Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Opposition
Next Post: How the impasse endangered children who needed vaccines
Posted in:
* As I told subscribers this morning, Tulchin Research is a reliable firm and is used heavily by Speaker Madigan and his organization during campaign season. He craves good numbers. So, yeah, while a gun reform group sponsored the poll, the pollster is pretty good. From a press release…
A new poll released [yesterday], finds that two-thirds of Illinois voters support legislation that addresses loopholes in the state’s existing gun licensing system that were brought to light following the tragic shooting that took five lives on February 15, 2019 in Aurora, Illinois.
The poll, released by the Illinois Gun Violence Prevention PAC (G-PAC), shows major support from across the state for HB 96, the Fix the FOID Act, which addresses gaps in the Firearms Owners Identification (FOID) system by ensuring that people with criminal histories, who are prohibited from gun possession, are not able to easily evade the law and purchase guns.
“Five innocent lives in Aurora, Illinois were lost because a system that should have prevented a known felon from having access to guns failed,” said Kathleen Sances, president and CEO of G-PAC. “Now, residents from across the state are uniting behind legislation that would put a stop to preventable tragedies, like this one, in Illinois.”
The poll also shows that Illinois voters are more likely to support state lawmakers who support the bill, by a margin of nearly 2-to-1.
“In Illinois, voters want to know their legislators are committed to making sure criminals can’t get their hands on a gun,” said Robin Lloyd, managing director of Giffords, the gun violence prevention organization founded by former Representative Gabrielle Giffords and her husband, Captain Mark Kelly. “The results of this poll shouldn’t come as a surprise. Illinois residents want to live in a state free from the dangers of everyday gun violence, and HB 96 addresses loopholes that contribute to this growing crisis. We look forward to the legislators continuing to work to protect Illinoisans from gun violence and will do all we can to help swiftly move this bill through the legislature.”
“I know what it’s like to lose a child to gun violence. It’s something no parent or guardian should ever have to go through,” said Tom Vanden Berk, founder of G-PAC and CEO Emeritus of UCAN, a social services agency. “This legislation would strengthen existing laws to protect Illinois families from experiencing the pain of losing a loved one.”
Under current Illinois law, individuals seeking to buy a gun must first obtain a Firearm Owners Identification (FOID) Card from the Department of State Police. Voters overwhelmingly support the Act’s three key provisions:
81 percent support a provision that would require a background check for all gun sales, including those by a private seller.
75 percent support a provision that would reduce the FOID Card duration from 10 years to 5 years.
73 percent support a provision that would require applicants for FOID Cards to apply in person with the State Police and submit fingerprints as part of their applicationFix the FOID Act would also mandate the State Police take action to remove guns once a FOID Card is revoked.
Support for the bill comes from across the state and is favored by 77 percent, roughly three-quarters of voters in the City of Chicago; 74 percent of voters in suburban Cook County; 75 percent of voters in the “collar counties” of DuPage, Kane, McHenry and Will; as well as 48 percent, nearly half of voters in Downstate Illinois.
Support is broad-based, as this proposal attracts support from across the state and across the political spectrum, and comes notably from the following:
84 percent of Democrats, 60 percent of independents, nearly half of Republicans;
70 percent of women and 61 percent of men;
64 percent of voters age 18-54 and 67 percent of those age 55 and older; and
82 percent of black voters, 65 percent of white voters and 61 percent of Latino voters.The poll was conducted by Tulchin Research on behalf of the Gun Violence Prevention Action Committee. The survey was comprised of 600 likely November 2020 voters in Illinois between April 25-30 of 2019.
The polling memo is here.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:07 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Opposition
Next Post: How the impasse endangered children who needed vaccines
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
So gun owners are now hearing anecdotes of ISP reclassifying expired FOIDs as “revoked”, then sending local LEOs to search the home, confiscate firearms, etc.
Indeed, there is a fresh lawsuit in the works from GSL on a particular incident.
A downstate judge recently ruled that the FOID can be considered unconstitutional under certain grounds.
Consider that the FOID was created pre-Heller, pre-McDonald.
Relevant content: A gun-control group funded a poll and came up with a gun-control finding. Why am I not surprised?
Comment by Shall not be infringed Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:14 am
===So gun owners are now hearing anecdotes===
Totally believable. Bet they’re hearing those rumors on Facebook, right?
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:17 am
A poll by a gun control group found that a majority support gun control? How shocking
Comment by Frank Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:20 am
=A poll by a gun control group found that a majority support gun control? How shocking=
Pretentiously stupid.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:33 am
I stand with the majority of Illinois residents and gun owners, I don’t fear any of what is being proposed.
Comment by Truthteller Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:38 am
Other states allow the fingerprinting at the county level for gun permits such as the CCL. I would think that is more workable than requiring everyone to visit the state police.
Comment by A Jack Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:40 am
A-Jack: CCW maybe, but fingerprinting just to own a gun? Few if any states do that, and it’s a non-starter here.
Comment by DD Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:49 am
= Shall not be infringed=
Any thoughts on the 4th Amendment or do you only care about the 2nd Amendment?
Of course you know the founding fathers were referring to muskets when they wrote the 2nd Amendment, right?
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:49 am
==Consider that the FOID was created pre-Heller, pre-McDonald.==
Neither Heller nor McDonald said FOID was unconstitutional. The opposite.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:50 am
muskets…similarly, they were only referring to the written and spoken word when referring to freedom of speech, yet here u are on the internet.
Comment by DD Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:54 am
When a child decides to kill a bunch of classmates, there is a much deeper problem than theirs or their parent’s FOID card, but closing the loopholes in licensing will help too. I don’t have the answers, but I know we are not looking at the whole picture.
What is missing from the mass shootings problem is a conversation about what causes a child or an adult to do it in the first place.
1. Part of the problem is kids are being bullied at school and home on the Internet nonstop until they can’t take it anymore, and act out by shooting their classmates. How can legislators and schools stop kids from bullying others kids day and night?
2. Sometimes mental illness is the problem. Maybe all children should be screened for metal illness every 3 or 4 years from K-12 when they have to get their shots.
Comment by Mama Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:57 am
–So gun owners are now hearing anecdotes of ISP reclassifying expired FOIDs as “revoked”, then sending local LEOs to search the home, confiscate firearms, etc.–
Yeah, ISP is so anxious to confiscate guns. And the NRA and ISRA are saying nothing about it. They are such quiet and timid little daisies.
I don’t see anything surprising about the poll. It tracks previous research.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/12/27/facts-about-guns-in-united-states/
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:01 am
==similarly, they were only referring to the written and spoken word when referring to freedom of speech, yet here u are on the internet.==
Similarly they never said money was speech, yet here we are with Citizen’s United and legal bribery.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:03 am
The current FOID act requires a background check for all gun sales including private party sales. HB 96 eliminates this provision to mandate all transfers go through a FFL dealer to begin a process whereby all firearms are in a registry that could be established to support later confiscations. I believe the polling questions did not inform the poll participants of these facts to obtain its 81% support for a provision already in place under current law.
Comment by willco pros Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:05 am
Recent clients include U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the Democratic Party of Illinois, Defenders of Wildlife, and the American Civil Liberties Union.
No bias there at all, LOL.
Comment by DD Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:15 am
gun confiscation? If this goes to the scotus they could strike down the foid card altogther
Comment by foster brooks Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:23 am
==So gun owners are now hearing anecdotes==
I own multiple firearms, and I have yet to hear this “anecdote”. Even assuming for a moment that this is true, then they kind of deserve it. If they were responsible owners like the majority of us, they wouldn’t have allowed their FOID to expire in the first place. Part of being a “responsible gun owner” is following all applicable laws, and frankly I’m tired of being lumped in with those too lazy to do so. It’s well past time we take our 2A responsibilities as seriously as we do our 2A rights, and stop believing absurd conspiracy theories pushed on social media by those who refuse to do so.
Comment by Lester Holt’s Mustache Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:52 am
==gun confiscation? ==
What’s the issue. These people aren’t supposed to have guns in the first place.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:56 am
Any regulation that passes constitutional scrutiny if applied to the right to vote can then and only then be applied to gun rights. If a right is fundamental the same rules apply.
Comment by Jack Forbes Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 12:02 pm
–Any regulation that passes constitutional scrutiny if applied to the right to vote can then and only then be applied to gun rights.–
Like registration?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 12:06 pm
Disclosure: long time blog readers know I lost a son many years ago to an accidental shooting.
== So, yeah, while a gun reform group sponsored the poll, the pollster is pretty good. ==
Assuming the question was asked as described in the report, it seems it wasn’t a push poll. But they may have left out a couple of nuances.
== 81 percent support a provision that would require a background check for all gun sales, including those by a private seller. ==
Thought you already had to verify a purchaser has a valid FOID card. It is my understanding ISP runs the FOID database every night against the Federal database. So what is going to be different about this? Are they going to require the sale go through a FFL licensed dealer with that added expense? If so, the only differences I see is the sale will cost more and the State will have a record of the transaction.
== 75 percent support a provision that would reduce the FOID Card duration from 10 years to 5 years. ==
I can live with this if the State cuts the fee in half. Otherwise, it would just be a revenue enhancer. IMO, it would be a lazy way to revoke FOID cards.
== 73 percent support a provision that would require applicants for FOID Cards to apply in person with the State Police and submit fingerprints as part of their application ==
I see in person being a nightmare. And requiring fingerprints is just an added expense on a constitutional right; you could even call it a poll tax which has been found to be unconstitutional. Disclosure: the State and FBI already have my fingerprints (if they haven’t lost them) from the background checks I had to pass for State employment about 50 years ago.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 12:07 pm
I was going to reply but RNUG pretty much hit my points on 1 & 2.
As for cost of prints if ISP is taking them perhaps that’s not as much of a concern. I do wonder about the logistics of in person. That’s twice as many applications per year & if it’s in person does that mean the electronic application ISP is using will be junked? It wasn’t long ago that FOID renewals were taking 6 months or so. I would think this would require A Lot more Clerical staff at ISP. I know CCL renewals are running long.
RNUG I didn’t know that, I’m sorry for your loss.
Comment by Mason born Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 12:25 pm
FOID Act is useless. Thug kills and maims everyday in Chicago and other parts of Illinois but does not have a FOID card. Abolish the FOID, which is just a people registration scheme, that does not reduce violent crime in Illinois.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 12:34 pm
==which is just a people registration scheme==
What does that even mean? A people registration scheme? The government already “registers” people slick.
Tighten up your tinfoil hat and step back into the shadows. The black helicopters are after you.
==FOID Act is useless==
Someone is always going to break the law. Lets just get rid of all of them. That’s the type of ridiculous argument you are making.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 12:39 pm
81 percent support a provision that would require a background check for all gun sales, including those by a private seller. YES
75 percent support a provision that would reduce the FOID Card duration from 10 years to 5 years. DON’T CARE.
73 percent support a provision that would require applicants for FOID Cards to apply in person with the State Police and submit fingerprints as part of their application. RIDICULOUS and NON STARTER
Comment by Nonbeleiver Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 1:12 pm
Rich –
Yes an individual had his guns confiscated by a local PD due to a lapse in his FOID card which triggered a revocation of his carry license and that led to Round Lake Beach sending out detectives to confiscate his guns.
I have spoke to the Mayor about it and he is aware of it. The gentleman now has legal representation and agreed to be a plaintiff is a suit challenging the constitutionality of the FOID card. I have a draft of the lawsuit in my possession.
What GPAC fails to disclose are the details of the bill, which I have as well. FOID cards head to $200 for the same time period.
$50 for 5 years so to make it equal to todays 10 year card that’s $100. Then the State Police get to charge for the background check, based upon current rates just the finger print check is $32.50. No word if they are going to add anything else to it for their time and effort. Most vendors are charging $65-75 to scan the prints and submit them to ISP so you’re looking at a $200 tax on the RKBA. For a family of 4 like mine $800 if your kids hunt or participate in the shooting sports.
this will make great fodder for another lawsuit. Which if things go right, Illinois will be left with less than what it has today. The New York City case is pending at SCOTUS. NYC tried to moot the case saying they were going to change the law but the Court rejected that and said briefings will continue on schedule. So me thinks Thomas is going to write an opinion that slaps some lower courts pretty hard and this issue may even get brought up.
As far as the poll goes, I go along with what Judge Benitez said about the Cali mag ban which was done by referendum “An unconstitutional statute adopted by a dozen jurisdictions is no less unconstitutional by virtue of its popularity”
RNUG got most of it right is his points, my bet he just hasn’t read the proposal.
At this point most gun owners have put up with the FOID act and tolerating it. But with this latest round of BS, more are resenting it. and now we might as well swing for the fence and work to take it down in the courts. We have very little downside.
Comment by Todd Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 1:29 pm
What exactly is a pool of 600 representative of? With about 9.89 MILLION Ill residents of voting age, 600 people wouldn’t even comprise 1% of that pool…not by a long shot. 600 people isn’t even 1 ten-thousandth of the voting population. Making a bold statement of “Voters overwhelmingly support” seems a bit of a stretch given the extremely small amount of people that they actually asked.
Comment by Jon Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 1:54 pm
@Todd,
If what you say about the proposed fees is accurate this brings the whole issue in to a far different light.
And if the G-PAC knew about this, and they should know the details of what they are polling about, I find it most interesting that this information was not provided when people were polled.
Of course, that is what many polls do no matter what their political spectrum. They go for the jugular and the emotional and too often purposely do not provide relevant background and more comprehensive questions.
Comment by Nonbeleiver Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 1:56 pm
–Yes an individual had his guns confiscated by a local PD due to a lapse in his FOID card which triggered a revocation of his carry license and that led to Round Lake Beach sending out detectives to confiscate his guns.–
My, my, that’s quite a bit of deep-dive monitoring and action by the local coppers up there in the goo-goo liberal bastions of the Chain O’Lakes. They well-known for that sort of thing, do it often?
–The gentleman now has legal representation and agreed to be a plaintiff is a suit challenging the constitutionality of the FOID card. I have a draft of the lawsuit in my possession.–
Well lemonade out of lemons. Nice when unexpected random acts just work out so perfectly.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 2:01 pm
Word –
I was alerted to it by a friend. Chased down the rumor and got to the source. He is a 80+ year old man, combat vet and retired Marine.
Usually suits are brought as part of criminal cases and you get less than ideal fact patterns and plaintiffs.
In this case its just the opposite. He has applied for his FOID again and no one wants to go through this BS to get their carry license back.
But there are other instances, we have a woman who lost her wallet. Works at a gun shop. She is required to carry a gun at work. But now what? Can she legally possess it or transport it?
Good news is for our Vet, that as all the Heller naysayers that cry it only applies in the home well here you have it. Can someone be compelled to pay a fee, fill out a form and submit a picture just to exercise their fundamental right of self defense in their home? One would think that based upon Heller it would require strict scrutiny which I doubt this would pass that test.
Comment by Todd Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 2:13 pm
We really do need to tighten up background checks and do a better job of tracking weapons. Neither is any kind of panacea, but that’s no argument against them. But other proposals are more troubling. In-person renewals will just burden the ISP with another administrative task and possibly add further delays. I submitted electronic fingerprints for my FOID and CCW cards to expedite their processing, but not everyone can afford that. I suspect some people are looking to use higher costs as a backdoor gun control measure, which raises troubling equity issues.
The commenters here who talk about the likelihood of gun-related court actions are probably right. In addition to the NY case already before SCOTUS, a petition for a writ of certiorari has been filed by Gun Owners of America asking SCOTUS to hold that the 2A applies not just firearms themselves but also to items necessary for their use. These cases, plus others at the state level, mean there might finally be some clarification of the nuances in Heller and MacDonald.
Comment by Flapdoodle Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 2:23 pm
== and do a better job of tracking weapons. ==
Interesting phrasing. Thought the State was tracking owners with the FOID. What do you mean?
Comment by RNUG Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 3:04 pm
I have received 3 FOID cards in my life. The first had the wrong/misspelled first name and wrong middle initial, but was still issued. The second had the wrong home number, but was still issued. The third, still retained the wrong home address, but was still issued. We can’t correctly implement the FOID card now but we want to expand the criteria and guidelines. What gives?
For once, let’s fix the broken system and THEN move to making it better.
Comment by Typical Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 3:45 pm
@Word, BTW ISP is pushing revoked status up to local LEs. Some take is seriously some don’t and it seems this PD did and confiscated his 2 revolvers and 1911. They came back and allowed a neighbor to take control of the guns so they didn’t have to keep them. They were pretty decent about it but its still an issue when ones property and rights can be removed for lack of a government permission slip
Comment by Todd Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 4:28 pm
===its still an issue when ones property and rights can be removed for lack of a government permission slip===
We shall overcome. Some day.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 4:36 pm
47 — I think that day is coming and me thinks it will be in January after the fall term of SCOTUS
Comment by Todd Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 4:37 pm
We certainly wouldn’t want gun owners to have to abide by any rules now would we.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 4:41 pm
At the end of the day Todd, while you believe you are a martyr to the cause of protecting the 2nd Amendment, all you are protecting is the right of firearms manufacturers to keep their profits high. Fear of a gun-confiscating black president did more to sell firearms than any marketing campaign would dare dream.
Heck of a job Todd. I hope you own a lot of stock in those companies. Please tell me you aren’t a volunteer.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 4:46 pm
I own 5 shares of Ruger that’s it but it’s not the manufacturer s as you claim it’s the Otis McDonald’s , Rhonda Ezell’s, Sean Horton’s and Mary Shepard’s that I’ve worked for
Comment by Todd Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 5:47 pm
Once again the the ILGA is punishing law abiding citizens by requiring costly finger printing and showing up for an application in person (which is nonsense). I can get a US passport application in the mail and back in 6 weeks. Its good for 10 years and cost $110. I get my DL automatically renewed online. Just guessing but I believe far more people are killed by incompetent drivers than LEGAL gun owners. I suppose we will see what the courts do with this one as well.
Comment by theCardinal Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 8:04 pm
RNUG: “nteresting phrasing. Thought the State was tracking owners with the FOID. What do you mean?”
Sorry to be late in responding — ironically, I was at the range most of the afternoon. What I mean is that we need some means of tracking the flow of weapons from owner to owner so that (e.g.) straw purchases can be more reliably identified, so that “off the books” sales between individuals can be identified. Estimates are that 85% of gun crimes are committed with unregistered weapons. Reducing the number of unregistered or untraceable weapons may help reduce gun crime like gang violence.
Comment by Flapdoodle Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 8:04 pm
–I have received 3 FOID cards in my life. The first had the wrong/misspelled first name and wrong middle initial, but was still issued. The second had the wrong home number, but was still issued. The third, still retained the wrong home address, but was still issued.–
You think you’ve got problems? The White House today welcomed the “Boston Red Socks,” the “2018 World Cup Series Champions.”
And they’ve got the nuke codes. Sleep well.
https://ftw.usatoday.com/2019/05/watch-white-house-roasted-for-mistakes-about-the-red-sox
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:35 pm
== Reducing the number of unregistered or untraceable weapons may help reduce gun crime like gang violence. ==
Sounds like you are calling for a universal gun registry, something I believe a lot of gun owners would be opposed to. In the long run, that hasn’t worked out well everywhere it was implemented.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 9:36 pm
===the long run, that hasn’t worked out well everywhere it was implemented.===
With respect, could you please cite where this was implemented, and your evidence that it didn’t work out well?
Because i’ve Heard that before but other than 1930s Germany, which is a rather dubious example, I would like to learn when/where a gun registry led to a bad outcome for whatever jurisdiction tried this approach.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:06 pm
>>>>>I would like to learn when/where a gun registry led to a bad outcome for whatever jurisdiction tried this approach.
Everywhere, and everywhere else.
Canada tried a long gun registry and gave up.
California got citizens to register certain semi-auto rifles, so that the government could come and confiscate them later on.
Sen Julie Morrison wants to ban semi-auto rifles, so dangerous, don’t ya know… …unless registered, for a fee, with ISP. (SB107) Once registered, they are safe enough for citizens to own, until later confiscated with further legislation.
Comment by Shall not be infringed Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 10:27 pm
Here’s how to ethically conduct a poll, which wasn’t done in this case:
“Additionally, researchers are called to disclose fully to those who sponsor surveys the limitations and shortcomings of the survey and to avoid use of methods that deliberately introduce bias into the results. A survey report should include information on who sponsored it, who conducted it, exact wording and sequencing of questions, description of the population and how a sample was selected, sample sizes and sampling tolerance, and the method place and dates of data collection.”
https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/ethical-issues-for-online-surveys/
I wonder why they cut corners on this?
Comment by What if we had a FOID card for the 1st amendment? Thursday, May 9, 19 @ 11:14 pm
==Sounds like you are calling for a universal gun registry, something I believe a lot of gun owners would be opposed to. In the long run, that hasn’t worked out well everywhere it was implemented.==
Can’t argue about the opposition registry would generate, not sure I’m altogether in favor of it myself. But it just seems that the more we know not only who the owners are (through background checks at time of purchase) but also what they own, maybe the more the flow of guns into the wrong hands might be stopped. Vain hope? Quite possibly, but I’ve had a lot of those over the years. Peace out.
Comment by Flapdoodle Friday, May 10, 19 @ 12:06 am
==Can someone be compelled to pay a fee, fill out a form and submit a picture just to exercise their fundamental right of self defense in their home?==
Yes according to District of Columbia v Heller: here’s a quote by Scalia, “Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Friday, May 10, 19 @ 7:24 am
@ 7:24 am:
Sorry, Wolf, nothing in Scalia’s quote addresses “Can someone be compelled to pay a fee, fill out a form and submit a picture just to exercise their fundamental right of self defense in their home?”
Comment by Shall not be infringed Friday, May 10, 19 @ 8:00 am
Wolf, hate to break it to you but you be wrong.
The courts have interpreted as long standing not in terms of 10, 20 or 30 years, but at the time of the ratification.
The real question is can they force you to pay a fee, fill out a form, provide an a picture ID to be able to have the right of self defense in your own home and confiscate your property if not?
this should rise to strict scrutiny and we have the New York case at SCOTUS. I would also suggest you read Duncan out of Cali.
Comment by Todd Friday, May 10, 19 @ 8:10 am
“or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”
The FOID card requirement would be such a law.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Friday, May 10, 19 @ 8:17 am
–“Can someone be compelled to pay a fee, fill out a form and submit a picture just to exercise their fundamental right of self defense in their home?”–
Strawman. Unless you’re proposing some sort of second-class right in which gun possession would be limited to the home only.
I doubt that’s what you’re doing. I’m pretty sure you want to carry your guns around in the public square.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 10, 19 @ 8:27 am
Commercial, meaning retail. I would take it that the licensure of dealers is one thing. ownership and possession is something else. You guys continue to try and drive a bus through anything Heller spoke about.
But you might want to read this:
http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/NYSRPA-v.-NYC_Brief-for-Petitioners___.pdf
Comment by Todd Friday, May 10, 19 @ 8:28 am
Also from Scalia in Heller; “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited… It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”
Just take the five minutes to fill out the form and pay the $10 for ten year fee. Sheesh
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Friday, May 10, 19 @ 8:32 am
==You guys continue==
Scalia isn’t continuing anything. He passed away in 2016.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Friday, May 10, 19 @ 8:38 am
“or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”
Of course it’s commercial. The dealer isn’t going to sell you a gun if you don’t have a FOID card.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Friday, May 10, 19 @ 8:45 am
66% my @$$
Comment by NunyaB Monday, May 13, 19 @ 11:54 pm
==66% my @$$==
Well that’s a real poll, not your barstool buddies.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Wednesday, May 15, 19 @ 6:45 am
No mention of the White County case “People v. Brown” in which a circuit court judge ruled the FOID card act unconstitutional? Granted, it’s a trial court decision that is in the process of appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court, but I find it odd that it has been so little reported in the general news media in the state. Seems newsworthy to me…
Comment by PrairieDog Wednesday, May 29, 19 @ 12:29 pm