Illinois CCW battle begins--Man arrested for fanny-pack carry!

[Don Gwinn]

(Got this from John Birch in Chicago today--no relation to the John Birch Society.)


JOHN HORSTMAN ARRESTED - GUN RIGHTS HERO
By John Birch, President, Concealed Carry, Inc., PO BOX 4597, Oak Brook,
IL 60523-2708 Tel: 630 986-8550

PLEASE PASS THIS ON TO YOUR FELLOW GUN RIGHTS SUPPORTERS!

John Horstman did not set out to be a hero on Tuesday July 25th when he
went bike riding in unincorporated DuPage County. Details are sketchy
and indefinite at this point, but evidently someone called the DuPage
Sheriff to report a man exposing themselves on the trail. Along comes
Mr. Horstman on his bike and the DuPage Sheriff stops him because "He
could be the person they are looking for." Ordering him off his bike the
deputies quickly discovered loaded magazines on his belt and then the
search got down in the dirt UGLY. Mr. Horstman's unloaded Taurus was
found in a "day planner" style carry case. He was transported to DuPage
County Jail and charged with Aggravated Unlawful Use of Weapon, 720 ILCS
5/24-1.6(a)(2)(B). After a night in jail and breakfast of cold French
toast, Mr. Horstman was transported to his bond hearing...more on that
in a minute....

At this point I must digress. On July 4th you might recall we had Gun
Day at Taste of Chicago. While entering the park with Chris Morley we
saw a man with an NRA cap and fanny pack walking with his son. Chris
said "Hey John! He's got to be one of us!" Turned out to be John
Horstman! Small world eh? We spoke quite a while and Mr. Horstman's son
is quite the polite young man. Unlike yours truly, Mr. Horstman was
packing the real deal at the Taste. Mr. Horstman is a patriot and is a
Computer Systems Engineer for a top laboratory. I mention that so you
all know Mr. Horstman is upstanding American who deserves our support.
Totally clean arrest record.

THE BOND HEARING: I think we all know it is unlikely in the extreme that
someone would carry a gun and back pack and then go out exposing himself
with all that gear on. I regret this unseemliness but it is part and
parcel of Mr. Horstman's arrest. You see at the bond hearing they
DEMONIZED Mr. Horstman over this false allegation (he is not charged
with anything except Unlawful Use of Weapons) to get his bond set at
$250,000. You read right...for fanny pack carry the bond is ONE QUARTER
OF A MILLION DOLLARS! Mr. Horstman had to post $25,000 in cash and turn
his guns over to the DuPage Sheriff to make bail. Is this America? I'd
like retired cop Leroy Pyle to weigh in on this as if I do I'll write
things about the police I will later regret. Think how you would feel as
a parent if stopped by a cop and told "Hey you look a flasher, put your
hands on the hood and I'm going to search you." I am so mad I could
spit!

Are you feeling unnerved by this? Do you realize that Mr. Horstman could
easily be Mr. Birch? Mr. Lally, Mr. Morley or anyone else reading these
words? Gun owners must band together and take on the attitude that when
you arrest one gun owner...YOU ARREST ALL GUN OWNERS. Mess with one of
us, you get ALL OF US. It is great you send money to the NRA or even the
ISRA (not recommended these days). But that will NOT get our rights
back. It may make you feel good now, but you won't feel so good when the
cuffs are snapped closed on your wrists and your children find out daddy
is in jail.

This case takes on even more significance as the State's Attorney in
this case is Mr. Joe Birkett. Mr. Birkett of DuPage County appeared at a
press conference with Cook County State's Attorney Richard Devine and
members of the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence on December
9th, 2000 to announce that anyone caught fanny pack carrying would be
charged with and prosecuted for UUW, a class IV felony. Then on July
16th (just ten day prior to Mr. Horstman's arrest) SA Birkett said on
One Eyed Jack's Springfield based talk show (http://oej.jack.net) that
he was going for full felony UUW's against law abiding gun owners with
fanny packs. He did say he would regret having to do it, but he is
resolute that we must be jailed as felons. If SA Birkett does not win
this case he, SA Devine and the ICHV will look like idiots. They are
going bring the big guns to bear on Mr. Horstman and put him through
hell on earth in the name of political expediency. I think it's fair to
call Mr. Horstman a hero don't you? He did not seek this, but now that
it is thrust upon him I can say in my long talks with Mr. Horstman that
he is a MAN IN FULL and is not going to kneel before master and beg for
forgiveness.

We have spoken with SA Birkett twice in an effort to dissuade him from
this course of action. We have even provided SA Birkett with the
Illinois Gun Law book published by the Illinois State Police and signed
by Governor Ryan. SA Birkett acknowledged what the book said made fanny
pack carry legal, but said the book was poorly written and that he would
go to the Governor to change it. SA Birkett assures me he is pro-Second
Amendment but he feels guns in the hands of his citizens are dangerous.
Bull hockey.

So it's time to get personally involved because what happened to Mr.
Horstman is personal to you. Bet on it before you are the one naked and
strip searched.

HERE IS WHAT NEEDS DOING:

1) Plan on being at Mr. Horstman's arraignment on Monday morning August
20th at the DuPage County Judicial Center,
505 N. County Farm Road, Wheaton Illinois 60187
(http://www.co.dupage.il.us/jofbldg.html). I'll get exact time and court
room soon. WEAR A FANNY PACK! NO GUN! I know it's a work day. Remember,
it's a workday for Mr. Horstman too. Our gun day in Springfield is not
important in light of Mr. Horstman's arrest. If you won't show up and
support him at the courthouse then DO NOT EXPECT anyone there for you.
It's just that cold and just that simple. If we don't pack the place and
cause the DuPage County Sheriff all kinds of problems in terms of our
PEACEFUL presence then we DO NOT DESERVE OUR RIGHTS and Mr. Horstman can
just be eaten alive by the justice system.

2) Mr. Horstman has been strip searched, vilified as a pervert in a
court, and lost his guns. Now he's about to undergo intense media
spotlight. Won't you consider dropping him an email? JSHorstman@aol.com

3) You have dug deep to support or Democrat Day surprise on Aug 16th.
Thank you. Please consider that Mr. Horstman needs TOP FLIGHT legal
talent. Expensive talent. CONSIDER AGAIN: It will be a LOT cheaper to
fund Mr. Horstman's defense RIGHT NOW, then to let them arrest us one by
one. WHEN YOU ARREST ONE GUN OWNER, YOU ARREST ALL GUN OWNERS. While we
intend to give the Democrats their "Surprise" on August 16th...ALL
EFFORTS FROM THIS MOMENT ON ARE BEING DIRECTED TO MR. HORSTMAN'S
VICTORY. Concealed Carry, Inc. has minimal resources and this is MUST
WIN. We are establishing the CONCEALED CARRY, INC. DEFENSE FUND today.
You can make checks out to CONCEALED CARRY, INC. DEFENSE FUND if you
wish and mail them to CONCEALED CARRY, INC. DEFENSE FUND, PO BOX 4597,
OAK BROOK, IL 60523-2708.

Please notice that when Concealed Carry, Inc. asks for money it is for a
SPECIFIC PURPOSE. We don't say: Send us money and you will get a
concealed carry law just by sitting on your ass. It DOES NOT WORK THAT
WAY. No matter how many checks you send to the NRA or the ISRA, unless
you know what that money is going to be used for. Do not take it on
faith that there are people in the ISRA who know how to spend your
money. THEY DON'T or we would not be in this mess today. Anyone who
donates to the Defense Fund can look over the account and cancelled
checks just about anytime they want. The fund is totally open book. Even
the ICHV can come by and look at cancelled checks if they donate first.

Can you be there for Mr. Horstman on Aug 20th? Bring your kids...let
them see justice in America close up. We need to cheer Mr. Horstman
going in and going out of the palace of justice. Shake his hand! If I
have to be a one man rally for Mr. Horstman, then so be it. But gosh
darn it the same people can't do the heavy lifting all the time! I'm
begging you to call your boss and tell him "Sorry boss...I'll be in at
lunch time."

ARE YOU COMING TO THE ARRAIGNMENT? EMAIL john@concealcarry.org

PLEASE PASS THIS ON TO YOUR FELLOW GUN RIGHTS SUPPORTERS!

[Don Gwinn]

For those who don't know, Illinois law does not allow concealed carry of a loaded firearm under any circumstances and most residents assume that anyone carrying a gun is committing a felony (Unlawful Use of a Weapon.) However, the UUW statute lists several exceptions and states that anyone who meets those exceptions is not covered. The exceptions are for guns which are broken down, OR guns which are not immediately accessible to anyone (such as in the trunk--apparently this allows you to leave the gun loaded.)

The dispute is over the third exception, which has three components. The person must possess a valid FOID card (on his person) the gun must be unloaded, and the gun must be enclosed in "a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container" (empasis mine.)

Obviously Mr. Horstman meets all three, so his acquittal should be a simple matter, but I predict every dirty trick you can imagine. I sent $50 for the Democrat surprise at Democrat Day, but I'm sending $100 to Mr. Horstman.

[Zander]

Don't reckon they'll be putting Mr. Horstman in the ranks of the sheeple, will they, Don?

From the recounting, it seems he is married and has already contributed to the gene pool.

This is a good thing.

[madmike]

Henry Karlson may be able to help. I've forwarded this to him.

He's a member of the IL bar, here in Indiana, an advisor to the state SC, and a rabid gun bunny. He chews poli scis apart in debate, and spits out the bones.

If he's able to get involved, he'd LOVE a case like this.

But I can't promise, only forward.

[Don Gwinn]

Excellent! Thanks. That might make all the difference since it looks like they may be trying to crush him by expense and you never know how much money gun owners will be willing to part with.

[Justin Moore]

I sent $50 for the Democrat surprise at Democrat Day, but I'm sending $100 to Mr. Horstman.

Don,

You are one fine human being man

250 GRAND for bail? Good god, you'd think the guy was Charles Manson or something That's just completely insane.

[Don Gwinn]

That part is a genuine mystery to me--if I read it right, John is alleging that they used the idea of a flasher on the bike trail to justify the bail, but I have a couple of questions about that:

1. Is $250,000 bond really normal for flashers? How about for people with no criminal record or flight prospects whatsoever accused of a nonviolent crime?

2. What kind of pathetic excuse for a judge lets his judgment on bond be swayed by allegations the prosecutor didn't even have enough to bring charges on? I can almost hear it:

"But your honor, half a million is really not sufficient. There were reports of a rape, an armed robbery, and three muggings within five miles of where the defendant was arrested. He could be guilty of all of them!"
"With which of those crimes has the defendant been charged?"
"Well......none......but......hey, anything's possible!"

[Justin Moore]

2. What kind of pathetic excuse for a judge lets his judgment on bond be swayed by allegations the prosecutor didn't even have enough to bring charges on? I can almost hear it:

The same pathetic excuse for a judge that would turn over all records of firearms purchases to the Illinois CAGE team

[Zundfolge]

Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted

Even if he was carrying a loaded handgun in violation of the law, where the hell does ANY judge get off setting A QUARTER OF A FREAKING MILLION DOLLARS bail??!!


Damn, I have always spoken out against the more extreme among us who believe that violent revolution will soon be necessary...I'm slowly begining to agree with them.

[Justin Moore]

Zund,

Thanks to liberals constantly trying to frame the terms of the 'gun control debate', you are no longer a gun owner, you are a 'dangerous right wing extremist' Hence, your excessive bail.

It doesn't matter anymore if you've been a law abiding, upstanding citizen all your life, they still label you as a 'danger to society' and try to make it sound like you want to 'kill all the children' if you are against gun control, aka victim disarmament.

Do you remember the commercial about George Bush? "Mommy, can I have some more arsenic in my drinking water"? These are the same types of disgusting tactics they use against people who uphold the 2nd Amendment. And then if you are opposed to all these land grabs in the phony garb of 'enviromentalism' they make it sound like you want to kill the earth, cut down all the trees, and poison your children

And they aren't going to give up. Make no mistake, these people are EVIL and they don't care about your rights.

[RickD]

I am posting this to my personal lists.

We must raise money for this man's defense.

Why?

Two reasons.

1) Mr. Horstman must know that he is not in this alone.

2) His anti-gun bigot prosecutor must know that Mr. Horstman is not alone.

You folks in the midwest need to organize and fast.

Rick
I'll be sending a check for $10 to start it off.

[paratrooper]

Please help me here . I always thought that the arraignment was for 2 things . One: A crime was commited . Two: There is proof that the person brought before the judge was involved . So unless there was an eye witness the exposing charge is thrown out . If the man met the requirements for safe and legal carry that is thrown out . I am assuming that the judge went to law school and can understand a statute .It looks clear to me and I landed on my head more often than not as a paratrooper not to mention a million miles in a truck bouncing from coast to coast . If that other politico wishes to go to the Gov. and have the law changed let him have at it . A retroactive law does not count . The man followed the law at that time . I think the judge needs to be sued one nanosecond after the bogus charge is thrown out . I also think jury trial is the way to go .

[Zundfolge]

So unless there was an eye witness the exposing charge is thrown out .

I don't think this guy was ever charged with exposing himself.

If I understand correctly, the police where looking for a bicycle rider who was exposing himself, they used this search as an excuse to stop Mr Horstman (and possibly other bicyclists) and upon searching him found the gun.

[rock_jock]

This Texan will send him $30. And I'll pass this on to my local gun club email list. Let's get the word out.

What is the chance that a complaint can be made against the judge for exceeding reasonable guidelines in setting this kind of bail?

[MellowMikey]

A $250.000 bond on that. :barf: :barf:
Friggin ridicilous.
Is Illinois in America???
I guess living in Arizona I take for granted the freedoms we have.
I am on my pension, but I can spare some cash for this guy, I wish him luck.

Regards,
MellowMikey

[Justin Moore]

Hrm, good tactic to use against tyrannical judges is to subpeona their oath of office. They tend to get a little scared when you do that

[Skibane]

Mr. Birch's appeal for help has also been posted over on FreeRepublic.com. Hopefully, that'll stir up the Calvary a little more...

I think I've found a good use for that change left over from spending my IRS refund check!

[Jeff Thomas]

Not to trivialize the issue, but stopping bicyclists and searching them to see if they're the flasher sounds like a bad joke. What were they searching for ...

[Double Naught Spy]

Did I read that right? Horstman had loaded magazines on his belt? I am not quibbling about the law here, but given Illinois' anti-gun persona, what person in their right mind would be carrying loaded magazines on their belt? I know that it probably is not illegal to do so, buy why risk drawing attention to yourself in that manner?

[Don Gwinn]

My guess is that he wanted to draw attention to it, or at least not hide it. He's braver than I am that way; I keep the magazines in the pouch or in a pants pocket with the floorplate sticking out.

But as you say, the bottom line is that it was legal. Birkett is going to wish he'd gone the other way on this one.

[hornet]

This is my first post here and I know this can be a hot topic, but here goes. I live in central Illinois, shoot pistols every week and have a Florida concealed carry permit. If this individual is getting the shaft I will send money, but I do want more information. This fanny pack issue has been kicked around for some time and it was generally known that you did not want to be the test case. I, for one, have always questioned the logic of carrying an unloaded pistol. If a person, or persons, commit a crime against you, a family member, etc. and then takes off what do you do: load up, pursue and shoot? There are only a couple of states that allow this when you are legally carrying. If the mags being exposed is true, IMO this goes against a basic principle of concealed carry; you don't want anyone to know you are armed. It's entirely possible the police, or someone else, was on to him and just waiting for the right situation; this happens. If I was that individual I would not help them get me by doing something blatant. IMO, the laws here are pretty rough for individuals who are honestly trying to protect themselves. However, there are exceptions. Several years ago, a 70 year old man was robbed at gunpoint at a local gas/convenient store. He had a loaded pistol under the seat of his car(that is highly illegal here) and pulled it and killed one guy face to face. The second guy took off running and the old boy plugged him too(just wounded him). He was not charged for killing the guy face to face: that was clearly self defense. He was charged with a lesser crime for shooting the second guy in the back while running away. Public opinion was overwhelmingly positive for his actions, so 3-4 mos. later the charge against him was quietly dropped. Don't know if he got sued or not. I know responsible people in the Chicago area who have carried pistols for 30 years and according to them the police know they carry and don't bother them because they don't think they are a danger to society. I personally know of people from out of state who have been stopped for traffic offenses and readily, and honestly, admitted to the LEO that they were carryng a loaded weapon for protection. They were allowed to continue on: with their weapon. What has happened to this gentleman is totally against what I feel are my basic rights: but I'm going to do my best not to walk around with a bullseye painted on my back.

[RickD]

Hornet,

If you want more information, you won't get it here. You live in Illinois. Invest 87 cents and call the man. Give him money or not. Spread the word or not.

Rick

[paratrooper]

Perhaps I was not clear in my earlier post . My point was that without a witness to connect him to the alleged flashing the gun and ammo are fruit of the poison tree . Even more , the gun was said to be legal so where's the charge coming from ???? As I said earlier , the judge should believe that the person before him has commited the crime . He should know that no crime was commited ergo this person has not commited a crime . The judge must be backing the cops play thinking he can't be touched . He needs to be sued to the point of having to live in the backseat of a Dodge Dart sitting up on blocks in a bad neighborhood .

[Don Gwinn]

All:

The time of the hearing has changed, it will be at 1:30 on the 20th. There will be a rally at 1:00. If you can get there, get there, please. http://www.concealcarry.org/horstmanrally.html

Hornet,
I'm not sure what information you want. Do you want proof that what he did is legal? I'll try to provide what information I can, but it's not clear to me what you're asking. I can tell you that fanny pack carry, although it isn't the same as real CCW with a loaded weapon, is considered better than nothing by those of us who do it. Moreover, we hope it will have added political value as a bargaining chip in the CCW fight. Briefly, the idea is that since anyone with a FOID card can carry in a fanny pack, if we can build enough momentum for CCW we can sweeten the pot by offering a deal--we support a law "closing the fanny pack loophole" in exchange for passage of the CCW bill. Obviously, if the other side thinks they'll win on CCW, this won't make much difference. They'll close the loophole without us and laugh us off. However, if we're close and this tips a legislator or two our way--or a governor.....anyway, to do any of that, fanny pack carry has to be public and publicized. I live in Virden, about a half hour south of Springfield. If you'd like to go shooting, let me know.

Paratrooper, it is said that the gun is legal only by pro-gunners like us. Many politicians, including prosecutor Birkett, claim that the law does not protect fanny pack carriers. I'll post the actual text of the law in a moment; I thought I had done so. Suffice it to say that whether this method of carry is legal is the crux of the dispute.

[Don Gwinn]

Sec. 24-1. Unlawful Use of Weapons.
(a) A person commits the offense of unlawful use of
weapons when he knowingly:
(10) Carries or possesses on or about his person, upon any public street, alley, or other public lands within the corporate limits of a city, village or incorporated town, except when an invitee thereon or therein, for the purpose of the display of such weapon or the lawful commerce in weapons, or except when on his land or in his own abode or fixed place of business, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm, except that this subsection (a) (10) does not apply to or affect transportation of weapons that meet one of the following conditions:
(i) are broken down in a non-functioning state; or
(ii) are not immediately accessible; or
(iii) are unloaded and enclosed in a case,
firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container by a person who has been issued a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card.

The bold is mine, highlighting the three conditions one must meet to be exempt. He met all three. It's a matter of getting other people to acknowledge what the law says. This is quoted from the Safe Neighborhoods Act of last year, but it was already law word for word. The Safe Neighborhoods Act simply increased the penalty to a felony and reaffirmed what UUW was. (That was the limit of what most of the Republicans who went against Governor Ryan were able to accomplish, because rather than argue about good people forced to carry illegally by an unjust law, they argued that hunters would be charged with felonies if they made mistakes while transporting firearms.)