• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Illinois crazy law

hunt4riches said:
It may be worthwhile for people to start planting contraband mags on lefties in ban states and call the rat line. Maybe then after going through the ringer they understand how stupid the law is. Especially after you explain to the new felon that "well if this little stick of metal only held 10 rounds, and not 12, you wouldn't have had your life ruined". I also like to use this one: "Imagine in very high and unpleasantly accurate detail, you are eating in a restaurant. There is an armed robbery that quickly occurs and goes south. You are seated next to a party of 10. Each member is asked to get up from the table, kneel, and they are shot in the forehead at close range while screaming and crying. You have to watch while a river of blood runs under your table. After the 10th victim falls limp to the ground, you think it has ended, but no.... in a matter of seconds the assailant loads another mag into his Glock and proceeds to the next table, and this horror repeats. I see you are becoming unsettled, but let's now instead imagine this was done with a pistol with a single 20-round mag. Please explain why you would prefer to actually live through the first scenario instead, and why it doesn't bother you that your neighbor was recently convicted for possession of the mag in the second scenario. He will now serve at least a year in jail. He was immediately terminated from his job after being denied bail. His wife's petition for divorce was successful. The family court slapped him with a $15,000/year child support judgement that he cannot pay, since he can no longer maintain a high-paying job due to his felon status - they don't care why he lost his job of 15 years as someone with his employment record has no valid excuse for being under-employed as they ignore his criminal record. And while we're on the topic, this is the same man who later broken into a home after his release, stole a pistol and two 10-round mags and went to rob the patrons of a high-end restaurant so that he could pay his child support and not end up in jail again on contempt orders."
Click to expand...

I don’t believe the laws are constitutional for anyone, liberal, conservatives or independents. I’m not using the govt as a weapon
 
oldgunner said:
They don't care. As long as the fight is in the courts their laws still stand. They can do this over and over again because there are no repercussions. As each 'law' is stuck down as unconstitutional they make new ones to replace it and the cycle continues.

The people seem fine with it tho as they keep 'electing' the same people over and over again who appoint the same kind of people to positions of power for the same reasons (skin color, diversity, inclusion, blah blah)
Click to expand...

The NJ law just got slapped with a TRO, there’s a decent chance the Illinois one will get one too. And there are repercussions once it is resolved in Esenthings will be resolved in the next 2 years
 
Hoover said:
I don’t believe the laws are constitutional for anyone, liberal, conservatives or independents. I’m not using the govt as a weapon
Click to expand...
"the other side" just destroyed your future with it from multiple stolen elections and in a few years you'll be making choices.... one of which is "give up my guns, or go to jail"
 
Broc said:
Additionally, for every law considered unconstitutional, the State should be required to pay 2X the cost of the lawsuit. This refunds the money spent and gives money for a future lawsuit.
Click to expand...
Not the state, because then that hoses taxpayers, the legislators responsible for writing and passing the unconstitutional law should be personally liable.
 
Waher said:
Not the state, because then that hoses taxpayers, the legislators responsible for writing and passing the unconstitutional law should be personally liable.
Click to expand...
No, the State. While it is paid with tax dollars, they are tax dollars used to fight anti constitutional laws, therefore benefiting tax payers.

While forcing legislators would be sweet, my scenario is more realistic.
 
Broc said:
No, the State. While it is paid with tax dollars, they are tax dollars used to fight anti constitutional laws, therefore benefiting tax payers.

While forcing legislators would be sweet, my scenario is more realistic.
Click to expand...

NYSRPA vs Bruen set the standard of review and the period of time which is important for the review but it didn’t decide AWB mag limits, sensitive places, etc. Over the next 18-24 months most of these issues will be resolved through court cases. Once the courts rule, if states enact laws in defiance of the court, people will be able to civilly sue the states and officials who violate their rights. That will end the games quickly. But we need to court rulings first.
 
Hoover said:
NYSRPA vs Bruen set the standard of review and the period of time which is important for the review but it didn’t decide AWB mag limits, sensitive places, etc. Over the next 18-24 months most of these issues will be resolved through court cases. Once the courts rule, if states enact laws in defiance of the court, people will be able to civilly sue the states and officials who violate their rights. That will end the games quickly. But we need to court rulings first.
Click to expand...
How long would those lawsuits take?

Will that have any effect on States like MA?
 
Broc said:
How long would those lawsuits take?

Will that have any effect on States like MA?
Click to expand...

Say AWB are ruled unconstitutional. If any cop arrested you for it, you can sue them personally, their department, etc. civil cases can take a long time but if it’s a straightforward case like an arrest for a law which has been decided as unconstitutional, it will be much quicker. And the cops won’t want to risk their assets to enforce a law for healey or any other politician. They’re 1984 lawsuits.

An example is the county clerk in Kentucky who wouldn’t issue a marriage license to gays after the SCOTUS ruling. She’s being sued personally. I think her name is Kim Davis.
 
The funny thing about Constitutionally guaranteed civil rights, is that they're not subject to the popular vote. Libs keep forgetting that, and until they are personally held accountable, nothing will change.

These people are perhaps well intended, but truly ill-advised if they think they can get such obviously unConstitutional laws passed.

They're playing with house money though, so... Laws it is!
 
StevieP said:
These people are perhaps well intended, but truly ill-advised if they think they can get such obviously unConstitutional laws passed.
Click to expand...
The Illinois legislature had multiple members that were openly malicious and smug about it in the legislative deliberations.
 

View: https://twitter.com/WISD0MTREE/status/1613287349991149569


View: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1613289353534648320?cxt=HHwWgMDR1dKHx-MsAAAA


View: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1613283772153069573?cxt=HHwWioCwkeLCxOMsAAAA

FmOAaUxXkAE_1De


View: https://twitter.com/Non_Fudd/status/1613222227951947796
 
Waher said:

View: https://twitter.com/WISD0MTREE/status/1613287349991149569


View: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1613289353534648320?cxt=HHwWgMDR1dKHx-MsAAAA


View: https://twitter.com/2Aupdates/status/1613283772153069573?cxt=HHwWioCwkeLCxOMsAAAA

FmOAaUxXkAE_1De


View: https://twitter.com/Non_Fudd/status/1613222227951947796
Click to expand...

Hate be a wet blanket, but I remember when NY passed the SAFE act. There were a bunch of towns, counties or LEO's that said they would not enforce that law lol.

When faced with a loss of dental plan and retirement, don't count on a LEO to side with the US constitution because the kings men will always side with the king.
 
FalArAk said:
Hate be a wet blanket, but I remember when NY passed the SAFE act. There were a bunch of towns, counties or LEO's that said they would not enforce that law lol.

When faced with a loss of dental plan and retirement, don't count on a LEO to side with the US constitution because the kings men will always side with the king.
Click to expand...

View: https://twitter.com/Non_Fudd/status/1613547468016259073?cxt=HHwWgsC4tfG3vOQsAAAA


bcfa6c_34e3f40d86ca4f9488033c0cd49e259d~mv2.jpg


View: https://twitter.com/KurtSchlichter/status/1613422446916562945?cxt=HHwWgsDT0dnKg-QsAAAA
 
Last edited:
HARRYM said:
'The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The Constitution was written to specifically protect Americans from Tyranny enforced upon them by those entrusted with power. Jefferson understood this better than anyone of his era.

Once Judges in this Country decided the Constitution was subject to their own interpretation it's just been one slippery slope after another.
Click to expand...
Great point about judges
 

Similar threads

What is “law enforcement technology?
Replies
14
Views
424
dcmdon
dcmdon
MA Law: carrying a gun where animals may be present
2
Replies
56
Views
2K
MisterHappy
MisterHappy
BREAKING: Manhunt underway after 8 shot dead in Joliet, Illinois
Replies
9
Views
527
allen-1
allen-1
1% of Illinois Gun Owners Comply with 'Assault Weapons' Registration
Replies
20
Views
1K
T-Unit
T
Washington Gun Law Youtuber Puts Proposed New Mass Gun Law in the Spotlight!
Replies
12
Views
830
inerlogic
inerlogic
Back
Top Bottom