Posted on 08/03/2014 5:50:16 AM PDT by rellimpank
Gun control advocates are learning the downside of getting their way. Recently, a federal judge struck down the District of Columbia's ban on the carrying of concealed handguns. Anti-gun forces have been losing in legislatures for a long time. Now they are finding that even where they win, they lose.
Washington used to have the strictest gun laws in America. Besides the prohibition of concealed guns, all firearms had to be registered and handgun ownership was forbidden.
Graphic: Legal restrictions of Illinois' concealed carry law Graphic: Legal restrictions of Illinois' concealed carry law READ THE STORY The restrictions had no evident effect on crime: In the 1990s, the nation's capital was known as the murder capital. But they invited a legal challenge — a historic one, as it happened. In 2008, the Supreme Court invalidated the city's handgun ban as a violation of the Second Amendment.
It was the first time the court had recognized that individuals have a constitutional right to own firearms for the purpose of self-defense. It was also a drastic shift in the court's view of the Second Amendment, which for decades had been treated as a forgettable footnote.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
In NC you can only apply deadly force if you or your loved ones are subject to death, bodily harm or rape. One the threat is stopped, you must cease fire. Further action could put you at risk for murder. You cannot go running down the street firing 33 rounds from your Glock 17 at a guy who stole your wallet.
Somehow I thought they changed the NC law to allow you to shoot if someone is breaking into your house. Once they are in your house it’s only allowed if you feared for your life. Perhaps some NC folks can clarify that.
LOL! You rebel you. But, I do get it. Why there is a CCW permit “requirement” for law abiding citizens is a load of horse hockey.
NC has the Castle Doctrine. If someone forces his way into your home you can assume he means to do harm and defend yourself without having a direct threat.
I'm a CCW holder here in Illinois, and I assume Chapman was referring to the law here in Illinois, and what we CCW holders resposibilities are prior to shooting.
Going through the required CCW training here in IL, one is specifically instructed that if a perpetrator is in the act of FLEEING once confronted by an armed CCW holder, the CCW holder *must* let the perpetrator go.
For example, if someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night and I paint them with my laser and they turn to flee my house, I have to let them go. Shooting anyone in the act of removing themselves from the scene is not considered a "good shoot" here in Illinois.
Don't anyone bitch at me about that --- that's just what the law says. I personally don't agree with it, but I have to abide by it.
Not in Illinois. Once a perp "turns and runs" we are bound by the law to let them go. Shooting at them while they're in the act of fleeing turns us into the criminal here in IL.
I say that having been through Illinois' CCW training, taught by a retired Marine and Illinois State Trooper.
That's the law. I didn't write it, don't complain to me how stupid it is. You'll be preaching to the choir.
The statement is not true! Concealed carry is a great cause of worry .........................for criminals.
” My son is a cop in an Illinois city (Not Chicago), he has long been an advocate of concealed and open carry for ordinary, law abiding citizens, he says, he’ll take all the help he can get. ”
Good for him! God bless!
"We moved our base camp last night and we’re now positioned literally
within feet of the river. Have been sitting here watching the border
patrol patrolling in their riverboats all night and all morning..."~Jim Robinson
Please support Free Republic
click the pic
Here's an article from Massad Ayoob I just saw about the incident in question. Apparently the investigators took the citizen's side.
If they are breaking in my house, then I can claim fear for my life and shoot to STOP the threat.
Thanks my friend. I will give that a try.
Any form of licensing or permit requirements are a clear violation of the Second Amendment. What part of "shall not be infringed" do they fail to understand?
I can only repeat what I was told by my CCW instructor (his credentials are in my previous post.) I also assume you intend to ask your question in the context of in defense of another in a public setting.
In Illinois, unless I, or someone I am immediately with are threatened with direct harm out in public, I should not pull my weapon and intervene. My responsibility under the law as my instructor understood it, was to remove myself and whoever I was immediately with away from the scene.
That is unless I want to be the first test case in Illinois for coming to someones defense and using my weapon (presumably to injure/kill/fend off the attacker of another individual.)
I’ve carried for 45 years in 40 different states without a permit.
-=0=-
Out of sight, out of mind. AND you do not spook the herd.....
Same in Illinois as far as I know.
—I have been searching the title—usually works—I’ll do the paragraph from now on—thanks—
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.