Illinois Bill to Ban All Modern Firearms

[OfficerObie59]

Heller was supposed to force Washington DC to allow licensed gun owners to carry outside the home... still hasn't happened.

You should re-read Heller. It was limited to possession of arms inside the home. That's why last month's case out of the 7th Circuit was so exciting.

A state can nullify a decision of the court, or it can simply say the court did not address this, or they will rely on the decision they made in Heller, which said that the government can regulate the ownership of firearms. The state can begin to enforce the new law. In this case it would mean that people would have to turn the guns in or face the consequences.

A suit can be filed for an injunction to stop the state from taking action until the court says we already told you that you can't do this type of regulation. If no one takes such a step, the courts remain mute and the enforcement either commences or continues.

States cannot nullify SCOTUS decisions, and this was reaffirmed as recently as 1958: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_v._Aaron

 

[mikem317]

I'm all for a peaceful solution. That is what I hope and pray for. All the while, I am not banking on it. There are plenty others here who have seen war and BTDT who feel the same way. I don't think people are chomping at the bit for go time because they want it to happen; many feel as though it will happen eventually and just want to get it over with so their kids don't have this fight on their watch.

It honestly doesn't have to be violent. A violent encounter with a failing, bankrupt (morally and financially) state, like the US, would be a full-scale disaster. For both sides. Liberty could be lost forever.

The best course of action is peace. Write and email your representatives. Buy as many guns as you can right now that run FBI NICS checks (these numbers are published). Join every gun-rights organization you can think of. Attend peaceful protests.

If we make it clear that we're not going away, they'll yield.

 

[OfficerObie59]

I will never give up on Massachusetts nor will I surrender to the libtards here.

At the risk of continuing to be off topic, I'm going to give defending the freedom of being a conservative in Massachusetts to an audience of conservative Americans a rest. I probably should/could have started a new topic about defending MA rather than post here.

Every topic turns into NH vs MA lately around here. I was/am disappointed in that sentiment. I find it short sighted and naive.

Give up on MA and you hand liberals one more state that they don't need to campaign in, worry about, or fight for in national elections.

I saw the post about rallying at state capitols on February 8th at 10am. I'll be there in Boston.... I get the feeling I might be alone though

My ancestor from whom I get my last name was one of the original Puritan settlers of the village of Boston, having gotten off the boat with Endicott in 1629 or with Winthrop's fleet in 1630. He's buried in a tomb in the basement of King's Chapel. His son moved to the south coast before 1700 and none of us has left the South Shore in that time.

I refuse to get up an move from a place where my family has been for 400 years and 13 generations without a fight. I feel I have a duty to do everything in my power to fight back, despite how futile it may appear by some to be--particulalrly when short of moving to Montana, the alternatives are only marginally better.

 

[HKdrummer]

My ancestor from whom I get my last name was one of the original Puritan settlers of the village of Boston, having gotten off the boat with Endicott in 1629 or with Winthrop's fleet in 1630. He's buried in a tomb in the basement of King's Chapel. His son moved to the south coast before 1700 and none of us has left the South Shore in that time.

I refuse to get up an move from a place where my family has been for 400 years and 13 generations without a fight. I feel I have a duty to do everything in my power to fight back, despite how futile it may appear by some to be--particulalrly when short of moving to Montana, the alternatives are only marginally better.

This.

 

[Roscoe]

Unfortunately it will take total outright bans to get people to understand its real and a big deal. But that means the damage would have been done. Anything before that would unlikely have the support needed to make an impact.

That's the only way I see the pro2a community actually organizing. Right now we are all just separate factions.

 

[cekim]

My ancestor from whom I get my last name was one of the original Puritan settlers of the village of Boston, having gotten off the boat with Endicott in 1629 or with Winthrop's fleet in 1630. He's buried in a tomb in the basement of King's Chapel. His son moved to the south coast before 1700 and none of us has left the South Shore in that time.

I refuse to get up an move from a place where my family has been for 400 years and 13 generations without a fight. I feel I have a duty to do everything in my power to fight back, despite how futile it may appear by some to be--particulalrly when short of moving to Montana, the alternatives are only marginally better.

Only a grandparent away from the boat ride here. I have no profound attachment to any state (lived in 4) though I like some more than others and MA being the state of birth for my children and wife, I know of at least 3 people from here worth fighting for.

For me it is about the principle of trusting your fellow citizens, respecting their rights in hopes they will do the same for me when I need it.

I am not naive, I know there are bad, selfish people out there, but even having met some of the worst, I have met far more good than bad. I may move someday for a change of scenery, or even politics, but wherever I am, the same things are worth the effort protecting.

 

[ChevyGuy91]

Welp, I guess you can't get to comfortable...

http://monderno.com/monderno/illinois-gun-control-moves-to-the-house/

 

[JuergenG]

If only these hags could work that fast when it's about issues vital for the Country......

 

[CLW42]

If only these hags could work that fast when it's about issues vital for the Country......

No kidding, seriously! It's ridiculous isn't it?!?

All part of the shell game I suppose.

 

[ShaunSweeney]

That's why when people starting celebrating the "win" when it was tabled, I kept silent. This is far from over people.

 

[sig2009]

That's why when people starting celebrating the "win" when it was tabled, I kept silent. This is far from over people.

You are correct. The vote is scheduled for tomorrow (Sunday)!
http://isra.org/alerts/sunday.html

 

[DMC2447]

Glad you guys have had an eye on the crap going on in IL. I've been feeding alerts to my older family members living there to take action. I moved from IL to MA back in 2009 to stay employed. All of my family is back there, and it is where I spent my first 41 years of existance (minus military service). So, I still have quite an attachment.

 

[center442]

The IL Senate tabled their bill. That's a common move and is usually translated as "we don't really want to do anything with it." If I'm reading the info online correctly, one Rep., Eddie Acevedo, has offered an anti-gun amendment to a minor bill working it's way through the House. If IL works like most other state legislatures, the amendment will have to be voted on favorably to actually be added to the original bill.

Then the complete amended bill has to be voted on to pass the House. It is possible that it will get sidetracked into a rules (or other) committee for further 'study.' That seems to happen fairly often with pro-gun bills on Bacon Hill.

Then the bill has to be introduced and passed by the senate...the same Senate that has already tabled a similar bill.

I'm not saying that the people of IL have nothing to be concerned about. I'm not saying that they shouldn't keep up the pressure to kill these bills. What I am saying is that a lot of bills get introduced in every legislative session even though everyone knows they're not going to pass.

Why would Acevedo introduce an amendment that he knows is most likely going to fail? Look at his resume:

Acevedo was born and raised in Chicago. He earned his associates degree in general studies from City-Wide College. Acevedo is a police officer for the Chicago Police Department, and he was decorated for heroism and valor by the Cook County Sheriff’s Office for rescuing victims trapped in a fire.

We've had numerous threads (and court cases) about Chicago violating the civil rights of its citizens. Surprise, surprise, that Acevedo is struck from the same mold. Introducing an amendment like this gives him cred with his moonbat constituents. He can tell them that he fought to end 'gun violence' but was defeated by the evil gun owners.

I usually don't get too upset over sweeping bills like Acevedo is proposing. In most states, they won't fly. (In MA I would be concerned, because our legislature is whacked out enough to pass them.) What should worry most people is the passage of small bills that only seem to have a minimal impact on liberty. Liberty is rarely lost with the passage of a single law. It dies a slow death from thousands of little cuts.

 

[OfficerObie59]

The IL Senate tabled their bill. That's a common move and is usually translated as "we don't really want to do anything with it." If I'm reading the info online correctly, one Rep., Eddie Acevedo, has offered an anti-gun amendment to a minor bill working it's way through the House. If IL works like most other state legislatures, the amendment will have to be voted on favorably to actually be added to the original bill.

IIRC, all that has to be done in the next day or two before the lame duck legislature adjourns for good, and the new legislature takes office.

 

[HKdrummer]

It appears the bill has been pushed out for this session. Been following this on the Illinois Rifle Association facebook page.

 

[bullseye]

I'm wondering with the high amount of traffic being intercepted or perhaps overwhelming the NSA's domestic eavesdropping staff that word isn't going out to various federal and local head honchos that a large portion of the armed populace is really pissed off!

 

[Rider]

I'm wondering with the high amount of traffic being intercepted or perhaps overwhelming the NSA's domestic eavesdropping staff that word isn't going out to various federal and local head honchos that a large portion of the armed populace is really pissed off!

Probably. At best, they have determined that the time isn't right because we aren't all asleep. At worst, they have probably put together a much more complete list of people requiring 'special visits'.

It's ironic that the same people who made us read 1984 to instill us with a basic distrust of government are the same ones who now want us to lie down and take the dystopian future they spent their lives telling us about.

 

[pastera]

Then you need to get your kids out of the MA school system. They will be programmed to think exactly how your parents thought (if not worse).

+100000000000....

I home school my two children (actually my wife does) - Don't let anyone give you the line that home schooled children are socially inept or broken. These children are brought up in the same environment as the patriots that founded this country.

 

[ShaunSweeney]

I am actually thinking about home schooling our future child. I just don't trust the liberal mindset that even private schools display these days.

 

[MA_Shooter]

Rahm is back at it again -

After the Illinois General Assembly failed to bring a bill amounting to a near-total statewide gun ban in last week's lame duck session, Rahm Emanuel said today he isn’t willing to wait any longer for new gun control laws.

Emanuel told reporters he feels confident he can pass expanded gun regulations:
Waiting isn’t a strong suit of mine… First of all, I believe there's, I know there's a majority in the state, an overwhelming majority in the city for a ban on assault weapons, clips, and comprehensive background checks on all sales, wherever they take place, wherever the location may be. And there's also a majority in the legislature.
According to the Chicago Tribune, Emanuel plans to introduce the legislation at next week’s city council meeting but refused to give any details. Last month, the state of Illinois’ ban to conceal and carry firearms in public was ruled unconstitutional by a federal appeals court.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/10/Rahm-to-Unveil-New-Chicago-Gun-Control-Ordinance