Revised gun penalty bill proposed
Tuesday, Nov 5, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Rep. Zalewski’s new amendment will likely move out of the House Judiciary Committee today, but as of late yesterday, the NRA was still opposed…
The sponsor of a plan to crack down on gun-related violence in Chicago has tweaked his original proposal in hopes of winning approval in the General Assembly this week.
State Rep. Michael Zalewski’s legislation to boost the minimum amount of time gun-toting criminals must spend in prison now includes a provision that would take a lighter-handed approach when it comes to first-time offenders.
“This legislation will in-crease minimum sentencing for repeat offenders and unlawful gun owners. It strictly addressed the most serious gun crimes and requires serving 85 percent of the imposed sentences,” notes a fact sheet distributed Monday by the Riverside Democrat.
The changes are largely aimed at addressing concerns raised by gun rights advocates, who argued the original version might have meant first-time gun law offenders could face a minimum of four years in prison for what amounts to a mistake.
* More…
State Rep. Michael Zalewski (D-Riverside) amended his proposal, Senate Bill 1342, so that someone caught for the first time carrying a loaded, accessible gun without a state gun permit would face a minimum one-year prison sentence and be required to serve 85 percent of that time.
His original bill established a three-year mandatory minimum sentence for such first-time offenses, a significant step up from existing law that permits one-year sentences with offenders getting set free in as little as six months with good-behavior credits.
Another change Zalewski made Monday involves eliminating county boot camp as a sentencing option for weapons offenses involving gang members, felons or parolees – a move motivated by circumstances in the September mass shootings at Cornell Square Park on the South Side. […]
But Todd Vandermyde, a lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, said he is “skeptical at best” about the changes and insisted they don’t “go far enough” to address concerns about law-abiding gun-owners, particularly from out of state, inadvertently facing prison time.
“This is like Jason out of a ‘Friday the 13th’ movie,” Vandermyde told the Chicago Sun-Times, when asked about the legislation’s overall chances this week, when lawmakers are expected to conclude their fall session. “It’s been killed three times already.”
* From an outline distributed by Zalewski’s spokesperson yesterday…
Strengthening Illinois Gun Laws
SB 1342 (Zalewski)
Detailed Outline
This legislation will increase minimum sentencing for repeat offenders and unlawful gun owners. It strictly addressed the most serious gun crimes and requires serving 85% of the imposed sentences. The legislation has been amended based on the newly effective Firearm Concealed Carry Act (7/9/13).
1. UUW by felons or people in DOC custody (Probationers, Parolees, Mandatory Supervised Release)
o Currently a Class 3 felony for the 1st offense and mandatory imprisonment of 2-10 years
• Subsequent offenses and violation by parolees are Class 2 felonies with mandatory sentences of 3-14 years
o Will remain a Class 3 felony with mandatory imprisonment of 3-10 years ; subsequent offenses will remain Class 2 felonies with mandatory 4-14 year sentences
2. Aggravated UUW (as amended under the Firearm Concealed Carry Act)
o Currently, if the weapon is in close proximity, loaded, and the offender does not have a FOID, it is a Class 4 felony. A 2nd or subsequent offense is a Class 2 felony a mandatory 3-7 year imprisonment.
o Will remain a Class 4 felony with a 1 year minimum for the 1st offense. Subsequent offenses will be Class 2 felonies with a 4-10 year imprisonment.
3. Unlawful Possession of a Firearm by a Streetgang Member
o Currently, a Class 2 felony with a mandatory prison sentence of 3-10 year
o Will remain a Class 2 felony, but require a mandatory 4-10 years in prison
4. Boot Camp
o County Boot Camp is not authorized for Unlawful Possession of a Firearm by a Streetgang Member or Unlawful Possession of a Firearm by Felons or People in DOC Custody offenses.
These offenses will be added to 730 ILCS 5/3-6-3(a)(2) following (vii), Rules and Regulations for Sentence Credit. The section requires service of 85% of sentenced time.
This bill increases prison sentences for the worst gun offenses and requires the offenders serve at least 85% of the sentence. The legislation has been amended based on the newly effective Firearm Concealed Carry Act (7/9/13).
Penalties are increased for:
o UUW by felons or people in custody of DOC to a minimum of 4 years and a minimum of 5 years for subsequent offenses
o AUUW + no FOID card with a minimum of 4 years for the 2nd offense
o Unlawful possession by a streetgang member up from 3 years to a minimum of 4 years
The Truth in Sentencing/85% service requirement is imposed on:
o UUW by felons or in DOC custody
o AUUW (no FOID and CCL)
o Unlawful possession by a streetgang member
Boot Camp is not permitted for the Unlawful Possession offenses.
Discuss.
- Happiness is a Warm Gun - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 9:05 am:
If you want to strike a balance between gun rights and combatting crime, apply the penalties to those criminals who use firearms without possessing a valid FOID card. These are the people who need to be targeted. The NRA and ISRA are constantly going to bat for lawful gun owners who are being burdened on account of criminals using illegally obtained guns from outside of the system.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 9:32 am:
== to address concerns about law-abiding gun-owners==
I don’t like the idea of first time offenders (depending on the crime) serving a minimum 1 year sentence. But I would argue that calling them “law abiding” is not correct. They are, in fact, breaking the law.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 9:40 am:
You have judges for a reason. Mandatory minimums make for good press releases by legislators, but generally make for lousy law.
- dupage dan - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 9:50 am:
I’d feel much better having to serve only 1 year in the pentitentiary after being convicted of AUW while carrying a weapon, in possession of a FOID but not licensed to carry. Yeah, that works for me.
In what universe does Zalweski operate? Nologicia?
- ~pfft - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 9:53 am:
So what does no FOID mean here - not in possession or non issued?
- Nick - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 9:57 am:
As we have seen in the disastrous war on drugs, mandatory minimums will affect many people who everyone agrees does not deserve long jail sentences. Judges need the discretion to impose a reasonable sentence based on the totality of the circumstances. Zero tolerance policies and one size fits all is never fair.
- Nick - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 10:04 am:
== So what does no FOID mean here - not in possession or non issued? ==
Not issued. 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(3)(C) “the person possessing the firearm has not been issued a currently valid Firearm Owner’s Identification Card”
- RonOglesby - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 10:04 am:
So its still a minimum 1 year for first offense even if someone has a FOID.
As the CPD Chief said, people with FOIDs aren’t the problem. So wy give someone a year for just having a loaded gun “in close proximity” if they have a FOID?
- Skeptical - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 10:09 am:
Other versions of this bill included an affirmative defense for persons who had a FOID application/renewal on file. That affirmative defense was taken out of this. I’m sure the NRA hasn’t agreed to that.
- Anon - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 10:12 am:
Happiness has it right in terms of striking the right balance, especially when we are talking about felons carrying guns and people who don’t have FOID cards. Zalewski’s bill strikes that balance.
pfft - In this context, no FOID means not issued. If you have been issued a FOID - even if its not in your possession - this bill has no impact on you.
- bk - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 10:13 am:
The whole Cook County court system is broken and this is the fix! Wow, Now i know why the gangs run the streets.
- Lobo y olla - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 10:33 am:
So its still a minimum 1 year for first offense even if someone has a FOID.
As the CPD Chief said, people with FOIDs aren’t the problem. So wy give someone a year for just having a loaded gun “in close proximity” if they have a FOID?
If they have a FOID, it’s still probationable.
- Sir Reel - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 10:51 am:
I agree with Word that mandatory sentences don’t work well and fill up prisons.
This well-intentioned bill is the result of the failure of virtually every other gun control legislation. We’re reduced to bills that allow folks to get and own as many guns as they want, but control is limited to not having the paperwork. Sad.
- Leave a Light on George - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 11:16 am:
Check with ISP, if you can get anyone to answer the phone there, and ask how long it takes them to actually issue a FOID card.
- PolPal56 - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 12:36 pm:
Mandatory minimums are bad policy. Sentencing should never be a one-size-fits-all, black/white thing. It’s better to risk that some are given what many may think is “too light” a sentence than to FORCE judges into giving some what is clearly an unjustly severe sentence.
- c - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 12:48 pm:
Does nothing to protect a non resident of illinois since they cant legally have a foid card..It stripped the defense for foid holders whos renewals are delayed by the isp that cant issue the cards within the 30 days they are allowed by law..It directly targets the black causus’s constituents and the chicago city alderman with gang affiliations.
- Southern IL - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 1:32 pm:
You have a lot of elderly people in southern Illinois who have guns and no FOID. Some of them might even have one in there pocket. I know it is wrong and against the law. But a ONE YEAR IN PRISON minimum sentence? What about the poor intercity mom who has one in here purse for protection. NO YOU CAN”T PROTECT YOURSELF, THE POLICE WILL DO THAT. Come on how many people can afford the approx. $150 class, $10 FOID, $150 Lic fee and the finger printing fee? Plus the cost of the handgun and ammo. He make it a slap on the wrist for someone who doesn’t know or understand and needs protection. The gang banger or convicted felon, throw the book at him. John Q Public might make a mistake.
- railrat - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 1:43 pm:
Is it just me or are we seeing a ISP agency that is woefully inadequate, both from a legal base an infrastructure base but also a base of relevancy toward this topic? no voice in ANY language? huh? regardless of a personal position on CCW ISP is rapidly becoming a joke !
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 1:47 pm:
–ISP is rapidly becoming a joke !–
I bet if you’re ever in a jam you’ll call them and they’ll come running. So who’s the joke?
- Logic not emotion - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 2:12 pm:
Sounds like most sides agree that this is not a good bill.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 2:17 pm:
@railrat:
What? Bitter much?
- Ruby - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 3:13 pm:
Here is the list of all of the nations that incarcerate more of their population than USA:
0
That’s right, zero nations.
- railrat - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 3:26 pm:
@Demoralized:
yes so? wouldn’t you like to some type of structure from ISP or are you enjoying the inability to adapt and prepare ? oh by the way my wife used my truck over the last weekend it had my unloaded .22 cased with NO ammo in the cab ….felon for sure right ??
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 3:41 pm:
@railrat:
It was not the ISP’s fault that they don’t have the infrastructure or the resources. I think a supplemental for $30M to help implement the CC law passed (or is moving).
And I already said I don’t think that people like your wife should go to jail or be a felon. But you should probably be careful to abide by the law.
- RNUG - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 3:50 pm:
railrat @ 3:26 pm
I never leave firearms in a vehicle … but I had MRS RNUG get a FOID for that exact reason. If something ever happened to me, then she would legally possess the gun safe contents.
- Ruby - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 4:26 pm:
We don’t need any more laws that are clearly designed to increase the profits of the prison corporations but do nothing to increase public safety.
- Ruby - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 4:30 pm:
I agree with Toni Preckwinkle:
“I’ve been quite clear that I don’t believe in mandatory minimums,” said Preckwinkle, who made it clear she was referring to both drug and gun crimes. “I think that they’re one of the reasons that our jails and our prisons are overcrowded, and they basically tie the judges’ hands and eliminate judicial discretion, and the reason we have judges on the bench is to exercise discretion.”
- railrat - Tuesday, Nov 5, 13 @ 5:22 pm:
@RNUG
wife has one my response did not qualify print by the editor lol