Evanston Votes To Amend Gun Ban—Tries To Avoid NRA Lawsuit

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tennreb

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
19
Location
Painesville, Ohio
Friday, July 18, 2008

Unlike the debacle in Washington, D.C., in the wake of the Supreme Court's Heller decision -- and in an effort to avoid NRA's lawsuit against their city -- aldermen in the Chicago suburb of Evanston unanimously voted to amend the city's 27-year-old handgun ban at a recent closed-door meeting.

The day after the Supreme Court ruled that laws requiring handguns in homes be disassembled and outfitted with trigger locks are incompatible with the gun rights accorded under the Second Amendment, NRA filed lawsuits challenging local gun bans in Chicago and the suburban towns of Evanston, Morton Grove, and Oak Park. Evanston city council members subsequently authorized a resolution that would rewrite their city's ordinance to comply with the Supreme Court ruling and avoid the NRA lawsuit.

"No one was particularly happy or anxious to do anything that would change the ordinance," Alderman Edmund Moran (6th) said. "But we're being confronted with this lawsuit and rather than engaging in a protracted fight and spending a lot of money, it would be a better course of action to revise our ordinance in a way that it would make it more legally sustainable."

With a new ordinance in place, the city of Evanston is now seeking to have the NRA lawsuit dismissed.

Rest assured we will keep you apprised of any future developments.

NRA
 
Commonsense prevails in Evanston.
Fenty,Lanier, Holmes and anarchy prevails in DC.
For now.
It won't last long.
 
I will believe common sense prevailed in Evanston after I have read the new ordinance, and seen that it is in conformity with the 2nd Amendment. So far, what I have read is that they (a) held a closed door meeting; (b) revised the ordinance; and (c) want the NRA lawsuit dismissed.

There's something missing ...
 
I wouldn't be so happy yet guys. Evanston is removing the ban in an effort to still maintain strict control on gun ownership.

They don't seem to be embracing the Heller decision at all, only changing their laws as a matter of necessity.
 
picard +1

I didn't read anything that shows that these people want to embrace the supreme court or the 2nd amendment.

Give only credit for attempting to pacify you. I say contact NRA representative an encourage the NRA to move forward until Evanston recognizes their citizens as people with inalienable rights.
 
Too early to either cry "foul" or pop champagne corks - WE DON'T KNOW what Evanston's new ordinance actually says.
 
So far, Wash. DC is classing the single stack 8 rd 1911 Auto as a "machine gun" -- presumably because you can find 10 rd mags for them.
Click to expand...

Actually, is because you can (allegedly) get 11 round mags for them, not 10. The statute says "capable of firing 12 rounds or more without changing mags" or similar - "OR readily convertible to do so." That means 11 in the mag and 1 in the pipe. I know of no one who makes an 11 round mag, so how in the world is a 1911 "readily convertible" to firing 12 rounds? So DC is violating their OWN LAW!
 
Evanston city council members subsequently authorized a resolution that would rewrite their city's ordinance to comply with the Supreme Court ruling and avoid the NRA lawsuit.
Click to expand...
Hogwash!

The NRA never does anything constructive for gun owners! I know that's true cuz I read it on the internet all the time.

They must mean they want to avoid a GOA lawsuit...
 
Actually, is because you can (allegedly) get 11 round mags for them, not 10. The statute says "capable of firing 12 rounds or more without changing mags" or similar - "OR readily convertible to do so." That means 11 in the mag and 1 in the pipe. I know of no one who makes an 11 round mag, so how in the world is a 1911 "readily convertible" to firing 12 rounds? So DC is violating their OWN LAW!
Click to expand...


40 round 1911 drum mag
 
Ok, fine, but it's STILL not "readily convertible" unless I actually have possession of one of those.

If they exist but I don't have possession, then it's merely "convertible" to firing more than 12.

But the words they chose are "READILY" convertible - READILY means readily - within just a few seconds or few minutes. If I have no possession of a 40 rounder, it would take days or weeks to place my order for one and have it shipped to me. So it's most certainly not "readily convertible" unless I actually possess the higher capacity mag.

Point is, they won't even follow their OWN laws, let alone the law which the SCOTUS laid down, about "common usage" guns being protected.
 
Point is, they won't even follow their OWN laws, let alone the law which the SCOTUS laid down, about "common usage" guns being protected.
Click to expand...

This ,"common usage" ,is the most salient point.
Only a matter of time that Fenty,et alia,get this shoved down their throats and give up.
Thank you,Justice Scalia.
 
"No one was particularly happy or anxious to do anything that would change the ordinance," Alderman Edmund Moran (6th) said. "But we're being confronted with this lawsuit and rather than engaging in a protracted fight and spending a lot of money, it would be a better course of action to revise our ordinance in a way that it would make it more legally sustainable."
Click to expand...

They hate American law and those of us who choose to exercise our Second Amendment rights, but aren't willing to spend money.

Beneath contempt.
 
It would seem that they have changed the ordinance enough that they believe that they can convince a judge that the NRA lawsuit should be dropped. I don't know how much "enough" is in Chicago-area federal courts. But, given that the legal system generally seems to be biased in the direction of allowing a suit to go forward if there is any reasonable possibility of the plaintiff prevailing, I would expect that the City must have fixed everything for which there is a claim in the NRA lawsuit.
 
They just want someone else to spend the bucks fighting in court and will immediately change the law back if Chicago or DC prevail. Good strategy but you can bet they aren't conceding a win to the NRA.
 
Unless the website is out of date, the Evanston, IL, City Code has not changed.

http://66.113.195.234/IL/Evanston/index.htm
9-8-2: POSSESSION:

No person shall possess, in the city of Evanston any handgun, unless the same has been rendered permanently inoperative. (Ord. 42-0-05)
Click to expand...
9-8-3: FIREARM DEALERS PROHIBITED:

No person, firm or corporation shall engage in the business of a dealer in firearms or handguns or ammunition in the city, including exchange, loan, rental or other transfer for consideration. (Ord. 42-0-05)
Click to expand...
 
I'd be surprised if the website was updated on any kind of a regular basis. Though what I would expect to see within the next day or so is a news report with solid references to exactly how Evanston amended their laws.
 
Is it possible that some municipalities are basically respecting the constitution as it is now interpreted?
Click to expand...

Not likely. They are just hiding behind the skirts of D.C. and Chicago so they don't have to fund a big lawsuit battle that they are going to lose.

They will let the taxpayers of Chicago and D.C. take the hit and then if by some minor miracle they succeed, they will change the law back as much as practicable.

Legally, it is a smart strategy. If Chicago or D.C. were playing it, it would be much harder to achieve our goals through litigation. Luckily, Chicago and D.C. have both being as extremist as possible and doing everything they can to derail the ruling. In fact, they are pretty much creating the same environment that made Brown v. Board of Education so effective in eventually dismantling institutionalized bigotry. I laugh a little every time I see them on T.V.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
  • Locked
Chicago Anti-Gun Propaganda
Replies
18
Views
1K
RP88
R
D
  • Locked
Evanston Illinois repeals gun ban (finally!)
Replies
2
Views
343
Standing Wolf
S
Neo-Luddite
  • Locked
Evanston amends its gun-ban law (Chicago Tribune)
Replies
21
Views
1K
rainbowbob
R
M
  • Locked
NRA files Second Amendment lawsuits in Illinois and California
Replies
5
Views
580
Cougfan2
C
S
  • Locked
Chicago's Daley Blinks:May Drop Fight to Keep Handgun Ban
2 3
Replies
50
Views
3K
Blackbeard
Blackbeard
Back
Top