A week after three days-worth of testimonial hearings took place on House Bill 5855 — legislation aiming to put an assault weapons ban in place in Illinois — an anti-gun violence group continues to advocate for the bill’s passing.
‘Protect Illinois Communities’ has bought time on Chicago TV, cable streaming and digital with a mother’s emotional plea to pass the ban on assault-style weapons.
“No parent should ever lose their child to gun violence,” said Mary Dieudonne-Hill. “So the way I honor her is to stand up and speak out. We have to all wake up and protect our children.”
Dieudonne-Hill’s 19-year-old daughter was away at North Carolina A&T working toward earning a degree in computer science when a gunman opened fire at a house party near campus, killing her daughter. Since that day in 2016, Dieudonne-Hill has been on a mission to keep her daughter’s memory alive through advocacy.
But the House bill needs to do a better job of addressing the dangers of high-capacity magazines. For example, it would make all high-capacity magazines illegal the minute the bill is enacted into law. Does Illinois really want to make criminals of people who legally bought the magazines in the past and may not even have heard about a new law? […]
Among other provisions that should be in the final bill are banning the manufacture and sale of assault weapons in Illinois and requiring existing assault weapons in the state to be registered. There are too many such weapons in the wrong hands now. At a hearing on Tuesday, Elena Gottreich, deputy mayor for public safety for Chicago, testified that 1,025 assault weapons were seized in the city last year and as of Tuesday, 1,156 were seized this year.
Lawmakers must be careful how they define assault weapons. It’s a complicated process, full of technical details. And once new rules are in place, gun manufacturers will start working on designing weapons that still act like assault weapons while staying just inside the law.
For years, people unfortunately felt the only answer to the widespread possession of powerful guns by criminals was to keep an eye out for escape exits when they were in public places. Now, the pendulum is swinging the other way, and people are coming to realize the right reforms can make everyone safer.
The Madison County Board has overwhelmingly approved a resolution opposing a proposed “assault weapon” ban being considered by the Illinois General Assembly.
At its most recent meeting the Madison County Board voted 22-4 for a resolution opposing the bill. Those voting against it were Democrats Michael “Doc” Holliday and Bill Stoutenborough, both of Alton, and Victor Valentine and Alison Lamothe, both of Edwardsville.
Prior to the vote Stoutenborough suggested referring the issue to the Public Safety Committee and holding a non-binding referendum in the spring, but others said that would be too late.
Lamothe said she was voting against the resolution in honor of those killed during a mass shooting at a Fourth of July parade in Highland Park this year that left seven people dead and dozens injured.
Madison County Board Member Michael Turner, R-Godfrey, said he wanted unanimous support for the resolution.
“It turns law-abiding citizens into felons,” he said of the bill, adding there is no evidence that such bans “solve any problems.”
* Mayor of Highland Park recalls the July 4 shooting during Q&A with the Daily Herald…
Time has passed — six months on Wednesday — but the pain is very much still there for Rotering and others affected by the senseless violence of that terrible day. [Highland Park Mayor Nancy] Rotering spoke with the Daily Herald about her memories of the shooting, how she’s coped with the tragedy and the action she’s taken to prevent other communities from experiencing similar suffering. […]
“I have spoken with President Biden several times. We are encouraged by his frequent public statements that he stands with us in our effort to federally ban assault weapons and large-capacity magazines. He, too, believes that these weapons of war have no place in our communities.
In the wake of the massacre, President Biden called to share his absolute grief at what had happened to our community and to offer words of support and his deepest condolences. At that time, he invited me to join him, and others impacted by gun violence in Washington. On Monday, July 11th, I traveled to the White House for an event to mark the historic signing of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. The act is a common-sense, bipartisan proposal to protect America’s children, keep our schools safe and reduce the threat of violence across our country.
Gov. J.B. Pritzker, Highland Park police Cmdr. Chris O’Neill and I had the opportunity to speak one-on-one with President Biden before the event. President Biden agreed with us that the act is a first step to reducing the carnage, diminishing the fear, and alleviating the suffering of the American public — but we need to do more. Around the same time, he unveiled his Safer America Plan that, among other things, includes steps to keep firearms out of dangerous hands as well as a federal assault weapons and large-capacity magazine ban. We are deeply appreciative of his continued support and work toward getting these high-powered weapons out of our communities.”
In principle, there’s a desire by a majority of lawmakers to ban assault weapons, but the details are yet to be worked out. House sponsors of the legislation are confident they have the votes, but they haven’t taken a roll call on the bill. They’re still talking to lawmakers about tweaks and clarifications. And then they have to confer with senators.
Devil in the details: They’re haggling over defining what capacity magazines to ban, what the timeline for enforcement would be and age limits for owning a gun.
* Sun-Times Letters to the Editor | My son was killed by gun violence. Pass Protect Illinois Communities Act to stop more deaths. : I take no issue with responsible gun ownership. I am a member of a family who used guns to hunt when we were children. My friends are responsible gun owners, and I know fellow survivors who are members of the NRA. However, as an advocate who witnesses the daily devastation of gun violence in our communities, and a mother who has experienced it first-hand, I stand unequivocally on the side of common-sense legislation like the Protect Illinois Communities Act under consideration in the Illinois General Assembly.
* The Center Square | Illinois Has a Gun Trafficking Problem : According to 2021 data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 53.0% of traced guns in Illinois were sold by an out-of-state retailer - the seventh largest share in the country. Firearms traced by the ATF typically have been used, or are suspected to have been used, to commit a crime.
* ABC Chicago | These are the gun control laws passed in 2022 : President Joe Biden in June signed into law the first major gun safety legislation passed in decades. The measure failed to ban any weapons, but it includes funding for school safety and state crisis intervention programs. Many states — including California, Delaware and New York — have also passed new laws to help curb gun violence, such as regulating untraceable ghost guns and strengthening background check systems.
- We've never had one before - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 12:19 pm:
People can make emotional arguments for laws that would infringe on any number of constitutionally protected rights, including the right to keep and bear arms.
No Governor that signs House Bill 5855 will get to 270 Electoral votes in 2024, and unless there’s some massive change in the next 5 years, probably not in 2028 either.
Ad is a C-. It’s very vague, especially if you only hear the audio.
And while I’m deeply sympathetic to anyone whose lost a child to gun violence, there’s nothing that connects how this bill would have prevented her daughter’s shooting.
I rarely speak of this, but my oldest son was killed in a hunting accident about 35 years ago that some people would say was just flat out stupidity. Others would have even harsher terms. Absolutely nothing in the proposed bill would have changed things. And emotional appeals like this ad won’t change my position on firearms ownership.
== Conveniently overlooking the fact that an assault weapons ban was in place from 1994 until 2004. ==
Said ban also grandfathered existing ownership without onerous or confiscatory provisions. I suspect the current bill goes a step too far, but we’ll have to see what the courts say.
the ad….a C. It’s very vanilla, though maybe that is the point they want to make. a very likable attractive woman gets killed. for me it loses out because the weapon was used in another state. there are good cases to use here and visuals of where the shooting happened in Illinois would be more compelling. but maybe they know their target votes…actual legislators and their constituents who would call them…. respond to this kind of victim. it’s all about the votes.
I give it a B+. It is effective at what it is trying to do.
===Stick to the topic. ===
My apologies, Rich. To be more topic focused, I think that this ad represents an incredible waste of funding on a strategy for advocacy that I don’t think is likely to be very successful. There are consultants, et al, cashing checks on this issue by presenting overly simple solutions that don’t actually successfully address the policy problem.
To me this ad represents a political racket, no matter how good it is. When it comes to matters of constitutionality public opinion doesn’t matter. The money spent on this ad is a waste.
- We've never had one before - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 12:19 pm:
People can make emotional arguments for laws that would infringe on any number of constitutionally protected rights, including the right to keep and bear arms.
- Candy Dogood - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 12:21 pm:
No Governor that signs House Bill 5855 will get to 270 Electoral votes in 2024, and unless there’s some massive change in the next 5 years, probably not in 2028 either.
- Jocko - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 12:33 pm:
==laws that would infringe on any number of constitutionally protected rights==
Conveniently overlooking the fact that an assault weapons ban was in place from 1994 until 2004.
- Huh? - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 12:35 pm:
=== there is no evidence that such bans “solve any problems.” ===
Sorry to say, there is research that says assault weapons bans save lives.
https://chicago.suntimes.com/2022/12/24/23522697/federal-assault-weapons-ban-1994-saved-lives-the-conversation-michael-klein
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 12:49 pm:
People, you were asked to rate the ad, not repeat your talking points from earlier posts. Stick to the topic.
- We've never had one before - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 1:03 pm:
>>>>you were asked to rate the ad
The ad makes an emotional appeal in 30 seconds.
/I don’t think it was a really good emotional appeal/ but I am biased.
- Excitable Boy - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 1:45 pm:
Ad is a C-. It’s very vague, especially if you only hear the audio.
And while I’m deeply sympathetic to anyone whose lost a child to gun violence, there’s nothing that connects how this bill would have prevented her daughter’s shooting.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 1:51 pm:
It’s a B+
If touches all the necessary points to the “why”
That’s the ball game to this ad, to this campaign.
The fundamental to the “how” is far too complicated to an ad.
The editing wasn’t as crisp, so B+
- Lurker - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 2:04 pm:
D
It was a heartwarming statement but I do not see it changing anyone’s mind on the topic, which I assume was the goal.
- Karen - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 2:07 pm:
If the legislature passes the assault weapons ban with remote voting, what the likelihood of the NRA filing a legal challenge to remote voting?
- Todd - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 2:11 pm:
moving, poignant well done.
The shooting was in North Carolina, they could have found a victim closer to home
- RNUG - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 2:32 pm:
I rarely speak of this, but my oldest son was killed in a hunting accident about 35 years ago that some people would say was just flat out stupidity. Others would have even harsher terms. Absolutely nothing in the proposed bill would have changed things. And emotional appeals like this ad won’t change my position on firearms ownership.
- RNUG - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 2:35 pm:
== Conveniently overlooking the fact that an assault weapons ban was in place from 1994 until 2004. ==
Said ban also grandfathered existing ownership without onerous or confiscatory provisions. I suspect the current bill goes a step too far, but we’ll have to see what the courts say.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 2:39 pm:
I’m sorry to hear of your loss, - RNUG -
So terribly sorry.
- Todd - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 2:59 pm:
Sorry to hear that RNUG, my sympathies.
- ChrisB - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 3:28 pm:
@Todd
She went to HF. I recognize those lockers.
- btowntruth from forgottonia - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 4:30 pm:
B
Editing was a touch off on it but not bad.
- Shytown - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 4:41 pm:
Powerful and sad. Makes the right points. A
- Amalia - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 4:57 pm:
the ad….a C. It’s very vanilla, though maybe that is the point they want to make. a very likable attractive woman gets killed. for me it loses out because the weapon was used in another state. there are good cases to use here and visuals of where the shooting happened in Illinois would be more compelling. but maybe they know their target votes…actual legislators and their constituents who would call them…. respond to this kind of victim. it’s all about the votes.
- Shytown - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 5:21 pm:
Amalia, the young woman is from the chicago area. Her mother is in the chicago area. They matter.
- Candy Dogood - Tuesday, Jan 3, 23 @ 9:06 pm:
To rate the ad:
I give it a B+. It is effective at what it is trying to do.
===Stick to the topic. ===
My apologies, Rich. To be more topic focused, I think that this ad represents an incredible waste of funding on a strategy for advocacy that I don’t think is likely to be very successful. There are consultants, et al, cashing checks on this issue by presenting overly simple solutions that don’t actually successfully address the policy problem.
To me this ad represents a political racket, no matter how good it is. When it comes to matters of constitutionality public opinion doesn’t matter. The money spent on this ad is a waste.