|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 11, 2012, 11:00 PM | #51 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 301
|
Still do not understand what they think the registry will solve. Do they think criminals will register their guns? If not, what is the point accept to control the law abiding masses.
|
February 11, 2012, 11:41 PM | #52 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 23, 2009
Posts: 3,963
|
That's exactly the point.
|
February 12, 2012, 12:29 AM | #53 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Chicago
Posts: 703
|
Spanishjames... I know someone would object to my agreeing with the registration cause then we will end up like England? I think where they progressively registered and than took all the guns pretty much.
That is the common fear, but I don't think it will happen. Other states are supposed to register guns. Even in MI you are supposed to register every handgun you own. Even if you move in and have 2+ huge gun safes full of them. I think this is more accurate... Quote:
|
|
February 12, 2012, 12:35 AM | #54 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
|
bitttorrent, only two of the states in which I've resided had registration laws: Hawaii and Rhode Island.
(Edit: I was a teenager in RI, and didn't have guns, so it didn't matter. When the Navy sent me to HI, I left all but two of my guns in storage at my parents' place, because I dislike registration. I won't move back to either state, gun laws being one of several reasons.) Maine, Florida, Texas, Washington, Georgia, and Missouri do not. Tell me what the benefit of a registration scheme is? Or tell me why the states I listed are worse than states that have registration? Government should always have to prove a real benefit, any time it wants to impose ANY restriction of ANY sort, let alone a restriction on a Constitutionally protected right. |
February 13, 2012, 07:18 AM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 854
|
As a Chicagoan, who works in Chicago, lives about 2.5 miles from downtown, I can tell you that this registry business isn't big news here. After the high of getting our handguns back, I think there is little steam sufficient to bring this bill to fruition. I doubt many people would register their firearms given the history of disarmament through registration lists. Gun owners in the know just aren't that stupid. Like everyone else has said, "Sorry, officer, tragic boating accident you see..."
__________________
"Shut up, crime!" |
February 13, 2012, 06:04 PM | #56 |
Junior member
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
|
Part of the issue is that they're not interested in catching criminals, they are interested in rounding up firearms.
These proposals come from some erroneuous foundational beliefs: 1) That it's possible to pass laws which disarm criminals 2) That taking firearms away from criminals is going to cut down on crime, and taking firearms away from the rest of the population A) makes them and those around them safer, and B) restricts the supply of firearms to criminals. Each one of these points is false, but it doesn't matter. If the city was interested in catching criminals who use firearms in the commission of crimes they could. The state could increase the sentencing for UUW by a felon from 2 to 4 years to 15 to 30, with no plea bargaining, no reduced sentencing, no early release. Most felons are serving concurrent sentences for whatever crime they committed plus the weapons charge. It's actually not that hard to catch and convict them. One of the criminals involved with murdering Officer Clifton Lewis in December of 2011 was arrested for UUW that came to light during a traffic stop. He had a weapon in his vehicle. When they do drug busts, they usua;lly have enough evidence to also charge the gang members with UUW charges. They could incarcerate the people who are actually perpatrating gun violence. They choose not to. |
February 13, 2012, 06:53 PM | #57 | |
Junior member
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
|
Initial response by some of the other Illinois elected officials:
http://www.bnd.com/2012/02/10/205258...k=omni_popular Sen. Bill Haine, said: Quote:
|
|
February 13, 2012, 07:53 PM | #58 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 10, 2012
Posts: 3,881
|
The politicians cannot get the criminals so they settle for harassing and badgering law abiding citizens, making every attempt to trample on the 2nd amendment rights. It is disgusting and shameful the way they want to regulate people's rights.
Do some of these like minded officials get a kick back for trying to disarm the law abiding citizens, making them an easier target for the criminals ? |
February 13, 2012, 08:11 PM | #59 | |
Junior member
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
|
Quote:
Yes it's crazy. I'm posting this again: http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Ma...holy-Alliance/ |
|
February 14, 2012, 11:43 PM | #60 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 29, 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,328
|
It's a red herring issue.
Read about the financial situation in Illinois. If they can talk about anything but the budget and pension funding they'll be happy. |
February 15, 2012, 12:46 PM | #61 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 17, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 185
|
As a collector of modern handguns, registration fees would cost me in excess of the cost of my most expensive handgun. It may be cheaper to set up residence in another state. I really can wait until my family responsibilities are relieved and I'm able to leave this state permanently.
__________________
GreySmoke Tactical Firearms and FFL Transfers, Greysmoketacticalfirearms.com |
February 15, 2012, 01:37 PM | #62 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2009
Location: Back in a Non-Free State
Posts: 3,133
|
Quote:
__________________
Simple as ABC . . . Always Be Carrying |
|
February 15, 2012, 03:45 PM | #63 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 854
|
What checkmyswag said, that is completely true. Anything to distract us is what they're selling. The Chicago Sun Times (my preferred paper) reported today that Chicago is rated the most corrupt city in the US (again).
As an interesting aside pertaining to this thread, one time right in front of my apartment these UCs pulled over a car and put two black individuals in bracelets. While they sat on the curb, the officers emptied the contents of the car and put it all on the trunk. Open beer bottles and bags of drugs. After about 15 minutes, they took the bracelets off, waved goodbye, got in the car, and drove off. "I guess you're not the boys we're lookin' fer!" That's pretty much how things fly here. It may be interesting to note I live in Humboldt Park, a very high crime neighborhood with lots of gangs. Most of this is business as usual here. Poor 57 year old lady was shot in the neck at the Subway a block and a half away for the $52 in the till. She died at the hospital and the Subway has been closed by the owner until further notice. You guessed it! No suspects.
__________________
"Shut up, crime!" |
February 15, 2012, 03:47 PM | #64 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 854
|
Oh, and I forgot a few years ago the 15 year old that was arrested (also in front of my apartment) after shooting up a business a few doors down then running into the business located next door to me. Saw the officer emptying the rather expensive looking 1911 over his trunk, and staring at the gun thinking "where the hell did he get THIS?!?"
__________________
"Shut up, crime!" |
February 15, 2012, 04:14 PM | #65 |
Junior member
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
|
I have a theory that Emanual is conversing more with Washington D.C. than he is with people in Illinois in the Democratic party.
His proposals seemed to take some in his own party by surprise: http://www.pantagraph.com/news/state...#ixzz1m28joACq http://www.kmov.com/news/local/Chica...139124114.html Last edited by C0untZer0; February 15, 2012 at 04:19 PM. |
February 16, 2012, 06:22 PM | #66 | |
Junior member
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
|
Mayor's proposal is DOA but it will be interesting to see what is the fallout
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-...b_1273586.html
Quote:
. |
|
February 17, 2012, 11:25 PM | #67 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 30, 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 635
|
The bill was introduced today by Kelly Cassidy.
Quote:
http://www.nraila.org/legislation/st...the-house.aspx |
|
February 17, 2012, 11:47 PM | #68 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
February 18, 2012, 12:01 AM | #69 | |
Junior member
Join Date: October 4, 2007
Location: All the way to NEBRASKA
Posts: 8,722
|
Quote:
|
|
February 18, 2012, 12:09 AM | #70 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 30, 2010
Location: Chicago 'Burbs
Posts: 543
|
Don't listen to rahms polital babble about common sence safety. The bill he proposed is about two things ....
1: taxing law abiding gun owners to further discourage ownership 2: turning law abiding patriotic citizens into criminals for excercizing their rights This will do nothing to make the streets safer, what criminal is going to register their illeagle handgun? Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk |
February 18, 2012, 02:07 AM | #71 |
Junior member
Join Date: April 21, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 4,555
|
It very well may end up costing Gov. Quinn his re-election, and he understood that, hence his unsupportive comments concerning it.
It may also cost downstate democrats their re-election bids. Emanual completely lost the support of the people in his own party that he needed at the state level to get beneficial state laws and initiatives passed for Chicago. He won't be able to get anything passed to help Chicago in any way now. But more importantly, this may have tipped the scales for the next election, that's really the most important issue. We were very close to having a super majority veto-proof concealed carry law passed last year. With a pro-gun governor, we don't need to worry about a super-majority but the loss of a few democratic seats downstate could be all that's needed this next go-around to pass carry legislation in such a way that it over-rides home rule, meaning cities like Chicago and Oak Park would have to allow people to carry. |
February 19, 2012, 04:13 PM | #72 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 14, 2004
Posts: 447
|
Re: the super-majority - it was my understanding that the super majority was imposed by the leadership of the house (Madigan - father of the anti-gun States Atty of Illinois Lisa Madigan) and possibly by the senate leadership - as it was a law that would effect home rule cities - (ironically state wide bans and taxes on firearms seem to not require such a super majority).
I would like to think that Rahm's rash proposal to tax and register handguns would cost democrats their seats and tip control of the senate and house - but didn't see that happen in the last midterm election - when you had the Dem. Governor removed from office due to criminal charges and replaced by his Lt. Governor - in fact Quin was elected governor - all that despite a nationwide tide that was running against Dem. candidates. I believe if there are enough votes to pass CC legislation with a super majority then there would theoretically be enough votes to override the governor's veto. However the vote counts on close legislation are suspect as often once there are enough votes to defeat passage of a bill - representatives whose votes aren't needed are allowed to vote whatever way will allow them to look good for the next election. Therefore not all those who voted for CC may be solid votes for it. |
February 19, 2012, 05:01 PM | #73 |
Member
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: SE of Memphis
Posts: 43
|
Why is the state letting a city mayor dictate laws to them?
|
February 19, 2012, 09:32 PM | #74 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 21, 2009
Location: Quadling Country
Posts: 2,780
|
Quote:
__________________
Thus a man should endeavor to reach this high place of courage with all his heart, and, so trying, never be backward in war. |
|
February 19, 2012, 11:40 PM | #75 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 28, 2009
Location: North Central Illinois
Posts: 2,710
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|