Illinois is looking to New York as their guide to conceal carry. In New York, counties are in charge of issuing the permits, and they can be very restrictive. The biggest restriction is the need to prove that you "need" a gun.
This restriction doesn't seem to be in accordance to the second amendment to me. What other natural rights does the government allow you to have only if you can prove that you need them?
New York counties can also restrict those gun rights in other ways. My buddy has a permit, but the judge restricted its use so that he can only carry from his home to the range. I thought that that was pretty blatantly illegal, but from the article it turns out that that restriction is commonplace.
A system like New York's is obviously a huge improvement over what Illinois had, and I am sure that in rural counties it would be similar to what we have here in Indiana. Maybe that's the best they're going to get over there.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
8 comments:
Indiana is a "shall issue" state. All permits are issued on the state level by the ISP. If you pass the background check, the state shall issue the permit. We also have repripocity for concealed weapon permits from other states. I think varying the law on a county by county basis is BS. The end result is law abiding citizens end up with weapons charges because the government has made traveling with weapons unnecessarily uncomplicated.
Wow, Sparks and I are in agreement. There's a first for everything.
Illinois is protecting New York's litigation budget by adopting the same foolish rules. New York is only marginally better than DC and IL. They are protected from challenge until they become the bottom of the barrel. By adopting fresh rules imitating NY, IL ensures that they get another round of litigation to prep for the fight in NY later.
The Supreme Court has repeated ruled that states have the right to restrict gun ownership. Illinois is rewriting their laws because they have an outtright ban on concealed carry permits.The level of gun violence in the US is completely unacceptable and the courts know it. As long as Illinois grants it's residents concealed carry permits, the courts won't intervene. The problem is the Federal government hasn't moved to close the gaping loopholes in national laws. 40 % of the guns sold in he US are sold at gun shows with no background checks. I believe we will see national Licensing and registration passed in 2013 all with a ban on assault weapons and hig capacity magazines.
High capacity ban is bull shit. How many ten round mags can you carry? I'd venture to day a lot. Sparks once again is an F'N idiot. But hey, being a card carrying member of the 'World Improver Brigade' out must make him feel better to do something.
As far as your loop hole goes, I'd say a God majority are ffl dealers at gun shows. I'v never been able to or seen one purchased at a gun show w/o a background check being done. I'm not doubting you Sparks even tho you are an F'N idiot, but the situation you sighted sounds more like a straw purchase than an occasional sale. After all selling 30 guns is not an occasional sale and that vendor should be thrown in jail for straw man. But to Sparks of course it looks like a loophole sale because Sparks is a Moron.
Sorry about typos, typing on an Android sucks.
While the Supreme Court does allow for the restriction of rights, arbitrary and capricious restrictions such as those that have been happening for years in may issue states like NY are on more precarious ground. Until an individual right was established, the question wasn't ripe and so long as there were holdouts like Illinois, it didn't make sense to devote resources to the topic.
Since Illinois will be defending brand new law and regulation, the chance that they screw it up is likely to be higher. Given that, I expect that it is they, not the more established regime in NY that will get litigated again. And I suspect that they are going to lose because somebody in Chicago without pull is going to seek a license and be denied because the "didn't come from nobody". Denying that permit will be viewed as an unacceptable restriction on a constitutional right.
And sparks, we're more likely to see 3d printed firearms than we are to see national licensing and registration in 2013. In fact, any moves towards licensing is likely to generate more contributors for the project currently out there that will make the legal restriction moot.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/08/stanley-mcchrystal-gun-control_n_2431063.html?utm_hp_ref=daily-brief?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=010813&utm_medium=email&utm_content=NewsEntry&utm_term=Daily%20Brief
When one of the "rock stars" of the military comes out publicly in favor of an assault weapons ban, I think the time for real change in gun control policy has come.Have you watched any news at all? Even Fox is doing pieces on why it's time to fix the system. I have some great news of my own. One of the editors of Policymic has invited me to write a piece for them. Also, look for the county to ban any gun shows from the fairgrounds.It's really poor public policy to allow gun traffickers to supply gangs with weapons from taxpayer owned property.
Post a Comment