It’s just a bill
Wednesday, Jan 15, 2025 - Posted by Isabel Miller
* WAND…
Illinois Democratic lawmakers have reintroduced a plan to improve gun storage across the state. The legislation also includes requirements for reporting lost and stolen firearms.
Senate Bill 8 could ban people from storing or leaving a gun outside an owner’s possession or control unless it is unloaded and secured in a lock box. This proposal specifically notes that minors, at-risk people and those prohibited from using guns should not be able to access firearms in the home.
“We need to ensure that all of our gun owners are responsible and they know what they need to do to keep everybody safe, including our youth,” said Sen. Ram Villivalam (D-Chicago). “I want every youth regardless of the community they live in, but especially those communities that have been disinvested in, to feel safe.”
Gun owners could face a fine of $500 to $1,000 if someone prohibited from accessing guns obtains their weapon. The legislation could also create a $10,000 penalty if a minor or at-risk person uses someone else’s gun to injure or kill people.
Rep. Bob Morgan filed HB1365 yesterday…
Amends the Clinical Psychologist Licensing Act, the Clinical Social Work and Social Work Practice Act, the Marriage and Family Therapy Licensing Act, the Music Therapy Licensing and Practice Act, and the Professional Counselor and Clinical Professional Counselor Licensing and Practice Act. Establishes temporary licenses for social workers, professional counselors, licensed marriage and family therapists, music therapists, and clinical psychologists whose license application is pending and creates termination conditions for such licenses. Removes good moral character standards as qualification requirements for the licensing of social workers and music therapists. Creates procedures for placing a license on inactive status for social workers and professional counselors. Provides that the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation must allow reasonable exam accommodations for licensed marriage and family therapists and clinical psychologists whose primary language is not English if a test in the therapist’s or psychologist’s primary language is not available.
* 13 co-sponsors were added to HB1226 yesterday…
State Representative Patrick Sheehan (R-Lockport) announced that he is sponsoring new legislation aimed at reducing burdensome requirements for some Illinois motorists. House Bill 1226 would raise the age for mandatory behind-the-wheel tests for older drivers renewing their licenses from 79 to 87 amongst other changes to the Illinois Vehicle Code. The bipartisan legislation builds upon House Bill 4431 introduced by Rep. Jeff Keicher (R-Sycamore) in the 103rd General Assembly and seeks to do away with the discriminatory practice of requiring behind-the-wheel tests for seniors based on age as the sole factor.
“House Bill 1226 is a much-belated change to our state’s driving laws and, beyond that, a sign of respect for our seniors,” said Sheehan. “This legislation would align Illinois with the rest of the nation in no longer requiring road tests based on age and would cut costs for drivers in the process. I would like to extend my thanks to the Secretary of State and Representatives on both sides of the aisle for coming together so that we may remove unnecessary requirements such as these and ensure our license renewal process is fair to everyone.”
Today, Illinois requires drivers aged 79 or 80 to take behind-the-wheel tests in order to renew their licenses. Drivers aged 81 to 86 are required to take behind-the-wheel tests every other year and, at age 87, must take the test each year. If signed into law, House Bill 1226 would no longer require road tests for those renewing their licenses at age 79 or 80, only vision exams taken at the DMV. The same standard would also apply to motorists aged 81 to 86 completing their biyearly license renewals. If passed and signed by the Governor, the new law would go into effect on July 1, 2026.
House Bill 1226 was originally filed on January 9 and awaits further discussion in the House Rules Committee. You can track House Bill 1226 here.
* HB1328 from Rep. Robyn Gabel…
Creates the End-of-Life Options for Terminally Ill Patients Act. Authorizes a qualified patient with a terminal disease to request that a physician prescribe aid-in-dying medication that will allow the patient to end the patient’s life in a peaceful manner. Contains provisions concerning: the procedures and forms to be used to request aid-in-dying medication; the responsibilities of attending and consulting physicians; the referral of patients for determinations of mental capacity; the residency of qualified patients; the safe disposal of unused medications; the obligations of health care entities; the immunities granted for actions taken in good faith reliance upon the Act; the reporting requirements of physicians; the effect of the Act on the construction of wills, contracts, and statutes; the effect of the Act on insurance policies and annuities; the procedures for the completion of death certificates; the liabilities and penalties provided by the Act; the construction of the Act; the definitions of terms used in the Act; and other matters. Effective 6 months after becoming law.
- ChicagoBars - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 9:59 am:
I haven’t read HB1226 yet (apologies) but is there anything in there at least that sends an advanced senior citizen to a driving test if they get a major moving violation or in an accident report?
- Edge - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 10:15 am:
If advanced seniors have to test after a major moving violation or an accident, then every 42 year old should be required as well. Hmm, yes, my motor (pun indented) skills are not as they used to be, yet just having a moving violation or accident report should not deem an advanced senior required to test.
- Donnie Elgin - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 10:16 am:
Senate Bill 8
There are so many problems with this bill -
A prohibited person - is anyone without FOID - so your wife or adult child could not touch the weapon.
What exactly is the definition of ” under the control of the owner”
Perhaps the worst part is that it provides that “a violation of the Act is prima facie evidence of negligence per se in any civil proceeding if a minor, an at-risk person, or a prohibited person obtains a firearm and causes personal injury to the death of oneself or another”
So if someone breaks into my home and a guest who does not have a FOID(a prohibited person) uses one of my weapons to defend themselves in my premises then I have committed a crime - just plain silly - and making IL more unsafe.
- JR - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 10:19 am:
I wonder if terminally ill justice-invovled individuals residing at IDOC have the right to terminate their lives if they have a terminal illness under House Bill 1328.
- Homebody - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 10:35 am:
@Donnie Elgin-
There are tons of examples of negligence per se in common law for lots of personal injury type cases. This is not a new concept. Note that prima facie evidence doesn’t mean to the exclusion of all other evidence, just means that it is enough on its face to show blame in absence of other evidence.
Further, the concept of “necessity defense” already exists, and has existed in common law for at least a hundred years. If you break into someone’s cabin because you’re lost in the woods and you were going to die of exposure otherwise, you can claim the necessity defense to avoid criminal liability (though depending on the state you may still be liable to damages to the home if you broke a window or something to get in).
So again, none of these ideas are new.
- TheInvisibleMan - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 10:37 am:
If we are going to use the incorrect argument of age discrimination as a reason to lower the license standards, why not instead use it as a path to raise standards? Age is not the determining factor of having a license, no matter how much this incorrect argument is attempting to make it seem like one. Being able to pass a test is the determining factor and age isn’t one of the metrics measured or taken into consideration during the test.
We can also remove this incorrect argument by taking the other approach of changing it to everyone no matter what age has to take a road test to renew their license.
–
“This legislation would align Illinois with the rest of the nation in no longer requiring road tests based on age”
–
To test if the line of thinking taken in these proposed bills is valid - Would we use this rationalization in any other issue? Just because Illinois has stricter educational standards than Alabama, would we also be taking seriously a proposal for Illinois to lower their standards to that of Alabama to bring Illinois in line with Alabama.
If I’m lucky enough to make it to make it to 79, I would have no problem with being required to take a road test to renew my license. I would have no problem with taking that test if I had to do it right now to renew my license.
This is a bad bill and a bad idea.
- Jibba - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 10:41 am:
Did Donnie notice the part about storage in a locked box? That might prevent someone from using it, and also will likely defend against any civil action since they were complying with the law.
A bigger set of questions regards how they construe a locked box. Gun safe? Lock on the hard case? Also, one wonders if a trigger or cable lock is sufficient for safety instead.
- Socially DIstant Watcher - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 10:59 am:
I can see the reasons for filing and cosponoring HB1226, but if it passes and an octogenarian kills someone, everyone who voted for it could be blamed.
@Edge: the bill as filed contains no language about elderly drivers who have accidents. The onus is on family members, who must submit signed statements, not anonymous statements, to the SoS to prompt any additional review.
- Anyone Remember - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 11:12 am:
===A bigger set of questions regards how they construe a locked box.===
Particularly vehicles. Major source of stolen sidearms is vehicles, as many Concealed Carry licensees have sidearm with them at all times. If they’re going somewhere weapons aren’t allowed, it is left in the vehicle.
- RNUG - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 11:35 am:
== your wife or adult child could not touch the weapon. ==
Which is why Mrs RNUG has a FOID … to avoid any ambiguity in the laws.
I wonder how this fits with the provision that allows a surviving spouse to possess / sell their deceased spouse’s firearms?
- Harold W. in Plainfield - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 11:37 am:
Regarding SB 8; most violent crime is related to alcohol use. We could prevent more violent crime by closing the taverns at 10:30 pm and increasing alcohol taxes than by passing this bill.
- JS Mill - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 11:39 am:
=So if someone breaks into my home and a guest who does not have a FOID(a prohibited person) uses one of my weapons to defend themselves in my premises then I have committed a crime - just plain silly - and making IL more unsafe.=
Speaking of just plain silly…
- Matty - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 11:39 am:
===I wonder if terminally ill justice-invovled individuals residing at IDOC have the right to terminate their lives if they have a terminal illness under House Bill 1328.===
I have this same question and concern as well. It’s imperative that incarcerated individuals who will spend the remainder of their lives without freedom have the same opportunity as the general public. Unfortunately, I see this becoming a contentious point when reconciling with Illinois’ prohibition against the death penalty.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 15, 25 @ 12:18 pm:
===closing the taverns at 10:30 pm===
Meh. They’ll just load up before closing time. One of the drunkest concert crowds I ever saw was an Aerosmith show back in the 90s. Everyone was warned that the bar would close shortly after the opening act finished, so people drank hard and stocked up.