Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Scout26 on December 12, 2013, 04:05:31 PM
-
A week or so ago Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart got shot down when he announced that he would use LEADS on every applicant (whether in his county or not) to file objections.
From the State NRA Lobbyist:
ISP has said that law enforcement may not use the LEADS system as a means of creating an objection. Essentially, LEADS is the Google of criminal records. And Tom Dart seems to think that he is going to run every applicant through LEADS and then file an objection if there are any hits or incidents documented. ISP is saying that is a no no. And is putting the burden on the LEs to come up with a real reason for an objection. Dart is having a fit.
I think because there's a Federal No-no, re: that pesky consitituion and the like. This was after he got shot down saying he was going to object to every application, and the ISP said you have to have a reason.
From today's ISRA e-mail.
Illinois State Police Says Only Digital/Online ApplicationsTo Be Accepted!
1000s of Illinois citizens won't be able to apply for a concealed carry license, if the Illinois State Police proposed rules and regulations are approved by the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules on Dec. 17, 2013. ISP administrators say requiring electronic applications will make it easier for the ISP licensing division and will speed up the application process.
However, 1,000s of Illinois residents do not have computers and internet access, and even if they did, they do not have the technical knowledge to maneuver through the complicated process of creating a digital signature, or scanning and attaching the required documents and photo. The process also requires applicant to set up an online ePay account in order to pay the license fee online with a credit card. This requirement will make it impossible for people who do not use credit cards.
A great many people will be able to navigate the digital process just fine, but there must be a process made available for those without computers/internet/credit cards to fill out a paper application, put it in a paper envelope along with a paper check or money order, and mailed with a paper stamp.
Other problems with ISP's proposed rules:
1. Their definition of a state's carry law needing to be substantially similar to IL nearly rules out all carry licenses for out of state residents. The definition should be that the state preforms a background check, has a reasonable amount of training, and they prohibit people with a mental health problem that show a clear and present danger.
2. ISP goes beyond the law and requires non-law enforcement instructors to have a current carry license but exempts instructors who are law enforcement. The Firearm Concealed Carry Act requires all instructors to be treated equally.
3. ISP has changed the definition of law enforcement official to include only LEOs who are employed, which rules out auxiliary law enforcement officials.
So while not wanting to get smacked with a Federal court case for violating the 4th and 5th Amendments, they are willing risk one (again) on the Second. Although this could also be transferred to voting rights. ;)
Yeah, this is going well....
-
hmmm, this makes me wonder about the nys process. we are required to pay for an fbi background check before any permit is considered.
-
Well, at least the citizens of Illinois are safe from gun crime. :police:
-
The IL ccw law was poorly written and full of confusing bovine excrement. They couldn't have simply cut and pasted from states that managed to do this with out problems? No. This is Illinois. Pass a bad law and leave it up to the ISP to make it worse.
The ISRA should never have accepted this crappy law and Rep. Phelps and the other pro ccw lawmakers should be embarrassed to have their name on it.
-
ISP has said that law enforcement may not use the LEADS system as a means of creating an objection. Essentially, LEADS is the Google of criminal records. And Tom Dart seems to think that he is going to run every applicant through LEADS and then file an objection if there are any hits or incidents documented. ISP is saying that is a no no. And is putting the burden on the LEs to come up with a real reason for an objection. Dart is having a fit.
And how is the ISP saying "Nein!" going to stop him from having a couple low level flunkies running every name through LEADS?
(From my point of view, LEADS is a funky system, BTW. I've set it up a couple times for people. Written a decade ago for IE5 (the client side), and never upgraded.)
-
Its way past time that you outstate Illionoisans burn cook county to ashes then salt the earth.
-
The IL ccw law was poorly written and full of confusing bovine excrement. They couldn't have simply cut and pasted from states that managed to do this with out problems? No. This is Illinois. Pass a bad law and leave it up to the ISP to make it worse.
The ISRA should never have accepted this crappy law and Rep. Phelps and the other pro ccw lawmakers should be embarrassed to have their name on it.
Not to mention they should have just made the current FOID card a carry permit.
-
.
The ISRA should never have accepted this crappy law and Rep. Phelps and the other pro ccw lawmakers should be embarrassed to have their name on it.
Agreed. But the ISRA (and/or NRA) didn't have anything to with the drafting/writing of the law. (And IIRC both were "Neutral" as for a being for/against it.) It was Cullerton, Madigan, Phelps and one or two other Reps/Senators, that went into the proverbial smoke filled room and wrote the bill, after all the good ones (and bad ones) had been shot down. Phelps should have refused to participate and let the Court Order become law. FOID Carry would have been the law.
But nooooooooooo....... We have to have a law.
:facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: