[Nalapombu]

Hey all,

Just heard this on the radio during Limbaugh show, haven't seen a link yet. A Federal judge has struck down the total BAN on CCW that Illinois has in place calling it UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Finally the people of Illinois are going to have some ways to protect their families from the thugs and bangers.


I'll look for a link and post it if I can find the story and the PDF of the ruling.

Nalajr

[Nalapombu]

Here's a link. It was a 2-1 decision in the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. The state has 180 days to draw up a measure to allow CCW.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,7034171.story


Here's the text of the ruling....

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...64134.htmlpage

Nalajr

[Nalapombu]

It's a time to celebrate folks. We finally get a couple of Federal judges in the lower circuits to agree with us....

It wasn't decided on 2nd amendment grounds from what I hear.

Nalajr

[DonD]

Shove that where the sun doesn't shine, Governor and corrupt Rahm Emanuel. WAY, WAY past time for this to happen, Rotten Richard Daley's influence may be finally starting to dissipate. Don

[johnstein11]

Nice.

[Fear Night]

But Illinois, specifically the great city of Chicago, are safe havens from crime and gun violence. What are they thinking by introducing guns into these perfectly modeled utopias? There will be complete and utter chaos! The streets will run red!

[redbaron007]

I'll be interesting to see if the Attorney General will appeal to the SCOTUS. Don't jump and scream with pleasure, yet. The Chicago machine will get in gear.

I hope the State accepts the defeat and moves forward. The question is, what will the legislation look like. "you can carry a handgun only on days that end in "z" with a full moon, $1,000 of cash in your pocket, and no bullets!'.

It is truly good news, but still a potential long road ahead.



red

[Thumpernator]

The Fat Lady hasn't sung yet. Illinois will make it very restrictive and expensive for the license and will probably not honor any out of state licenses.

[Nalapombu]

I was initially wrong in my post. I am reading the ruling now, trying to at least, and it seems that the 2nd Amendment was a SIGNIFICANT factor in their decision. They quote the findings of Heller and studies regarding the 2nd amendment over and over again.

I am on page 15 now and some of the stuff is hard for a layperson to understand, but it is kinda interesting to see how they came to their ruling. They mention that Chicago already LOST at the Supreme Court in McDonald vs. City of Chicago. I think that is the one that Incorporated the 2nd amendment to the states.

I don't think they'll appeal. This is their 2nd loss and one at the Supreme Court. Besides there isn't any conflict in the lower courts on this issue. They court likes to take cases where the lower courts rulings are in disagreement with each other.

Maybe they will try and appeal it, but I don't think it will be granted.

Still a GREAT DAY despite what the pinheads in Illinois try to do.

Nalajr

[Brucev]

Sometimes a judge gets it right. This was one of those "sometimes." About time. Cool.

[Nalapombu]

It seems to me after reading the majority opinion that they think the model that New York uses is OK. They mention that it passed a challenge in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. New York makes you PROVE you need a permit in order to carry. They refuse most of the permit requests.

I think that is what the Illinois legislature is going to impose.

Nalajr

[cowboy1964]

I seriously doubt IL is going to get "shall issue" CCW. Still, this is at least a baby step in the right direction.

[redbaron007]

After reading the decision, the dissenter wanted it to be resolved in the State of IL. In other words, didn't feel the Feds should be involved. Their argument was Heller was interpreted too broad and that bearing arms was mainly in for the persons own property/house. However, those in favor agreed it did extend past the premises.

This will be interesting from here on out. They may appeal it on the hopes King Obama appoints another SCOTUS judge by the time it gets heard....then we can see what happens.



red

[cheapshot]

Originally Posted by redbaron007

After reading the decision, the dissenter wanted it to be resolved in the State of IL. In other words, didn't feel the Feds should be involved. Their argument was Heller was interpreted too broad and that bearing arms was mainly in for the persons own property/house. However, those in favor agreed it did extend past the premises.

This will be interesting from here on out. They may appeal it on the hopes King Obama appoints another SCOTUS judge by the time it gets heard....then we can see what happens.



red

Bingo!

[Dawolf]

If I lived there, (and I don't thank goodness) I would not hold my breath.

[Warp]

Originally Posted by Nalapombu

It seems to me after reading the majority opinion that they think the model that New York uses is OK. They mention that it passed a challenge in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. New York makes you PROVE you need a permit in order to carry. They refuse most of the permit requests.

I think that is what the Illinois legislature is going to impose.

Nalajr

Yup.

I predict that what IL will get will be even worse than what they have now. I predict they get a "may issue" system where, in many counties (or will they make you apply to the state no matter where you live?), nobody who isn't rich/powerful/politically connected will be able to get a license

[HexHead]

Keep in mind the legislation to make IL shall issue with just the usual restrictions failed in their legislature last year by just 3 votes to get the supermajority needed to make it veto proof. That's the way the wind is blowing in IL

I doubt this new court ordered version will be much different.

[vafish]

Originally Posted by cowboy1964

I seriously doubt IL is going to get "shall issue" CCW. Still, this is at least a baby step in the right direction.

Yep, they just have to go "May Issue" like New York City to comply with the decision.

[ilgunguygt]

Originally Posted by redbaron007

I'll be interesting to see if the Attorney General will appeal to the SCOTUS. Don't jump and scream with pleasure, yet. The Chicago machine will get in gear.

I hope the State accepts the defeat and moves forward. The question is, what will the legislation look like. "you can carry a handgun only on days that end in "z" with a full moon, $1,000 of cash in your pocket, and no bullets!'.

It is truly good news, but still a potential long road ahead.



red

Originally Posted by Thumpernator

The Fat Lady hasn't sung yet. Illinois will make it very restrictive and expensive for the license and will probably not honor any out of state licenses.

Originally Posted by Nalapombu

It seems to me after reading the majority opinion that they think the model that New York uses is OK. They mention that it passed a challenge in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. New York makes you PROVE you need a permit in order to carry. They refuse most of the permit requests.

I think that is what the Illinois legislature is going to impose.

Nalajr

Originally Posted by cowboy1964

I seriously doubt IL is going to get "shall issue" CCW. Still, this is at least a baby step in the right direction.

Originally Posted by Warp

Yup.

I predict that what IL will get will be even worse than what they have now. I predict they get a "may issue" system where, in many counties (or will they make you apply to the state no matter where you live?), nobody who isn't rich/powerful/politically connected will be able to get a license

Originally Posted by vafish

Yep, they just have to go "May Issue" like New York City to comply with the decision.

Id make a 50 dollar bet with any of you that you are wrong. Todd Vandermyde, the NRA lobbyist who helped create and push HB148 is a member of Illinoiscarry.com . This is a pretty plain situation. They have 180 days to pass concealed carry. If they dont then we have restriction free concealed carry with our FOID cards.

That means chicago has only a few options. First they can stall, then submit a crap bill. It cannot pass without downstate support. It fails. They dont support our bill, that almost passed last time anyway, and it fails. In 180 days we get concealed carry anyway. Second, they can give us what we want without a fight. Third, they can attempt an appeal with the SCOTUS. Being that this opinion was based on SCOTUS decisions on HELLER, its unlikely they would even want to hear it.

[Lior]

They'll just copy the law from MD and HI, then assert compliance with this ruling. Man in the street still gets shafted.

[redbaron007]

Originally Posted by ilgunguygt

....snip....

That means chicago has only a few options. First they can stall, then submit a crap bill. It cannot pass without downstate support. It fails. They dont support our bill, that almost passed last time anyway, and it fails. In 180 days we get concealed carry anyway. Second, they can give us what we want without a fight. Third, they can attempt an appeal with the SCOTUS. Being that this opinion was based on SCOTUS decisions on HELLER, its unlikely they would even want to hear it.

You're thinking logical....and I don't disagree with you logically. However, from a pure political standpoint.....the Chicago machine will get ramp up'd to delay and/or to prevent from this occurring.

I'm sure a lot of the southern IL reps will be courted by the Chicago reps to vote the Chicago way....which means, if they don't appeal it (this would be a an additional avenue to delay it till the SCOTUS hears it) then they will push for the strictest avenue they can get...i.e. copying NY/HI. The real question is, does the Chicago machine have enough influence to get what they want?

I'm not sure how the election turned out, as in state reps, but if the Chicago influence was diluted....a descent CC bill may come to fruition for IL residents...then maybe reciprocity with other states. I don't see IL passing a CC bill that will allow reciprocity. I hope I'm wrong.



red

[vafish]

Originally Posted by ilgunguygt

Id make a 50 dollar bet with any of you that you are wrong. Todd Vandermyde, the NRA lobbyist who helped create and push HB148 is a member of Illinoiscarry.com . This is a pretty plain situation. They have 180 days to pass concealed carry. If they dont then we have restriction free concealed carry with our FOID cards.

That means chicago has only a few options. First they can stall, then submit a crap bill. It cannot pass without downstate support. It fails. They dont support our bill, that almost passed last time anyway, and it fails. In 180 days we get concealed carry anyway. Second, they can give us what we want without a fight. Third, they can attempt an appeal with the SCOTUS. Being that this opinion was based on SCOTUS decisions on HELLER, its unlikely they would even want to hear it.

Since my post I've read up on it a bit more. Seems like you have a super majority in both houses and can over ride a veto.

I may have been too pessimistic.

posted from my stupid smart phone, please excuse any spelling mistakes.

[10mmbob]

Having lived in Illinois all my life, one thing I've learned is that the downstate Dems. hate the Chicago Dems. The only thing saving us from total socialism in our corrupt state is that we have two Democratic parties, and one Republican party. The Downstaters rarely agree with anything the Chicago Dems. want, I think this time we will have concealed carry. Fingers crossed of course.

[vafish]

Originally Posted by 10mmbob

Having lived in Illinois all my life, one thing I've learned is that the downstate Dems. hate the Chicago Dems. The only thing saving us from total socialism in our corrupt state is that we have two Democratic parties, and one Republican party. The Downstaters rarely agree with anything the Chicago Dems. want, I think this time we will have concealed carry. Fingers crossed of course.

I believe you are correct.

IL had almost enough votes to override a veto last year, They were 3 votes short.

Now they supposedly have enough votes to override the veto.

But they don't have to override a veto, all the have to do is let nothing happen and you get Vermont style constitutional carry open or concealed. This could actually be a case of pro gun legislators voting against a concealed carry bill because it isn't good enough for them and just letting the 180 day run out.

But if they do get a good law and pass it, then IL has no grounds for an appeal to scotus and a possible overturn.

[billwade]

Originally Posted by Nalapombu

It seems to me after reading the majority opinion that they think the model that New York uses is OK. They mention that it passed a challenge in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. New York makes you PROVE you need a permit in order to carry. They refuse most of the permit requests.

I think that is what the Illinois legislature is going to impose.

Nalajr

Maryland lost their case about having to prove you need a reason, maybe that will heip people i NY if someone want to take on the state.