Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: lee n. field on December 11, 2012, 01:58:55 PM
-
ISRA Notice:
Decision in Shepard / Moore v Madigan
We are disinclined to engage in another round of historical analysis to determine whether eighteenth-century America understood the Second Amendment to include a right to bear guns outside the home. The Supreme Court has decided that the amendment confers a right to bear arms for self-defense, which is as important outside the home as inside.
The theoretical and empirical evidence (which overall is inconclusive) is consistent with concluding that a right to carry firearms in public may promote self-defense. Illinois had to provide us with more than merely a rational basis for believing that its uniquely sweeping ban is justified by an increase in public safety. It has failed to meet this burden.
The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment therefore compels us to reverse the decisions in the two cases before us and remand Nos. 12-1269, 12-1788 21 them to their respective district courts for the entry of declarations of unconstitutionality and permanent injunctions. Nevertheless we order our mandate stayed for 180 days to allow the Illinois legislature to craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendment as interpreted in this opinion, on the carrying of guns in public.
REVERSED AND REMANDED, WITH DIRECTIONS;
The legislature has 180 days to change the law.
Illinois joins the 21th century.
-
Twenty-oneth century? Awesome! :P
Congrats, Land of Lincoln.
-
We ain't quite there yet, but boy this is feeling good.
-
Chicago Tribume -- U.S. appeals court strikes down state's concealed-carry ban (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-us-appeals-court-strikes-down-states-concealedcarry-ban-20121211,0,7034171.story)
Seventh Circus, Moore vs. Madigan (http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?caseno=12-1269&submit=showdkt)
-
That is pretty awesome!!
-
Looks like its possible the last state to ban CC might be changing.
http://blogs.suntimes.com/politics/2012/12/big_win_for_gun-rights_groups_federal_appeals_court_tosses_state_ban_on_carrying_concealed_weapons.html
-
Now for that "full faith and credit" stuff.
-
Merged.
-
It'll be interesting seeing how badly the state tries to screw around.
-
It'll be interesting seeing how badly the state tries to screw around.
How dare your besmirch the fine reputation of Illinois! =D
-
=D
-
Nevertheless we order our mandate stayed for 180 days to allow the Illinois legislature to craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendment as interpreted in
this opinion, on the carrying of guns in public.
Yeah, and that law is probably going to look something like this....
[cynic]
- Applicants must pass a background check to include traffic violations and misdemeanors. It shall be deemed that any person ever charged with an offense that may carry a penalty greater than 1 dollar or 1 day imprisonment shall be a barred.
- The application cost for consideration of issuance shall be set at $1,000 with an automatic annual increase at a rate of one and one half times the rate of inflation specific to the State of Illinois.
- Application filing will be conducted between 0817 and 0823 on Tuesday mornings at a place to be determined by the State AG.
- Applications will take no longer than 900 days, and no less than 600 days to allow for thorough background investigation, from date of filing to be approved or denied.
- Applicants must have a minimum 100 certified hours of concealed carry and pistol shooting training at a Chicago police training range, and shall be required to maintain a minimum of 50 certified hours of training per year to maintain their concealed carry permit. The availability of the police training range to be at the convenience of the CPD.
- It shall be deemed that the current or prior holding a public office or employment in the State, County or City legislatures, government or law enforcement agency shall be considered the equivalent of holding a concealed carry permit in good standing.
-
Decision in Shepard v Madigan and Moore v Madigan:
We are disinclined to engage in another round of historical analysis to determine whether eighteenth-century America understood the Second Amendment to include a right to bear guns outside the home. The Supreme Court has decided that the amendment confers a right to bear arms for self-defense, which is as important outside the home as inside.
The theoretical and empirical evidence (which overall is inconclusive) is consistent with concluding that a right to carry firearms in public may promote self-defense. Illinois had to provide us with more than merely a rational basis for believing that its uniquely sweeping ban is justified by an increase in public safety. It has failed to meet this burden.
The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment therefore compels us to reverse the decisions in the two cases before us and remand Nos. 12-1269, 12-1788 21 them to their respective district courts for the entry of declarations of unconstitutionality and permanent injunctions. Nevertheless we order our mandate stayed for 180 days to allow the Illinois legislature to craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendment as interpreted in this opinion, on the carrying of guns in public.
REVERSED AND REMANDED, WITH DIRECTIONS;
The Illinois legislature has 180 days to change the law.
[popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn] [popcorn]
-
Merged again. ;)
-
How dare your besmirch the fine reputation of Illinois! =D
I know, what was I thinking?
It'll be interesting seeing how badly the state tries to screws around.
FTFM
-
Blood is going to run in the streets of Chicago! [ar15]
Oh wait, the blood is already running in the streets.
I guess I'll have my own conceal carry permit later this summer. =D
-
First, woohoo, time to celebrate.
Second, others are speculating that if nothing is passed the legislature in 180days, then the court may force constitution carry until passed.
-
There's a concealed carry bill that been floating around (HB148), it was full of compromises, but it would have least opened the door.
All bets are off. Rep Brandon Phelps (D, yes a Democrat) was the sponsor of that bill.
Phelps fought unsuccessfully in the House to pass concealed weapons legislation with a long set of restrictions, but he warned opponents of his legislation may regret they had not supported it when they had a chance. Now, he said, he “can’t see us” going forward with legislation that has as many restrictions as the bill that failed.
The prior bill largely limited carrying weapons to when a person was in a car, walking into a house and out on a sidewalk, and it specifically disallowed guns to be carried in churches, schools, gymnasiums, sporting events, bars and businesses, Phelps said.
He said no decision has been made on which restrictions in his previous legislation would be removed in a new bill.
Phelps warned that gun control groups who might want to appeal the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court might put strict laws in other states in jeopardy
The interesting thing is that this will put the laws other states with "May Issue" in jeopardy, even if the anti's aren't dumb enough to appeal the USSC.
Rumour has it that Speaker of the Illinois House, Mike Madigan (father of our state AG Lisa Madigan) will put together a sham bill that includes a AWB and the restrictions previously mentioned along with any others they think they can get away with.
-
Chicago Tribume -- U.S. appeals court strikes down state's concealed-carry ban (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-us-appeals-court-strikes-down-states-concealedcarry-ban-20121211,0,7034171.story)
Seventh Circus, Moore vs. Madigan (http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?caseno=12-1269&submit=showdkt)
I especially liked how you called it the Seventh Circus instead of Circuit.
-
First, woohoo, time to celebrate.
Second, others are speculating that if nothing is passed the legislature in 180days, then the court may force constitution carry until passed.
They're calling it the "CCW Cliff".
>:D >:D >:D
-
I especially liked how you called it the Seventh Circus instead of Circuit.
Oh, did I slip up? ;)
-
Time to start looking for a nice tooled leather holster for my shiny nickel S&W, suitable for an outdoor BBQ. Yeah, dream on.
-
Good luck, IL!
I know it almost surprised me, when we passed CCW. All those years of fighting, and it happened almost overnight.
>Second, others are speculating that if nothing is passed the legislature in 180days, then the court may force constitution carry until passed.<
We had something similar happen: court ruled on a concealed carry case, found the law unconstitutional, and put in their ruling a note to the legislature to come up with some form of permitting system. Was a few years later before we actually got it...
-
Could we be that far away now from the 14th Amendment taking hold and permits are valid country wide no matter where issued. Granted IMHO we don't need no stinking permits, but that is a different argument.
-
>Second, others are speculating that if nothing is passed the legislature in 180days, then the court may force constitution carry until passed.<
In reality, the court has effectively already mandated "Constitutional carry" if the legislature doesn't write an acceptable law within 180 days. The current law has been ruled unconstitutional, with a stay of 180 days. That means as of 181 days, the current law ceases to apply and does not have any validity. Remember, the general principle is that if a law doesn't say something is NOT legal ... it's legal.
The Illinois state constitution says:
ARTICLE I, SECTION 22. RIGHT TO ARMS
Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
"Subject only to the police power" means subject to the power of the legislature to write a law regulating it. Otherwise, the right CANNOT be infringed. So if there's no replacement law after 180 days, Illinois defaults to Constitutional carry automatically. ( I think ... IANAL).
-
In reality, the court has effectively already mandated "Constitutional carry" if the legislature doesn't write an acceptable law within 180 days. The current law has been ruled unconstitutional, with a stay of 180 days. That means as of 181 days, the current law ceases to apply and does not have any validity. Remember, the general principle is that if a law doesn't say something is NOT legal ... it's legal.
The Illinois state constitution says:
"Subject only to the police power" means subject to the power of the legislature to write a law regulating it. Otherwise, the right CANNOT be infringed. So if there's no replacement law after 180 days, Illinois defaults to Constitutional carry automatically. ( I think ... IANAL).
Whats exciting about this possibility is that we almost got CCW by democracy, it failed by a 65-32 vote. Therefore, a majority contingent should be able to hold out for a decent law or force constitution carry.
-
>"Subject only to the police power" means subject to the power of the legislature to write a law regulating it. Otherwise, the right CANNOT be infringed. So if there's no replacement law after 180 days, Illinois defaults to Constitutional carry automatically. ( I think ... IANAL).<
The problem here is, how will the police and DA's deal with the situation.
Here in WI, we had the AG send an open letter to county prosecuters, telling them that open carry was legal. And we still had cops busting people for it (using charges like "disturbing the peace)
-
That would be one hell of an amusing turn of events
-
first, woohoo for those in IL!!
second, if they pass a law that seems overly restrictive, will it take another court case to overturn it?
-
first, woohoo for those in IL!!
second, if they pass a law that seems overly restrictive, will it take another court case to overturn it?
Chicago tried that with it's first handgun permit law. It required that one getting a set number of hours of training on a shooting range, then banned all shooting ranges within the city limits as being "too dangerous". The Seventh Circuit told the city they "were being too cute by half" and bitch-slapped the city in the Ezell (http://www.volokh.com/2011/07/08/ezell/)ruling. It stated that the closer an activity gets to the fundamental right the stricter the scrutiny. Another huge loss for the anti's.
So the Seventh Circuit isn't going to put up with any BS from the state. If the state tries to be "too cute by half" the court may strike down the law and "Hellooooo Constitutional Carry !!!!"
-
The Chicago antis are scrambling to hold on to some of their precious restrictions but it ain't gonna work this time. We are now on offense and we don't have to play nice. F them.
-
Well, let's hope we get universal concealed carry before handguns are banned altogether to bring us into conformity with most of the "civilized" world.
-
from the news according to gunsmith
Illinois has declared the ban carrying a gun unconstitutional.
When asked about his home State abiding by the Constitution, Obama replied "Indonesia doesn't have to follow USA's laws"
-
from the news according to gunsmith
Illinois has declared the ban carrying a gun unconstitutional.
When asked about his home State abiding by the Constitution, Obama replied "Indonesia doesn't have to follow USA's laws"
The Onion Gunsmith? :P
-
From the Chicago Tribune article;
Mayor Rahm Emanuel said through a spokesman that he was “disappointed with the court’s decision.” The city is reviewing the opinion and will work with others “to best protect the residents of Chicago and still meet constitutional restrictions,” Bill McCaffrey added.
“As the mayor has said all along, the City of Chicago is committed to maintaining the fullest degree of lawful handgun restrictions possible while still respecting the Second Amendment rights of law abiding citizens, because maintaining common-sense restrictions is an issue of public safety.”
Guess we will have to wait to see what Chicago does. They clearly have a (gang) crime problem, and have not been able to come close to solving it. Concealed carry is the answer.
Maybe in 4 years when the President moves back, he can community organize again like Jimmy Carter builds houses. I bet the Obama and Emanuel houses will be well protected. Shouldn't everyone have the same right?
-
Mayor Rahm Emanuel said through a spokesman that he was “disappointed with the court’s decision.” The city is reviewing the opinion and will work with others “to best protect the residents of Chicago and still meet constitutional restrictions,” Bill McCaffrey added.
“As the mayor has said all along, the City of Chicago is committed to maintaining the fullest degree of lawful handgun restrictions possible while still respecting the Second Amendment rights of law abiding citizens, because maintaining common-sense restrictions is an issue of public safety.”
:rofl:
"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria)
-
Dear Illinois,
You already have an FOID system in place. Now pass a law stating that it allows concealed carry. See? Was it really that hard?
Sincerely,
Bemused Missourian
-
Dear Illinois,
You'd better sit down. This is you, in 25 years.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/12/us-usa-florida-guns-idUSBRE8BB1SR20121212?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&rpc=22
Sincerely,
Bemused Missourian
-
From the Chicago Tribune article;
Guess we will have to wait to see what Chicago does. They clearly have a (gang) crime problem, and have not been able to come close to solving it. Concealed carry is the answer.
Maybe in 4 years when the President moves back, he can community organize again like Jimmy Carter builds houses. I bet the Obama and Emanuel houses will be well protected. Shouldn't everyone have the same right?
-
From the Chicago Tribune article;
Guess we will have to wait to see what Chicago does. They clearly have a (gang) crime problem, and have not been able to come close to solving it. Concealed carry is the answer.
Maybe in 4 years when the President moves back, he can community organize again like Jimmy Carter builds houses. I bet the Obama and Emanuel houses will be well protected. Shouldn't everyone have the same right?
I am excited too, but lets be realistic, concealed carry will not solve the gang problems. Look at florida, highest per capita ccw and that doesn't stop the gang areas.
It might be solved with a combination of neighborhood guard (volunteer teams of armed neighbors publicly on watch on every street corner where drugs are sold, or druggies hang out; combined with quick reaction teams- battle rifle armed and quasi-hidden at home ready to support the street teams) + CCW + soft to medium drug legalization. Cutting off welfare/child support may play a part, but I haven't checked the data to be sure.
Cut off the supply chain (drug profits) and confront directly with superior firepower.
The streets were conquered by thugs using violence, they will only be retaken with public display of violence. Cops may or may not be helpful since they are on the cut and haven't done a thing about it. My guess is that they would resist this idea as it becomes more successful.
-
I don't expect concealed carry permit availbility to solve the crime problem. But it might just save some lives and people may have a fighting chance if they are willing to take it. Feeling empowered is important.
I frankly am more interested in what the State and City of Chicago come up with. They already have the FOID system and whatever comes next will build on that. I would guess it will be something along the lines of the DC or NYC laws which make concealed carry permits very selective and difficult to get as I understand it.
I chuckle when I saw the union folks beating on that reporter in MI (Detroit I believe). What would have happened if the reported pulled out a gun as if I were him, I would be in fear of my life. Probably wouldn't have a reload with me however and judging by the situation, a reload might come in handy. From my point of view, there is no need to "dook it out like men".
-
A whiff of realism.
-
I don't expect concealed carry permit availbility to solve the crime problem. But it might just save some lives and people may have a fighting chance if they are willing to take it. Feeling empowered is important.
I frankly am more interested in what the State and City of Chicago come up with. They already have the FOID system and whatever comes next will build on that. I would guess it will be something along the lines of the DC or NYC laws which make concealed carry permits very selective and difficult to get as I understand it.
I chuckle when I saw the union folks beating on that reporter in MI (Detroit I believe). What would have happened if the reported pulled out a gun as if I were him, I would be in fear of my life. Probably wouldn't have a reload with me however and judging by the situation, a reload might come in handy. From my point of view, there is no need to "dook it out like men".
Lansing (the capital)
And some of the AFP (americans for prosperity) people were armed; I guess they decided not to escalate.
-
Lansing (the capital)
And some of the AFP (americans for prosperity) people were armed; I guess they decided not to escalate.
Crowder is also a pretty accomplished MMA guy from what I understand. I imagine if he'd wanted to beat Fatty McUnion's ass into the ground he would have.
-
Never mind - I goofed and read the wrong bill.
stay safe.
-
So, most shall-issue permit systems allow a certain amount of time for the issuer to issue the permit, like 90 days. So does that mean IL has 180 days to pass a law, or that they have only 90 days + a 90 day issuing period?
Also, what the hell is this about the 180 days, anyway? It's ok for something to be unconstitutional for 180 days? Is there any precendent whatsoever of a law being found unconstitutional but NOT being struck down?
"Oh, this law is unconstitutional, but I mean, look, we all know that 'unconstitutional' is the new 'constitutional', so like, you should probably get around to changing your law at your convenience; it's ok in the meantime." Wha?
-
Also, what the hell is this about the 180 days, anyway? It's ok for something to be unconstitutional for 180 days? Is there any precendent whatsoever of a law being found unconstitutional but NOT being struck down?
"Oh, this law is unconstitutional, but I mean, look, we all know that 'unconstitutional' is the new 'constitutional', so like, you should probably get around to changing your law at your convenience; it's ok in the meantime." Wha?
I am intrigued by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
-
Nobody's added to this thread since Mr. Sicko-pants ran amok in Connecticut.
What do you all think will happen here?
-
Wait and see. =|
-
I'm waiting to see how soon Illinois jumps on the New York model...
-
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=132&GAID=12&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=68539&SessionID=85&GA=98
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=159&GAID=12&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=69163&SessionID=85&GA=98
-
Guess I can stop waiting. When does the 5 round mag limit get introduced? (Knowing that it's going to become a contest to see who can put in place the toughest law...)
-
Nobody's added to this thread since Mr. Sicko-pants ran amok in Connecticut.
What do you all think will happen here?
Dunno.
We shouted them down when they tried to weasel stuff through in the lame duck session.
Little Lisa Madigan (our AG) wants the full 7th circuit to review Moore vs. Madigan. This will not (so I have read) affect the 6 month limit Illinois has to make a carry law.
-
I saw this morning that "bullets that pierce metal" (versus AP) are on the list of planned prohibitions (not sure if that was just Chicago or all of IL - it was a Rahm Emanuel interview). So complete ammo ban I guess...
-
I saw this morning that "bullets that pierce metal" (versus AP) are on the list of planned prohibitions (not sure if that was just Chicago or all of IL - it was a Rahm Emanuel interview). So complete ammo ban I guess...
Stick an aluminum pop can out there, and this would get rid of BB guns, pellet guns, airsoft, paintball, and probably a couple of the Nerf guns.
-
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=132&GAID=12&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=68539&SessionID=85&GA=98
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=159&GAID=12&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=69163&SessionID=85&GA=98
Eddie Acevedo, the Energizer Bunny.
-
Here's a story on the IL CCW situation. I don't know if any of this is actually news.
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/02/02/concealed-carry-prompts-lively-debate-in-bronzeville/?utm_medium=VPH&utm_source=topvph_news&utm_campaign=420959
-
Here's a story on the IL CCW situation. I don't know if any of this is actually news.
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2013/02/02/concealed-carry-prompts-lively-debate-in-bronzeville/?utm_medium=VPH&utm_source=topvph_news&utm_campaign=420959
The NRA rep stating "if they pass nothing we won" and how it WILL be shall-issue, with NO exemptions for Chicago out Cook county is awesome.
It's awesome to hear an NRA rep show he has stones.
-
Illinoiscarry's thread on that. (http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=34161)
-
The NRA rep stating "if they pass nothing we won" and how it WILL be shall-issue, with NO exemptions for Chicago out Cook county is awesome.
It's awesome to hear an NRA rep show he has stones.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wwCcn-KHXXk
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fimages%3Fq%3Dtbn%3AANd9GcQkwwQVSCe0HJRWrfFdSeU5YmQADzcvV-W5BsEQLfjDK4yB27Wt&hash=dc331ac5c2a87431586a79313faa34a058140ea2)
-
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocTypeID=HB&DocNum=997&GAID=12&SessionID=85&LegID=71413 (http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocTypeID=HB&DocNum=997&GAID=12&SessionID=85&LegID=71413)
HB 0997, this years iteration of the Family and Personal Protection Act. Right out of the gate, there's darn little to quibble about with this. Darn little.
-
Here is the whole 2 hours of the televised town hall meeting. I watched most of it. Rhonda Ezell spoke for a few minutes.
http://new.livestream.com/blueroomstream/events/1848092
It is really sad the way some of these people think of government as the supplier of needs and solver of problems. Have a crime problem in your community? The first response is "the government needs to give us more resources." Since CCW isn't "resources," it can't help their community. ;/ =(