Posted on 02/14/2025 4:41:06 AM PST by marktwain
An Illinois Circuit Court in White County has found portions of the Illinois Firearms Owner ID law to be unconstitutional under the Second Amendment for the third time. From wmay.com February 10, 2025:
A White County Illinois judge has found the state’s Firearms Owner’s ID card unconstitutional when enforced against someone possessing their firearms in their home.
The case Illinois vs. Vivian Brown stems from a 2017 case where police found a rifle in her home and charged her with possessing a firearm without a FOID card.
Conversely, since the inception of this case, both parties have agreed that the Defendant was and is eligible to receive a FOID Card and, as such, is a law abiding, responsible citizen. Only now does the State seek to re-define the Defendant as a criminal and strip her of her Second Amendment rights. Despite the State’s novel “law-abiding” argument, this Court has determined that the Defendant is a responsible, law-abiding citizen deserving of the protections guaranteed under the Second Amendment. Accordingly, the Defendant’s possession of a .22 caliber rifle withing the confines of her home, even without a valid FOID card falls squarely within the protections afforded her by the Second Amendment.
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
Leftards such as wHitler never stop marching (until they are jailed and executed for treason). Similar to Hochul. They just ignore oppositional rulings, which is what MAGA MUST do in turn.
If we had a real Supreme Court, no state would have any gun control. And, I’d like it to be a felony for any elected legislator to try and impose gun control.
Just a question, at what point do you draw a line at owning weapons? Should people own manpads? Artillery with ammo? Functional tanks?
Not making an argument on touchy subject, just curious about hearing someone’s opinion.
In the Constitution there is a proviso for Letters of Marque — such that, if you own a Warship, you might gain government permission to go off an raid an enemy nation. Also, it was well understood that some private citizens at the time owned artillery (cannons).
I don’t want prison inmates to have firearms in their possession. That might be the only line I would draw. Other exceptions might come up that I might agree with — but I see the Right in an extremely broad and all-encompassing way.
Is there any implication in this respecting concealed carry?
The basic 2A reads, in part: “- - -the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
In the era the 2A was written, the private ownership of hand guns and long guns was a common thing for the sake of self protection and hunting. The writers of this amendment knew fire arms technology had advanced over the centuries and most certainly were aware such advancement would continue.
If they would have wanted the Brown Bess rifle to be the only gun that could be owned, then language to that effect would have been included somewhere.
My point is, any hand gun or long rifle of today or yesterday’s design can be legally owned and such a right cannot be infringed on. If a person wants to own a hundred AR15’s, so be it. It’s no ones damn business.
However restrictions should be placed on criminals committing crimes using guns.
The 2A and massive gun sales over the past few years save our bacon from the Biden regime.
Guess they figure if we go before enough courts they have to win one. Of course nothing happen to the other 99 arrests were they lost!
[[A White County Illinois judge]]
That’s racist!
Nothing in the Constitution states that gun owners need to be registered and have id cards!
Weird how liberals demand gun id’s but scream and hollar when conservatives state quite reasonably that voters need to prove citizenship to vote.
Hmm. I’m in Illinois and I do have an FOID (not concealed carry).
Is there any implication in this respecting concealed carry?
+++++++++++
My first fake ID was made using a FOID application form. I still have it 45 years later. As I understand the FOID is needed to purchase ammunition / guns. Don’t know about FOID and CC. I ask no one for permission to CC and as such have no CC ID.
A felony with the only punishment allowed to be hanging until dead. Time to end the assault on the God blessed constitutional rights of Americans. Armed citizens make for more polite societies.
“some private citizens at the time owned artillery (cannons)”
I own a cannon. One of my neighbors owned a huge German 1917 Krupp 210mm Lange Morser
some things are state specific
somethings are fed specific
somethings are local specific
somethings are all or a combination of the above
a machine gun is legal - to include a mini-gun - grenade launcher(have to jump thru hoops to own one)
a gatling gun is legal
a flame thrower is legal
a cannon is legal
a tank is legal
Tannerite is legal
A claymore mine is not legal - darn it.
I’m aware... except for the claymore. I’ll take it off my Christmas list. The question is to the degree you think weapons should be regulated. Or, should the Second Amendment have no cap at all. IF there is a local or state or federal law that is a restriction, is the Second Amendment being infringed on? Are our rights being infringed on?
Good questions.And they’ll continue to be asked long after i’m dead and gone.
I’m not a fan of regulation of a God-given, constitutionally protected right.
Once the camel’s nose is under the tent, where does it stop ?
with that said, should the weapons be regulated ? in a word...no.
Restricted ? no - and this is the SCOTUS ruling in Bruen (which seems to allow legislature to legislate ((Illinois gun type and gun accessory bans)) and let the courts decide on restriction )
“Under this framework, courts must assess whether a given regulation is consistent with the historical understanding of the Second Amendment at the time of its ratification.”
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.