This is What the Antis Want: Illinois SB 1413 Firearms Registration Act

Minimum_wage_floor_web

Here’s the synopsis of SB 1413, introduced by Illinois State Sen. Jacqueline Y. Collins. It doesn’t have a hope in hell of passing, but it shows what the enemies of firearms freedom are thinking. If you want to call it that . . .

Creates the Firearms Registration Act. Provides that every person in the State must register each firearm he or she owns or possesses in accordance with the Act. Provides that a person shall not purchase or possess ammunition within this State without having first obtained a registration certificate identifying a firearm that is suitable for use with that ammunition, or a receipt demonstrating that the person has applied to register a suitable firearm under the Act and that the application is pending.

Provides that the Department of State Police must complete a background check of any person who applies for: (1) a registration certificate for a firearm that was lawfully owned or possessed on the effective date of the Act, was brought into the State by a new resident, or was acquired by operation of law upon the death of the former owner; or (2) a renewal of a registration certificate unless, within 12 months of the date the renewal application is submitted, the applicant passed a background check conducted by the Department in connection with the applicant’s acquisition of another firearm. Provides exceptions. Amends the Criminal Code of 2012.

Provides that it is a Class 2 felony to sell or transfer ownership of a firearm to another person without complying with the registration requirement of the Firearms Registration Act.

h/t RY]

comments

  1. avatar Red in Texas says:

    Why don’t we just divide up the USA, and see how it goes? Let the antis have their country within a country to do as they wish, and leave the rest of us alone.

    1. avatar CT says:

      Tried that once bout a century and a half ago…didn’t turn out so well.

      1. avatar actionphysicalman says:

        Yeah, if something didn’t work once, that means it can never work, even under wholly different circumstances.

        1. avatar O-Hebi says:

          We could all just take the Demoratic approach and continue to throw more money at it until it sticks. How about a bigger program? If it just saves one persons freedom… Just think of the kids already!

        2. avatar actionphysicalman says:

          O-Hebi – WTF are you talking about? This is a side thread about succession. There is no government program for that to throw money at or save children with.

      2. avatar JeffR says:

        Worked just fine for Czechoslovakia.

        1. avatar Bungameng says:

          That worked mainly because Czechs couldn’t care less if a part of the country they have been subsidizing from their taxes for 70 years decided to secede.

          Not to mention that Czechs are freedom loving atheist people and the Slovak nationalistic catholic ways were simply world apart from that attitude.

          Now, Slovaks are free to hold their gay bashing referendum and Czechs have shall issue concealed carry that includes also semi-auto rifles, which can’t be even legally bought in Slovakia.

        2. avatar Red in Texas says:

          I’m sure a large percentage of the US population feels the same way, I know I do. Too bad it will never happen. 🙁

        3. avatar Yellow Devil says:

          @ Bungameng

          That’s kind of a over generalization of Czechs and Slovakians in regards to religions. My friend from Slovakian said that most of his family and friends back home were at least agnostic if not atheist. Also, although you may to a point be right about subsidies being the reasons why the Czech republic favored dissolution, both countries had strong nationalistic feelings going back to when Czechoslovakia was first founded. It was really only outside circumstances that forced the east and west to be united for so long.

        4. avatar JoshuaS says:

          Bungameng, you are extremely ignorant and foul

          1) The per capita income in Slovakia is about 50% higher than the Czech republic, making Slovakia, which has had one of the fastest growing economies in Europe since the early 2000’s, far wealthier.

          2) Gays are free from discrimination and harassment. Are you butthurt that they passed a law to refuse to recognize the square circle which is “gay marriage”? The state has no authority to define marriage, only to recognize and protect it.

          3) IVF and surrogacy are the only other issues, and both of those are immoral for anyone under Catholic doctrine. So those aren’t a gay issue.

          Disagree with them, but try not to be ignorant in doing so

        5. avatar Bungameng says:

          @Yellow Devil: Slovakia is 80% catholic, Czech Republic is about 85% atheist. Sure, there are atheists in Slovakia and catholics in the Czech Republic, but the general attitude in the society could not be more different (unless we want to talk Poland, the most catholic country in Europe).

          I am not sure by what you mean that Czechoslovakia was nationalist. Did the Czechs want to reinstate their own country after being occupied since losing their part in 30 years’ war? Yes. Did they take Slovaks along, once they asked for it? Yes. Is that nationalism?

          @Joshua S:
          1) Slovak economy did grow nicely in past 15 years, that may be true. They retained growth in 2009-2014 due to government investment on borrowed money, while Czechs had government austerity and decided not to invest money they would have to borrow. Still, Slovak per capita GDP PPP remains lower than Czech, GDP nominal is slightly higher mainly because Czech retain own currency and it is now intentionally undervalued in order to boost exports. However, there are more things to take into consideration. Czech population is still increasing quite significantly, unlike Slovak (once you point to per capita increases, the general population increase needs to be taken into account too). While there are hundreds of thousands of Slovak immigrants (and dozens of thousands studying at Czech universities, many of them who will stay after graduating), there has been next-to-no Czech immigration to Slovakia. The small population increase in Slovakia was mainly due to its gypsy minority, which contributes almost nothing to the economy. While in Slovakia, there are two main economically developed (and wealthy) areas that benefited from the past 15 years of growth, the rest of it remains in 1990, or went slightly backwards. Slovak nationwide unemployment rate is around 13%. Czech is at around 7%.

          So yes, the per capita GDP nominal may be looking good, but there is a reason why hundreds of thousands of Slovaks are emigrating to the Czech Republic and no one is immigrating to Slovakia.

          2) Homosexual people in Slovakia are far from being free from harassment and discrimination. Being openly homosexual in Slovakia is social suicide. While the issues in the past referendum may have been put in a politically correct way, the mayhem that the catholic circles made around it made it clear that Slovakia is no country for anyone with different sexual orientation.

          3) I am not sure what you mean by IVF and surrogacy being the only other issues, but generally the level of freedom in Slovakia is very different compared to the Czech Republic. From freedom of press to gun rights, the two countries went in very different directions since the dissolution.

      3. avatar Duke of Sharon says:

        Didn’t work out well? Rather passive construction isn’t it? The dividing part actually went just fine. It was the not invading other counties and killing their citizens part which the Federal Government got wrong. Kind of seems like the start of a habit in hindsight.

      4. avatar A Hill says:

        … because this act would work so much better than the Long gun registry we already tried up here in Canada right? Not only did it cost a fortune in treasure, it cannot be even proven that it prevented a single crime(unless you include the paper crime of not registering, which a large portion did not do so anyway).

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          Bingo.

          Canada had it, it didn’t work. Canada then junked it.

          Looks like Canada has done the heavy lifting for America on gun registries.

          Let’s be like Canada…

      5. avatar Mike says:

        Eff that, I live behind so-called enemy lines in a collar county to Chicago, few people outside Cook County vote for these eff-wads and my area is very Conservative, I will not vacate my home for these people, I will stay and fight these ignorant fools.

    2. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      Illinois is already divided. We have Cook County, and we have the rest of the state.
      The amazing thing is, millions of people live in cook county, on purpose.
      Go figure.

      1. avatar Omer Baker says:

        Not all is on purpose. I just moved out of C(r)ook and still have property there. Trying to sell. I lived there 90% of my life.

      2. avatar pwrserge says:

        I had to live in Crook County because it was close to work. Then my big boy hair came in and I realized that a 40 minute commute is not a big deal and moved out to Kane. Have never been happier.

        1. avatar Chevelier says:

          I did the same thing. Lived in Chicago and moved out to Kane county. An hour commute to work is a small price to pay for getting out of cook county.

        2. avatar JSIII says:

          Same here, stuck in Crook, moving up to Lake or over to Kane in about a year.

        3. avatar Calvin says:

          There’s this other Lake county you guys should consider. It has freedom and a solvent government. It’s also closer to the Loop than the collar counties. Check it out.

        4. avatar Pwrserge says:

          @Calvin

          I did, but the property costs… Ow… I can buy a mansion and multi-acre estate out by me for a 1500 sq ft house in Lake.

        5. avatar DKMII says:

          I’ll do you guys one better. I’m going from Cook County to Lake County this year…Lake County, Indiana that is. Land of the free and home of the brave.

      3. avatar Chip Bennett says:

        We don’t need to divide the country; we merely need to apply checks and balances to the power wielded by the City-States. The Constitution is wholly inadequate to deal with such City-States. Federally, they should be treated as separate States, with their own representatives/senators, and with their own bloc of electoral votes.

        1. avatar Chris says:

          I’m pretty sure the founders could never have forseen the abominations that are NYC or LA.

          Cities with more population than the entire nation in 1787.

        2. avatar Nick says:

          Wouldn’t really have much of an impact. Over 80% of electoral votes are distributed based on the population of the states, therefore, they would still have unfair leverage since they have a massive amount of population, while the more rural areas will only have a handful of votes. Think comparison between somewhere like California (~50 votes) where population is huge, to somewhere like my home state where population is a fraction of that and we only get 5 votes.

      4. avatar Former Water Walker says:

        We can’t all live in Rockford like you Curtis. I’m stuck here for now in cook. My town is pretty friendly to gun rights too. I’d love to move a mile away to Indiana- nowhere in Illinois. Chicago is the enemy-not all of cook.

        1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

          I understand. There are people who live under tyranny on purpose, there are people who stay because of reasons beyond their control, and there are people who stay just because they don’t know any better.

          I have reasons to stay in Illinois, in spite of its corrupt, incompetent government.

      5. avatar J- says:

        They already have handgun registration in Chicago, which has done little for their crime rate, and the FOID, which has done even less for their crime rate.

        I lived in Illinois and I know a lot of commuters who live outside Cook county just for the reason of Chicago gun laws. If they try to expand Chicago’s laws to the rest of the state, there will be a fight.

    3. I think in the long run (probably not in my lifetime) that it will be that way de facto. The state is losing legitimacy and people’s confidence is shaken.

      As a consequence, people will turn to each other and do their best to take care of themselves in the ensuing financial decline, security decline etc. They’ll just try and avoid the state coming to “help” them as much as possible and lay low.

      Pretty depressing, but that’s my prediction. I hope I’m wrong.

      1. avatar Frank Masotti says:

        Well some counties and towns in New York are trying to ceased to other states due to fracking. Gun rights might cause the same thing.

    4. avatar Texsylvanian says:

      Remember, statist ideas are always compulsory. It doesn’t matter if a New York law wouldn’t be a good fit for rural Texas. They WILL force a square peg into a round hole. Their self styled elitism demands no less than the universal adoption of the laws they want. First, because they truly feel that they know what’s good for you better than you do… even though they probably haven’t spent any significant amount of time outside of a major urban center. Second, so there will be no successful counter-comparison to undermine their ideology. Third, because nothing pleases a statist more than lording their desires over others.

      So you’ll notice a common theme: statist ideas are ALWAYS compulsory, ALWAYS universal, ALWAYS involve more government power, ALWAYS involve more government spending and almost always involve punishing productive citizens who aren’t the ones creating victims.

    5. avatar Dale says:

      That’s already been tried (Washington DC vs Virginia) and you know what, the refrain was “well we still can’t get the utopian paradise we want because guns are so freely available in Virginia and criminals keep bringing them into DC”

    6. avatar Marcus (Aurelius) Payne says:

      Because their mindset does not allow them to live and let live. When their totalitarian failed, they would blame it on our success, and demand that we implement their policies. When we didn’t, they would encourage their citizens to emigrate under any false pretense necessary, infiltrate our governments and education system until we had to split again or were successfully subjugated.

      How do you think the U.S. got to the condition it’s in now?

  2. avatar Shannon's Pimp says:

    OK, can we do the same with EBT cards and background checks? Felons and the chronically unemployed would be filtered out of the system, yeah, I didn’t think so.

    1. avatar Texsylvanian says:

      They might delete you but your name is full of win anyways…

  3. avatar pwrserge says:

    Yeah… Even in Illinois this bill has no chance in hell of passing. I think I could hear the down-state Democrats laughing all the way from where I am. This is yet another example of a Chiraq fantasy.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      How many years were cigarette companies sued before the victories started to pile up?

      That’s the litigation model they are using…

  4. avatar Davis Thompson says:

    Yeah. Cause so many New Yorkers registered their ARs.

  5. avatar George says:

    There are too many dangerous books written. I think book purchases and library cards should come with a background check. We don’t, for example, want the wrong people reading radical texts like “The Art of War” or “Civil Disobedience”.

    People wanting these texts should have licenses and background checks.

    It is just common sense.

    1. avatar Texsylvanian says:

      That day will come.

    2. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “There are too many dangerous books written.”

      The ‘Boston Bombers’ learned how to make pressure cooker bombs from the internet.

      Dangerous web pages must be identified and local law enforcement notified so internet users could be brought in for questioning to make sure they aren’t budding terrorists.

      If you aren’t doing anything illegal, you have nothing to worry about

      It’s just common sense…

  6. avatar Julio says:

    Sounds like the current Mexican gun registry system…

  7. avatar fedlaw says:

    Ms. Collins has some anti-Second Amendment background, having worked with the noted Fr. Pfleger (who threatened to snuff out the owner of a gun shop) and the heroine of Benghazi, H. R. Clinton, but this proposed Bill is more likely what is quaintly termed in Chicago as a “fetcher” bill. Fetcher bills are proposed laws designed to fetch campaign contributions rather than having any substantive content or serious chance of being enacted.

  8. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    Illinois has a $9 Billion budget deficit and $111 Billion in unfunded pension liabilities, and the Dummycrats are spending their time on crap like this.

    1. avatar Pantera Vazquez says:

      Wag the dog……….?

    2. That was going to be my comment but on the National scale. Why are Democrats so fixated on dismantling the 2nd amendment while Rome is burning from an $18,000,000,000,000 debt?
      Before you righteous Libertarians jump on me, let me say that the debt is bipartisan. But Republicans are not going after our guns. The republicans are the only ones to draft a serious budget in 6 years. The Republicans are the only ones complaining about the debt. The Democrats only say “well Bush did it too”. Well Mr. and Ms. Democrat, if you hate Bush so much why don’t you do the opposite and STOP SPENDING MONEY WE DON’T HAVE!

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        Amen to that. I’m an Independent Constitutional Conservative. While the Bush administration did tack on a significant amount of debt (with bipartisan support of the war during the initial stages), the current debt drivers are solidly Democrat. Incidentally, Dems are also stumping for open borders, preventing voter ID, and massive amounts of gun control. To be followed by even more gun confiscation.

        In my youth I thought the best way to take over a nation was by military force. The easiest way to defeat the US is to simply let us continue spending our nation to death. Add a little gun control and anti-American leaders and you are well on your way. It just requires a bit more patience.

        1. After I wrote the above comment, I had a terrible thought. Without getting too Alex Jones here, what if gun control is tied to the debt and the inevitable cutbacks required to save our economy? Remember the Austerity protests in the UK in 2011? When we eventually cut entitlements in America, the riots that will erupt here will make England’s event look like a cake walk.
          We that have a job and plenty of guns will make out okay. Those on the dole will have to get a job, any job or they may turn to violent protests. They are overwhelmingly Democrat voters. The Democrats may want to disarm the public in advance of giving the go ahead to austerity in order to preserve their voting base.
          The Progressive plan will have run its course once The Government controls the people by force. But before that can happen, there will be terrible destruction. We have had hints of it during the Occupy movement. The real fight following the cuts will be a thousand fold. The only way to avoid this I see is to have massive economic growth while making small cutbacks to entitlements. That seems like a good Republican plan. The Democrat plan is to spend into oblivion then clean up the mess left over and declare pure Statism.

        2. avatar BigDinVT says:

          @Michael in GA, that’s pretty much what I believe our founding fathers had in mind when they wrote the 2A. The Government should NEVER be more powerful than the people. In order for our citizens to protect their freedoms they must be prepared and able to defend it by force if need be.

          But now the current trend will result in the government having more power and our citizens having no way to protect liberty. The toppling of our economy through insurmountable national debt will result in a citizenry dependant on social programs to survive.

          The fact that close to half of the U.S. population is already receiving some sort of federal assistance bears this out.

      2. avatar Marcus (Aurelius) Payne says:

        I get down on the repubs’ for their shortcomings and all the things they don’t do, bit then I think of the media and ask myself if I would even know if they were doing the things I want them to do.

  9. avatar LJM says:

    I’m so glad I no longer live in Cook County, Will is so much more friendly.

    Illinois is a deeply divided State, the difference between Illinois and New York, the collar counties and downstate politicians hold a much greater sway in Springfield than their upstate NY counterparts.

    1. avatar Roscoe says:

      As it should be.

      No state should be lorded over by a single or a few concentrated liberal progressive statist metro areas to the detriment of vast portions of the rest of the state.

  10. avatar Scorpion says:

    Even if this bill has no chance to pass, it is still important that anyone introducing a bill like this is punished politically. From 2011 data, Ms. Collins’ district is 52% African-American. This is why showing African-Americans that gun rights should be embraced is so important. The people in her district need to show her that there are lines in the gun rights discussion that should never be crossed, and she will be voted out if she does.

    1. avatar Red in Texas says:

      Yeah, good luck with that. I would be willing to bet she is involved in a lot of “freebies” legislation at the state level. Her re-election will always be assured. Not having to work for things, will always be more important than the 2A, to some people,.

      1. avatar Roscoe says:

        ‘Zactly.

        ‘Free Cool-Aid here…’

        ‘Come get your free Cool-Aid here…just bring me your vote.’

      2. avatar Scorpion says:

        You’re right. But that shouldn’t stop us from trying. How about an “NRA phone”?

  11. avatar Jay in Florida- says:

    And pigs have wings and fly too…………
    Good luck with that one lady.

  12. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Hey lady-
    Sieg Heil

  13. avatar TJ Reeder says:

    I’m very lucky in that I’m retired and have enough income to allow me to do as I wish so it’s easy for me to say ” Why don’t all the Americans” move the hell out of places like Commifornia, Commarodo, Ill A noises, and any other state that has these socialist leanings, if the “Good” folks left, it would free up jobs for the ones who don’t/can’t want to work, and then the liberal money tree would die from lack of green ($$) blood.

    But I understand why they don’t leave, I’m living in Texas but I hear people saying Texas will go Blue soon, if it does I’m out of here, Maybe to the most gun free, people free state out there Oklahoma!

    I already boycott the purchase of any new any guns or ammo from any company that stays in NY, Ill, CN, CA, CO or any of the other Socialist states, why subsidize their liberal agenda? Of course that don’t mean I don’t buy used lol,, just NO MORE New! until they do as Magpul did and move. And yes the can move and will if their sales drop off.
    If I were a gun Mfgr I’d move everything to Okla or Texas or Wyo.

    One day I see the nation split in two, it can’t go on this way, the Liberal population centers are running the country and to a point “MY LIFE” and that shit ain’t gonna continue.

    A last question….. Why are all these liberal Socialist bra burners such ugly skanks ?

    1. avatar Raul says:

      I wouldn’t be too quick lumping Illinois in with that crowd. We’re not only fighting the good fight, we are winning. It’s an inch at a time, but we are succeeding. You get out of Cook County and Springfield and even the Dems are fairly conservative. Many, more so than a lot of Republicans.

      This isn’t just with 2A issues, either. The latest was just last week, we shut down an effort to foist that UN Rights of the Child treaty on us (actually an anti-parent treaty). Rainer has been in office less than 2 months and he’s already heading fast for a Scott Walker style confrontation with the Chicago Lib power brokers.

      So takes us off and put NJ in its place.

  14. avatar Nick says:

    What’s worse than the registration is that it criminalizes owning ammo in a caliber you can’t shoot. Sold your only 9mm but kept the ammo? Uh oh! You’re now gonna get arrested. To the anti’s, this is perfection, a gotcha law that many are likely to break. This ideology and the idiots who support it are the enemy and we can’t forget it.

  15. avatar TheSleeperHasAwakened says:

    You need Registration before Confiscation.

    1. Not really. It still comes down to raiding your home and taking them by force. It makes targeting easier but not needed. See Katrina.
      I think this is a prelude to another failed revenue grab. Register your gun then pay a fee to own and operate. It may also be a deterrent to gun ownership rather than a disclosure of where the guns are.
      Don’t get me wrong. I believe all governments are capable of full blown tyranny and they may one day attempt to confiscate all weapons. But I think this is more of an obstacle that they are trying to throw in the way of the gun trade on the whole. They truly believe the gun is the root of all evil.

  16. avatar chadwick p. says:

    No wonder she hates guns. She dresses like a wild animal. I wonder if that’s her “stroll through the forest” outfit?

  17. avatar Bob says:

    How dare that lady kill a leopard and wear it’s skin. Where’s somebody with a bucket o’ blood? /sarc

    I think we need to find something the anti’s love and work to make that illegal. Or I’ll find a hobby that is double plus hateful to them and take that up out of spite.

  18. avatar Jeff says:

    How will this bill change criminal behavior? If hackers get into this proposed database, imagine the increase in burglaries and home invasions!

  19. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    BTW I became politically active and joined TTAG because of b###hes like this Illinois hag. It gets real old my vote doesn’t count in cook co.

  20. avatar John L. says:

    (2) a renewal of a registration certificate unless, within 12 months of the date the renewal application is submitted, the applicant passed a background check conducted by the Department in connection with the applicant’s acquisition of another firearm.

    I wonder if she realizes this is an incentive to buy at least one gun per year …

  21. avatar Anonymous says:

    That’s petty psychotic. What’s their legislative plan for kitchen knives?

    More felons – lets make more felons! Did the hurt or bother anyone else? No? Felonies! Yay.

  22. avatar (Formerly) MN Matt says:

    Huh, I never really understood dazzle camouflage until now. It actually forces you to look away. O.o

  23. avatar MarkPA says:

    I wonder if we need to mount a peremptory attack on the idea of gun registration.
    We are more or less convinced that the Antis want UBC as a back-door to registration. Would they continue their campaign if they could NOT get a UBC with an effective registration scheme? How could we pre-form the battlefield so that the Anti’s would have to overcome 2 obstacles vs. just 1? Then the UBC proposition would appear to be more daunting.
    So, let’s separate UBC from registration, just for a moment.
    We tell the public and the legislators that we don’t like UBC for the various reasons independent of the back-door registration implications. Even if we could imagine some UBC scheme without registration, we oppose UBC.
    Now, what about registration? We have a long history of Congressional opposition to registration and for good reason. Now, add additional reasons.
    The NFA registry has been in effect for 70 years. How has the ATF been doing in keeping up with this registry? We have anecdotal evidence that they have problems with keeping this registry up-to-date. Before there is any talk of extending any registry beyond NFA weapons, Congress must commission a thorough audit of the NFA registry to see how well it is working. No point in even considering anything new without knowing how well things have been.
    Several States have registries for some, if not all, types of guns. Congress ought to commission a study of these registries as well. If NY or CA can’t maintain correct registries how would we expect the Federal government to do much better?
    Canada has recently tried to impose a broadened registry scheme and failed to the point of abandoning it. Congress certainly ought to study this attempt and failure before embarking on a new adventure.
    There must be safeguards to protect citizens from the failures of government clerks. It is unconscionable to punish an innocent citizen for a paperwork violation caused by government negligence. Until adequate safeguards are devised, we will not submit to any such scheme.
    Some system must be devised to ensure that a registry – were it created – would be used exclusively for legitimate law-enforcement purposes in investigating a real crime beyond some mere paperwork error. E.g., a lawyer in the government’s employ would have to review an affidavit and assume individual liability for it’s completeness and accuracy. Then a judge would have to grant a warrant to pursue the paperwork trail.
    Some system would need to be devised to ensure that the registry were never complete enough to support a confiscation. E.g., it would have to be limit the trail to some reasonable period such as 5 or 10 years.
    The paperwork reduction act would require that whatever scheme devised, its costs would have to be estimated and measured against the benefits to be derived. That would require an evaluation of the efficacy of the existing tracing scheme for 4473 forms kept by FFLs. If few FFL traces result in information valuable to resolving a crime then Congress would have to question whether all the expense of any registry would be well spent.
    I’m just getting started with lines of inquiry. Obviously, if the PotG gave the matter enough thought, the proposition of a gun registry – however it might be formed directly or back-door – would be so daunting that the public wouldn’t buy into it. Moreover, Congress wouldn’t want to chase down this rabbit hole. All we really have to accomplish is to persuade Congress that we can tie them up on the registration issue; and, that we are prepared to dos.
    Circle back. Now, how do the Anti’s propose to implement UBC without leading to the rabbit-hold represented by the gun-registration issue? They would have to come up with a really clever UBC with no registration implications; or, prepare to face the onslaught of the fight against registration.

  24. avatar Jeff, Alabama says:

    I swear. They’re gonna try to make it a crime to buy ammo for dad for father’s day without first owning a registered firearm of the same caliber. Man.

  25. avatar Chip in Florida says:

    So comply with our new rules for firearms ownership or become a felon and loose your rights regarding firearms.

    Is this from an elected official? Can we start a recall election?

    1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      She was elected in a district where the voters (and I use that term loosely) wouldn’t know the Constitution if they accidentally pissed on it. Other concepts foreign to most of her district: employment, marriage, home ownership, etc.

      1. avatar BlueBronco says:

        Wait until 2020 when we have about 50 million “new” “Americans” on the voter rolls.

  26. avatar John Dennis says:

    Do they all have to look the same?

  27. avatar RaulYbarra says:

    Every time I see a story about this Collins lady, I keep hearing in my head Ronald Reagan telling Jimmy Carter, “There you go again.” The problem is that if we don’t post these stories, eventually her insanity will get through the legislature.

  28. avatar Icabod says:

    The solution is very simple. We pass a law that makes it illegal to commit a criminal act with a gun! After all it with do as much good as registration. /sarcasm off.

  29. avatar Robert Halton says:

    Nope! Will Not Comply!

  30. avatar Freeheel says:

    If Obama had a sister…..

  31. avatar Charles Durham says:

    These politicians need to do research before coming up with these new proposals. UCC Article 9, private property needs not be registered.

  32. avatar BlueBronco says:

    This is called the Nelson “Pete” Shields model. He advocated registering all guns as a first step and later banning them. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out why he was for registration first. He was one of the early leaders of the Handgun Control Inc. The ass-hat died in 1993 but many of his schemes live on. He started this strategy back in the 1970s.

  33. avatar lulu hughes says:

    It has been years since I worked or shot a USPSA Nationals…and the constant return to PASA/Barry, IL was the reason. Seeing this and hearing that USPSA is again holding Nationals at PASA; all I can do is ask really, why…this state does not want shooters there. You tax dollars go to Cook Country, not Pike/Adams Counties.

    Its time for shooters to start protecting their rights with their checkbooks; but it seems not enough are willing to miss “the big event” or not hunt the deer of Pike/Adams to make a point. The age old tale of it won’t make a difference seems to be the never ending excuse. Sorry my principles and rights mean far more than a deer or pistol match.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email