Jump to content

Lake Co mayors are trying to get an AWB passed at the county level


steveTA84
 Share

Recommended Posts

Preemption doesn’t exist anymore I guess. Of course, now that we know the game plan in terms of pro-Bono defense teams of these laws being in place, not like these Democrats actually care about anything 

https://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/lake-county-news-sun/ct-lns-gun-violence-interrupters-town-hall-st-0806-20220805-k6bakfq3knhfhgpwockmj7zciq-story.html

 

North Chicago Mayor Leon Rockingham Jr. and Highland Park Mayor Nancy Rotering shared the challenges their communities face with gun violence with members of the Lake County Board during its Committee of the Whole meeting Friday morning.

Both mayors expressed support for a County Board resolution adding an assault weapons ban to its legislative advocacy agenda and for the county’s new Gun Violence Prevention Initiative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The current Lake County Board, is rogue and power hungery.

 

I have little doubt that the current Lake County Board will take this request seriously and actually try to act upon it.

 

Lake County has essentially become a mini-Illinois where the elite Lake Michigan coastal population dictates policy over the entire county.

Edited by Flynn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This list shows the towns each Lake Co Board Member represents. Clearly Highland Park and Deerfield are leading the anti-gun charge. Lake Forest is bending liberal with many new residents moving from Chicago. They need to hear that Highland Park's total Gun Free Zone strategy was an abject failure.

 

https://www.lakecountyil.gov/2336/County-Board-Members

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2022 at 4:27 PM, RECarry said:

This list shows the towns each Lake Co Board Member represents. Clearly Highland Park and Deerfield are leading the anti-gun charge. Lake Forest is bending liberal with many new residents moving from Chicago. They need to hear that Highland Park's total Gun Free Zone strategy was an abject failure.

 

https://www.lakecountyil.gov/2336/County-Board-Members

It will be even worse after the November elections when we will see the impact of the newly gerrymandered district map. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sent an email to my board member yesterday but it evidently didn't help.  They supposedly passed the resolution today by a 3 to 1 vote which seems weird because there are 21 members.  This was a gesture only as I understand it they are supporting AWBs at the state and federal level. The file is at this link 

https://lakecounty.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5747782&GUID=1F080E8B-45CF-46C6-B6E1-A22BB4DC14B6&Options=&Search=

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2022 at 7:34 PM, mab22 said:

Why doesn’t the mayors pass a van themselves? 
why do they want the county to do it for them? 

 

$$$ They know full well it will be litigated to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, these mayors don't want that cost on their books so if they can find a sucker like Lake County to foot the bill win-win for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2022 at 11:07 PM, Flynn said:

 

$$$ They know full well it will be litigated to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, these mayors don't want that cost on their books so if they can find a sucker like Lake County to foot the bill win-win for them.

Maybe it’s only cook county, it’s my understanding that if my village/township/city doesn’t restrict “modern rifles” then the counties ordinance doesn’t apply as it’s in conflict with my local ordinance as it is less restrictive. 
 

So as I understand it it would be meaningless for Lake County to do that.
( not a lawyer insert other necessary text, mileage may vary.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2022 at 11:30 PM, mab22 said:

Maybe it’s only cook county, it’s my understanding that if my village/township/city doesn’t restrict “modern rifles” then the counties ordinance doesn’t apply as it’s in conflict with my local ordinance as it is less restrictive. 
 

So as I understand it it would be meaningless for Lake County to do that.
( not a lawyer insert other necessary text, mileage may vary.)

 

It's the other way around, lower municipalities can enact equal or stricter ordinances to county or state laws, they can't enact lesser ones.  OK better stated they are not supposed to enact lesser ones, but we live in a clown world were it does happen.  Either way the village/township/city is bound by county law as well as state law, it tiers down, each level down can enact equal or stricter laws but not lesser laws.  That said like other 'sanctuary' laws, if a faux lesser law is enacted, that just means that your local po-po will generally ignore the higher up law and follow the local one, County Sheriffs and State Police on the other hand will still follow county/state law if they are involved.

 

BTW if you are curious as to why they would enact equal laws it's so when they arrest someone they can charge them with the local ordinance and keep the kings share of the fine themselves, same reason states enact equal laws to federal law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2022 at 11:43 PM, Flynn said:

 

It's the other way around, lower municipalities can enact equal or stricter ordinances to county or state laws, they can't enact lesser ones.  OK better stated they are not supposed to enact lesser ones, but we live in a clown world were it does happen.  Either way the village/township/city is bound by county law as well as state law, it tiers down, each level down can enact equal or stricter laws but not lesser laws.  That said like other 'sanctuary' laws, if a faux lesser law is enacted, that just means that your local po-po will generally ignore the higher up law and follow the local one, County Sheriffs and State Police on the other hand will still follow county/state law if they are involved.

 

BTW if you are curious as to why they would enact equal laws it's so when they arrest someone they can charge them with the local ordinance and keep the kings share of the fine themselves, same reason states enact equal laws to federal law.

 

 

There's debate about that.

 

Power to craft local ordinance doesn't flow from the state, through the county, to cities and villages.  Rather, that authority flows from the state to the county in one case, and from the state to the cities and villages in another.  Cities and villages are a parallel form of government to the county, not subordinate to it.

 

Some folks, myself included, believe that while the county has authority over unincorporated  areas, they cannot enforce law in home rule cities and villages (non home-rule municipalities are a little murkier and the ability to tax within the county is a separate issue).

 

In the Orland Park / Cook County AWB clarification topic it was pointed out that the Orland Park village attorney, Ken Fricker, believed that to be the case as well.  Besides being the village attorney Mr. Friker was a respected member of the Illinois Municipal League with expertise in home rule matters.

 

Putting it into practical terms, there is a reason firearms banned by the county continue to be sold in municipalities within the county, without incident.  

 

A copy of the Orland Park board meeting minutes is attached.  See Page 17.

 

 

Orland Park 8-5-2013 Board Minutes.pdf

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/10/2022 at 1:07 PM, mauserme said:

 

 

There's debate about that.

 

Power to craft local ordinance doesn't flow from the state, through the county, to cities and villages.  Rather, that authority flows from the state to the county in one case, and from the state to the cities and villages in another.  Cities and villages are a parallel form of government to the county, not subordinate to it.

 

Some folks, myself included, believe that while the county has authority over unincorporated  areas, they cannot enforce law in home rule cities and villages (non home-rule municipalities are a little murkier and the ability to tax within the county is a separate issue).

 

In the Orland Park / Cook County AWB clarification topic it was pointed out that the Orland Park village attorney, Ken Fricker, believed that to be the case as well.  Besides being the village attorney Mr. Friker was a respected member of the Illinois Municipal League with expertise in home rule matters.

 

Putting it into practical terms, there is a reason firearms banned by the county continue to be sold in municipalities within the county, without incident.  

 

A copy of the Orland Park board meeting minutes is attached.  See Page 17.

 

 

Orland Park 8-5-2013 Board Minutes.pdf 4.59 MB · 2 downloads

 

 

 

Thank you Mausere, 

It’s on page 32 in the PDF for those that are looking for it. 
That was how I understood it, a municipality had the option to enact so called “AWB’s” with 10 days. 
Also, reading through my municipalities firearms regulations they never mention bans or “assault weapons”, only firearms. Modern rifles are in fact firearms I believe. 🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/10/2022 at 1:07 PM, mauserme said:

There's debate about that.

 

Yep, there is debate and I personally don't buy the debate short of the ordinance being codified to exempt the incorporated area or if a contract stating so exist, otherwise IMO the hierarchy is still in play, especially since the county sheriff by default under Illinois law has jurisdiction in the entire county.

 

I believe the 'allowing' of it is no different than all the states that are openly passing laws to decriminalize things that are criminal at the federal level, it's being tollerated and allowed but not exactly following the rule of law.

 

I would argue that if the county ordinance does not preempt the incorporated area, then it's enforceable by default (under Illinois law that grants county wide jurisdiction to County Sheriffs) as even a casual glance at the Lake County ordinances shows that some ordinances specifically state they are not enforceable inside incorporated areas, while other county ordinances specifically state incorporated areas are not preemepted and the ordinance is applicable in both incorporated and unincorporated areas.  That to me sure implies the County has authority to enforce it's ordinances upon an incorporated area unless codified to the contrary.

 

For an example, under the Lake Couny 'PUBLIC NUISANCES' ordinance, it clearly state both incorporated and unicorporated areas are subject to the county ordinance with a few specifically preempted as enforceable in incorporated areas.

 

Quote

(A)   The provisions of this subchapter shall apply to incorporated areas (those areas which are located within the corporate limits of any city, village, or incorporated town) as well as unincorporated areas (those areas which are outside the corporate limits of any city, village, or incorporated town) of Lake County, Illinois, in accordance with the jurisdictional or contractual authority of the enforcing county department, with the exception of §§ 94.05(A), (E), (F) and (I), 94.06(A), and 94.07, which shall apply only to unincorporated areas of Lake County, Illinois.

 

Edited by Flynn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was incorrect this measure actually was passed with a 17-5 vote.  I watched quite a bit of the proceedings and it was pretty bad.  Eddie Sullivan spoke and they cut him off at 3 minutes.  It was shameful, after allowing an invited panel of gun control advocates over 3 hours last week. The board chair Hart seemed pretty confident in her knowledge that an AR-15 is a weapon of war so powerful that a hunter would never use it because the game would be damaged beyond recognition. Duckworth told her she carried an AR into battle because it was specially designed to pierce helmets and shot through armored vehicles, etc.  A few board members wanted to table to allow the "other side" a chance to present but that motion was voted down. As one member who pleaded for more balanced information noted, they spent far more time considering a leaf burning ordinance than this resolution.  It was really arrogant and I was ashamed to see elected officials act as they did. Horrible!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2022 at 9:00 PM, Rev Jim said:

I was incorrect this measure actually was passed with a 17-5 vote.  I watched quite a bit of the proceedings and it was pretty bad.  Eddie Sullivan spoke and they cut him off at 3 minutes.  It was shameful, after allowing an invited panel of gun control advocates over 3 hours last week. The board chair Hart seemed pretty confident in her knowledge that an AR-15 is a weapon of war so powerful that a hunter would never use it because the game would be damaged beyond recognition. Duckworth told her she carried an AR into battle because it was specially designed to pierce helmets and shot through armored vehicles, etc.  A few board members wanted to table to allow the "other side" a chance to present but that motion was voted down. As one member who pleaded for more balanced information noted, they spent far more time considering a leaf burning ordinance than this resolution.  It was really arrogant and I was ashamed to see elected officials act as they did. Horrible!

What do you expect. They’re Democrats and don’t care about reality regarding firearms 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2022 at 9:00 PM, Rev Jim said:

Duckworth told her she carried an AR into battle because it was specially designed to pierce helmets and shot through armored vehicles, etc. 

Duck must have been sick the day they covered the M16.

Perhaps we can send her to Ukraine to show them how to use an AR against some rooskey armored vehicles so we can stop paying for javelins and other expensive weapons.

I bet that means the Barrett .50 would vaporize tanks, she can demonstrate that in the field as well. 
She can bring Dick and make it a true field day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2022 at 9:00 PM, Rev Jim said:

As one member who pleaded for more balanced information noted, they spent far more time considering a leaf burning ordinance than this resolution.  It was really arrogant and I was ashamed to see elected officials act as they did. Horrible!

 

My guess is that was Dick Barr?  He is basically the ugly duckling conservative surrounded by liberal nutwings and they despise the fact he won't fall in line!  That burn ordiance is a real sore spot as public opinion leaned heavily towards allowing buring outside densely populated neighborhoods on acreage, but they didn't want to hear any of that, they had already made up their mind they were going to ban it before they even authored the ordinance.   You should see the monster bon-fire I have building for when I can burn in November, it's going to be huge at least a 2 car garage size pile by November when I can light it up!

 

As I said in my first post in this thread "The current Lake County Board, is rogue and power hungery." they don't serve the people they serve themselves and the liberal agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2022 at 9:00 PM, Rev Jim said:

Duckworth told her she carried an AR into battle because it was specially designed to pierce helmets and shot through armored vehicles, etc.

 

It really begs the question are our military trainers and soldiers really that ignorant and dumb, or is she and other ex or current military that make similar claims just flat out liars or are they just stupid? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/12/2022 at 1:36 AM, Flynn said:

 

It really begs the question are our military trainers and soldiers really that ignorant and dumb, or is she and other ex or current military that make similar claims just flat out liars or are they just stupid? 

From my time on active duty I can say with authority it is both.   Some are flat out liars. and met more than one person that had a lower IQ than a box of BA1100

Edited by RANDY
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/12/2022 at 1:33 AM, Flynn said:

 

My guess is that was Dick Barr? 

Yes, Barr was a voice of reason, and so was Danforth.  The board action was prefaced last week by a 3 hour Committee of the Whole meeting where only one side was invited to speak.  I watched a lot of it.  The grand finale was a presentation by Sara Knizhnik - professional gun control advocate who runs the Gun Violence Prevention Initiative for Lake County State's Attorney  Eric Rinehart.  She is also running for her own seat on the county board.  

 

Sara began by explaining the root cause of everyday violence: inequity in the criminal justice system.  So inequity in criminal justice causes gun violence in black and brown communities, which then leads directly to the Highland Park shooting!  No one questioned this...

 

She explains it like this...gun violence in black/brown communities leads to...the firearms industry using racist and fear-based marketing tactics to sell guns, which leads to...people in communities of privilege buying more guns out of fear, which leads to...many more gun available on inventory, accessible to kids, available to be stolen, etc.

 

I was also surprised to learn her answer to the question "why do we need more gun laws, when the ones we already have aren't working?"  Sara says "our gun laws ARE working as designed, which is not well.  Why pass laws that don't work well?  Because that's what the gun industry wants!  They own so many politicians in DC we have a 40 year patchwork of laws that don't give law enforcement the tools they need".  The board expressed total agreement.  It all really makes sense as long as you don't think about it! 

image.png.93ba6c457d43695828e710c40c736144.png

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...