62 Comments - Homer J. Simpson - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:03 am: Seems pretty common sense, which by the way is often hard to come by in this debate. - Motambe - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:06 am: Reciprocity is another issue that should be addressed. - Huh? - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:08 am: The only things that give me pause are the local input and the background checks. How are the background checks going to be carried out and how much weight does the input from the local police carry? The other thing that the checklist does not address is reciprocity with other states. A couple friends of mine have concealed carry permits from Utah(?). What sort of process would they have to go through to get an Illinois permit? - Dan Bureaucrat - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:12 am: Doesn’t seem like much more than a boiler-plate, although maybe it is harder to agree on a boiler-plate than it should be. It just doesn’t impress me that much was hashed out here. I guess the main thing is getting progressives to sign up for the bill at all. - nieva - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:13 am: As a gun owner and advocate of CC I can go along with most of the what is in the list above. The part about a mental health background check is troublesome to me. Who will decide if I am unfit to carry? My family doctor? Are we all going to have to visit a shrink? Are they going to go on the internet and see what blogs we visit? Most people have suffered from some depression in their life. Did you take a antidepressant? Have you ever talked to a medical professional about being depressed. I would think any of the above could cause problems. - walter sobchak - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:14 am: ‘User fees’ is a slippery slope. They gouge now just to get a FOID. - Skeeter - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:18 am: The devil is in the details. As a general framework, it seems fine. It is nice to see Democrats start to realize that a bill needs to be passed, so they should get the framework together. As others noted, the local control is an issue. It seems to be one area where abuse is possible. The excluded list also will be a source of battle. The way to get around that issue would be to have a provision that any business could opt out and not allow guns, but I suspect a few Chicago Dems will reject that compromise. Todd is back in town. He should have fun with this. Welcome back and now there is work to be done. - Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:19 am: ===They gouge now just to get a FOID. === You’re joking, right? The fee is $10. - Plutocrat03 - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:19 am: Lots of room for paperwork nightmares for regular citizens while making no inroads against the criminal class who is killing indiscriminately. Making an overly complicated system to manage what is a right may be a violation of the second amendment right out of the box. I am curious how this system will manage federal HIPPA requirements while providing the seemingly needed health care status of the applicants. - Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:20 am: ===Are they going to go on the internet and see what blogs we visit?=== Considering some of the weird and bizarre comments I’ve deleted here, let’s hope so. Just kidding. Kinda. - Skeeter - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:20 am: Not to digress, but after many months of debate right here, I think that along with this we need to take another look to see if the FOID card serves a real purpose. It seems that real background checks would take care of the need for that card. Instead of a way to get guns out of the hands of bad guys, it seems like just another hoop to jump through. - Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:22 am: ===I think that along with this we need to take another look to see if the FOID card serves a real purpose. === If you add too many moving parts, you’ll never get anything done. Keep it as simple as possible. - facts are stubborn things - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:23 am: Seems to me item one in that list would be a good place to start for pension reform. IL Constiution. We need to be a “shall carry” state. - Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:24 am: ===We need to be a “shall carry” state. === You mean everyone in Illinois should be required to carry a loaded pistol? - wordslinger - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:26 am: It’s all rather general. Not a whole lot of heavy lifting here. - Skeeter - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:33 am: Rich, I agree. Too many moving parts for now. But it should be on the “to do” list if we want to have an efficient state government. Of course, “efficient state government” has never really been our thing but that’s another digression. - Anon - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:36 am: It all looks good but I question the local input. As a pro CC resident of Cook County, I feel like that language could allow the sheriff to determine that anyone carrying in Cook or Chicago poses a threat to public safety. Chicago is where we need this most. - RonOglesby - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:44 am: HB 997 seems to have most if not all of that. Sensistive places, NICS check, training and live fire testing requirements, Local Sheriff can object to any permit (They have to document why, not just blanket object to CCW). Gov buildings and schools are out of bounds as are Bars, sports arenas, etc… There is an entire bill that was negotiated with input from the sheriffs association that Phelps has out there. Wonder why it doesnt get the love from the Lt Gov? - walkinfool - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:48 am: mushroom cultivation? - Amalia - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 10:05 am: i’m with Skeeter on the FOID card look. if Illinois could go background check for every gun sale, we could skip the expense of the FOID system. - John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 10:23 am: >>>> * Funding: The concealed carry law should also create a fund made up of user fees in order to finance the concealed carry permit application and renewal process. >>>> * Permitting Authority: The Illinois State Police (ISP) should be the permitting authority for concealed carry, and the ISP should maintain a database of permits issued. Is the Gov and the ISP out to prove a point by not staffing the FIOD desk with staff sufficient to issue or deny cards within 30 days? >>>> * Permits: Lost, stolen or destroyed concealed carry permits should be reported to authorities in a timely manner. Replacement or renewed permits MUST BE ISSUED by authorities in a timely manner. - Norseman - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 10:26 am: I agree with Word that it’s very general. The one thing item that I feel needs to be fleshed out is the felony for violation. Violations of some portions of the law may warrant that, administrative violations may not. Do we charge someone with a felony for not reporting the loss of the permit in a timely manner. Perhaps, if it’s a repeated problem, but I wouldn’t like to see it done for a first offense. - Freeze up - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 10:30 am: FOID is also required for ammunition purchase and possession. No background check required for purchasing ammunition. - Slick Willy - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 10:31 am: Illinois should dump the FOID card all together. At the very least, allow a CC permit to replace the FOID card. If I can pass the requirements to carry a loaded pistol in public, I should be able to buy shotgun shells at WalMart. - Freeze up - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 10:32 am: Above should read ” no background check currently required for ammo purchase”. My bad. - RonOglesby - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:07 am: Norseman, Dead right. Why should an administrative issue be a felony? I lose my card on business in mass and don’t realize it for two weeks? What is someone else going to do with my card? It has my picture on it just like muy foid. If I lose my foid should I be charged with something? No. There are lots here to agree with in general. And really this may just be cover for some of them to vote for a solid bill that is already out there. - Skirmisher - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:07 am: The devil is in the details. A point that sounds quite reasonable on Simon’s list may turn out to be quite onerous when the General Assembly gets done with it. And, I see no reason for the State Police to seek “local” input. The State Police shoudl already have access to applicable records, and local input, especially from that invariably political creature Cook County, just muddies the waters. - Kasich Walker, Jr. - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:13 am: It looks like an attempt at legitimacy as an Attorney General candidate. Has she considered hiring a biographer? It didn’t get Chris Christie get the GOP VP award, but it appears to be helping the mayor dodge some school closing heat. - Dazed & Confused - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:14 am: Very general. For example the statement that “Concealed firearms should be prohibited in certain public places, such as schools, which is consistent with U.S. Supreme Court guidance. Private property owners should also be able to prohibit concealed weapons on that property.” While this is in the ISRA bill, it also includes a “parking lot exemption” meaning that people can keep a weapon in a parking lot of a school, library, business, or other place. Should businesses, for example, be able to ban weapons on ALL of their property? - langhorne - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:21 am: local input is totally vague. it may mean very different things from county to county. small county sheriffs might know who the local troublemakers are, who prob shouldnt carry. but elsewhere it is meaningless. if county sheriff A says no, all you have to do is move to the county next door, where sheriff B doesnt know you. - Tim Elenz - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:22 am: I don’t agree with all of it but a good start to open discussion. One of the best starts I have heard. Chicago/Illinois has done everything possible to prevent honest citizens from protect themselves. A citizen should not have to wait for a 911 dispatcher to send a police car to help someone being violated. Granted that the Founding Fathers never had the vision that people would be living so close to each other (Chicago being 50 foot lots)and stray bullets could harm innocent bystanders. Or that guns could fire x amount of rounds per second.That should be taken into consideration but throwing out the 2nd Amendment through procedural moves is just wrong. People should be responsible for their guns and face consequences if they are not. No one on either side wants people to be harmed with any type of instrument Common sense legislation should be in acted to address the common good not EGOs of opposite positions. As far as assault weapons are concerned is it possible to have special permits for these type of fire arms? Do all private citizens and sportsmen need assault rifles? How about a special back ground on certain types of weapons with special training for those who own them? Training like how to secure them from anyone using them them? Safes? How about we spend 90% in a solution to the issue instead of arguing over and over pointless issues. - Non-ISRA Member - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:31 am: What, the FOID card process does not include background checks already??? The FOID card requirement either includes a background check, and we therefore have universal backgound checks in Illinois, or it doesn’t, and the three plus month processing time is a sham. I agree with Skeeter, upon adoption of CC and what we are told is another background check the FOID system needs to go. Even if the fee is nominal, it’s the equivalent of a tax on a fundamental right–the equivalent of a poll tax. - Small Town Tax Payer - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:33 am: “They gouge now just to get a FOID.” At a hearing in Springfield in Feb. Illinois “State Police Lt. Darrin Clark said the agency currently gets a $10 fee for issuing Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) cards that are valid for 10 years. The process calls for background checks through a federal database on crime and mental health issues. Clark said it now costs $12 to cover the expense of issuing those cards.” With about 70,000 FOID card being issued each month it appears to me that the taxpayers are the ones being “gouged” for about $140,000 per month or about $1.7 million per year. I just renewed by drivers license for $101. That pays for the license itself and a lot more. Considering the state of Illinois finances, maybe it is time to consider an increase in the cost of a FOID card to a level that at least covers the cost to issue it. - Arthur Andersen - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:42 am: A good jumping-off point for more discussion. I don’t see how you kill off the FOID, due to all the non-carry people and the need to have some check on ammo sales. Maybe a fix down the road. I previously advocated for local input-maybe that doesn’t work above I-80. Background checks-good. This “mental health history and substance abuse”-bad. Could take out half the regulars here for one or the other if booze is included. - Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:43 am: ===it’s the equivalent of a tax on a fundamental right–the equivalent of a poll tax. === More like a birth certificate fee. Just sayin… - RonOglesby - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:46 am: @small town tax payer, Part of the problem is that the ISP doesn’t get the entire 10 dollars… We are one of two states I know of with a FOID type card. I don’t mind paying what something costs, but illinoios, even the ISP is crazy about what things SHOULD cost. Hell they had an emergency rfp out for millions of dollars and like 5 or 8 man years of time to create a CCW program and database… Something they could buy from another state or get done cheaper. My first software startup got 8 million in funding and developed new products with numerous developers for 2 years on it… - John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:47 am: >>>>> With about 70,000 FOID card being issued each month it appears to me that the taxpayers are the ones being “gouged” for about $140,000 per month or about $1.7 million per year. How much are the taxpayers being “gouged” for the cost of providing an election system and Voter’s ID cards? - Huh? - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:54 am: Here is a link to the FOID application. http://www.isp.state.il.us/docs/6-181x.pdf There are 11 questions you you have to answer. Your signature “authorizes” ISP to verify your answers. The big question is do they really go and check every FOID application. - John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 11:54 am: >>>>> I just renewed by drivers license for $101. That pays for the license itself and a lot more. Isn’t that just for the Illinois Registration? The driver’s license costs $30 for the “basic” model. Driving is a privilege, not an enumerated right. If you lose your driver’s license, or it expires, you can get a replacement ASAP. If you lose your FOID, or it expires, you get to play lunar roulette to guess which calendar month you receive a new one. - Skeeter - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 12:06 pm: Actually JJJS, interstate travel is a fundamental right. You have the right that is important to you. I’ve got the one important to me. But really, when are we going to stop this “you can’t do anything at all because the right is so important” whining that we keep hearing? In every discussion, people trot it out and then the argument is demolished when we list all the fees and restrictions on other fundamental rights (notably the First Amendment). With all these discussions, can’t we make some progress? Can you all just stop tossing out that completely discredited argument? - RonOglesby - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 12:16 pm: @Huh? They say they do. Part of the argument int he recent ILGA debates has been that the Illinois court clerks have not been sending mental adjudication records to NICS system. They are supposed to check these. If they are not I would like to know why my wife’s card still isnt here 60 days later. - wordslinger - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 12:24 pm: There’s a beef about a $10 FOID card that’s good for 10 years? Man the ramparts. - RonOglesby - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 12:31 pm: @Word I dont think there is too much of a beef (beyond the poll tax argument you see). But crying poor, when the state does not follow the FOID and not mentioning that the ISP is not getting the full 10 dollars is a bad way to start an honest discussion about the FOID. Both sides must be honest. And the pro-gun side says “where is the money going? Why in the last 2 years has the state not been complying with its own law, yet we can become felons should we fail to comply with the same law” - A Citizen - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 1:00 pm: The initial workload for issuance is going to be massive and probably lead to virtually punitive delays. Perhaps FOID holders should be grandfathered in as the requirements will in the end be about the same. Except for Word and Skeeter of course, they must wait. - Non-ISRA Member - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 1:01 pm: ===More like a birth certificate fee.=== Rich, I don’t think not having a birth certificate will get you charged with UUW. - MrMonarch - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 1:05 pm: “Actually JJJS, interstate travel is a fundamental right.” Travel is a right, travel by automobile is not. - Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 1:06 pm: ===I don’t think not having a birth certificate will get you charged with UUW. === No, but it might keep you off the ballot in Arizona. Just sayin… - Skeeter - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 1:11 pm: ” “Actually JJJS, interstate travel is a fundamental right.” “Travel is a right, travel by automobile is not. ” Are you sure you want to go down that route, Monarch? Because if you do, expect to be told that a 22 is your only option. “Bear arms is a right, a shotgun is not.” - the Patriot - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 1:41 pm: It is all about the Money. Simon is ignorant and out of touch with our reality. To process a permit where the ISP will run a criminal background check, verify with the local sheriff/city police agencies, check mental health databases, and court records for competency judgements is a monumental task. You are talking about layers of buracracy where most of the agencies have 21st century systems. ISP can barely handle the FOID apps right now because of funding cuts. You are going to need massive overhauls of the computer systems of ISP, DHS, local police agencies and the entire court system. Tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars to make this work in a timely effecient matter. They won’t be able to get an agreement that includes adequate funding in 4 months, much less have it implemented. Reality check. Any bill is meaningless without the funds to implement it. We are heading for unrestricted conceal and carry in IL. - FormerParatrooper - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 1:43 pm: Madigans list is actually tame to Illinois standards. I do not see a ban on any weapon listed to pass ccw, which surprises me. Any fee associated should be reasonable so that the poorest if the State can afford. - FormerParatrooper - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 1:45 pm: Should have read… So the poorest in the State can afford - John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 1:51 pm: >>>>>> You are talking about layers of buracracy where most of the agencies have 21st century systems. ISP can barely handle the FOID apps right now because of funding cuts. Didn’t you mean “20th century systems?” The ISP uses windows desktop machines as thin clients to access various critically End-Of-Service-Life mainframe systems running unix-V and applications written in COBOL. The lack of staff is just half of the problem. - RonOglesby - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 1:57 pm: @thePatriot, Then how is it that 40+ other states can issue permits and most of them for less than $100? Wisconsin is what? $25 or $50? you check the NICS system which is where all criminal records should roll up. App goes through the sheriffs office and they can object. You dont have to call every local office. - Colossus - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 1:59 pm: Patriot - Was your reference to “21st century systems” was a typo, right? Without engaging on the issue at hand, those systems are massively out of date and need to be overhauled at some point anyway. The state’s aging digital infrastructure is a ticking timebomb that no one is going to defuse because it is possibly the least sexy topic for an elected to engage in. We get the government we pay for. - Boondocks - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 2:19 pm: Colossus - We get the government we vote for…for if we got the government we “pay” for, we’d all be drinking free bubble up and eating rainbow stew! We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem - Levois - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 2:20 pm: The checklist sounds reasonable to me. Let’s just hope that it will pass. - the Patriot - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 3:12 pm: FOID cards applications are already behind. That is a fact, not fiction. Fact 2. DHS does not have a current database of past and present enrollees that it is capable of sharing with ISP or other local law enforcement. Fact 3. Most county and municipal departments are not currently evaluationg people for “dangerous” status, much less sharing information with ISP. Fact 4. The IL court system does not have electronic filing and most court records are not on a computer…anywhere. You are talking about sharing alot of information, some of which is not currently in electronic form, accross several agencies. You aren’t going to just waive a magic wand and make it so. our socialism is starting to collapse on its own weight. Or, I am wrong, there is a simple solution that is easy to implement. Mike Madigan just did not address the issue for the past several years because he needed Simon to put her weight behind this issue to ram it home. C’mon Man. - Just The Way It Is One - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 8:33 pm: Seriously, from her vantage point in a position she’s already publicly announced she no longer desires to serve the People of Illinois in any longer, does anybody really care, or, at least care a whole LOT about her views/necessary CONDITIONS whichout of the blue she now suddenly proclaims should be MANdated from one who, has, on the whole, been a relatively timid voice out in the Wilderness for over 3 years…in what COULD have been used as a MUCH more effective Bully Pulpit for Social Justice and progressive policies in Illinois?! Thanks, Sheila, for your earth-shaking input at this point, but, for the future 9 months, really, don’t bother…! - railrat - Monday, Apr 8, 13 @ 9:46 pm: Canada tried these type of requirements ! please check how much it cost, how in effective it was and what the end result has been….to do away with all of it !!! end of story..June 13 tic toc - JohnB - Friday, Apr 12, 13 @ 8:20 am: Once the law is passed and you have a concealed carry permit I would strongly suggest taking additional training over and above what is required by law to get the permit. Armed confrontations happen in seconds and without training and practice you may not respond appropriately when the adrenalin is rushing through you. I also hope that they do not get too carried away with restricted carry places. A criminal intent on harming someone will see this as a list of opportune places to target. - RJG - Thursday, Apr 25, 13 @ 7:42 am: Why doesn’t Illinois want it’s citizens to have the right to protect their families and theirselves as all other states allow - RJG - Thursday, Apr 25, 13 @ 7:47 am: Why should anyone be against a thorough background check if u have nothing to hide and are a law abiding citizen Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.