KSPD Story on Illinois' Concealed Carry Laws

Noah Bond, of KSPD channel 6, has this story about carry in Illinois.

I'm not sure, but I think he believes we already have carry laws. Someone should tell him we don't.

"A large crowd gathered at the Vienna, IL Public Library to learn more about concealed carry laws."

Perhaps, "...learn that concealed carry does not exist in Illinois.", would be more accurate.

More Support for Right to Carry

The Quincy Herald-Whig has this:

"Mark Mountain, a Pike County Board member and a leader in the Pro 2A effort that has won support in 88 counties, plans to develop a resolution of support for concealed carry for the county, which finds economic benefit and enjoyment from firearms recreation, hunting and shooting.

"The citizens are requesting it," Mountain said. "That's why I'm pushing it so hard." "

Full Story

Gander Mountain in Springfield, IL

The State Journal-Register has this:

"Outdoors equipment retailer Gander Mountain will let its central Illinois fans go inside its new store in less than a month.

The retailer’s new Springfield store in Prairie Crossing is expected to open March 27.

Company spokesman David Ewald said Friday Gander Mountain plans a “soft opening” on that date and a grand opening to start April 3."

Full Story

Saying "YES" to carry!

The Quad City Times has this letter, by Rita Coyne of Moline, IL, about carry in Illinois.

"We have enough problems with gun violence without adding permits to carry concealed weapons. This bill is opposed by the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police who have firsthand experience with weapons and violence.

You might also register your opinion against such legislation to Sen. Mike Jacobs, for he, too, is in favor of allowing people to carry concealed weapons, and because the Senate will also have to vote on further legislation."

I suggest letting these legislators know we support their decision to support this issue.

Rep. Patrick J Verschoore (D)
72nd District

Springfield Office:
259-S Stratton Office Building
Springfield, IL 62706
(217) 782-5970
(217) 558-1253 FAX

District Office:
Cnty Off Bldg-1504 3rd Ave.
2nd Floor
Rock Island, IL 61201
(309) 558-3612
(309) 793-4764 FAX
Rock Island County

Senator Mike Jacobs (D)
36th District

Springfield Office:
Senator 36th District
127 Capitol Building
Springfield, IL 62706
(217) 782-5957

District Office:
606 19th Street
Moline, IL 61265
(309) 797-0001
(309) 797-0003 FAX

SECOND AMENDMENT TASK FORCE RESPONDS TO ATTORNEY GENERAL’S COMMENTS ON ASSAULT WEAPONS

http://www.house.gov/list/press/ok02_boren/2009_02_26_assault_weapons.html

Pelosi and the NRA agree?

In this article at TheHill.com, Nancy Pelosi says what many of us have been saying for years.

“On that score, I think we need to enforce the laws we have right now,” Pelosi said at her weekly news conference.-TheHill.com

February 26 , 2009 Governor Quinn Calls on IDNR to Reopen State Parks Action fully reopens seven state sites closed last year; restores 12 full time

More information at the IDNR website.

Thanks you Governor Quinn, it's nice to see we are allowed to use what our tax dollars payed for. Blago didn't seem to think we needed the privilege.

$1million Insurance=less gun ownership?

I think the anti-gun politicians in Illinois are trying to offset the Obama effect on firearm sales!

"One bill that is getting a lot of attention is HB 687, which would be a $1,000,000 insurance policy required of FOID card holders. Outrageous? You bet. One can only wonder at the motivations for introducing legislation like that."-from the ISRA website.

Let's face it, Obama and the liberal majority in D.C. have prompted the highest sales volume of firearms and ammunition we have seen in a long time. The retailer I work for had a stack of 4473's for December that was larger than the stack for the rest of '08. I know Christmas has some effect, but I haven't seen that big of a difference before.

Maybe I give the anti's too much credit, maybe they just want to make gun ownership expensive here in Illinois. Either way, the cost of a $1million policy would make many of us cringe.

Another Thought on Carry

Here is what I have been thinking, why have another ID to carry around?

We have the FOID, why not establish a "carry endorsement" that can be on the FOID?
I think this would lighten the burden on the State and make providing proof of a license to carry easier, we all know the police are going to ask for an FOID if you have a firearm with you.

Illinois Gun Owner Lobby Day - IGOLD

This years Illinois Gun Owner Lobby Day is scheduled for Wednesday, March 11, 2009. I have attended in the past and saw a huge turnout. Be ready to search the Capital and locate your representatives' offices. If you don't know your districts, you will want to look them up before you go. Just remember to be courteous to those conducting the business of our State, we want to make a positive impression not be a nuisance.

I think we have a chance at seeing a carry bill pass into law this year. Let's make certain our lawmakers know how the people feel. Even if your representatives already support firearm rights and carry, other lawmakers will notice the support.

Help support firearm ownership and carry!

For more information and details visit the ISRA IGOLD page.

Obamasiah lied???

Obama hasn't met an anti-gun bill, scheme, or tax he didn't like!

Why would this surprise anyone?

John Lott's Website: Obama to push for new "assault weapons ban"

More thoughts on Carry in Illinois

I was reading HB 2257 and I realized there was no mention of "concealed" being a requirement.

"...qualified to carry firearms on or about their persons..."-HB 2257 Section 5.

The bill simply establishes a system to determine persons eligible to acquire a "LTC" or "License To Carry". There is no mention of the requirement to conceal the firearm. I have always felt that concealed carry would invite charges for brandishing a weapon or something to that effect if your jacket fell open or the wind blew your shirt and exposed the weapon.

The bill also establishes a means for municipalities and businesses to post "No Carry Zones" by posting their property, yet does restrict them from prohibiting carry in ones vehicle on a parking area of that property.

I like this bill. No, I don't favor the municipalities being able to restrict carry, but it may be what is needed to get it passed. This creates the problem of plotting a driving route through Illinois so as to miss all the No Carry municipalities. I think after the leaders of those municipalities that would restrict carry see the resultant decrease in crime, they will change their minds or the voters will change them.

Illinois Concealed Carry is on the move!

I have a feeling Illinois is going to see some form of concealed carry soon. Maybe the Chicago machine can take a hint. All of these are bills for concealed carry in Illinois.

HB 0367 Passed out of committee.
HB 0245 Passed out of committee.
HB 0462 Passed out of committee.
SB 1976
HB 2257


Now, I am honored you are reading my blog, but go to the Illinois General Assembly page and find your reps phone number and call in support of these bills!

Illinois Legislation a.k.a. "Stupid laws"

These are all bills currently in the Illinois General assembly:

HB 2389-Requires anyone selling a firearm to ask the recipient if they have previously owned a firearm, and if not provide them a firearm safety brochure. I'm not sure who prints or pays for the brochure.

HB 0179-Changes the current storage laws that require a person to keep a firearm locked or otherwise inaccessible from a person 14 years of age or younger to a person 18 years or younger.

HB 0045-Requires anyone selling a firearm to do so at the business premises of a licensed firearm dealer, and requires that dealer to conduct the sale as if the firearm was in their inventory, this requires the NICS background check for all firearm sales.

SB 0085-Holds firearm owners liable for actions of a person they sell a firearm to.

SB 1875-Don't know why, but strikes the word "the" and replaces the same word with "the". I think they wanted to waste some time.

And on the topic of stupid laws......

HB0687

Introduced 2/6/2009, by Rep. Kenneth Dunkin

SYNOPSIS AS INTRODUCED:
430 ILCS 65/4.5 new
430 ILCS 65/8 from Ch. 38, par. 83-8

Amends the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act.

"Provides that any person who owns a firearm in this State shall maintain a policy of liability insurance in the amount of at least $1,000,000 specifically covering any damages resulting from negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person. Provides that a person shall be deemed the owner of a firearm after the firearm is lost or stolen until such loss or theft is reported to the police department or sheriff of the jurisdiction in which the owner resides. Provides that the Department of State Police shall revoke and seize a Firearm Owner's Identification Card previously issued under this Act if the Department finds that the person to whom such card was issued possesses or acquires a firearm and does not submit evidence to the Department of State Police that he or she has been issued in his or her name a liability insurance policy in the amount of at least $1,000,000 specifically covering any damages resulting from negligent or willful acts involving the use of such firearm while it is owned by such person. Effective January 1, 2010."


Rep. Dunkin, would a person who commits "willful acts" not already be liable for those actions?

Why do we need to force a $1,000,000 insurance policy on every gun owner in Illinois?

Why not a $1,000,000 policy for car owners, more people are hurt by cars than by firearms?
(Look at the CDC statistics, I did.)

Do you own or have relations with someone who owns an insurance company?

I guess if they can't figure out a way to make guns illegal, they will just try everything they can to make firearm ownership too expensive for most people.

Ignoring the Constitution of the United States of America

What follows is an excerpt from Article I of the U.S. Constitution:

"Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Section 9 - Limits on Congress

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

(No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.) (Section in parentheses clarified by the 16th Amendment.)

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.

Section 10 - Powers prohibited of States

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

Can anyone tell me where the Constitution allows our government the authority to appropriate money of the public trust to "stimulate" the economy?

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States", this first sentence seems to disagree with what Barack Hussein Obama is doing!

Legislation

Some legislation fellows hunters may want to contact their representatives about. Some is legislation to allow carry in Illinois!

From IllinoisCarry.org

Current Legislation

What is the need for the FOID?

JG-TC.com has a letter from Brad Metcalf of Mattoon, IL that suggests dropping the FOID Act.

While I am prone to dislike the FOID I think it has some use. When the Brady law that required the NICS background check and waiting periods was enacted, it allowed for exemption if a state had a screening and ID system in place for legal gun ownership. The reason we have the waiting periods in Illinois is because the Illinois General Assembly passed a law requiring the wait. Under Brady an Illinois resident with a valid FOID would only have to fill out the Federal 4473, undergo the NICS background check, pay, and take the weapon home that day. The Illinois General Assembly, our own state legislators, are the people who have mandated the waiting periods in Illinois. With the current laws of Illinois, the FOID is redundant. If the Illinois law requiring the waiting period were repealed the FOID is a pre-approval system that exempts Illinois residents from the Brady required waiting periods.

Now, lets imagine a retailer of ammunition....

A customer enters the store, asks the clerk about some ammunition, and decides he would like to purchase some .45auto ammunition.

With the FOID-

The clerk would ask the customer for their FOID, check that it is valid and the customer is of legal age for that ammunition and proceed with the sale with a reasonable assurance the customer is able to legally posses that ammunition.

Without the FOID-

The clerk would ask for ID and check that the customer is of legal age for that ammunition. The clerk would have no idea if that person was a felon or otherwise prohibited from possessing that ammunition.


If the laws allowed an Illinois resident to go to an FFL and purchase a firearm and take it home at that time the FOID would be a welcome thing to most people. I think if a dealer receives an approval from the NICS to transfer a firearm, the transferee should be allowed to take the firearm at that time, yet should have to wait for a proceed response.

Each time a NICS background check is performed the State of Illinois charges the dealer $2, because the State Police is the point of contact for NICS in Illinois. This may be to satisfy Brady when the Illinois General Assembly passed legislation requiring the waiting periods in Illinois.

If used as Brady would allow, I don't mind the FOID. I also would like to see an endorsement on the FOID for CARRY!

What should be required for a person to be permitted to carry?......that's a topic for another article....