Tip

Nope, don’t talk to folks about carrying. Well that’s not entirely true - I don’t initiate conversations about carrying because it’s none of their business that I carry and it’s not my place to convince them one way or the other - it’s a personal decision. Now, if they wish to initiate the conversation I will gladly discuss the state of things with them and answer general questions however I will duck any questions regarding my personal habits WRT carrying, again, it’s none of their business.

NOOOOOOOO!!!!! The problem with holding your breath is though you start out RED you end up turning BLUE!

Can somebody please forward them the text of PICA?

A good part of that is probably due to the myriad of pro-gun folks who keep perpetuating the myth that Chicago has “the strictest gun control laws” in the nation…..

And update it…

I carry everywhere it is legal to do so. You do you.

How about they just do away with all taxes and subsidies for Chicago Transit and simply make the system be self sustaining— set rates so income = operating expenses — those who use it should pay for it. They can add in surcharges to rates to get outta debt. (Note that I said operating expenses - capital improvements and system expansion can still be on the public’s dime via grants and taxes).

And if you voluntarily participate they offer you pennys on the dollar because if you don’t accept it they will come and take it by force, AND they’ll know where you live and what you have…. (not purple)

And having firearms you legally bought/sold/possessed in your previous state declared illegal to buy/sell/possess….

Hard to scream against violating the constitution and then scream for violating the constitution without it looking totally absurd….

What if the powers that be (i.e. the money brokers) on the other side decide that, because of the interest shown by SCOTUS, this isn’t the case they want before SCOTUS??? A hard core throw down ruling by a conservative bent SCOTUS might end their endless game of infringe, rewrite, infringe again… and might be difficult to overturn once issued…

This is what happens when “feelings” or “thoughts” are allowed to overrule actual facts.

Thought it was revoked, not suspended. Those are two different things. Generally to obtain a DL in another state your license must be clear (i.e.not suspended or revoked) and must be “surrendered” (often just defaced to indicate it’s no longer valid). States who participate in the Drivers License Compact share data and check that database. Wisconsin is one of a few states that DO NOT participate in DLC although they may use other means to check if you are suspended elsewhere.

DL does not establish residence. He could have had it inside the vehicle on his waistband only if he was indeed a Wisconsin resident, if he is indeed an Illinois resident he’d need an Illinois CCL. Illinois car, suspended Illinois license, Wisconsin DL, Wisconsin CCL — I agree with MAB - there is sufficient questions raised to warrant an arrest and charges and let the courts do their job of sorting it out. If the court (or potentially the DA) determines Wisconsin residence - charges should be summarily dismissed.

Ya know…. Maybe we ought to require LEO’s to take CCL classes - that way we’d know they were at least exposed to what the CCL law says. Exempting them from them serves no useful purpose….