Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition
Next Post: Brady: Fraud at polls!
Posted in:
* Madison County’s state’s attorney was the first this month to say he wouldn’t prosecute anyone arrested for concealed carry, as long as they followed some rules. Several others have followed, including these…
Tazewell County State’s Attorney Stewart Umholtz issued a formal statement stating such about noon Friday, saying that a recent federal appellate court ruling declared the state’s blanket ban on concealed carry unconstitutional.
“A citizen who wishes to exercise their Second Amendment right to carry a firearm outside of the home for self-defense should not be placed in the situation where they fear prosecution if they exercise a constitutional right,” the prosecutor said in a news release.
By 3 p.m., Peoria County State’s Attorney Jerry Brady said he agreed with much of what his colleague across the river said.
“Since the court’s ruling, Peoria County has been following the court’s opinion and not charging persons with valid FOID cards entitled to possess a firearm,” he said. “Our office seeks to follow the court’s opinion and honor a person’s constitutional rights outlined by the recent decision.”
Woodford County State’s Attorney Gregory Minger said he fully supported the Second Amendment and Umholtz’s stance as it related to concealed carry. He qualified his statement by saying he needed to talk to law enforcement in his county to see how such a change would manifest itself.
* And…
Macon County officials are crafting regulations to allow concealed carry in the county, State’s Attorney Jay Scott said.
Scott said he and Sheriff Tom Schneider plan to meet later this week to discuss some of the “sensible rules and regulations” which will dictate how and when residents will be able to carry firearms in public. […]
Scott said he will follow the ruling already sent down from the courts and craft their own regulations since no law has taken effect.
“Prosecutors and law enforcement across the board have to come up with some sort of policy to let the people know what’s going on,” Scott said. “Without a concealed-carry law and with the current law (banning concealed carry) being ruled unconstitutional, there’s just a lot of issue to sort through.”
* And…
White County State’s Attorney Denton Aud says since a federal court ruled Illinois’ concealed carry ban is unconstitutional he should not prosecute those cases.
“It would be in direct conflict with my oath of office so I would be betraying the trust of those individuals that put me in office by prosecuting anyone for that,” said Aud.
* And…
Randolph County State’s Attorney Jeremy Walker told KFVS-TV that residents can carry concealed guns in public.
“Responsible, law-abiding citizens will finally be able to exercise their constitutional right to carry concealed weapons in Randolph County,” a statement from his office reads, according to the station
* And…
…the sheriff in Clinton County said anyone from a county that allows concealed firearms would not be arrested for carrying in his jurisdiction.
* Not everybody is falling in line, however…
But in Rock Island County - this states attorney says he will be following the law - until the law changes.
“We are not legislators. That’s for them to write the laws. We enforce the laws that are written.”
* And…
The Illinois State Police, Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police, and the Illinois Sheriff’s Association issued a public safety advisory in response to numerous inquiries from citizens to the Illinois State Police Firearm Services Bureau empasizing that it will continue to enforce Illinois’ current unlawful use of a weapon statute in all jurisdictions.
Current Illinois law prohibits the carrying of an immediately accessible or loaded firearm on your person or in your vehicle regardless of whether it is concealed. Persons in violation are subject to arrest until the law changes.
* Meanwhile…
A move by several municipal governments to consider banning assault weapons has come to Lake County, and gun owners are preparing for a struggle.
The first arena will be village board and City Council chambers across the region, as firearms owners plan to speak publicly in opposition of local bans. If that doesn’t work, the next venue likely will be the courtroom, according to Mike Weisman, second vice president for the Illinois State Rifle Association.
“There is litigation around the country on ordinances like this, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see more,” Weisman said.
A state law allowing gun owners to carry their handguns awaits Gov. Quinn’s signature, but it also starts the clock ticking for home-rule municipalities with regard to larger firearms, commonly referred to as “assault weapons.”
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 9:01 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition
Next Post: Brady: Fraud at polls!
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
As attorneys, we have a duty to uphold the law, no matter what we believe it should be or if we are impatient for it to change. It boggles my mind that for seemingly political reasons, some attorneys would unilaterally disobey the command of current gun laws. The court has not yet entered judgment, the law is changed only after it does.
Comment by Election Lawyer Abe Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 9:06 am
I live just north of two of these counties and spend quite a bit of time in both Tazewell and Peoria counties. I won’t be taking these gentlemen up on their offers to carry now. It is not worth risking my standing as a lawful gun owner and being denied that right in the future.
Comment by downstater Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 9:06 am
When it comes to refusing to enforce a law that the 7th Circuit has ruled unconstitutional, these guys have a point.
However, they seem to have gone further and created their own rules.
No, they can’t write the law. They can refuse to enforce one that a court has rejected, but they have no authority to modify.
It gets their names in the press though, so that’s good.
Comment by VonKlutzenplatz Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 9:15 am
Is this a case where in the void of real leadership on a statewide basis, local leaders step up to do the right thing?
Comment by Logic not emotion Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 9:27 am
Lisa Madigan created this legal chaos when she began arbitrarily deciding which laws she would enforce. The counties are just following the state’s example.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 9:28 am
@Von
–
When it comes to refusing to enforce a law that the 7th Circuit has ruled unconstitutional, these guys have a point.
However, they seem to have gone further and created their own rules
—
I actually see it differently. Anything they put in writing is already required to legally have a gun in Illinois anyway. So, if you had the gun “otherwise” legally you will not be prosecuted just for having it.
It see it two fold. 1- Prosecutors discretion. They have it, and are using it. 2- Political… it looks good for their constituents.
Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 9:34 am
Welcome to FOID carry, at least in these counties.
It seems that while Lisa Madigan requests extension after extension and Governor Quinn wrings his hands trying to decide whether or not to sign the CC bill, local officials are exercising leadership, whether mistakenly or not.
I seriously doubt they will be punished at the polls.
Comment by Hedley Lamarr Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 9:34 am
Let the chaos begin ..along with the law suits.
Comment by Empty Suit Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 9:37 am
This is turning into a nightmare. While i agree with the sentiments of the States Attorney’s coming up with your own rules will turn into a disaster. It’s one thing to use discretion but this public statements have a very risky side affect. When the standard varies for different Law Enforcement there will be serious conflict. Do you inform the State Cop who will lock you up as soon as the words leave your mouth? Do you not inform and then he catches sight and draws on you? I can understand these rules being discussed as a contingency if PQ vetoes and the July 9th deadline passes but to say it now 3 weeks before the deadline is reckless.
Comment by Mason born Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 9:40 am
I do find is humorous that some of the same folks that chide the Courts for legislating from the bench are now choosing which laws to enforce and which laws not to enforce. A bit hypocritical if you ask me.
Comment by Stones Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 9:55 am
Believe these gentlemen may be going a bit too far, since the June 9th deadline was actually extended. However, I hope Quinn is paying attention to downstate sentiments on this matter; I am sure that these States Attorneys are on pretty safe political ground in their own counties.
Of course, Quinn lost all of these counties anyway in the last election, so he probably doesn’t care…
Comment by downstate commissioner Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 9:57 am
“It see it two fold. 1- Prosecutors discretion. They have it, and are using it. 2- Political… it looks good for their constituents.”
It’s more than that.
The locals don’t see any benefit (actually, many downsides) to putting the alleged ‘offender’ into the criminal justice system in the first place.
‘Prosecutoral discretion’ normally occurs after the person is arrested and put into the system. The local LE doesn’t see the benefit of even arresting folks for ‘violating’ a law that the 7th Circuit has ruled is unconstitutional.
It’s like “Why are we doing this?”. And arresting law abiding gun owners over an unconstitutional statute is expensive, eats up precious judicial resources, and bottom line, just clogs up the system.
Think about it. You likely end up with a very angry taxpayer who is likely telling everybody about Illinois ‘justice’ (or lack of), who
now has been arrested over an unconstitutional statute (and even if not charged, the arrest paperwork stays around forever), who then wants their property back (which means more time and expense), and overall will probably will make some of them so angry that they will be looking at filing legal action over unlawful activities by Law Enforcement.
So why wouldn’t the State’s Attorney’s want to short circuit all of that from happening?
And all because we have a Governor who apparently enjoys prolonging the agonies of decision making.
Comment by Judgment Day Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 10:00 am
O/T, but wasn’t Stewart Umholtz one of Lisa’s past opponents?
Just trying to keep my Illinois political trivia skills up to date.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 10:47 am
My question to these states attorneys would be that if Quinn signs the CCW bill, at what point will they expect people to comply? It will take some time (6+ months) for the State Police to start issuing permits. So in the meantime is it FOID carrry, or does that stop as soon as the bill is signed?
Comment by 332bill Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 11:07 am
Some of the most politically ambitious folks in Illinois are States Attorneys.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 11:07 am
===And all because we have a Governor who apparently enjoys prolonging the agonies of decision making. ===
Nah. Crafting a stupendously creative gun control amendatory veto designed to get maximum publicity from the gun-unloving Chicago media and maximum campaign dollars from Mayor Bloomberg takes time, man. Be patient.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 11:22 am
“Crafting a stupendously creative gun control amendatory veto designed to get maximum publicity from the gun-unloving Chicago media and maximum campaign dollars from Mayor Bloomberg takes time, man. Be patient.”
One of the best, most insightful posts I’ve read for a long time.
There is often a lot of truth in humorous statements.
Comment by Logic not emotion Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 11:53 am
Upon re-reading, I’m afraid my post and symbol might be misinterpreted. I do think Rich had a great post that addresses the issue in a funny, biting sort of way. I like it.
Comment by Logic not emotion Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 11:56 am
—
Nah. Crafting a stupendously creative gun control amendatory veto designed to get maximum publicity from the gun-unloving Chicago media and maximum campaign dollars from Mayor Bloomberg takes time, man. Be patient
—
HAHAHAHA. spot on.
Comment by RonOglesby Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 1:32 pm
=== As attorneys, we have a duty to uphold the law, no matter what we believe it should be or if we are impatient for it to change. ===
I concur wholeheartedly.
Unfortunately, Alvarez and Madigan let the cat out of the bag last summer on a separate issue. Hardly a voice of opposition or concern was raised, save a few legal experts and ethicists.
As a member of law enforcement, your job is to uphold and defend the law whether you are a police officer or state’s attorney.
Not create it.
That holds whether you are laying down on landmark cases that will change the law or just making up your own laws.
Either scenario undermines the entire process and point of our system when dealing with major issues.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 1:32 pm
–Nah. Crafting a stupendously creative gun control amendatory veto designed to get maximum publicity from the gun-unloving Chicago media and maximum campaign dollars from Mayor Bloomberg takes time, man. Be patient–
Priceless Simply Priceless. PQ is crapping his pants trying to figure out who leaked to Rich Miller.
Comment by Mason born Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 2:18 pm
Its the same reason Lisa has been trying to leapfrog over Quinn with deadlines. If she goes up and looses, it very well may undo all the MAY issue states like New York, Maryland, Jersey and such. And Bloomy would be mighty unhappy about loosing his control over his little theifdom.
They are both after all those campaign dollars I mean who wouldn’t want $2 million in outside expendatures aimed at your opponent.
And Quinn can’t stand not trying to put his little fingerprints on a AV cause , well he just can’t help himself. they all feel that the road to the nomination is through Cook County. That’s where the majority of the votes are in the dem primary. But they write off other parts of the state for it. Funny as this always was a game of addition in my book.
Comment by Todd Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 2:53 pm
Just curious if any of these SAs have tried to prosecute someone for recording police officers recently…
Comment by SimonSez Tuesday, Jun 18, 13 @ 4:48 pm