Welch optimistic about assault weapons ban but won't say if it will be approved in January

[Molly B.]

https://www.newspressnow.com/tn_exchange/welch-poised-for-another-term-as-illinois-speaker-reflects-on-growing-house-majority/article_37ec2114-bdeb-525b-ab37-6c606712a1bd.html
 

 

Quote

 

" Regarding assault weapons regulation, Welch said that issue will have to wait until the 2023 session begins in January, when only a simple majority of votes is needed to pass new laws with an immediate effective date. That’s because the Illinois Constitution requires a three-fifths majority for bills passed after June 1 to have an immediate effective date.

 

“Anything that we do on assault weapons, we would want it to be effective immediately,” he said. “And I just don’t think we would have 71 votes to get something done in this shortened veto session. But I do believe that we’re going to be able to deliver for the people of Illinois an assault weapons ban next year, and we’re going to work real hard to make that happen.”"

 

 

[springfield shooter]

On 11/22/2022 at 6:16 PM, Molly B. said:

https://www.newspressnow.com/tn_exchange/welch-poised-for-another-term-as-illinois-speaker-reflects-on-growing-house-majority/article_37ec2114-bdeb-525b-ab37-6c606712a1bd.html
 

 

 

 

If so, they're going to "make that happen" right into a losing lawsuit for the state.

[Molly B.]

🙂

[steveTA84]

Ha!!!!!!! Go for it, Welch. Please, go for it LOFL

[steveTA84]

“Your honor, the types of weapons that were banned are in common use for lawful and thus under Bruen and Heller, they are protected under the second amendment. In fact, here is a brief example of just how popular they are in illinois. Keep in mind this was just a short period of time, but Illinois was a leading state in lawful purchases of these firearms, therefor they are in common use and protected. Criminalizing the residents of the state, of which this state was the 5th largest in number of residents who purchased these firearms in 2020, classifying them as criminals unless they pay fees or forfeit their weapons is not only unconstitutional, it’s draconian. And this is just off of one website, so you can only imagine the number of them sold from other websites and shipped to FFL’s, as well as what was sold in stores statewide”.

https://nssfpdf.s3.amazonaws.com/OnlineSalesViewJune2020.pdf

Edited November 23, 2022 at 02:56 AM by steveTA84

[EdDinIL]

On 11/22/2022 at 8:55 PM, steveTA84 said:

“Your honor, the types of weapons that were banned are in common use for lawful and thus under Bruen and Heller, they are protected under the second amendment. In fact, here is a brief example of just how popular they are in illinois. Keep in mind this was just a short period of time, but Illinois was a leading state in lawful purchases of these firearms, therefor they are in common use and protected. Criminalizing the residents of the state, of which this state was the 5th largest in number of residents who purchased these firearms in 2020, classifying them as criminals unless they pay fees or forfeit their weapons is not only unconstitutional, it’s draconian. And this is just off of one website, so you can only imagine the number of them sold from other websites and shipped to FFL’s, as well as what was sold in stores statewide”.

 

State of Illinois' potential response:  We are a SCOTUS sanctuary state and are choosing to ignore the Bruen, Heller, McDonald and all other pro-2A decisions.  Good luck stopping us. 

Edited November 23, 2022 at 03:39 AM by EdDinIL

[Caveman2021]

We need another name for the title of representative if they violate peoples rights..

[papa]

On 11/22/2022 at 11:05 PM, Caveman2021 said:

We need another name for the title of representative if they violate peoples rights..

Tyrant seems to fit very well.

[lilguy]

Misfire

Edited November 23, 2022 at 11:38 AM by lilguy

[ryr8828]

Just when I thought I couldn't hate this state any more than I already do.

[SiliconSorcerer]

 

Need to learn how to refer someone to the bar for review maybe this would stop (at least the ones with a law degree) for voting to pass laws they must know are clearly unconstitutional. 

[Jeffrey]

The judges are equally to blame.  They are supposed to be well versed in law last time I checked.  They should be able to read a case prior to trial and see the forest for the trees.

[2A4Cook]

They don't care.  Flip the SCOTUS the bird because they don't control it anymore, stomp on our rights, unlawfully prosecute us when we resist, tax us to defend the lawsuits brought against them for violating our rights,  do this for years and wait for SCOTUS while they continue prosecuting gun owners as criminals when they, themselves, are the criminals.  And stupid sheep just cheer them on.

[SiliconSorcerer]

Maybe we just need to start flooding the ISBA with ethic complains about lawmakers that are lawyers be incompetent about the law. 

Just need to find the right form and get a everyone to start filing them. 

 

https://www.isba.org/ethics/bysubject/Reporting Lawyer Misconduct

[BobPistol]

On 11/22/2022 at 10:05 PM, Caveman2021 said:

We need another name for the title of representative if they violate peoples rights..

 

I call them traitors.

[MrTriple]

On 11/22/2022 at 8:10 PM, springfield shooter said:

 

If so, they're going to "make that happen" right into a losing lawsuit for the state.

What I don't understand (and this goes for the entire gun control movement, not just Illinois) is why they'd attempt a ban that is suspect under Bruen and at risk of being overturned.

 

I get that there's a certain calculus to what they're doing, but aren't there folks on their side giving them an honest, unbiased take on things? If I'm a legislator, I'm gonna want to hear from someone who's gonna give me the unvarnished truth about my bills. How likely are we to get sued? What's our realistic chance of winning in court? I'm not gonna pick a fight I can't win, especially if it establishes a negative precedent for my side.

[crufflesmuth]

They say this every year. Welch wants to make a name for himself. The Democrats are out of touch. The 9th Circuit has struck the magazine and assault weapon ban; at least that's what I've seen. Illinois progressives really need to acquaint themselves with reality: the legal landscape is changing. 

[Flynn]

On 11/23/2022 at 9:38 PM, MrTriple said:

What I don't understand (and this goes for the entire gun control movement, not just Illinois) is why they'd attempt a ban that is suspect under Bruen and at risk of being overturned.

 

It's really simple, it's politics.  They push through this law and their voter base fawns over it, it gets struck down by the courts and they blame Trump and the GOP and their voter bases fawns over them again.  This won't stop until they allow civil rights lawsuits in their individual capacity against those that create and enforce these blatant unconstutional laws, but that will never happen as they won't pass a law that puts them at risk and having to answer to the people and Constitution.

[springfield shooter]

On 11/23/2022 at 9:38 PM, MrTriple said:

What I don't understand (and this goes for the entire gun control movement, not just Illinois) is why they'd attempt a ban that is suspect under Bruen and at risk of being overturned.

 

I get that there's a certain calculus to what they're doing, but aren't there folks on their side giving them an honest, unbiased take on things? If I'm a legislator, I'm gonna want to hear from someone who's gonna give me the unvarnished truth about my bills. How likely are we to get sued? What's our realistic chance of winning in court? I'm not gonna pick a fight I can't win, especially if it establishes a negative precedent for my side.

 

Well, above Flynn said "politics". I'd agree with that, plus add virtue signaling.

[Matt B]

JB has been very dismissive of the risk of lawsuits to his future AWB. I do wonder how much of it is driven by the fact they only listen to lawyers for gun control groups who of course tell them that Bruen doesn’t implicate any potential gun control law they want to pass.

[steveTA84]

On 11/24/2022 at 10:11 AM, Matt B said:

JB has been very dismissive of the risk of lawsuits to his future AWB. I do wonder how much of it is driven by the fact they only listen to lawyers for gun control groups who of course tell them that Bruen doesn’t implicate any potential gun control law they want to pass.

Like that Everytown lawyer who spoke about how Bruen, a National decision, doesn’t affect IL at all.

[ragsbo]

On 11/24/2022 at 10:11 AM, Matt B said:

JB has been very dismissive of the risk of lawsuits to his future AWB. I do wonder how much of it is driven by the fact they only listen to lawyers for gun control groups who of course tell them that Bruen doesn’t implicate any potential gun control law they want to pass.

It is because he never faces negative consequences for his actions. Hold him accountable like the wants to do us, and see how he likes it.

[ealcala31]

On 11/23/2022 at 12:56 PM, 2A4Cook said:

They don't care.  Flip the SCOTUS the bird because they don't control it anymore, stomp on our rights, unlawfully prosecute us when we resist, tax us to defend the lawsuits brought against them for violating our rights,  do this for years and wait for SCOTUS while they continue prosecuting gun owners as criminals when they, themselves, are the criminals.  And stupid sheep just cheer them on.

Couldn't have said it better...

[springfield shooter]

On 11/24/2022 at 11:10 AM, steveTA84 said:

Like that Everytown lawyer who spoke about how Bruen, a National decision, doesn’t affect IL at all.

 

Article VI of the Constitution (second paragraph) says otherwise. To wit:

 

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

 

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript

[steveTA84]

Here’s a top DNC lawyer agreeing with Joe. Why are Democrats such tyrants?

 

[RECarry]

Democrat playbook: [create problem] >> [mandate a solution] >> [spend tax dollars on poor implementation] >> [raise campaign funds by smearing critics] 

 

What's missing?

1. Self-awareness of how Democrat policies have created many problems that lead to poverty, crime, violence, and suicide.

2. Analyzing all possible solutions versus the first populist "do something" knee-jerk response that comes to mind.

3. Follow-up metrics to identify policy failures and willingness to revise or reverse strategy.

4. Addiction to blaming opponents for failures as a means to raise campaign cash.

5. Investigative journalism and discernment of voters.

[mab22]

On 11/22/2022 at 11:21 PM, papa said:

Tyrant seems to fit very well.

Commie Tyrant?
 

[mab22]

So are they going to ban sticks or partial branches? 
In this old military training video they describe washed up beach wood can be used as a “club”.
So if your calling AR’s “weapons of war” then according to this historical video “clubs” or wooden branches are also weapons of war as well. So would technically a mini sword be a weapon of war, but we know from history that swords and daggers were also defensive weapons and people were allowed to have them, in the open, and in public even! 

 

[Euler]

On 11/22/2022 at 9:10 PM, springfield shooter said:

If so, they're going to "make that happen" right into a losing lawsuit for the state.

 

The organization that would normally be the one to bring such a lawsuit within Illinois can't really, at the moment, be trusted to do so, though.

[mab22]

On 11/25/2022 at 9:01 PM, Euler said:

 

The organization that would normally be the one to bring such a lawsuit within Illinois can't really, at the moment, be trusted to do so, though.

So you may be saying, any organization that’s wants to actually win, should go or file first?