Cook County Wants “Gun Team” to Collect Revoked FOID Cards

 Chicago SWAT team (courtesy boloreport.com)

Cook County doesn’t like legal firearms ownership. The Chicago machine is doing everything it can to make it as difficult as possible for law-abiding residents to exercise their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms under the new statewide concealed carry law. Put another way, “Cook County officials are concerned people who are not qualified to carry firearms will inadvertently be issued state permits allowing them to carry weapons for self-defense.” That’s nwitimes.com‘s take on the matter. Specifically . . .

One of the qualifications for getting a concealed carry permit is that an individual first have a firearm owner’s identification card.

But within Cook County, the sheriff’s department estimates that about 4,000 people have had their FOID card privileges revoked. Yet that does not mean the actual card has been taken away from them.

Cook County Commissioner Edwin Reyes, a former Illinois State Police trooper, introduced a resolution Wednesday that calls for the county sheriff, the state police and municipal police departments to create a “gun team” going after people whose cards have been revoked to prevent them from trying to use the credential to get a concealed carry permit.

The resolution was referred to the County Board’s law enforcement subcommittee, where Reyes said he’d like to see all the law enforcement agencies have hearings to help figure out a procedure for regaining revoked FOID cards.

Those hearings have yet to be scheduled, although Reyes said he’d like to see them take place later this month.

There have been cases where convicted felons have used revoked FOID cards for a private firearms transaction. Which is . . . wait for it . . . illegal. There have also been cases where letters requesting revoked FOID cards have gone to old addresses. So yes, a citizen should return a revoked FOID card.

But sending a team to get them? And what then? We all know that Chicago’s “gun team” would be about more than simply collecting bits of plastic. What are the odds they’d be a fully-equipped SWAT team nosing around for guns as well?

And after they were finished, then what? Would they disband? Would they, hell. The last thing Chicago needs is a bunch of anti-gun goons knocking on the doors of lawful gun owners. Sorry, another bunch of anti-gun goons knocking on the doors of lawful gun owners. Or some wrong address.

Sec. 8. The Department of State Police has authority to deny an application for or to revoke and seize a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card previously issued under this Act only if the Department finds that the applicant or the person to whom such card was issued is or was at the time of issuance:

(a) A person under 21 years of age who has been convicted of a misdemeanor other than a traffic offense or adjudged delinquent;

(b) A person under 21 years of age who does not have the written consent of his parent or guardian to acquire and possess firearms and firearm ammunition, or whose parent or guardian has revoked such written consent, or where such parent or guardian does not qualify to have a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card;

(c) A person convicted of a felony under the laws of this or any other jurisdiction;

(d) A person addicted to narcotics;

(e) A person who has been a patient of a mental institution within the past 5 years or has been adjudicated as a mental defective;

(f) A person whose mental condition is of such a nature that it poses a clear and present danger to the applicant, any other person or persons or the community;

For the purposes of this Section, “mental condition” means a state of mind manifested by violent, suicidal, threatening or assaultive behavior.

(g) A person who is intellectually disabled;

(h) A person who intentionally makes a false statement in the Firearm Owner’s Identification Card application;

(i) An alien who is unlawfully present in the United States under the laws of the United States;

(i-5) An alien who has been admitted to the United States under a non-immigrant visa (as that term is defined in Section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(26))), except that this subsection (i-5) does not apply to any alien who has been lawfully admitted to the United States under a non-immigrant visa (j) (Blank);

(k) A person who has been convicted within the past 5 years of battery, assault, aggravated assault, violation of an order of protection, or a substantially similar offense in another jurisdiction, in which a firearm was used or possessed;

(l) A person who has been convicted of domestic battery, aggravated domestic battery, or a substantially similar offense in another jurisdiction committed before, on or after January 1, 2012 (the effective date of Public Act 97-158). If the applicant or person who has been previously issued a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card under this Act knowingly and intelligently waives the right to have an offense described in this paragraph (l) tried by a jury, and by guilty plea or otherwise, results in a conviction for an offense in which a domestic relationship is not a required element of the offense but in which a determination of the applicability of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(9) is made under Section 112A-11.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963, an entry by the court of a judgment of conviction for that offense shall be grounds for denying an application for and for revoking and seizing a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card previously issued to the person under this Act;

(m) (Blank);

(n) A person who is prohibited from acquiring or possessing firearms or firearm ammunition by any Illinois State statute or by federal law;

(o) A minor subject to a petition filed under Section 5-520 of the Juvenile Court Act of 1987 alleging that the minor is a delinquent minor for the commission of an offense that if committed by an adult would be a felony;

(p) An adult who had been adjudicated a delinquent minor under the Juvenile Court Act of 1987 for the commission of an offense that if committed by an adult would be a felony; or

(q) A person who is not a resident of the State of Illinois, except as provided in subsection (a-10) of Section 4.

(Source: P.A. 96-701, eff. 1-1-10; 97-158, eff. 1-1-12; 97-227, eff. 1-1-12; 97-813, eff. 7-13-12; 97-1131, eff. 1-1-13.)

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

71 Responses to Cook County Wants “Gun Team” to Collect Revoked FOID Cards

  1. avatarST says:

    First California, now Illinois .

    What’s next,a tac squad built to seize your books if your library card lapses?

  2. avatardwb says:

    i wondered why we need an actual team. Can’t they just check before they issue the card and not issue the carry card? Just because you have a card, or an ID, does not make it valid. I dont see why we need a swat team to take some plastic. but then, I would.

    • avatarSoccerchainsaw says:

      Exactly. Perhaps they’re afraid of their own incompetance? That must be it.

      • avatardwb says:

        I doubt that they are even aware of their own incompetence, let alone afraid of it.

      • avatarCliff H says:

        “(g) A person who is intellectually disabled;”

        Covers a pretty wide swath, including most of the people who wrote this law or are public officials in Cook County. If I wanted to be cruel I could also include people who remain in Illinois who do not absolutely have to.

    • avatarSCS says:

      Stop using logic. It confuses the liberal sheeple.

    • avatarBillF says:

      Or why can’t the existing cops do it without “team” status.. It would be a great way to get their hours in while avoiding exposure to real crime and criminals.

  3. avatarSD3 says:

    “S.S.”? nice.

  4. avatarBlue says:

    Illinois agencies shouldn’t be allowed firearms without FOID cards and should be jailed immediately, including their superiors such as Rhamnbutt and Quinn.

    This sounds good on the very thin surface, but ccw permits would require a back ground check and an expired FOID or revoked FOID would come up in the background check anyway.

  5. avatarPat says:

    What’s next take your driver license? How about your birth certificate? More then taking my gun, I worry about taking my family members. They already took people’s homes. When will it stop?

  6. avatarJerry R says:

    That team with that firepower might make a difference in the gang infested areas of Chicago. But of course, they will never use it there. Instead, they want to make a big show of force in areas of the suburbs where little violence is evident. And the gang violence and nightly murders continues.

  7. avatarPeterC says:

    There are many under-21 individuals serving in the military in active combat areas, but gawd fabbid they should have any access to GUNZ! I would classify Chicago as an active combat area, but with any luck, none of our military will be assigned there.

  8. avatarBlue says:

    Interesting pick with an armored vehicle with S.S. on the side of it on U.S. streets. I am certain my grandfather and great uncles fought and spilled blood to keep that from happening. Quinn and Rhamn should be shipped to Nuremberg for trial and hanging.

  9. They’ve been doing this for awhile now with mixed results. Most of the time the people they’re after aren’t home so they just leave. As for Chicago sending in SWAT teams, that’s unlikely given the so few resources the CPD has available nowadays. When there are nights when response times are in the multiple hours range, it says they’re strapped for bodies and money. FOID cards aren’t a priority. The burbs? Sure, SWAT away. They don’t have much else to do anyway.

    Illustrating Chicago’s Murders, Homicides, Violence and Idiocy at heyjackass.com

  10. avatarA-Rod says:

    If the names of SWAT Team members like this were public knowledge things like this would not happen.

  11. avatarJay1987 says:

    Whoo gotta roll heavy man them soccer moms with guns are worse than the gangs.

  12. avatarTimbo says:

    You left off the following regulation;

    (r) No card shall be issued it is a day ending in “Y”

  13. avatarKCK says:

    To elaborate dwb’s point above:
    In the Olden days, a piece of paper/card was what you carried to show authorities you were OK for what ever activity for which the card was issued. Yes there was a gap between expiration or revocation where the card would appear to be valid. If Central got a call from a cop about a permit, a clerk would have to go to the dungeon and pull the paper file. Hardly workable for instant street validation. Now, your cards (FOID) only real purpose is to carry a number. That card/permit number is called in every time it is shown for official purpose. It will be validated by the central computer data base just like your DL. Nobody comes to collect your DL after it expires. If they can’t flag that FOID in the data base so that it shows up as no longer valid during a gun purchase or other interaction with police, there is something wrong with their system.
    In this modern era, with a computer in every squad and a call in from ever FFL transaction, the card itself is useless. If they are telling people they need to go collect the FOID cards, it is cover for them to come into your home and screw with both the 2A and 4A.

    • In Illinois, a retailer selling you ammunition doesn’t call in your card – they just make sure it isn’t expired per the printed expiration date.

      Not suggesting these things should be checked live by any means.

      As you said, when it comes to law enforcement, they’re calling it in but non-law enforcement interactions are typically just based on the holding of an unexpired card. I’m not even sure if a gun purchase checks the validity of the card…

      All that said, the problems in Chicago don’t stem from revoked or expired FOID cards; I doubt the folks doing the bulk of the shooting have a FOID.

  14. avatarB says:

    People are going to die if this happens. Ideally it would be the Cook County officials pushing this and not the cops too stupid to not refuse an insane order or a family when they inevitably swat a wrong address. I’m not optimistic though.

  15. avatarAnonymous says:

    The reasons to revoke a FOID card is pretty vague. Really vague. So vague in fact that LEO/state governance could basically revoke your card for any reason they wanted.

    • avatarPig humper says:

      Yup. This +1
      You could get a card revoked for almost anything. The interesting thing is that if your card is revoked you must dispose of your firearms. Give them to someone with a valid FOID or in some cases cops have just confiscated them…

      Of course once a weapon is collected (for sure in Illinois) you need a court order to get it back. And even if you get a court order municipalities have been know to “lose”, destroy, deface and even in some cases flat ignore the court order to return the legal weapon.

      I had a friend who had his FOID pulled after getting in an argument (not physical) at a bar with another patron. The bartender called the cops because of the shouting and within like a week of the arrest the locals and ISP notified him his FOID was revoked due to being detained on suspicion of a violent crime. He got a lawyer but it took 9 weeks to get a judge to order his FOID back.

    • avatarBlue says:

      That will give Quinn & Company the loophole they were looking for since they are now a “shall issue” ccw state. The FOID is a prereq but not a shall issue card.

  16. avatarMarty the Lett says:

    Only one sensical part of the proposal
    (g) A person who is intellectually disabled;

    That means all Democrats and Liberals would be automatically included…

  17. It is my understanding that under the new firearms law in Illinois they are supposed to be setting up an online system to allow sellers to verify that a person’s FOID card is still valid. I would THINK that the CPL issuing authority should be able to use the same system.

    • avatarKCK says:

      As I stated above.

      • I missed that, sorry. But it is also my understanding that they have until July of 2014 to complete that system.

        I was surprised when I read about it, because it is remarkably similar to what Coburn had(has?) in his background check bill, except for the FOID thing of course.

  18. avatarMediocrates says:

    they have to have a reason to call out the new Po-Po bus with the armored tires… any good ole reason will do….

  19. avatarCubby123 says:

    Get used to it aholes,you’ve been illegally denying people their constitutional rights since1968.

  20. avatarDon says:

    Is that actually an un-doctored photograph of the side of their truck??

  21. avatarCulpeper Kid says:

    This is moronic. All they have to do (and I would think this would be part of the process) is to verify the validity of the FOID card in the system where the cards are issued, at the time they receive the application for the CCW permit. which should have been updated when the card was revoked. I’m not saying I like the whole FOID, which I consider unconstitutional, just that this should be a simple part of the process, as long as they have the dumb-ass FOID.

  22. avatarJim says:

    Wait, so is Cook County admitting that the IL government is so incompetent that it cannot cross-check its own databases before issuing a CCW permit? So what if a person still has the stupid physical FOID card? Shouldn’t the state’s own internal system clearly indicate that the FOID has been revoked, and therefore no CCW should be issued to that person? Good lord.

  23. avatarBillC says:

    “(b) A person under 21 years of age who does not have the written consent of his parent or guardian to acquire and possess firearms and firearm ammunition, or whose parent or guardian has revoked such written consent, or where such parent or guardian does not qualify to have a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card;”

    Wait, you need your parents permission if you’re, say 20 years old? That’s ridiculous! I was over 21 when I joined the military, but had many friends that were under 21. You can join and fight for your country without needing parental consent, but damned if you want to buy a shotgun. Fvck that place, again.

    • avatarPig humper says:

      Yes you do. This is in Court in Illinois right now because an 18 or 19 year old that is legal (federally) to buy a shotgun and wants to buy a shotgun cannot, Because the parents will not sign the form. Interesting right? I was out of my house at 18. But for some reason you can vote, enter into contracts, join the military, take out loans, be convicted of crimes as an adult, but cannot buy a gun or ammo of any type without mommy’s signature. OR if mommy has a 20 year old conviction for a violent crime and cannot get a FOID, then neither can you even if she does sign your paper work!

  24. avatarDanny says:

    If they’re going to do that, then the DMV needs to hire armed officers to collect and prosecute people with expired drivers licenses. Cars are even more dangerous than guns if you look at the statistics, as well as used by more Americans. Why should we let people drive illegally in this country?

  25. avatarDefens says:

    I can just see King Leonidas and his Spartans, standing at the top of the pass at Thermopylae, waving his FOIDs card: Molan Labe!!

  26. avatarGs650g says:

    Nothing more than a reason to kick in the door at 4am and flip the place.

  27. avatarRalph says:

    If this is the same Chicago PD tasked with controlling gang violence, I’d say that people with a revoked FOID are quite safe.

  28. avataruncommon_sense says:

    “Cook County Commissioner Edwin Reyes … introduced a resolution … that calls for … a ‘gun team’ going after people whose cards have been revoked to prevent them from trying to use the credential to get a concealed carry permit.”

    Oh come on. Does Mr. Reyes really think that an applicant is going to flash their FOID card and get a carry license? So the Illinois State Police are not going to check every applicant’s FOID status on their electronic database before approving their concealed carry license?

    This is nothing more than an excuse to exert heavy-handed tactics on the citizens of Illinois. This stinks to high-heaven.

    And another important comment. Concealed carry licenses are a carry-over from the Industrial age when police had no way of knowing whether or not someone was “legitimately in possession of a handgun”. These days, police can simply call their dispatchers and verify instantly if someone is a “prohibited person” in terms of firearm possession. The entire premise for concealed carry licenses no longer exists and we should eliminate them in all states as a simple cost saving measure. Of course that would make concealed carry easier for citizens and the government doesn’t want that. Whose side is government on?

  29. avatarDaveL says:

    Does seizing a document really warrant a visit from the SWAT team? Send them a letter with a postage-paid envelope. If you don’t get the card back in 30 days, issue a bench warrant.

    • avatarThe Original Brad says:

      Damn you beat me to it Dave – see my comment (submitted after yours) below.

    • avatarJim R says:

      This way the local government gets to show the peons who’s boss.

    • avatarGS650G says:

      what is the fun in sending letters when you can drive the APC up to the house and throw grenades in. Then as the cameras roll tape of you frog marching someone out in their underwear after taking the dog out.
      Turn the rooms upside down and break up the furniture. Confiscate the 10/22 and a box of bullets and call it a job well done.

      Meanwhile down the street people are being killed for no reason other than being on the street at the wrong time.

      But at least we got that expired FOID card back and that dangerous assault rifle off the streets.

  30. avatarThe Original Brad says:

    How about sending a letter to the revoked FOID holder and telling them to turn in their cards or risk arrrest. Include a SASE so they can just drop it back in the mail and done. My guess is you’d get a lot back that way. For those that have moved or refused, get a two person team to try and relocate them and conduct a field stop at some point and politely ask for the card back. You’d probably get a few more then. Some you won’t get back at all, but the risk to the public and civil liberties in general from a SWAT style operation is not worth the risk of a few firearms out their in the hands of people who could care less about the revoked FOID in the first place.

    In my view this is uneccessary and highly dangerous. Watch, there will be some serious sh1t from this policy very soon. I see dogs dying and WWII vets getting shot by “accident”.

  31. avatarFYI says:

    http://boloreport.com/south-side-chicago-swat-well-ssert-fundraiser

    The mission of the South Suburban Emergency Response Team is to provide member agencies with a tactical response to critical incidents, which are defined as but not limited to the following:Armed/Suicidal Subject(s)
    Barricaded Subject(s)
    Hostage Situations
    Sniper Situations
    High-Risk Apprehension
    High-Risk Warrant Service
    Dignitary Protection
    Civil Disturbances
    Disaster Assistance
    Terrorist Incidents
    Special Assignments

    The Women’s Tactical Association is dedicated to bringing training to female LE in firearms, fitness, tactics & combat mindset.

  32. avatarnemsis says:

    Maybe they should put together a team to catch the 75% of murderers that get away in Chicago

  33. avatarsagebrushracer says:

    This seemed appropriate: “Alas, you’re now in the hands of the SS.”

  34. avatarSteve D. says:

    So let me get this right…
    The problem is they’re sending FOID revokation letters to old addresses…
    And the best solution they could come up with is to send a dedicated SWAT team to the old address instead!??

    I smell bullshit. They’re probably going to use the SWAT team for random Gestapo type home inspections on legal firearm owners.

    • avatarBlue says:

      What percentage of these para-military cop units are going to go to the wrong house? Plus, if the address is old, it could very well be that a new family lives there.

  35. avatarPeterZ in West Tennessee says:

    I’m sorry, Officer. I lost my FOID in a tragic boating accident on Lake Michigan.

    • avatarBlue says:

      You will have to speak loudly. There will be gunfire from them shooting your dog, cat and throwing the wife on the front lawn in handcuffs.

  36. avatardan says:

    a police state does not ask permission or obey any laws…they are above the law….names and addresses of all public officials paid with tax payer monies…needs to be made public and maybe some of those that order and some of those that enforce..such unjust and unlawful orders would be exposed and liable for damages and such …….imho

  37. avatarMark N. says:

    It is obvious that Reyes doesn’t want to just collect cards–he would have to be incredibly dense believe that anyone could purchase a firearm or get a CCW win expired FOID–and as a politician and ex-cop, I really don’t think he’s that stupid. Rather, he is assuming that all the anti-gun soccer moms are that stupid and will support his measure, whose true and sole purpose is to authorize warrantless searches of homes to seize guns and make arrests for illegal weapons possession

  38. avatarPat says:

    Hey morons, stop voting libtard (democrat). That way, you wont have to deal with any more effing gun grabbing laws.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.