HB0462 FIREARMS-CONCEALED CARRY

[45superman]

Synopsis As Introduced

Creates the Family and Personal Protection Act. Permits the county sheriff to issue permits to carry concealed firearms to persons at least 21 years of age who meet certain requirements. Requires an applicant for a permit to have completed specified training requirements developed by the Illinois Law Enforcement Training Standards Board consisting of classroom instruction and live firing exercises. Preempts home rule. Amends the Illinois Police Training Act and the Criminal Code of 1961 to make conforming changes. Effective immediately.

 

http://ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp...mp;SessionID=76

[Chiburbian]

It says it is in rules committee.

 

Do bills ever make it out of rules or am I mistaken?

 

Also, on first read I don't see anything objectionable. Am I missing something? Should we contact our reps about this one? Looking for direction...

[abolt243]

It says it is in rules committee.

 

Do bills ever make it out of rules or am I mistaken?

 

Also, on first read I don't see anything objectionable. Am I missing something? Should we contact our reps about this one? Looking for direction...

 

Cogz,

 

Rules is where the bills go to be submitted to a "substantive committee" that will read the bill and either recommend to pass or not pass and possibly add amendments. See this thread.

 

See Molly's post in another thread. Don't fall in love with a bill until we've seen them all. Deadline for filing is the latter part of Feb. I see nothing highly objectionable, but I don't see reciprocity with other states for one issue, I see state control of training class charges and a kickback to the state by the trainers required, "concealed or mostly concealed", only a three year term, and a few things that would be nice to have added.

 

Read all the bills submitted, get familiar with them and let's see what else comes out before we jump on a bandwagon.

 

Overall though, you're right, we could probably live with this one as a "work in progress" if we had to.

 

Tim

[Chiburbian]

Yes, while it doesn't have reciprocity, I think its a satisfactory bill. We can always work for reciprocity later. They took our rights from us piecemeal so we didn't realize it was going on - we can play the same game getting them back.

[illinisnare]

Wow - I now know to read the bill and not interpret the synopsis.

[Silver Guardian]

Looks very may-issue to me, and has no preemption. Their references to the police training law makes it sound like the 40 hour training needed if you are a mayor/alderman that would want to carry.

 

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.a...s=&Session=

 

9 Section 80. Applicant training.

10 (a) The applicant training course shall be the standardized

11 training course furnished by the Board and taught by a

12 qualified firearms instructor, consisting of:

13 (1) Eight hours of classroom instruction, covering at

14 least the following topics:

 

14 Section 105. Preemption. The regulating of carrying

15 firearms being an exclusive function of the State under Section

16 24-1 and 24-1.6 of the Criminal Code of 1961, an ordinance of a

17 unit of local government, including a home rule unit, is

18 invalid if it is inconsistent with the Family and Personal

19 Protection Act. It is declared to be the policy of this State

20 that the regulation of the right to carry concealed firearms

21 and the issuance of permits to carry concealed firearms is an

22 exclusive power and function of the State. A home rule unit may

23 not regulate the carrying of concealed firearms. This Section

24 is a denial and limitation of home rule powers and functions

[Chiburbian]

14 ( The county sheriff, upon a person's application for a

15 concealed firearms permit, upon receipt of the appropriate

16 fees, and after compliance with the procedures set out in this

17 Section, shall issue the applicant a concealed firearms permit

18 if the person:

[lockman]

It is a class a misdemeanor to carry in a church on private property with the consent of the church!

 

Let' get it passed and then work to strike most if not all of the Criminal protection zones (CPZ) the law sets in place. At least passage as it is will remove the entire state as a CPZ and limit it to government buildings and private businesses that choose to advertise that fact.

[lockman]

At least the government building prohibition does not extend to outdoors such as grounds, parks and preserves.

[Bitter]

I don't like that there is no reciprocity. That would affect me adversely because I am currently a Mo. resident and when I move back to IL I wouldn't be able to get a permit for 6 months...going that long without carrying is unthinkable for me at this point...

[Chiburbian]

If there is a bill we like 90% of, can we petition to have an amendment made on it before it is voted on? Such as adding reciprocity?

 

Or, does another bill have to be submitted entirely?

[Drylok]

If there is a bill we like 90% of, can we petition to have an amendment made on it before it is voted on? Such as adding reciprocity?

 

Or, does another bill have to be submitted entirely?

 

Ya What ^ he asked!??? I know we can of course come back and amend a bill after it's passed but can we the people call and ask for the would be law to be amended ahead of time? Or is there a better one coming anyway and we just need to be patient?

 

Inquiring minds want to know

 

I know I know...."patience grasshopper"

 

 

lol

[Flea]

From the St. Louis Post Dispatch.

 

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stor...4A?OpenDocument

[anonymous too]

If there is a bill we like 90% of, can we petition to have an amendment made on it before it is voted on? Such as adding reciprocity?

 

Or, does another bill have to be submitted entirely?

 

Not all bills have come out..........yet. I have a hunch there may be a much better bill in the pipeline.

 

Support for allowing concealed carry of firearms in Illinois — one of just two states that still outlaw it — is coming from what seems like an unlikely direction: the Illinois Sheriffs' Association.

 

I also have a hunch this didn't happen by accident

[Chiburbian]

Kent - How much better can it be?

 

Obviously reciprocity. But what else are we looking for? (not arguing against these improvements, just wondering what they are so I can look for them)

[Drylok]

Kent - How much better can it be?

 

Obviously reciprocity. But what else are we looking for? (not arguing against these improvements, just wondering what they are so I can look for them)

 

Ok I had heard there was a new one coming, I thought maybe this was it. That's good if there's even a better one coming.

[predator1972baz]

From looking at some of the posts I think it looks pretty good. IMO May issue, is racist. I say this without any evidence in saying this because the issuance isn't from facts but from the feelings of the sherrif, and I bet you if a study was done in may issue states a VERY low number of conceal carry holders are minorities. I like Shall issue because it forces the state to give the right not by how the sherriff feels but by factual law. Basically not being a felon and passing the qualification.

 

I have a Florida and Utah LTC, both are shall issue. Granted I don't use it that much, granted I used it traveling from Indiana to Ft. Benning GA. with no problems. But mostly because no-one knew. Most shall issue laws are at the will of the sherrif who usually (if he doesn't want to give you one) can say "Are you in any immediate any danger ?" and you say no and he says no, you say yes and he says where, when, and how, takes a report and says I will see if you need one. Then you are stuck waiting. Which is basically a no. Shall issue doesn't have that problem. Needless to say it's colorblind.

[Chris]

Kent - How much better can it be?

 

Obviously reciprocity. But what else are we looking for? (not arguing against these improvements, just wondering what they are so I can look for them)

 

Ok I had heard there was a new one coming, I thought maybe this was it. That's good if there's even a better one coming.

 

I agree, we should wait a little longer and see if there are some other bills that come out that might work even better for us.

[abolt243]

I'm not sure where the "May Issue" issue came from. Read the bills!!!! All three that have been proposed so far are "Shall Issue"!!!! No mention of May Issue in any of them.

 

While reciprocity is not the only issue with this bill, it is a big one! If IL does not recognize any other state's license or provide a way for non-residents to aquire a license to carry in IL, not very many states will look favorably on your IL license when you travel to their states. Reciprocity needs to be addressed.

 

Yes, bills can be amended while they are in committee or after they are on the floor of either house of legislature. Agian, I encourage you to look at this THREAD and check out the two flow charts there. It's usually an extended process to get a bill from introduction to the finished product.

 

The best way to "petition" to get it changed is to contact your elected officials and the legislators that sponsored the bill. Now is not the time to do that. Let all the bills get introduced and let's see what we have to pick from.

 

As Drylok says, "Patience Grasshoppers"

[Buzzard]

I'm not sure where the "May Issue" issue came from. Read the bills!!!! All three that have been proposed so far are "Shall Issue"!!!! No mention of May Issue in any of them.

I believe Predator was misled by the fact that these bills have the Sheriffs Dept. as the issuing agency.

 

As Drylok says, "Patience Grasshoppers"

...like thirty cats watching one mouse hole.

[Buzzard]

Kent - How much better can it be?

 

Obviously reciprocity. But what else are we looking for? (not arguing against these improvements, just wondering what they are so I can look for them)

 

Ok I had heard there was a new one coming, I thought maybe this was it. That's good if there's even a better one coming.

 

I agree, we should wait a little longer and see if there are some other bills that come out that might work even better for us.

I agree also.

[Bitter]

The other thing I don't think is quite there on this one is that carrying in the "no carry" zones is a misdemeanor, and of course some of those zones are places that you would most want to carry, church for example. In Missouri if you are carrying in a prohibited zone you MAY be asked to leave, and IF you do not AND the police are called you can get a non-criminal minor fine ($25 I think). If you get 3 you get your license revoked. I think that is a lot better than forgetting to leave it in your car and catching a case.

[abolt243]

The other thing I don't think is quite there on this one is that carrying in the "no carry" zones is a misdemeanor, and of course some of those zones are places that you would most want to carry, church for example. In Missouri if you are carrying in a prohibited zone you MAY be asked to leave, and IF you do not AND the police are called you can get a non-criminal minor fine ($25 I think). If you get 3 you get your license revoked. I think that is a lot better than forgetting to leave it in your car and catching a case.

 

I cant' find all the statutes, but it may be that some of those NoCarryZones are mandated by the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968 and as such would carry higher penalties. I think that reading the bill, I see that carrying past a NOGUN sign on a business, is not a criminal act and gets you invited to leave immeadiately. Carrying in a school, a Fed building or a Gov't building is a misdemeanor. I think there is that same distinction in MO and IN also. I'll try to back that up with sources in a bit.

 

Tim

 

I stand corrected. If I read this correctly MO STATUTES carrying in those places just gets you invited to leave. Refuse and the ante goes up, to include losing your LTC if your a real slow learner.

 

Tim

[Silver Guardian]

Support for allowing concealed carry of firearms in Illinois — one of just two states that still outlaw it — is coming from what seems like an unlikely direction: the Illinois Sheriffs' Association.

 

I also have a hunch this didn't happen by accident

 

Care to share your theory?

[anonymous too]

Kent - How much better can it be?

 

Obviously reciprocity. But what else are we looking for? (not arguing against these improvements, just wondering what they are so I can look for them)

 

It will not be perfect, but much better than the same old bills that have been filed the last few years.

 

Care to share your theory?

 

It's not a theory and I can't share at this time. Be patient and know others are working much, much harder than me on this issue.

[jagco]

My reply when asking my state senator how he felt about LTC:

 

Dear Jeff,

If proper background checks and training are in the law, I will support concealed carry. With the present leadership in Springfield concealed carry has almost no chance of even being called for a vote.

Sincerely, David Luechtefeld

State Senator - 58th District

[asfried1]

My reply when asking my state senator how he felt about LTC:

 

Dear Jeff,

If proper background checks and training are in the law, I will support concealed carry. With the present leadership in Springfield concealed carry has almost no chance of even being called for a vote.

Sincerely, David Luechtefeld

State Senator - 58th District

 

That's a tad disheartening. Is part of the reason these bills don't survive that even supporters are sorta downtrodden about them?

[Ol'Coach]

My reply when asking my state senator how he felt about LTC:

 

Dear Jeff,

If proper background checks and training are in the law, I will support concealed carry. With the present leadership in Springfield concealed carry has almost no chance of even being called for a vote.

Sincerely, David Luechtefeld

State Senator - 58th District

 

If some of the "non-leaders" would step up, that could change!!!!!!!!!!!! Instead of just supporting it, how 'bout signing on as a sponsor??

 

It's like those firearms owners who gripe and moan, but that's all they do!

[SirMatthew]

My reply when asking my state senator how he felt about LTC:

 

Dear Jeff,

If proper background checks and training are in the law, I will support concealed carry. With the present leadership in Springfield concealed carry has almost no chance of even being called for a vote.

Sincerely, David Luechtefeld

State Senator - 58th District

 

If some of the "non-leaders" would step up, that could change!!!!!!!!!!!! Instead of just supporting it, how 'bout signing on as a sponsor??

 

It's like those firearms owners who gripe and moan, but that's all they do!

 

It's awfully funny how the political machine seems to work so well for less important things, but grinds to a halt on 2A issues. The very definition of "politics" is a system of favors, so why aren't the authors, sponsors, and supporters of this bill working with the opposition and trading one favor for another? I'm not talking illegal, corrupt, Blago-type stuff; just a simple trade: "You vote for my bill and I'll vote for yours."

[abolt243]

My reply when asking my state senator how he felt about LTC:

 

Dear Jeff,

If proper background checks and training are in the law, I will support concealed carry. With the present leadership in Springfield concealed carry has almost no chance of even being called for a vote.

Sincerely, David Luechtefeld

State Senator - 58th District

 

If some of the "non-leaders" would step up, that could change!!!!!!!!!!!! Instead of just supporting it, how 'bout signing on as a sponsor??

 

It's like those firearms owners who gripe and moan, but that's all they do!

 

It's awfully funny how the political machine seems to work so well for less important things, but grinds to a halt on 2A issues. The very definition of "politics" is a system of favors, so why aren't the authors, sponsors, and supporters of this bill working with the opposition and trading one favor for another? I'm not talking illegal, corrupt, Blago-type stuff; just a simple trade: "You vote for my bill and I'll vote for yours."

 

Gents, it's still very early in this session. Don't forget, in IL, legislative sessions run for two years. So a bill introduced on the first day of the 96th session, in Jan of '09, might not be voted on until May of '10. Lots of time to forge alliances, build support and get sponsors.

 

That will be important once we see all the bills and decide where to place support. We'll need to call, fax, email and FTF contact our lawmakers to encourage them to sign on as sponsors of the bill we like. The more sponsors a bill has, the better traction it gets and the more pressure can be brought to bear to get it to the floor for debate.

 

With the pro-gun bills we have and are yet to see as well as the stuff that the antis have already thrown at us, it's shaping up to be a very interesting and busy year!!

Tim