46 Comments - John A Logan - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 11:37 am: Maybe President Obama can call and report a few thousand assault rifles missing in Mexico. - DM - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 11:38 am: I think it makes sense to have reporting laws to report weapons if they are stolen and to check FOID or Federal weapons cards during the sale of weapons. I am not sure this will reduce crime but it is logical. I don’t think it is the law abiding gun owners (on the whole but there are accidents, stealing of weapons etc) who are causing crime but there are some gun dealers who are just out to make money and some bad people out there who sell weapons. It will drive more sales to Indiana and other places. - DM - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 11:38 am: A federal law would make sense and stop cross border circumvention of laws. - anon 1140 - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 11:39 am: BATFE already monitors guns nationwide. Every purchase from a gun dealer goes through the.m in addition to importation and exportation of firearms - Fan - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 11:42 am: My thought is how does reporting a gun theft prevent the next time that gun gets shot? And if a gun is lost, does that mean it’s somewhere in your house, you just can’t find it? If this is an attempt to slow down “Straw Purchases” isn’t that already a federal crime. Put some teeth into that. If some guy reports that he is losing or having a stolen gun five times a month, I think we have a problem that can already be dealt with. Someone shed some light on this? - 47th Ward - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 11:45 am: Private gun sales have become big business. It’s about time this loophole was closed. Yes, it’s going to be a burden for some people who collect firearms or buy and sell among friends and family. But hopefully this will make it much harder for criminals to get firearms illegally. - Statey McGrady - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 12:00 pm: both bills make sense… - votecounter - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 12:03 pm: How do you know if its within 7 days? Most people put their guns away. What if I am giving it to my son who lives in Wisconsin or Indiana they don’t have or need FOID cards? How can they get away with charging me to exercise my constitutional rights by making me get a FOID card? - reformer - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 12:04 pm: These bills are the consolation prize for gun control advocates. Having lost in preventing concealed carry, they got a couple of minor new regulations. - Todd - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 12:08 pm: Ah Rich,m it was one bill with both issues in it. And there is no penalty for not making the call on the FOID card. If you do make the call, you get civil immunity from anything that happens with the sale. And the offense for not reporting guns lost is a petty offense. I’m sure that is going to scare gangbangers into reporting their firearms lost when they throw them in the bushes — oh wait, it only applies to people with FOID cards. - Judgment Day (Road Trip) - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 12:10 pm: Reality is, that virtually all non face-to-face gun sales are handled through FFL (federally licensed firearms dealers) anyway. Costs a little more, but it’s protection for both sides of the transaction. If it’s face-to-face, which in IL, would be substantially through gun clubs or dealers locations, it’s kind of a waste, but whatever. Probably just going to be another added nuisance fee complements of Pat Quinn. The reality is, most of the guns you are talking about tend to be anywhere from a minimum of $300 up to several thousand dollars. If you are selling a weapon (or any other high ticket item) face-to-face, it’s just common sense to know something about the other party in the transaction. I’m just not sure I trust the State of Illinois to perform such checks in an efficient and timely manner. How about if private owners have max. 72 hours to notify police on stolen weapons, the State Police have max. 72 hours to notify people, otherwise it defaults to being approved. - PublicServant - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 12:26 pm: Agree with DM. - wordslinger - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 12:41 pm: –The reality is, most of the guns you are talking about tend to be anywhere from a minimum of $300 up to several thousand dollars.– You’d sure want a police report, too, if that valuable property is lost or stolen, correct? For the insurance claim, no doubt. Sounds like a win-win for law-abiding gunowners in the state. - RonOglesby - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 12:51 pm: “These seem like common sense laws. But Quinn’s bill signing took place” They do in some ways. Though if you call the FOID office today to ask about the status of your card or renewal you may not even talk to anyone for an hour or more (had it happen to me). If the system is instant and not a hassle (it really wont stop thugs) but whatever… My money? given the way the state responds to gun owners today, I dont think this system will work any better than the FOID does. - Demoralized - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 1:50 pm: ==How can they get away with charging me to exercise my constitutional rights by making me get a FOID card? == Charging a fee for something doesn’t infringe on your constitutional rights. Stop with that ridiculous argument already. - OLD BRASS - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 1:51 pm: So…I can call the ISP and give them a name and they will tell me if that person is eligible to purchase a gun? Sounds like anyone can start their own background check on anyone else to me. Then….I call in the same person 15 times fraudulently, does the state now flag that poor, unassuming soul as a gun trafficker without even knowing his identity has been manipulated? Sounds like the ills outweigh the good…. - Demoralized - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 1:52 pm: ==I’m sure that is going to scare gangbangers into reporting their firearms lost when they throw them in the bushes — oh wait, it only applies to people with FOID cards. == That’s right. Since people might not follow the law lets just not have any laws at all. - Rich Miller - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 2:00 pm: ===I’m sure that is going to scare gangbangers=== Lots of gangbangers get their guns from people who say they “lost” their weapons. Others get guns through the personal sales loophole. The law isn’t about making gangbangers report, it’s about trying to dry up some of their sources. Attempt to at least understand this before posting again. Thanks. - Fan - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 2:36 pm: Lets see how long this comment stays up: “47th Ward - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 11:45 am: Private gun sales have become big business.” “Rich Miller - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 2:00 pm: Lots of gangbangers get their guns from people who say they “lost” their weapons. Others get guns through the personal sales loophole.” Either of you two have any facts to back these claims up? “Big business” and “Lots of gangbangers…” are pretty vague statements. If they are un-recorded transactions how would you know? I’m not saying these things don’t happen, but give some figures please. I propose that most of the guns are stolen (already against the law). So what one facet of this bill/law now puts the onus on the victim of a theft crime. This is picking the lowest hanging fruit and will little to nothing to stop gun crimes, especially in Chicago. - Demoralized - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 2:47 pm: ==this bill/law now puts the onus on the victim of a theft crime== If something of yours gets stolen I would presume you would want to report that to the police anyway. Moreover, it seems like a silly statement to say that the “onus” is on the victim. How else are the police going to know a crime has been committed if the victim doesn’t tell them? ==I propose that most of the guns are stolen== Well, since you asked for facts how about some on your end. - Chavez-respecting Obamist - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 2:53 pm: I agree with whoever said it upstream this should be a federal law. I don’t know why law-abiding people wouldn’t tell the police when something was stolen from them, especially something that can be traced back to the owner after it’s been used in the commission of another crime. - 47th Ward - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 3:28 pm: Fan, as I’m guessing you already know, finding good data on retail, wholesale and private party sales of firearms is exceedingly difficult. Despite that, some inferences can be made that support my claim that private party, non FFL sales, are in fact a big business. For example, this study published in February of 2013 says one in four U.S. small arms sales are non FFL sales. http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/fileadmin/docs/F-Working-papers/SAS-WP14-US-Firearms-Industry.pdf The study also shows that U.S. total handgun production has soared from less than 500 per 100,000 population to more than 1,700 per 100,000 population in the past decade. In other words, production has tripled, and 25% of firearm sales are private party, non FFL sales. I stand by my claim that private party sales have become big business. - Fan - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 3:52 pm: 47th - Thanks for the reply. At least you made an effort. The work that you site was surmised by an economist who is also anti-war. Therefore, makes sens that he would be anti-gun. I would have hoped you could site some government statistics instead of a person who appears to have an anti-gun agenda. I won’t dispute your gun production numbers other than to say, how do you NOT know that these are gun collectors buying these guns. That they are lawful abiding citizens purchasing these guns? I never understand why anyone would need to have 30 handguns in their house, but would not deny them the 2nd amendment right to do what they want. They are only one person for crimony’s sake, they can only shoot one gun at a time. But I must take issue with this comment: “In other words, production has tripled, and 25% of firearm sales are private party, non FFL sales.” That is utter nonsense. I find it incredibly hard to believe that one if four guns sold goes without a background check. I need some Federal stats to go with that one, and there are none. Again, thanks for the reply, but you have not changed my thoughts one bit on private gun sales. - 47th Ward - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:01 pm: Fan, I wasn’t trying to change your mind, nothing will change your mind. Read the study’s section on how difficult it is to get decent data on the firearms industry in the U.S. It is nearly impossible. Do you ever wonder why that is? Why do you think there is no federal data on this stuff? Would it be nice to know which company has greater market share, Smith/Wesson or Colt? In which market segments? Etc. Who would oppose collecting data on gun sales? People who think like you, Fan. That’s who. You can’t on one hand ask for proof and on the other support policies that exist solely to obscure the very proof you’ve asked for. - Fan - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:02 pm: 47th - One more interjection if I may. Your opening sentence is 1/3rd true. Retail and wholesale gun transactions are easily verifiable. Have you ever bought a gun at Scheels? The government does know who is buying what. Same with wholesale. - 47th Ward - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:08 pm: Care to provide a link Fan? Where can I find data on retail gun sales? - Fan - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:08 pm: That a boy, when a Liberal loses an argument, they almost immediately get nasty. My mind could be changed if I had REAL proof. Not some assertations by people that think the opposite of me. I say there are ZERO illegal gun purchases. Does that make it true? Market share is irrelevent really. Does it matter who is making the gun? Nope. I’m not sorry for people that think like me (nice Liberal comment). I’m not against statistics being kept on pretty much anything. But even in the example you sited as somewhat fact, you have to look at the motive behind statistics. People like you try and bend the numbers to portray your point of view. And many times those numbers are misused. I want facts, not interpretations of facts, just facts. - Todd - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:10 pm: Lots of gangbangers get their guns from people who say they “lost” their weapons. Others get guns through the personal sales loophole. The law isn’t about making gangbangers report, it’s about trying to dry up some of their sources” Rich– there is. No private sales loophole. You have to have a FOID for a private sale. No FOID,the transfer is a felony. So where is the loophole? What you just did was give trafficers a legal way out. Officer my car/house was broken into . And my guns are gone. Report filed, and all is fine. Gunrunner did it in MD where hekickedin his own door to stage the break in. Took them a longtime to figure it out. Then we havethecase ofmy friendwho tried to report a fiream stolen,but the cops refused roo take the report. Then theCPD showed up at his house demanding to see alof the guns he owned. Its a stupid law - 47th Ward - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:11 pm: Fan, I get nasty even when I win an argument, as I did here with you. But on this, I agree: ===I want facts, not interpretations of facts, just facts.=== - 3rd Generation Chicago Native - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:11 pm: It only makes sense to report a gun registered to you stolen when it is. It’s for your protection, now there is a law…ok. Any one with common sense would report a stolen gun, car, etc. right away for liability reasons alone. You would think? - wordslinger - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:15 pm: The painful rationalizations for not reporting stolen guns are hilarious. Would anyone have a problem if a registered pharmacist didn’t report a missing load of Oxy or Vicodin? - Todd - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:21 pm: Word — differance between a gundealer not reporting it stolen, vs a person not reporting their presecription gone/lost after a party. Apples and oranges - Fan - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:26 pm: Of course you won, keep living the dream. Just produce some facts. @Word - of course a responsible gun owner would report a theft if known. Check your fellow thinkers that will really admit they actually own a where is it? After a blank state, they will tell you (maybe), followed up with I think. Shouldn’t be laughing to hard. This effects us all. Wait, pretty much Chicago, a place I avoid as they are tough on gun crimes. Stats show that it works. Now, I’m laughing! - wordslinger - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:27 pm: –Word — differance between a gundealer not reporting it stolen, vs a person not reporting their presecription gone/lost after a party.– It’s not a perfect analogy. But you don’t have to be a gun “dealer” to have as many guns as you want. I’m sure you know people who have dozens. And if someone with dozens of guns continually has the misfortune of misplacing them or having them stolen, they sound like a pharmacist or a doctor who has a problem keeping track of his painkillers. - wordslinger - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:31 pm: –Check your fellow thinkers that will really admit they actually own a where is it? After a blank state, they will tell you (maybe), followed up with I think.– Dude, are you on vacation? If not, pace yourself — it’s Monday. - Fan - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:34 pm: Word too much too soon. Deal with the debate with facts, thats all I’m saying. And hopes and false thoughts are not facts. Kick your pace up. - Demoralized - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:35 pm: @Fan: When a liberal loses an argument? Give me a break. That’s just partisan hack garbage. As for @Word, he’s right. You ask for “facts” and then dismiss them because they don’t fit into your pre-conceived view. What you really want are “your” facts. At least be honest about it. - Demoralized - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:38 pm: ==Its a stupid law == Sure it is. What gun law isn’t stupid to you? I have no idea what is so “stupid” about asking people to report a lost or stolen gun in a timely manner. And, sure, you already have to have a FOID card but what’s wrong with checking to see if it’s actually still valid? When you oppose things like this it only cries extremism. - wordslinger - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 4:53 pm: –@Word - of course a responsible gun owner would report a theft if known.– It’s pretty hard to report something that you’re not aware of, don’t you think. I’m sure most gun owners have secured their weapons and keep a pretty close eye on them. You’d notice if your car or TV were missing, right? - 47th Ward - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 5:29 pm: Fan, here’s why I know I’m not dreaming. I made a claim, you asked for some back-up. I provided some facts. Then you made a claim (”the government does know who is buying what. Same with wholesale”). I asked you for some backup for that. I’m still waiting. But please, preach to us more about debating with facts. Put up or shut up. - Fan - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 6:10 pm: 47th - I will try and be civil again. have you ever bought a gun? Do you know what steps it takes to buy a gun in Illinois? I’m gonna assume you don’t so lets walk through what do you say? You walk into a local store and say you want to look at a Glock 26. Now, I will assume you know what your asking for as far as the caliber and the maker of the gun. First thing they ask, do you have your FOID card? They wont even show you a gun until you produce it. Now the clerk is somewhat comforted that you produce a valid one. They show you a handgun that you asked for and some possible alternatives. You decide on the gun you want, so they take your FOID and drivers license and make a call to the Federal Government database. You go through a second background check with the Fed/ You have already passed a State background check or you wouldn’t have the FOID card. Did you know, Illinois is the only state that has a FOID program? Anyway, a call is made and you are excused. You get your ID’s back and there is a three day wait. So, the government (State) calls the Federal government to check and see if they can sell me the gun. These are facts mind you. After a 3 day “cooling off” period I’m allowed to pick up my gun. So your actually stating that the Federal Government doesn’t know about my recent gun purchase? That I waited three days for nothing, and all our governments did was to sit around like the Maytag repairman? They know not only the serial number of the gun I bought, but the caliber. Now, why would I need to back that info up, when I know it is available to the Feds now? So, what I am saying is the government knows all “store purchases” of guns. I will assume they know all wholesale purchases of guns (besides what Eric Holder authorized). What they or you don’t know is what guns are being brought privately. So, how can you say 25% of guns transactions are through private means? You can’t say. So, therefore you have no facts. And as a side notice, Demoral is fact less, Just because someone says something is true, doesn’t mean it really is. - Todd - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 6:24 pm: Demoralized– its stupid because it only applies to people with FOID cards. Gangbanger looses their gun, no problem. They don’t have to. so if I don’t report it, I can be penalized and like my friend harrassed by cops and threatened with arrest because they want to go on a fishing expedition. As for the call in, then why do we have FOID cards to begin with? Dart just got his bill passed that says you have to turn them in in 48 hours if revoked. Ok so if they have it under control, then why do I have to keep checking? Why do we even have the FOID,lets just do away with it. and now that i have gotten my FOID and been checked by the State Police, and now I’ve been called in by the guy down the street for his shotgun I want to buy why do I have to wait any longer? - 47th Ward - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 7:13 pm: Thanks Fan, so can I file a FOIA to get the data from the Feds? It’s obvious you can’t produce any data that shows how many weapons are bought/sold and how, via private sale, retail or wholesale. But according to you it’s a fact that the federal government “knows” so it must be subject to FOIA, right? The gun industry is the only industry in America that doesn’t want anyone to know how successful it is. Individual companies don’t want anyone to have an accurate picture of their annual sales figures or who their largest customers are. Does anyone else find that odd? Thankfully the Feds know, so maybe researchers can have access to this data so we can add more facts to the debate. That should make you very happy Fan. - downstater - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 8:11 pm: Just because they do a check on you doesn’t mean that the sale ever went through. The gov’t doesn’t get the information on what gun I am buying so they would have no way of knowing if I had one lost or stolen. I understand that if one of my guns is ever used in a crime then it might get traced back to me by serial #. This would only apply to guns bought through an FFL and not all of the ones that are private sale/inherited. We already have a waiting period on private sales and I didn’t see anything in the coming CCW legislation that will negate that. Other states allow CCW holders to bypass any waiting periods. Wouldn’t a waiting period only be effective for a first time firearm purchaser? - Demoralized - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 8:39 pm: @Todd Thanks for the explanation but I still disagree with you. @Fan You’ve gone completely off the reservation. I have no idea why anybody would even try to “debate” you since it’s clear you have no respect for anybody. Next time any of us need an opinion we’ll be sure to ask you since you are apparently a know it all. Good to know. - Kevin Highland - Monday, Aug 19, 13 @ 9:13 pm: “Did you know, Illinois is the only state that has a FOID program?” If you followed the stories after the Newtown shooting, you would have learned that Connecticut has something very similar. Many other jurisdictions have a “permit to purchase” and it can take as long as 30 days to purchase a firearm. While Illinois makes a buy jump through hoops the process could be much worse. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.