Official: Illinois becomes last State in the nation to have Concealed Carry

Fight isn't over yet, not by a long shot.

They're going to use this law as a new battleground to make deals on other issues.

The question that remains is will it get whittled away slowly to further uselessness, or made stronger with time?

The list of gun free zones is staggering.

Very glad to hear this.

No doubt, the fight isn't over and the anti-Constitutionalists will try to subvert this with all sorts of local rulings.

Keep at it!

One Word (sic)

Wshew!

Trent said:

Fight isn't over yet, not by a long shot.

They're going to use this law as a new battleground to make deals on other issues.

The question that remains is will it get whittled away slowly to further uselessness, or made stronger with time?

The list of gun free zones is staggering.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm sure Kim Jung Emmanuel is just going to roll over and accept this.

Mgkdrgn, The bill that passed is a shall issue bill. This is Illinois, thankfully not Maryland, New Jersey or Hawaii.

To all those who said "They'll be packing on the trains in Tokyo before Illinois gets carry. Time to sit down to a nice meal of CROW!

Kim Jung Emmanuel is just going to have to accept that he no longer has complete control over the fiefdom of Chicago. It will probably take some lawsuits against the city for unlawful arrests and big payouts from the city though. The bill had preemption so except for the AWB in Chicago so the ordinances requiring a Chicago Firearms License and special transport requirements more restrictive than state law, go away.

I have no doubt that Illinoiscarry.com will after 9 years of fighting to get license to carry will continue to fight to reduce the restrictions to carry in the bill.

At the least, my home state (with a big push from the Federal Courts) has actually admitted that the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution does exist!



- some restrictions apply, not available at all locations, void where prohibited -

Even though I'll never be able to carry in Illinois with my Texas CHL, I'm sure that as soon as you guys start getting licenses issued that Texas will recognise Illinois CHL holders.

Last year's attempt was a better bill. As originally introduced, this bill was barely acceptable. After the Senate screwed around with it, it got worse. Unfortunately, that's what got passed. Thankfully, Baldy lost big-time!

Click to expand...

I totally agree that its a horrible law, but honestly its more than I ever expected IL to see. Just don't give up the fight, you have your foot in the door, now keep pushing to get a better CCW law.

Archaic said:

Really, except for the 16 hours (Texas is 10), its not much different than most other states. The defining word is SHALL. Compared to CA, NY, MA, etc., that word is golden.

Click to expand...

The 16 hours sounds a lot worse than it actually is. I talked to my Representative Monday before he left for Springfield and he mentioned that-IIRC-Vets get 8 hrs. waived. Completion of ANY hunter safety course excuses you from 8 hrs. There were a couple of other ways to be excused that I'm not real sure of yet.
Some people are going to get hit with the full 16 hrs. no doubt, but it seems like the GA made a good attempt to cut some of the "training" from a lot of citizens.

Any word from the Federal Court?

Did they go ahead with the injunction on UUW as they said they would?

IL state police issued a statement saying "after July 9th we will still arrest people under existing UUW law"... but wasn't that law supposed to go the way of the buffalo yesterday?

Blackbeard said:

Anyone got a list of the slaughter zones? (i.e. gun-free)

Click to expand...

"Chicago Democrats repulsed by gun violence got a long list of places deemed off limits to guns, including schools, libraries, parks and mass transit buses and trains. The law will allow diners to carry weapons into restaurants and other establishments where liquor comprises no more than 50 percent of gross sales."

Chicago Democrats. Yep.

Trent said:

Any word from the Federal Court?

Did they go ahead with the injunction on UUW as they said they would?

IL state police issued a statement saying "after July 9th we will still arrest people under existing UUW law"... but wasn't that law supposed to go the way of the buffalo yesterday?

Click to expand...

I'm not surprised the ISP would issue such a statement. If they arrested someone under the old uuw law it surely would be contested in court. The Illinois tax payers would foot the bill on something that would more than likely get tossed since the federal courts have ruled it unconstitutional. More frivolous spending of taxpayers' money from the Illinois government. I wouldn't expect anything less from Quinn's bunch of lackeys.


Posted from Thehighroad.org App for Android

^^^Well now. What a great opportunity for those in LE to show their true colors. Stand up for the rights of citizens, or roll over to the whims of the Chicago Old Guard.

junglebob said:

Mgkdrgn, The bill that passed is a shall issue bill. This is Illinois, thankfully not Maryland, New Jersey or Hawaii.

To all those who said "They'll be packing on the trains in Tokyo before Illinois gets carry. Time to sit down to a nice meal of CROW!

Click to expand...

I still ain't heard no Fat Lady.

IL state police issued a statement saying "after July 9th we will still arrest people under existing UUW law"... but wasn't that law supposed to go the way of the buffalo yesterday?

Click to expand...

I would expect the “old law” to remain in effect until the effective date when the new law comes on board, (unless of course the Federal Court comes back into the picture) This could be months. However when the recently passed law does take effect - if it does, the Illinois State Police will be on very thin ice if they continued to enforce the previous statute. A number of gun-rights organizations would love to bury them in class action lawsuits.

The 16 hours is not a big deal. They give credit for Hunter Safety, CFP course etc up to 8 hrs so for many (most?) of us it is a one day requirement. Without this law I would be redoing my CFP class this month anyway as it is required every 3 years.

The only other real issue I have with it is the parks requirement. Parks are just open public space like sidewalks and roads. There is no "reason" guns should be prohibited. Obviously I would prefer no restrictions but that one bugs me the most. Is my boat in a park district harbor a no gun zone? hard to tell.

Old Fuff said:

I would expect the “old law” to remain in effect until the effective date when the new law comes on board, (unless of course the Federal Court comes back into the picture) This could be months. However when the recently passed law does take effect - if it does, the Illinois State Police will be on very thin ice if they continued to enforce the previous statute. A number of gun-rights organizations would love to bury them in class action lawsuits.

Click to expand...

Man I completely agree. If I had a little more money, and a whole lot more time, I'd have my lawyer tear them a new one over what they've pulled.

Now that it's been signed, let's do the math.

July 9 + 180 days for ISP to start accepting applications = January 5, 2014

Assuming (and you know what they say about that) they deliver certified instructors in a timely fashion, AND you can get in to a class before then, AND you have *everything ready to go on January 5, 2014*, you can submit your application to the Illinois State Police.

Now, several clocks start.

Local and state police have 30 days to file an objection to your application.

If no objection is filed, and you are FIRST in line, you "shall" receive your concealed carry license no later than April 5, 2014.

Here's where it gets fun. If ANY of the law enforcement agencies in Illinois objects to your application, a review board consisting solely of Governor Quinn's appointed members determines if you will be issued a license.

The review hearing is secret, off the record, and not subject to freedom of information act requests.

At their SOLE discretion, with no further oversight, the Governor appointed Review Board can delay your hearing an additional 30 days.

They can exercise this right as many times as they want. There is no limit.

So some people might get their Concealed Carry Licenses, well, about the time that hell freezes over.

There is no recourse, no appeals process.

No one is liable for abuse. All government and law enforcement officials are indemnified from civil or criminal charges under this law.

So, to recap:

• 9+ months to get a license
• State Police controls who is certified for instruction
• Can't carry anywhere worthwhile (can't protect my children)
• No recourse if the review system is abused.
• No recourse if the state doesn't meet the deadlines in the law. (the original bill had damage awards if they didn't issue in a timely fashion)
• High cost. Even higher for out of staters.
• No reciprocity.

I could go on and on, but really, at this point we're beating a dead cat.

We went from a de-facto ban, to "might as well be banned."

To recap:

The Federal Court said the State of Illinois total ban on carrying a firearm for self defense was unconstitutional.

WE ARE STILL DENIED THAT RIGHT, now over 7 months after that ruling, and for (at least) another 9 months beyond that. And what we get at the end of that road is next to worthless for most everyone. No public transportation? No public places?

Hell, I can ALREADY carry a loaded firearm at my business and home. I'm gaining the ability to carry in my car, instead of having to unload it and toss it and the loaded magazine in the glove box. Big deal. Won't be allowed to carry any other place I go to.

Local restaurant we eat lunch at, at work, is a pub. Can't carry there. (Only food in town, besides subway)

Take my kids to the pool in the park. Can't carry there.

Take my kids to the playground, can't carry there.

Etc. Virtually everywhere I go, will be banned.

I seriously hope the Federal Court smacks them.

Hard.

Trent asked:

Any word from the Federal Court?

Did they go ahead with the injunction on UUW as they said they would?

IL state police issued a statement saying "after July 9th we will still arrest people under existing UUW law"... but wasn't that law supposed to go the way of the buffalo yesterday?

Click to expand...

As I understand it, the injunction was NOT implemented as there is a law in place now.
Certain UUW statutes still apply as OC is still banned and they can still prosecute (persecute) that.

As so many have said - "I ain't heard no fat lady yet!"

As I understand it, the injunction was NOT implemented as there is a law in place now.

Click to expand...

Not quite: The Court found that the previous Illinois statute was unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court’s Heller and MacDonald decisions. But it allowed the Illinois Legislature and Governor to correct the situation by amending the old law or replacing it with a new one that would provide the remedies the Court demanded. If they did nothing then there would be no law on the books.

Not wanting that, the Legislature – over the Governor’s veto – did pass a law. But now the U.S. District Judge will have to decide if the new law does or doesn’t address the conditions he said had to be remedied in a satisfactory manner. If he finds it doesn’t then we’re back to “no law.” If he is satisfied, the new law will remain in place, unless one or the other of the two sides appeals to a higher court. For the anti-gun side of the issue this poses a grave risk, because if they lost it could disqualify a lot of gun control statutes in other states.

Take this new statute, and in place of “guns” or “gun owner” or anything related. substitute the words “vote” or “voter” or related and see what it reads like.

The "Right to keep and bear arms," and to do so outside of their residence, is a Constitutionally protected civil right! Subject only to "reasonable" regulation. Now we are about to find out what's considered "reasonable."

Trent said:

To recap:

The Federal Court said the State of Illinois total ban on carrying a firearm for self defense was unconstitutional.

WE ARE STILL DENIED THAT RIGHT, now over 7 months after that ruling, and for (at least) another 9 months beyond that. And what we get at the end of that road is next to worthless for most everyone. No public transportation? No public places?

Hell, I can ALREADY carry a loaded firearm at my business and home. I'm gaining the ability to carry in my car, instead of having to unload it and toss it and the loaded magazine in the glove box. Big deal. Won't be allowed to carry any other place I go to.

Local restaurant we eat lunch at, at work, is a pub. Can't carry there. (Only food in town, besides subway)

Take my kids to the pool in the park. Can't carry there.

Take my kids to the playground, can't carry there.

Etc. Virtually everywhere I go, will be banned.

I seriously hope the Federal Court smacks them.

Hard.

Click to expand...

Isn't it also banned 1000 feet around any of those places or something like that?

JTHunter said:

Trent asked:

As I understand it, the injunction was NOT implemented as there is a law in place now.
Certain UUW statutes still apply as OC is still banned and they can still prosecute (persecute) that.

As so many have said - "I ain't heard no fat lady yet!"

Click to expand...

Both sides have filed additional motions.

Madigan is asking for the Federal Court to render the cases MOOT.

The other side is insisting on an injunction to begin carrying immediately using the newly passed statutes as a guideline for behavior.