Jump to content

Fraction of 1% of FOID card holders register banned guns in first week


Molly B.

Recommended Posts

Even if the law is struck down, IL will never surrender that registration data.  They'll smuggle a copy out, give it to the ATF, and bury it someplace for future use. 

 

Heck since there is no provision for privacy in PICA, I fully expect the data to be shared with hostile media and activist groups - just like Lisa Madagan attempted to do with the FOID data. Only last minute action by the state legislature prevented that, and this time, the clowns in charge won't stop it.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2023 at 6:07 PM, davel501 said:

 

What happened here? I had one set of quotes and used SpongeBob case. Why did someone change that? 

 

I was suggested that the term should always be enclosed in quotation marks even when it wasn't posted that way.  It isn't working as planned when the quotation marks are already there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2023 at 6:18 PM, Dumak_from_arfcom said:

Even if the law is struck down, IL will never surrender that registration data.  They'll smuggle a copy out, give it to the ATF, and bury it someplace for future use. 

 

Heck since there is no provision for privacy in PICA, I fully expect the data to be shared with hostile media and activist groups - just like Lisa Madagan attempted to do with the FOID data. Only last minute action by the state legislature prevented that, and this time, the clowns in charge won't stop it.  

 

 

I smashed the LIKE button !!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2023 at 6:19 PM, mauserme said:

 

I was suggested that the term should always be enclosed in quotation marks even when it wasn't posted that way.  It isn't working as planned when the quotation marks are already there.

 

 

 

Oh, it ruined my funny. 😂

 

I did "a Ss aULt WEapOnS" without the spaces. It would tickle me if it always corrected to that though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm trying to get my head past the fact that there are 10 "assault weapons" bans in the US currently - 

California, Connecticut, Delaware, D.C., Hawaii,  Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Washington. The SCOTUS has yet to strike any of these down so to assume it will be different with Illinois is pie-in-the-sky. Even with the political hanky panky and bribing/buying of Justices by Pritzker SCOTUS has not seen fit to delay or stay registration and is letting this travesty play itself out in the lower courts. 

 

I hope I'm wrong but I think Amerika is in the twilight of gun ownership. I have a bad feeling that SCOTUS is not gonna save US. We'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2023 at 6:53 PM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

I'm trying to get my head past the fact that there are 10 ""assault weapons"" bans in the US currently - 

California, Connecticut, Delaware, D.C., Hawaii,  Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Washington. The SCOTUS has yet to strike any of these down so to assume it will be different with Illinois is pie-in-the-sky. Even with the political hanky panky and bribing/buying of Justices by Pritzker SCOTUS has not seen fit to delay or stay registration and is letting this travesty play itself out in the lower courts. 

 

I hope I'm wrong but I think Amerika is in the twilight of gun ownership. I have a bad feeling that SCOTUS is not gonna save US. We'll see.

 

You have to admit, the bare knuckle enforcement messages have softened a lot in the last few weeks. They know their days are numbered and their just trying to get a few extra by not being complete tyrants. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2023 at 6:53 PM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

I'm trying to get my head past the fact that there are 10 "assault weapons" bans in the US currently - 

California, Connecticut, Delaware, D.C., Hawaii,  Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Washington. The SCOTUS has yet to strike any of these down so to assume it will be different with Illinois is pie-in-the-sky. Even with the political hanky panky and bribing/buying of Justices by Pritzker SCOTUS has not seen fit to delay or stay registration and is letting this travesty play itself out in the lower courts. 

 

I hope I'm wrong but I think Amerika is in the twilight of gun ownership. I have a bad feeling that SCOTUS is not gonna save US. We'll see.

 

I have to tell you, your constant negativity is getting wearisome.  Please stop trying to encourage folks to give up or, if you're not able to stop yourself, find some other forum to post it on.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2023 at 8:48 PM, mauserme said:

 

I have to tell you, your constant negativity is getting wearisome.  Please stop trying to encourage folks to give up or, if you're not able to stop yourself, find some other forum to post it on.

 

What you wrote might be a little bit harsh but... I would hit the like button if there was one.

We will all stick together.

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2023 at 8:48 PM, mauserme said:

 

I have to tell you, your constant negativity is getting wearisome.  Please stop trying to encourage folks to give up or, if you're not able to stop yourself, find some other forum to post it on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

On 12/18/2023 at 12:43 AM, soundguy said:

 

What you wrote might be a little bit harsh but... I would hit the like button if there was one.

We will all stick together.

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

 

One of the GREAT things -IMHO- about 1st Amendment freedom of speech, is the way it was crafted and the way it is implemented to protect speech with which we do not agree. I would hate to see any sort of forum turn into an echo chamber in which only 'like' commentary is welcome. Doesn't much make for the opportunity to have a reasoned discussion of varied viewpoints I'm thinkin'. But that's just my view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2023 at 8:48 PM, mauserme said:

 

I have to tell you, your constant negativity is getting wearisome.  Please stop trying to encourage folks to give up or, if you're not able to stop yourself, find some other forum to post it on.

 

 

 

 

 

Apologies for going against the flow. I'll shush,

 

VooDoo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst. Scotus won't save us, we have to do the leg work. If they hand down a decision which slaps down this horrible law, great. But, the people that put it in place aren't gone, they're just going to come at it from another angle. We have to plan for that. 

 

For me, that's in the form of exit plans from this state. My family is here, but between the horrifying property tax bills, the regressive restrictions on constitutional rights, the wokeifying of schools, soft on crime DAs, the unpleasantness of this place is just becoming too much. It probably won't be immediate, but I'm going to leave this inky blue place to stew in its juices. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2023 at 4:49 PM, davel501 said:

If you read the law, you can register, permanently disable the weapon, remove a part that is illegal to buy, like a firing pin, or the implied remove the firearm from the jurisdiction of this law. 

 

As I'm reading and thinking, the safest option may well be to remove the firing pins from the """assault weapons""" and store them, labeled individually with the firearm they belong too with all my other illegal spare parts in a bin out of state. 

 

I think 2024 is optimistic. Easterbrook is going to need a personal slap down to tell him Friedman is no longer good law. 

 

That "judge" needs more than a "personal slap down".  At the very least, he should have to be "re-trained" in Constitutional law and/or be "restrained" from being a judge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2023 at 6:53 PM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

I hope I'm wrong but I think Amerika is in the twilight of gun ownership. I have a bad feeling that SCOTUS is not gonna save US. We'll see.

 

If you want to use that line from the Star Wars movies, then consider their alternatives.

 

Alliance red.jpg

Alliance.jpg

Alliance & Jedi.jpg

 

:devil: :devil:

Edited by JTHunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/18/2023 at 12:43 AM, soundguy said:

 

What you wrote might be a little bit harsh but... I would hit the like button if there was one.

We will all stick together.

 

Cheers,

Tim

 

 

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I accept that Illinois is functionally two disparate States - one is the lands North of I80 and East of Rte 39 and the other is everywhere else. Most Illinois law enforcement officials have suggested that they will NOT enforce this inane law. I can almost guarantee that here in Chicago, Cook County and most of the collar counties' officials are not included in that group. I anticipate that enforcement here will be in high gear and the loss of FOID/CCW and all 2A Rights will happen to some poor sods who get caught transporting an unregistered firearm to a local range, gunsmith or wherever. Everyone will be making their final decisions over the next week or so as to whether or not it is in their individual best interests to comply. I offer neither criticism or praise for whichever route someone chooses. You only gotta keep you happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2023 at 12:29 PM, Vodoun da Vinci said:

 

Here's someone who agrees.

 

VooDoo

 

I cannot fault this man, based on his experience. What else will he say? You lose a big chunk of business if you advocate non-compliance in Cook County. This law functions just like DUI laws: a tack on charge for even the most minor infractions. So it could go further than just not having "disclosed" weapons or attachments. It could effectively chill conceal carry of any weapon. They can claim any weapon is an "assault weapon", charge you and get away with it under qualified immunity. You might win. But not without being ruined. That alone is why non-compliance should be a norm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2023 at 3:10 PM, bmass said:

To me, this 0.3% of FOID holders is confusing. Would it be safe to say that 80-90% of FOID holders do not have anything to "disclose" ? Most folks I know just own a pistol, hunting rifle or shotgun. They should not be part of the "0.3% calculation".

 

Depends on where you live maybe? Most gunowners I know have an AR or similar, including many women. Those women include a 20-someting recent college grad and my skinny IT nerd girlfriend - you wouldn't expect either of them owned any kind of gun. 

 

Using your 90% figure, thats saying that only 200k FOID holders own one, I think that's really low.

Edited by countyline
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2023 at 2:10 PM, crufflesmuth said:

 

I cannot fault this man, based on his experience. What else will he say? You lose a big chunk of business if you advocate non-compliance in Cook County. This law functions just like DUI laws: a tack on charge for even the most minor infractions. So it could go further than just not having "disclosed" weapons or attachments. It could effectively chill conceal carry of any weapon. They can claim any weapon is an ""assault weapon"", charge you and get away with it under qualified immunity. You might win. But not without being ruined. That alone is why non-compliance should be a norm.

 

"(2) ""assault weapon"" does not include:
        (A) Any firearm that is an unserviceable firearm or has been made permanently inoperable.
        (B) An antique firearm or a replica of an antique firearm.
        (C) A firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action, unless the firearm is a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
        (D) Any air rifle as defined in Section 24.8-0.1 of this Code.
        (E) Any handgun, as defined under the Firearm Concealed Carry Act, unless otherwise listed in this Section.
"

 

Stop fear mongering. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2023 at 3:10 PM, bmass said:

To me, this 0.3% of FOID holders is confusing. Would it be safe to say that 80-90% of FOID holders do not have anything to "disclose" ? Most folks I know just own a pistol, hunting rifle or shotgun. They should not be part of the "0.3% calculation".

 

Statistically, there are 500,000 AR-15s alone in Illinois. The broad and vague definitions in the law expand the number of firearms eligible for registration into the millions. 

 

Any of your friends have a pistol with the threaded barrel? That's an "assault weapon". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2023 at 4:33 PM, davel501 said:

 

"(2) """"assault weapon"""" does not include:
        (A) Any firearm that is an unserviceable firearm or has been made permanently inoperable.
        (B) An antique firearm or a replica of an antique firearm.
        (C) A firearm that is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action, unless the firearm is a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
        (D) Any air rifle as defined in Section 24.8-0.1 of this Code.
        (E) Any handgun, as defined under the Firearm Concealed Carry Act, unless otherwise listed in this Section.
"

 

Stop fear mongering. 

 

The black letter of the law does not exempt a person from law enforcement harassing them. An officer could claim a barrel was threaded or similar, make an arrest and then cite that person. It has not been done but it could be. They have that ability now with this act. It would be stupid of them. But they do have that ability. That is the unspoken intent of this law: to discourage firearm ownership and lawful carry. 

Edited by crufflesmuth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is like reliving the period after concealed carry passed in Illinois.  A few folks were running around saying if you print, or carry more than one gun, or more than one magazine they're going to bankrupt you with legal fees while you rot in jail.  I'm sure the anti's in Chicago and Cook County enjoyed all the worry they were able to sew, and am convinced they sent people here to promote that worry.

 

Just as I am convinced now that some are purposely spreading doubt out of motives that have nothing to do with protecting our rights.

 

My advice then and now, is to weigh the entirety of their posts and decide if they are expressing genuine concern, or if they're beating the horse to death with constant admonitions of all the things that can go wrong in life.  Once you figure them out it's easy to ignore their nonsense.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2023 at 3:10 PM, bmass said:

To me, this 0.3% of FOID holders is confusing. Would it be safe to say that 80-90% of FOID holders do not have anything to "disclose" ? Most folks I know just own a pistol, hunting rifle or shotgun. They should not be part of the "0.3% calculation".

 

How about some solidarity?
It's the problem of all gun owners, no matter what they own.

"I didn't say anything when they came for the ARs because I don't own an AR"


If it ever come down to searches, it won't matter.  If you have a FOID, then they're searching.
How will the powers coming down on you know whether you don't have anything, or whether you failed to report it?
They won't, so they will search.


If you're a criminal, and have no FOID card, perhaps not.

But, if Illinois and ISP go full police state, then consider everyone fair game for a search.
Won't that be a surprise for the smug ones?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2023 at 10:24 PM, Black Flag said:

 

How about some solidarity?
It's the problem of all gun owners, no matter what they own.

"I didn't say anything when they came for the ARs because I don't own an AR"


If it ever come down to searches, it won't matter.  If you have a FOID, then they're searching.
How will the powers coming down on you know whether you don't have anything, or whether you failed to report it?
They won't, so they will search.


If you're a criminal, and have no FOID card, perhaps not.

But, if Illinois and ISP go full police state, then consider everyone fair game for a search.
Won't that be a surprise for the smug ones?

 

Think about what you're suggesting that, in order to get a search warrant,  they would use your compliance with Illinois law in the form of the FOID Act  as evidence that you probably violated PICA.  Or did you mean warrantless searches?

 

 

 

 

 

 

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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