Posted on 07/19/2011 5:30:19 AM PDT by marktwain
Especially now that Illinois is the only state that does not allow concealed carry, some local officials said it’s time to change the law.
State Rep. Jack Franks, D-Marengo, wasn’t always in support of concealed carry but has since shifted positions, even co-sponsoring a bill that would allow it.
The deaths of several police officers around Chicago helped change his mind.
“Last year, when I saw a number of police officers being targeted around Chicago, I saw that the laws we’re using aren’t working,” Franks said. “I think it’s time to try a different thing.”
In Illinois, a concealed carry bill went to a vote in May, but it fell just short of the supermajority it needed to move forward. In Wisconsin, Gov. Scott Walker signed concealed carry into law July 8.
State Rep. Mike Tryon, R-Crystal Lake, said that although concealed carry is controversial, the issue isn’t guns, it’s gun violence.
“We should treat gun violence like we do with other communicable diseases and develop prevention programs for it,” he said. “Clearly, Chicago has a problem with gun violence.”
McHenry County State’s Attorney Louis Bianchi supports concealed carry on a personal level.
“I am very pro Second Amendment, right to bear arms,” he said. “Unfortunately, those who commit crimes have access to all kinds of weapons, and our current statute really punishes law-abiding citizens who are trying to protect themselves.”
But professionally, Bianchi must enforce the law as it currently stands.
“As the state’s attorney, I enforce the laws, and we will continue to follow and enforce the gun laws,” he said.
McHenry County Sheriff Keith Nygren echoes the position of the Illinois Sheriffs Association, which supports the “right of law-abiding citizens to possess and carry a concealed firearm for the purpose of protecting their life and families.”
The association believes that there also should be rules and regulations, such as permits and training. The bill that went before the Illinois House included provisions for this, as well as restrictions on where concealed firearms were allowed. Schools, courthouses and professional sporting events all were listed as off-limits.
The McHenry County Right to Carry Association has been an active voice locally in the concealed carry debates with President Lou Rofrano as a driving force.
People opposed to concealed carry often say they don’t want a Wild West where there are shootouts in the streets, but that has never happened anywhere, Rofrano said.
Those who have concealed carry permits tend to be among the most law-abiding citizens and take it very seriously, he said.
“They understand that it’s a huge responsibility,” he said. “If you make the decision to carry a firearm, not only do you risk criminal penalties if you’re involved in an incident, there’s also the risk of civil liabilities.”
He questions how Illinois can be “so out of step” with the rest of the country.
“Why do our leaders think that Illinois residents are less responsible than the residents of Indiana, Missouri or now Wisconsin?” he said.
Lawsuits saying that Second Amendment rights are being violated are common. Earlier this week, the Illinois Second Amendment Foundation filed paperwork in U.S. District Court seeking an injunction that would prevent enforcement of the laws against concealed carry.
Rofrano remains hopeful that a concealed carry law will pass, although he’s unsure when and whether it will be through legislation or litigation.
“Illinois is such a complicated political landscape that it’s very difficult to predict,” he said. “I think it will eventually come one way or another.”
Well....duh.
Now Mark, I've read your posts for a long while; do you really think Pat Quinn would sign concealed carry into law? What does Rahm have to do with the State? (Just curious, not meant to be argumentative)
If you get heat on anything in the future please reference the following quote.
The rule is perfect: in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane.
Mark Twain
bump
I’d be very interested in seeing a statistical breakdown of these Chicago/Peoria/Decatur/East St. Louis sociopaths who use guns to kill and maim people: I wonder how many of them have FOID cards. I’m guessing not very many - if any. And yet, the red dupes in Chicago insist that the state’s FOID program is all that stands between law abiding citizens and absolute mayhem. In reality, FOID is nothing more than a defacto gun registry program. Clearly, NOT having a FOID card is no deterrent to someone insane enough to shoot a cop.
Nice.
Well, silly. This is Obama's state. It is obvious the other 56 states are wrong. Obama and Chicago are ALWAYS correct.
I'm with you - I don't think it will happen here until we can put a canal around Cook County and give it away to Chavez or someone. It is an anchor around the neck of the rest of the state.
If they charged $100 for the permit, it would be a source of revenue for the State. As much as that would rankle people like myself who reject the idea that rights cannot be licensed to free citizens for a fee, the political reality is that some votes in the legislature, maybe enough votes, would be swayed on this important (shall) issue.
In the case of Missouri, when the CCW law was proposed as an ballot initiative, the reason that some Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs gave for pushing back against it was that the proposed fee was too low, and it would “divert” resources.
Indeed, the anti-gun Kansas City newspaper was happy to highlight the statements from the chief Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) of Johnson County that it would divert urgent resources because the proposed fees could not cover his $75 cost of processing the application. The ballot initiative failed in that county and in the two counties that comprise St. Louis, and thus failed state-wide.
A few years later when the law was being worked through the legislature, the fee was set at $100 (for 3 years) exactly to allow it to be a profit center for every LEO in the State. The logic was that it was more important to have a shall-issue CCW law in effect than have a low fee, because it would be a lot easier to tune the fee later. In any case, a lot fewer LEOs were publicly against the bill that time. Even so, it passed by a one vote margin, and that vote was cast only by through heroic efforts.
Those advocating CCW in Illinois would be politically wise to allow a little profit in the administration of CCW licenses to grease some of the local-level wheels in the process. You need all the votes you can get. If you eventually are successful, the fight to lower the fee or extend the license term will be nothing compared to what it took to get a decent CCW law.
I'm all for a 52nd State (after SoCal does it's 51st of course).
Amen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.