House IL - AWB Passes Out Of Committee HB873 8 to 5


PDA






M110
March 21, 2007, 05:29 PM
http://ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=0873&GAID=9&GA=95&DocTypeID=HB&LegID=26943&SessionID=51



Here we go with the house version to SB16. New batch of letters going out tomorrow. Bastages!

If you enjoyed reading about "House IL - AWB Passes Out Of Committee HB873 8 to 5" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
K-Romulus
March 21, 2007, 05:36 PM
they exempted the mfrs who make them for police/.gov.

And they allow grandfathering of existing owners who submit proof of ownership to the state police before the bill's effective date.

Allow magazine grandfathering with same "proof of ownership" rules.(!)

And allow possession at that Sparta shooting complex (but you can't own a non-grandfathered one in the state).

We'll be fighting this in MD next year. Good luck guys with your battle in the full State House. :banghead:\

edited to add:

Holy cow! It makes possession of an "assault weapon attachment" the same crime as possessing a SCAW!!!! :what:

PILMAN
March 21, 2007, 05:45 PM
Holy ****, this passed? I am glad I left Illinois in 2002. Good luck guys, hope everything goes well :(

ATAShooter
March 21, 2007, 05:50 PM
Yea ATA,... Illinois,... that's the best place for the Grand American, ... so gun friendly....

PPGMD
March 21, 2007, 07:19 PM
Chicago has been on my do not travel list since Mayor Daley bulldozed Meigs Field, time to add the entire state to the list like the Peoples Republic of **********.

SaintofKillers
March 22, 2007, 10:31 AM
Illinois is going to lose alot of jobs over this, not that the pols care.

nucstl1
March 22, 2007, 10:43 AM
An interesting article. Don't know how accurate it is, but it is probably close.

ISRA Press Release
$300 Million Gun Ban Could Bankrupt Illinois

SPRINGFIELD, Ill., March 19 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following was released today by the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA):

A gun control bill currently making its way through the Illinois Senate could prove to be the "coup de grace" to the state's seriously ailing finances. The bill in question, SB16, would require the registration of certain semiautomatic firearms within 90 days of the bill's signing by the governor.

The ISRA estimates that there may be upwards of 10 million affected firearms in the hands of law-abiding Illinois citizens. To remain on the 90- day schedule, the state would have to hire approximately 7,000 new employees to process in excess of 111,000 registration forms per day.

The costs associated with this registration program would be staggering. Taking salaries, equipment, supplies, and real estate into consideration, the state could expect to spend at least $300 million to process the initial flood of registration forms. File maintenance and registration renewals in the out years would heap additional expense on an already strained state balance sheet.

"Even in the best of times, $300 million is a lot of money," commented ISRA Executive Director, Richard Pearson. "And these ain't the best of times for Illinois. Standing-up an operation to process 111,000 registration forms per day would be a monumental task -- an endeavor full of uncertainty. As Canada learned in its recent attempt to register guns, costs associated with gun registration programs can quickly spiral out of control. What started out to be a $2 million plan to register Canada's rifles has grown into a $2 billion debacle that has done nothing to make the people of Canada safer. The registration boondoggle has also cost a number of Canadian politicians their jobs."

"Like all 'assault weapon' bans, SB16 is essentially symbolic," continued Pearson. "Even the Chicago Police Department's own murder analyses show that firearms included under the ban are rarely, if ever, used to commit murders. The impact of SB16 on crime would be zero, but the bill's impact on the state's budget would be a gut-shot to the tune of $300 million."

"Legislators really have to ask themselves whether spending $300 million to attack the rights of law-abiding citizens while ignoring the career criminals responsible for 88% of murders is really a good investment. I suspect that we all know what the taxpayers, who would have to pick up the tab for this folly, would say."

The ISRA is the state's leading advocate of safe, lawful and responsible firearms ownership. Since 1903, the ISRA has represented the interests of over 1.5 million law-abiding Illinois firearm owners.

This press release is posted at US Newswire.

Posted Tue Mar 20 06:57:49 CST 2007


I know the ban in Australia cost hundreds of millions of dollars. The cost of this ban, plus some other tax crap the GOV is trying to pass will definately turn Illinois into a Welfare State.

nico
March 22, 2007, 01:14 PM
That really sucks. Good luck guys

alan
March 22, 2007, 02:46 PM
Seems like this is a matter for voting gun owners in IL. to address.

SaintofKillers
March 22, 2007, 02:52 PM
I can tell you as a former resident of central Illinois that if the whole state voted are way it still wouldnt outvote the city of Chicago and the business as usual that goes on there.

Sad really.

I personally would simply disregard the law.

Soybomb
March 22, 2007, 08:30 PM
I personally would simply disregard the law.
And then what do you do with your felony charges when your guns get looked at on a traffic stop? One could certainly ignore such laws if they wanted to keep them hidden at home, but if you actually wanted to use and enjoy your property and not keep it locked up at home like a secret meth lab its harder to ignore.

Anyway my house rep is kurt granberg and while I'm sure of how he'll vote I will write him and ask that he encourage his colleagues to vote similarly.

xd45gaper
March 22, 2007, 09:33 PM
so say this bill does get passed and they spend well over the 300million they say they could spend. and the state goes "bankrupt" or whatever happens when the state spends all its money (if that is even possible) what happens to the State of IL? do they just raise taxes? cut the program? i bet some politicans are going to lose ther jobs over this if it goes threw :evil: :evil:

Gudis
March 22, 2007, 10:28 PM
I hope if this does pass that Armalite, DSA, Springfield et al. refuse to sell weapons to the police in this damn state, or failing that, simply move to other states.

.cheese.
March 23, 2007, 07:31 AM
How is this going to effect jobs dramatically as was mentioned? How many people work in industries affected by this?

I'm not criticizing - I'm genuinely asking.

isp2605
March 23, 2007, 10:05 AM
$300 mil may sound like a lot of money but when put in perspective, it's not. The state of IL is somewhere between $5 and $7 billion (with a B) in debt already. Another $300 mil is a drop in the bucket.

klcmschlesinger
March 23, 2007, 11:27 AM
When is the actual vote on this? I mean, when will we know the final outcome. Also, what would be an acceptable proof of ownership? A receipt from a gun bought 10 years ago??? If we don't have "acceptable" proof, would it then be immediate confiscation?
I am from southern Illinois and I know how my rep and senator are voting, but as indicated in some previous posts, I am afraid Chicago will just out weigh us all.

SamTuckerMTNMAN
March 23, 2007, 11:42 AM
Assault Politicians Ban!

I 'm all for banning politicians who are assualting their own country.

What a**es, sniveling, drip nosed, greedy pol's stab their home state/country in the back for a short term feel good dribble. Par.

ST

nucstl1
March 23, 2007, 11:44 AM
At the same time these jokers are trying ban assault rifles, the gove is trying to pass a gross reciept tax for companies with gross reciepts over 1million. They want univeral health care to take care of the democrats voter bas in Chicago and Cook County, and they look at this as a way to pay for it. What they obviously don't realize is that Companies with HQs in IL like Boeing, CAT, State Farm, Country Companies, etc. will pick up and move out of state...taking the jobs and current tax payments with them. This state is such a joke. The power base will do anything to protect its base in Chicago...I just which there was something the citizens of Illinois cold do short of a fence to seceed from Cook County & Chicago.

Example...A company like CAT would pay 100 Million dollars in Tax. If they didn't pass the cost on to thier customers, that would potentially be a lot of manufacturing jobs sent to Mexico and China.

http://www.pjstar.com/stories/030807/REG_BCJ8REBU.060.php

http://www.pjstar.com/stories/030807/TRI_BCJ7O6OB.048.php

M110
March 23, 2007, 11:59 AM
Well they have nearly the exact same bill in the state senate SB16.

My feelings is each bill in the house and senate will try different amendments to see what will get the fence sitters on the anti's side, and to see which possible amended version will pass both the house, and senate.

My take on it.

SaintofKillers
March 23, 2007, 01:13 PM
Quote Soybomb-
"And then what do you do with your felony charges when your guns get looked at on a traffic stop?"

First, I wouldnt give JohnQLaw a reason to be looking at my guns on a traffic stop.

Second, just because its the law doesnt make it right. You have to take a stand sometime.

My guess would be that this is not your time.

IllHunter
March 23, 2007, 04:09 PM
This is where I draw the line, I live in Cook Co and I won't let this happen. I ask all of who "feel my pain" send either a dollar (or more) to ISRA or a bullet to any of the crack head chicago politicians responsible for this blatant attempt to violate my rights. What will they do with 1 million bullets of varying calibers and age? Where in the hell is the ACLU when the 2AM is violated? I acknowledge that the NRA has pushed RTC in 48 of 50 but what about Illinois? When was the last time Wayne La Pierre set foot in Chicago? I've invited him to my FNRA dinners for 5 years and neither he nor any board member has dared to show up. I'm not gonna send any more $ till someone shows up and does something constructive. I propose a march on Chicago, that's where the power is, not Springfield.:cuss:

M110
March 23, 2007, 04:47 PM
The ISRA is is in court in cook county trying to get an injuction on the AWB amendment they recently passed. I'm in crook county too brother, I feel your pain. But we have to stop this from spreading to the rest of the state.

You wont win in chicago, but we can stop that bastard cold in Springfield. Thats where all of our energy must be concentrated. More letters, emails, calls, and faxes.

ajax
March 23, 2007, 09:14 PM
I don't mean to disappoint or be a drag fella's but if you guys haven't figured this out for your selves let me be direct. We've lost! I have discused moving to the state of Mo with my wife and she doesn't want to even tho she knows how much this matter means to me. Do I become a criminal or move. Damn hard descision. Hope your choices are easier gentlemen.

lamazza
March 23, 2007, 10:12 PM
Maybe a compromise Ajax-come to WI first...increments.

alan
March 24, 2007, 01:33 AM
I've heard it said that Chicago/Cook County legislators swing a big enough hammer in the legislature to overcome pro-gun votes by the remainder of the legislature, assuming that such a vote spread was obtained. True??

On the other hand, looking at what was elected as governor, what might that say about things? Of course, there is then question of, for instance Pennsylvania, which last year re-elected Fast Eddie Rendell as governor

sctman800
March 24, 2007, 02:32 AM
I was in Springfield on the 14th along with 1250 to 2000 other gun owners (depending on whose figures you use). I met people from the Chicago area including some from the district of Emil Jones. Of course he was too busy to honor an appointment with his constituents, but he knew we were there.
I am a member of the NRA, Champaign County Rifle Association, ISRA, I vote and call and write my state rep and Senator on a regular basis. I am the NRA in Illinois and I will not give up and I will defend whatever type of firearm you want to own. Jim.

RWMC
March 25, 2007, 05:26 PM
Gov. Fueher Blagoiavitch ( or was it Son-of-a-b***h? ) is nothing but Mayor Daleys' lap-dog. He spends more time in Chi-comgo saying yes sir, yes sir than he ever spends in Springfield. I make a motion that we have Lincolns body exhumed from Springfield and moved to somewhere safe like Wyoming or Idaho where his body wouldn't have a tendency to roll-over! Do we have any hope left in this once great land of ours?

alan
March 25, 2007, 06:33 PM
RWMC Gov. Fueher Blagoiavitch ( or was it Son-of-a-b***h? ) is nothing but Mayor Daleys' lap-dog. He spends more time in Chi-comgo saying yes sir, yes sir than he ever spends in Springfield. I make a motion that we have Lincolns body exhumed from Springfield and moved to somewhere safe like Wyoming or Idaho where his body wouldn't have a tendency to roll-over! Do we have any hope left in this once great land of ours?

----------

Whatever the present governor is or might be, in my uninvolved view, nothing good, he ran for election and obtained the job. I wonder as to how many people outside Cook County voted for him, knowing exactly what he was, based on his past record as a congress critter. Also, how many of them are gun owners. Ditto for Ram Emanuel.

-----------------

nucstl1:

Re the outfits you mentioned, all Fortune 500 types I think, how many of them do you realistically think will actually up and leave?

-------------------

I also saw a post here mentioning the possibility of 3 Illinois based firearms makers possibly leaving the state. Do you really think that:

1. They will actually forgo law enforcement sales that they might currently have over YOUR rights? Interesting question, one that might be tossed around in corporate board rooms.
2. Do you think that corporations will move over a MATTER OF PRINCIPLE, if they so view it? I know of just one that did, Navy Arms used to be located in New Jersey. They moved, a while back to West Virginia, as I remember. Did Colt or Smith and Wesson ever take a stand that defended the rights of CIVILIAN customers. Remember Bill Ruger Sr. and his position on "large capacity magazines".

Soybomb
March 26, 2007, 03:07 PM
I also saw a post here mentioning the possibility of 3 Illinois based firearms makers possibly leaving the state. Do you really think that:

1. They will actually forgo law enforcement sales that they might currently have over YOUR rights? Interesting question, one that might be tossed around in corporate board rooms.
2. Do you think that corporations will move over a MATTER OF PRINCIPLE, if they so view it? I know of just one that did, Navy Arms used to be located in New Jersey. They moved, a while back to West Virginia, as I remember. Did Colt or Smith and Wesson ever take a stand that defended the rights of CIVILIAN customers. Remember Bill Ruger Sr. and his position on "large capacity magazines".
Well business are obligated to their shareholders to make money and I think this might at times preclude going off best principles. Google filtering search results in china isn't the best principle but they had a duty to their shareholders to do it. I think it gets a little more tricky when you're talking about cutting sales to try to keep from losing a large portion of your customer base. Colt made their decision to go with LE and not worry about private sales, ultimately how would losing civilian sales impact RRA? Maybe they're better to suffer some losses now to try to prevent big losses in the future?

I think corporations would move over a matter of protecting their business. If you keep huffing and puffing threatening my business, I'm going to eventually move so I can do it on my schedule and not worry about tight schedules hurting my operation even more. The continued real possibility of a awb is a real liability to these companies. If you found out you lived over a sinkhole would you just shrug and hope that nothing terrible happened? ;)

mack
March 26, 2007, 03:08 PM
I know gun owners in Illinois that voted for Ogun Ban Obama. And hunters who bought into Gov. Chi-com-ovich's rhetoric during his campaign that he was pro-gun. I don't know how one could have half a brain and vote for either one.

However, the real story in Illinois and why Democrats have complete control of the state is the Rhino - (liberal not even moderate) - Republican party bosses - that year after year line up annointed liberal candidates for state wide office that no one wants to vote for and who - if their annointed candidate does not win in the primary - will not support any conservative or even semi-conservative candidate - and in fact will work behind the scenes to sabotage their election. Why, because if a conservative candidate got elected it would threaten their continued control over the party and Illinois Republican party bosses seem more concerned about keeping control than about winning. In fact they have essentially concluded that they can't win, so they cut the best deal they could with the Democrats in order to maintain a small piece of the action.

Rahm Emanuel holds a reliable democratic seat that the democrats could run a dead barnyard animal in as a candidate and still win going away. The Chicago, Cook county power base for the democrats continues to grow as the list of living and deseased voters that are paid to vote democrat swell each year.

Voters downstate are starving for a real candidate from either party - but neither party will allow a non-chicago area controlled candidate for state wide office and if one should happen to get through the primary - they will gleefully and dedicatedly shoot him down, regardless of party. That was how a Republican Gov. Ryan got elected - he cut deals with Chicago and his Democratic opponent from downstate did not.

Let's put it this way, Richard Daley the Democratic Mayor of Chicago could walk around dropping babies off of the top of skyscrapers all day everyday and still get re-elected.

The only brake on Chicago's power is the downstate democrats that are afraid to go too far and tick off their constituents, as they are in seats that could go either way.

Illinois is just a stones throw away from being the California of the Midwest. :banghead: :cuss: :fire: :mad: :banghead: :cuss: :fire: :mad:

Soybomb
March 26, 2007, 03:41 PM
I know gun owners in Illinois that voted for Ogun Ban Obama. And hunters who bought into Gov. Chi-com-ovich's rhetoric during his campaign that he was pro-gun. I don't know how one could have half a brain and vote for either one.
I'm not sure how obama is relevant to this conversation any longer, but that was me. While i'm certainly no obama fan, you can blame the republicans for running keyes. I'm not a single issue voter and the choice was quite clear.

I'm mostly with you on the rest of your post. I do get a little tired of the sourthern illinois people blaming chicago though. 39% of people in my very southern illinois county voted for blago. It sure doesn't make it seem like chicago is forcing them into anything.

mack
March 26, 2007, 05:23 PM
;) Obama was mentioned in a prior post. Just another example of a glib pretty boy ultra-liberal who essentially ran without opposition. Whether one liked Keyes or not - he was just a sacrificial lamb for the slaughter - after the Republican parties bosses had totally screwed up the election - their picked candidate was forced to drop out in a scandal, then they couldn't find anyone in the entire state who was willing to run so they allowed the conservatives to get Keyes - then they helped the media and the Daley machine politically gut Keyes. Though he realistically had no chance anyway. However, their political crushing of Keyes helped them to discredit their conservative party rivals and also helped them to reassert their control over the Republican party - as their initial major screw up in the governors race that made the whole thing possible was then forgotten.

As far as voting for Obama - there is always third party or write in - works for me - helps me to be able to look in the mirror after I vote.

Don't get too offended about Chicago - there are crazy people everywhere - I actually like visiting Chicago occassionally, as far as cities go it has a lot to offer, and the people are generally okay. It is just that when it comes to politics - Chicago is evil - and that evil permeates the state of Illinois. Yes, there are goofballs downstate too when it comes to politics. It is just that there are so many more of them in Chicago.
;) :banghead:

Nanook
March 26, 2007, 08:27 PM
Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty. - KJV 2 Cor 3:17

Mack, your signature says it all, in regards to Chicago. From the top down, they are rotten to the core. And they are driving the bus from Chicago. I wouldn't trust a Chicago politician of either "party" with a 3rd grader's lunch money.

Remember the old ZZTop song? "Jesus just left Chicago.."

I wouldn't blame him.

The American Indian name for the place still applies. Something about smelly place, or a place that smells.

klcmschlesinger
March 26, 2007, 08:59 PM
I love all this banter back and forth, but I asked a question before and I was hoping someone had the answer. Maybe I asked the question on TFL. I can't remember. When is the actual vote and when will we know the outcome. Also, if we have to register our guns, what shows proof of ownership?

Diesel man
March 26, 2007, 09:41 PM
klcmschlesinger,
NEVER REGISTER YOUR GUNS ITS ONE STEP AWAY FROM CONFISCATION.
Either move out of that state or be a Dominant agressive gun owner who refuses to register any gun.

klcmschlesinger
March 26, 2007, 09:55 PM
I love my guns, but I can't be a felon. I just can't. I may move, but otherwise I have to comply. I vote accordingly. I call the reps. I do what I can. But I cannot be a felon.

Autolycus
March 26, 2007, 10:31 PM
I am really thinking that it is time for me to move. I cannot stand the politicians here in Illinois. This bill is just rediculous.

I dont think it is right that I have to prove that I owned mags and guns before a certain date. Isnt the burden of proof on the prosecutor and not on the accused?

I cant believe they want to make me a felon and I have not done anything but buy something that was perfectly legal. Suddenly they want to change the legality and I am now a criminal?

220_Swift
March 26, 2007, 10:46 PM
How is this going to effect jobs dramatically as was mentioned? How many people work in industries affected by this?

I'm not criticizing - I'm genuinely asking.


Their are several manufacturers in state, that would be forced to move to another state if this passes.

Rock River Arms
Les Bauer
Armalite
Springfield Armory

Just to name a few.

Neo-Luddite
March 26, 2007, 11:08 PM
Also, if we have to register our guns, what shows proof of ownership?


They haven't seemed to hammer out that detail yet. You'd think that would be spelled right out. The point being, they probably won't be able to do it at all and they know it. They will drop the whole registratioin scheme as a compromise proposal and, in effect, make only the sale of 'new' weapons mags, ect. a crime. Dealers will no longer be able to sell them to the plebians anymore. No more ugly black rifles at gun shows.

And since no one will really be able to tell if the AW on the firing line is pre-or post ban or was in Illinois on a certain date the law will have done what they want it to do: nothing in fact.

Or maybe they'll do us all like the nice folks in Cook County got done--they'll pass the ban make us fellons and not even write up a press release to let us in on it.

They'll ask for receipts or, better yet, make you appear at your local police station.

Autolycus
March 26, 2007, 11:51 PM
The registration scares me. Because I dont think it would be cool to have police kick my door down looking for high cap magazines.

sctman800
March 27, 2007, 02:28 AM
Quote "When is the actual vote and when will we know the outcome"


That is a question no one can answer right now. The Democrats are in power but don't have or at least dont think they have the votes to pass this piece of stuff. They will keep it hanging on untill they are sure they can pass it before bringing it to a vote. Dont worry, it will be well advertized if and when it comes to a vote. Jim.

cindynles
March 28, 2007, 01:34 AM
Good luck guys. We went through this same thing here in the peoples republic of ********** back in 2000. I suggest that you buy any evil AW's and their hi-cap mags now before the price goes through the roof. When it happened here people were paying $600 for a stripped AR lower. :banghead:

Autolycus
March 28, 2007, 02:40 AM
This quote comes from: An AR15 member.

Here is the link: http://www.ar15.com/forums/manageReply.html?a=quote&b=8&f=23&t=261177&r=2520384&page=2

Originally Posted By Nate7out:
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e134/JovanJ347/sb16lf2.jpg

I need information on Garrett, Pankau and Sullivan. I had something down for Pankau before from IL carry, but couldn't find it to confirm. Perhaps someone registered there could search. I found these by looking at every thread on the issue here and at Illinois Carry. If your name is next to incorrect info, please correct me.

alan
March 28, 2007, 05:41 PM
Re who voted for whom, I Might I offer the following historical comment, one attributed to Thomas Jefferson. People usually get the sort of government that they do not vote against.

Soybomb
March 28, 2007, 07:08 PM
Keep your eyes on the ISRA page too guys, it looks like we're really being hammered this year.

Today we learned that the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence (ICHV) may have hired two more experienced lobbyists. We will undoubtedly find out in the very near future.

Tomorrow we will hear a hostle amendment to Senator Wilhelmi's bill SB1095. This amendment is from Senator Lightford. Senator Wilhelmi is a very progun Senator, so it appears the antigun Senator Lightford is trying to highjack his bill. The amendment will be heard in the Jud Criminal at 11:00 am.

My next report will be tomorrow night. In the mean time keep pressure up on SB16, SB1471, and HB873.
It doesn't look like the text of the amendment is available on the ilga page yet, but here's a link to it http://ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=1095&GAID=9&GA=95&DocTypeID=SB&LegID=27226&SessionID=51

Glockfan.45
March 29, 2007, 08:34 AM
From the link on Soy Bombs above post:

Amends the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act. Makes a technical change in a Section concerning a legislative declaration.


I find it disturbing that this is the only text on the bill. Does anybody else remember when they wanted to raise the cost of F.O.I.D cards to $500, and make them expire yearly? I just cant belive this sudden attack we are under. I vote, call/write state reps and senators. I belong to the G.O.A and the ISRA but jesus its just getting to be too damn much anymore. With AWBs, bullet stamping bills, fifty cal bans, and this mystery bill in the works I am really about to give up and move 20min west to Missouri. Illinois has become quite the leftist hell hole and I just cant stand it any longer.

Jeff White
March 29, 2007, 06:25 PM
This isn't a sudden attack. We deal with many of these same bills every time the legislature is in session. A lot of them, like the .50 ban are part of the Brady Campaign's agenda and probably have been introduced in all 50 states.

Most of these bills won't ever see even a second reading on the floor.

This is nothing new. It's nationwide. Just like we have our legislators that will introduce our model legislation, the other side has legislators that will introduce theirs.

Jeff

Sungun09
April 10, 2007, 09:12 PM
Screw Illinois.:cuss:

bclark1
April 16, 2007, 05:04 PM
and the state goes "bankrupt" or whatever happens when the state spends all its money (if that is even possible) what happens to the State of IL? do they just raise taxes? cut the program?

the ipass tolls go up to $4 a pop, and everybody's "happy." seriously, every other state just uses toll roads to pay of the construction, illinois uses them as an ATM machine and just raises them as their spending gets more and more out of control.

does chicago have the money for the 2016 olympics? hell no! but are they going for it? why of course!

same with this. unfortunately cook couny does run the state. it's a sin.

i always planned on coming back to illinois, this could be grounds for reconsideration. if i transplanted back though, how would that work with registering my guns? would i just be compelled under penalty of death to tell them what i'm bringing into the state? what about if i stay elsewhere and just visit? and in that sense, could you buy a small plot of land on the indy border with some other guys, leave a safe there, and just say that's where all your guns are?
oh, gun laws. they're just so practical, and they make so much sense.

Autolycus
April 18, 2007, 08:49 AM
So does anyone think that the Virginia Tech shooting was basically a death knell for "Assault Weapons" and magazines with a capaicty larger than 10 rounds?

I have a feeling that we are screwed now. Its only going to go downhill and get worse for us.

Glockfan.45
April 18, 2007, 09:01 AM
Yes with this bill ready to go in Illinois, and 10/22 drafted and waiting at the federal level I fear knee jerk reactions by congress critters. I look to see restrictions on all auto-loaders, magazine capacity, as well as restrictions placed on the amount of ammo one can posses. I have been ignoring much of this story untill now just because I really dont want to think about how badly the antis will exploit it.

Autolycus
April 18, 2007, 09:16 AM
I know what you mean. I been following it through the gun forums. I checked out a few different articles at the major newssites but in the end I am afraid IL residents are screwed. The kneejerk reactions are going to be what does us in. The VA nutjob basically did us all in with his actions. I honestly do not see any way that this bill will not pass in IL.

James T Thomas
April 18, 2007, 02:31 PM
Committes to review proposed legislation, both in our state houses, and in the federal congress are a means for an oligarchy to pass laws that are against the best interest of the governed.

In this day of computer tallying of votes in the assemblies, it is no longer necessary to sieze bills behind closed doors for committe processing in order to table, stall, or otherwise interfere with the legislative process.

alan
April 19, 2007, 02:15 PM
Re "knee-jerk" reactions by our elected things, and or the possibility thereof, one message must be, clearly an unmistakably sent to these people.

There will be significant, possibly fatal to their careers, results/costs attributable to such actions on their part.

The time for a clear showing by the people of this country that tampering with and or trashing of their rights, by their servants (those elected things) will no longer be tolerated is now. That this message should long since have been sent is beside the point, it very badly needs to be sent now.

Autolycus
April 20, 2007, 12:45 AM
Re "knee-jerk" reactions by our elected things, and or the possibility thereof, one message must be, clearly an unmistakably sent to these people.

There will be significant, possibly fatal to their careers, results/costs attributable to such actions on their part.

The time for a clear showing by the people of this country that tampering with and or trashing of their rights, by their servants (those elected things) will no longer be tolerated is now. That this message should long since have been sent is beside the point, it very badly needs to be sent now.
If only it was so easy. I dont think here in IL it matters. THey just dont care.

Don Gwinn
April 20, 2007, 01:13 AM
OK, folks, it's good to have a bull session from time to time, but now it's time to settle down, settle in and fight. Passing a committee doesn't mean jack; they massage the committee assignments until the distinctions between the different committees amount to nothing.

The reaction to the VA Tech shooting hasn't been anything like the reaction to--for instance--Columbine. Don't panic.

thedpp
April 20, 2007, 04:39 AM
As a very old fashioned and strong believer in the 2nd, I would simply give them 2 options change the law or take em from my dead hands. People who want to see change need to have that kind of mentality...they cant arrest us all or shoot us all.

Autolycus
April 20, 2007, 11:35 AM
I dont think that any sort of rhetoric or anything that can be perceived as violent is a good idea right now.

NukemJim
April 22, 2007, 10:47 AM
The reaction to the VA Tech shooting hasn't been anything like the reaction to--for instance--Columbine. Don't panic.


I agree with Don. Every poll that I have seen the results of shows we are winning. The majority of the public do not believe additional gun control would have helped. :what: I am shocked. Pleased:D , but shocked.

Having said that we have to be VERY careful in our language in regards to mass shootings. Tecumseh is correct.

I dont think that any sort of rhetoric or anything that can be perceived as violent is a good idea right now.


As for me I am going to poke holes in the other guys logic and not push (for now) for CCW on schools (Like Utah).

NukemJim


NukemJim

Len S
April 22, 2007, 11:02 AM
Mark my words. The dems are playing possum. If they get a anti in the white house adn still control both houses of congress look out. People are right when they say the gun issue cost them various elections. I do not believe they changed their way of thinking just their way of speaking. They are waving the white flag of surrender in their right hand while their left is making deals that will be put into action as soon as they get the votes. Ig they control the White house and both houses of congress and stillsay no guncontgrol I will believe it. As long as tghey are still trying to gain ground watch their lips. If the lips are moving they are lying


Len

JimmyN
April 22, 2007, 08:24 PM
It's true that democrats control congress, but it hasn't done them much good. Even McCarthy has stated that it is a pro gun congress now, and anti-gun legislation will be tough to pass. She is there on the floor and knows what she is up against in promoting what many now see for what it is, ineffective anti-gun legislation.

It does no good for them to pretend to be anything. In the long run it's their votes on the floor that count, not what they say, and as many editorials have pointed out lately the pro-gun voters don't forget. They will remember come next election, and the democrats know that, they have experienced it first hand.

The primary goal of any politican is to be re-elected, and they can see the current trend in supporting self defense use of firearms that is sweeping across the nation. To take a stand against that could mean political suicide. After all, it is finally becoming obvious to the population that gun control hasn't worked any better than drug control, and even though the hard core anti-gunners still have their stand it seems that many of the fence-sitters that could go either way are starting to see the light. This is helped lately by the liberal media actually starting to air bits that are less biased, a shift away from the absolute gun control mentality of the past.

Times have changed, the biased liberal MSM is no longer the only source of information for concerned citizens. They now exchange information and facts instantly over the internet, and many that didn't realize it before are now seeing how biased against guns the MSM has become.

Politicians always want to be on the winning side. If the trend in pro-gun opinions continue we will see more of them doing a flip-flop in their stance on gun control, as Guillani and others have done. Still not pro-gun yet, but not as strongly anti-gun. As pro-gun becomes the "flavor of the month", supported by the opinions of the voters, many more will be jumping on board.

But then I tend to be an optimist....

Autolycus
April 23, 2007, 03:28 AM
Nukejim: I agree with you that the polls are showing we are winning. However how many of us are fixing those polls by continually voting on them?

The gun culture posts these links on numerous message boards and forums for all to see. However I dont know of any anti-gun message boards. There is no bradyforum.com or anything like that that I know of.

We see gunownership as a hobby and a right. If you dont understand look at how many forums we have dedicated to shotguns and technical aspects of guns. Gear and accessories etc. etc. So for us it is just more than a right but a hobby as well.

For them it is a problem and an issue. Not a hobby. An anti will not discuss caliber with you or what kind of grip you should hold your gun in. They wont tell you about the difference between a wood stock or a polymer. To them a gun is something that is irrelevant in their daily life.

So I do ask that we not take these polls into consideration. IT seems like gunowners are intentionally voting these polls in a pro-gun direction. But these votes dont matter, the one in legislature is what matters.

Robert Hairless
April 23, 2007, 03:40 AM
Tecumseh, well said and wisely too.

Fulcrum of Evil
April 23, 2007, 03:51 AM
restrictions placed on the amount of ammo one can posses.

What would you consider reasonable? Personally, I'm fine with restricting the amount of ammo you can possess without some sort of safe storage area. I use ammo cans in the closet, but that only scales so far.

Mannix
April 23, 2007, 06:16 AM
The main issue, as I see it, is the general ignorance of most people about guns and what they see as "gun culture". All they know is what they see in movies, hear in music, and see on the news. That's where these idiotic measures start.

So what can we as gun owners and citizens do? Well vote and be vocal for one, but to get converts we can't just spew rhetoric. The typical city dweller doesn't care one way or another, and even tends to lean towards gun legislation. In their minds restricting them will stop some of the stuff they hear about on the news. What they fail to see is that if criminals want guns they will get them, legally or otherwise(that's why they call them CRIMINALS).

My suggestion, take a coworker/neighbor out shooting if you can. Appeal to their pride, say that they should at least know what they want to restrict(Indirectly telling most liberals that they are ignorant tends to get them a little flustered, I've noticed). Worst that could happen is that they say no.

Just my 2 cents.

Soybomb
April 23, 2007, 06:52 AM
It's true that democrats control congress, but it hasn't done them much good. Even McCarthy has stated that it is a pro gun congress now, and anti-gun legislation will be tough to pass. She is there on the floor and knows what she is up against in promoting what many now see for what it is, ineffective anti-gun legislation.

It does no good for them to pretend to be anything. In the long run it's their votes on the floor that count, not what they say, and as many editorials have pointed out lately the pro-gun voters don't forget. They will remember come next election, and the democrats know that, they have experienced it first hand.
National level democratic politics are honestly pretty irrelevant in this discussion. Just because democrats have to play nice on the national level to win the white house, don't expect state politics in NY, NJ, CA, IL to suddenly turn pro or even gun neutral.

NukemJim
April 23, 2007, 09:15 AM
I agree with you that the polls are showing we are winning. However how many of us are fixing those polls by continually voting on them?


Very good point.

You are correct about some polls being rigged by both sides. I was refering to some large natinal ones that would be hard to influence.

I have to go now. Work calls. When I get home tonight will do some checking to see if I was wrong in my perception.

NukemJim

If you enjoyed reading about "House IL - AWB Passes Out Of Committee HB873 8 to 5" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!