Illinois Ban on Carry Ruled Unconstitutional (See Page 7)

[mack59]

The anti's in Illinois just want to delay as long as possible, they also hope to add as many restrictions to the law as possible. This fall session they will introduce numerous restrictions to the bill before any permits have been issued, such a mag limits, church carry ban, ban in all restaurants that serve alcohol, etc...

With a carry law in place they will only need majority votes in house and senate to pass them as the governor will sign any restrictions that pass.

While the converse is not true as the governor will veto any pro-carry legislation that passes by majority votes.

There are majorities in house in senate who are pro-carry but it will still be a battle to stop many of the new proposed restrictions.

However, it is and will remain a shall issue law and in the Spring of 2014 permits will start being issued.

I would like to see the state lose this case and be required to allow CCW based on FOID carry until they start issuing permits, but I doubt that will happen. I think the state will successfully with the aid of the court drag this out until it is moot or the court will rule for the state.

[Armed_Chicagoan]

I really don't see more restrictions passing in either house in Illinois. There was strong support for a far less restrictive carry law, it was just a few votes short of the super majority needed for home rule preemption. Because of the required super majority a minority of lawmakers were able to get the restrictions in the bill.

Now that that's out of the way the only changes I see happening to the law is it becomes less restrictive - such as getting rid of the ban on carrying in parks. But that only happens with a pro-gun Governor, since an anti will surely veto such changes.

What people not from Illinois often fail to understand is that it is only Chicago and Cook County that has strong anti-gun sentiment, downstate they're as pro gun as just about any state you pick. Republican or Democrat, it really makes no difference downstate - they are by and large strongly pro gun.

I don't see any changes in the near term, and long term I think it gets less restrictive as people get used to concealed carry and realize the Chicken Little "sky is falling", blood in the streets wild west scenario just isn't happening.

I think the table is also set for a GOP governor next election if they play their cards right - meaning get a pro gun GOP candidate who is a moderate on the social issues that will doom a GOP candidate here. The incumbent anti-gun Gov. Quinn is extremely unpopular, and his likely challenger is Bill Daley. I can't imagine that anyone with the name "Daley" gets enough support downstate to win the general election. Even here in Chicago people are leery, having experienced the complete mess his brother made of the city's finances.

So sit tight folks, the future is actually looking pretty good from where I sit. Just be patient!

[stormy36]

Second City Cop is reporting that the CCW law supersedes all local handgun restriction and as such CPD is no longer accepting CFP applications or registration and that the magazine limits are also no longer being enforced. Had anyone seen this elsewhere? I guess I should probably just call the CPD gun desk and ask, just wondering if anyone had a different source on the current status.

[Armed_Chicagoan]

Originally Posted by stormy36

Second City Cop is reporting that the CCW law supersedes all local handgun restriction and as such CPD is no longer accepting CFP applications or registration and that the magazine limits are also no longer being enforced. Had anyone seen this elsewhere? I guess I should probably just call the CPD gun desk and ask, just wondering if anyone had a different source on the current status.

It's my understanding that the concealed carry law preempts home rule statutes with regard to registration, permitting/licensing etc. They can keep home rule "assault weapons" bans. But even those bans are inapplicable for concealed weapons, so they apply to long guns only. Not that I've ever heard of Chicago charging anyone with violating the "assault weapon" ban ever, it's purely symbolic.

I know all the places that used to have CFP classes no longer offer them, and cancelled the ones scheduled. I also can no longer find anything on the Chicago Police site about it.

Article on Chicago gun registration law published in the Chicago Tribune before the new law was passed: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...es-gun-control

[stormy36]

Thanks for the reply-- sounds good to me.

Now to decide if it's worth switching back to an Illinois ID, getting a FOID, and getting another safe for my place here just for my last 16 months as a Chicago resident.

[ming]

CFP and registration have been gone for some time. I spoke to the gun desk at Chicago Police Headquarters shortly after the new law was passed and they confirmed that both were no longer required.

[Luger_carbine]

Well they have basically pre-approved at least 55 CCPs. Illinois has approved 55 instructors, and those instructors by virtue of their certified training don't have to take training to get a permit - they're going to get one as part of their instructor application.


http://www.isp.state.il.us/firearms/...&Search=Search

[Jim March]

Wait...hold on...55? Doing weekend classes for...say, 30 people, that's 120 a month times 55 is 6,600 people a month. 79,200 a year.

Ho-ly-crap that's a backlog. It will take...good GAWD, decades at that rate to clear.

Well that has to be discussed in court ASAP.

[press1280]

Depends whether that's it or there will be more, and hopefully those instructors will do several classes a week, and not just 1 class a month.

[Mike38]

Well they have basically pre-approved at least 55 CCPs. Illinois has approved 55 instructors, and those instructors by virtue of their certified training don't have to take training to get a permit - they're going to get one as part of their instructor application.


http://www.isp.state.il.us/firearms/...&Search=Search

I question the accuracy of that list. For the instructor closest to me, it’s listed as the wrong county, and when I call the phone number I get a recording saying it’s been “disconnected or no longer in service.” So that quick the list is now 54.

[Jim March]

Depends whether that's it or there will be more, and hopefully those instructors will do several classes a week, and not just 1 class a month.

Look again. My calculations are based on each instructor doing FOUR classes a month, 30 people per class. (120 people a month is 30x4.)

The classes have to be two-day, so four classes a month is the practical limit.

[Luger_carbine]

I think they have until October 3rd to increase the number of approved instructors.

I would think it would be a factor if the ISP has create a bottleneck by virtue of not approving instructors.

A right delayed is a right denied right?

[Al Norris]

Oral arguments were heard today in Sheppard, which is challenging the mootness of the case. A link to the orals is in the post by press1280, here.

To say this didn't go well for Mr. Cooper (the NRA attorney), is quite an understatement. I don't suspect that the panel will have to spend much time in writing an opinion which merely affirms the lower court.

In other news, looking at the IL link for Concealed Carry Instructors, provided by Luger_carbine above, I see that there are now 861 approved instructors. Quite a leap from 2 weeks ago.

[press1280]

I think the NRA's attorney was Thompson, who probably wishes it were Cooper instead of him.
Anyway it's pretty much cut and dry that they'll have to file a new lawsuit against the new law. It may be worth it, just to hold ISP's feet to the fire. ISP is indicating CCW applications will not be available until January; before they had indicated the applications would be ready by January. Then they give themselves another 90 days to process.

[Armed_Chicagoan]

To be fair to the ISP, there is gong to be huge crush of applications in the beginning. I'd expect it to take far longer to process applications initially than it will be a year from January. Hopefully the pols won't take the $150 fee and divert it to other things, but this state being as broke as it is I wouldn't put it past them.

[press1280]

District judge in Moore just ruled the case isn't moot, due to the delay in CCW issuance and no exceptions for the carry of tazers/stun guns. Very interesting, I don't know what the implications are now.

[Al Norris]

That is a sea change for Judge Myerscough!

I wonder what Judge Posner will now do?

[armoredman]

To quote a famous Vulcan...fascinating. Thank you for all the hard work with the updates, guys!

[kilimanjaro]

Sounds like an instructor could make good money working full time. Offer the two day course on weekends, and during the week. Give folks the option of taking Day One and Day Two in sequence, or on any scheduled day of the month, with a month to take the entire course.

Could get a lot more people through the system doing that.

[press1280]

CA7's opinion for Shepard is out. No suprise here, although I'm sensing Posner is inviting another lawsuit to challenge the foot dragging by IL.
They also make a passing reference to the District judge in Moore finding the case isn't moot. But the cases aren't consolidated, so there's not much more to say until, and if, Moore gets back to CA7.

[Al Norris]

That actually took more time than I figured it would.

No, Judge Posner didn't "invite" a new lawsuit. He flat told them that that's what it would take.

[Chicago]

And now we see just how misguided was the gambit for FOID carry.

On 10-JUL-13, Plaintiffs moved Federal District Court Judge Stiehl: "... to forthwith and no later than July 16, 2013 (i) declare the challenged laws barring the public carrying of firearms by law-abiding citizens unconstitutional, and (ii) enter a preliminary and/or permanent injunction barring said laws' enforcement ...". Sixteen days later the Court dismissed the motion "for lack of subject matter jurisdiction" and, on 05-AUG-13, Plaintiffs appealed seeking "... reversal of the district court's order and a remand instructing the district court forthwith to enter the declaratory and injunctive relief they are entitled to under this Court's decision in Moore".

With that as background, the Posner panel re-convenes; not to adjudicate the Motion regarding continued enforcement of the state's longstanding prohibition on the bearing of arms but, rather, to address a "gripe ... that the state is dragging its heels in bringing its new, concealed-carry law into line with our ruling." Really?!!

Plaintiff's, I dare say, couldn't care less about 430 ILCS 66; the issue is 720 ILCS 5/24-1.

If you don't like the answer then just re-phrase the question, eh Judge?

[Carry_24/7]

Well I'm off to my IL concealed carry class this morning. A big shout out to all who supported the state in making this possible. Cook County's hold on the state ain't what it used to be, especially concerning this issue.

[Mike38]

Carry 24/7, fill us in on how it goes. I'm signed up for a class in January.

[Carry_24/7]

Since I'm a veteran I received an instant 8 hours credit towards the 16 hour requirement. The best part about the class was line item by line item going over IL laws concerning firearms, mostly dispelling myths and rumor; that was priceless. Did some basic, rookie draw/reholster drills, clearing jams/stovepipes, and some concealing theory then off to the range to prove you can hit the broad side of a barn. Overall, the 8 hours was worth my time. The opportunity to sit and grill an IL NRA instructor on the ins and outs of the insane IL laws was a good thing (especially since I'm a transplant from FL). I took my class through Illinois Gun Pros in Lombard, IL.