 10 years.

 

A key aspect of items 3 & 4 is the effective date is January 1, 2024. Last year the ISRA filed a depravation of rights lawsuit in federal court over the FOID card. We began with four plaintiffs and within a month all four received their FOID cards in the mail. Clever trick but short sighted. It is a tactic frowned upon by the court and is not likely to work again. The litigation to eliminate the FOID card continues with new plaintiffs and with a far more friendly SCOTUS it is anticipated that the FOID card may very well be found unconstitutional prior to the implementation of HB562’s provision for person-to-person firearm transfers.

 

Given that either HB1091 or HB562 was going to be implemented, the ISRA took the position of objecting to HB1091 and remaining neutral on HB562. We did not want to endorse a bill that was overall anti-Second Amendment, yet we did not want to come out against it which might have increased public sentiment to stop HB562 and as a result see HB1091 approved. Clearly HB562 is the better of the choices and ISRA will continue with litigation to end the FOID card. Having said that, if the litigation is unsuccessful, HB562 will be far better to live with than HB1091.

 

What would you have had us do differently? If we objected to HB562 you’d have the far more unfriendly HB1091 now. Remember, it was definite that it would be one or the other and no way to stop it.

 

dal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Got this answer to my email to ISRA on HB562. This is the most verbosity I have seen

 

 

Thanks for that, that 110% reinforces that they will not be getting a penny from me ever again! There is no reason they could not have opposed both bills, the fact they chose to remain neutral on a bill they admit they should be against but have no spine to say they are against it all I needed to hear to affirm my position that they no longer represent me...

 

Attention Illinois gun grabbers, the ISRA just told you how to get them on the side of any anti-gun bill, just put out two anti-gun bills and demand one will pass, the ISRA will roll over like a puppy and capitulate to at least one of them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rewind: Pritzer demanded some action that would reduce the gun violence in Illinois (Chicago). These two bills do nothing to stop the lawless.

 

What the public needs to hear NON-STOP is that feel-good gun control bills from Democrats NEVER move the needle. Hardened criminals will still be walking free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rewind: Pritzer demanded some action that would reduce the gun violence in Illinois (Chicago). These two bills do nothing to stop the lawless.

 

What the public needs to hear NON-STOP is that feel-good gun control bills from Democrats NEVER move the needle. Hardened criminals will still be walking free.

It is funny that people still believe that These Mercedes Marxists want to do anything but hold power over honest and law abiding people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks... I know this isn't popular; but I've been involved in a lot of legislative discussions over a lot of years and there are definitely times you have to choose how to use what political capital you have - especially when your perspective is not in the clear majority. There have been times, in my discussions, where the groups I participate in have remained neutral on legislation we were very opposed to. Usually, there is either a consideration on something else of higher priority to us or we know in advance that there is simply no way to kill it and public opposition will hurt us with support on other issues.

 

To assume that ISRA's statement isn't accurate may be a bit naïve. When there is a supermajority of gun rights supporters and the governor is a staunch ally of the 2nd amendment cause, we can dictate the terms. Unfortunately, we have the opposite and sometimes have to negotiate for the least, worst legislation we can get.

 

Elections are important and we need to try to get a pro second amendment Governor elected who would veto such bills instead of applying pressure to ensure they pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks... I know this isn't popular; but I've been involved in a lot of legislative discussions over a lot of years and there are definitely times you have to choose how to use what political capital you have - especially when your perspective is not in the clear majority. There have been times, in my discussions, where the groups I participate in have remained neutral on legislation we were very opposed to. Usually, there is either a consideration on something else of higher priority to us or we know in advance that there is simply no way to kill it and public opposition will hurt us with support on other issues.

 

To assume that ISRA's statement isn't accurate may be a bit naïve. When there is a supermajority of gun rights supporters and the governor is a staunch ally of the 2nd amendment cause, we can dictate the terms. Unfortunately, we have the opposite and sometimes have to negotiate for the least, worst legislation we can get.

 

Elections are important and we need to try to get a pro second amendment Governor elected who would veto such bills instead of applying pressure to ensure they pass.

Yep.

 

Well put Ranger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elections are important and we need to try to get a pro second amendment Governor elected who would veto such bills instead of applying pressure to ensure they pass.

 

That still doesn't address getting rights back that have been dealt and given away, that just puts a small speed bump in having more taken away. Sorry but I am a firm believer that Illinois will not see any significant restoration of 2nd rights in my lifetime due to voting of the Governor or Senate/House seats, any significant 2nd restoration we get in my lifetime will come from the courts forcing the politicians hands, not the politicians good will and this is mostly the case at the Federal level as well...

Edited by Flynn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Elections are important and we need to try to get a pro second amendment Governor elected who would veto such bills instead of applying pressure to ensure they pass.

 

That still doesn't address getting rights back that have been dealt and given away, that just puts a small speed bump in having more taken away. Sorry but I am a firm believer that Illinois will not see any significant restoration of 2nd rights in my lifetime due to voting of the Governor or Senate/House seats, any significant 2nd restoration we get in my lifetime will come from the courts forcing the politicians hands, not the politicians good will and this is mostly the case at the Federal level as well...

 

Bingo! Well said! If we can magically get a Republican governor again, he can only sign or veto what comes from the ISL. You can bet they're not going to be sending over any bills restoring rights they've stolen from us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Making excuses for Pearson is absurd. If the ISRA thought they were doing us some big favor by claiming the lesser of evils, and thereby essentially being tricked into offering an implied endorsement, they are dumber than we have imagined. If they state the long term objective is to do away with the FOID, it in no way helps your standing when you do NOT proclaim a vigorous objections to ALL further legislative transgressions. It's ridiculously stupid to try and float this after the fact as some "smart strategic" plan that worked in our favor. In my damn opinion, they should have vehemently fought all of the above, every step of the way, no matter what. They were absolute fools to allow the Anti's to hoodwink them into this implied endorsement, and they should be taken to task accordingly.

Edited by mrmagloo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think our best chance is with SCOTUS. I'm not as confident with SCOTUS as I'd like to be; but I'm not sure how realistic the chances are that we'll get a pro 2nd amendment Governor and legislature are during my lifetime. I think we can likely get a pro 2nd amendment Governor if we have the right candidate and organization. I'm not sure who that is yet; but fairly certain it will have to be someone who is very well spoken, pretty well connected, and extremely wealthy in order to compete. Best guess so far might be Gary Rabine. Darren Bailey is solidly pro 2nd amendment and wealthy by most of our standards; but not like it will likely take to get the seat. Remember that Pritzker donated somewhere around $176 million for his last campaign. He's probably more vulnerable now; but his opponent will need the financial resources to not only compete for Governor; but also help support pro 2nd amendment candidates so he can actually accomplish something if he gets elected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This strategy of negotiating to less terrible glosses over some very big problems with all of this:

 

1) Their negotiating has now, very publicly, reset the benchmark at the Statehouse of what gun groups are willing to live with. Theres zero turning back from that without major turnover in both the executive branch and legislative branch. Which is now even tougher to do now that youve given cover to some Dems to say they voted with the ISRA for reasonable gun laws

 

2) All of the good things in the bill couldve, shouldve, and have been been previously introduced as stand alone legislation to fix the backlog. In fact the pressure to improve the process was strong enough that they probably couldve passed. And if they didnt, it only helps the lawsuits.

 

3) A grand scheme that ultimately relies on the United States Supreme Court is about as trustworthy as basing your retirement plan on a handful of lottery tickets. Theres absolutely zero guarantee the Court even takes the case, much less issues you a winning decision. Odds are, by a lot, that they never even grant Cert.

Edited by MRE
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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...