Someone help me understand this statement:
“The courts ultimately will decide on the proposed ordinance stating “the people have an individual and fundamental right to keep and bear arms free of infringement by any local, state or federal government; and further, that the method or manner of possession, carrying or transporting said arms shall not be infringed.””
The puzzling question is why courts are routinely overriding the will of the people?
In theory, at least, courts answer to constitutions rather than the will of the people. In reality, all too many judges answer to their own prejudices rather than constitutions, which is, for all practical purposes, no different from answering to the mob.
Again in theory, constitutional guarantees take precedence over the will of the people. The good people of Pike County have expressed their will. It's now up to the good people of Illinois to override the will of the representatives of the Democratic [sic] party in Chicago and restore their Second Amendment rights in the state legislature.