cuchulainn
Member
How's it feel being a bellwether, Illinois?
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=7550960&BRD=1719&PAG=461&dept_id=25271&rfi=6
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=7550960&BRD=1719&PAG=461&dept_id=25271&rfi=6
Measure to ban assault weapons under fire
March 31, 2003
By STEVE WHITWORTH
The Telegraph
SPRINGFIELD -- A bill introduced as part of a gun-control package supported by Chicago Mayor Richard Daley has raised the ire of Second Amendment supporters but appears likely to misfire in a key Illinois Senate committee this week.
The measure, designated Senate Bill 1195, is sponsored by state Sen. Antonio Munoz, D-Chicago. It would change the state’s criminal code by amending the state law regarding manufacture, possession and delivery of semiautomatic assault weapons, large-capacity ammunition feeding devices and assault weapon attachments.
The bill is one of the few pieces remaining from a gun-control package that already has been rejected for the most part by members of the Illinois Senate Judiciary Committee. Two Democrats on the committee have joined Republican members in criticizing the proposals to fingerprint and photograph people getting firearm owners’ identification (FOID) cards, as well as to raise fees for those cards. Lawmakers also have panned proposals that would have required criminal background checks for purchases at gun shows and would have limited handgun purchases to one per month.
While most Democrats favored the bills, state Sens. William Haine of Alton and James Clayborne of East St. Louis voted against most of them.
Many senators reported receiving numerous telephone calls, letters and e-mails during March from citizens wanting to express their opinions about the proposed legislation.
State Sen. Iris Martinez, D-Chicago, one of the co-sponsors of SB 1195, said she believed the vast majority of those who called her office to oppose the measure were gun owners from Downstate Illinois. She said she understood their concerns that the measure would make some types of guns and attachments used by hunters illegal and insisted that was not the intention of the bill’s sponsors.
"I represent a district where there are a lot of guns on the street that are bought illegally," Martinez said. "Somehow, guns are coming into our neighborhoods, and it looks like every gang-banger out there has a gun. My job is to try to address that.
"We’re not trying to take away guns from responsible gun owners," she said. "This bill is not about taking guns away from people, it’s about banning automatic weapons."
Martinez said she also understood the argument of opponents that placing further restrictions on the obtaining of FOID cards would do little to prevent assault-type weapons from winding up in the hands of criminals.
"I know that responsible people with FOID cards are not in Chicago, shooting up people," she said. "But there has to be some legislation that we can start, and we have to continue. Our people have to have hope that somewhere, somehow, we can address this. We’re trying to assure ourselves that people coming forward that have FOID cards don’t have shady backgrounds."
Second Amendment supporters have argued that SB1195 would make the possession of many weapons commonly used by hunters a felony, including most shotguns.
"SB1195 has almost everything that’s against every firearm owner in the state in it," said Richard Pearson, president of the Illinois State Rifle Association. "It would ban anything over .50-caliber, and that includes shotguns. All shotguns except .410s would be banned.
"It would ban semiautomatic rifles, and that would ban most of the target rifles used in this state. If you had your grandfather’s M1 carbine, all its magazines and the rifle would be illegal. And the penalty is seven years in prison for every magazine and seven years for the rifle."
Pearson said he believes it is the intention of SB1195 and those who supported the Daley-backed gun-control package to wipe out most hunting, target rifle shooting and gun collecting in Illinois. He said that threat has prompted an outpouring of concern from gun owners statewide.
"For many years, the hunters and sportsmen of this state thought they were not in the sights of the gun-control crowd," Pearson said. "This bill shows they are. The preamble says the sporting use of firearms is outweighed by the danger to citizens. That is really a direct shot at hunters and sportsmen."
The preamble to SB1195 reads: "The General Assembly finds that the high rate of fire and capacity for firepower of semiautomatic assault weapons, assault weapon attachments and large-capacity ammunition feeding devices pose a significant threat to the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of this state; that the use of these weapons, devices or attachments for sport or recreation is substantially outweighed by the danger these weapons or devices present to human life; and that restrictions should therefore be placed on the manufacture, delivery and possession of these weapons, devices and attachments."
One of the bill’s opponents in the Judiciary Committee has been state Sen. Kirk Dillard, R-Hinsdale. Earlier this month, Dillard offered a so-called "shell" amendment to the bill, which he hoped to use to "gut" it so that it would not reach the Senate floor. Senators on both sides of the issue said last week that they were trying to negotiate compromise language to bring back to the committee this week.
Commentary on the ISRA’s Web site (www.isra.org) warns that Dillard’s amendment may not be enough to prevent SB1195 from being resurrected.
"Rumors exist about the bill having been gutted or shelled -- not true," Todd Vandermyde writes in his "Capitol Commentary." "An amendment was offered to gut the bill while the sponsor works on it. That amendment never made it out of the Rules Committee and has not been adopted. The bill is still as it was drafted. We expect to see the sponsor offer up something as an attempt to water down the proposal to try and gain support."
However, Dillard said he doubted the original language of SB1195 could ever win passage in the committee or in the full Senate.
"There may never be a middle ground between Mayor Daley’s position and that of the ISRA," Dillard said. "I could not vote for SB1195 in its current form on final passage. The bill would have to be very substantially amended to make sure that it did not include hunting rifles, and it didn’t hurt sportsmen, gunshop owners, manufacturers, competitions and gun collectors.
"We also would have to make it very clear that it excluded law enforcement and the military, and those who sell to law enforcement and the military," the senator said. "The bill needs a lot of work. Its chances of passage are less than 50 percent."
Dillard predicted that the bill’s main sponsor, Munoz, and his Chicago allies would work on an amendment that would mirror the federal assault weapon ban, while making sure .50-caliber weapons are not included.
"If we have a federal law, why do we need a state law?" Dillard asked.
He said he did not expect to try to amend the bill substantially this week, but he expects its sponsors to try to make it more palatable to him and other senators.
"I would bet this wouldn’t pass," Dillard said. "I want to make it real clear to my constituents that I don’t support the bill. But I could be for something as long as hunters, ammunition and gunshop owners don’t get hurt.
"I’m not going to do anything that will cost one Illinoisan a job," he said, referring to ammunition manufacturing giant Olin Corp. of East Alton, as well as numerous small businesses that manufacture guns and related equipment statewide.
Dillard notes that the bill would have to be approved by the Judiciary Committee by Friday, or it will be dead for this legislative session. He reiterated that he thinks the chances of passing any version of SB1195 by the end of this week are less than 50 percent.
The Associated Press contributed some information for this article.
[email protected]
©The Telegraph 2003
:banghead: 