HB182: League of Women Voters of Champaign Co.

[Ol'Coach]

I started to write a response to this, and the more I wrote, the angrier I became. I'll try again later; meanwhile Abolt, Lou, some of you folks, how 'bout it?

 

Link: "Quinn should veto new handgun law"

Quinn should veto new handgun law

Sunday July 5, 2009

 

The League of Women Voters of Illinois, at its convention in Peoria recently, voted to urge Gov. Quinn to veto HB 182, which would change Illinois law governing the concealed carry of handguns and allow a person to carry concealed handguns into another person's home.

 

Current Illinois law allows individuals to carry firearms on their own land, in their abode or in their fixed place of business. HB 182 would allow a person to carry or possess a firearm on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an "invitee" with that person's permission. Under current Illinois law, an "invitee" includes customers of businesses and restaurants, spectators at sporting events, job applicants and baby sitters.

Members of the League of Women Voters of Champaign County would like to know how law enforcement officials will be able to charge a threatening or suspicious person with unlawful possession under such a vaguely written law. How was permission granted? Is the invitee required to notify the inviter that he or she is carrying a firearm? Can domestic violence offenders merely invite armed accomplices into their homes in order to avoid a charge of illegal possession?

 

We ask voters to write to Gov. Quinn urging him to veto this bill.

 

CAROLE REBEIZ

President

League of Women Voters of Champaign County

Champaign

 

(emphasis mine)

 

She conveniently forgot to mention,

"...Senate Floor Amendment No. 3

Permits the carrying of a concealed firearm on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission (rather than a place where the person is an invitee therein)."

[2nd amendment forever]

Gee....

 

Those same women who demanded the 1st Amendment be stifled at that FORUM they held in Wheaton this year.....

 

(Why am I not surprised???)

[spec4]

Their name should be "League of Liberal Socailist Women of Champaign County".

[Ol'Coach]

So as not to get too intense, I thought I might just submit this:

 

In response to a letter to the editor by Ms Carole Rebeiz, President, League of Women Voters of Champaign County, printed Sunday, July 5, 2009:

 

HB182 is not a bill “governing the concealed carry of handguns”. It is a bill governing the possession of loaded firearms of any type, and where they may be legally “possessed,” which of course, also defines where they may not!

 

It is recommended that before anyone contacts Governor Quinn asking him to veto HB182, they fully understand what is actually in the bill!

For anyone so inclined it may be read at the Illinois General Assembly website:

 

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.a...HB&LegID=40

 

I would think anyone would want to know what they are asking the Governor to do, whether veto or sign into law, before they ask!

[anonymous too]

This whole thing is a private property issue ladies!

 

A property owner in my opinion already has the right to grant permission to those they so choose to possess firearms on his or her property. The only exception on the books being a liquor establishment.

[lockman]

This whole thing is a private property issue ladies!

 

A property owner in my opinion already has the right to grant permission to those they so choose to possess firearms on his or her property. The only exception on the books being a liquor establishment.

 

Why an exception? You just open the door for more prohibited places. Most states with RTC do allow carry in places that serve alcohol an many have no restrictions.

[anonymous too]

Why an exception?

 

I didn't make it up. It already exists.

 

Actually, I thought this was worded more specifically to mean only bars and liquor stores.

 

(8) Carries or possesses any firearm, stun gun or

taser or other deadly weapon in any place which is licensed to sell intoxicating beverages,

[junglebob]

Why an exception?

 

I didn't make it up. It already exists.

 

Actually, I thought this was worded more specifically to mean only bars and liquor stores.

 

(8) Carries or possesses any firearm, stun gun or

taser or other deadly weapon in any place which is licensed to sell intoxicating beverages,

So this would mean a grocery store, drug store, convenience store or Walmart if they sell liquor or beer.

[junglebob]

Why an exception?

 

I didn't make it up. It already exists.

 

Actually, I thought this was worded more specifically to mean only bars and liquor stores.

 

(8) Carries or possesses any firearm, stun gun or

taser or other deadly weapon in any place which is licensed to sell intoxicating beverages,

So this would mean not only bars and liquor stores but grocery stores, drug stores, or convenience stores that sell alcohol. This needs to be changed, especially when we get right to carry legislation. If a grocery store or convenience store is included it could be very easy to be in violation of that law when you to into a grocery store store or drug store you haven't been in before.

[GarandFan]

Illinois League of Women Voters is funded in part by the Joyce Foundation.

 

Their views on HB182 are not surprising in the least.

 

It seems that Joyce might have been hit the the recession, and/or is circling the wagons a bit closer.

 

This article outlines that they did not renew their funding for Iowans for the Prevention of Gun Violence.

 

http://www.radioiowa.com/gestalt/go.cfm?ob...79E1A4DD3EAA3AB

 

Good.

[Yas]

I was at an event in my home town AFTER the 1st "Wheaton presentation" where my hometown chapter of the LoWV was handing out small copy's of the United States Constitution with the bill of rights included.

 

Seeing that they have now had ample time to review the Heller decision and still has not changed its position to reflect the decision of the Supreme Court I can only view them as corrupted or hopefully only misguided by fear mongering groups such as the Joyce foundation or ICHV.

 

I had hope the League would have woken up, but I guess they are willing to remain subservient victims and rely on the hopes of a 911 call and tongue depressor to save themselves if attacked. I thought such an organization would have promoted self reliance, independence and free thought.

[anonymous too]

So this would mean a grocery store, drug store, convenience store or Walmart if they sell liquor or beer.

 

I really thought it was going to be worded to mean businesses that derived their main income from the sale of alcohol, not just anyone with a license to sell when I went to look it up.

[lockman]

Why an exception?

 

I didn't make it up. It already exists.

 

Actually, I thought this was worded more specifically to mean only bars and liquor stores.

 

(8) Carries or possesses any firearm, stun gun or

taser or other deadly weapon in any place which is licensed to sell intoxicating beverages,

 

I prefer "Carries or possesses any firearm, stun gun or taser or other deadly weapon in any public place while under the influence of drugs or alcohol" and "It is unlawful to consume alcoholic beverages in any public place while in possession of any firearm, stun gun or taser or other deadly weapon". (No exceptions for police either - no loopholes for the Anthony Abates' of this world)

[tdiller]

I can assure you that if it was legal for a bar owner to carry, that gun would be on my hip in a flash.

 

This whole thing is a private property issue ladies!

 

A property owner in my opinion already has the right to grant permission to those they so choose to possess firearms on his or her property. The only exception on the books being a liquor establishment.

 

Why an exception? You just open the door for more prohibited places. Most states with RTC do allow carry in places that serve alcohol an many have no restrictions.

[abolt243]

Why an exception?

 

I didn't make it up. It already exists.

 

Actually, I thought this was worded more specifically to mean only bars and liquor stores.

 

(8) Carries or possesses any firearm, stun gun or

taser or other deadly weapon in any place which is licensed to sell intoxicating beverages,

 

I prefer "Carries or possesses any firearm, stun gun or taser or other deadly weapon in any public place while under the influence of drugs or alcohol" and "It is unlawful to consume alcoholic beverages in any public place while in possession of any firearm, stun gun or taser or other deadly weapon". (No exceptions for police either - no loopholes for the Anthony Abates' of this world)

 

The carry legislation that was introduced last year did specify no carry in the portion of the liquor establishments that is devoted primarily to "consumption on the premises". It specifically did not apply to any establishment that derives more than 50% of it's gross income from sale of food. That's similar to several other states.

 

AB