Democrat Gov. Signs Illinois’ Ban on Commonly Owned Semiautomatic Rifles, Magazines

Breitbart ^ | 01/12/2023 | AWR HAWKINS

[ChicagoConservative27]

Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D) signed legislation Wednesday night banning commonly owned semiautomatic rifles and magazines which Democrats consider “high capacity.”

The law took effect immediately with Pritzker’s signature. It allows those who already own the now-banned firearms to retain them, but requires that the owners register the guns with the Illinois State Police.

Pritzker’s office released a statement upon his signing of the bill. It said, in part, “The new law also requires existing owners of semi-automatic rifles to register their ownership, ensuring that law enforcement knows the location of these weapons of war and who to hold accountable if they fall into the wrong hands.”

[Lurker]

Our gun club will be filing multiple lawsuits on this next week.

L

[Big Red Badger]

Good on Ya!
I look south an see Mehico.

[HartleyMBaldwin]

They’re so far south they actually have accents

Egyptian accents, no doubt.

[telescope115]

new law also requires existing owners of semi-automatic rifles to register their ownership, ensuring that law enforcement knows the location of these weapons

The whole goal-registration and confiscation.

Let the legal games begin!

[telescope115]

+1

[metmom]

It said, in part, “The new law also requires existing owners of semi-automatic rifles to register their ownership, ensuring that law enforcement knows the location of these weapons of war and who to hold accountable if they fall into the wrong hands.”

Totalitarians all.

[Mlheureux]

Weapons of war because semi-auto? I guess uniforms of war will be next. Fascism is great isn’t it?

[NavyShoe]

too stupid...

[OldGoatCPO]

The denial to hear the case at this time came with a rebuke of the 2nd Circuit. 2nd Circus did not explain why they lifted the stay so there was nothing for SCOTUS to rule on. (Remember, this was about lifting the stay not the law itself). SCOTUS told the 2nd Circus to either list a reason for the stay in a timely matter or SCOTUS will take up the matter if the plaintiffs file another appeal of the stay. Courts have a process, this ruling was about procedure not the law or the stay.

[metmom]

"Kill all they send, and they will stop coming." (We were Soldiers, 2002)

Attrition is a wonderful thing..

They’re going to run out of goons at some point.

[Dead Corpse]

“Shall not be infringed.”

“Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”

“Further declaratory and restrictive clauses...”

Time to nut up or shut up.

[Boogieman]

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4073382/posts

A little different case, but Illinois will not be able to show a historic precedent for this kind of restriction any more than New York could show a precedent for theirs, so I expect it will end up in the same result.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

No, just twangy-Southern, versus my nasally-Northern.

You Betcha! :)

[unread]

"too stupid."

Yeah, that's what I said.. Two stupid, he is.. :)

[Wayne07]

I agree that the supreme court should strike this down, but the NY case is in somewhat different territory - concealed carry vs banning a type of firearm.

[telescope115]

They’ve got their claws dug in, don’t they?

[DPMD]

So if they don’t register the guns, the gov won’t know where to conduct the raids. Pritzker just gave the sole reason for having a gun registry. It would be good, then, to have a similar registry of all state employees who carry firearms, along with the results of psychiatric exams for each one of them.

[mrmeyer]

...but requires that the owners register the guns with...

NO.

[Boogieman]

True, it’s different, but Bruen didn’t make a distinction along those lines. If the state/municipality can’t show a historic precedent, it’s going to get struck down.

[Flaming Conservative]

Unfortunately, the counties my kids live in are NOT refusing to enforce this law.