Illinois’ Local Gun Shops Closing in Face of New Dealer Licensing Law

gun dealer licensing law illinois

Courtesy Illinois News Network (ilnews.org)

Illinois’ new Gun Dealer Licensing Act doesn’t even take effect until July, but already it has claimed casualties. A number of small dealers have opted to close their businesses rather than submit to the expensive new rules and regulations.

As of January, 2019, Illinois has 2,464 FFL licensees. Todd Vandermyde of the trade group FFL Illinois estimates that number will fall by at least 30% before the end of the year thanks to the new gun dealer mandates. Many small dealers simply don’t want the hassle or the expense the new law requires.

The Washington Free Beacon has the story:

Several gun dealers in Central and Southern Illinois are closing their businesses rather than pay what they’re saying is thousands of dollars in costs to comply with a law enacted last month.

When he signed the bill into law last month, Gov. J.B. Pritzker said the Gun Dealer Licensing Act was about stopping straw buyers.

“The reason for it is to deter straw purchases so that we can prevent someone from buying a gun for someone else who is not legally allowed to own a gun,” he said at the signing ceremony in Chicago.

For Jim Barnard, 69, couldn’t see a way to afford the cost of compliance with the new law. After more than 4 decades of operation, the owner of Fishman’s Sporting Goods in Girard had to make a tough decision.

“I’m just going to retire, I guess,” he said. “I hope that I can live off of what I’ve saved over the years.”

He made the decision to close his business in late January.

Mick Moore made the same decision for Walnut Creek Shooters Supply in Brownstown after seeing not only the cost of the license and the camera system. but also the uncertainty additional regulations and more fees.

“It’s just not worth it,” he said. “I’ve fought it and fought it but I’m just not up to the fight much longer.”

Over at the FFL Illinois Facebook page, a few dealers talked about their plans.

  • William Dykstra  – I’ll be shutting down mine when my license expires in April. The costs outweigh the benefits at this point for a smaller dealer as it would wipe out most of my current profit to keep up with all the additional costs with annual training, electronic records, video surveillance, alarm systems, and licensing costs that this law requires. No way I can keep it open as a part time thing anymore. I don’t have the capital to expand it beyond that quickly while they expand my costs over the next 3 years with various parts of the law becoming active each year.
  • Kristofer Swinburn – 90 days of video is where I decided to turn in my FFL until I move to IOWA. That’s like (45)terabytes of storage for 4 camera. That’s Sounds like some serious equipment.
  • Mike Weller – We have been open since 2011 and won’t be renewing this go around. We are also asking customers to get their guns out of pawn immediately.
  • Bill Rusher  – I’ll be closing mine.

And Wild Dave’s in Herrin posted an announcement January 17th, just hours after Governor Pritzker signed the measure into law. From Facebook:

OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT:
Due to the new Illinois legislation on gun dealers, Wild Dave’s will be discontinuing gun sales after the current firearms stock is liquidated. We have seen a lot of changes in the firearms business over the last 5 years, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to operate a business that sells firearms. In spite of rising insurance costs, companies that refuse to work with firearms businesses, the inability to market and advertise on social media platforms, competing with big box stores, and increasing online firearm sales that have hurt our retail business, we have tried to hang on to an inventory to accommodate our loyal customers. With the new state licensing fees and requirements that will be put on us, it is no longer worth the liability to us.

We are incredibly sad that this day has come, but we will remain Wild Dave’s! We will be transitioning fully to a Toro and Gravely lawn equipment retailer, small engine service and repair shop, as well as a retailer for utility trailers.

We appreciate your business and loyalty over the last 5 years. We hope to earn your business in the lawn equipment and trailer products and services that we offer.

Visit us soon to take advantage of our remaining firearms and ammunition inventory.

Sincerely,
Brandon Dempsey
Owner, Wild Dave’s

Others have put their dealerships up for sale in an effort to recoup something as they shut down their business.

FFL Illinois’ Todd Vandermyde also noted how this bill will devastate gun shows. “Most of the dealers at gun shows are these small, home dealers who will fold rather than face these new mandates,” Vandermyde said in a phone interview with TTAG. “Imagine what gun shows will look like when 30% of their vendors go away.”

comments

  1. avatar LKB says:

    Brought to you courtesy of those fine folks at Springfield Armory and Rock River Arms.

    Never forget. Never forgive.

    1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

      Bullshit. They worked to defeat it.

      Also, as a general principle.

      “To carry a grudge is like being stung to death by one bee.”
      — William Walton

      1. avatar Ing says:

        Worked to defeat it after they helped create it.

        I’m not giving up the Springfields I already own, but I’m not buying anything from them in the future either.

        “Even the hand of compassion is stung when it strokes a scorpion.”
        Persian proverb

      2. avatar Biatec says:

        No oyu are the problem you allow these companies to be anti gun and do carve outs. Never forgive them unless they provable get gun control repealed what they did was fuck us up the ass

        1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

          You assume the lobbyist acted with their knowledge. Given that he worked for a separate company (with SA and RRA only being on the board, not involved in day-to-day operations) makes that an invalid assumption. In other words, You. Are. Wrong.

          I find it amazing how you spiteful haters completely discount the fact that they promptly fired his ass and shut that company down and actively worked to kill that bill. Those are not the actions of someone who agreed with the lobbyist’s actions.

        2. avatar Biatec says:

          Family members from the owners were involved with that vote. What are you talking about? You are part of the problem. I’m tired of giving up more and just forgiving traitors. it was owned by them even if somehow they didn’t know they owned the lobbying group it’s their responsibility.

        3. avatar EWTHeckman says:

          @Biatac, you are being belligerently ignorant of how companies—especially ones with corporate boards-— actually work. I award you no points and may God have mercy on your soul.

        4. avatar Biatec says:

          If a gun company has a lobbying group and the gun companies lobbying group approves gun control with a carve out. I will not ever buy their products again. It should make sense to but I guess it won’t. I’m just too belligerent maybe. It is disgusting that you would defend them.

        5. avatar Ian in Transit says:

          I tried to give them the benefit of the doubt when the carve out was originally discovered. It was their behavior during the following 10 days or so that convinced me that both SA and RRA were complicit. Their actions were not those of the innocent. I love my SA firearms and wanted badly to see their name cleared but it just didn’t happen that way. They sold us (particularly IL residents) down the river.

          “You assume the lobbyist acted with their knowledge. Given that he worked for a separate company (with SA and RRA only being on the board, not involved in day-to-day operations) makes that an invalid assumption. In other words, You. Are. Wrong.”

          The “separate company” was the “Illinois Firearms Manufacturers Association” which consisted of the lobbyist, the owners of SA and the owners of RRA. Nobody else. A fact that they tried to deny until tax records went public. It wasn’t a separate company . . . they were the company. Just them. Only them. Only the top level of ownership of each company conspiring together.

          “I find it amazing how you spiteful haters completely discount the fact that they promptly fired his ass and shut that company down and actively worked to kill that bill. Those are not the actions of someone who agreed with the lobbyist’s actions.”

          They did not fire him “promptly”. They made several attempts to explain their way out of it with a constantly shifting series of stories, some of which were proven to be outright lies. It wasn’t until after they were exposed that he was fired and they flipped their position. After the damage was done and the carve out was guaranteed.

          It takes a bit of digging but all the internet history is there to reconstruct the timeline. They fucked us. No way to explain around it.

        6. avatar EWTHeckman says:

          Two days, Ian. The lobbyist and his company was gone before the end of the second day (Tuesday). That is promptly.

          You’re demonstrating the same willful misunderstanding of corporate structures and attacking based on your misunderstanding, not the facts.

        7. avatar Ian in Transit says:

          Promptly . . . after their initial efforts at denying, deflecting and lying didn’t work. Then they got rid of the only employee that existed but could not be kept tabs on and doubled down on a continuing flow of bovine excrement and half-truths. But you are correct that after their carve out was secure they did get around to opposing it.

        8. avatar Hannibal says:

          a “different company” with the same people- and done that way specifically to fool people who can’t tell a scam when they see it.

  2. avatar Ed Schrade says:

    Looks like it’s working as planned. How about a class action lawsuit for depriving citizens from earning a living thru lawful commerce.

    1. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      Better still would be a suit claiming pretext. The new rules are obviously using the color of law to limit pepole’s right to keep and bear arms.

      1. avatar Jim Bullock says:

        “Looks like it’s working as planned. How about a class action lawsuit for depriving citizens from earning a living thru lawful commerce.”

        Civil rights lawsuit, with a dollop of targeting poor people, or perhaps some protected class “disparate impact.”

        Well, we’ll know the SAF, NRA, or similar are serious when they back suits like these as a matter of course. When the anti-people create planitiffs with standing, it’s time to organize as a group to support their claim. Being right isn’t enough, you need the resources to work throught he legal system.

        Plus, the ad campaigns come election time. Civil rights. Targeting poor folks, and disparate impact. Crushing trade, and driving people out of business. Tallies of businesses eliminated, and jobs destroyed.

    2. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      The folks over at the Institute for Justice are always willing to consider such economic liberty cases. I bet if we could drum up enough cash donations from the firearm freedom community, we could help persuade them to take the case and offset some of their costs.

      That outfit has one helluva track record, but it does take money to be successful. Freedom isn’t free, my friends. I donate quarterly, but I’d be willing to kick in another c-note if we can get some funding action going in here.

      1. avatar Ed Schrade says:

        A go fund me page to raise the money ?

    3. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Ed Schrade,

      I was thinking the same. This might be a legitimate reason for fedzilla to flex its commerce power, since the purpose of the commerce clause is to ensure that government can help businesses to FLOURISH, NOT CLOSE.

  3. avatar strych9 says:

    I’m just waiting for them to start screaming about the lost revenue for the state.

    Illinois doesn’t have two pennies to rub together and they slash part of their tax base by 30% (or more). As a friend of mine would say “You gotta be dumb”.

    1. avatar Craig in IA says:

      ^^^
      This posting makes about as much sense as anything else in this thread. Like taxing the hell out of gasoline, then seeing tax revenues drop because people either drive less or choose a Yugo-tyoe vehicle over one that only gets, say, 27 mpg. Or killing off the tobacco taxes and now having to make it up elsewhere. Politicians in many states have killed off many golden egg-laying geese and are still trying to figure out why ganders don’t lay the same.

      I remember NY Gov Patterson bragging about how he would’ve raised taxes on millionaires years earlier if he thought Rush Limbaugh would’ve left sooner when he moved to FL. Of course, Andy Cuomo isn’t singing the same song now that the wealthy are fleeing there and there is no way to make it up…

  4. avatar NORDNEG says:

    This is exactly what the anti gunners want, looks like they won., America is on a ANTI constitution roll right now, thanks to a useless GOP Congress,

    1. avatar Kyle says:

      Thats certainly true. The left is increasingly opposed to more and more of the amendments to the constitution. Pretty frightening in face.

    2. avatar EWTHeckman says:

      Yep. I think they see this as a victory because this outcome of such a bill was so predictable that it had to be what they intended.

    3. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

      Not just the congress, the Supes also gave the thumbs up to adding encumbrances to an enumerated right. The wildly overrated Scalia wrote the opinion allowing “reasonable” regulations of the 2nd.

    4. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      Not all of America. Two weeks ago South Dakota just allowed permitless carry. Oklahoma has such a bill sailing through the legislature this week. I do realize that those states have smaller populations than Illinois, let alone the other big infringing states.

      Still, what can be said about gun rights and the Constitution overall is that there is a fast widening and deepening divide between the forces of freedom and oppression in this country which has many historical parallels to the early 19th century.

      What

  5. avatar StLPro2A says:

    This is the objective. They don’t really care about the “gun violence”. Really a poor article detailing virtually none of the new law details. Illinois….what a shit hole!!!! Live west of St. Louis, MO…the better side of the river….but never go into Illinois even when going East. Always drop south to Memphis, TN and head East from there. It is not worth traveling theough that shit hole and possiblyngetting caught up in their ant-gun laws. Also, that assurs me that I don’;t spend any money in their state. Their new governor, JB, reslly fills the bill as another crooked scum. Will need to expand the Illinois Governor’s Wing at the prison.

    1. avatar Ian in Transit says:

      Links to all the details in the article. They have been covered here in detail a couple times already. No reason to duplicate the wall of text when links can direct you.

    2. avatar m. says:

      i’d relieve myself into illinois from a safe altitude & speed, or from another state using a trough

  6. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    I don’t remember if there any firearms manufacturers in Illinois but if there are they should relocate.

    1. avatar Still mad at them says:

      There are at least 2, Springfield and Rock River Arms. They are in large part responsible for this mess. Too long to go into but look up IL SB 1657 from 2018 and then look up what Springfield and Rock River did to get a carve out from that law. They back peddled on it but it set the stage for it’s passage this year.

      1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

        Bullshit. When they found out what the the lobbyist did (who did not work for them directly), they promptly disbanded that lobbying firm, fired him, and actively campaigned against the bill, succeeding in killing it during that term.

        1. avatar John Boch says:

          Oh, FFS.

          The board of the lobbying group was comprised of three people: Reese, Jay Keller and Mr. Rock River. Keller and Reese were best buddies and drank together in the hotel bar until 3am the night the story broke of the carve out deal.

          To claim that Keller didn’t engineer this carve out that would save RRA and SA tens, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars and not tell them is straining credulity.

          Add in the fact I called and left messages with both Reese and Larson asking for comment on what was rumored with Keller and the Democrats in the weeks ahead of the deal… as well as asking about the donations made to anti-gun democrats. Neither returned my call.

          I suspect that they thought they could get away with this but I let the cat out of the bag.

          THE IMPORTANT THING is that they’ve found Jesus now (now that they both darn near folded out of the public’s reaction). Springfield Armory in particular has spent some serious money working hard to oppose gun control legislation in Springfield.

          At the same time, we’re keeping an eye on them. Trust, but verify as they say.

        2. avatar Manse Jolly says:

          TTAG did a very in-depth series of write-ups concerning this at the time, in fact (I may be misremembering) TTAG was the leading platform and story broke over the interwebs (gun culture interwebs)

          Feel free to correct me as my memory ain’t what is was, age will do that to you.

        3. avatar strych9 says:

          I’m not really the grudge holding type. Personally I think the truth is in the middle here.

          Did RRA and SA know what was going on? To some extent they almost certainly did. The real question is the details of what the lobbyist told them, something we’ll never know. However, it is possible that they knew of the carveout but not the extent of the law or that the lobbyist told them “Look, this is a done deal either get on board with the carveout or get run the fuck over without it” and they believed the “expert”. Of course it’s also possible that they knew and didn’t care as long as they were protected. I mean RRA’s main business is alphabet soup agency contracts, not sales to the public.

          Regardless of who knew what and when I personally don’t give a fuck. Since when is it the job a private business to shell out it’s money to protect anything other than the company? How is it remotely reasonable to expect a company that’s set up to make a profit to spend that money on “protecting the rights” of the people of a state who willfully chose to elect politicians who openly ran on trampling those rights?

          Now, when the people fuck up Corporate America is supposed to use it’s resources to ride to the rescue and unfuck the situation? Even if you like that idea it’s a bad one because eventually what you see as a good thing will be something a major company sees as a fuck up to be undone.

          The people of Illinois fucked up. It’s not up to RRA, SA or any other company to undo that. It’s up to them to make their product, sell it as best they can and do what they can to protect the business. At worst that’s what they did. You can choose not to buy their product because of it but to expect the companies to shield Illinous residents from the consequences of their own mistakes is asinine.

          If you’re blaming the companies in this case then, IMHO, you need to check your premise because your priorities are completely fucked from the jump.

        4. avatar Ranger Rick says:

          If you call the shuck and jive show then sure. It really pains me to say this since I really like their products, but they’re dead to me.

        5. avatar Special Ed says:

          Sorry Heckman, the lobbyist DID work directly for S.A and R.R.A. They fired him when they got caught and now the chickens have come home to roost. No amount of spin will make that sorry bit of history any better. They screwed gun owners/dealers and there is no excuse.

  7. avatar Pg2 says:

    Too bad for southern I’ll, has to watch as Chicago metro calls the shots.

  8. avatar Red in CO says:

    Is this the same law that Springfield and Rock River attempted to covertly support via the Illinois Firearms Manufacturers Association?

    1. avatar Ian in Transit says:

      Yep. Come full term.

    2. avatar EWTHeckman says:

      Same basic law that the LOBBYIST agreed to. Springfield Armory and RRA FIRED HIM immediately upon discovering that. Then they directly fought against that bill, succeeding in getting it killed during that legislative session. But the Left gained seats, making it impossible to kill it this time around.

      The blame belongs on the idiot voters of that God forsaken state, not on the foolish lobbyist who betrayed the trust of those two companies.

      1. avatar Sian says:

        Their lobbyist, their responsibility.

        So either they were so incompetent that they didn’t check in on what this guy who they were paying was doing, for MULTIPLE YEARS,

        Or they got caught playing Dirty Illinois Politics and backpedaled hard once it was clear gunowners were pissed.

        Either way is not a good look.

        1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

          They set up a separate company to do the lobbying. The whole point of such an arrangement is so they don’t have to have daily oversight. Their business is making and selling guns, not being full time lobbyists.

          Corporate boards only meet periodically, so actions taken in the interim are unknown until the next meeting. The lobbyist taking an action that SA and RRA fired him for taking are fully consistent with that arrangement.

          While it is possible that they knew, it is far more likely that they did not. After all, as members of the gun community they would be fully aware that anti-gun actions would be discovered and attacked by the gun community. Only a fool would willingly put themselves in that position on purpose.

          Furthermore, since you cannot know for certain what they did or did not know, then acting as if you do know for certain is… well, I don’t really have words, but they’re not very nice.

      2. avatar Ian in Transit says:

        “Same basic law that the LOBBYIST agreed to. Springfield Armory and RRA FIRED HIM immediately upon discovering that. Then they directly fought against that bill, succeeding in getting it killed during that legislative session . . .”

        SA and RRA fired him eventually after getting caught and trying to explain their way out of it. It took them several days of back peddling and changing their bullshit stories before they took any action at all. If they hadn’t got caught they would still be smiling about it.

      3. avatar SgtSupz says:

        You must represent either Springfield Armory or RRA with your “pro SA” comments. You can’t mske a blind man see

        1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

          No, I just get as pissed off at the “guilty until proven innocent (and probably not even then)” approach applied to the gun world as I do in other areas of life.

          Or you could call it the “burn the witch” approach. Either way, it’s assuming guilt first, then ignoring all contrary evidence, followed by a lynching. It’s wrong.

      4. avatar SFleischer says:

        EWTHeckman

        I respect your opinion; you certainly put enough effort here trying to outshout the non-believers.

        But. At best SA and RRA were negligent in their management of their paid lobbyist. At worst they were complicit in selling us down the river.

        My opinion, my money. Haven’t bought a weapon from either company since. Lots of good companies with equal products and either better management skills or better ethics.

  9. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

    result.
    gonna be a long year legislatively in the prairie state.
    if you’re dumb enough to live here please join isra.

  10. avatar GS650G says:

    A feature not a bug. Next year they will bitch about the iron river of guns they still have coming from Indiana

  11. avatar former water walker says:

    I know of at least 2 gunshop’s that may fold nearby me. Pelcher’s in Lansing and Borderline in Steger. Glenwood appears to already quit selling merely being a gun range only. I doubt Chuck’s will bother with further harassment. Borderline advertised “no Cook co. tax” referring to Cook’s $25 handgun slushfund tax. There main business is transferrs. The small shops who mainly do transferrs will be gone…EFF YOU demonrat scum!

    1. avatar TheUnspoken says:

      One would say just buy online, but you still need a local dealer to transfer… If the locals close up, then transfers will get more difficult, and costly.

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        And what happens when there are no more dealers in the state?

        1. avatar Ranger Rick says:

          Well that’s the plan.

        2. avatar EWTHeckman says:

          The Tyrants throw a big party. Only those who are “more equal” are invited.

  12. avatar TFred says:

    And the evil part here is that any similar restrictions placed on abortion providers would be terminated by the courts so fast, the ink wouldn’t even be dry on the signature.

    One can only hope that the upcoming SCOTUS case sets a precedent of STRICT scrutiny for gun laws, which might eventually allow this one to be tossed out.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Fortunately, the 7th circuit is one of the most conservative in the country. Time to start filing for preliminary injunctions.

  13. avatar EWTHeckman says:

    When he signed the bill into law last month, Gov. J.B. Pritzker said the Gun Dealer Licensing Act was about stopping straw buyers.

    Pritzker is a liar. Driving dealers out of business via oppressive regulations was the crystal clear goal. That was well known the last time they tried to ram that piece of garbage through (unsuccessfully, thanks in part to Springfield Armory sending out mailings against it). If it was really as he claimed, it would have helped dealers instead of driving their costs through the roof.

    1. avatar TheUnspoken says:

      Certainly, if they really want to go after criminals and straw purchasers, prosecute them, along with background check failures, no slaps on the wrist for criminals caught with weapons, etc. Maybe work with dealers to catch the perps, could even have grants or incentives for extra security, etc.

      As usual, the ones they control are the law abiding, by claiming that “bad FFL dealers are responsible for crime and violence” rather than the actual people committing it.

      The same as background checks, registries, bans, etc, hold the lawful accountable for the sins of a few who don’t follow the laws anyway.

  14. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

    This is exactly the aim of so-called universal background checks. They want that because it means that all legal purchases would have to go through federal firearms license (FFL) holders. That’s key because the state can then come back with onerous, abusive regulations designed to run them out of business altogether.

    To all the moderates and fence sitters out there, understand that whenever you hear a Democrat propose universal background checks, what they really mean is banning private sales of firearms and placing FFLs in a choke hold.

    The consequence is fewer retailers, higher prices, and ultimately fewer gun owners and gun rights voters to stand up to these fascists. DON’T fall for the “common sense gun reform” propaganda lies. They’re playing on your emotions and playing a long con to abolish civilian ownership of firearms.

    1. avatar EWTHeckman says:

      ^^^ THIS!!! ^^^

      We need to be pushing harder on “shall not be infringed.” That means not even a little bit. That means talking about the fact that the 2nd Amendment is a “doomsday” provision to be able to fight a war if necessary to defend the freedom of where we live. Their gun control/safety/regulation/ban actions make winning such a defense impossible. It’s almost like they intend to enslave us and their goal is to make sure they can survive the attempt.

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      California has had universal background checks for 18 years. Since then, three new gun shops (one of whom is a manufacturer of ARs), another pawn shop, a Dick’s and a Sportsman’s’ Warehouse have opened in my little town with a population of 100,000. (We have lost gun shows all over the place, but that is solely due to community activism resulting in laws intended to ban the shows completely.) So the experience here tends to refute your predictions about stores closing up. The real painful part is that they all charge $75 to do a transfer on top of the background check fee of $25.

      1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        I’m referring to FEDERAL firearms licenses and regulations, as I clearly wrote in my post. What authority does California have over federal regulations of federal firearms licensees? None. Seems your little strawman rebuttal just blew away in the wind right there.

        You point anecdotally to a few local gun shops in your town? Hurrumph! Who knows what their story is? Lots of people open up businesses that are really more just hobbies. Lots of businesses open up with mo idea what the realities of the industry are and promptly go under. See the independent restaurant success rate, for example. With FFLs, some people get the license just to attend SHOT Show or to be able to buy directly from manufacturers or to sell to their friends/family at a discount. Cherry picking from personal experience is not data science.
        You have to look at the big picture. A couple of openings is dispositive of nothing.

        We can look at the overall number of FFLs, whose numbers reached a peak on 1993 and have been on a bumpy descent ever since. The number took a huge plummet in 1994, with the federal “assault weapons” ban. There’s some of that federal regulation I was talking about.

        California itself lost 114 FFLs from 2016 to 2017, the most recent year for which data exists. There were some gains in CA during the administration of the best gun salesman ever, when the hysteria made even putting up with the regulations still profitable, but those counts are receding now.

        Really, I’d bet the only thing keeping a lot of CA FFLs alive are Internet sales, where the actual transfer is governed by the receiving state and federal law, not California and its draconian dictates. The idea that saddling a business with complex and expensive mandates is somehow good for them, or at least that they can take the impositions in stride, is flat out asinine. It’s absurd on its face.

  15. avatar raptor jesus says:

    So close all the gun dealers in Illinois – people will jump the border and get unrestricted, non-compliance weapons from neighboring states.

    Kind of like how I totally don’t buy standard capacity magazines in Pennsylvania.

    1. avatar 41mag says:

      Who’d be your FFL tho

  16. avatar Cary says:

    Not only is this new wave of proposed laws sweeping the nation totally ineffective at stopping crime, the factions that are pushing for it are totally unapologetic about the economic downsides to forcing dealers and manufacturers to shut down or lay off employees. So in the interest of their agenda, which we ALL know what that truly is, they couldn’t care less whether American citizens and their families suffer, or if the economies in these cities and towns suffer huge blows from the fallout. Yet they claim to care about us and that they are doing all this in the interest of the public? Please…Go sell that New Green Deal to someone else. But to the blind sheep that will vote for these people no matter, what, they are so ignorant that they don’t even realize they are voting to have their very OWN rights taken away..

  17. avatar M1Lou says:

    “We are incredibly sad that this day has come, but we will remain Wild Dave’s! We will be transitioning fully to a Toro and Gravely lawn equipment retailer, small engine service and repair shop, as well as a retailer for utility trailers.”

    Sounds good until a “Green New Deal” gets passed, and then you will be selling scissors to cut the lawn with.

  18. avatar J says:

    This just the first swing in Illinois of the anti-2A agenda from Chicago. The newest is the proposed Gun Tax, HB2331, which adds an additional special 3.75% surcharge on firearms and firearm components. There is the new Ammunition Registry Bill, HB1467. There is SB107, which is semi auto firearms, parts, and accessories ban. There is HBs 888, 892, 899, and 174 that have been proposed. HB888 is the social media accounts search bill that would require all FOID holders to submit all there social media accounts and passwords to a Communist style search for something. Just the tip of the onslaught coming to Illinois firearm owners.

    https://www.nraila.org/articles/20190212/illinois-gun-tax-legislation-introduced

    https://www.nraila.org/articles/20190201/illinois-ammunition-registry-bill-introduced

    https://www.nraila.org/articles/20190124/illinois-bill-introduced-to-ban-many-firearms-accessories

    https://www.nraila.org/articles/20190125/illinois-social-media-search-bill-other-anti-gun-legislation-introduced-in-house

  19. avatar Keyword Spam says:

    Working as intended.

  20. avatar Alan says:

    I don’t live in The Land of Lincoln. That said, the following comes to mind concerning people there. Unhappy with the performance of elected things, who did you support or vote for? Given past performances, who didn’t you oppose?

    1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      Illinois has a cancer known as Chicago. The rest of us are trying to not let it metasticise, but you can’t always beat cancer.

  21. avatar ROBERT says:

    Didn’t the NRA just recently move some of their National Matches away from Camp Perry, Ohio? I could be wrong, but I thought they moved to Illinois. — I hope I’m wrong. ——- Well, if they did, it’s time to move those matches again. Since this is a new STATE law, the only way the rest of us can support the gun owners of Illinois is to deny that state any of our money/revenues. —— The NRA did it years ago when they moved their HQ out of Washington, D.C., and stopped having their annual conventions there. $$$$$$ talks!

  22. avatar Not The Droid says:

    Uh, could we have one or two sentences on what this law says?

  23. avatar Bill says:

    NRA matches were moved to Indiana.

  24. avatar PWinKY says:

    Screw Illinois in every way possible. I live out of state and haven’t set foot in Illinois one time in the last decade. I don’t need anything they have there and I won’t spend a dime.

  25. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    The Free Beacon is missing the mark. It isn’t the gun stores who don’t want to cover the costs, it’s that their customers cant or wont pay for the new, imposed price point.

    “Cost of new state gun tracking laws drive gun prices out of customers’ reach at in-state dealers.”

    “New paperwork driving gun dealiers out of business.”

    “No arms for self-protection in poor neighborhoods, after new registration laws drive up costs.”

    “Costs” that the store owners “don’t want to pay” is untrue and already spun to divide and daemonize. It’s the evil store owners. They’re cheap. They don’t care about all the people who are gonna die, because they want to pocket a few more pennies. Like the NRA that doesn’t care about all the dead babies, because they enjoy playing Rambo.

    No business ever paid a cost. Business’s customers pay costs … throught he business. While the great state of Banistan would happily make gun dealiers collectors for their patronage jobs (some more), nobody has to let them misrepresent what they’re doing. Every regulation (I live in NY State), is a cost that gets passed throught to customers. Every risk, like of being raided, sued, or charged.

    These costs aren’t imposed on gun dealers, but on gun owners. The dealers are just the conscripted collectors. (Who are themselves at increased risk of charges and penalties, for doing the new thing wrong.)

    These costs are expecially imposed on people who can’t protect themsleves with a gun because of the higher costs, or diminished access.

    Say it that way. It’s true. It’s good politics. And, actually, taking guns away from other people on the sly was the anti-people’s goal in the end, anyway.

  26. avatar KD says:

    I left IL seeing the future, I was lucky to transfe to TX. The Madigan machine and with his purchase of Pritzer I had to leave and glad I did. I feel for those left behind. As to RRA and SA…. they are guilty and only after they were exposed did they make an apology and small financial effort to save face in my opinion. I will never purchase a Brazilian or Croatian product with a Springfield logo on it ever again. Same for RRA who I used to support as an IL resident. They made sure they got theirs but I will no longer spend one dime with them!

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