Monday, July 25, 2011

Illinois Responds

The State of IL AG's office has responded to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction of UUW (Shepard v Madigan) and although I'm nowhere near a lawyer, it looks to be full of holes to me.

Apparently they feel that (among many other things) a currently law abiding citizen can turn into a bloodthirsty killer at any instant. They also claim they aren't infringing rights and therefore don't need to justify the UUW law.

Look folks, there is ZERO legal method of carry in Illinois. Period. My opinion is that if the legislature can't pass a concealed weapons permit system, then the state must allow open carry as a default. We simply must have a way to defend ourselves, the state certainly can't do it for each of us.

As I said, I'm no lawyer and I can't decipher a lot of the lawyer-speak in the response. If you'd like to read the filings you can find them at post # 191 on this thread at Illinois Carry and join the conversation about them there.

Monday, July 11, 2011

It's been a busy couple of weeks!

Since I last posted, WI Gov. Scott Walker has signed the bill for WI concealed carry and a little court case about gun ranges has made some serious waves in IL.

So, first, Congratulations to the good folks of WI! They now join 48 other states in the right to conceal a handgun for their own defense.

For those of us in IL, it puts the focus on us alone....I'm confident that we'll get RTC but it will still take a bit more time. It's pretty tough to argue that IL is the only state that has it right, especially when the streets of Chicago are being ruled by groups of thugs.

That brings us to the court case I mentioned previously. One woman in Chicago wanted to get her Chicago Firearms Permit, but the requirements were so restrictive that she couldn't get it. There is a live fire/range requirement but there are no civilian shooting ranges in Chicago. This put an undue burden on many folks as they would be required to the suburbs to complete this requirement. Sound OK until we factor in that many folks in the city don't own a car and must use public transportation to get to the ranges....but can't transport a firearm on that same public transportation.

So, Ezell v Chicago came about, it asks for an injunction against the ban on ranges in the city. The original court denied the injunction and the decision was then successfully appealed, with the decision handed down last week.

Many had thought that this case would be won but weren't ready for some of the language in the decision. The court basically told Chicago that the city was thumbing its nose at the SCOTUS and that the 2A does indeed apply to the city. The court also states that it's obvious that the ordinance was intended to make firearm ownership as difficult as possible.

The court also paralleled the 2A with the 1A, stating that the city could not limit free speech inside the city limits simply because free speech is available in the suburbs.

It's a brilliant decision really and very well worded. You can find it here:

After the decision was handed down, two other plaintiffs in other cases have filed for a Preliminary Injunction against the total ban on weapons carry in IL. These are: NRA/ISRA/Shepard v IL Attorney General and SAF/Michael Moore/Charles Hook v IL attorney General. 

Be sure to head on over to Illinois Carry for plenty of discussion on all of these cases and info on any and all things RTC in IL.

Also, don't forget to stay on top of the Project Gunwalker goes deeper and deeper every day. The BATF may have outdone themselves on this travesty.