View Single Post
Old February 27, 2013, 06:11 PM   #16
Luger_carbine
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 18, 2012
Posts: 377
Their FOID thing is weird, maybe I don't understand how it is controlled, but it certainly seems like it could quickly be turned into a prohibitively expensive scheme that acts as a prior restraint.

I'm always interested in Kwong v Bloomberg because I think its a lot more important than people give it credit for.

My analogy is there have to be a dozen different ways you can keep a car from running right? Flatten the tires, pull the spark plugs, take off the oil plug, remove the battery, take off the starter etc etc... I could go on. In order to stop a car from being used, you only have to be successfull at one of these methods.

The anti-gunners only have to figure out one way to stop people from purchasing or possessing, So the outright ban in Chicago and DC failed - it's not the only avenue open to them. Illinois's carrying outside the home failed? OK, it's not the only avenue open to them. They're already talking about a special surtax on ammunition and firearms, I think Cook County may have instituted this already?)

I don't think mandatory insurance has been tested yet - correct me if I'm wrong.

And then you've got these really expensive permitting or registration schemes - like Kwong.

I don't see why people in Illinois can't see that their FOID system can easily be turned into an obstacle to gun ownership by the government doing either or both of two things:

1) Underfunding the part of the Illinois State Police that process FOID applications.

2) Raise the FOID fee to a few hundred dollars and make it an annual fee.
Luger_carbine is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.04401 seconds with 7 queries