[cuchulainn]

from the Rockford Register Star

http://www.rrstar.com/opinion/columnists/anderson/20030315-36781.shtml

COLUMN: Chad Anderson
Behavior of pro-gun lobby counterproductive

We all know the saying: If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

While true, that saying often is dismissed as propaganda from the extreme and sometimes irrational supporters of gun-owner’s rights.

Why? Because the typically anti-gun media love to run stories and photos showing the stereotypical, radical gun fanatic who cries out that the government can take his gun from his cold, dead hand.

The problem is, these people really exist, and so does the crude behavior. That problem reared its ugly head in Springfield this week as a Senate committee prepared to consider gun control legislation.

“People who called my office referred to me as a spic ... and told me to go back to my country,” Sen. Iris Martinez, D-Chicago, told the committee. “My staff received a lot of really ugly comments, and I was even threatened that I would be spit on during these proceedings.”

THE NATIONAL RIFLE Association’s lobbyist, Todd Vandermyde, apologized to the committee and said the NRA does not condone such actions. He said as much to me in a telephone interview Friday.

As a sportsman, hunter and supporter of the Second Amendment, I think these are tough times in Springfield. And it scares me to think my Second Amendment rights are being defended with such racist and obviously undiplomatic tactics.

Chicago Democrats, backed by Mayor Richard Daley, are trying to use their newfound power to pass sweeping gun-control laws — some refer to it as a gun grab.

The NRA defeated most of the bills in the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday. The committee did, however, approve Senate Bill 1195, which would ban semiautomatic guns. As currently written, the bill does not provide any grandfathering clause and would require that semiautomatic guns be destroyed, forfeited or moved out of state within 90 days of the bill becoming law.

I’m not here to change your mind on the issue. Obviously, Chicago and many areas of the state have a problem with violence — some of it committed using guns. That puts politicians under pressure to get tougher on crime.

BUT, AT THE same time, there are more than 1 million law-abiding gun owners in Illinois who purchase and possess guns legally after obtaining a Firearms Owners Identification card issued by the Illinois State Police.

Some are collectors of rare firearms, some are hunters, and still others are sportsmen who participate in shooting competitions. They’re bankers, business owners, politicians, middle managers and everyday Joes. These people don’t run guns illegally. They don’t threaten people. And those whom I shoot with treat gun safety rules as seriously as religion. So, as an upstanding, safe and responsible gun owner, I was disappointed — no, irate — when I heard of the behavior by gun supporters in the Capitol this week.

Vandermyde was right to lecture his supporters before the committee hearing started. The threatening phone calls to senators were bad enough. The NRA didn’t need “nitwits,” giving gun owners a bad name, he told supporters.

He’s right. A battle this big should not be lost because of stupidity.

Call or fax Chad Anderson at 217-782-2959 or e-mail GNSSpringfield@aol.com

Copyright © 2001Rockford Register Star.

[Bob Locke]

The NRA didn’t need “nitwits,” giving gun owners a bad name, he told supporters.
That's true. They're doing quite a job on their own.

[WyldOne]

*sigh*

Well, this kind of behavior does help fulfill stereotypes that already exist. And--even if it is a tiny minority of people who do this, the bad stuff (you know, being called a "spic", etc) stays in your head a lot longer than the good stuff.

[Pendragon]

Hey WyldOne!

Long time no see!

Well, I have no idea where this IL legislation is going. With appologies to the good people who live there, a tiny part of my is curious to see it go through.

Only because it could really accellerate things in the gun debate.
Sorry - I hope it goes well for you guys up there, but this is way worse than anything going on in CA.

Of course, I may be moving to FL, so why worry? :P

I think the momentum is going our way, but the loonies in occupied territory are going to try and pull out the stops in the areas they have power.

Buckle up.

[Jim March]

I'm sure there's a few thoroughly-pissed gunnies in Illinois :rolleyes:. But I'm equally positive the grabber politicians SERIOUSLY exaggerate their numbers and rudeness levels for political gain.

Within limits, it's OK to let the grabbers know you're pissed. The key is to make sure you have a way of showing them a good REASON you're pissed, in terms they can understand. An example of that sort of thing:

http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw/AB462.PDF

[AR-10]

The sad part is of the estimated million gun owners in the state, less than two hundred care enough to drive to a meeting to voice their displeasure.

It is unfortunate that a few of the phone calls Ms. Martinez received were hatefull or rude. That makes us all look bad.

It is also unfortunate that she has such a poor grasp of the intent of the bill of rights. She does not seem to understand that many people feel her desire to see this bill passed is a direct threat to their freedom and personal safety.

The message needs to be brought home definitively (and politely) that bills like this are so repugnant that the resulting laws will be ignored and considered an act of aggression by a government on it's own citizens.

Takes more than two hundred spectators sitting quitely in the gallery to convey that message.

[Don Gwinn]

Y'know, I was there (as a reporter) for the hearings on the ERA, the most controversial thing in this session besides this bill. Either side of that would have jumped for joy to see a fourth of our turnout.

"Less than two hundred" might not sound like much, but it's an incredible turnout for a committee hearing and the members knew it. We filled the room and the hallway.


As for exaggerations, how ever did you know that? Senator Martinez made it sound as if she'd received multiple death threats, not ONE threat of embarassment. It was a filthy and stupid thing to do, but it was not at all representative of us. They don't mention that when VanDermyde condemned those calls he got a hearty ovation from the gallery. That kind of thing is against the Senate's rules on decorum, but Cullerton couldn't allow himself to look like he was against us on that one (and just to be clear, I'm sure he wasn't. I think he and Martinez get along pretty well.)

[AR-10]

It was not my intent to belittle your participation at the hearing. Kudos to you guys who attended, and thanks for letting us know what went on.

I hope as this bill is debated there will be a huge outcry throughout the state. Even though I don't live in Illinois, I have come to see that issues like this do affect us all, eventually. I'd rather not see it spread. As I sit here in relative comfort, I ask the same question I asked a gentleman from New Jersey.

What can we Out-of-Staters do to help?

[antsi]

Mr. Anderson had it right in his column. Sometimes we gun owners are our own worst enemies. Whoever the goofball(s) is/were who threatened that Senator, they couldn't have done anything more effective to SUPPORT the gun grab than what they did.

When you are speaking to the opposition -- and especially when you are speaking to the undecided -- it is CRITICAL to paint yourself and your position as a moderate, mainstream, "regular-guy" point of view.

Personally, and when talking to like-minded folks, yes, I do agree that a major point of the Second Ammendment is an anti-tyranny measure. It is a lot harder to impose a dictatorship over an armed citizenry.

But that would not be one of my points when debating a law like this one, especially to a mixed audience. It would only play into the opposition's view of gun owners as crazy extremists who want to overthrow the government.

Most of the gun owners I know are decent law-abiding citizens, hard workers, contributors to their community, mostly religious, "regular folks." That's the angle we want to play up.

When it comes to politics and public opinion, talk about the gun safety class you're teaching to the Boy Scouts, not the SHTF store you're maintaining.

[Marko Kloos]

I can see how getting your basic civil rights denied by people who know how to play and cheat the system can get some people a little ticked off.

"We were just sitting here preparing to take guns away from people who haven't done anything wrong, and they have the nerve to be mad about it and call us nasty names!"

[Hkmp5sd]

Gun Control, Abortion, Civil Rights, War with Iraq, Gay Rights, Senior Citizens....

There are extremists on both sides of ever political battle that use langauge and threats in an attempt to intimidate others. The difference is that the media, which has a lock on how the stories appear in newspapers and TVs, only give airtime to the side of the debate the reporter opposes.

Some loudmouth idiot sitting in his living room making telephone threats to politicians about gun control gets wide coverage. The tree huggers spiking trees, resulting in injury and death to lumberjacks, *might* get one sentence in the paper, *if* that paper happens to print the police blotter without actually reading it.

[Baba Louie]

Far be it from a politician to exploit an opposing angry comment or name calling incident to her advantage.

" Now we HAVE to pass this legislation because of the hate filled invective spewing gun owning redneck neanderthals. See, See what they SAID? Believe me when I say they said it. My staff heard it and we all cringe in fear. THEY MUST BE DISARMED!"

orsomethinglikethat.

Darn that WildAlaska anyway

Adios

[jmbg29]

It is unfortunate that a few of the phone calls Ms. Martinez received were hatefull or rude. That makes us all look bad.What I find unfortunate is that people will automatically assume that: [list=a]
She actually recieved those calls.
That if she did recieve them, that they were from pro-gun people.
[/list=a]

After all, Demorats have never used the phony race card in the past.:rolleyes: :scrutiny: :uhoh: :barf: :fire: :cuss:

[CZ-75]

“People who called my office referred to me as a spic ... and told me to go back to my country,” Sen. Iris Martinez, D-Chicago, told the committee. “My staff received a lot of really ugly comments, and I was even threatened that I would be spit on during these proceedings.”


jmbg beat me to it.

All we have to go on is the statements made by one who is our enemy.

I seem to remember reading how those against prop 187 (anti-affirmative action, I believe) in Kali sponsored bringing David Duke to speak out in FAVOR of the proposition to "poison the well." The press ate it up and didn't research the truth behind the story.

[Standing Wolf]

“People who called my office referred to me as a spic ... and told me to go back to my country,” Sen. Iris Martinez, D-Chicago, told the committee. “My staff received a lot of really ugly comments, and I was even threatened that I would be spit on during these proceedings.”

Do I believe a word of that?

[Baba Louie]

Standing Wolf,
You're not inferring that Iris would actually commit an untruth to further her cause are you?

Heavens to Betsy man, she could have had a big goober hawked on her by some unknown assailant. And to suffer the indignity of being called that, that horrible racial slur probably assured her re-election next go round.

The important thing is that the mommies of Illinois probably DO believe her, or want to believe her and now have PROOF that there are no law-abiding gun-owners in Illinois. I mean, it was in the paper, and they never lie. Just like politicans.

Poor lady. Just trying to do her job of trampling on gunowners rights and gets her Civil rights violated. Or something.

Probably end up registering telephones next. Its not like anyone could actually trace the call based on time of day or anything, right? Anyone smart enough to terrorize an elected official would be smart enough to use a pay phone I'm sure.

Poor lady.

Adios

[ahadams]

the question isn't whether anyone on our side of the issue believed it, it's whether enough folks on the other side of the issue believed it enough to be motivated by it, since that's why she made an issue of it after all, no?

Personally the NRA's response on this one sounded just about right. As we used to say in the Army "it takes ten 'attaboys' to make up for one 'aw :cuss: ' "

[Grin&Barrett]

Here is the text of the Bill
093_SB1195


LRB093 10905 LRD 11424 b

1 AN ACT in relation to criminal law.

2 Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois,
3 represented in the General Assembly:

4 Section 5. The Criminal Code of 1961 is amended by
5 adding Section 24-1.7 as follows:

6 (720 ILCS 5/24-1.7 new)
7 Sec. 24-1.7. Manufacture, possession, and delivery of
8 semiautomatic assault weapons, large capacity ammunition
9 feeding devices, and assault weapon attachments.
10 (a) The General Assembly finds that the high rate of
11 fire and capacity for firepower of semiautomatic assault
12 weapons, assault weapon attachments, and large capacity
13 ammunition feeding devices pose a significant threat to the
14 health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of this State,
15 that the use of these weapons, devices, or attachments for
16 sport or recreation is substantially outweighed by the danger
17 these weapons or devices present to human life, and that
18 restrictions should therefore be placed on the manufacture,
19 delivery, and possession of these weapons, devices, and
20 attachments.
21 (b) Definitions. In this Section:
22 (1) "Semi-automatic assault weapon" means:
23 (A) any of the firearms or types, replicas, or
24 duplicates in any caliber of the firearms, known as:
25 (i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly
26 Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);
27 (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military
28 Industries UZI and Galil;
29 (iii) Beretta AR-70 (SC-70);
30 (iv) Colt AR-15;
31 (v) Fabrique Nationale FN/FAL, FN/LAR,

-2- LRB093 10905 LRD 11424 b
1 and FNC;
2 (vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;
3 (vii) Steyr AUG;
4 (viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and
5 TEC-22; and
6 (ix) any shotgun which contains its
7 ammunition in a revolving cylinder, such as
8 (but not limited to) the Street Sweeper and
9 Striker 12;
10 (x) any firearm having a caliber of 50 or
11 greater;
12 (B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to
13 accept a detachable magazine and has any of the
14 following:
15 (i) a folding or telescoping stock;
16 (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes
17 conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
18 (iii) a bayonet mount;
19 (iv) a flash suppressor or barrel having a
20 threaded muzzle; or
21 (v) a grenade launcher; or
22 (C) a semi-automatic pistol that has an ability to
23 accept a detachable magazine and has any of the
24 following:
25 (i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to
26 the pistol outside of the pistol grip;
27 (ii) a barrel having a threaded muzzle;
28 (iii) a shroud that is attached to, or
29 partially or completely encircles the barrel, and
30 that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with
31 the non-trigger hand without being burned;
32 (iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or
33 more when the pistol is unloaded; or
34 (v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic

-3- LRB093 10905 LRD 11424 b
1 firearm; or
2 (D) a semiautomatic shotgun that has any of the
3 following:
4 (i) a folding or telescoping stock;
5 (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes
6 conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
7 (iii) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5
8 rounds; or
9 (iv) an ability to accept a detachable
10 magazine.
11 "Semiautomatic assault weapon" does not include:
12 (A) any firearm that:
13 (i) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever
14 or slide action;
15 (ii) is an "unserviceable firearm" or has been
16 made permanently inoperable; or
17 (iii) is an antique firearm; or
18 (B) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a
19 detachable magazine that holds more than 5 rounds of
20 ammunition; or
21 (C) any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more
22 than 5 rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable
23 magazine.
24 (2)(A) "Large capacity ammunition feeding device" means:
25 (i) a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or
26 similar device that has a capacity of, or that can
27 be readily restored or converted to accept, more
28 than 10 rounds of ammunition; or
29 (ii) any combination of parts from which a
30 device described in subparagraph (i) can be
31 assembled.
32 (B) "Large capacity ammunition feeding device" does
33 not include an attached tubular device designed to
34 accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber

-4- LRB093 10905 LRD 11424 b
1 rimfire ammunition or any device that has been made
2 permanently inoperable.
3 (3) "Assault weapon attachment" means any device capable
4 of being attached to a firearm that is specifically designed
5 for making or converting a firearm into any of the firearms
6 listed in paragraph (1) of subsection (b) of this Section.
7 (4) "Antique firearm" means:
8 (A) any firearm, including any firearm with a
9 matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of
10 ignition system, manufactured in or before 1898, or
11 (B) any replica of any firearm described in
12 subparagraph (A) if the replica:
13 (i) is not designed or redesigned for using
14 rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition;
15 or
16 (ii) uses rimfire or conventional centerfire
17 ammunition that is no longer manufactured in the
18 United States and that is not readily available in
19 the ordinary channels of commercial trade; or
20 (C) any firearm (other than a machine gun), which,
21 although designed as a weapon, the Department of State
22 Police finds by reason of the date of its manufacture,
23 value, design, and other characteristics is primarily a
24 collector's item and is not likely to be used as a
25 weapon.
26 (c) Except as provided in subsection (e), 90 days after
27 the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 93rd General
28 Assembly, it is unlawful for any person within this State, to
29 knowingly manufacture, deliver, or possess or cause to be
30 manufactured, delivered, or possessed, a semiautomatic
31 assault weapon, a large capacity ammunition feeding device,
32 or an assault weapon attachment.
33 (d) Any person who knowingly possesses a semiautomatic
34 assault weapon, large capacity ammunition feeding device, or

-5- LRB093 10905 LRD 11424 b
1 assault weapon attachment must, within 90 days after the
2 effective date of this amendatory Act of the 93rd General
3 Assembly, destroy the weapon or device, render it permanently
4 inoperable, relinquish it to a law enforcement agency, or
5 remove it from this State.
6 (e) A person has an affirmative defense to an alleged
7 violation of subsection (c) of this Section if he or she
8 lawfully possessed or delivered the semiautomatic assault
9 weapon, large capacity ammunition feeding device, or assault
10 weapon attachment while in the performance of his or her
11 official duties as a peace officer, correctional institution
12 employee or official, or member of the Armed Services or
13 Reserve Forces of the United States, or of the Illinois
14 National Guard.
15 (f) Sentence.
16 (1) A person who manufactures, possesses, or
17 delivers a semiautomatic assault weapon in violation of
18 this Section commits a Class 3 felony for a first
19 violation and a Class 2 felony for a second or subsequent
20 violation or for the possession or delivery of 2 or more
21 of these weapons at the same time.
22 (2) A person who possesses or delivers in violation
23 of this Section a large capacity ammunition feeding
24 device capable of holding more than 17 rounds of
25 ammunition commits a Class 3 felony for a first violation
26 and a Class 2 felony for a second or subsequent violation
27 or for possession or delivery of 2 or more of these
28 devices at the same time.
29 (3) A person who possesses or delivers in violation
30 of this Section a large capacity ammunition feeding
31 device capable of holding more than 10 rounds but not
32 more than 17 rounds of ammunition commits a Class 4
33 felony for a first violation and a Class 3 felony for a
34 second or subsequent violation or for possession or

-6- LRB093 10905 LRD 11424 b
1 delivery of more than one of these devices at the same
2 time.
3 (4) A person who possesses or delivers in violation
4 of this Section an assault weapon attachment commits a
5 Class 4 felony for a first violation and a Class 3 felony
6 for a second or subsequent violation.

Second hearing for this bill scheduled for March 18.
Call Senator Cullerton at (217) 782-7260 and tell him to vote
"NO" on SB1195

Call Senator Harmon at (217) 782-8176 and tell him to vote "NO"
on SB1195

Call Senator Clayborne at (217) 782-5399 and tell him to vote
"NO" on SB1195

Call Senator Silverstein at (217) 782-5500 and tell him to vote
"NO" on SB1195

Call Senator Obama at (217) 782-5338 and tell him to vote "NO"
on SB1195

[Carlos Cabeza]

While I do feel like the name calling reflects the intelligence of the bigot spewing the puke, Why would this woman even let a mere word affect her at all ? Who cares.........People should not be reduced to the level of hypocrites based on the intolerance of a cretin level IQ redneck Illinois resident. Stupid people inhabit most of the entire United States and the behavior of such should be expected. Thankfully, they are the minority of people and of gun owners.

[WyldOne]

As far as believing the if Martinez actually received those calls, and if they were as bad as she says, eh, hard to tell. Personal judgement call, I suppose.

Personally, I believe it, and that's based solely on some of the names I've been called (though since I'm white, nobody's called me any racial slurs). I mean like stuff like communist, socialist, etc.

Sorry.

Also, yes, the "other side" does it too. And I hate that as well.


(HI!! Pendragon :D)

[geekWithA.45]

Every congress critter gets their fair share of rudeness on every issue.

It's interesting that we, the demonized gun owners have it held against us collectively, whereas in most other contexts, it's properly dismissed for the fringe element it is.

[Ryder]

"The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they suppress." Frederick Douglass

What you are beginning to witness is the endurance limit of a people.

If she is disappointed now I can't imagine her reaction to people finding out that she has successfully backed them into a corner by voiding their rights.

Odd that there is no mention of her armed body guard in this article.

[Jim March]

Anybody catch how they want to ban all shotguns?

--------------
10 (x) any firearm having a caliber of 50 or
11 greater;
--------------

Well OK, the 410s would still be OK...

:barf:

Man, I almost hope they pass it. No, not really, but WOW would it finally wake up the ritzy morons taking their "fine sporting doubles" to the clay range in their Range Rovers and pissing on everybody else's "nasty evil guns" :fire:.

[Don Gwinn]

Jim, that's just NRA and ISRA exaggeration. "Sporting" shotguns are specifically exempted by features. "This measure shall not apply to such and such."
Shotguns will NOT be banned by this, though modern muzzleloaders will. They're not that stupid. They will never, ever mess with deer hunters until the rest of us are gone. If there WERE any wording that could be construed that way, according to Democrats at the hearing, it will be changed before a floor vote.

[SaintofKillers]

so what if they exaggerate, its not like the politicians dont ever do anything like that, the end result is the same we lose our guns. At this point say and do anything to get Illinois hunters off their half moons and protest this bill.

[Jeff White]

Everyone in my immediate family is a card carrying ISRA member (bought the family membership). I think that the exaggerations and in some cases outright lies that the ISRA puts out there in order to scare people hurt more then help. Politically active gunowners tend to be a little smarter then the ISRA gives them credit for, and I think the exaggerations and scaremongering put off more people then they attract.

A lot of this is preaching to the chior, just like we sometimes do here. I can't speak for the rest of the state, but I never see an ISRA spokesman quoted in the media around here. The only people who hear the ISRAs message are the ISRA members.

State Senator John O Jones (R Mt. Vernon) introduced a whole raft of progun bills including concealed carry at the same time the Daley package was introduced. Who even heard about it? It would have been nice to tell the comittee that there was legislation they could support.

There is opportunity here, if only the ISRA and other groups could get together and exploit it. Blago could see a Gray Davis type setback in Southern Illinois. The Chicago Democrats may have grabbed for too much too fast. Lumping the gun grab into the minimum wage increase, moving the capitol to Chicago, the big spending programs while the state is bankrupt could cost the Democrats badly. Blago actively campaigned against his own record on gun control down here. We somehow need to turn this into a conterattack. You don't win playing defense.

Jeff

[Grin&Barrett]

QUOTE: ""Sporting" shotguns are specifically exempted by features. "This measure shall not apply to such and such."
Shotguns will NOT be banned by this, though modern muzzleloaders will. They're not that stupid. They will never, ever mess with deer hunters until the rest of us are gone. If there WERE any wording that could be construed that way, according to Democrats at the hearing, it will be changed before a floor vote."

I won't take a chance on underestimating the stupidity of liberals.
With the management at the top, Gov, Senate & House & the Atty Gen all solidity in the hands of anti-gun politicians they have never had a better time.

I plan on being in Springfield on Thursday.


NRA calls on all gun owners to come to Springfield Illinois for a lobby day on Thursday, March 20.

SB 1195 could come up for a vote in the Senate this week, come to Springfield and make your voice heard.

SB 1195 bans any firearm with a bore diameter of .50 caliber and larger. This includes all 10, 12, 16, 20 and 28 gauge semi-automatic, pump, single shot, over/under and side-by-side shotguns. As well as all modern black powder firearms.

SB 1195: Outlaws the manufacture, possession, sale and transfer of AR-15s, M1As, FALs, plus lower and upper receivers, magazines and magazine parts capable of holding more than 10 rounds, including all shotguns 28 gauge and larger and hunting rifles with a bore diameter greater the .50 caliber.

Everyone is asked to meet at 9:00 AM in the Stratton Building Cafeteria which is right across the street from the Capitol. Signs won`t be allowed in the building so don`t bring any. Folks are asked to dress sharp and be prepared to politely make your position clear - NO GUN BANS!

Please attend if possible, thank you.

[Don Gwinn]

Look, I'm not telling you not to go to the rally. I attended the Judiciary Committee hearings on the same bill. All I'm saying is that you are not going to make progress by lying to your friends and allies about what this bill does or does not do. They'll find out eventually, and if they have any self-respect at all, they won't put faith in you again. More immediately, it's dangerous to put too much emphasis on a point that isn't true. If the public begins to percieve that this is our main objection, and the Democrats make a big show of removing the .50 cal section (which makes no difference in actual fact as regards shotguns, but will defuse the argument) then we lose. In the minds of the public, our one big objection has been addressed and we no longer have a valid reason to oppose the bill.

Besides, I'm not asking you to take a chance. Read the text of the bill yourself. It's quite clear. Yes, .50 cal. firearms are included in the definition of "assault weapons," but shotguns that hold 5 or fewer rounds and don't have pistol grip stocks are then specifically exempted from that definition.

Again, I am not saying we shouldn't fight this bill with everything we have. I'm just saying that being dishonest about it is going to hurt us.

[Grin&Barrett]

I'm going for a NRA / Sportsman's fundraiser Wed night anyway so I'll stay over & see what is going on Thursday.

The text of the bill that I've seen is clear:

6 (720 ILCS 5/24-1.7 new)
7 Sec. 24-1.7. Manufacture, possession, and delivery of
8 semiautomatic assault weapons, large capacity ammunition
9 feeding devices, and assault weapon attachments.
10 (a) The General Assembly finds that the high rate of
11 fire and capacity for firepower of semiautomatic assault
12 weapons, assault weapon attachments, and large capacity
13 ammunition feeding devices pose a significant threat to the
14 health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of this State,
15 that the use of these weapons, devices, or attachments for
16 sport or recreation is substantially outweighed by the danger
17 these weapons or devices present to human life, and that
18 restrictions should therefore be placed on the manufacture,
19 delivery, and possession of these weapons, devices, and
20 attachments.
21 (b) Definitions. In this Section:
22 (1) "Semi-automatic assault weapon" means:
23 (A) any of the firearms or types, replicas, or
24 duplicates in any caliber of the firearms, known as:
25 (i) Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly
26 Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs (all models);
27 (ii) Action Arms Israeli Military
28 Industries UZI and Galil;
29 (iii) Beretta AR-70 (SC-70);
30 (iv) Colt AR-15;
31 (v) Fabrique Nationale FN/FAL, FN/LAR,

-2- LRB093 10905 LRD 11424 b
1 and FNC;
2 (vi) SWD M-10, M-11, M-11/9, and M-12;
3 (vii) Steyr AUG;
4 (viii) INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9 and
5 TEC-22; and
6 (ix) any shotgun which contains its
7 ammunition in a revolving cylinder, such as
8 (but not limited to) the Street Sweeper and
9 Striker 12;
10 (x) any firearm having a caliber of 50 or
11 greater;
12 (B) a semiautomatic rifle that has an ability to
13 accept a detachable magazine and has any of the
14 following:
15 (i) a folding or telescoping stock;
16 (ii) a pistol grip that protrudes
17 conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon;
18 (iii) a bayonet mount;
19 (iv) a flash suppressor or barrel having a
20 threaded muzzle; or
21 (v) a grenade launcher; or
22 (C) a semi-automatic pistol that has an ability to
23 accept a detachable magazine and has any of the
24 following:
25 (i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to
26 the pistol outside of the pistol grip;
27 (ii) a barrel having a threaded muzzle;
28 (iii) a shroud that is attached to, or
29 partially or completely encircles the barrel, and
30 that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with
31 the non-trigger hand without being burned;
32 (iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or
33 more when the pistol is unloaded; or
34 (v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic
.......

I'm not excited about that even if the later exclusion exempts some shotguns.

[Jeff White]

From today's St. Louis Post Dispatch"

ILLINOIS LEGISLATURE
Bill to ban some guns draws fire from many downstate

Many Democrats denounce move to ban semiautomatic assault weapons - Constituants fear impact

By Kevin McDermott and Alexa Aguilar
Post Dispatch Springfield Bureau

SPRINGFIELD, ILL - A proposal to ban semiautomatic assault weapons in Illinois has ignited fevernt opposition among downstate residents, who fear the effort to stop urban "gang-bangers" will ensnare rural hunters.

"They're going crazy," said Rep. Michael Boat, R-Murphysboro. He's one of the many downstate legislators in both parties who say they'll oppose the ban, after being inundated with constitutiant outcry against it.

The pending legislation - sponsored by Chicago Democrats in the legislature and heavily lobbied by Democratic Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley - has spotlighted the historic regional chasm in the state's Democratic Party. Some of the strongest opposition is coming not from Republicans but from downstate Democrats.

"I wouldn't vote for that bill in a million years," said Rep. Thomas Holbrook, D-Belleville. He said he has received 100 calls already, all opposed. "You have got to remember, we are Southern Illinois. It's part of our culture. Our area is very conservative, and they are very concerned about intrusions to their Second Amendment rights."

The main bill, sponsored by Sen. Antonio Munoz, D-Chicago, would ban the manufacture, possession and delivery of semiautomatic assault weapons, large capacity feeding devices, and assault weapons attachments.

The long list of weapons cited in the legislation includes Israeli-made Uzis and Galil rifles; the Baretta AR-70, the Colt AR-15, described by some as a "civilian version" of the M-16 assault rifle; and "Street Sweeper" shotguns, which contain their ammunition in a revolving cylinder.

Eric Palmer, a Senate Democratic staff member working on the bill with Munoz, said the descriptions of the weapons should put to rest any concern about law abiding citizens being cited under the proposed law.

"These are weapons that were originally meant for close combat...You pull the trigger and the weapon fires repeatedly, automatically," said Palmer. "There's not going to be much left of a deer unless you enjoy hamburger."

But some of the more open ended language in the bill - particularly a passage that would ban "any firearm having a caliber of .50 or greater" - would encompass some kinds of target rifles. Some say other language in the bill could be interpreted to include some kinds of commonly used shotguns.

Munoz has agreed to work with opponents to soften the language of the bill, which could include changing the .50 caliber limit and include more sweeping exceptions for hunters, collectors and others. "The intent of the legislation was never to curtail the lawful rights of hunters," Munoz said in a written statement.

Some legislative opponents say those changes might placate them. "I'll have to see the amendment", aid Sen. Willian Haine, D-Alton.

Sen. James Clayborn, D-Belleville, said he might yet support the ban "as long as the hunters are not criminalized."

Others say they will oppose the very concept of the weapons ban, regardless of the details.

"People in my district don't think the use of weapons that are currently legal should be made illegal." said state Rep. Dan Reitz, D-Steelville. "It's going after law abiding citizens when we need to go after those who break the law."

Rep. Ron Stephens, R-Troy, said he received six calls by 9 a.m. Tuesday morning. "We don't want more gun legislation. We don't need to turn to Mayor Daley (and Chicago), where everything is banned all the time."

Rep. Wyvetter Younge, D-East St. Louis, said she hasn't made up her mind yet. "I am still weighing whether it is an infringment on rights," she said.

The bill, as currently written would require gun owners in Illinois, within 90 days of the law being enacted, to turn any affected weapon over to law enforcement, destroy it, get it out of the state or "render it permanently inoperable." Failure to do so would be a felony.

Leo Sullivan of O'Fallon, a target shooter, said he would move out of the state if the ban is enacted.

"I've never heard, in America, that they would come in and seize my property when I'm a law abiding citizen," Sullivan said. "Is this the message that we want to send to companies that manufacture these weapons: Leave the state and take your business elsewhere?"

The bill is SB1195. It has passed one Senate committee and could get a Senate vote as early as today.



The misspelling of Beretta is the reporters....Jeff

[SaintofKillers]

"These weapons that were orginally meant for close combat...You pull the trigger and the weapon fires repeatedly, automatically," said Palmer.

Eric Palmer Senate staff member who assisted senator Munoz in drafting SB1195.

Where is he getting this information from??? I thought that these weapons where already banned if not severly restricted??? Why isnt anyone talking about this?? I for one am tired of hearing how we need to get these UZIs off the street that spray one zillion bullets in a second and are able to go through car engine blocks and only hit young teenagers who are standing on the street corner at 2am. Maybe Don is right that by saying that this bill bans shotguns when it doesnt isnt right, but THE WHOLE BILL IS A BIG:cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: LIE. I hope they do pass this bill to teach gunowners in Illinois a lesson, I for one will be in another state :neener: your precious :cuss: :cuss: duck gun is next. Some will never learn.

Sorry about the rant my frustration has reached its zenith.