I generally concur with Musketeer. I live in the People's Democratic Republic of Illinois, and apparently exist outside the protection of this Second Amendment thing I hear so much about from citizens of the United States
, so I have no personal frame of reference on CC. If he is breaking the law by carrying, then that choice is personal, and he must weigh the consequences of that decision. Does he carry, potentially needing it to defend life/family and risking jail, or does he not carry? If I'm in urban Detroit or East St. Louis, I might risk the chance. If I'm in suburban Illinois, I might not.
He has other options: if he is legally able to
own, but not carry, he might be able to transport legally in his vehicle and carry a Taser on his person. Any deterrence is better than none. It might be much slower for him to retrieve from a vehicle and engage in a SHTF scenario, but the likelihood of him needing that firearm is lower than the possibility of him getting a stay in the hoosegow for illegally carrying.
I appreciate the sentiment of "Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6", but the odds of one are greater than the other. No option is perfect in this case, and discretion is typically the deciding factor. YMMV. I'm not a legal eagle.