Meeting notice Tue 11/18: Lake County SA and Sheriff update on concealed carry

[Hap]

Last spring the Lake County State's Attorney and Sheriff held two information sessions on concealed carry. These meetings are discussed in the following threads (with a good summary by domin8 in the first thread):

 

http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=46741

http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=46861

http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=48124

 

The organizers explicitly stated that the purpose of these meetings was to discuss plans for and issues with implementation of the FCCA and not to debate the issue, and they followed through on this statement. The general tone was "New law, could have been better written, we don't expect problems but this will be a learning experience for everybody, stay cool and we'll all be fine."

 

Next Tuesday there will be a followup meeting held by the same organizations. The meeting announcement is on the State's Attorney's Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/lakecountyilsao or see below. I believe the intent is to provide an update on how the FCCA has worked from their point of view during the first year, what issues have arisen, and how they have been dealt with. If it's like the meetings last spring, there will be plenty of opportunity for questions or discussion with people from both offices.

 

[Pipedoc]

From the other thread......

I saw Hapless there, but was anybody else there? So many people showed up they turned people away and scheduled a second meeting. It will be held the 21st at 7pm at the same place. I was one of those initially turned away. After a few minutes I went back in and they started finding days for those that were willing to stand in the hallway. I ended up being seated at the very front on the room behind the speakers. I took some notes and thought I'd share them. First off, observation of the audience. My impression was they were either for concealed carry or were neutral and simply wanted the facts. It was a very friendly audience. The Lake County Sheriff, Chief, whatever you want to call him was the first to speak. He flat out said he's pro 2A and didn't follow that with any exceptions. The States Attorney then got up and presented a brief PowerPoint. He went over the FOID Card Act, presenting only facts. That was followed by facts from the FCCA. After the SA's presentation was a Q & A with the audience. I didn't notice any questions that seemed to come from an anti. Most of the questions were directed to the police in terms of how they are going to conduct things, what sends off warning signs to police, etc. The police officer answering questions was asked about the glove box being considered "a case" for storing a firearm. They said they glove box by definition is a case. Firearm doesn't have to be concealed whole the FCCL holder is in the vehicle. Common sense here: If you get pulled over don't start turning around and messing with things in your vehicle. It's going to send a warning sign to the officer. They acknowledged Highland Park's 10 round magazine capacity. The SA was unsure about the legality of switching from concealed carry to transport (aka FOID carry) on public transit. He indicated that if CTA or Metra posted a sign stating no guns that it would include transport too, but want sure on that. When he said this it seemed he was trying to differentiate between the FCCA GFZ sticker that applies to concealed carry and a generally posted sign for all firearms. There was a question pertaining to general aviation, and how it might differentiate from a major airport like Midway or O'Hare. The SA, again wasn't sure. Mostly concealed doesn't cover printing. The application to mostly concealed pertains to an incident where somebody might bend over to pick something up and their shirt or jacket lifts up revealing their firearm. The carrying of loaded magazines will be subject to the FOID Card Act. The SA didn't have an answer to the carrying of spare loaded magazines in GFZs. He seemed to indicate GFZs only applied to handguns. Deployable = pick up & go. This will be how the Lake County Sheriff will differentiate between how a firearm is covered under the FCCA and the FOID Card Act. As for nonresidents, 430 ILCS 66/40 is being interpreted as if somebody is passing through, not occupying a home in, Lake County. This is a bit disconcerting for the ~2,000 active duty military personnel, and their families, in Lake County. They're is nothing in this section that pertains to passing through Illinois. It clearly states while in Illinois. It's likely there are things I forgot, failed to write down, or misinterpreted. If there is anybody else that was there that would come in it would be nice to hear what you have to say about last night.

Good summary.

There are several things in there that should be brought up with the states attorney again this year. Hopefully there will be a better understanding of the law by the SA's office now.

[dadude999]

I think I'll go to this, though it's a good 1 - 1 1/2 hour drive from Chicago.

[Hap]

Got there late (uninteresting family mini-crisis) but talked with a Lake County officer who was on the program. He said that there have been precisely zero problems in Lake County with concealed carry licensees. He also said that there were some startup glitches with the local LE review process - they didn't realize things had started until about two weeks after the first applications were received, so they had a short window on some of the early applications. Everything seems to be running smoothly now, however. Other than that, no news is good news.

 

If anybody made it on time, please post!

[domin8]

How'd it go? I wasn't able to attend.

[Hap]

I gather (from a couple of attendees who hung around) that it was something like the meetings this spring, but more low-key - a lot of the discussion last spring was driven by uncertainty, which has largely been dispelled.

[dadude999]

I was the first in the room. It was very low attendance, about 10 people. Hapless, you didn't miss much. The Sheriff and State's Attorney introduced themselves and then left.

 

I got the impression even the DAs and such are on shaky ground since there really haven't been any actual cases that have come up yet. They want to have case law to cement the "grey areas" and nuances. Or better yet, amending the law itself (which they believe will happen a few times in the next few years, which I'm sure is right).