here we go - HB-5172 - Center consoles

[Tvandermyde]

HB-5172 was filed by Rep. Chapa Lavia to prohibit center consoles of glove boxes from being considered a case for the purposes of transportation.

 

game on. Start calling your reps tommorrow.

[Kenny]

HB-5172 was filed by Rep. Chapa Lavia to prhibit center consoles of glove boxes from being considered a case for the purposes of transportation.

 

game on. Start calling your reps tommorow.

 

Ummm didn't the courts just rule on that? How does that work?

[GarandFan]

IL legislature --- no you can't.

 

IL Supreme Court --- yes you can.

 

IL legislature --- no you can't.

 

IL Supreme Court --- yes you can.

 

 

Chapa LaVia is from Aurora, and as I recall, strongly antigun.

 

http://www.ilga.gov/house/Rep.asp?MemberID=1022

[Ol'Coach]

Am I wrong in how it's SUPPOSED to work?

 

The legislature writes the law, the judicial system interprets what has been written when what has been written is questioned. The enforcement arm of the legislature, the ISP supposedly enforces what has been written/interpreted.

 

If I'm correct, how can the legislative arm say, "No, it isn't"? All they can do is write a new law, or amend the old one. Until that time, whatver interpretation the judicial gives it, the law remains the law.

 

Oh...forgot...this is Illinois, where even the enforcement agency interprets the written law however it sees fit!

[Drylok]

That is in the group of bills I was assigned. I've been looking through the rest of what's been put out of mine and don't see anything else yet. Do we need to actually read the whole text to make sure there aren't shell bills? Cause that's what I'm doing

Edit: Oh yep HB 5166 also folks. FOID "mental Health"

[Lou]

HB5172 is anti all the way. We need to keep a close eye on this one. It does not {yet} criminalize "enclosed in a case" but rather that a center console or glove box is not considered a case. depending on the definition and/or amendments this could turn ugly very quickly.

[GarandFan]

It probably helps to remember that Diggins didn't turn on whether you have a right to carry an unloaded gun in a center console. It turned on whether a center console is a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container.

 

The current statements by some US congresspeople about introducing legislation to limit Citizens United is analogous to what Chapa LaBia is doing in IL.

 

She wants to specifically exclude center console from being a "container?" How about passing a carry bill anyway.

[illinisnare]

Reading the bill, I find it interesting that they are amending the FOID Act in addition to the UUW statute.

 

Under the FOID act, the only mentions of 'case' that I find are with regards to non-residents and non-resident hunters.

 

They reference a term 'enclosed in a suitable case' for the change to UUW. I've never seen that language before. Does suitable mean appropriate or able to be worn with a suit?

 

 

 

Go get 'em Todd.

23 case

'

[Krigloch]

haha. I love this state, and it's just another reason why I dont think CCW will EVER be allowed here.

[GarandFan]

... why I dont think CCW will EVER be allowed here.

 

Wanna bet?

 

They have no where to go. This Diggins fixer in my mind can only represent a vain distraction from the real issues facing them (the antis). And they aren't going to like a post-McDonald future.

[abolt243]

HB-5172 was filed by Rep. Chapa Lavia to prhibit center consoles of glove boxes from being considered a case for the purposes of transportation.

 

game on. Start calling your reps tommorow.

 

Ummm didn't the courts just rule on that? How does that work?

 

 

The state supreme court has determined that a previously written law says that a center console is considered a case for transportation of a firearm. The antis don't like this interpretation. So, they are filing a bill to make a new law that supercedes the old law and declare that a center console is NOT a case for transportation of firearms.

 

My question to them is: Do you really expect criminals and gangbangers to obey this law. We already know, from experience in RTC states and states with more permissive transportaion laws that road rage does not increase with the availability of firearms.

 

My guess is, they don't care.

 

AB

[GarandFan]

My question to them is: Do you really expect criminals and gangbangers to obey this law.

 

My guess is, they don't care.

 

AB

 

That would be a very good guess. And the fact behind the guess is why more and more people are seeing this kind of stuff for the meaningless symbolism it is. More and more people don't even like the symbolism.

[Bill Matio]

Doing some searching about her, I found the following

 

Went to college at NIU, was in the ROTC

 

United States Army, 1987-1991

 

Illinois National Guard, 1991-1996

 

Currently on Inactive Ready Reserve

 

I would of expected a little more intelligence from someone who enlisted in the Army, but what do I know?

 

And then I found this, from back in '06:

 

Rep. Linda Chapa Lavia Seeks Statewide Ban on Water Pistols, Says ISRA

 

1/25/2006 11:00:00 AM

 

To: State Desk

 

Contact: Richard Pearson of the Illinois State Rifle Association, 815-635-3198, Website: http://www.isra.org

 

SPRINGFIELD, Ill., Jan. 25 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following was released today by the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA):

 

"What kind of nut would want to ban squirt guns?"

 

That's the question that tens of thousands of law-abiding Illinois firearm owners are asking today after it was revealed that Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia (D-Aurora) has co-sponsored a measure that would ban the possession of everything from water pistols to hunting rifles.

 

The bill in question, HB4132, would ban the sale and possession of so-called "replica weapons" including anything that looks even remotely like a firearm or other materiel produced for military purposes.

 

The ISRA stands firmly opposed to HB4132 as the bill is a thinly veiled attempt to ban private firearm ownership in the state.

 

"Never in my career have I seen such a slick attempt at instituting a state-wide gun ban," commented ISRA Executive Director Richard Pearson. "Nearly every firearm model for sale in Illinois was either designed for military use, or is used by the military for one purpose or another. Therefore, under this bill, nearly every pistol, revolver, rifle or shotgun owned by Illinois citizens would be banned."

 

"The laughable part is that the scope of this bill goes way beyond conventional firearms," continued Pearson. "Every VFW and American Legion Post would have to remove the tanks and howitzers from their property or face prosecution. The cannon adorning town squares across the state would have to be rounded up and destroyed. The dummy grenade paperweight on your desk would have to go as well. Oh boy, and won't all the honor guards look pretty snappy shouldering broomsticks in the July Fourth parades next year?"

 

"HB4132 is so sweeping that it would go as far as to ban cap guns and water pistols," said Pearson. "Given that this is an election year, I can't wait to see how Rep. Chapa LaVia will spin her ban on squirt guns to her political advantage."

[Tvandermyde]

Guys --

 

this is where I go to work and we sort the wheat from the chaff.

 

Before anyone reads more into this than there is, take a breath. What we need right now is just calls into your state rep opposing the bill.

 

When it come to the why or how come, give it some time. Things in springfield are not always as they seem. I have to remind my self of this time and time again.

 

Sometimes, stuff does happen.

[Jeff Johnson]

I met her in Chicago in November and she was talking about the state budget mess. Her best solution to that was the suggestion that everyone pray for them (the lawmakers). umm..,OK.., I'm not opposed to using the power of prayer but when an elected member of the majority party has nothing else to offer- that scares the heck out of me.

[sctman800]

Anyone running against her in the primary or will there be a race in the fall? Jim.

[Buzzard]

 

The current statements by some US congresspeople about introducing legislation to limit Citizens United is analogous to what Chapa LaBia is doing in IL.

 

 

Which gives validity to my concern that Chicago and other liberal cities will pass new legislation in the wake of McDonald. This is what the District of Columbia has done since Heller. This necessitates further legal challenges. Which when repeated, over and over, can indefinitely prevent a concealed carry law here in Illinois. Is this not possible?

[Tvandermyde]

Buzz --

 

it can be a delaying tactic. But once we win McDonald, we also have the ability to start looking at 1983 civil rights suits, which come with attorney's fees.

 

There also becomes a certian element of you lost get over it. And they have a lot less stroke at the capitol. It also puts us at a point of gaining votes for the push back. Some people are getting fed up with dealing with the issue.

[1957Human]

 

I would of expected a little more intelligence from someone who enlisted in the Army, but what do I know?

 

I'd guess most people would question whether enlisting in the army is usually a sign of intelligence.

[Don Gwinn]

The current statements by some US congresspeople about introducing legislation to limit Citizens United is analogous to what Chapa LaBia is doing in IL.

 

Well, not really. The SCOTUS found that the statute it struck down violated the 1st Amendment. In order to do anything about it, the Congress presumably can't just come back with another version of the statute that states that it doesn't violate the 1st Amendment, lest it be struck down in the same way. They either need to find a way to regulate what they want to without violating the 1st Amendment as interpreted in Citizens United, or they have to get the Constitution amended to allow infringements on the free speech of people organized as corporations.

 

But the Illinois SC did not rule that the statute violated the Constitution of IL or the US. They ruled on what the statute itself means--in other words, what the legislature was saying when it created the statute. If the legislature passes a new bill that insists on a different interpretation, the Court is duty-bound to interpret the new statute differently.

 

The bar is much lower in this case, in other words, than in trying to undo Citizens United.

[wazzle]

 

I would of expected a little more intelligence from someone who enlisted in the Army, but what do I know?

 

I'd guess most people would question whether enlisting in the army is usually a sign of intelligence.

 

 

Care to explain that comment? :ermm: :ermm:

[Buzzard]

Buzz --

 

it can be a delaying tactic. But once we win McDonald, we also have the ability to start looking at 1983 civil rights suits, which come with attorney's fees.

 

AH! And with the civil rights suits, we will finally have the teeth to bite back when attacked. I hadn't made that connection with the 2A incorporation. I must have missed that in previous discussion.

 

There also becomes a certian element of you lost get over it. And they have a lot less stroke at the capitol. It also puts us at a point of gaining votes for the push back. Some people are getting fed up with dealing with the issue.

 

This I did know. I've gotten that same feedback from talking with Rep. Jim Sacia in the past. The downstate reps are tired of dealing with these Chicago gun bills which are by design meant to deflect attention away from Chicago's crime problem while restricting the rights of citizens to possess handguns.

 

Thanks for the reply, Todd.

[45superman]

Shameless plug: I did a little bloviating about it here.

[Ol'Coach]

Shameless plug: I did a little bloviating about it here.

 

Outstanding!

[abolt243]

Shameless plug: I did a little bloviating about it here.

 

Outstanding!

 

Nicely done .45!!!!

[duke66]

 

I would of expected a little more intelligence from someone who enlisted in the Army, but what do I know?

 

I'd guess most people would question whether enlisting in the army is usually a sign of intelligence.

 

 

Care to explain that comment? :ermm: :ermm:

 

Still waiting on the explanation...

[Sigma]

There reason for not liking it is the fear of road rage shootings. Quick qeustion. How many has it been since the ruling? IO'm willing to bet zero.

I dont mean the gang bangers drive by's thats illegal anyway. I think that is a good point to bring up whwn you contact your reps. Ask them to tell you why then ask how manytimes since has it happened

[Drylok]

That news clip on the Diggins case is a classic. Brings me to tears of laughter every time I watch it. The one guy says "conceal carry, just like they have in Texas" ya and 40 some odd other states. Haven't seen any shoot outs in traffic jams over in IN that I recall.

[1957Human]

I would of expected a little more intelligence from someone who enlisted in the Army, but what do I know?

 

I'd guess most people would question whether enlisting in the army is usually a sign of intelligence.

 

 

Care to explain that comment?

 

 

If you believe people think you must be smart because you enlisted, you're in for a rude awakening. Enlisting doesn't have anything to do with intelligence one way or the other.

[Buzzard]

I would of expected a little more intelligence from someone who enlisted in the Army, but what do I know?

 

I'd guess most people would question whether enlisting in the army is usually a sign of intelligence.

 

 

Care to explain that comment?

 

 

If you believe people think you must be smart because you enlisted, you're in for a rude awakening. Enlisting doesn't have anything to do with intelligence one way or the other.

In my opinion, it's a very wise decision, even if you don't know where you're going in life. And I say this as one who missed out on this huge opportunity by respecting my parents wishes - once too often. My father was in the Army through all of WWII. My mother did not want to go through that again with VietNam. I may be better off - but I will never know. I regret deeply not enlisting to serve.

 

As I've said before, we must always honor our serving military and our veterans - at home or abroad, above or below ground, from the very first skirmish way back when, to the fire fight that will happen tomorrow. They are our most sacred American treasure.