Illinois House Passes Bill Requiring Fingerprint Submission, Fees to Touch A Gun

BigStock.

The Illinois House Wednesday passed a bill to require the submission of fingerprints, along with higher fees in order to own, shoot or even handle a firearm or ammunition. Kathleen Willis’ Amendments to SB-1966 would also end private firearm transfers and even require immediate family members gifted a firearm to report themselves to the Illinois State Police under penalty of a felony.

The bill passed solely with Democrat votes, Democrats who claim to fight for poor, inner-city minorities. At least at election time. SB-1966, with its increased fees, has a guaranteed disparate impact upon poor people of color within the Land of Lincoln.

Just like Black Codes and Jim Crow laws a hundred years ago, this bill effectively prices the exercise of fundamental constitutional rights out of the reach of poor folks in general, and disadvantaged inner city African-Americans and Latinos in particular.

From Clayton Cramer’s The Racist Roots of Gun Control:

Today is not 1893, and when proponents of restrictive gun control insist that their motivations are color-blind, there is a possibility that they are telling the truth. Nonetheless, there are some rather interesting questions that should be asked today. The most obvious question is, “Why should a police chief or sheriff have any discretion in issuing a concealed handgun permit?” Here in California, even the state legislature’s research arm–hardly a nest of pro-gunners–has admitted that the vast majority of permits to carry concealed handguns in California are issued to white males. [36] Even if overt racism is not an issue, an official may simply have more empathy with an applicant of a similar cultural background, and consequently be more able to relate to the applicant’s concerns. As my wife pointedly reminded a police official when we applied for concealed weapon permits, “If more police chiefs were women, a lot more women would get permits, and be able to defend themselves from rapists.”

Gun control advocates today are not so foolish as to openly promote racist laws, and so the question might be asked what relevance the racist past of gun control laws has. One concern is that the motivations for disarming blacks in the past are really not so different from the motivations for disarming law-abiding citizens today. In the last century, the official rhetoric in support of such laws was that “they” were too violent, too untrustworthy, to be allowed weapons. Today, the same elitist rhetoric regards law-abiding Americans in the same way, as child-like creatures in need of guidance from the government. In the last century, while never openly admitted, one of the goals of disarming blacks was to make them more willing to accept various forms of economic oppression, including the sharecropping system, in which free blacks were reduced to an economic state not dramatically superior to the conditions of slavery.

Days ago, many of these same Democrats objected to voter ID in Illinois as an undue burden upon the poor. Because, they say, a lot of poor people of color don’t have government-issue photo identification.  Yet Kathleen Willis’ bill requires the submission of electronic fingerprints…and that requires a state-issued photo identification to get that done.

Yet as the floor debate went on for hours, nowhere and at no time today did these Democrats express any concern for the significant numbers of poor African-Americans without some form of government-issued photo IDs. For them, this law creating an undue burden on the exercise of fundamental constitutional rights is a feature, not a bug.

The bill’s provisions

The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action has a pretty good run-down on this onerous bill.

  • Criminalize private transfers, with violations being punished as a Class 4 felony.
  • Require the recipient of a firearm gifted by a family member to call into Illinois State Police within 60 days to run a background check on themselves, even though they must already hold a FOID.
  • Allow for the indefinite delay of firearm transfers.  Currently, federal law allows a licensed firearm dealer (FFL) to release a firearm after three business days if they have not received any additional correspondence after receiving a “delay” when conducting the initial background check for a firearm transfer.  This safeguard prevents the potential shutdown of sales via endless delays and allows law-abiding individuals to take possession of a firearm in a timely manner.
  • Mandate FOID applicants submit fingerprints, including for renewals, which would not add anything of investigative value.
  • Increase FOID processing time from one calendar month to thirty business days, which can span more than six weeks.
  • Reduce the duration of the FOID from ten years to five while also increasing the application fee from $10 to $20, resulting in a significant increase in the cost to maintain a FOID for the same amount of time.
  • Require FOID applicants pay all costs for fingerprinting and processing the background check, totaling around $150 on top of the application fee.
  • Prohibit those with a revoked FOID from transferring firearms to another FOID card holders in the same household and also take away the right to self-defense from individuals due to the alleged actions of someone else in their household.
  • Require the owner of the seized firearms to petition the court to have them transferred to a third party.

The fingerprints…

As part of the gun rights community here in Illinois, I’m not sure about the costs of fingerprinting totaling $150 after Amendment #2.  Yes, originally the costs would easily total over $150 per person (or $600 for a family of four just to remain legal to own guns in Illinois).  $70-100 for prints + $50 application fee + $38 background check fee = about $150-200 in the original bill.  Or up to $800 for a family of four.

Willis, in true Venezuelan socialist fashion, mandated the maximum fee charged for electronic fingerprinting at $30, far less than the current market rate around the state of $70-100+, depending on the provider and the location.

However, from past offers made to me as an Illinois concealed carry instructor, $30 stands as probably $10 to $15 less than LiveScan fingerprint providers must pay to the state (and the LiveScan people) when they submit a set of prints to the state. How many businesses are going to take fingerprints for a FOID card for the privilege of losing money?

Exactly none.

[Edit:  Since publication, I’ve learned that Willis plans to allow the LiveScan providers to pass along the $38ish background check fee to the applicants instead of including it in the LiveScan fee.  So once again, getting “fingerprints” in Illinois still cost about $70, they just break down the fees into categories now instead of charging a single fee.]

Not only that, but Illinois only has 109 LiveScan providers, and many of those are municipalities and school districts. Those entities will not offer prints for non-government business purposes. And I’ve heard that there are possibly as few as a dozen non-governmental LiveScan providers south of Interstate 80.

Interstate 80 is highlighted in red. Image via Wiki.

Imagine the hue and cry from Dems if there were only a dozen or two dozen places to register to vote south of I-80. For rural residents, they may face a two-plus hour drive to find a LiveScan provider and an equally long return trip home.

 

The $10 private transfer cap

The bill also requires all private transfers to go through a gun dealer…so-called universal background checks. Similarly, Willis capped those fees, too at $10 per firearm. That $10 is one-half to one-quarter the current going rate for firearm transfers in Honest Abe’s home state.

As FFL-Illinois president Dan Eldridge noted here at TTAG last week:

I won’t willingly do a $10 transfer; it’s a money loser and an un-compensated risk to my license as an FFL.

Will the state compel all FFL’s to do these $10 transfers? They may try, but consider that a) some shops will not do transfers of any kind currently, and b) an FFL can deny any sale at any time to anyone, as long as it’s not on the basis of racial/protected class discrimination.

So…say good bye to private firearms transfers.

Indeed. Why would any business provide a service that loses money?

In short, they won’t.

The mainstream media looks favorably on the bill

As day follows night, the state’s mainstream media outlets have dutifully gotten behind the bill.

From the Chicago Tribune:

Looking to address the broken system that enabled the Aurora shooter to buy a gun and keep it — despite his criminal history — the Illinois House narrowly passed legislation Wednesday that requires residents to provide their fingerprints before obtaining a firearm license.

The measure also would create a task force to enforce laws requiring those whose gun licenses have been revoked to surrender their firearms or place them with a legal owner. And the bill would raise the application fee for the license, known as a firearm owner’s identification card, to $20 for a five-year license, up from a $10 fee for a card that was good for 10 years.

The 62-52 vote followed about three hours of heated debate on the House floor, with strong opposition mainly from suburban and downstate Republicans. One downstate lawmaker, Rep. Darren Bailey, called the bill “a total and complete infringement of the Second Amendment and the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution.”

Within minutes of the measure’s passage, the Illinois Rifle Association issued a statement vowing a court fight and calling it “one of the most onerous regulations for gun owners.”

As Guns Save Life’s executive director, I have high confidence we will likely either amend our current NRA-supported suit challenging the FOID Act’s constitutionality or file a new suit if this bill becomes the law of the land. Frankly, passage of this bill into law would only bolster our case Guns Save Life v. Raoul for striking down the FOID Act outright. Which would be a darned shame.

Prospects of Senate passage

Looking into my crystal ball, I see this bill passing through the Land of Lincoln’s Senate.  Democrats control a super-majority there as they do in the House, but only require a simple majority for passage if done by the end of this month. The bill is scheduled for action today. That would allow some downstate Dem senators who are up for election in 2020 to cast a no vote for political cover.

And nobody expects our new governor not to sign any gun control that makes it to his desk. The only question we shall face will be what Kathleen Willis will try to pass next.

The silver lining I see is that this bill provides easy, low-hanging fruit for a court to invalidate the entire FOID Act as unconstitutional should it become law. Let’s hope so.

comments

  1. avatar Kyle says:

    Until there is a personal penalty that legislatures that pass Unconstitutional laws is created. This will not stop.

    Were I emperor of the country, id sign a “frivolously unconstitutional Law” That would mandate a all court fees + a $1,000,000.00 fine to the actual people that pass laws that are by any reasonable measure, unconstitutional.

    Not to be paid by taxpayers, but the actual authors and co-authors of the actual bill.

    1. avatar NRAssholes says:

      Aww heck. It’s just not worth the hassle of owning a gun anymore. And I certainly don’t want to burden my offspring. Guess I’ll just take up heroin instead.

    2. avatar guest says:

      The people doing fingerprints are price gouging. Paper cards are $20 for a set locally in my part of the country.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Not really, the state charges a fee for submitting the fingerprints to their system. The people who lease out the equipment charge a fee per set. Those fees combined are greater than $30.

    3. avatar Thixotropic says:

      Socialists ALWAYS use someone else’s money to push their Socialist agenda. It is their Socialist right as they see it.

      ALL of this crap is the result of a failed system run by Socialists in Illinois, Land of Shitbama.

      It also appears Unconstitutional in many aspects.

    4. avatar JW says:

      The appropriate personal penalty is loss of public employment. Only the voters can apply it and it is our job to try to tip that balance. When the day comes (inevitably) in any democratic system that votes are ignored entirely, other remedies are legitimately available, but they tend to be more messy, more morally fraught and more risky to freedom than trying to rally our fellow citizens.

  2. avatar former water walker says:

    Yep we’re f###ed in ILLinois. All that lobbying makes NO differece. Demscum always votes party-line. I can’t afford the new “fees” but I’ll have to…Indiana here I come!

  3. avatar Rick the Bear says:

    WTF??? This is insane. I can’t get my head around the idea that at least (hopefully?) some of the legislators believe that this sort of law is somehow helpful. How???

    1. avatar Stateisevil says:

      That is why we fail. We need to recognize that there are two options. They base everything on “feels” without thinking. Or they know it won’t do anything and they just want to chill the gun culture. The truth is no defense in the legislatures, media, or kourt system. What matters is what is popular in the culture. If people like their guns, they stay. If future generations can be steered away from that culture, people won’t care about their rights at all and any law can be passed with impunity.

    2. avatar barnbwt says:

      To be fair, they most likely don’t expect any of this to pass (which is sadly different from it not actually passing) and definitely don’t expect it to hold up in court. They’re just virtue-signaling their loyalty to the party at each other, turning the statehouse chamber for debate into a pep-rally with these ‘two minutes hate’ type bills. The problem comes when the senate does the same thing…and then the governor does the same thing –oops, now it’s a law!– and then district attorneys & attorney generals start doing the same thing in order to promote themselves for re-election, and courts start doing the same thing since “now errybody’s doin’ it”…the whole unbalanced system just feeds on itself until they’re justifying mass executions and end up hanging from lamp posts, themselves.

    3. avatar Bob Watson says:

      The reasons for their insanity are not complicated. They are hate filled bigots and they want revenge. Revenge for the 2016 election, revenge for a robust economy, revenge because it rained on their birthdays. This is what a culture war looks like.

    4. avatar Red in CO says:

      They don’t care if it’s “helpful”. They hate us for owning guns and will happily do anything they can to make the system more expensive, more onerous, more time consuming, and more likely to see honest people imprisoned. It really is that simple

      1. avatar Rick the Bear says:

        Red in CO: I was hoping that _some_ of them thought that it was helpful. I refuse to believe that the whole L / R thing is reversed: The Right is misguided and the Left is evil.

  4. avatar kevin says:

    The Plan: 1) Tax legal gun owners out of existence. 2) Imprison the rest.

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      “The Plan: 1) Tax legal gun owners out of existence.”

      Perfect SCOTUS challenge – No taxing of *any* enumerated civil right. This will kill many birds with one stone…

  5. avatar Stateisevil says:

    If you rely on the Kourts you will lose. What was the purpose of the 2nd amendment again? Was it sport shooting or hunting or self defense from the common brigand? No.

  6. avatar Huntmaster says:

    It’s supposed to be pretty simple. Shall not be infringed.

  7. avatar Vinnie Boombotts says:

    I thought I read in the bill that if you submitted your prints for you CCL that should suffice for the application for FOID renewal. Once they have your electronic prints why would you have to be printed each time you apply? Your prints don’t change.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I sympathize, but that is a really simple question. For a better understanding of the big picture, you *should* be asking, “why fingerprint applicants AT ALL? What are these fingerprints to be used for?” And the ever popular “If the government demands these fingerprints, why isn’t the government paying for them?” Because the answer to all of these (including your original) is the same! The goal is to obstruct and deny any exercise of a personal freedom specifically guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, under a pretext of some ridiculous and laughable bullshit.

      1. avatar Vinnie says:

        I’m not saying the bill isn’t a clear violation of the Second Amendment but my reading of the bill was that if you submitted your prints for your CCL and that was voluntary, you didn’t need to submit prints again for FOID renewal. I know that prints were not needed for CCL renewal if you submitted them the first time. The “plus” was that you would allegedly get your CCL faster if you submitted prints. My reading of the article above seem to indicate that prints were to be submitted each time for renewal. I guess time will tell but I could easily see this bill struck down in federal court. State court maybe downstate but in federal court for sure. As a side note, we should be able to personally sue legislators for unconstitutional bills. That may slow them down.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Vinnie, it is a process. When I got my CHL (now LTC) in TX back in the day, it required all that crap, fingerprints, “safety” course which taught essentially nothing but was specified to be at least 12 hours long (in order to force a 2-day course) big money, all manner of crap, with onerous restrictions on any actual use of a firearm and ease of prohibiting entry by businesses, all that stuff is widely disseminated by the nutcakes in order to deny your rights, because they think they are just so SLY, none of us rednecks will realize what they’re doing! At renewal, you had to do it ALL again, fingerprints, 12-hour course, every bit. A few years go by, and the sky has not fallen as promised, absolutely nothing has happened, and it becomes possible to start chipping away at the bullshit, until now, in TX, there is no renewal course, there is no fingerprinting, you renew online and are renewing a license to carry, since it for concealed or open carry, and posting businesses to not allow carry is completely toothless, campus carry, unlicensed car carry, one after another, about the only thing left is Constitutional carry, and it’s coming.

          When the constant screech has been the same since FL in 1987, “two gun cowboy rigs”, “gunfight at the OK corral”, and “rivers of blood in the streets” in state after state, while no such thing has happened anywhere on the planet, eventually people get smart enough to ask those legislators “just where has that ever happened?” rather than letting them get away with their lies. A process. Does not mean you can make any sense out of it.

        2. avatar Someone says:

          Larry, it works that way in states that are not under total control of leftists. States like California, New Jersey or Illinois move in opposite direction. While normal states slowly loosen the regulations all the way to the constitutional carry, we in blue states get the bullshit piled on us higher and deeper. One day I’m a law abiding gun owner and the next day a felon, while not doing anything at all.
          If it wasn’t for the Supreme court’s ruling, Illinois would still have no carry. Btw. I see your 12 hours of class time and raise to 16 hours here.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Someone, you have 16 hours because 12 did not work as expected, most popular courses were 12 hours in one day, usually 7 am to 7 pm. I did that 3 times before the course was eliminated altogether, and I think it was reduced to 4 hours in between there, which disappeared so fast it never affected me. The trick is, there was no syllabus which had to be taught, which took that time, the entire goal was to force 2 days out of work in order to get the license which is itself unconstitutional. They figured 12 hours would do it, and were *furious* when it did not. This is the caliber of people we are working with.

    2. avatar Southof16 says:

      It’s my understanding that the fingerprints are a 1 time only deal. I am fortunate enough that the $ increase is manageable, but I refuse to give my fingerprints, and all the other bullshit contained in these amendments are where the real problem lies. My FOID isn’t up till 2021 so hopefully there’s some relief from the courts by then because I’m not sure what my workaround will be yet.

  8. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    Serious question: if Illinois wants people to submit finger prints and pass a background check before they can acquire a firearm, why doesn’t Illinois require people to submit finger prints and pass a background check before acquiring chemicals/poison, gasoline and matches, and bowling balls — all of which someone could use to easily murder people?

    (Note: bowling balls are quite deadly when dropped from tall buildings and even highway overpasses.)

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      They would tell you that it’s because those things are not “meant” to kill people that that Chicago doesn’t have an epidemic of gasoline-fire-murders or poisonings.

      In reality it’s the intersection of politics, fear and a problem they have difficulty sweeping under the rug.

      In terms of the politic it’s multifaceted. Part of it is virtue signaling, part of it is “doing something!”, part of it is punishment for political adversaries, part of it is a dislike/misunderstanding of guns, part of it is thinking that a law can do things that a law cannot do, part of it is offering a simple solution to a complex problem, part of it is a shirking of responsibility… fuck that list goes on and on.

      But overall the answer to your question is this: If you were to ask that question in person to most of these people they’d look down their nose at you and say “You clearly don’t understand the differences here” and walk away. Not because they don’t feel like explaining the differences but because they feel those differences are there but can’t rationally explain what they are.

      One of the other things to consider in politics is the Gary Johnson “What’s an Alepo?” moment. That’s the thing pols fear the most and they are afraid that answering with a “I’m not sure, I’ll have to get back to you on that” will be taken as “What’s an Alepo?” and they’ll get crucified for it. They have to project competence at all times and so they often come back with stupid answers or just spew bullshit. They get away with it because 80%+ of the audience is ignorant.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        strych9,

        Undoubtedly some gun-grabbers would use the “gasoline/chemicals/poison/bowling balls are not made for killing” cop-out.

        … they feel those differences are there but can’t rationally explain what they are.

        Now THAT is an interesting insight. I have to wonder if that is an extremely important opportunity for us.

        We could respond along the lines of, “You demand that I change or give up my rights for reasons that you (gun grabber) cannot even verbalize. Well, I demand that you (gun-grabber) disrobe because it is really, really important! Why it is so urgent, I cannot really explain it but you must disrobe anyway.” Perhaps that would help them to accept how ridiculous their demands are and stop demanding that we acquiesce.

        1. avatar Someone says:

          “Get naked now! It’s of utmost importance. It’s for the children!”
          … they need a good laugh.

  9. avatar LibertyToad says:

    They were able to get the bill to pass the Judiciary Committee by using a rule that that lets the Speaker of the House (a Dem) temporarily replace Judiciary Committee members. They simply “kicked” out the pro-gun House members (a number of them were Dems) and replace them with anti-gun members and voted.

    How is this representative government when elected members can be replaced at-will on a temnporary basis in order to get a bill passed? Pure tyranny.

    Illinois is broken…I can’t wait to get out in a few years.

  10. avatar scott says:

    My FOID expires in 2022, I retire in 2021. Should be out of the People’s Republic of Illinois by the time I need to renew.

    1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      thinking early renewal will avoid one fingerprinting session. i’m up in 2020.

  11. avatar A O says:

    If they pass this law, how will the poor, inner city minorities ever be able to afford a firearm license? They won’t, and it is exactly going against what they fight for- equal opportunities for all.

    Not like they would have done any of this anyways….

  12. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    These guys need a dictionary, shall, not, and infringed are in it. The gun owners should check Murdock v Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 1943 regarding charging a tax r fee in order to enjoy a Constitutionally guaranteed right.

  13. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

    oy gevalt. i’m surrounded by nudnicks.
    all the sanctuary counties vs. one county. just as the world needs another really good pandemic and biblical cleansing, a nice nice local collapse and purge might be the only way to repair this state.
    and to the delightful ms. willis i’d like to say, bless your dear little heart. and all that that implies.
    i’ll miss harmfist. can i still purchase a long arm in adjacent states?

    1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      and by that i mean a private sale…

  14. avatar 2a suxs sucks says:

    I think I’ll take my NRA money and send it to GSL

  15. avatar LarryinTX says:

    Why would *anyone* comply with such a stupid law? Just ignore it. Legislators are simply virtue signaling, they do not expect anyone to comply. Don’t think so? Wait one year, then check to see how many arrests and/or prosecutions. I’ll bet money there will be more murders of young black men in Chicago than prosecutions for violating this law. Make that *UNSOLVED* murders. It is not serious, ignore it.

    1. avatar Bob Watson says:

      Make that “uninvestigated murders” and you will have a winner.

  16. avatar Soon to be a former Illinois resident says:

    I’m a lifelong Illinois resident. I have an appointment with a realtor in Wisconsin this Sunday. Good riddance.

  17. avatar Tim says:

    Why was yesterday’s “suppressor 101” post taken down?

    1. avatar Someone says:

      It was giving three years old advice.

  18. avatar Darkman says:

    The time has come for Illinois gun owners to vote from the roof tops or kneel and submit. Choosing to former requires great courage. Much as those who fought for their freedom 244 years ago. Choosing the latter only requires compliance or forfeiture of their personal property and civil rights. To each their own. Keep Your Powder Dry.

  19. avatar Hannibal says:

    NY tried to implement a similar law mandating a low cost for FFL transfers. It’s completely ignored.

    1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      so they charge a high fee?
      ignore the ffl transfer at your risk. my shorts might be lined with kaiser broiler foil (and a pair of blunt scissors) but i believe harmfist is crawling w/ atf already (three day, foid bla…).

  20. avatar BatPenguin says:

    Born and raised in SOUTHERN ILLINOIS. I live in the suburbs of St. Louis on the Illinois side. It is convenient to get to downtown St. Louis for events, and work. Also not bad to get to the airport. For years I have put up with the BS out of convenience sake. I say no more. Wife and I are now remolding our home to sell it and we are looking at where in Missouri we can move to. Honestly, I don’t want to move but my state is celebrating killing babies, abortion now on demand up to 9 months, celebrating drug use (recreational marijuana), and infringing on my 2nd Amendment rights. Not to mention the taxes I pay out the waazooo.

    1. avatar Nickel Plated says:

      I guess, if not putting people in prison for possession of a harmless plant counts as celebrating drug use.
      Why exactly shouldn’t it be legalized?

      The one thing Illinois is doing right. NY, NJ, and PA need to hurry up and get on that. Especially NY. How are THEY so far behind on this.

    2. avatar Jason Statham says:

      Spent $2.99/gal in IL last weekend so I could liberate some second amendment related items over to a free state. $2.38 in St Louis. Insane taxes, fees, out the wazoo over there.

      1. avatar Someone says:

        You got it cheap. Cheapest gas today around me is $3.19 and in Chicago it’s $3.50

  21. avatar HOTPITCHHangman says:

    Its clear that tar and feathers and rope is the only hope to fight tyranny

  22. avatar User1 says:

    Remember when they couldn’t hold down the Chinese via racist laws like they did to black and brown people, so they banned them from entering the U.S.? Which led to the Japanese taking their place until the U.S. put them in concentration camps and stole their land to give to whites.

    Now Trump is banning Chinese companies from doing business with the U.S. He banned ZTE and Huawei in his first term. This is supposed to help the average American and the economy.

    Why did they ban Huawei? Because the U.S. government thinks they spy on American citizens using their hardware. Pfft… What about the NSA spying on every American and creating dossiers? What about Google? What about Facebook? Naww. Those yellow people have to be put in their place.

    Remember how Obama wanted to protect Americans by making sure they couldn’t do business with Russia? No more nice quality AKs or cheap ammo for you.

    So now Americans can’t get themselves a nice quality AK and cellphone for a good price. For public safety…

  23. avatar grumpster says:

    Why are they banning private transfers? Right now in Illinois private transfers must be done by the seller entering the FOID of the buyer into the ISP website portal to get an approval number indicating the buyers FOID is valid and that number is good for 30 days. The sale needs to be competed within 30 days and the seller needs to record that approval number, the buyer info, and the firearm info and to keep for 10 years. The FOID database is updated nightly to revoke FOID card from those deemed no worthy to have one anymore.

    This whole bill is racist to the core to prevent many lower income minorities from being law abiding firearm owners.

  24. avatar Deer not in headlights says:

    Introducing let alone passing unconstitutional laws is illegal and the county sheriff has a duty to arrest all treasonous communist or face arrest their-self.

    Thousands need to March on the capitol daily when in session and get loud and demand all politicians to be fired for treason and arrests and hauled away to jail.

    This will get news coverage and support from other Places as well.

    U have to push back 100 times harder than the criminals to solve this problem!

  25. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    Although I have long fought for Universal Background Checks they are not effective unless its done at the Federal level and what is even worse is that the States often do not have the money to run such systems so you end up with outrageous fees to run the new systems. In the State I live in the Brady Bill check costs the customer nothing and if he does a transfer usually only $20.00. This system could easily be used at the Federal Level for all purchases of firearms with the new addition of a serial number check. A finger print check is not necessary.

    One must realize with all the school shootings and because Congress puts politics over the cost of human life even those of children you end up with the mess we as a Nation are in now, which is dead bodies piling up high on a weekly level and the States passing outrageous new restrictions and bans on firearms. Thank the Republicans at the Congressional level for taking away your guns and gun rights by proxy.

    1. avatar B.D. says:

      Are u high? The only dead bodies that are about to be piling up are the ones in office who continue to pass these laws. Thank idiots like u for compromises instead of standing your ground and defending the right to self defense. Fuck the federal government.

      We’ve had enough.

    2. avatar Rick the Bear says:

      Vlad,

      Save some hyperbole for someone else.

    3. avatar Someone says:

      Oh, go fornicate yourself, Dracula, I’m not in mood for idiots.

    4. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Vlad, you ignorant slut. You mention the “effectiveness” of UBC. Effectiveness at what? They are not able to accomplish anything, nor are they intended to accomplish anything, except to force a national registry. And a national registry would not be able or intended to accomplish anything, except to facilitate door-to-door confiscation. To paraphrase DiFi, “Mr. and Mrs America, turn them all in or we will kill you.”

    5. avatar grumpster says:

      Fingerprints? No they are too easy to fake. One should be required to have DNA test via blood drawn from an eyeball every time they want to handle a firearm or buy a box of ammo. Got to protect those children assuming they don’t all die from diseases being imported from south of the border invaders.

  26. avatar B.D. says:

    Road trip. Grab the guns, ammo and MREs.

    See u there?

    1. avatar Someone says:

      Springfield or Deerfield?

  27. avatar 2aguy says:

    The Supreme Court already ruled on this crap……
    Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 U.S. 105 (1943)

    Held:

    – A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution.
    – The flat license tax here involved restrains in advance the Constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise

    Opinion:
    …It is contended, however, that the fact that the license tax can suppress or control this activity is unimportant if it does not do so. But that is to disregard the nature of this tax. It is a license tax — a flat tax imposed on the exercise of a privilege granted by the Bill of Rights. A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution….
    … The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down…
    … It is a flat license tax levied and collected as a condition to the pursuit of activities whose enjoyment is guaranteed by the First Amendment. Accordingly, it restrains in advance those constitutional liberties of press and religion, and inevitably tends to suppress their exercise…

    1. avatar Rick the Bear says:

      2AGUY,

      “…of a right granted by the Federal Constitution.”

      I’m not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but IIRC, the Constitution doesn’t _grant_ ANY Rights: it protects them (or, it’s supposed to, anyway).

  28. avatar GS650G says:

    Anti gunners are clever at drafting these laws. Once again the states are incubators for really bad laws.

  29. avatar Illinois_Minion says:

    I’m still struggling… How does a FOID card differ from a voting card?? Permission slip, and heavy fees, to exercise a federal right?

    1. avatar Someone says:

      Doh – the difference is clear: guns!

  30. avatar jobob says:

    I live in Chicago and look forward to being the case that takes this to the supreme court.

  31. avatar Warlocc says:

    Forget the 2A for a second.
    Self report to the police? What about the fifth? What about right to remain silent?

  32. avatar BatPenguin says:

    This was not passed in the Illinois Senate so it did not become law. At least until the next legislative session.

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