Anti Gun Illinois Senator using State Police


PDA






Anotherguy
June 19, 2007, 12:49 AM
.....to possibly harass his constituents that called or faxed him in opposition to anti gun legislation.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/06-18-2007/0004610614&EDATE=

If you enjoyed reading about "Anti Gun Illinois Senator using State Police" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
gc70
June 19, 2007, 01:02 AM
"If Sen. Kotowski cannot produce any such evidence, then we will be asking Attorney General Madigan to conduct an investigation into the apparent use of the ISP to suppress the First Amendment rights of persons who express opposition to gun control legislation."Why goes second-string? Freedom of speech is a federal civil right, enforced by the Justice Department.

never_retreat
June 19, 2007, 01:08 AM
This is my gun and this is my gestapo.

Autolycus
June 19, 2007, 01:33 AM
Its getting more and more oppressive in this state and the majority of people here do not seem to care. I cannot wait to leave this place!

Don Gwinn
June 19, 2007, 01:52 AM
Oh, Dan . . . . will you never learn? What an assclown.

What kind of bugs me is that I didn't get a visit. I live less than an hour from the state ISP headquarters over there on I55, I teach children for a living, and I write a blog called "The Armed Schoolteacher." What does it take to get repressed in this state, anyway? Srsly you guyz.

If he thought he was getting phone calls and faxes before . . . . I'm tempted to call him up and do the Dale Gribble voice:
"You don't know who I am but I know where you live . . . ."
But I've probably pushed that joke as far as it can go; I used to sign in at the security desk at the state Capitol building as "Rusty Shackleford."

This seems like an excellent time to note that Kotowski has made the mistake of angering "Mack" MacWilliams, who is organizing grassroots teams to work the districts of anti-gunners. Kotowski is job one. I'm hoping I get to work his district, but I'm signed up for whatever is needed.

If you'd like to sign up to travel around these idiots' districts convincing people to give 'em the boot, email tbi2a@frontiernet.net
I am in the process for forming teams to work on some of the campaigns in the coming 08 election and am looking to build a contact database of individuals who want to give a weekend or two to get some of these anti-gun legislators out of office and some pro-gunners in. I'm looking to form teams close by a target district so no one person has to drive a considerable distance. The Simpson/Bond race in District 31 was lost by a total of 1113 votes and the guy we just love to hate Senator Kotowski won by a total of 1435 votes. People going door to door to Get Out the Vote (GOTV) can make the difference as well as get the ear of the candidate if he or she should win because of our effort. If you interested in this project, send me your contact information and I will keep this info confidential. I need your name, mailing address, phone number and email address. When we get enough people in a certain area, I'd like to get everyone from that area together and elect a team leader to organize the GOTV session, that way you would get to know the other people in your area and all work together to make this possible. Will this work? Only if you make it happen. If you would like to be on one of these teams, email me and I'll get you on the list. When we start getting enough people, I'll start grouping everyone together.

Mac McWilliams

tbi2a@frontiernet.net

www.IllinoisCarry.com (http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=5272)

Kentak
June 19, 2007, 08:39 AM
The ISRA said it best:

"The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right of
citizens to petition the government for the redress of grievances," said
ISRA Executive Director, Richard Pearson. "Of course, the manner in which
citizens exercise that right must not include any threats of harm against
elected officials."

One would hope all RKBA proponents follow that advice. Alas, we all know there is a minority fringe that either has a deficiency of common sense or may believe threats against the person (as opposed to political career) are justified. Such individuals do RKBA great harm.

The ISRA is right to disavow such threatening advocacy, and equally right to demand that this politico justify this action by proving threats. Unfortunately, if they exist, they will not put gun control opponents in a good light. That's why it behooves us all to be forceful, but rational and civil in our expression of displeasure with our representatives' actions.

K

jselvy
June 19, 2007, 09:35 AM
How do you define threat?
Is there not an inherent threat in the ownership of arms?
It was, I believe, included as a serious backstop in the fight for civil rights. And is therefore a threat to an oppressive regime.

Jefferson

Autolycus
June 19, 2007, 10:17 AM
I would like to ask, if the man does not believe in the 2nd Amendment, whatever made anyone of us think he would believe in the 1st Amendment?

Kentak
June 19, 2007, 10:33 AM
Is there not an inherent threat in the ownership of arms?

Way to go, jselvy, that's exactly what the Brady Bunch says.

jselvy
June 19, 2007, 10:42 AM
Kentak,
I know that the antis use that argument. I was trying to illuminate the "thought" (if you can actually call it that) processes of the Distinguished Gentleman. Truth be told oppressive and want to be oppressive government officials should fear an armed populace. An inherent threat does not a criminal make. Technically "you will pay for this at the next election" is a threat. Threat is a vague term that can cover a myriad of communications.


Jefferson

Kentak
June 19, 2007, 10:43 AM
P.S.

I am in NO way defending Kotowski. The ISRA says they've examined the faxes and couldn't find justification for ISP visits to the originator. I tend to believe them. My post was simply a reminder to be careful how you word your displeasure when you communicate with these asshats. Ditto to what Tecumseh said.

K

Kentak
June 19, 2007, 10:45 AM
jselvy,

Thanks for the clarification. I just know that our words here are probably scrutinized by the opposition for ammunition. Gosh, I hope that's not too tin hattery! LOL.

K

Kentak
June 19, 2007, 10:48 AM
"you will pay for this at the next election" is a threat.

And I see nothing wrong with that kind of threat. Just as I will be writing my reps to say, "Ignore this mandate (to secure the borders) at peril of your political career."

K

jselvy
June 19, 2007, 10:56 AM
Kentak,

I didn't mean that there was anything wrong with that threat, just that it was a threat. A wise man once wrote that voting is exercising political power, and power is violence. This could be construed to mean that voting against a particular politician is doing violence to them. Thus to state that you will vote against them if they do not represent your interests is a threat of violence. I will not make moral (good, bad, or indifferent) judgments about that threat but technically it is a threat nonetheless.

Jefferson

BTW The wise man was Robert A. Heinlein in the book Starship Troopers a novel on political theory disguised as science fiction. A romping good read, I highly recommend it.

S.P.E.C.T.R.E.
June 19, 2007, 10:59 AM
I really wish that cops would refuse to participate in this type of thing. This is extremely unnerving.

WeThePeople
June 19, 2007, 11:03 AM
This wreaks of Trent Lott's recent comments. He very recently said in regard to the immigration bill's defeat “Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that problem.”

At some point, Mr. Lott said, Senate Republican leaders may try to rein in “younger guys who are huffing and puffing against the bill.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/15/washington/15immig.html?ei=5099&en=0fadcc32e711981d&ex=1182484800&adxnnl=1&partner=TOPIXNEWS&adxnnlx=1181927333-P5hPmYu7q38uxSRhO18Guw

Where the heck are these guys getting the idea that they have ANY kind of power over our thoughts? If we don't like their gun bans, we're nuts and need to shut up and stay out of the process. If we don't like their immigration nonsense, they need to "deal with" us?

Man, these nut jobs are really frustrating to deal with. The worst part is that they keep getting elected regardless of the fact that they seem, in my opinion anyway, to be outspoken fascists.

DonP
June 19, 2007, 11:05 AM
In Kotowski's "Brady designed" world, anyone that owns a gun is obviously a threat and any contact from them constitutes a potential problem that should be addressed pre-emptively.

I have no doubt that he feels using the state police to send a warning message to "protestors" is perfectly justified. After all he knows what the right thing to do is and the rest of you peasants should just shut up and know your place.

Deanimator
June 19, 2007, 11:10 AM
Nowhere here do I see mention of a warrant.

My ironclad rule of police visits:

Get a warrant or get bent.

I will NEVER allow a cop into my house without a warrant, and if at ALL possible without my lawyer present.

I would tell them that if they want to talk, to make an appointment to meet me at my lawyer's office. I would also tell them that my lawyer planned to record the conversation.

I'm betting that would stop most of this...

jselvy
June 19, 2007, 11:13 AM
I hope that the State Police involved know that " I was just following orders" is NOT a valid defense. U.S. judges were involved at Nuremberg, making this valid U.S. case law (I think). It would be unfortunate if there were an eventual backlash over this that put then in prison for violating the civil rights of those that they are asked to intimidate.

Jefferson
BTW technically that's a threat too.

JohnBT
June 19, 2007, 11:39 AM
"Is there not an inherent threat in the ownership of arms?"

I own a chainsaw too, but don't take a day off from work to wait for me to come over and trim your trees.

John

jselvy
June 19, 2007, 11:41 AM
Are ya sure John? I'll buy ya a beer if you do.

Jefferson

scout26
June 19, 2007, 01:24 PM
And a Priest can openly threaten, not only private citizens, but also state legislators with being "snuffed" for not sharing his views, but if you send a fax saying "I oppose your stand on gun control" to a state senator and the ISP comes to visit.

Any wonder why I call this place "The People's Democratic Republic of Illinois".

Meanwhile back in Springfield, the the budget has not been passed, Electric Rate "Reform" is not finished, and CTA/RTA fiasco is a clear demonstration of what will happen when the government takes over health care.

ConstitutionCowboy
June 19, 2007, 01:53 PM
Were any warrants issued to send the police out to question these people?

Woody

Spartacus451
June 19, 2007, 03:22 PM
Were any warrants issued to send the police out to question these people?
Why would a warrant be necessary?

jselvy
June 19, 2007, 03:34 PM
Wouldn't a warrant be necessary for the police to detain you for questioning?

OTH If they are willing to dispense with the First amendment, ignore the second amendment, they probably won't have much respect for they fourth, fifth, ninth, tenth, and fourteenth amendments.

Jefferson

ancient_philosophy
June 19, 2007, 03:37 PM
Someone needs to FORWARD this damming into to some news guys, such as Hannity, or OReiley....

im sure they would love to jump on this miserable representative who is jumping upon lawful gun owners voicing their 1st amend. rights.


this miserable person needs MORE exposure

ancient_philosophy
June 19, 2007, 03:45 PM
call DAN, press #1 , to talk to DAN, or leave him a message, I DID :D

be sure to be civil, because DAN is obviously "threatened" by anyone who questions his lack of intelligence :scrutiny:


Dan Kotowski:::::847-268-4033

JohnBT
June 19, 2007, 03:50 PM
"Are ya sure John? I'll buy ya a beer if you do."

Do you have a 40-foot ladder and a six pack? I like excitement. The guys I used to work with at the tree service company drank everyday on the way to the first job and it always looked like fun.

John

ConstitutionCowboy
June 19, 2007, 03:55 PM
Why would a warrant be necessary?

I didn't say a warrant was or wasn't necessary. I want to know yea or nay because if the police were sent out without warrants, obviously their investigation of the "evidence" did not warrant arresting or filing charges against any of those people who sent faxes. It means the police were sent to intimidate.

Woody

Look at your rights and freedoms as what would be required to survive and be free as if there were no government. Governments come and go, but your rights live on. If you wish to survive government, you must protect with jealous resolve all the powers that come with your rights - especially with the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Without the power of those arms, you will perish with that government - or at its hand. B.E. Wood

Deanimator
June 19, 2007, 04:04 PM
Wouldn't a warrant be necessary for the police to detain you for questioning?

OTH If they are willing to dispense with the First amendment, ignore the second amendment, they probably won't have much respect for they fourth, fifth, ninth, tenth, and fourteenth amendments.

Not necessarily for questioning, but I'm betting they'd need one to enter your home without your permission, which you should NEVER give.

They can do all of the things which you note above. However a cost attaches if you're not willing to just roll over and be abused. When somebody tries to intimidate me, it's all downhill from there. I'll ruin your day, no matter what it costs me. I never let that kind of thing go.

Soybomb
June 22, 2007, 04:37 AM
I am in NO way defending Kotowski. The ISRA says they've examined the faxes and couldn't find justification for ISP visits to the originator. I tend to believe them.
I have no reason to not believe them but I'd like to see some scans of faxes that got ISP visits posted as well as a more solid list of who/how many people received visits. If you've got proof on your side, show it off and make your case look even stronger.

Kingcreek
June 22, 2007, 11:14 AM
Katowski put out a press release yesterday claiming death threats against him because of his anti-gun position. Sounded like damage control to me, to counter the ISRA claims. He said he was scared but wasn't going to let that change his stance. said that it was appropriate to let the ISP handle it, just like they would for the governor or any other elected official.

ConstitutionCowboy
June 22, 2007, 11:34 AM
If Katowski is going to try these people in the media, he needs to present his evidence in the media. Cough up the faxes, Katowski.

Woody

"If they silence the sound of my voice, they'll surely hear the sound of my gun - if I decide to use something subsonic, that is!" B.E.Wood

ilbob
June 25, 2007, 04:46 PM
Its seems Blago is using the ISP more and more as a political tool. While the ISP has never been known for their crime fighting acumen, at least in previous administration they were not overtly taking sides in political affairs. This is not a good sign. Hopefully the people of IL get seriously offended by this. But I wouldn't bet on it.

rdhood
June 25, 2007, 04:57 PM
How do you define threat?
Is there not an inherent threat in the ownership of arms?

Yep. The paper targets, deer, squirrels, and all manner of vermin are shaking in their paws.

Oh, you mean "Is there not an inherent threat in the ownership of firearms" that is a general threat to every person? NO, and it takes a mentally unstable and paranoid person to believe so. Any person who believes so should NOT have a gun.

HiroProX
June 25, 2007, 05:05 PM
Jefferson

BTW The wise man was Robert A. Heinlein in the book Starship Troopers a novel on political theory disguised as science fiction. A romping good read, I highly recommend it.

See also, my sig line.

If you enjoyed reading about "Anti Gun Illinois Senator using State Police" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!