faint glimer of potential progress in illinois



faint glimer of potential progress in illinois

Postby grumpyvette » December 11th, 2012, 2:44 pm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/1 ... d%3D244020

http://blogs.suntimes.com/politics/2012 ... apons.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12 ... d-weapons/

CHICAGO -- The long-standing ban on carrying concealed weapons in Illinois is over.

On Tuesday, a federal appeals court in Chicago tossed the state's ban on carrying concealed weapons, reports the Sun-Times. The court is giving the Illinois state legislature 180 days to craft a law legalizing concealed carry.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in two downstate Illinois cases that challenged the state's concealed weapons ban, according to the Sun-Times.

"We are disinclined to engage in another round of historical analysis to determine whether eighteenth-century America understood the Second Amendment to include a right to bear guns outside the home," wrote Judge Richard Posner in the court's majority opinion.

Capitol Fax has excerpted additional key parts of the opinion, including the portion where the court agrees to put a stay on the opinion for 180 as the legislature makes a new law that "will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendment as interpreted in this opinion, on the carrying of guns in public."

KNOWING THE LIBS IN ILLINOIS the requirements will be open to virgins that can walk on water, and democrat politicians only, OBAMA will do anything he can to get the second amendment declared invalid, as STALIN, HITLER AND MOA, all KNEW, you can,t exactly start matching political opponents off to re-education /concentration camps unless they are previously disarmed
GUN CONTROLS ARE ALWAYS PROPOSED AS CRIME CONTROL BUT ITS ALWAYS ABOUT PEOPLE CONTROL AND REDUCING ANY POTENTIAL RESISTANCE TO POTENTIALLY WILDLY UNPOPULAR GOVERNMENT CONTROLS< OR MANDATES


Illinois is the last state to have a ban on carrying concealed weapons.
Im sure the usual predictions of blood ankle deep in the street and predictions of a 100 fold increase in gang violence that never appear, that the libs always start screaming about will be on every news paper head line for months
the libs can,t grasp the concept of normal people without strict government over site doing anything correctly


read this link
http://voices.yahoo.com/firearm-ownersh ... 18143.html

Do you know that if you live in the small town of Kennesaw, Georgia, you are required to have and maintain a firearm?

On May 1, 1982, a new ordinance was passed by the city council of Kennesaw. This law ( Sec. 34-1 Heads of households to maintain firearms) made it mandatory for each household to own and maintain a gun, as well as ammunition. Not only was the ordinance passed by city council, it was a unanimous decision. The ordinance states the gun law is needed "In order to provide for the emergency management of the City, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the City limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore." Of course, exclusions were made to convicted felons, people with religious objections, and people with disabilities.

Members of the city council introduced and voted for the ordinance to make a statement when a city in Illinois, Morton Grove, passed an ordinance banning hand guns from anyone other than peace officers. Morton Grove was the first community to ever ban the sale and possession of handguns.

Both city ordinances drew worldwide media attention, with Kennesaw's attention being negative. Nicknamed "Gun Town USA" from a column titled the same and written by Art Buchwald, expectations were for the town to covert back to the Old West style of handling disagreements with ruthless shoot outs. This expectation never happened. In fact, more than 25 years after the ban, not a single resident of Kennesaw has been involved in a fatal shooting - as a victim, attacker or defender. There has been one firearm related murder but not from a resident of Kennesaw. Since the ordinance, no child has ever been injured with a firearm in Kennesaw. Crime dropped after the ordinance and the city has maintained an exceptionally low crime rate ever since, even with the population swelling from 5,000 in 1982 to approximately 30,000 today. The truth is crime has plummeted and population has soared.

In comparison, the population of Morton Grove, Illinois has dropped slightly and the crime rate has increased, especially right after the ban.

Putting a ban on owning a firearm may keep guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens but will it put them at a disadvantage when it comes to protecting their families and possessions? Criminals who do not abide by laws anyway, will still possess handguns. If you were a criminal planning on breaking into a home to steal or cause somebody harm, would you choose a home in a city where every homeowner is required to carry a gun and ammunition or a home in a city where homeowners are banned from carrying guns?
IF YOU CAN,T SMOKE THE TIRES AT WILL,FROM A 60 MPH ROLLING START YOUR ENGINE NEEDS MORE WORK!!"!
IF YOU CAN , YOU NEED BETTER TIRES AND YOUR SUSPENSION NEEDS MORE WORK!!
grumpyvette

User avatar
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14105
Joined: September 14th, 2008, 1:40 pm
Location: florida

Re: faint glimer of potential progress in illinois

Postby grumpyvette » February 22nd, 2013, 2:55 pm

http://www.saf.org/viewpr-new.asp?id=423
NEWS RELEASE
Second Amendment Foundation
12500 NE Tenth Place • Bellevue, WA 98005
(425) 454-7012 • FAX (425) 451-3959 • http://www.saf.org
7TH CIRCUIT LETS POSNER RULING STAND; HUGE WIN FOR CCW, SAYS SAF
For Immediate Release: 2/22/2013

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today won a significant victory for concealed carry when the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals let stand a December ruling by a three-judge panel of the court that forces Illinois to adopt a concealed carry law, thus affirming that the right to bear arms exists outside the home.

The ruling came in Moore v. Madigan, a case filed by SAF. The December opinion that now stands was written by Judge Richard Posner, who gave the Illinois legislature 180 days to “craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendment…on the carrying of guns in public.” That clock is ticking, noted SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb.

“Illinois lawmakers need to create some kind of licensing system or face the prospect of not having any regulations at all when Judge Posner’s deadline arrives,” Gottlieb said. “They need to act. They can no longer run and hide from this mandate.”

“We were delighted with Judge Posner’s ruling in December,” he continued, “and today’s decision by the entire circuit to allow his ruling to stand is a major victory, and not just for gun owners in Illinois. Judge Posner’s ruling affirmed that the right to keep and bear arms, itself, extends beyond the boundary of one’s front door.”

In December, Judge Posner wrote, “The right to ‘bear’ as distinct from the right to ‘keep’ arms is unlikely to refer to the home. To speak of ‘bearing’ arms within one’s home would at all times have been an awkward usage. A right to bear arms thus implies a right to carry a loaded gun outside the home.”

Judge Posner subsequently added, “To confine the right to be armed to the home is to divorce the Second Amendment from the right of self-defense described in Heller and McDonald.”


“It is now up to the legislature,” Gottlieb said, “to craft a statute that recognizes the right of ordinary citizens to carry outside the home, without a sea of red tape or a requirement to prove any kind of need beyond the cause of personal protection.”

The ruling also affects a similar case filed by the National Rifle Association known as Shepard v. Madigan.

The Second Amendment Foundation (http://www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. In addition to the landmark McDonald v. Chicago Supreme Court Case, SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; New Orleans; Chicago and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and numerous amicus briefs holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.
IF YOU CAN,T SMOKE THE TIRES AT WILL,FROM A 60 MPH ROLLING START YOUR ENGINE NEEDS MORE WORK!!"!
IF YOU CAN , YOU NEED BETTER TIRES AND YOUR SUSPENSION NEEDS MORE WORK!!
grumpyvette

User avatar
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 14105
Joined: September 14th, 2008, 1:40 pm
Location: florida


Return to handgun related

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron