Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: AG Raoul’s inaugural address
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
*** UPDATE *** The bill will head to the governor…
That’s more “Yes” votes than last time.
…Adding… Press release…
Today, Protect Illinois Communities Chair and President Becky Carroll released the following statement on the House’s passage of the Protect Illinois Communities Act, sending it to Governor Pritzker for signature:
Thanks to the tireless efforts of the legislature and leadership in both chambers, including Speaker Welch, President Harmon, and original bill sponsor Representative Morgan, along with the voices of hundreds of survivors and advocates who bravely shared their stories, and the work of numerous organizations that worked to advance gun reform, Illinois is now poised to have one of the strongest gun safety bills in the country.
The Protect Illinois Communities Act will help save lives and reduce the trauma inflicted upon communities across our state. That’s something we can all be proud of, and we look forward to seeing Governor Pritzker sign this historic bill into law.
…Adding… Press release…
Statement of Mayor Nancy R. Rotering Regarding the Passage of the Protect Illinois Communities Act
Highland Park, Illinois – As we continue to mourn the horrific aftermath of last year’s mass shooting in Highland Park and the gun violence losses in so many other Illinois towns and cities, we applaud the sponsors of the assault weapons ban and all ILGA members who took action to save lives, making Illinois the 9th state to ban assault weapons.
Banning assault weapons has proven to be effective at curbing gun violence, as shown by the ten-year Federal Assault Weapons ban that expired in 2004. While we know that no town or county is an island and appreciate that this state-wide ban will make it that much harder for someone with horrible intentions to obtain a combat weapon, neither is a state. This important step taken by our IL legislators sends a clear message to other states and the Federal government that we need continued bold action to address mass shootings across our nation. We urge them to continue their work towards protecting all Americans’ rights to live free from fear of gun violence.
…Adding… Press release…
Following is a statement from State Rep. Bob Morgan in response to the Illinois House’s passage today of HB 5471, a sweeping gun reform bill that includes an assault weapons and high-capacity magazine ban:
“For decades, the residents of Illinois have demanded common sense gun reforms to reduce the ripple of firearm deaths, and this week, the legislature met the urgency of the moment.
“This firearm reform legislation is among the strongest in the nation, and can serve as a model for other states looking to protect their residents and end the carnage in their communities.
“I thank my colleagues on the Firearm Safety and Reform Working Group, Reps. Ford, Gong-Gershowitz, Harper, Barbara Hernandez, Hirschuaer, Hoffman, Smith, Stoneback, Willis, Yednock, and staffers Kat Bray, Fallon Sellers, Hank Strickler, John Webb. This bill simply would not have passed without the steadfast leadership of Speaker Welch, Senate President Harmon, and Governor Pritzker as we navigated this complex but vitally important issue.
“Above all, I am in awe of the countless victims and survivors and family members who sat with us, told us their stories, and refused to give up until they got the change we all needed. This victory is a testament to their strength and resilience in the face of unimaginable pain, and I am forever grateful to them.”
…Adding… Press release…
Following the passage of the assault weapons ban by both the House and Senate, Governor JB Pritzker issued the following statement.
“For a long time now, I and many other leaders in the Illinois General Assembly have prioritized getting the most dangerous weapons off our state’s streets. Today, honoring the commitment we made, we passed one of the strongest assault weapons bans in the nation, one I will be proud to sign.
No Illinoisan, no matter their zip code, should have to go through life fearing their loved one could be the next in an ever-growing list of victims of mass shootings. However, for too long people have lived in fear of being gunned down in schools, while worshipping, at celebrations or in their own front yards. This legislation will stop the spread of assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, and switches and make our state a safer place for all. I look forward to signing this bill immediately, so we can stop the sale of these deadly weapons as soon as possible.
My deepest thanks to Speaker Welch and Senate President Harmon for championing this historic legislation, and to Representative Morgan for his leadership on this issue.”
…Adding… ISRA…
Dear Gov. Pritzker, President Harmon, and Speaker Welch,
Challenge accepted. The Illinois State Rifle Association will see the State of Illinois in court.
Best Regards,
Richard A Pearson
Executive Director
Illinois Rifle Association
* More background is here if you need it. Patrick Keck…
The Illinois Senate on Monday passed an amended version of the assault-style weapons ban. The Protect Illinois Communities Act now heads to the Illinois House of Representatives for a concurrence vote Tuesday.
The matter was discussed on the Senate floor in a relatively short debate with several Republicans rising in opposition to House Bill 5471. The final tally at 6:15 p.m. was 34-20 with four Democrats, including state Sen. Doris Turner of Springfield, voting against it.
Senate President Don Harmon introduced five amendments to PICA filed under HB 5471. Harmon detailed what they would entail on the Senate floor Monday evening.
The bill would prevent the sale, manufacture, possession and purchase of assault-style weapons, assault weapon attachments, and .50 caliber cartridges in the state of Illinois. It would also keep standards set in earlier versions of the act, such as maintaining the age to get a Firearm Owner Identification Card at 18.
* CBS Chicago…
The vote came down after almost four full days of backroom discussions and debate. The clock had been ticking to pass the ban before current lawmakers leave office and newly-elected ones are sworn in Wednesday.
The bill must now go back to the Illinois House of Representatives for reconciliation, but this is really just a formality. The House passed its own version of the bill, called the Protect Our Communities Act, on Thursday night into Friday morning. […]
The bill would in addition expedite the implementation of universal background checks, but would not change the age range for Firearm Owners Identification cards.
Illinois Senate President Don Harmon (D-Oak Park) introduced the bill in committee Monday morning. On Sunday, state House Speaker Emmanuel “Chris” Welch said the House would not accept a watered-down version of the bill.
During debate, Republican senators argued the legislation is unconstitutional and punishes legal abiding gun owners in the state.
“All of you that are thinking about voting for this today, you should resign,” state Sen. Neil Anderson, R-Moline said. “This is a blatant disregard for the United States Constitution.”
Sen. Chapin Rose, R-Mahomet, said the state should focus on enforcing the laws that already exist, instead of creating new ones.
“We’re going to make felons out of taxpayers. Why don’t we go after the bad guys, put hem being bars and actually keep them there?” Rose said. “Put the bad guys behind the bars, not the taxpayers, not the citizens.”
* WBEZ…
The breakthrough on the gun package came after dramatic testimony earlier in the day in the state Senate from Highland Park mother Ashbey Beasley, who was at the July 4th parade with her 6-year-old son, Beau.
She played a jolting phone recording of screams from another child who was trying to escape the chaos that ensued as a rooftop gunman sprayed the crowd with bullets. Neither Beasley nor her son were shot.
“What’s happening? What’s happening? What’s happening?” the boy screamed as senators sat stoically while Beasley played the recording of the boy’s shrieks in committee.
“This is what it sounds like when a child runs from an assault weapon. This is what happens when a child goes to a parade in our country. This is the sound of the loss of innocence,” Beasley told the panel in urging support for the gun ban.
* NBC Chicago…
If approved, Pritzker has said he would sign it into law.
Mayor Lori Lightfoot praised the progress on the bill.
“I haven’t read the bill, like I said the devil’s in the details, but at least in the broad strokes, I think this is significant and important progress,” Lightfoot said.
* More…
* Crain’s | Illinois Senate passes assault weapons ban after heated debate: “After continued negotiations between the leaders, stakeholders and advocates, we have reached a deal on one of the strongest assault weapons bans in the country,” senate President Don Harmon said in a statement. “Gun violence is an epidemic that is plaguing every corner of this state and the people of Illinois are demanding substantive action.”
posted by Isabel Miller
Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 10:37 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: AG Raoul’s inaugural address
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
“Why do we allow anyone to easily purchase a rapid-fire, high-capacity weapon that can kill dozens of unarmed people in under a minute?” So maybe JB can ask why both the House and Senate version of Morgan’s bill exempts retired police? Certainly no one in either house will even mention the influence of the police unions in this and every firearms bill.
Comment by Elmer Keith Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 10:52 am
Elmer, you and Lucky Pierre feel free to take potshots at Democrats for siding with police and not going further on gun safety.
I’ll just remind you, Republicans are free to file a bill closing the “Retired Police Officer Loophole.”
Please share the bill number when you have one.
Comment by Thomas Paine Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 10:59 am
Now that all the sound and fury is mostly past, let’s take a look at the Cliff Notes version of what passed. This is my take on it.
.50 caliber rifles and ammos banned. Don’t see these being used for mass shootings, so no significant impact.
‘Assault Rifles’ banned / existing must be registered. Will keep some new ones off the street. The biggest impact here is slightly limiting the availability of semi-auto rifles that can be converted to full auto. Since some of these have been used in mass shootings / drive-bys, it may have some impact. If nothing else, it is another weapons charge prosecutors can add.
Bans converting semi-auto to full auto. Basically a feel good provision since this was already illegal, specifically under Federal law.
Shotguns limited to 5 shells. Again, most shotguns were already plugged to just 3 shells per the hunting regulations, minimal impact. There are a few older / antique shotguns with a 6 shell capacity it might affect. Basically, minimal impact.
Rifle mag capacity - 10 rounds for rifles could have a bit of impact, but as quickly as you can change magazines, it’s not too much difference. Being cynical, I’ll say it would give the victims a couple of second break is someone is on a shooting spree. So it will have some impact, but not as much as legislators might want to believe.
Pistol mag capacity - 15 rounds is pretty standard, although a number of semi-autos come in 17. You see some of these pistols confiscated with 20, 30 or more capacity but those are bulky and useless if you are using your pistol for concealed carry. Same argument as rifles, can quickly change mags so the 15 limit isn’t much of a limit. But this may limit some of the drive-by damage because you aren’t going to have time to change mags while speeding down the road. Of all the actions, this may actually have some impact.
Bottom line:
(1) There MAY be some incremental improvement from this bill, but I don’t expect major changes in gun crime statistics. We’ll have to see in a few years.
(2) There will be some hassle for legal gun owners to comply with the new requirements, mostly registration of ‘assault rifles’ and replacing , (or proving pre-existing ownership) of non-compliant magazines.
(3) The only potential constitutional issue I see is the ‘assaukt rifle’ ban. I think it will hold since they grandfathered things, but that is going to depend on how the courts interpret the “in common use” phrase that SCOTUS has used in other decisions.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 11:22 am
Re magazines, I’m going to have to disagree. This will have no impact as I doubt the criminals will care about this change the new restriction.
Comment by Labradoodle Dad Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 11:27 am
The 2A folks can complain all they want, but this bill is literally going to save lives. That’s what it’s all about. That’s all that matters.
Comment by Shytown Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 11:27 am
=== I doubt the criminals will care===
Then you should advocate for repealing all criminal laws, which are routinely violated by criminals.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 11:30 am
–There will be some hassle for legal gun owners… replacing, (or proving pre-existing ownership) of non-compliant magazines.
Doesn’t the burden fall on the state to prove that you didn’t own those magazines prior to a ban? Also, non-compliance would only be in the instance where a person wasn’t on private property, at a licensed gun dealer, or a gun range, or transporting to a gun dealer or to/from a range.
Comment by ChuckIL Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 11:33 am
So Springfield Armory in Geneseo and Rock River Arms in Colona are out of business?
Comment by Enemy of the State Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 11:34 am
…this bill is literally going to save lives.
wanna bet?
Comment by Blue Dog Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 11:39 am
===wanna bet?===
Explain national statistics before and after the national changes…
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 11:46 am
===are out of business? ===
Nope.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 11:47 am
RNUG @1122 & ChuckIL @1133
The Senate version of the bill (which I believe is consistent with House bill on this point) says that to grandfather an “assault weapon,” the owner must file an affidavit under oath stating 1. owner’s valid FOID card number, 2. legally owned the weapon prior to law’s effective date of 1/1/24 *or* inherited it from someone who met the deadline, and 3. weapon’s make, model, caliber, and serial number. This affidavit becomes a “completed endorsement application submitted to the ISP” that establishes a “rebuttable presumption” that individual is entitled to possess and transport the weapon under the terms of the new law. No mention of sales receipts or other records.
So yes, the burden of proof is on the State.
Comment by Flapdoodle Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 11:54 am
“Then you should advocate for repealing all criminal laws, which are routinely violated by criminals.”
What a goofy statement. How about enforcing the existing laws instead of dumping on legal and law-abiding citizens? Start in Chicago and East St. Louis.
Comment by Someone Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 11:55 am
Rich, you belong on the pedestal on Bailey’s left with comments like that.
This legislation was passed to get a desired outcome or behavior. Based on how current laws are disregarded and not enforced, I fail to see how this law will have any meaningful impact.
Comment by Labradoodle Dad Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 11:56 am
===I fail to see how this law will have any meaningful impact===
Then what’s the problem?
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 12:02 pm
=What a goofy statement.=
The goofiness is solidly in your court. Read what you wrote. You imply that we should not pass laws that will be ignored by criminals which is just dumb. By ignoring laws, people become criminals.
=I fail to see =
Yeah, we all get that.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 12:04 pm
== I fail to see how this law will have any meaningful impact. ==
The action that would be most likely to have an impact isn’t really addressed: identifying / prosecuting straw buyers and the importation of firearms from neighboring States.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 12:09 pm
===What a goofy statement===
It is a direct logical conclusion based on the original statement. Let’s not pass this law because the criminals will ignore it. Ergo, let’s not pass any laws that will be ignored.
Also, bite me.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 12:12 pm
=== ===I fail to see how this law will have any meaningful impact===
Then what’s the problem?===
This, ALL DAY, lol
What do you care if it’s not meaningful, then you should be 100% for it.
The very same wonky folks who want no changes or see any changes as either not impactful or unconstitutional don’t understand the politics of being on the wrong side of this specific issue.
The GOP specifically is on the wrong side of the polling… again.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 12:14 pm
=identifying / prosecuting straw buyers and the importation of firearms from neighboring States.=
@RNUG- this is something that already happens. A guy in the chicago area was just charged with multiple counts of this. I wish I could remember the name but I saw the story on WGN a while back.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 12:18 pm
== this is something that already happens. ==
-JS Mill- , yes it happens, but not enough.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 12:24 pm
==I fail to see how this law will have any meaningful impact.==
Half-measures/doing nothing has led us to this point. What could be more ridiculous than having a 6-year-old using a 9mm to ‘bust a cap’ in his first grade teacher?
Comment by Jocko Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 12:33 pm
The meaningful impact is the registration part. That irks me to no end. May not be a popular response but it is an honest one. Just finished watching Ken Burn’s “The US and the Holocaust”. Highly recommended for all to watch. The correlation being: The first step to confiscation is registration. Once the information is in a database somewhere, someone, eventually, is going to find a way to use it. In JB’s inaugural address he made the statement “and we need to know where these weapons are”. Who does? Why?
Comment by Papa2008 Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 1:02 pm
=== 6-year-old using a 9mm to ‘bust a cap’ in his first grade teacher ===
Unfortunately, nothing about this bill relates to or has any measures geared towards preventing that exceedingly rare occurrence from happening again. But I do see your point, if that child had been an Illinois resident, he surely would have simply complied with the FOID law and other criminal statutes, and the tragedy would have been prevented. I just cannot understand why Virginia has not yet passed a law against shooting people - to prevent such crimes from occurring. /s (emphasis added on the /s)
Comment by rtov Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 1:06 pm
=but not enough.=
Point taken and I agree.
One of the issues with “government” is that for all the legislation passed, the compliance side of the equation is often left un or underfunded.
Maybe not the police per se, but the element that tracks things like revoked FOID and investigates crimes like straw purchases never seems to have the manpower it needs.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 1:09 pm
===The first step to confiscation is registration.===
Please stop with this canard. Nobody is talking about confiscation and this isn’t Facebook.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/little-gun-history/
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 1:10 pm
I find it interesting that many feel that we can incrementally legislate our way to end gun violence. Those same people seem to believe that Illinois legislators can write and pass effective laws to that end. Not true. Under the current bill it defines an “assault weapon” consisting of a folding stock or having a shroud to protect the shooter from burning their hand. This is laughable. The magazine limitation may have some benefit but allowing 10-12 rounds which can easily be switched out in seconds will still not stop mass shootings. I do understand the argument that we must do something to stop gun violence in this country. Passing this legislation is doing something and if that is the goal then they have succeeded.
The question is what happens after this becomes law and gun violence continues? Do the politicians go back and pass more restrictive piecemeal measures? I support reasonable laws that are designed to protect people and prevent crime. This bill ultimately will not change much. I think we all know that guns are not going away in this country and more legislation is not going to change that.
Comment by Southern Illinoisan Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 1:12 pm
===The question is what happens after this becomes law and gun violence continues? Do the politicians go back and pass more restrictive piecemeal measures? I support reasonable laws that are designed to protect people and prevent crime. This bill ultimately will not change much. I think we all know that guns are not going away in this country and more legislation is not going to change that.===
It’s losing politics “doing nothing because nothing changes”
Lots of words saying you want nothing done, no matter what the tragedies demand?
It’s also interesting how one looks at “what if” in a crystal ball and land on, continually “nothing changes”
Yeah, that’s not a real policy thing.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 1:20 pm
=Papa2008=
Switzerland has a very high gun ownership per capita, yet requires guns to be registered.
You can add that to your correlation.
Comment by Pius Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 1:20 pm
47th Ward, thanks for sharing. From your own link:
“What’s True
Mass killings of civilians by military dictatorships in the 1900s were more often than not preceded by the confiscation of firearms from targeted populations, a task made easier by laws requiring the registration and/or licensing of privately-owned weapons.”
Comment by Concerned Citizen Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 1:49 pm
Where is my comment? Is this a fact-free zone?
Comment by Concerned Citizen Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 1:56 pm
===Is this a fact-free zone? ===
LOL
You used as an example military dictatorships. Not exactly a substantive American argument.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 1:59 pm
== How about enforcing the existing laws instead of dumping on legal and law-abiding citizens? Start in Chicago and East St. Louis. ==
Racism?
Comment by H-W Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 2:50 pm
=Please stop with this canard. Nobody is talking about confiscation and this isn’t Facebook.=
This “CANARD” is exactly what is currently happening in the state of CT.
Comment by Not a fan Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 2:51 pm
If the point of this legislation is to prevent gun violence, someone please take a shot (intended) at explaining how registration of existing firearms (and accessories) is going to prevent future violence. Solving crimes after the fact, maybe. I’ll hang up and listen.
Comment by Papa2008 Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 2:54 pm
Not a fan of links, are you? What in God’s good name are you talking about?
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 2:56 pm
The big problem with this ban is it fails to address root causes of these mass casualty events. Six months before the Highland Park shooting, there was a mass casualty event using a Ford Explorer. One less person was killed, but 20 more were injured.
I certainly won’t feel safer with this law in place. Instead more attention should be paid to mental issues and more effective security.
Comment by A Jack Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 3:02 pm
Here’s one, plenty more readily available online. Politicians on either side are big fans of incrementalism and will slowly eat away at freedoms. Only hundreds of examples of that throughout history.
https://ctnewsjunkie.com/2022/11/02/lamont-looks-to-revisit-connecticuts-assault-weapons-ban/
Comment by Not a fan Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 3:03 pm
Not a fan, that story tells me nothing is happening in CT, your fever dreams notwithstanding. Wake me up when CT rescinds its grandfather clause and starts confiscating AR-15s.
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 3:13 pm
===The first step to confiscation is registration.===
Apparently you’re too enamored of this Red Dawn (80s version) scene. Confiscation will be preceded by the hacking of the NRA, their state chapters, and Todd Vandermyde’s organization’s computer files. Much more efficient and quicker (and not in COBOL).
https://youtu.be/3OaF-j8×5Vc?t=3
Comment by Anyone Remember Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 3:18 pm
===that story tells me nothing is happening in CT===
And nothing is still happening.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 3:18 pm
When will we wake up and realize some people are born broken and no piece of legislation will fix that? Darrell Brooks drove his car into a parade to kill multiple people. Timothy McVeigh used a bomb.
Some people are born broken and you can’t legislate them fixed. We need more mental health services, we need more accountability, we need more values, and we need present fathers.
Another failure in IL government.
Comment by Deputy Sheriff Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 3:20 pm
=== some people are born broken and no piece of legislation will fix that?===
I don’t think people are born broken. I do think that no one bill will solve all the word’s problems. And just because a bill doesn’t solve all problems doesn’t make it a particularly bad bill.
Stick to the topic at hand.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 3:27 pm
In the end nobody seems to know where these guns come from. They are manufactured and then sold to someone ostensibly legally. Then magically they appear in the hands of criminals at some point. Everyone here defending the right to hold weapons capable of high rates of Fire seems to talk about responsible gun owners so how are all these guns getting the hands of criminals? If you want to talk about people getting run down by a car as above they’re probably was a complete chain of ownership from the factory to the last person who had legal ownership of that car. A stolen car tends to be something that people immediately notify the police about. Yet there seems to be a lot of loose guns floating around.
Comment by OverByDere Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 3:28 pm
Giving up and writing off people to allow yourself to own an assult weapon is quite the way to make people seem disposable.
Why that’s important in the context to the post? Easy.
Once again, it’s about the weapon and that want of it outside the politics of understanding people don’t think life is at all… disposable
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 3:40 pm
Prediction- compliance with registration less than 20%.
Impact on crime? Negligible.
Very little of it will survive court challenges.
Comment by Tequila Mockingbird Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 3:41 pm
I’m not going to comment of AR’s, but please understand limiting magazines limits the amount of protection I have for my family. I live in a rural area which is so often forgotten in this blog. Also remember, it is rare that only one person breaks into a home out in the sticks and although a good shot, I like the insurance more rounds give me.
Comment by Huckleberry1926 Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 4:07 pm
“Just finished watching Ken Burn’s “The US and the Holocaust”. Highly recommended for all to watch. The correlation being: The first step to confiscation is registration.”
No.
Just stop.
In no way can this be compared to anything having to do with the Holocaust.
Comment by btowntruth from forgottonia Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 4:12 pm
=we need present fathers=
Like the dad in Highland Park who made sure that his kid got an assault rifle? Or maybe you’re talking about a different “construct” because the suburban kid taking out a group of parade goers doesn’t fit your narrative?
Good to see that Durkin’s light was green.
Comment by Pundent Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 4:14 pm
===we need present fathers===
Is that you Jeanne Ives
I guess that comment is pretending that’s not a racial thought…
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 4:21 pm
I think we can all agree that rifles of all kinds are not even the tip of the iceberg, nor are large cap mags. 97% of homicide attempts are not rifle related. So if someone could enlighten me as to how exactly this bill will fix anything for Illinois go ahead.
Comment by Not a fan Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 4:24 pm
- not a fan -
You advocate doing nothing?
Got it.
Let the courts set the bridges, and where it’s too far.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 4:28 pm
=we need present fathers=
That sure stopped Harris and Klebold didn’t it?
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 4:29 pm
Just wait until some sheriff arrests a trooper. It will happen if they try to get heavy handed with this….
Comment by DeputySheriff Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 4:29 pm
== Confiscation will be preceded by the hacking of the NRA, their state chapters, and Todd Vandermyde’s organization’s computer files. Much more efficient and quicker (and not in COBOL). ==
Right? Gun owners who have this fear of government databases have largely all registered themselves with one or more private NFP corporations. Their database may not contain what types of guns they have, but the Venn Diagram of “Registered NRA Members (or similar organizations)” and “People Who Have a Boatload of Guns” is practically a circle.
Comment by Leap Day William Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 4:32 pm
I live out in the sticks too. I cannot name a single farmer friend or other, who has used a weapon for protection, nor a single farmer friend or others who has needed to present a weapon in self-defense.
I offer those words sincerely. If you need more rounds and more magazines because you fear a couple clip would not be enough, your fear of crime is the problem. You are not in danger.
Comment by H-W Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 4:33 pm
===Just wait until some sheriff arrests a trooper===
lol
Right.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 4:33 pm
(Last comment directed to Huckleberry 1926).
Comment by H-W Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 4:34 pm
I really detest having fat thumbs! Sorry for the awful typing!
Comment by Huckleberry1926 Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 5:07 pm
Just to add a bit of historical context … not all of us are old enough to remember this.
The (1968) FOID card was the compromise reached of registering the firearms owner, not the individual firearm(s) by make model and serial number.
It only took government 55 years to partially break that compromise / promise.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 5:29 pm
RNUG,
A previous statehouse can’t bind the hands of a future one. In this case the state has changed by a lot since 1968. As has weapon technology. And the frequency of firearms related mass casualty events.
Comment by cermak_rd Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 6:05 pm
-cermak_rd-
I agree things have changed. And I can live with what the GA passed. But that is one reason people don’t trust government. They will continue to, as a friend describes, it salami slice at things until they achieve their final objective.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 6:13 pm
RNUG, 52 years is hardly a salami slice. Things change. Laws need to change with the times.
Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 6:21 pm
Wasn’t the FOID instituted to combat gun violence? How’d that work out? Address the problem.
Comment by Papa2008 Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 6:57 pm
- 47th Ward -
Rifles like the AR-15 existed before 1968. The Armalite model 15 was in production starting in 1959. Something changed, but it wasn’t necessarily the armaments.
Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 8:03 pm
===I live out in the sticks too. I cannot name a single farmer friend or other, who has used a weapon for protection, nor a single farmer friend or others who has needed to present a weapon in self-defense.===
I’m sure that your words will add comfort to those who you don’t know, that had a need to protect themselves. Some who could and others who couldn’t. Per capita is overrated, IMO
Comment by Lorie Darktoe Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 8:04 pm
It may take 5-10 years to get through the courts but the major parts of this law will be found unconstitutional. That combined with the fact it will have very little impact towards the stated purpose of the bill is why many gun owners are frustrated today. I can’t blame the Democrats and Governor Pritzker though. They get to campaign on it either way.
Comment by Pretzel Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 8:23 pm
===I’m sure that your words will add comfort to those who you don’t know===
- Lorie Darktoe -
Do you have stats to refute? Thanks.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 8:24 pm
===They get to campaign on it either way.===
That’s the whole ball game to the goal of the exercise, as the outcome may or may not be seen.
Republicans are on the wrong side of the politics, if it takes 4, 5, 6 years, those are years the ILGOP will be seen as soft on assault weapons that inflict causalities and death.
“See you in court”
“We have the law on our side”
My favorite is talking about “Revolution” again.
Meanwhile… the political hacks take to the wonks. Again.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 8:28 pm
Republicans may be on the wrong side of the politics but Democrats are on the wrong side of the constitution here. Also failing to address the issue while they scream about the NRA. I hope people remember the victory lap being taken tonight when nothing changes, the law is struck down, and the state pays the NRA, SAF, and FPC millions. But they wont.
Comment by Pretzel Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 8:41 pm
===Republicans may be on the wrong side of the politics but…===
Winners. Make. Policy.
That’s the ball game.
Seats. Governor. Supreme Court.
If you’re a hard core “one issue” voter… but the thing is… the GOP continues to be wrong on so much policy, the politics make it easier and easier to defeat them.
I know, I know… “see you in court”… “the constitution”
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 8:49 pm
Not a one issue voter but in talking about this issue it is not the Republicans wrong on policy. At some point the Democrats will own that.
Comment by Pretzel Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 9:16 pm
===but in talking about this issue it is not the Republicans wrong on policy. At some point the Democrats will own that.===
Yeah, actual polling says otherwise.
Democrats want to own the side that wants to stop assault weapons.
It’s like you’re helping them here.
It’s why Republican wonks to 2A policy are zero help to the political hacks that have candidates framed by votes that deny a ban on some assault weapons… Republicans are dangerous, that’s how the politics here is going.
Abortion is similar.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 9:20 pm
===in talking about this issue ===
Your circle is not a polling sample. I see this all the time. Almost no one is immune. Reporters included. You have to get outside yourself.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 9:26 pm
Even the most ardent supporters of this law probably accept that it does nothing to stop assault weapons coming to Illinois from other states, used illegally here. However, after Highland Park, the law’s proponents do not want Illinois to be associated with assault weapons being sold here and winding up in a mass shooting.
Big thanks to Leader Durkin, for a great parting act, voting for the bill. It’s about the terrified eyes of a child, as expressed in Highland Park, and no longer enabling this in Illinois (or Ellinois, as many say).
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 9:41 pm
You view this as a chess match between Democrats and Republicans. I’m talking about the results of this law. This law is going to fail in many different ways. I’m sure from a PR (polling) perspective the Democrats will continue to take the position that it only failed because of the NRA. How long can they do that? We’ll see. People continue to pay the price for the violence while we find out.
Comment by Pretzel Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 9:42 pm
Rich Miller, to clarify I am not referring to talking to others about this issue. I am not taking a poll. I am merely offering my opinion. But logically speaking this law does not address the issue at hand and will be found unconstitutional.
Comment by Pretzel Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 9:47 pm
===How long can they do that? We’ll see.===
Every time there are incidents like the shooting at a parade.
The Democrats win the politics, because deciding that voting against any banning of assault weapons when people don’t feel safe…
===People continue to pay the price for the violence while we find out.===
That’s not a winning argument when Republicans refuse any type of gun control.
Bailey showed he didn’t believe it was a political winner.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jan 10, 23 @ 9:54 pm
I like the insurance more rounds give me.
You can keep the High capacity mags and use them on your own private property or, on other private property as long as you have permission from the owner.
Comment by reelpro Wednesday, Jan 11, 23 @ 9:30 am