Illinois Legislator Harris Sneaks “Terrorist Watch List” Gun Ban into Police Training Bill

You may recall that Connecticut Governor Malloy recently decided to sign an executive order to add citizens on the “No-Fly List” to the state’s list of prohibited firearms purchasers. As we’ve mentioned here many times, the feds’ “No-Fly List” is a secret government enemies list that denies Americans their Constitutionally protected right to due process. Anyone who supports removing gun rights from people on the List might as well revoke their Eight Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment. And by that we mean proto-fascists like Illinois Representative Greg Harris who’s added this little ditty to HB4359 amending the Land of Lincoln’s Firearm Owners Identification Card Act . . .

Provides that the Department of State Police has authority to deny an application for or to revoke and seize a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card (FOID card) previously issued under the Act if the Department finds that the applicant or the person to whom the card was issued is or was at the time of issuance a person named on the consolidated Terrorist Watchlist maintained by the Terrorist Screening Center administered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Note: Rep. Harris goes one better/worse than Malloy. Harris wants to expand the gun purchase possession ban to anyone on the Terrorist Watchlist (of which the “No-Fly List” is a subset). Although secret, the Terrorist Watchlist is said to contain the names of over a million Americans, none of whom have been charged or convicted on any terrorist-related offense.

They’re coming out from under the rocks folks. Just sayin’….

[h/t BP]


  1. avatar Kyle says:

    Hopefully a court will strike these down. There is some comfort in the fact that even some gun controllers recognize the dangers with this.

    1. avatar Mr. AR-10 says:

      Why do we need a court? This is unconstitutional on its face.

      Blatant tyranny.

      1. avatar J says:

        I have never seen the Constitution tested so much as it has been in the last few years.

        1. avatar Five says:

          If we’d been alive to see FDR, then this would be fairly similar. FDR threatened to stack the Supreme Court, Obama just blackmailed Roberts.

      2. avatar Kyle says:

        Yeah, so are all the assault weapons bans, but unless you want to defy the law and risk prison if caught, it’s a lot nicer if a court strikes the thing down. This law is also an example of how gun registries lead to gun confiscation.

        1. avatar MIkeP says:

          The problem here is the concept of “standing”. No matter how obviously unconstitutional any law or EO is, no court will entertain a lawsuit until someone can demonstrate “harm”, and in the case of criminal statutes or EOs that create crimes out of thin air, it means someone has to be arrested and charged under that law. So someone has to whip their junk out and slap it on the chopping block to challenge it

        2. avatar doesky2 says:

          Well in the case of this new law nobody has to get arrested. They simply have to go in and try to purchase a gun and get turned down. Then they can sue. A pro gun group should find a sympathetic person that is on the list and get them to try to purchase a gun.

      3. avatar ButtMunch says:

        Would any of you convict someone for shooting/killing this tyrant?

        1. avatar Aerindel says:

          What makes you think any of us will be allowed to choose?

    2. avatar Researcher says:

      This is no less than a Blacklist. This is a redo of the Hollywood Blacklist.

      It is a list that is secret and even the qualifications to get on it are secret.

      The Hollywood Blacklist had until recently been like the Alcohol Prohibition “moment” in history. A grand attempt to make society safer that were “epic” fails. The Hollywood Blacklist has apparently been forgotten by the media, politicians and “Hollywood”.

      The Wikipedia entry IMO actually downplays the damage and ignorance of the Blacklist idea.
      The Hollywood Blacklist “was the mid-20th-century practice of denying employment to screenwriters, actors, directors, musicians, and other U.S. entertainment professionals because of their suspected Communist sympathy or membership in the Communist Party. Artists were barred from work on the basis of their alleged membership in or sympathy with the Communist Party USA and refusal to assist investigations into the party’s activities. Even during the period of its strictest enforcement, the late 1940s through the late 1950s, the blacklist was rarely made explicit or verifiable, but it directly damaged the careers of scores of individuals working in the film industry.”

      Lists like this are not new and are universally despicable for the simple reason that they are inherently flawed and are the path to abuse of human rights and guarantee persecution. The fact that they are done in secret by hidden rules guarantees that the innocent will be persecuted based on the presumption of guilt.

      The existence of lists in a society is prima facie evidence of corruption and incompetence in a republic. This list isn’t about terrorism, or guns it is about using fear for political purposes. If there are people that dangerous then arrest them, charge them with the crime and try them.

      Ref to infamous Blacklists.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        The hollywierd blacklist was of marxists owned by Moscow. Today the list on nonmembers would find on a postcard.

      2. avatar Watts' Twat says:

        This is in NO way comparable to the Hollywood Blacklist. The fact is those on the Hollywood Blacklist WERE “enemies of the state”. they were or had been Communists whose sole aim was the destruction of the USA, when they were exposed they REFUSED to name their accomplices even when given “immunity”.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          The fact is that both lists had zero due process. So it’s the “alleged terrorist” list and the “alleged Communist” list. And when all it takes to get on one is for someone to inform on you, it guarantees that most people on the list are there wrongly.

          Also, being a communist doesn’t make one “enemy of state”. At least, not in a free society.

      3. avatar Watts' Twat says:


        Commie! Commie! Commie! A damned “Red” or at the least a “Pinko”.

        If it wasn’t for the enablers and subversives that undermined and ultimately stopped patriots Sen, Joseph McCarthy and HUAC, Richard Nixon (1950’s Alger Hiss/Elizabeth Bentley cases), Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer (1919), N.Y. State’s Lusk Committee (1919-1921), and the U.S.House of Representatives Dies Committee (1938-1940) all who tried to expose and remove from academia, municipal. county, state, and federal offices the traitors to our nation and Constitution, those who nurtured and mentored our enemy ie, today’s Democrats/Progressives/Liberals (Communists/Socialists) and Cultural Marxists we wouldn’t be having the problems we are having now.

        The fact is I’m probably on a “list”, I know for a fact that I’ve been “reported” for my anti-Obama/Hillary Clinton/Huma Abedin online posts and I’ve been “interviewed”. What was “their” main concern, it was “where” I obtained my information, which was ALL true and backed up with sources going back to when Huma Abedin’s parents (while she was working for Hillary Clinton as an aide to the First “Lady”) petitioned a federal immigration judge in Newark N.J. to let the infamous Blind Sheik Omar Abdul Rakhman (’93 WTC attack) stay in the USA despite his entering the country “illegally”? Do I give a ****? Nope! Why? Because under a patriotic president I like so many others including some who post here will be recognized for ringing the “alarm bells” as to what was happening to our nation.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          So basically your sole problem is with who draws up the lists, and who ends up in the concentration camps. You don’t have any problem with the existence of such camps, or lack of due process, or other constitutional rights and guarantees; just so long as the result is agreeable.

          That would make you a totalitarian. The only thing that remains to be determined is whether you’re a commie or a fascist. That one is fairly simple: you hate commies, therefore, you’re a fascist.

          Congratulations! You even have a representative candidate in this election cycle. Yay for democracy.

        2. avatar Watts' Twat says:


          “Fascist”? Why not go “full Monty” and call me “racist” (I’m “White” and proud), “xenophobic” (I believe in borders and “legal” immigration). “misogynist (I’m “male”), “homophobic “(I’m “straight” and think queers are mentally ill) and “Islamophobic” (many are terrorists/terrorist sympathizers/most believe in Sharia Law/they follow a pedophile “prophet”)?

          BTW: Who makes up all these terms, terms purposely designed to demean and vilify others, terms to which there is no way to disprove the assertion, oh that’s right it’s the same diabolical Communists/Socialists in academia, politics, and the psychiatric profession, the same traitorous Liberals that I referenced above.

          So I’m a “Fascist”? Thank you, Thank you very much (Elvis drawl) I take THAT as a compliment.

          BTW: I’ll be voting for a patriot in the Presidential Primary and his name is Donald J. Trump.

          Help Make America Great Again!

          Vote Trump!

        3. avatar int19h says:

          >> BTW: I’ll be voting for a patriot in the Presidential Primary and his name is Donald J. Trump.

          I rest my case.

        4. avatar Watts' Twat says:


          Hi Chris (Chris Hayes)! Shouldn’t you be at MSNBC’s studio at “30 Rock” taping tonight’s episode of “All In” or commiserating with your gang of “Inners”?

          Vote Trump!

        5. avatar int19h says:

          Sorry, I’m too busy to go to MSNBC – too much time taken by maintaining my collection of weapons of war, that I need to make sure I can fight back in case you guys manage to elect the crazy, after all. Molon Labe! =P

      4. avatar Wade says:

        Simply phenomenal comment. Thank you.

  2. avatar Mark N. says:

    Hopefully there are enough Republicans and conservative downstate Democrats to dump this idiocy. Plus there is the fact that the federal government is EXTREMELY unlikely to turn over its highly confidential list to any state government or state governmental police agency, thus rendering the bill, if it passes, moot.

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      Not so. Illinois could submit a name to the Feds to check on their behalf.

      1. avatar fiun dagner says:

        Voilla unaccountable district attorney or someone of the same legal authority could simply determine that anyone wishing to purchase a gun poses the potential to become a terrorist threat simply because they want to own a gun and it could possibly be used to threaten someone else’s life. then they simply submit the name to the federal government to be added to the terrorist watch list and then no check is required

      2. avatar David says:

        The insane part is that these tyrants don’t even know who is on this list. The list itself is probably illegal on its face (if it includes US Citizens)

        1. avatar int19h says:

          The list is known to contain US citizens – there have been several court cases over it already.

          And it’s still a rights infringement even if it includes non-citizens – everyone is entitled to due process.

      3. avatar Cliff H says:

        Since the list is secret how would you verify that the response was “No Sale”? By denying the sale the local authorities have just admitted that you ARE on the list and blown the secret. Unless they include a clause where they do not have to tell you WHY your purchase is refused, which is another problem altogether.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          >> they do not have to tell you WHY your purchase is refused

          This is exactly how it works for the no-fly list. You’d be denied boarding, but they will refuse to explain why, or even acknowledge that you’re on the list at all. In one of the cases that ACLU took up, it took four years for the feds to even admit that the plaintiff was on such a list – they kept telling the judge that saying “yes” or “no” in response to that question would constitute an irreparable national security breach…

  3. avatar Ralph says:

    Every elected official with a (D) after his or her name should be on the watch list. They are the true terrorists.

    1. avatar Rabbi says:


    2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      Well, they are most certainly on my Special High Information Terrorist list. Also known as the S.H.!. T. list.

    3. avatar Dyspeptic says:

      Every politician, DemocRat or Repulsivecan, who voted for the Patriot Act should be on the list for terrorizing the constitution.

      1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

        The Patriot Act was unpatriotic and actually idiotic.

        1. avatar JSJ says:

          Why restrict it to just those with a (D)? The (R)’s have done plenty of damage. If you’re going to take out the trash, don’t leave half of it behind.

  4. avatar Larry MacNeal says:

    There are some right thinking Illinois politicians. With the help of the NRA, a bill was drafted and submitted for review that would eliminate the oppressive cook county $25.00 sales tax on guns and the 5 cent per bullet tax on center fire ammunition and the penny tax on rim fire ammo. The bill would prevent other municipalities from imposing similar taxes. House bill 4348 was introduced on December 2, 2015. I smell some sort of compromise.

  5. avatar CTstooge says:

    Oh snap. Malloy hates being one-upped by fellow dictators. IT’S ON!!!

  6. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    I realized this possibility when Malloy did his tyrannical deed out east.

    That sure didn’t take long.

    1. avatar Researcher says:

      The Game in Connecticut is that whatever the Obama Administration says Gov. Malloy parrots the party line. I don’t know if it is for preferential treatment in federal grants or just what Party Members of the Dem Party do but there is a real aura of malfeasance to the Malloy administration.

  7. avatar Robert Boyce says:

    I heard from a gun dealer that the ATF is planning to implement – with no action of Congress – a change that would classify all weapons that use a caliber of ammo ever used by any military in the world as the same class as fully automatic weapons and silencers. There would be a requirement that all owners of existing weapons apply for a stamp and all new purchases go thru the much more rigorous licensing process. That this would create the nation wide registration of gun owners is the obvious intent since it will cover basically everything but .22 rim fire weapons. He indicated he got this from a contact at ATF> Have you heard of this?

    1. avatar Ragnar says:

      .22 lr is commonly used in all branches of the military. As is 12 ga. Shells.

    2. avatar Rabbi says:

      Yeah, like that won’t cause a revolt.

    3. avatar Badgerman says:

      I will make sure I will only shoot .223 Remington and .308 Winchester through my AR-15 and AR-10. Never, with the evil 5.56 mm or the 7.62×51 mm. But, alas we need to come up with a nice civilian name for the 7.62×39 mm.

      1. avatar Cj says:

        .300 Slightly Tipsy

      2. avatar boardsnbikes says:

        .300 Whiteout

    4. avatar doesky2 says:

      You and your buddy need to take a break from the hash pipe.

    5. avatar int19h says:

      It’s bullshit. ATF has considerable leeway in creatively interpreting the language of NFA and GCA (like they did with e.g. braces), but they can’t write new language. And there’s nothing there that is even remotely similar to what you’ve described, or that could be turned into such a thing. This would require a new law.

      Now, is such a law possible? In theory, yes. Some countries have such a thing – e.g. Spain. All it does is make people switch to similar “non-military” calibers, like .222 Rem or 9x21mm.

    6. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

      Did the gun dealer also tell you that .45acp can knock a man down, women should only carry revolvers, and that you don’t have to aim a shotgun?

  8. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Well it’s Illinois-I expect worse. Don’t hold your breath waiting for “conservative” dems or Rinos to stand up to back-door gun control either…

  9. avatar rob g says:

    The look on that guy’s face says it all. “Your will be damned. We, the enlightened ones, who know better, will decide for you what’s best. Take your EBT card and Obamaphone, and get back in your Section 8 apartment.”
    I’m not old, but I’m not young anymore, either. I’m NOT giving up any more of my money or my freedom.

  10. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Ugh another Chicago jerk trying to make things safer for his criminal voter base by selling out the constitution. To be blunt, why doesn’t Chicago Cede that way they can keep their corruption. We’re happy to let them have it.

    I thought we weren’t supposed to be giving in to terrorists by changing what we do. Then again, as there were background checks made and gun buyers in these incidents weren’t on terrorist watch lists, that really isn’t changing anything at all because of the watch list.

  11. avatar Mitch says:

    I really don’t intend this as ad hominem, but what is up with his facial hair? It looks like he was trying to grow a mustache but it melted and ran down his face.

    1. avatar CTstooge says:

      This guy’s got a Mussolini thing going.

      Malloy on the other hand looks like Stephen Colbert.

  12. avatar JR_in_NC says:

    Maybe both Malloy and Harris should watch this:

    That’s more mild than federal prison, which is where all these yahoo Progressive Power Mongers belong. (I’m being nice..tis the season).

  13. avatar gs650g says:

    When someone important ends up on The List we will see what happens next. Hillary has earned a spot I’m sure

  14. avatar Chip in Florida says:

    Has the recall campaign started and to whom do I !make the donation check payable to?

  15. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    “… the Department of State Police has authority to … revoke and seize a Firearm Owner’s Identification Card (FOID card) previously issued under the Act if the Department finds that the … person to whom the card was issued is or was at the time of issuance a person named on the consolidated Terrorist Watchlist …”

    I hope everyone sees how dangerous that is. The Illinois State Police would be able to seize someone’s FOID card … then that person would not be able to own their firearms. If the Illinois State Police show up to seize someone’s FOID card, they would also immediately seize their firearms.

    Let that sink in for a spell.

    This is going to get really ugly if this law passes … you couldn’t pay me enough to be a deputy or police officer in Illinois.

  16. avatar Silver says:

    This kind of scenario is exactly why the 2nd Amendment exists. Perhaps some innocent Americans who find their rights suddenly gone thanks to one of the fascist government’s secret lists will feel the same way. These fascists who think they’re untouchable better think twice before assuming their entire constituency is as spineless and treasonous as they are.

  17. avatar Stuki Moi says:

    That place could use some seriously unrestricted Syrian immigration. To refresh the Tree of Liberty if nothing else.

    1. avatar Aerindel says:

      Hey, enemy of my enemy is my friend. As long as the Syrians are willing to fight the US government I’m happy to have them.

      1. avatar Stuki Moi says:

        Put that starkly, I would tend to agree with you. Things get nasty because “our” government fights by pushing decent people in front of them as a shield. I doubt many of those who are doing the actual fighting in Syria, enlisted in order to help protect Obamacare, gun confiscations and bankster bailouts. If war commitments help bring about a quicker national bankruptcy with attendant “we’re not gonna pay it” attitude from the younger generation wrt the national debt, it’s all for the good, though.

  18. avatar Avid Reader says:

    The State’s Attorney in Chicago, Anita Alvarez, is on record stating she opposes the private ownership of firearms. I can easily imagine her office submitting the list of all legal firearms owners in Cook county to this database as a quick and easy way to circumvent the Constitution.

    This won’t affect the gangs, of course. But since law abiding gun owners have a Firearms Owner’s Identification (FOID) card, they would be easy pickin’. And it would be a long and painful process to right that wrong.

  19. avatar Sammy^ says:

    What I see is:

    Step 1 Create a corral. (No Fly List)
    Step 2 Fill the corral with those of your choice. (Like registered gun owners, who , because they own guns are a risk to the flying public. Especially those who belong to an alleged terrorist group like the NRA)

    More than the usual grabber shenanigans, this doesn’t feel.

  20. avatar Kyle says:

    Does ANYONE actually follow the insipid gun laws of this nation anyway?

  21. avatar Sammy^ says:

    It’s all about the economy.

    Go to 26:10

  22. avatar Ironbear says:

    Illinois Representative Greg Harris isn’t a “proto-fascist”. He’s a full on totalitarian.

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