Illinois House rejects assault weapon ban


PDA






iamkris
May 24, 2005, 07:48 PM
...but certainly not by a very wide margin...

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/24ban.html

Illinois House rejects assault weapon ban

May 24, 2005

BY CHRISTOPHER WILLS ASSOCIATED PRESS

Illinois lawmakers narrowly rejected a proposed ban on assault weapons and .50-caliber rifles Tuesday amid intense lobbying by both sides in the debate.

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley has repeatedly called for stronger gun control measures, and Gov. Rod Blagojevich, a fellow Chicago Democrat also got personally involved by calling lawmakers and distributing videos demonstrating the firepower of assault weapons.

The National Rifle Association argued that the proposed ban was too broad.

"I just don't think the state's ready for that," said NRA lobbyist Todd Vandermyde.

Rep. Edward Acevedo, a Democrat and also a Chicago police officer, denied the ban would have such a broad impact, saying it contained specific exceptions meant to exempt hunting and target-shooting guns and focus instead on weapons with more sinister uses.

"I believe these weapons are made for mass destruction and war," Acevedo said.

The definitions of an assault weapon vary, but the term generally applies to semi-automatic rifles with large ammunition magazines and such features as folding stocks and bayonet mountings.

The measure also targeted .50-caliber rifles, which critics say have the power and range to punch through body armor, kill someone from a mile away or even bring down an airplane as it takes off or lands.

The measure was an amendment that Acevedo attempted to add to an existing bill. It failed on a vote of 57-58 in the House on Tuesday. A swing of one vote would have given the amendment enough support to be added; approving the bill would than have taken 60 votes.



Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

If you enjoyed reading about "Illinois House rejects assault weapon ban" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Bartholomew Roberts
May 24, 2005, 08:05 PM
Close call! Still good news to see that this type of fight can be won in places like Illinois though!

Harry Tuttle
May 24, 2005, 09:31 PM
Add Illinois effort to Maryland's failure to pass an AWB and the gun control folke seem to be orbiting the relevance drain pipe.

Edmond
May 24, 2005, 09:40 PM
The measure also targeted .50-caliber rifles, which critics say have the power and range to punch through body armor, kill someone from a mile away or even bring down an airplane as it takes off or lands.

They make it sound like a .50 cal is the only cartridge that could penetrate body armor, that just anyone who picks up the weapon could successfully terminate a target from a mile away and that anyone could bring down an airplane.

Short of having Jack Bauer as the shooter, I don't forsee that happening much. :D

iamkris
May 24, 2005, 10:14 PM
The disappointing part was I heard one of our local conservative talk AM stations (WIND) report this as "Illinois legislature defeats '.50 caliber assault weapons' package" and quoted Acevedo as "needing this since the fed didn't renew the 1994 Assault Weapons law". Disappointing that even the "balanced" media outlet takes in lies and reports them back out.

Hey Edmond...the WASR is running like a champ. Not terribly accurate with Wolf but not bad with the brass cased ammo you sold me. I just got done threading the barrel and installing a AK74-style brake.

Don Gwinn
May 24, 2005, 10:56 PM
Call 'em, Kris! Tell 'em on the air why that information is wrong.

Standing Wolf
May 24, 2005, 11:23 PM
The measure also targeted .50-caliber rifles, which critics say have the power and range to punch through body armor, kill someone from a mile away or even bring down an airplane as it takes off or lands.

Yeah, and those terrible awful wicked evil malicious .50 caliber rifles cause cancer in kittens, deprive babies of sorely needed nutrition, cause crops to fail, and may well contribute to global warming, too. They're way too dangerous for commoners, I tell you!

whm1974
May 24, 2005, 11:36 PM
The measure also targeted .50-caliber rifles, which critics say have the power and range to punch through body armor, kill someone from a mile away or even bring down an airplane as it takes off or lands.

Please. a centerfire bolt action rifle can kill a target a mile away and go through body armor. As far as shooting a plane, jetliners at least you have to hit the right spot to shoot one down, even then it would take more then one hit.

-Bill

Edmond
May 25, 2005, 12:14 AM
Kris,

Glad to hear you like the WASR. At least you have the opportunity to enjoy it, which was something I never did. I ended up getting a P229 so it's all good. :D

Maybe with Daley's numbers slipping, they can get a new mayor in Chicago and start changing for the better. Yeah right, the political machine would never let anyone else run.

Thundercleese
May 25, 2005, 01:22 AM
Excellent excellent news. Not thrilled that it was "close", but it looks like we'll survive a bit longer. Seems that in IL, it becomes scary for gun owners every 2-3 years. I seem to recall being really worried in 2002 or so.

In any case - eat it Blago - you're outta here like last year come next election.

TimRB
May 25, 2005, 10:09 AM
""I believe these weapons are made for mass destruction and war," Acevedo said."

And therein lies the difficulty; they *were* made for war. (The "mass destruction" part seems a little contrived...)

Many people don't understand (or, more likely, simply refuse to acknowledge) that the US Constitution's 2d Amendment was put there so that *the people* can carry weapons of war to defend themselves. They may need to defend themselves against crime, internal insurgency, foreign invaders, or maybe even a tyrannical government. But the point is that they need, and are specifically allowed to own and carry, WEAPONS. Not "ineffective" weapons, and most definitely not "sporting goods".

Tim

Johnnybgood
May 25, 2005, 11:39 AM
for assault weapons ban and .50cal ban have been held until May 31st. I don't know if that means their dead or if they are going to try and sneak in another vote before then. Sb2104 that makes state law concerning firearm transport the same statewide in Illinois is also held until May 31st. I would not take the chance and call my Reps and Senators and tell them no again on HB2414 and hb1098 and yes on SB2104. Just my 2 cents.

TheEgg
May 25, 2005, 11:42 AM
"I believe these weapons are made for mass destruction and war," Acevedo said.

Yeah, and your point is?

:banghead:

ocd
May 25, 2005, 01:12 PM
It was just amendment #5 and they extended it to December 31st

Norton
May 25, 2005, 01:27 PM
""I believe these weapons are made for mass destruction and war," Acevedo said."

and your beliefs are not what we base our laws on, fortunately :banghead:

Sungun09
May 25, 2005, 03:36 PM
I called three of the reps and politely told them I VOTE, I CONTRIBUTE, and I am a gun owner.

See you at the next election.

OCD - good link thanks

MichaelEzekiel
May 26, 2005, 05:02 AM
"I just don't think the state's ready for that," said NRA lobbyist Todd Vandermyde.

Tell me Mr. Vandermyde...what gun control legislation is the State of Illinois ready for?

Jeff White
May 26, 2005, 03:52 PM
Well I guess Rod has come out of the closet. Not that anyone down in Southern Illinois who paid attention believed he wasn't anti gun. But I personally intend to see that all the gun owning democrat voters down here know what they are getting this time. Maybe he's convinced himself he can win re-election without Southern Illinois. Or maybe he's already given up on re-election. Either way, he's filled the magazines of his opponents with plenty of high powered ammuntion to use against him in the upcoming election.

Jeff

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/illinoisstatenews/story/F981EA63493FDF7B8625700C0010E73D?OpenDocument
State House rejects proposal to outlaw assault weapons
By CHRISTOPHER WILLS
The Associated Press
05/25/2005

Close vote is marked
by intense lobbying


SPRINGFIELD, Ill. - Illinois legislators narrowly rejected a proposed ban on assault weapons and .50-caliber rifles Tuesday amid intense lobbying by both sides in the debate.

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley has repeatedly called for stronger gun control measures. Gov. Rod Blagojevich, a fellow Chicago Democrat, got personally involved by calling legislators and distributing videos demonstrating the firepower of assault weapons.

The National Rifle Association argued that the proposed ban was too broad and would include weapons used by hunters, target shooters and collectors.

Rep. Edward Acevedo, a Chicago police officer, denied that the legislation would have a broad impact. He said the measure contained specific exceptions limiting its grasp.

He and the governor's office intend to continue pushing for a ban.

The definitions of an assault weapon vary, but the term generally applies to semiautomatic rifles with detachable ammunition magazines and such features as folding stocks, pistol grips and bayonet mountings.

The measure also targeted .50-caliber rifles, which critics say have the power and range to punch through body armor, kill a person from a mile away or even bring down an airplane as it takes off or lands.

The measure was an amendment that Acevedo attempted to add to an existing bill. It failed with a vote of 58-57 in the Illinois House on Tuesday. A swing of one vote would have given the amendment enough support to be added; approving the bill would then have taken 60 votes.

Acevedo said he thought he had support from several lawmakers who ended up not voting.

One such person was Rep. Lovana Jones, D-Chicago.

She said weapons have little to do with the problems of drugs and poor schools that plague her constituents. Echoing the comments of gun control opponents, she questioned whether a ban would keep the weapons off the street.

"That's a wasted vote as far as I'm concerned because nothing's going to stop them from making" assault weapons, Jones said, "and as long as they make them, people are going to buy them."

The manufacture of assault weapons was banned by federal law until last year.

Rep. Mike Bost, R-Murphysboro, said if Acevedo were truly concerned with preventing crime, he would work to improve enforcement of existing laws.

The bill is HB2414, amendment 5.

Kingcreek
May 26, 2005, 08:22 PM
Jeff White Either way, he's filled the magazines of his opponents with plenty of high powered ammuntion to use against him in the upcoming election.
Jeff, I agree with you but only if his opponents are PRO-gun. With the current crop of incontinent, hand-wringing suburban republicans, a RINO candidate could be just as anti and gun rights won't be an issue.

SmershAgent
May 26, 2005, 08:38 PM
Jeff, I agree with you but only if his opponents are PRO-gun. With the current crop of incontinent, hand-wringing suburban republicans, a RINO candidate could be just as anti and gun rights won't be an issue.

Agreed, and that's why I want Congressman Lahood to get the GOP nomination for 2006. He's pro-gun, he's from a rural district (nowhere near Crook County), he's explicitly stated his support for getting a CCW law in Illinois, and I think he's the best man to neutralize whatever vestigial remnants of support Rod may have downstate from union members who have been living in caves for the past 3 years.

Jeff White
May 27, 2005, 04:36 AM
Kingcreek,
Gun rights are always an issue down here. I looked at the voting record of this bill and the only name from Southern Illinois from either party who voted for it was Yvetter Young from East St Louis and she always votes with Chicago.

I think that we can make RKBA an issue in the election. I'm certainly putting my two cents in, with what little say I have in republican party matters.

Jeff

ocd
May 27, 2005, 05:04 PM
Correct me if I am wrong but I believe Amendment 5 would have banned semi-auto pistols

(C) a semi-automatic pistol that has an ability to
15 accept a detachable magazine and has any of the
16 following:
17 (i) an ammunition magazine that attaches to
18 the pistol outside of the pistol grip;
19 (ii) a barrel having a threaded muzzle;
20 (iii) a shroud that is attached to, or
21 partially or completely encircles the barrel, and
22 that permits the shooter to hold the firearm with
23 the non-trigger hand without being burned;
24 (iv) a manufactured weight of 50 ounces or more
25 when the pistol is unloaded; or
26 (v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic
27 firearm;

Jeff White
May 27, 2005, 06:15 PM
ocd,
That's the same language they used in the federal assault pistol ban. It's aimed at things like the Tech 9, OA93 etc.

Jeff

perception
May 28, 2005, 04:12 PM
It seems to me that that could coceivably make glocks illegal:
26 (v) a semiautomatic version of an automatic

The glock 18 is fully automatic, and the way many laws are loosely interpreted these days, there is plenty of room for abuse by those that say all other glocks are just semi-auto versions of the 18.

This is not the case, but I bet it could be interpreted that way.

Thundercleese
May 28, 2005, 04:31 PM
What about things like the Desert Eagle? At 4 pounds, 6 ounces that's way over the mark specified.

If you enjoyed reading about "Illinois House rejects assault weapon ban" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!