Final Illinois Concealed Carry Agreement: Exclusive Details

TTAG has learned from sources close to the discussions that Illinois House and Senate members have finally agreed on the details of the new concealed carry bill. Forced to enact some form of concealed carry law by the courts, the final form of the bill has been hotly debated between upstate Democrats and downstate Republicans. While some believed the state wouldn’t come to an agreement before the court-mandated deadline, it apparently has indeed happened. And it’s a bill that New York and California residents would be jealous of . . .

First things first – the law will be SHALL ISSUE.

Statewide pre-emption for all handguns is part of the bill. It had been hoped that the bill would include full pre-emption for all firearms, but the final bill was only able to keep handguns free from Chicago’s ridiculous laws. This means that local permits will no longer be required for handguns, cities cannot regulate magazine size or the kind of handgun you can buy and there will be no local restrictions on concealed carry. Concealed carry permits issued or recognized by the state will be valid in Rahm Emanuel’s disarmed utopia.

The bill will not pre-empt existing laws when it comes to long guns, but new laws will indeed be pre-empted by the new state statute. So while Chicago’s existing laws regarding assault weapons and other long guns will remain in place, any newly enacted laws will be invalid. Also in the legislation are safe passage provisions, allowing residents of places other than Chicago to pass through the city unscathed. Legally speaking, at least.

As of now, the requirements for a permit will include 16 hours of training. However, the type and manner of training is not legislated. So one hour of classroom training and fifteen hours on the range will work. Theoretically. Also, eight hours worth of credit toward the 16-hour total will be awarded for hunter safety classes, or prior military experience.

Is it the best concealed carry bill in the nation? Not by a long shot. But it’s a damn sight better than New York.


  1. avatar Ralph says:

    Is it the best concealed carry bill in the nation? Not by a long shot. But its a damn sight better than New York.

    Talk about damning with faint praise! But yes, a New York State permit is not valid in New York City. Amazing.

    1. avatar jerry says:


      1. avatar Hannibal says:

        Really. If you are connected and can get a NYC permit, it’s good everywhere… but a regular guy with a New York State permit will get arrested if he carries in the five boroughs.

        Some are more equal than others.

        1. avatar Chas says:

          SUCK IT, RAHM!!!

        2. avatar Joe Wright says:

          Chas: be careful, he may take you up on that.

    2. avatar mina says:

      Damning with faint praise is right!! I have been following, very closely, and actively participating with many letters, phone calls, rallies, etc to support the new IL conceal carry law.

      This is not at all what we wanted. But after watching the legislative process in IL now for about 5 months, I understand it at least.

      Summary: the people in charge are the dumbest, most ignorant, clueless, selfish, delusional, argumentative, contrary, stubborn, close-minded, ignorant (yes, I said it twice) people on the planet!! Except maybe for their counterparts in NY and CA.

      1. avatar Chuck in IL says:

        You got that right. There needs to be an IQ test to run for office. Set the threshold at 100, and you would eliminate 75% of them.

      2. avatar IdahoPete says:

        Take the approach the civilian disarmament twits use: this is a good first step. After a few years of “shall issue”, and no “Dodge City shootouts”, it gets easier to amend the existing law a step at a time. Keep fighting.

    3. avatar Western New Yorker says:

      I’m a former police officer. At the time I was an active full-time P.O. I was prohibited BY LAW from carrying into NYC. At that time on NYPD and Troopers could carry into NYC. Obscene.

    4. avatar LongPurple says:

      The reason for the NYC “carve out” was supposedly because some of the hoods in the City were bribing upstate judges, not controlled by Tammany Hall, to issue permits to them under the Sullivan Law.
      Once that tactic was discovered, the law was changed to require issuance by a NYC judge (under the control of “Big Tim” Sullivan and the Tammany Hall bunch) for a permit to be valid in NYC. Tammany Hall wanted exclusive power to have only THEIR hoods legally armed.
      Check out “Protecting New York’s Gangs With Gun Control Laws
      Posted on January 23, 2012 by Tim McNabb” on this site.
      Of course, no such corruption in issuance of gun permits is possible in modern times. (sarcasm off) Google “apalachin crime convention gun permits” to find that a dozen hoods at the Mafia convention had permits.

  2. avatar amagi says:

    It’s also way better than New Jersey, where concealed carry is a distant hope.

    But I can dream, can’t I?

    1. avatar mark_anthony_78 says:

      It’s so far beyond “hope” for CCW in New Jersey.

      We have more rights as non-residents of other states (i.e. a Utah carry permit is recognized in Pennsylvania) than we do in our own back yards.

      Is there any way this legal battle in Illinois can ever help us?

      1. avatar Charles says:

        If you move to Illinois, sure.

      2. avatar mina says:

        Yes, someone has to sue in order to get the issue before the Federal Court. To me that’s the lesson out of this. IL would have never in a trillion years changed anything at all with regard to firearms if they weren’t under an edict from the Federal courts to do so.

        1. avatar Nor'Easter says:

          Exactly right, this well demonstrates the power of the courts in these matters and how important it is to keep up the struggle on this front. We need the same kind of thing in NY and NJ.

  3. avatar DonS says:

    “Statewide pre-emotion for all handguns is part of the bill. ”

    That sounds like a bad thing. Wasn’t emotion for handguns previously limited to places like Chicago? Now it’s statewide?

    1. avatar Nick Leghorn says:

      On my phone, you know what I mean.

      1. avatar DonS says:

        Yeah, I just thought it was an amusing typo.

        (For future reference – if using a spelling checker, you can avoid that particular typo by not putting a hyphen or space in words like “preempt”.)

      2. avatar WA_2A says:

        Damn! I can’t type a paragraph on my phone without wanting to throw it off a bridge.

  4. avatar Chris says:

    Honestly, 16 hours for my students would be the NRA Basic Pistol and then Personal Protection in the Home. Even then no one is fully educated but it’s much better than the bare minimum 8 hours SC requires.

    Did the 1 year wait make it in the bill?

    1. avatar Steve says:

      Let’s get real here: Education wise, as far as CHL/CCW goes, should be on the states laws pertaining to carrying, nothing more, nothing less.

      Do I think people should have safety education? You bet… just not legislated and required by law to do a Constitutionally protected right. Unless, of course, you’ll require 3 years of civics and government education so people can vote.

      1. avatar e says:

        I’d tend to agree. The whole ‘education’ thing sometimes leaves me in utter disbelief. Quite frankly, most defensive shoots are up close and personal, we’re talking a few feet, if not inches. See Zimmerman. It does not take a Rocket Surgeon to make the shot to save your life. Bottom line, if you can load a weapon and chamber a round, you should be ‘qualified.’ Hell, we let people vote who have not a clue as to what and who they are voting for…

        1. avatar Davis Thompson says:

          Studies by John Lott and others show that a training requirement actually makes society less safe as it creates a disincentive for people to get permits.

    2. avatar Rattlerjake says:

      Why is it that these laws always restrict the military, “Also, eight hours worth of credit toward the 16-hour total will be awarded for hunter safety classes, or prior military experience.”, when most military far exceed the 16 hour requirement, experience requirement, and are much better qualified than the majority of police? It’s also stupid to require classes and permits for concealed carry when most of the same states require nothing for open carry. These laws are nothing more than watered down restrictions on the 2nd amendment.

    3. avatar Erik says:

      Washington (my state) adopted their shall issue law in 1961, no training required, still no training required, only a fingerprint card.

      we’ve always had crime 30 to 40 percent lower then national average.

      1. avatar WA_2A says:

        Damn straight!

        Next step: Constitutional Carry.

  5. avatar Dave357 says:

    I am glad to hear Governor Quinn can’t wait to sign this into law.

  6. avatar gloomhound says:

    What about AR-15 pistols?

    1. avatar SeanC says:

      Hot damn! I think you hit on something. If this bill pre-empts the Chicago/Crook county ban vis-a-vis handguns and handgun mag capacity, that would be awesome to see folks sneak in some AR-15 pistols and some mini Drakos and Krinks 🙂

      None of that BS affects me, but I have a lot of family still in Crook county.

      1. avatar amagi says:

        Most Chicago cops probably don’t know Single Action from Double Action.

        I’d like to seem them identify a AR-15 pistol without using the expression “Da faq?”.

        1. avatar Patrick says:

          Each time I read your second sentence I laugh so hard it hurts my throat. 🙂

  7. avatar JMS says:

    Better than I expected!

  8. avatar jwm says:

    Amazing, in the 80’s if you had told me most of America would be shall issue I would have not believed you. We’ve come a long way since the 68 gca. We’ve got a long way to go yet, but at least we’ve gained the upper hand.

    1. avatar sagebrushracer says:

      yeah, I hear you. If they can get this going over there, I still have hope for CA, not much, but we will fight tooth and nail to keep what is left of our rights.

    2. avatar Erik says:

      And I’m proud to be from Washington, the first shall issue state that started it all


      Ok, so New Hampshire beat us out by passing one in 59…

      so everyone from New Hampshire be proud too!

  9. This was what was mentioned last night on local radio. The no Chicago carve out is HUGE! Interested to hear what the training reqs are for those who have Utah or Florida CCPs.

    Illustrating Chicago’s Murders, Homicides, Violence and Idiocy at

    1. avatar dook says:

      I got my FL and UT CCW permits as tag-ons to my NV CCW. UT was a portion in the 2nd half of the class (and cheap at ~$50). FL-specific was just a bit at the end (And ~$117 for a non-resident). An 8-hour Nevada class sufficed for all three, which gets 33 or 35 states between the three.

  10. avatar Lemming says:

    In the long run this is so important. For generations Chicago citizens have only known guns in the hands of villains.

    Perhaps as they slowly come to know guns in the hands of friends and colleagues 3 million voters will start to see 2a in a more positive light.

  11. avatar TStanton says:

    Lucky them… even though I waded through the CCW process here in California… I’m still jealous.

    1. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

      Yeah jealous is right.. That is sad when it is easier to get a CCW in Chicago than in California.. 🙁

      1. avatar Brooklyn in da house says:

        Is there any way to use this to help us in California?

        1. avatar CA.Ben says:

          This is what I’m wondering. If they can get shall-issue in Chicago, why can’t we have it in CA?

        2. avatar Brooklyn in da house says:

          @CA.Ben The thing i dont get is if you go 2 counties out of the Bay Area its pretty much shall issue which is good for the whole state. So people that live a couple hours outside can drive over everyday with their permits and people who live here are SOL. I am assuming same thing goes for the LA area. It makes no sense.

        3. avatar amagi says:

          Yeah, it’s very similar to NY State…except if you live in a county that is Shall Issue in New York State your permit is worthless in New York City….”New York City Carve Out”.

  12. avatar Human Being says:

    When does this go into effect?

    Be ready for lots of Chicago tap-dancing on what’s happening with their murder rate and “why”.

    1. avatar Joseph says:


      And what does this do to the Chicago Firearm Permit requirements?

  13. avatar Matt in FL says:


    1. avatar DisThunder says:

      I don’t expect much, but the thought that maybe someday in the future I might be able to carry in Chicago means I might dust off my suitcase afterall.

    2. avatar Pwrserge says:

      Don’t hold your breath.

    3. avatar SeanC says:


    4. avatar Bova says:

      If you want to pay 300 bucks, sure.

      What no one seems to want to talk about is the price tag for the permits. If you’re an IL resident and you want to get the permit, it’s gonna set you back $150. If you are an outside visitor, your CCW/CCDW/CCL/WhateverTheFuckElseYouCallIt is valid in your car. After that, you are able to pay $300 to be able to do what little they will actually allow us to do.

      “The license is valid for 5 years and the license fee is $150 for a resident and $300 for a non-resident.”

      Read up on it if you want:

      So, basically, I am going to have to pay 30 bucks a year pretty much just to be able to exercise my rights that are reaffirmed by the US Constitution. Lovely. /sarcasm

      Oh, one last thing. Fuck Illinois.

      1. avatar Matt in FL says:

        Reciprocity doesn’t require a fee. It’s not the same as a non-resident permit. Hence my question.

      2. avatar Taurus609 says:

        Hey, I’ve got eight hours of training in Missouri for my CCW and I’m a veteran, so does that mean I have the 16 hours covered……yep I’m delusional.

    5. avatar LongPurple says:

      With a price tag of $300 per non-resident permit, there is no way I see that they care about reciprocity.

  14. avatar Buzzlefutt says:

    What I read is that the ISP will have 180 days to get ready for applications and then 90 days to fill applications. So next March Illinois can become a safer place.

    1. avatar KCK says:

      June 8 2011 bill signed by Gov.
      146 days later
      Nov 1, 2011 first day law went into effect our attorney General was issued Permit # 1
      A buddy dropped envelope same day, had permit # 100 in five days
      I hand delivered, May 21,2012, three days later, Permit #109***in my mailbox.
      500 + per day from jumpstreet.

      180 days to pass a law.
      180 days to get your shit together
      90 days to process your shit.
      Was the ISP not getting ready at all?
      Buy the laminating machines, hire the forms processors, rent some space ie, gear up man. A lot of the ground work could have happened before June 9th.
      Wisconsin wanted it, Illinois stalls.
      The line that separates us is hardly imaginary.
      BTW the previous Dem Gov 2006 veto of CCW fell one vote short of a 2/3 override.

  15. avatar ready,fire,aim says:

    so in time crime will drop in the windy city (except for gand bang land which is 99% of the problem) and mayor romaine noodles will still be up to his dirty tricks …..

  16. avatar Kevin says:

    Wait, so the Chicago people agreed to statewide pre-emption on HANDGUNS but not any other kind of firearm? They do realize that 95% of all gun crime in Chicago is done with handguns and not assault rifles right? I don’t understand why they would trade away their handguns restrictions (including the magazine restrictions) but nothing else. Any rational negotiator for Chicago would trade assault rifles before handguns, if only because they aren’t really used in crimes to begin with.

    1. avatar Pwrserge says:

      Flaw in your logic. Chicago negotiators are hardly rational.

      1. avatar SeanC says:

        +10, FTW

    2. avatar joe smith says:

      Don’t tell them that!

    3. avatar uncle nunzie says:

      They’re fully aware. They just can’t target handguns and get away with it after the 7th’s ruling, perhaps. And with recent anti-rifle hysteria frothing up the waters, long-guns and other scary stuff can be a target. Something they can bring back to their supporters even after the “terribly misguided” Appellate ruling. 😉

      Being stuck in NJ, I could only hope for a victory like this. But our appeals court is not so enlightened.

    4. avatar Ropingdown says:

      I would suppose 95% of all legitimate DGU’s outside the home are also performed with handguns…in states allowing such a thing. I’m happy for Chicago, and think the difficult part will be keeping the deal that they’re getting now. The incentive to go crime-free in order to qualify for a CCW permit later on may help smart teens pursue the relatively straight-and-narrow.

  17. avatar Mark N. says:

    By the way, the would not be “down state Republicans.” There are very few Republicans in the state. It was mostly downstate Democrats, joined by the paltry few republicans floating around the periphery.

  18. avatar MrVigs says:

    I have the theme song from The Saprano’s going thru my head.

  19. avatar Colby says:

    It’s an important step in the right direction, IMO.

    Once Chicago experiences the drop in murder rates that all cities in free states experience when the criminals start worrying about return fire, the argument will get harder to make in the other metropolitan areas.

    It’s a far cry from a lack of infringement on a Constitutionally -protected right, but it’s a good step back toward the path.

    1. avatar Chuck in IL says:

      The murder rate in Chicago won’t change significantly, I believe. Bloods shooting Crips shooting Gangster Disciples. Criminals killing criminals. Crime rates on the El will go up. Thugs will know where to go to not get shot.

    2. avatar Taurus609 says:

      Missouri is a shall issue state, has been for years, but St. Louis is one of the top most dangerous cities in the country. Chiraq will not change even with the new CCW law, but it will make those that carry (legally) at least have a fighting chance…literally!

  20. avatar AecDuck says:

    I don’t normally point this stuff out, but… two glaring spelling errors in the very first sentence? Come on guys, we can do better.

      1. avatar AecDuck says:

        I didn’t want to be “that guy” but I refer antis and on-the-fencers here, and they’ll jump on anything to discredit.

      2. avatar CarlosT says:

        If you’re using Android, go and get SwiftKey. It really is a much better mobile keyboard than any I’ve seen previously. If you’re using iOS, I guess you just suffer.

  21. avatar LJM says:

    Its not great, but I’ll jump through the hoops for my CCW. And if/when Wisconsin recognizes the ILL CCW permit I’m good to stow when I go to cottage in NW Wisc.

    Oh… and its nice to see that Quinnypoo and the Rahmfather were screwed on this as well.

  22. avatar Red Sox says:

    Great news. How do we change Massachusetts to a shall issue, no restrictions. We are may issue at the local Police Chief’s discretion and whatever restrictions he wishes. The highest license / permit level in this state is LTC Class A which I just went through the process for and cannot conceal carry. Go figure! Any suggestions?

    1. avatar foggy says:

      What town are you in? You should be able to carry concealed with a class A license.

      Link to state website:

      1. avatar Red Sox says:

        Springfield. I can only conceal carry if I handle large amounts of cash as part of my job (and I have to prove this) or I own multiple rentals properties. Other than that I am restricted to hunting and sporting with an LTC Class A. Arbitrary I know but Springfield does not accept “for all lawful purposes” as a reason for wanting an LTC.

        1. avatar racer88 says:

          My brother lives in Westfield (next door) and can carry full time. He doesn’t carry cash or anything like that. He’s just a working stiff.

  23. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    God is good!! One of the antis must be ticked that attempts to disarm the citizens of Chicago will be no more . . .

    Enjoy this . . .,0,248195.story

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      Guess he took the news badly….

    2. avatar Red Sox says:

      Priceless! He should have called one of his “interrupters” to mediate.

      1. avatar Gyufygy says:

        Hey, McCarthy doesn’t like CeaseFire, so they can’t be ALL bad.

    3. avatar DJ says:

      If convicted – won’t be able to own a firearm.

      Ahhh – the irony!

    4. avatar sagebrushracer says:

      Should have been a Defensive Gun Use….

  24. avatar Ronaldo Ignacio says:


  25. avatar Toasty says:

    And here i am in NJ trying to not get arrested for stopping at McDonalds on my way home from the range.

  26. avatar Glenn Goewert says:

    Comment: this is great! Question : does anyone know if there are reciprocity provisions in the new law? My wife and I live in St. Louis, have Missouri CCW cards, and, so far at least, have not been able to travel anywhere in an even tangentially Easterly direction armed. If you have any familiarity with what lies directly across the Mississippi from St. Louis, you’ll understand the need. If not reciprocity, are there provisions for out of staters to get an Illinois license? Any information on the subject would be of great interest to thousands of Missourians.

    1. avatar Bova says:

      For 300 bucks, yes. If not, you can keep it in your car. Talk about a scam.

    2. avatar Bova says:

      Actually, the more I think about it, just do yourself a favor and don’t even bother to come into Illinois. It isn’t that we have any problem with outsiders, but more that I would rather just see our God awful state just go bankrupt, already. Stay on your side of the river. I will happily stand on your side of the river and support your economy, too(like I do pretty much all the time since I live 10 minutes from downtown STL). It means money isn’t going to the corrupt leaders of IL. That is certainly something I can stand proud for. Let’s be honest, you guys basically have it better with everything, already. Cheaper gas, beer, cigs, you name it. Add to it that your state isn’t run solely by Chicago, and you guys have a better state by an infinite amount.

      Can you tell I don’t like Illinois, or being an Illinois resident? lol

      1. avatar Tom C says:

        So move

  27. avatar David Griffith says:

    There’s a big problem in the restrictions. Most of the area restrictions are stupid, useless, and needlessly-annoying; but one of them is particularly onorous: public transit. This would seem to have the effect of discouraging the poor from exercising their Second Amendment rights given that they are less likely to own cars. There’s something for those of you fighting the fight in Illinois to consider for the next lawsuit.

    1. avatar Patrick says:

      In our city also, carry is not permitted on buses.
      It is not only “poor” such as jobless and disabled, but the employed lower class who can have enough money and even save up money, provided a proper budget is followed. A big part of keeping on budget with low income is not having a car. Anyone with such a lifestyle/income bracket then cannot really go anywhere except by foot/bicycle, which is often difficult here. This is a city where most people drive cars, and it’s organized as such.

      1. avatar Joe Wright says:

        I was raised in St Louis, and worked down town, I rode the bus due to parking problems. St Louis, keeps poor and any one else, who uses public transit unarmed. I live in Lee Co. Iowa, now , just across the river from Hancock Co, IL. We have a Shall Issue Carry Permit, open or concealed. We can carry an AR-15 strapped to our back if we so desire. If you have a carry permit, Iowa, will recognize it. The best part of the Carry Permit, I can have a loaded and uncased Ar-15 and shotgun in my truck for coyote hunting

  28. avatar LongPurple says:

    “Also, eight hours worth of credit toward the 16-hour total will be awarded for hunter safety classes, or prior military experience.”

    There might be a case for some credit for hunter safety training, but how does that equate to the same credit for “prior military experience”?
    It reminds me of the absurdity of being excused from the first year of mandatory ROTC when I was in college, but not the second year. My active duty in the USMC just wasn’t good enough to match that second year of ROTC.

    1. avatar Sgt. Pettis USMC says:

      I’ve served in the U.S. Armed Forces for 20 years and have had countless hours of weapons training, not to mention defending myself in Desert Storm, but yet all of my years of experience only add up to 8 hours? What a bunch of BS ! How long is a hunters training course? Lets get serious here! If that’s all our politicians thing about the people that serve our country then maybe they should put their lives on the line everyday like we do !

      1. avatar LongPurple says:

        I suspect the same motivation is behind both “partial credit for military service” instances I noted — money. My college was paid by DOD for every student enrolled in the basic ROTC program, so they wanted to maximize that enrollment. I wonder who will make money on the required training for the CCW.
        I don’t know for certain, but I doubt if an ex-policeman, with far less weapons training than a veteran, will have to take any additional firearms training for his CCW.
        Florida has a more sensible law, and accepted my military service as proof of ability to handle weapons safely.

  29. avatar dwb says:

    i was thinking… does anyone know if the govie plans to veto this agreement? It would have to pass both houses with a veto proof majority in that case.

    1. avatar KCK says:

      off the cliff then?

    2. avatar Dave357 says:

      It has passed the Senate with a veto-proof majority and will most likely pass the House too, given that their vote last week for an even more pro-gun version was overwhelming. Furthermore, someone said at illinoiscarry dot com this morning that Governor Quinn was “neutral” on the latest version. It ain’t over yet, but it’s looking promising.

      Edit: looks like it just passed the house 90 to 27.

  30. So, in five years, can we please begin to hammer on the fact that violent crime will have gone down in Chicago (minus the gang on gang violence, of course) because of this?

    1. avatar racer88 says:

      Naaa… Emmanuel will claim credit, instead. It was his leadership that brought crime rates down.

  31. avatar JustLeaveLawfulGunOwnersAlone says:

    Let’s watch the murder rate in Chicago start dropping

    I may actually consider visiting that place again in a few years.

  32. avatar JWhite says:

    “Is it the best concealed carry bill in the nation? Not by a long shot. But it’s a damn sight better than New York [or Komifornia].”

  33. avatar John says:

    Special thanks to NRA contract lobbyist for IL Todd Vandermyde for supplying the UNLIMITED state & federal privacy waiver language from the original HB148 which failed in May 2011 in the new IL bill: “a waiver of the applicant’s privacy and confidentiality rights and privileges under ALL federal and state laws, including those limiting access to juvenile court, criminal justice, pyschological, or psychiatric records…” Thanks Todd! Now the government can pull bank accounts, tax returns, medical records, military records, sealed and expunged court records, grammar school report cards, and anything else they want, retain them indefinitely, and share them with fusion centers. Todd cares so much about the “fundamental, constitutionally protected right” to bear arms as he testified to the IL House judiciary committe in downtown Chicago on 2-22-13. Especially the rights of downtrodden people like Otis McDonald. Imagine being paid over $100K per year to betray the people you are hired to represent, and having a job with no oversight where your bosses Chris Cox and Chuck Cunningham at NRA/ILA are 1000 miles away and never question what you do? With friends like these, who needs enemies?

  34. avatar tdiinva says:

    As a former Illinois resident I have one question: What about reciprocity? It would sure be nice if they recognized my Virginia permit so I don’t have to do my “safe storage dance going in an out of the state.

  35. avatar Smoky says:

    I really hope they agree on some reciprocity. I live to the west of Illinois and am tired of explaining why I don’t ever wanna go visit Chicago.

  36. avatar RLE3 says:

    8 hr. Credit for hunger safety? That has very little of anything to do with hand guns, I am an armed security guard does my 20 got training classand certification for revolver and semi auto count for anything?

  37. avatar NT says:

    So 30 years in the military, including two combat tours only equals 8 hours of training?

    1. avatar RLE3 says:

      You obviously know how to handle a gun, I think the other 8hrs will cover rules and regulations. You know there will be some hidden snags just to screw with us.

  38. avatar RLE3 says:

    8hr. Credit for hunter saftey?

  39. avatar Tom C says:

    Where can I get the needed training?

  40. avatar Ed says:

    “a waiver of the applicant’s privacy and confidentiality rights and privileges under ALL federal and state laws, including those limiting access to juvenile court, criminal justice, pyschological, or psychiatric records…”

    So what does that mean ? Is it just for this application process or does that mean they keep it forever now on all background checks ? So hypothetically, if I got convicted as a juvenile for smoking a joint, and it was expunged lets say. Would all future jobs I apply for now see that in a background check because I gave up that right and they uncovered it ? On top of that you will also be exempt from privacy for FOIA requests when you sign up for CC. So thats out there now for whoever that you’re a gun owner and a permit holder. Plus starting march of 2014 they will put that you are a gun owner and CC holder on your license for everyone to see who looks at it. I can leave off my social security number on IDs for privacy but the fact I own guns has to be on there ? This is horrible legislation for anyone who values right to privacy, no thanks I will stay CC permit free I think.

  41. avatar MSG-USA-RET says:

    Training requirements are questionable. With 25 yrs in Army, I was a RSO & RO on ranges, handgun, rifle, MG, grenade, demo, & mortar. Am I qualified? An Il. resident, I may, or may not, apply. I have Florida CCW. In self defense, I don’t intend to show my CCW Permit, before I draw my weapon, anyway.

  42. avatar John Mohan says:

    Dear Mr. Leghorn,

    Are you sure this law will preempt the Chicago and Cook County magazine capacity limits for handguns? I’m afraid that the new law will just obliterate the part of the Chicago Handgun ordinance limiting a person to one functional handgun in (and only in) a dwelling, and the need to get the city handgun permit, but leave the magazine limit part of the city and county ordinances in effect.

    Best wishes,

    John Mohan

  43. avatar Walt says:

    Your’e right – not the best, but certainly not the worst. This gives us something to build on, at least. Introduce concealed carry, have people see that we’re actually safer, and then push for increased freedom down the line.

  44. avatar Don G says:

    When you consider the fact that active and retired law enforcement officers, covered under the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA), still get arrested in NYC and in at least one county on Long Island, it’s no wonder “honest Joe citizen” doesn’t have a chance. Being a retired Fed LEO, I think it would be a great mistake for them to continue doing this. One day, an LEO is going to win the NY Lottery through a law suit. LOL. Now, that is a spanking that I would want to watch.

    In the mean time, “honest Joe citizen” has to continue their fight through politics and voting. If they don’t vote your way, vote the rascals out!

  45. avatar Rattlerjake says:

    Why is it that these laws always restrict the military, “Also, eight hours worth of credit toward the 16-hour total will be awarded for hunter safety classes, or prior military experience.”, when most military far exceed the 16 hour requirement, experience requirement, and are much better qualified than the majority of police? It’s also stupid to require classes and permits for concealed carry when most of the same states require nothing for open carry. These laws are nothing more than watered down restrictions on the 2nd amendment.

  46. avatar Linda says:

    I live in Wisconsin, but right on the border of Illinois. I have CC Wisconsin issued card. I shop in both states. Let’s say I go to Kenosha, WI and shop, then on the way home I go to Antioch, Il and shop. I have my loaded firearm with me while I’m in Wisconsin. What do I do when I get to the Illinois border? If I have my card from WI can I carry in IL?

    1. avatar John Mohan says:

      Hi Linda,
      Under the new Illinois law, you, as a the holder of an out-of-State CCW permit are permitted to have your concealed weapon with you while in your car. You must leave it in your car (concealed) and lock your car if you leave your car. You are also allowed to have it outside your car in close proximity to your car so you can take it and put it in the trunk of your car (but you are required to unload it before taking it out of your car to put it in the trunk of your car, or to bring it into a private residence you are visiting). Note that if you park in the driveway on the property of a private residence in Illinois where the owner of the property gives you permission to carry concealed, you don’t have to unload the weapon and you can keep it (concealed) on your person – as long as you don’t venture out onto the sidewalk or other public land outside the private property lines.

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