Author Topic: Illinois carry status? (Read 29786 times)

Regolith · « **Reply #100 on:** June 20, 2013, 03:17:44 AM »

Quote from: lee n. field on June 19, 2013, 07:23:08 PM

Not that d*** tiny. It may not be up to texican scale, but this isn't one of those east cost glorified parking lots. The state's 400 miles end to end.

Texican Scale? Pffft. Texas may be big, but its counties are damn small. Lots and lots of little teeny bitty ones.

My home county is about the size of Connecticut. The county I was born in is ~5,000 square miles bigger than Maryland. Now THOSE are counties.

Scout26 · « **Reply #101 on:** June 20, 2013, 01:54:38 PM »

Quote from: fistful on June 19, 2013, 05:38:04 PM

I'm not eager to test this out, but I wonder how that would work out for a Missourian who crosses over into Madison County while strapped.

If you read what the SA's have written, it clearly states that as long as non-residents have a permit from their home state they are good to go.
Just like previously when non-residents were not required (because they couldn't get them) to have FOID card to transport guns in Illinois.

Why is this so hard to understand?? The FOID Law and its requirements apply ONLY to Illinois residents. Non-Residents are exempt. If you don't have an Illinois ID Card or Driver's Licence, it does not apply to you.

For Example:
http://www.madco-sa.org/documents/2013.06.06.CCWOpinionAndRelease.pdf

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #102 on:** June 21, 2013, 12:23:40 AM »

Quote from: scout26 on June 20, 2013, 01:54:38 PM

Why is this so hard to understand??

Because I've never spent much time reading up on Illinois law?

Gewehr98 · « **Reply #103 on:** June 21, 2013, 02:47:39 PM »

Yup.

Most of my Illinois carry law comes from Scout's postings here.

Matthew Carberry · « **Reply #104 on:** June 21, 2013, 04:49:14 PM »

If you read the text of the bill being discussed in this thread, it covered the FOID vs. home state permit issue. Reading it takes a couple minutes. A couple minutes to knowledgeably comment on the topic at hand.

I have no sympathy for you lazy people.

Gewehr98 · « **Reply #105 on:** June 21, 2013, 05:57:07 PM »

I have no sympathy for bored Alaskans who've got nothing better to do than bone up on Illinois carry law.

Matthew Carberry · « **Reply #106 on:** June 21, 2013, 06:02:22 PM »

Quote from: Gewehr98 on June 21, 2013, 05:57:07 PM

I have no sympathy for bored Alaskans who've got nothing better to do than bone up on Illinois carry law.

You can fit ours on a fortune cookie, I have to read something.

drewtam · « **Reply #107 on:** June 23, 2013, 09:22:44 AM »

Quote from: Matthew Carberry on June 21, 2013, 06:02:22 PM

You can fit ours on a fortune cookie, I have to read something.

You should read illinois self defense rules. We've had "stand your ground" since the sixties.

lee n. field · « **Reply #108 on:** June 23, 2013, 01:21:02 PM »

Quote from: drewtam on June 23, 2013, 09:22:44 AM

You should read illinois self defense rules. We've had "stand your ground" since the sixties.

Details here Illinoiscarry.com Justifiable Use of Force - IL Statute. I don't think we have the "anywhere we have a right to be" language, though.

Matthew Carberry · « **Reply #109 on:** June 23, 2013, 04:11:51 PM »

Quote from: lee n. field on June 23, 2013, 01:21:02 PM

Details here Illinoiscarry.com Justifiable Use of Force - IL Statute. I don't think we have the "anywhere we have a right to be" language, though.

In the absence of a duty to retreat I think that means it effectively exists, unless there is case law to the contrary.

Drew , SYG without RTC is... some other acronym.

I'd keep it quiet lest the legislature decide something must be done for the children. =/

drewtam · « **Reply #110 on:** June 24, 2013, 04:56:45 PM »

Quote from: Matthew Carberry on June 23, 2013, 04:11:51 PM

In the absence of a duty to retreat I think that means it effectively exists, unless there is case law to the contrary.

Drew , SYG without RTC is... some other acronym.

I'd keep it quiet lest the legislature decide something must be done for the children. =/

Its more than that... deadly force is acceptable in any case of 'forcible felony' outside the home, and the case of a felony on ones own property. If I read it right.

Scout26 · « **Reply #111 on:** July 02, 2013, 01:13:02 PM »

And he Vetoed it.

http://illinoissenatedemocrats.com/images/PDFS/HB_0183_Amendatory_Veto.pdf

It remains to be seen if the IL legislature can get it overriden in the next 7 days.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #112 on:** July 02, 2013, 02:48:17 PM »

http://www.bnd.com/2013/07/02/2680028/quinn-uses-veto-power-to-restrict.html

What in Sam Hill? That's not a veto. That is a drastic rewrite! I guess I shouldn't be surprised that Illinois' governor possesses such a dictatorial power that ties down, gags and rapes the principle of separation of powers.

AZRedhawk44 · « **Reply #113 on:** July 02, 2013, 02:57:06 PM »

Quote from: fistful on July 02, 2013, 02:48:17 PM

http://www.bnd.com/2013/07/02/2680028/quinn-uses-veto-power-to-restrict.html

What in Sam Hill? That's not a veto. That is a drastic rewrite! I guess I shouldn't be surprised that Illinois' governor possesses such a dictatorial power that ties down, gags and rapes the principle of separation of powers.

Read scout's link.

Last page says: With these changes, House Bill 183 will have my approval. I respectfully request your concurrence.

He vetoed it, but that doesn't mean what he writes in the sides of the bill becomes law (coughcoughPOTUSsigningstatementscoughcough). He's put proposals to the legislature suggesting what he would approve.

I still thing IL is better off with no legislation on this issue.

lee n. field · « **Reply #114 on:** July 02, 2013, 02:59:34 PM »

Yeah, and everyone's expecting the veto to be overridden.

All this makes me think they know it's inevitable, and they're just dragging it out as far as they can. ~~Princess Lisa of Madiganistan~~ Our esteemed Atty. General still has her thing up in the air, too.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #115 on:** July 02, 2013, 03:00:34 PM »

Quote from: AZRedhawk44 on July 02, 2013, 02:57:06 PM

Read scout's link.

Last page says: With these changes, House Bill 183 will have my approval. I respectfully request your concurrence.

He vetoed it, but that doesn't mean what he writes in the sides of the bill becomes law (coughcoughPOTUSsigningstatementscoughcough). He's put proposals to the legislature suggesting what he would approve.

I still thing IL is better off with no legislation on this issue.

Thank you. I was having a minor conniption here.

AZRedhawk44 · « **Reply #116 on:** July 02, 2013, 03:04:16 PM »

Quote from: lee n. field on July 02, 2013, 02:59:34 PM

~~Princess Lisa of Madiganistan~~ Our esteemed Atty. General still has her thing up in the air, too.

A shoulder thing?

What's her "thing" in the air?

lee n. field · « **Reply #117 on:** July 02, 2013, 04:25:53 PM »

Quote from: AZRedhawk44 on July 02, 2013, 03:04:16 PM

A shoulder thing?

What's her "thing" in the air?

She asked for an received an extra month to contemplate an appeal to SCOTUS.

slingshot · « **Reply #118 on:** July 02, 2013, 05:24:51 PM »

His a link to a news article on Gov Qunn's changes. He apparently has the legal authority to do this.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/07/02/quinn-changes-illinois-concealed-carry-legislation/

Scout26 · « **Reply #119 on:** July 02, 2013, 05:59:42 PM »

Yep, he has amendatory veto power. So it's now a dog's breakfast as far as what can happen during the override. Which is pretty much anything. If they fail to override it, IIRC, then what Quinn wrote becomes law. They could also override just part(s) of his changes.

But I would not be surprised if it did not get overwritten. Madigan had to twist quite a few arms to get this, and there are lots of Anti-gun Democrats in the legislature that may just accept Quinn's changes.

So here's hoping that it fails and we get FOID/Court carry.

AZRedhawk44 · « **Reply #120 on:** July 02, 2013, 06:15:08 PM »

Quote from: scout26 on July 02, 2013, 05:59:42 PM

Yep, he has amendatory veto power. So it's now a dog's breakfast as far as what can happen during the override. Which is pretty much anything. If they fail to override it, IIRC, then what Quinn wrote becomes law. They could also override just part(s) of his changes.

But I would not be surprised if it did not get overwritten. Madigan had to twist quite a few arms to get this, and there are lots of Anti-gun Democrats in the legislature that may just accept Quinn's changes.

So here's hoping that it fails and we get FOID/Court carry.

I'm going to pick up Fistful's indignation here... WTF is up with being able to amend a bill with unrelated text and veto it, and it becomes law?

That

.

Ron · « **Reply #121 on:** July 02, 2013, 10:16:08 PM »

We should have never gone through the charade of passing a bill. Should have stood our ground for everything we wanted.

Will the govs amendments pass muster with the courts?

Scout26 · « **Reply #122 on:** July 02, 2013, 10:17:49 PM »

Quote from: Ron on July 02, 2013, 10:16:08 PM

We should have never gone through the charade of passing a bill. Should have stood our ground for everything we wanted.

Will the govs amendments pass muster with the courts?

That's what I said all along. HB 1144 (the original carry bill) or nothing. With nothing being preferable.

drewtam · « **Reply #123 on:** July 03, 2013, 01:40:35 PM »

The amendatory veto goes back to the bill's sponsor. The sponsor decides motion to concur or override. Concur requires simple majority, override requires super majority. If either fails, the bill dies in totality.

This bill's sponsor, Phelps, has already filed for override. This is now a one way ticket... override or no new law.

The assembly is planned to vote the override July 9th, last day of the deadline. Surely planned this way all along.

For Illinois this is win-win situation:
If override wins, we get mediocre shall issue law - win.
If override fails, we get foid-court carry. ANY new law requires super majority because we are now in special session, so that raises the bar for any "no issue" from being passed until next year - win.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #124 on:** July 03, 2013, 01:56:57 PM »

Planned by the Left to give the impression that they fought to the bitter end?

News:

Author Topic: Illinois carry status? (Read 29786 times)