Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Afternoon roundup
Next Post: *** UPDATED x2 - House passes bill with 67 votes *** Dobbs Working Group bill explained
Posted in:
* House Speaker Chris Welch has filed an amendment to SB2226 containing the assault weapons ban, etc. language. The bill is now on 2nd Reading. Working on getting you a one-pager, but take a look for yourself in the meantime.
[Deleted some excerpts because the one-pager below explains it better than I did on the fly.]
…Adding… As I told subscribers earlier this week, this provision was doomed…
Gun control advocates had hoped to increase the age a person can purchase a gun/obtain a FOID card to 21 (with exceptions for active duty military/National Guard). But this provision made many moderate Dems uneasy. So it's out. #twill https://t.co/MXDG67lUtS
— Brenden Moore (@brendenmoore13) January 5, 2023
…Adding… The House Executive Committee will take up the amendment soon. Click here to watch.
*** UPDATE 1 *** One-pager…
• Assault Weapons Ban (prohibits manufacture, possession, delivery, sales, and purchase)
o Immediately ends the manufacture, sale, and purchase of assault weapons (unless exempted below)
o Allows possession and legal use of existing assault weapons by a person who possessed them before the effective date, so long as the weapon is endorsed with ISP within 300 days of the law taking effect
o Exemptions: The following are not affected by the endorsement affidavit requirement:• Active-duty and retired peace officers (ISP, sheriff’s deputies, municipal police)
• 10 or more years of service
• Retired or separated in good standing
• Local law enforcement acquiring and possessing for the purpose of equipping peace officers
• Wardens, superintendents, and keepers of prisons, penitentiaries, jails, etc.
• U.S. military and Illinois National Guard and Reserve Forces
• Manufacture, transportation, or sale of weapons, attachments, or ammunition to the persons listed above (manufacture, transportation, or sale is only allowed in state in this circumstance, except that existing contracts may be performed)
• Nonresidents transporting a banned weapon through this State within 24 hours if the weapon is broken down and unloaded.
• Possession and travel of a weapon while at an event held at the World Shooting Complex in Sparta. The weapon must be broken down and unloaded during transport
• Blank-firing versions possessed by authorized or permitted individuals• Large Capacity Magazines Ban (immediately prohibits delivery, sales, purchases)
o Immediately bans devices with a capacity of, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more 12 rounds of ammunition; or any combination of parts from which such a device can be assembled
o 90-day grace period for modification, personal destruction, or surrender to law enforcement
o Does not affect the same people/entities as the AWBRapid-fire Devices Ban (prohibits manufacture, possession, sale; offers to purchase, import, transfer)
o Immediately bans devices that increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic firearmFRO
• Increases the duration of a Firearm Restraining Order (“FRO”) from 6 months to up to 1 year, including renewed FROs
• Includes a representative from an association of court circuit clerks to be appointed to the FRO CommissionISP Firearms Anti-Trafficking Unit: Establishes within the duties and powers of ISP that the Criminal Division shall also investigate illegal firearm trafficking
…Adding… Press release…
Today, mayors and village presidents from across the state are calling on legislators to pass the Protect Illinois Communities Act, as they conclude the current legislative session. In a new letter signed by 27 mayors and village presidents who are encouraging swift passage of common sense legislation that includes bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines and other steps to protect residents of their communities.
Mayors are often on the front lines of working with local law enforcement to combat gun violence and coordinating with health care officials in the aftermath of shootings that leave families and communities shattered by their impact.
Among the mayors who signed on to today’s letter are:
“We need urgent action to reduce gun violence that tears entire communities apart. It’s our obligation as mayors to fight and advocate to pass laws to keep guns out of the wrong hands so no other city experiences the pain that we know all too well. I urge lawmakers to safeguard our communities by voting yes on the Protect Illinois Communities Act,” said Matteson Mayor Sheila Y. Chalmers-Currin.
“I am proud to join fellow mayors and leaders across Illinois in urging the General Assembly to pass this critically needed, common-sense, and lifesaving legislation,” said Chicago Mayor Lori E. Lightfoot. “The flow of illegal guns is an inherently cross-jurisdictional challenge that requires collaboration and decisive action from both the State and Federal government to alleviate the scourge of senseless gun violence which threatens our communities. The Protect Illinois Communities Act will absolutely make a marked, positive difference when it comes to safeguarding Illinois residents and families.”
“Gun violence poses a pervasive threat to each of our communities, and now is the time to step up and take action to prevent more senseless deaths. We need to get weapons of war off of our streets so that each of our cities is a safe place for all. Our legislators must pass the Protect Illinois Communities Act now,” said Rockford Mayor Tom McNamara.
“I have long advocated for gun reform and hope to see lawmakers pass the Protect Illinois Communities Act as the next step in making our state safer,” said Urbana Mayor Diane Wolfe Marlin. “Assault weapons and high capacity magazines are too deadly to serve any purpose but to injure and kill. Lawmakers must stand up to the NRA and pass this commonsense legislation as soon as possible.”
The letter, with signatories, is here.
…Adding… The bill was sent to the House floor on a partisan roll call.
*** UPDATE 2 *** The bill was amended to take out criminal penalties that were inadvertently left in the bill…
Sentence. A person who knowingly delivers, sells purchases, or causes to be delivered, sold, or purchased in violation of this Section a large capacity ammunition feeding device capable of holding more than 12 rounds of ammunition commits a petty offense with a fine of $1,000 for each violation.
The roll call…
Durkin has been open to these sorts of bills in the past…
Outgoing House GOP Leader Jim Durkin quoted the late conservative Republican US Rep. Henry Hyde, who voted for an assault weapons ban, by saying "Enough is Enough." So, the bill could get at least one Republican vote.
— Capitol Fax (@capitolfax) January 6, 2023
Democratic Reps. Anthony Deluca, Mike Halpin, Larry Walsh and Lance Yednock voted “No.”
The governor was present for the debate…
Pritzker sits next to Speaker Welch as he presents his assault weapons ban bill pic.twitter.com/iqEGZJuVw7
— Capitol Fax (@capitolfax) January 6, 2023
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 3:20 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Afternoon roundup
Next Post: *** UPDATED x2 - House passes bill with 67 votes *** Dobbs Working Group bill explained
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
It’s wise they removed the FOID language. Unfortunately that chunk may have had the most effect on the dirt bag spree shooters.
The wording on the rate of fire is really clunky and will need some guidance to understand. I.e. is a lighter competition trigger increasing the rate of fire?
It is severable so the trigger language probably has the best chance of surviving.
Comment by Mason born Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 4:11 pm
they made it worse.
Comment by Todd Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 4:39 pm
Not as dumb as some thought.
Comment by Blue Dog Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 4:53 pm
The changes are minor and the mag capacity going up to 12 is all for show. Very few weapons have 12 round mags - standard is 15 or 17. From a practical sense 12 might as well be 10. SCOTUS review under bruen still 100% certain
Comment by Donnie Elgin Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 4:54 pm
===The changes are minor===
I dunno about that. They grandfathered in currently owned guns.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 5:00 pm
It’s a civilian police force. Whatever the police have the people should be able to have.
To me it’s either that or you are for militarizaion of the police as them having access to “weapons of war” like JB calls it, while regular people dont is 100% militarizaion of civilian police.
So if you dont want your neighbor to have it then you shouldnt want your cops to have it either. Stop being wishwashy on this issue. If you are okay with with the police not having that tool then we can talk about the gun ban.
Comment by The Dude Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 5:04 pm
===Stop being wishwashy on this issue===
You bring that up all the time and it’s getting tiresome. Police have been granted the power by civil authority to use violence to uphold the law, etc. You are not.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 5:10 pm
The original bill also had a grandfather clause.
Comment by Stephanie Kollmann Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 5:11 pm
I’m shocked that this amendment is so punitive.
Comment by Stephanie Kollmann Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 5:12 pm
Would this preempt county or municipal bans which are more restrictive? Or will we still have a patchwork?
Comment by lincoln's beard Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 5:24 pm
The guns are grandfathered in but are the magazine clips also grandfathered or will a lot of those grandfathered guns require a clip modification?
Comment by Seats Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 5:25 pm
Seats, it looks like someone will have 90 days to modify or dispose of any magazine capable of holding more than 12 rounds. After that, possession is a Class A misdemeanor.
Comment by Mjrothjr Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 5:32 pm
Misdemeanor only for 1 LCM. 2 or more is a felony. And like Stephanie K said, the original language had a grandfather clause, so this is no different in that regard.
Comment by CJA Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 6:02 pm
There has to several hundreds of folks working in the gun and parts manufacturing business, more jobs soon to be leaving.
Comment by NorthSideNoMore Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 6:24 pm
I am curious about tge move from 10 to 12. There are very few magazines the extra 2 rounds will impact. If the original had been 15 and add 2 to 17 that would affect quite a few weapons. In my idle curiosity I just wonder if a Pol has a 12 rnd pistol he/she wanted to protect. If the Fed courts are inclined to strike down 10 I can’t see them going oh you said 12 never mind.
Comment by Mason born Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 6:52 pm
If owners have to give up their “large capacity magazines” or face a penalty. This could flood the market with magazines that the bill supporters want to be prevent from getting access to in the first place. They could quadruple the outside market accessible.
Just stop punishing constitutional and responsible owners from their right (and the accessories to enact that right).
Comment by Perplexed Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 9:38 pm
No thanks, I’ll keep my guns.
Comment by Big Tom Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 10:34 pm
So our state legislature uses the shell bill trick to shove this down our throat and ignore the three day rule made to stop things like this. And they wonder why we hate them so much.
Comment by Mike K Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 11:17 pm
===And they wonder why we hate them so much. ===
Even that Kankakee County judge disagreed with you on that topic, so your hate is more about you than you might think.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 5, 23 @ 11:23 pm
Great to see this life saving measure pass on a bipartisan basis.
Comment by Norseman Friday, Jan 6, 23 @ 1:08 am
Republicans on the record again against the public safety…
Thank you Jim Durkin.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jan 6, 23 @ 7:57 am
As other’s asked, is there a grandfather clause for magazines over 12 rounds? Not clear to me that there is a clause or not.
Comment by DG53 Friday, Jan 6, 23 @ 10:34 am
DG53…
Under the bill you would have 90 days to get rid of them or permanently modify them to accept no more than 12 rounds. After 90 days, they are illegal to possess. A $1000 fine for having 1, a felony for having 2 or more.
Comment by CJA Friday, Jan 6, 23 @ 10:44 am
Any word on when this will be up for a vote in the senate, or the likelihood of the governor signing this before the lame duck session is over?
Comment by MG42 Friday, Jan 6, 23 @ 11:53 am
Is the exemption for the entertainment industry in the final bill?
Comment by Gene Williger Friday, Jan 6, 23 @ 3:24 pm
A lot of talk about this is circling around the prospects for court battles over it, but I think the result would be far more immediate. Specifically, we’re going to hear from a lot of county State’s Attorney’s that will refuse to bring charges, leading to more “sanctuary counties” and a patchwork of enforcement over it.
Comment by Mike Sorensen Friday, Jan 6, 23 @ 4:31 pm
I am also fairly confident that a large portion of downstate AG’s will refuse to prosecute violations of this, unless they accompany something more egregious, but time will tell. I will certainly be messaging my state’s attorney about it, when we get one.
Comment by MG42 Friday, Jan 6, 23 @ 4:51 pm