Skip to comments.How to Write a Concealed Carry Law in Illinois
Posted on 02/27/2013 3:35:16 PM PST by Petruchio
I was watching this process yesterday If it was not so asinine, it would be funny.
1- Have the extremely anti-gun House Leader, Michael J. Madigan, introduce a Bill that "Amends the Criminal Code of 2012. Makes a technical change in a Section concerning the unlawful use of weapons."
2- Copy and post the text of an existing Law, in this case 720 ILCS 5/24-1.
3- Make your "technical change". In line #8, strike the word the, and replace it with the word the.
4- Create an Amendment template:
AMENDMENT TO HOUSE BILL 1155
AMENDMENT NO. ______. Amend House Bill 1155, AS AMENDED, by inserting the following in its proper numeric sequence:
In this area add the specific area or place you want to ban the ability to Conceal Carry .
The United States Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 128 S.Ct. 2783 (2008) has recognized that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution does not confer an unlimited right and that states may prohibit the carrying of firearms in sensitive places. The Supreme Court stated in the Heller decision: "Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings . . ." The Supreme Court also noted in a footnote referencing this statement in the Heller decision that: "We identify these presumptively lawful regulatory measures only as examples; our list does not purport to be exhaustive." This recognition was reiterated by the U. S. Supreme Court in McDonald v. the City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 130 S.Ct. 3020 (2010), which incorporated the Second Amendment against state action. The Supreme Court again stated: "We made it clear in Heller that our holding did not cast doubt on such longstanding regulatory measures as "prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill," "laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings . . . We repeat those assurances here." Further, the federal 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Moore v. Madigan, 702 F.3d. 933 (7th Cir., 2012) cited the "sensitive place" statement of the Supreme Court in both the Heller and McDonald decisions and concluded: "That a legislature can forbid the carrying of firearms in schools and government buildings means that any right to possess a gun for self-defense outside the home is not absolute, and it is not absolute by the Supreme Court's own terms." Therefore, the General Assembly finds that the place or location set forth in subsection (a) of this Section is a sensitive place and the prohibition on the carrying of firearms will promote public safety in this sensitive place.".
Comment: Quoting the Court Decisions in every Amendment makes them look like petulant little children. We don't wanna do this, but we gotta, so we are making this as painful to you as possible . . .
5- Using this template, file as many amendments as you can think of. (so far, 31) In each one call a prohibited area a "sensitive place" as your justification. Be as petty as possible.
6- Vote in lockstep to force every amendment to be included.
So far they have passed:
Also, every prohibition includes or onto any adjacent property or parking lot area under the control of or owned by This means that if you can't carry in a specific place, you also can't lock your weapon in your POV.
Still Pending a Vote:
7- Delay the effective date 180 days. The Court "stayed the mandate for 180 days to give the Illinois legislature time to enact laws that comport with the Constitution. " The first lines of the Bill give an effective date as the day the Bill becomes Law. This Amendment delays it 180 days with the intent of passing the Bill on the very last day . . . another act of a spoiled child having a tantrum.
I read each and every Amendment. I finally found the text of the actual Concealed Carry Bill in Amendment #27. The actual CCW text in Amendment #27 is not perfect, but is a workable Shall Issue Bill. It was written with the cooperation of the Illinois State Rifle Association and the NRA.
I suspect this will go on and on and on for as long as they can stretch it out. The Court decided that we will have CCW in Illinois. The Chicago Democrats are trying to make the process as hard and painful as possible.
20 hours of classroom training and 20 hours of live fire training? I didn’t get that much training in the USAF!
Chicago will never have meaningful CCW regardless of any court rulings. Look at DC after Heller. Pre-Heller it was impossible to get and own a hangun. Post-Heller, it is only “nearly impossible.”
That is what is called for in the pending amendment. the actual Bill in amendment 27 calls for 6 hours classroom and 30 rounds livefire. (10 rounds each from 5 yards, 7 yards, 10 yards, at least 70% hits)
There's also a requirement for five more hours of each to renew the CCP. Presumably that will require annual renewal, but they may surprise me.
And you'll need a liability policy for each weapon in the amount of $1,000,000. As the residents of New York State have learned, the premiums are about $2,000 a year.
The exclusions basically mean that in about two-thirds of the places you might feel that you need concealed carry, it will be illegal.
Keep in mind the second list is amendments that were filed but not passed. Yet. A few were even withdrawn for now but can be refiled at any time.
Hopefully they have been so crude in their efforts that it will truly tick off the judges of the 7th Circuit who ordered this. In that case, they should reward such cheekiness with appointing a “special master” who would in effect write Illinois’ cc law in such a way as it is not in conflict with any federal court decision of the 7th Circuit or Supreme Court. With probably more gun liberty than even the NRA has asked for.
And fine the state between $1m and $10m a day until it is passed by the legislature and signed by the governor.
If it sounds intrusive, it is, but about as intrusive as when the federal courts ordered the states to bus school children for purposes of integration.
I am familiar with the process that Missouri went through. It is important to keep the number of prominent LEOs who vocally oppose the issue to a minimum. But in Missouri it turned out that the ones who said they opposed it all did so on the grounds that the proposed fees were not enough to cover their costs in processing the applications.
But when the fee was set to a level that was higher than any LEO claimed he needed ($100), it was amazing how their opposition mostly melted away. In fact, after the law went into effect the LEOs now see CCW permits as a profit center.
My take— I would rather have CCW with a fee that might be reduced later than have no CCW at all.
As I tried to explain above, #31 is a stinker. #1 states it is effective immediately. #31 adds another 180 days from passage. If they hold off on passage until the last day of the Court Ordered 180 days, then add another 180 days, we lose a year of CC.
Those amendments that were withdrawn can always be refiled at any time.
The last few amendments have been filed only, not acted on.
20 hours of live fire training is an absolute joke. We send soldiers to war with less than 20 hours of live fire training under their web gear.
Never forget the Chicago aldercreature’s attitude towards CCW. Long ago they exempted themselves by declaring certain politicians “officers of the peace.”
FTR, Mikie Madigan can KMA. Illinois already lost this native son for lack of CCW.
Then Madigan can have his pet monkey Gov Potato Head print copies for everyone and they stick it up their collective @$$es. Starting with that Chicago NAZI, Ira Silverstein (1).
(1) Search Google News for the latest idea this schmuck came up. A State Law to Boot then Confiscate cars of people anywhere in IL who owe money to Chi and his BFF, 'Bath-house Rahm'. Oh and Ira's (cough, fug-ugly2) 'wife' just happens to be a Chicago Alderman.
(Making them wear Yellow Stars was his 1st idea, but he then realized that was to lenient)
also it is not just the second amendment:
it is also the 9th at issue. “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
The left never mentions that part when they say “it is not listed that....”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.