John Boch of Guns Save Life warned that Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan would try to pull a legislative fast one by pushing through his own court-mandated concealed carry bill rather than the one backed by the NRA. Madigan’s opus is spiked with restrictions so onerous that most Land o’ Lincoln gun owners would sooner turn down a date with Danielle Knudson than jump through the hoops required to legally pack heat. Under the Speaker’s scheme, prospective toters would be required to carry $1 million in liability insurance coverage and undergo 40 hours (yes, one full work week) of training. And that week would also include . . .
Twenty hours of range time — can you imagine the ammo cost at current prices? What’s more, only cops will be allowed to administer the training. Picture it: Chicago cops — who report to Garry McCarthy — teaching CCW classes. What could possibly go wrong?
Oh, one last requirement — a mandatory psych evaluation. Because you’d have to be nuts to want to carry a gun, right?
The Illinois State Rifle Association has issued the following APB for Illinoisans to contact their reps and oppose this steaming pile of merde:
URGENT ALERT – YOUR ACTION REQUIRED
It’s a floor fight going on in the Illinois House of Representatives right now on Mike Madigan’s HB-1155 carry bill.
It’s time a again to call your representative and urge hiim or her to only support the amendments to this bill that have been introduced by Brandon Phelps (right now that’s amendment #27)
Any amendment not by Brandon Phelps is an attempt to restrict your rights and is not supported by ISRA.
Urge your representative to vote NO on any such amendment.
If you do not know who your state representative is, please click the link below and you will be able to identify your representative and get their Springfield phone number.
The Illinois State Board of Elections has a new interactive search page here: www.elections.state.il.us/DistrictLocator/DistrictOfficialSearchByAddress.aspx
If you know who your representative is, you can find their contact info here: www.ilga.gov/house/.
The drunk-driving comparison completely misses the point of the “outlaw” statement. He compares possession of something (bearing arms) with a complex action (consuming alcohol and driving a motorized vehicle).
Outlaw statements like this already divert from the fact that the Bill of Rights reminds us that we are born with the right to bear arms and that the government is not to interfere with it. However, these unfalsifiable statements are useful (when concise) to engage people in a little critical thinking.
Let’s try switching it up a little to see what happens:
“If you outlaw alcohol, only outlaws will have alcohol.”
-and-
“If you outlaw shooting people in the face with a gun, only outlaws will shoot people in the face with guns.”
One statement makes you ponder the foolishness of outlawing something that, in the case of alcohol (and guns in the original), is deeply engrained in human nature and culture with a long history of use. The other statement is too cluttered to be useful of proving anything but itself.
We’ve been down prohibition road already. We couldn’t possibly be dumb enough to make that trip again. Oh, wait…
I’m just old enough to remember when restrictive “literacy tests” were required to vote in some states – but only if you were a certain color. The liberals opposed such things and the Supreme Court rightly threw those laws out. Now its okay for liberals to make it almost impossible for people to exercise their constitutional rights. No double standard here. Move along, nothing to see…..
Wait. The dog was in the spouses lap but employee only
pointed a firearm at the dog? Is this a legit defense now?
Can this be escalated? “I didn’t shoot him officer, I was
merely shooting at the target I asked him to hold on
his chest.”
And what’s with the mental issue thing? Are marriage
counselors now the default professional to treat mental
issues? Should I have a marriage counselor on speed
dial when I get a nutbag on an EMS run?
This post brings so many questions to mind and
there’s not one I can think of that makes the FBI
look good.
It would be ironic because while the police were administering this program, the non-police citizens would be getting an order of magnitude more range time than cops are required to get.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrdQCfgt00Q
Asshats like this one shoot the dog because it ‘proves’ what badasses they are, and they know damn well they can get away with killing a dog. After all, they’re in law enforcement!
I’m not sure if that law will be able to be enforced in NY, not a whole lot of white left on that map.
I’m waiting and hoping that New York splits on gun rights the way West Virginia split off on slavery.
I’m not sure these cases were completely swept under the rug, a few of them list misdemenor or other DUI offences that I have no reason to believe weren’t handled at some level by the local courts. I’m sure some of these folks are “special agents” but alot of FBI employees aren’t. This does ilustrate the key fault in police recruiting, though. They have to hire people.
And yet showing ID for your right to vote is a burden equivalent to a poll tax…
To add to mountocean’s comment, if they hire humans and humans will and do things like this, then it should go as it did for many of the FBI employees in the report summaries:Dismissed
The people are starting upset about the bad taste in their mouths from the laws being rammed down their throat. This is the type of stuff that we need to get out into the media.
So, here’s my question. I’m a NY legislator and the Gov hands me a bill, gives me 20 minutes to read it and wants me to vote. Unless the NY State political system is very different from every other state, I think that I have the choice to say Yay, Nay, or abstain. If I have not had a chance to read it thoroughly, I could always abstain from voting. If most of the reps from the counties in the map above did that, the law might have technically passed, but without a quorum, it would have been a lot easier to fight in court later.
Alternatively, since I’m a cranky old SOB, I probably would have told the party officials ramming this down my throat that either I get time to read and consider it or I will vote “No”.
Unfortunately in the end, it comes down to the same party politics that we have at the National level. Although many of these counties may be against gun restrictions, the simple fact is that these people have elected representatives who are of the same party as the governor. As such, they will most certainly fall in line with their party’s wishes, and pretty much anything that Cuomo wants to ram down the voter’s throats gets done.
If upstate New Yorkers want things to change, then they need to start electing more non-Democrats to the state legislature. The population disparity will almost always ensure that New York City’s population gets to choose the Governor, but my guess is that the sheer number of other counties might give people of different viewpoints a numerical advantage in at least one house of the legislature. That is all that would be needed to block crap like the SAFE act.
Offer made to NYPD for a gun buyback – Guns for Beyonce’ concert tickets!
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gun-buyback-proposal-trade-firearms-beyonc%C3%A9-tickets-195308327.html
Unless Beyonce is also gonna throw a freebie screw in, I don’t see many Glocks getting turned in.
The simple fact is that NY’ers outside of the “8 commie central” don’t give a flying EFF what Cuobama passed. An uncon law is not a law and I don’t know a damned soul that is complying.
Time to invest in RCBS and Dillion accessories.
The Nazgul is pleased with this news, and awaits further details.
Something about that ad is epic. It sort of has the feeling of a movie preview somehow.
Pardon my cynicism, but the actual masterminds behind the Gun Control (or Gun Prohibition) movement know that none of these measures will reduce the criminal misuse of firearms. Their plan is to create rules and requirements that are either impossible or prohibitively expensive to implement, while selling these as “reasonable and common sense” measures to a gullible public. The reason being is that they have a disdain for firearms, and that they have a moral imperative to disarm the public.
You can listen in here. Right now they are debating amendment 27 to HB1150. It is basically HB997, the bill the NRA is backing. It isn’t the best bill, I would change a lot in it. However, it is a decent bill and the best we can probably hope for. If amendment 27 is passed, HB1150 will need to go to a 3rd reading before it can be voted on as law, I believe.
http://www.ilga.gov/house/audvid.asp#
Link already seems taken down. You snooze, you lose, I guess…
I’m sorry, but what is to stop anyone from getting their magazines from a free state? I looked on my Magpul magazines, and they don’t have a single shred of evidence that would locate them to a certain date or place of manufacture. (Except for “Made in USA” doesn’t say CO anywhere and mine were purchased long before any of this was in the pipes) I say continue to flood the market long after the ban takes effect!