[iamkris]

The Illinois magazine ban SB1007 is being delayed in being read in House Committee. See the press release below.

I just called the office of my State Representative, Ed Sullivan (R), who has almost always been on the right side of these issues. Unfortunately he is now the Chief Co-sponsor for the House bill. His phone answerer said that if I read the bill, it doesn't take away guns from anyone. I told her that 1) it is "feel good" legisslation that doesn't actually affect crime and 2) criminals will get the higher cap mags anyway. Why waste the time on the bill? It only harms the law abiders and makes criminals laugh.

As I read it, the salient points of the bill are:

Bans sale or possession of mags of more than 10 rounds
Grandfathers in current possession
Exempts .22 tubular mags, blackpowder or "guns made expressly for military reenactments" - not sure how they are going to determine that
Exempts police, jailers, military on the job
Exempts guns for use at Sparta Range, Olympic shooting during competition or transport to/from
Exempts if hunting where permitted


She said he is very likely to call me and discuss...I was surprised. I want to have my points very clear, consise and influential. What would you say to him. My points were going to be


What is this legislation for? To reduce crime? To stop school/public shootings?
If the former, how will this legislation keep them out of the hands of criminals? Prove to me that other states it has reduced crime.
How will this bill be any more effective at keeping "banned items" out of the hands or those who want them? Will we be as effective as we are at keeping marijuana/cocaine/meth/crack out of hands we don't want?
If the latter, will a "magazine ban" really stop a person who is already so desparate in life that they would resort to this? Wouldn't it be better to address what is causing people to do these things? Be it poverty, depression, drug addiction, prescription psychotic drugs?

How else can I approach this?

ISRA link
http://www.isra.org.concentric.com/

Legisaltion link
http://ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=&SessionId=51&GA=95&DocTypeId=SB&DocNum=1007&GAID=9&LegID=27226&SpecSess=&Session=

[Anotherguy]

I faxed letters, called and called my rep again asking for a return call and I'm still waiting to hear from her.
I think the points you cited in your original post are all good but you might also want to remind your rep that the role of government is not to restrict your freedom but rather to preserve it and you won't vote for politicians who are hell bent on restricting them when you haven't broken any laws.

[iamkris]

and you won't vote for politicians who are hell bent on restricting them when you haven't broken any laws

That is our stick, isn't it? Thanks for that reminder.

[geekWithA.45]

At the end of the day, anything that is useful for assault is also useful for defense.

If anything, large capacity favors the defender, who is always working at a severe disadvantage. At first, the defender is reacting, pressed for time, and must get ahead of the attacker's OODA loop.


The attacker, on the other hand has the benefits of:

Initiative
Surprise
Choice of time.
Choice of place.

They also have the option of doing lots of preparation. Consider many mass killings: the killers brought numerous guns, magazines, and several hundred rounds with them. As I recall the original bell tower sniping, the killer brought a whole footlocker full of gear.

Civilians generally have one gun, the bullets in it, and _maybe_ a spare mag with them. (The police generally have two) Therefore, those mags ought to be as big as possible.


They guy going to work or the gym isn't going to lug a suitcase full of guns and ammo with him. The guy out to commit mayhem will, and with a footlocker full of stuff, mag size becomes irrelevant.

[pax]

Tell him it'll force Springfield Armory to move out of state and take their tax dollars and jobs with them.

pax

[tmajors]

Pax: Beat me to it. The bill will probably force several manufacturers to relocate out of Illinois. Springfield and Armalite off the top of my head, but I think there was 5 total that said they would probably move. I don't know how much of an economic impact that would be, but if I was in State congress I would take pause if a whole business class said they would be forced to move if a bill passed.

[foghornl]

Les Baer is already looking to (IIRC) LeClaire, Iowa to relocate his company. Is DSA also [for now] an Illinois-based company? If those 2 and Springfield Armory left, that would make a HUGE money hit on Illinois.

[Anotherguy]

Here is a link to an article about the economic impact it could have in certain communities in Illinois.

http://pantagraph.com/articles/2007/05/12/news/doc4644e8ae549f7250531755.txt#blogcomments

[Soybomb]

While it wouldn't take the magazines you have now, it would keep you from buying magazines for new guns in the future.

There is also no evidence to support magazine capacity limits having any impact on the crime rate. The largest example we've seen is the failure of the1994 federal assault weapons ban.

[Brian Williams]

Ask him why he is prejudiced against 11.
At a local school blue jeans were restricted so the kids went and bought black, green, pink and khaki jeans.

[o/u mike]

Here's a good link to the potential economic impact if SB1007 becomes law:

http://www.register-mail.com/stories/051207/LET_BD4D7C9I.GID.shtml

[iamkris]

Well true to his word, he tried reaching me....at my home number though instead of my cell phone as I asked.

I called him back and hopefully will have a chance to get some of these points across.

[Justin]

Point out that turning otherwise law-abiding citizens into felons for mere possession of a bit of stamped sheet metal or extruded plastic doesn't do much to prevent crime, and will only engender negative feelings towards the law.

[iamkris]

No luck in getting him...I wrote a letter and faxed it in case we can't talk

May 17, 2007

State Representative Ed Sullivan
200-5A N Stratton Office Building
Springfield, IL 62706
(217) 782-3696
(217) 782-1275 FAX

Representative Sullivan:

I called your office today to voice my opposition to SB1007 that you are a chief co-sponsor on for the House. My thanks to your staff, especially Kim, for passing the word to you and for calling me back. I hope you will reconsider your position on sponsorship and/or support of 1007. Here’s what I’d like you to consider:

What is the purpose of this bill? If it is for crime reduction…

Please name for me a “magazine ban” law that has reduced crime. California, Maryland and New Jersey have mag bans…is their crime rate low? NO
Please prove to me that passing a law will keep these illegal items out of the wrong hands. Has it worked for marijuana? Cocaine? How about manufacturing meth? How is effectively banning handguns in Chicago working for keeping gangs from having guns? NOT WELL


If it is to “prevent” mass public shootings…

Tell me how they occur in California?
Tell me that people that are deranged enough to do such a thing will obey your law?
Tell me that a 30, 20, 10, 5 round limit will prevent many killings when these lunatics plan for months to carry out heinous acts
You are handicapping the average citizen to defend themselves


Who will it hurt?

Illinois jobs – Les Baer has already stated they will leave. Rock River Arms, Armalite and DSA are right behind them. 100’s of jobs gone.
Law abiding shooters – I can’t compete in IDPA, IPSC, High Power Rifle anymore because I am not an “Olympic” shooter or not at “Sparta World Complex”
Me – You are punishing me because I will follow the law. Criminals and crazies won’t.
You – This will be the straw that broke the camel’s back. You can count on people actively working against your campaign over this.

This is only “feel good” legislation that doesn’t address the root of the issue. You’ve always been thoughtful in the past…I hope you will do some research and be thoughtful on this one as well.

Kristopher Rich

[LAR-15]

Magazine limits self defense.

Most guns were designed with specific magazine capacities.

The Beretta Model 92- 15 rounds STANDARD

The M1911-7 rounds STANDARD

Your not talking of banning 'HIGH CAPACITY' magazines your banning 'STANDARD CAPACITY' magazines.

[benEzra]

Regarding rifle magazines, rifles are almost NEVER used in crimes.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_20.html

There were 448 homicides in Illinois in 2005. According to the FBI, rifles accounted for 4 of them.

Rifles of WHATEVER capacity are almost never misused.

Also, 10 rounds is a ridiculously low capacity; 15-round rifles hit the civilian market in the 1860's. The standard capacity for small-caliber rifles has been 20 or 30 for decades.

And if 15-round pistols are useful only for mass murder, then this bill needs to also apply to Illinois police, since they carry over-10-round pistols...actually, the police carry full-capacity pistols because they are the best choice for personal protection.

A murderer doesn't need high capacity; he chooses the time and place of his attack. The average number of rounds fired in the commission of a crime is around 2.5, IIRC. An honest citizen defending against a murderer or group thereof may well need more than 10 rounds, though, since (unlike police) you will typically respond to a home invasion or whatever with only the ammunition you have in the magazine.

In short, banning over-10-round guns would do little or nothing to inconvenience violent criminals, but would have a huge impact on law-abiding rifle and pistol owners.

[ZeSpectre]

I think the most salient point is that this legislation (like most gun control) is actually aimed at the law abiding.

You and others like you are being slapped with more restrictions for NEVER HAVING DONE A SINGLE ILLEGAL THING.

If you feel it's worth the effort you can also explane that more laws don't affect criminals who, by definition, break the law.

[pdowg881]

point out the fact that someone can just buy 3 ten round magazines and reload a couple times which takes seconds, therefore making a hicap mag ban pointless.

[Autolycus]

I would suggest using the economic impact as data if the area being hit is in his or her district. I would also point out that there are not any evidence that the ban will lower crime rates. And it certainly does not prevent tragedies.

As someone else previously state it will most importantly affect the law abiding and not the criminals.

[ServiceSoon]

Read this (http://law.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7212&context=expresso) report.

[pax]

Kris ~

Good letter.

Did you hear back from him?

pax

[iamkris]

pax ~

Not yet. We've missed each other. I'll keep trying today.

Thanks for the support.

[ECB]

The point above, that the law is aimed at the law abidding, is a great one.
Its the slippery slope we are on. Today the 10 round limit. Tomorrow the 5 round limit. Next week, its single shots only. Next month, its the guns.

Don't believe me? Ask the English and the Aussies.

Don't negoiate.

Period.

[JimmyN]

Since existing mags are being grandfathered, there will be just as many in use as there are now, the ban would have little effect. Since mags are not marked with a date of manufacture how will LE know whether the mag in question was owned before the ban?

Don't have a receipt to show when you bought them? Of course not, they were legal with purchased, before any talk of a ban, why keep the receipt?

I don't see anything requiring "registration" of any "hi cap" mags you currently have, so it would appear to me the law would be hard to enforce. The hardest hit are the gun manufacturers in the state, they would have to comply.

[Mumwaldee]

Well, how about if companies don't want to ship hi-caps to your state anymore? Ok, maybe YOU can drive out and get some more, but why should you have to? Ok, YOU are ok with the 10 shot cap...and 20 more years down the road they drop it to 5...and the next guy says..."seems reasonable to me"...another 20...you see where this is going? There is nothing in the 2nd amendment about this as far as I can tell.

[iamkris]

Well, I talked to Ed for quite a while (~20 minutes). Here is his input


This bill will pass with or without his support
Northern Illinois Republicans are under attack...soccer moms want action and they see this as progress...they need to compromise to keep the more important legislation at bay (assault weapons, 50 cal ban)
He doesn't personally think anyone "needs" these magazines even though he personally has them and likes them (in his personal 9mm handgun and AR)
He is introducing amendments to put harsh punative elements in for the use of high caps in a crime
He is intro-ing legislation on harsh penalties for straw purchases to call out the positions of Chicago based legislators
He realizes that the law is ineffective at reducing crime but sees it as politically necessary to keep fighting the bigger issue
He is skeptical of a 1) slippery slope theory that this is just the beginniong of further bans and 2) that companies will leave the state


I made every argument in my letter above. I agreed with him that compromise is needed but not on something so fundamentally ineffective I urged him to take the time to educate his constituency that these laws are ineffective and intro some legislation that actually addresses the points (up the penalty for using them, economic incentives to reduce crime, etc).

So...that was frustrating. He acknowledges that my arguements are essentially correct but he has to do it for political purposes. He believes the fallout from gunowners will be less than the fallout from soccer moms if he doesn't support it.

:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

[iamkris]

I'll be starting to buy lots of high caps as of right now.

[geekWithA.45]

He believes the fallout from gunowners will be less than the fallout from soccer moms if he doesn't support it.

Very well.

HE has chosen gunowners as his enemy.

So be it.

[jcb]

I just called Sullivan's office and expressed my dissapointment in his decision. I then told them that I will be making a contribution to whoever runs against him in the next election, AND I WON'T FORGET!!

[Erebus]

He is introducing amendments to put harsh punative elements in for the use of high caps in a crime This so gonna scare the heck outta those psycho mass murderer types!!

I guess he would feel better if 30+ people are dead but the killer used six 10 round mags instead of four 15 round mags.

Why is it that pols would rather pass stupid pointless laws they know are completely ineffective than educate their electorate?

[iamkris]

Why is it that pols would rather pass stupid pointless laws they know are completely ineffective than educate their electorate?

That is a point I directly made with him at least 3 times during the conversation. He acknowledged that it wouldn't work but said people want action. He didn't comment on why it wouldn't be better to educate

[tmajors]

He acknowledges that my arguements are essentially correct but he has to do it for political purposes.

That is exactly why we lose. He is more concerned with getting himself and his party reelected then getting the right thing done. Reading that makes me the most angry.

[lee n. field]

He doesn't personally think anyone "needs" these magazines even though he personally has them and likes them (in his personal 9mm handgun and AR)

Well, isn't that nice. He sounds like a good one to be shown the door.

Time to get back on the phone, and go out and buy some more AK mags.

[Jeff White]

We should make him more afraid of us then he is of soccer moms. It's time for everyone on THR to call and tell his office we will donate to his opponent in the next election, no matter who his opponent is or what his opponent believes. Remind him that Illinois has no campaign finance laws.

Time to play hardball. Big boy rules and all that....

Jeff

[LAR-15]

soccer moms want action and they see this as progress

Oh really?

So where are the big 'soccer mom' marches in the Chitcago suburbs demanding gun bans???????????

:confused:

[Soybomb]

Could someone who is an NRA member look and see if Ed Sullivan had any sort of NRA endorsement or comments? http://www.nrapvf.org/Elections/Default.aspx

[kcmarine]

Take him to the range while your at it.


EDIT-

Forget it. What an idiot.

[ServiceSoon]

Put me in coach. Who do I call? Give me the phone number and I will tell him what an Indianian thinks.

[Jeff White]

He got a B B A generally pro-gun candidate, but a “B” incumbent may have voted for some restrictive legislation in the past. A “B” candidate who hasn’t held office may have made some statements or taken positions against the NRA on some issues. rating from NRA and they have a hot link to his old campaign website on the page. The link is dead now, get a server not found error. He was endorsed by NRA in his last election. His opponent was F rated.

Jeff

[LAR-15]

Does he really think the 'soccer mom' vote really cares about this?

[gak]

As soon as they can guarantee that all criminals will pin their magazines to 10 rounds I'm ok with this.