ILLINOIS LEGISLATUE PASSES CONCEALED CARRY! On Governor's Desk.

[xmanhockey7]

The legislature HAD TO PASS a bill like they did??

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at your implication.

I think it's ridiculous to blame this bill on the NRA. I honestly don't know if I should laugh or cry.

 

[BB62]

I think it's ridiculous to blame this bill on the NRA. I honestly don't know if I should laugh or cry.

Maybe you can point out where I blamed the bill's passage on the NRA? I thought not.

But, I can certainly say that 1) the legislature didn't HAVE TO pass this bill, and 2) the IL gun "rights" organizations and the Negotiate Rights Away people haven't gotten much of anything.

 

[randian]

This bill arguably has no preemption at all. I quote:

"The regulation, licensing, possession, registration, and transportation of handguns and ammunition for handguns by licensees are exclusive powers and functions of the State. Any ordinance or regulation, or portion thereof, enacted on or before the effective date of this Act that purports to impose regulations or restrictions on licensees or concealed handguns and ammunition for concealed handguns in a manner inconsistent with this Act shall be invalid in its application to licensees under this Act on the effective date of this Act."

I am certain we will see it argued that the second sentence limits the first. In other words, this language only preempts laws enacted on or before the effective date, and does not preempt home-rule laws enacted after the effective date.

 

[kurt555gs]

This bill arguably has no preemption at all. I quote:

"The regulation, licensing, possession, registration, and transportation of handguns and ammunition for handguns by licensees are exclusive powers and functions of the State. Any ordinance or regulation, or portion thereof, enacted on or before the effective date of this Act that purports to impose regulations or restrictions on licensees or concealed handguns and ammunition for concealed handguns in a manner inconsistent with this Act shall be invalid in its application to licensees under this Act on the effective date of this Act."

I am certain we will see it argued that the second sentence limits the first. In other words, this language only preempts laws enacted on or before the effective date, and does not preempt home-rule laws enacted after the effective date.

From the bill: "The regulation, licensing, possession, registration, and transportation of handguns and ammunition for handguns by licensees are exclusive powers and functions of the State."

This does not allow any Home Rule laws regarding these topics. This is a terrible Concealed Carry bill. It is a GREAT "Container Transport" bill. No more local laws like having ammunition separate. Unloaded and enclosed in a case with loaded magazines in the same compartment, on or about your person will be legal the instant Governor Jello signs this fetted steaming pile of poo. Illinois may not see actual concealed carry for a year ( limited even then ) but Fanny Pack transport will likely be here next week. Even in Chicago. Even on the CTA,

You quote was from Section 90? It dealt with Concealed Carry Licensees exclusively. Look at Section 13.1 Preemption for FOID card holders.

 

[marshaul]

From the bill: "The regulation, licensing, possession, registration, and transportation of handguns and ammunition for handguns by licensees are exclusive powers and functions of the State."

This does not allow any Home Rule laws regarding these topics.

This is my reading. The second sentence doesn't limit the first, but rather extends it explicitly to apply to past laws/ordinances as well.

Anything in existence is nullified, and if a locality wants to try to pass something again, well there's that little problem that "the regulation, licensing, possession, registration, and transportation of handguns and ammunition for handguns by licensees are exclusive powers and functions of the State." Oop, sucks for them.

 

[OC4me]

Shicago gets to keep its AWB and "not on public transit".
Can't carry in parks, NO reciprocity with other states, the most restrictive requirements in the country, the high expense (lic. app., "digital fingerprints", training, etc.), ID methods that even the State Police are unable to handle ("digital fingerprints"), long timeline from application start to permit (or final denial), just to name a few.

This bill is a P.o.S. and I hope Queball veto's it. If he does, it will be at least a week (probably longer) before they can convene an "emergency session" so June 9th will happen before that.
The only drawback to that is the 200+ homerule towns & cities will create a hodge-podge of conflicting laws.

As if Illinois wasn't already the "laughing stock" of the U.S.!

I agree the bill sucks. If you are poor and rely on 'public transportion' you are effectively denied the ability to defend yourself. But then again, if you are poor, you probably can neither afford to take the time off work for the costly training nor the $150 license.

Short-term there is little to celebrate here. Long-term however, after several accumulated years of falling crime statistics and a growing critical mass of permit holders, the political pressure should mount for further loosening of restrictions (one can only hope).

 

[kurt555gs]

Steaming pile of poo (tm).

 

[randian]

The second sentence doesn't limit the first, but rather extends it explicitly to apply to past laws/ordinances as well.

So we assume. I'm suggesting that somebody (Chicago) is likely to challenge that assumption. Anybody taking bets on whether an IL judge will summarily throw out that challenge? Or even whether the IL legislature will defend, now that the pressure to pass something is gone?

 

[WalkingWolf]

Steaming pile of poo (tm).

At least poo has a purpose, this bill insults poo.

 

[kurt555gs]

I know. However Container Carry is prohibited in many home rule municipalities.

Carthago Delenda Est