29 Comments - dupage dan - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:06 pm: Over-reach by the NRA? I didn’t know they wrote legislation for MJM. - Keep Calm and Carry On - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:13 pm: === As long as Chicago can’t pass its own non-concealed carry gun ordinances, then it’s a non-starter. === And any legislation that allows Chicago to pass its own is a non-starter among many others. The difference is what happens June 9th when Cullerton or Quinn or (___ fill in the blank) has failed to present and pass a bill of their own that garners sufficient support. - Rich Miller - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:14 pm: ===The difference is what happens June 9th === I’ll tell you Monday. - Mason born - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:18 pm: You know i wondered why Madigan had the whole total preemption thing in there something tells me he needed it to get his bill through. Makes me think stripping that part may just sink the “new” Raoul bill in house. I am having a hard time understanding the whole 50% problem with Cullerton. The way Raoul’s bill had it worded if you stop at Pizza Hut for Pizza somehow it’s the same as hitting the local pub. Seems like Phelps makes a good compromise between a restaurant and a bar. - Chicago Cynic - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:24 pm: I hope he’s not violently opposing it with a concealed handgun? - Keep Calm and Carry On - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:25 pm: And we shall anxiously await, Rich. Enjoy the weekend. - B - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:28 pm: A theory: this bill went through to ensure that no bill is passed (everyone assumes Senate won’t pass it) and AG Madigan then has more political cover to appeal the 7th Circuit decision? - Jeeves the Cat - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:29 pm: With the number of important House vs. Senate vs. Governor showdowns being set-up this year, it’s making the last week of session look very interesting. However, I doubt anyone will blow-out a knee running around any of this. The curious thing is if the Budget coverage gets buried under all of the hot button issues. Curious, but strangely typical too. - Chicago Cynic - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:32 pm: - B -, a bit of a stretch, don’t you think? I mean if you listened to that debate, it’s hard to conclude the vote was anything other than an attempt to pass the bill. I didn’t agree with most of it, but the vote was pretty lopsided. - Mason born - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:38 pm: -B- Unless the total preemption was the grease to get it too 85. It sounds like the total preemption thing is the big holdup and i can’t see it not being negotiable. That being said i listened to Raoul and to Cullerton the “tweaks” they keep referring too may kill their proposal. - B - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:40 pm: CC- didn’t listen to the debate but I believe that many surely really wanted to pass the bill. Even some of those who figure its likely DOA in Senate may still hold hope that it would tilt a compromise bill more in their direction. But Madigan’s support and the NRA’s silence makes me wonder whether there are angles being played. - Jim - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:42 pm: what are the changes the GA won’t be able to pass any bill at all? looking better and better to me, but I’m not in spfld. - Liberty First - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:44 pm: What rhetoric- good thing he can’t get a gun. - Mason born - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:44 pm: Jim – what are the changes the GA won’t be able to pass any bill at all? looking better and better to me, but I’m not in spfld. – Seems to me if Cullerton doesn’t call the bill just passed for a vote then i would say the chances are something will pass. If he calls it and it fails significantly then 6/9 here we go. - TheGoodLieutenant - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:46 pm: I wonder if people are actually viewing the 7th’s decision with beer goggles on. It would seem that many are focused on an open carry being the law after the 10th, with a patchwork of restrictions throughout the state. Isn’t the reality of the 7th’s ruling that come June 10, the current UUW, AUUW statutes are not only vacated for those who would be arrested after, but those convictions previous on those statutes were also null? - Rich Miller - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:47 pm: ===but those convictions previous on those statutes were also null? === Not necessarily. Courts can be weird about that stuff. - B - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:49 pm: Part of the theory rests on the fact that Cook County/Chicago apparently have legislation teed up if June 9 comes and goes without a bill. Then Chicago gets its restrictions and AG Madigan gets some cover to appeal - TheGoodLieutenant - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:54 pm: ==Not necessarily. Courts can be weird about that stuff.== It seemed fairly clear cut, that a stay of 180 days was issued so that the legislature could craft something that would keep the UUW/AUUW intact. I would think that failure to do so would result in the statutes being struck down by the 7th after the 180 days. - Mason born - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:55 pm: B I have always wondered if the pressure on LM not to appeal isn’t coming from out of state. A loss for her would potentially set a very bad outcome for places like NYC, Hawaii, and CA. I think there are certain people who do not want any case like this one to go up at least not until a few judges can be changed out. I also heard she is coming out against the House bill. Surely she would have at least a small degree of influence with the speaker. Which makes me wonder if she isn’t going to oppose it loudly while thanking her stars the choice to appeal is taken away from her. - Amalia - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 3:56 pm: home rule. that’s the problem. - John Boch - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 4:00 pm: Rich, I’ll put my money on Madigan. Wager a grand? I don’t have that to wager. I will wager you an adult beverage Madigan’s shall issue with pre-emption passes. Cullerton’s risking a revolt in his caucus if he fails to call this for a vote. John - TheGoodLieutenant - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 4:01 pm: ==home rule. that’s the problem.== I couldn’t agree more. I’ve never liked it. - Mason born - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 4:02 pm: Rich and John This is going to get interesting. - the Patriot - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 4:12 pm: [This commenter has been banned for life.] - Ryan - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 4:13 pm: If this bill were to fail (or not get called) in the Senate, it would make Mike Madigan look weak. He is THE power in Illinois, and he openly admitted to engineering the many votes on CCW over the past few months. I expect his power is much greater than Cullerton’s. But we will see on Monday. - Mason born - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 4:19 pm: You know after thinking about it you have to admit that Cullerton has been dragged quite a bit already. I mean he is on tape there saying Preemption for CCW makes sense. Wouldn’t have expected that a few weeks ago. That being said i wonder how much Muscle Madigan is willing to use to drag him the rest of the way. - Ken_in_Aurora - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 4:20 pm: @ - the Patriot - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 4:12 pm: And Godwin’s Law springs into action! ;> - hisgirlfriday - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 4:22 pm: “Violently opposed” interesting choice of words there. Also @patriot it really hasn’t been a good week for people in illinois politics who called people hitler yet you’re going there anyway? Good grief. - hisgirlfriday - Friday, May 24, 13 @ 4:26 pm: @Ryan - Hardly. Its not like MJM and Emil always saw eye to eye on things. Anyway Madigans real power has been shown over the years in winning elections, not through achieving legislative goals. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.