Lack of sunshine in concealed carry bill
Tuesday, Jun 4, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The Illinois Press Association is opposing the concealed carry bill. The group’s logic is reasonable, but a bit on the late side…
The Illinois Press Association has come out in opposition to concealed-carry legislation the General Assembly approved last week on the grounds that a newly created licensing review board’s exemption from the Freedom of Information and Open Meetings acts is unwarranted. […]
The legislation, which establishes the state’s first-ever system for people to carry weapons in public, also creates a seven-member panel responsible for reviewing concealed-carry permit applications red-flagged by local law enforcement.
Absolute exclusion from both acts is effectively “sealing all records of the board,” not just the identity of concealed-carry permit applicants, which is not information the group is after, said Josh Sharp, the association’s director of government relations.
As the legislation is written currently, what’s discussed at the board’s meetings and when and where they are held is off-limits to the public, Sharp said. […]
“There has to be some public indication of the existence and operation of that public body,” Sharp said. “The way the bill is set … if the seven-member body wants to meet in one of their own basements at midnight and talk about denying someone a license, they could do that.”
Even financial decisions are exempt. The bill went way too far. But all the IPA is doing now is giving Gov. Quinn yet another reason to “rewrite to do right.”
And, just so none of you gun guys get all worked up, the IPA does not want names of applicants or permit holders disclosed. Take a breath.
- RonOglesby - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 12:29 pm:
I agree
—
The Illinois Press Association has come out in opposition to concealed-carry legislation the General Assembly approved last week on the grounds that a newly created licensing review board’s exemption from the Freedom of Information and Open Meetings acts is unwarranted.
—
Sunshine kills the germs and could stop abuses or miscarriages of justice.
- Mason born - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 12:37 pm:
Seems the law of unintended consequences rears it’s head again. Wait till the last minute and you miss things.
- Skirmisher - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 12:39 pm:
I don’t know how you can say this concern is a “bit on the late side”. Like a lot of things that come out of the General Assembly, this compromise surfaced and passed so quickly that almost no one outside of the Statehouse had an opportunity to review it. In any case, the point is well taken. I certainly don’t care much for a politically appointed board to have the power to deny an individual’s Constitutional rights with no semblance of due process and no oversight or accountability.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 12:40 pm:
===this compromise surfaced and passed so quickly that almost no one outside of the Statehouse had an opportunity to review it.===
Um, the IPA is supposed to be in the Statehouse. Also, it’s pretty easy to electronically search legislation for this stuff.
- Just Me - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 12:52 pm:
The IPA should subscribe to Capitol Fax and then they would have known the bill was moving.
- Steve - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 12:58 pm:
The IPA makes a good case. How can you have accountable government with this level of secrecy? Why shouldn’t taxpayers know how this board is spending money? Secrecy leads to corruption: especially in a bankrupt place like Illinois.
- 332bill - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 12:59 pm:
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought the 2nd, Madigan backed, Phelps bill had this same langauge in it. That bill went through the house several weeks ago.
- Cal Skinner - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 1:01 pm:
So what happens on June 9th when Quinn has not signed the bill.
- Captain Hawkeye Pierce - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 1:08 pm:
As a former Illinois reporter, I always thought the IPA was kinda worthless when it came to actual reporting and public access issues. Their No. 1 agenda is to protect the publisher’s pocketbook (a worthwhile goal, to be sure, because there is no journalism without the revenue). You can be sure they’ll be all over any bill that threatens to deprive newspapers of legal ad revenue. Everything else is secondary.
- PJ - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 1:09 pm:
“Mama” Lisa has already asked for a 30 day extension, I guess she don’t think she’s answerable to the feds.
- merky - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 1:19 pm:
Rich, nice implication that “gun guys” are nervous nellies and easily agitated. Would I be banned for life if I ever asked you to “take a breath?”
- 332bill - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 1:24 pm:
I was correct that the secret review board language was in SB2193, the Madigan backed CCW bill, but my timing was off. The amendment was filed May 23, not several weeks ago. So the IPA had a little over a week to look it over.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 1:53 pm:
==“Mama” Lisa has already asked for a 30 day extension, I guess she don’t think she’s answerable to the feds.==
I don’t even know what that means. Apparently you have no idea how the legal process works.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 1:54 pm:
==Rich, nice implication that “gun guys” are nervous nellies and easily agitated==
Apparently you were asleep during the entire debate on concealed carry.
- Fred Friendly - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 2:02 pm:
IPA and IBA are both jokes.
- Chicago Cynic - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 2:07 pm:
PJ,
She’s applying to the Feds for a 30 day extension. Not sure how that makes her not think she’s “answerable to the feds?”
- Bigtwich - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 2:13 pm:
==So what happens on June 9th when Quinn has not signed the bill.==
The Seventh Circuit remanded the case to the two district courts involved for a deceleration of unconstitutionality and permanent injunction. So, I am guessing that on June 9th the district courts will schedule hearings. As to the finial effect, do not know when, do not know if it just affects the parties to the two cases. Do know lawyers will be employed. Do not know if other areas will be directly affected. Non parties may still be able to enforce the current law. Federal courts may use habeas corpus if cases come before them. Lawyers will be employed.
- Blah - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 2:36 pm:
I’m not sure why the IPA, or anyone for that matter, assumes all financials of this group are secret. The bill oly exempts the Open Meetings Act and FOIA related to decisions. It’s a panel within he State Police. The state police will provide administrative support and handle the financials. A bit of an overreaction by everyone in my opinion.
- Trust the Press - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 3:09 pm:
Does the IPA actually believe the public trusts them anymore than the politicians?
- FormerParatrooper - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 3:40 pm:
I tend to side with the IPA on this. The system has to transparent, otherwise accountability suffers.
They should have the homework.
- Curmudgeon - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 3:43 pm:
“And, just so none of you gun guys get all worked up, the IPA does not want names of applicants or permit holders disclosed. Take a breath.”
The IPA might not, but what about the Sun-Times & the Trib, or some anti-gun publisher of a suburban rag, like what happened on the East Coast?
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 3:56 pm:
Quite a scoop there for the IPA. Were they on vacation last week?
- FormerParatrooper - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 3:58 pm:
They should have the homework….. Sorry for typo
- Ragnar - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 4:02 pm:
I understand why the bill presents a problem. Governor Quinn and his staff only want the criminals in Chicago to be armed; the murderers, burglars, carjackers, drug traffickers, rapists, and politicians.
- dazed & confused - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 4:49 pm:
The Illinois Press Association is completely worthless. As others have noted, this provision was in the public domain for more than a week and was discussed by negotiators for longer. Perhaps if they actually read bills and amendments…
They’re primary focus is making sure that local governments have to BUY notices in newspapers of general circulation to inform the public. If they really cared, they would allow for electronic notification (quicker and cheaper) but that would cost newspapers revenue.
- cm - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 4:50 pm:
if you really want us to believe the press has no intentions what so ever of trying to make permit holder information public i’ll gladly sell you the Brooklyn bridge for a $100.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 5:06 pm:
–Governor Quinn and his staff only want the criminals in Chicago to be armed; the murderers, burglars, carjackers, drug traffickers, rapists, and politicians.–
With a handle like “Ragnar,” I imagine you think that’s a good thing.
Sailing to France, Ireland and Britain this summer, lol.
- Mongo - Tuesday, Jun 4, 13 @ 6:15 pm:
hey Ragnar, that’s a really articulate post. Come up with something original next time. Oh wait, as a Norseman you need only flaunt your staff and criminals (and really, politicians?) will shake and shudder.