“Illinois is the only state in the Union that flatly forbids law-abiding citizens from carrying operable firearms in public for self-defense. Illinois attempts to defend this ban as a public safety measure, asserting that mayhem would ensue if law-abiding citizens were licensed to bear weapons in public. The inconvenient truth that every other state in the nation allows some form of public carriage of firearms by at least some private, law-abiding citizens—and does so without fostering the mayhem forecast by the Defendants here—gives the lie to Illinois’s pleas that firearms in the hands of any and all law-abiding citizens are uniquely a threat to public safety in this state, even if nowhere else in America.” Mary Shepard’s attorney opening statement in Shepard v. Madigan [Click here to hear Alan Gura’s debate with the presiding judges.]
After taking all those hits to the head shes a pretty luck lady to be alive.
Motrin. Need more Motrin.
Please don’t tell me LEOs beat that lady up for carrying….
Thats hard to look at…poor lady.
Every politician in the state of Illinois who voted to ban concealed carry should have to look at this picture everyday for the rest of their lives!!!! That is look at it from the inside of their jail cell !!!! Everyone last one of them should be convicted of attempted murder and aggravated assault and battery for voting away Illinois citizens rights to protect themselves!!!!
I wonder how they would feel if that had been one of their mother’s or wife???!!!
They do not feel,because Illinois politicians do not possess a sense of ethics. Look at Obama.
Not to long ago Chicago Magazine published a brave article detailing the relationships between street gangs and Chicago aldermen. Among other things, the Gangs agreed to become ‘workers’ for the Democrat alderman’s election campaign. AKA, vote for Alderman Munoz….or get jumped in the stairwell.
In exchange, the gangs enjoyed protection by the City government for their crimes. Since the Chicago PD answers to the Alderman, this meant law and order effectively ceased in the Windy City.As one can imagine, having your collar let out of prison hours after being nailed for drug possession can cool the motivation of LE to risk it all for king and country.
Some of these turds are in State Office. Something to note next time one considers the insanity that comes out of Illinois.
Link to Chicago Magazine article, hopefully the authors aren’t in Witness Protection somewhere: http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/January-2012/Gangs-and-Politicians-An-Unholy-Alliance/
Everyone likes to quote the 2nd Amendment as a contingency plan in case government becomes tyrannical. Well this example shows another extremely important reason for the 2nd Amendment: when criminals become tyrannical and government either ignores them, fails to do anything about them, or in this case is in bed with them.
The 2nd Amendment isn’t for the times when everything is going right — it’s for the times when everything is going wrong.
I wish people would realize that fact … and that it takes a lot of time to change state or federal laws when people really need the 2nd Amendment.
Yes, this is the way it has always been, and it has a name: The Machine. Daley didn’t invent it, but he did perfect it. Before the black gangs, there were Irish gangs, and the pols hired them to run the polls. Most of them became cops and firemen when they were too old to be mugs anymore.
Old news!! The same weekend the Zimmerman thing was going down, there were 39 shootings in Chicago. I think 6 died. Since we have been in Afganistan, more people have been shot or killed in Chicago than the US losses in Afganistan. MSM will not cover this.
GOOD LORD this poor lady!!
I’m told the story behind this one is some punk a-hole robbed and assaulted Ms. Shepard and another member of her church and took the church’s money, a little less than $600. Heard that Shepard had a CCW in another state, but due to Illinois politicians infinte retardation, was not allowed to carry in that state.
Anti gunners have no common sense or sense of responsibility.
Too bad a posse can’t be formed and a rope procured for a purpose.
And this is yet another example of why state concealed carry laws that criminalize concealed carry (for licensees) in churches are wrong.
Ahhh….. Chicago. Where tolerance of crime and criminals is just another form of redistribution of wealth supported by government.
Please tell me the animal that did this has been caught and put down…
Disclaimer: No suspects were harmed in the development of this story.
Remain calm, carry on.
I wonder what Mikey would have to say about this one.
“She’s alive isn’t she? So she didn’t really need a gun.”?
“Anecdotal. These things are one-in-a-million.”?
“Look how old she is, if she’d been carrying a gun for the last 20 years or so then she probably would’ve shot herself by now.”?
The judges, police officers and prosecutors responsible for such injustices will never be held accountable in this country.
You know years ago frontier justice did serve a purpose at times!!!! Yes not all trials and convictions were truly just but in this case a little frontier justice would be a very good application of persuasion to do the right thing and make those responsible(politicos/thugs,etc) pay for the crime they caused and perpetrated!!!
Yes she is licensed for ccw in either one or two other states!!!
I hope this woman’s body and spirit heal. Overall, I prefer the people to be armed and the government unarmed.
so can she sue the state of Illinois for contributing to her injuries?
Depends on how good the lawyer is lol
In all seriousness could Ms. Shepard sue? the govt is supposed to protect their citizens and the politicians of chicago have failed miserably. Their duty as elected officials is (supposed to be) to the people they serve and represent. They NEED to be replaced.
could Ms. Shepard sue?
if you mean “file papers,”the anser is yes. But that’s it. Any such case would be immediately dismissed on motion.
U.S. Supreme Court ruling, DeShaney v. Winnebago Cty. DSS, 489 U.S. 189 (1989) Decided February 22, 1989:
“Petitioner is a child who was subjected to a series of beatings by his father, with whom he lived. Respondents, a county department of social services and several of its social workers, received complaints that petitioner was being abused by his father, and took various steps to protect him; they did not, however, act to remove petitioner from his father’s custody. Petitioner’s father finally beat him so severely that he suffered permanent brain damage, and was rendered profoundly retarded. Petitioner and his mother sued respondents under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that respondents had deprived petitioner of his liberty interest in bodily integrity, in violation of his rights under the substantive component of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, by failing to intervene to protect him against his father’s violence. …
Held: Respondents’ failure to provide petitioner with adequate protection against his father’s violence did not violate his rights under the substantive component of the Due Process Clause. Pp. 489 U. S. 194-203.
(a) A State’s failure to protect an individual against private violence generally does not constitute a violation of the Due Process Clause, because the Clause imposes no duty on the State to provide members of the general public with adequate protective services. The Clause is phrased as a limitation on the State’s power to act, not as a guarantee of certain minimal levels of safety and security; while it forbids the State itself to deprive individuals of life, liberty, and property without due process of law, its language cannot fairly be read to impose an affirmative obligation on the State to ensure that those interests do not come to harm through other means.”
In other words, you are on your own, pilgrim. For a good selection of horror stories on this subject, read a book titled “Call 911 and Die” by Richard Stevens.
My face looked like that in Feb, 2010 after I slipped and fell down a flight of concrete steps and did a face plant on a piece of machinery parked at the bottom of the stairs. I only mention this because I know how much her injuries must have hurt. Mine was an accident, hers was inflicted by wild animals that need to be culled from the herd. Please tell me they caught the guys that did this……. ok, I did some Googling and yes they caught the scum bag and he got 23 years for the crime. More info here:
http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/2011/05/mary-shepard-victim-of-thug-and-chicago.html
I listened to the whole recording and it sounded like the Judges on the panel weren’t buying the defense’s arguments (which were terrible).
Gura . . . Not good.
I listened to the whole recording as well. I got the sense that the judges were not buying either side. They pressed Gura for broad standards to “regulate”. And they pressed the state attorney general to that a complete ban is not reasonable.
I think the judges advocate for a Maryland type of situation for concealed carry for “just cause”.
I agree. The court seemed intent on discerning limits on both sides of the issue–too restrictive versus permissable restricted. I am not sure that they should go there. Judge Posner was suggesting that the court could “recommend” to Illinois what might be permissable, but I am not so sure that it can or for that matter should do that.
I think the judges advocate for a Maryland type of situation for concealed carry for “just cause”.
Why would the judges ever push for an MD-style system when that style system was just struck down by Judge Legg in the District Court for MD? The state’s appeal is in the 4th Circuit right now and the State submitted their initial brief a couple of weeks ago.
I am fully aware of Judge Legg’s decision for Maryland and that his decision, if it survives appeal, will only apply to Maryland and perhaps a few surrounding states. (I don’t know the exact extent of Judge Legg’s jurisdiction or of the 4th Circuit but I know it doesn’t include Illinois.) So technically speaking Judge Legg’s decision isn’t binding on Illinois. And even if it were, who ever said judges are interested in
what is rightrights?It will only apply to Maryland, as it construed one clause in the Maryland statute. What got the gunnies excited was that it specifically rejected an argument–made here by the State of Illinois, and as held by the Maryland Supreme Court–that the 2A does not extend outside the home. I don’t understand how they can argue from Heller’s language that the apex of the right is in the home to the conclusion that it disappers once you leave private property. This is the crux of the issue that needs to be resolved in our favor. Everything after that is pretty much downhill.
I can’t figure out why Gura didn’t say “Yes, your honor. Several states, including Tennessee, Ohio, and Arizona allow the carrying of guns in bars by licensed individuals on the condition that they do not consume alcohol. It is commonly referred to the designated driver exemption.”
That’s the worst makeup I’ve ever seen.
Living in the state of Illinois, I believe the only way we will be allowed CC is if the courts declares the law unconstitutional, forcing the state to act. The chicago political machine is too strong, it will stop all efforts of the legislature.
God, these judges are morons.
Yo! Judges! A world exists outside Illinois. Other states even. Where people carry guns with them on a daily basis. Even in bars.
And shut up about the Eighteenth Century already.
But they are only considering whether an Illinois statute barring carrying of handguns is constitutional. and yes, the judges are aware of what you say–they so indicated in argument. But is this a legislative or a judicial issue was where they were going.
No, no. You guys don’t understand. We’re all a bunch of criminals here in the great state of Illinois. I tells ya, if I could get my hands on a gun I’d be slaughtering everyone in sight. It’s just the way we are. Why, just the other day, a little old lady step in front of me and I spent the next thirty minutes coming up with creative ways to make her pay. Of course, by the time I came out of my fantasy, she was gone. Lucky for her.
The dirty little secret, that you won’t find in the history books, is that the other states got together and created the state of Illinois so that they would have a place to send their criminal elements. Just think ‘Escape from New York’. Our leaders who are, by definition, our betters, know what murderous scum we are. They’re just taking care of us.
God bless her, I am so glad she survived.
I am completely floored, some joker would beat and rob a 68 year old woman, and of her church money of all things!
I hope he is buhbuhs girl in the slammer. Seriously he deserves so much for doing something that is just so wrong.
I am so glad IL has no CCW. You know how it has cut down on the crime rate, especially Chicago!
I know a lot of folks want the Federal Government to stay out of 2A issues. They want to fought at the state level. Honestly I would love to have SCOTUS simply apply 2A directly to the states. Any other laws would then be mute. This pretty much would allow the SAF and everyone else to sue any laws restricting firearms, either carry, or sale etc. “Shall not be infringed” will get used a lot.
So if you have a 30 round magazine, or no bullet button, who cares! If they arrest you then you sue.
While listening to the whole recording, I couldn’t help but notice how the judges kept tripping over the entire debate. They clearly didn’t like complete prohibition — seeing both historical and current day cases for a compelling interest in self defense. As they pressed Gura for how the courts could allow the states to restrict the right, they seemed to keep touching on how arbitrary any restrictions could be — and that allowing restrictions means Illinois could
criminalizerestrict as they do.I think the notion of restrictions creates a logical problem. If you allow any restrictions at all, there is no simple way to prevent
stupidarbitrary restrictions and there is no simple recourse to appeal such restrictions.The only compelling arguments I have heard for locations where open or concealed carry could/should be restricted are in prisons and mental hospitals. Those locations are highly secured and every “guest” is strip searched. I can go along with that. Anything else is just bossing people around.
I have heard people try to argue that courtrooms should be restricted as well. The problem is that court buildings are not highly secured, several judges and prosecutors carry, and there have been incidents of defendants overpowering bailiffs and using their pistols to kill people in the court room and/or building. I have yet to hear a compelling solution to court buildings.
Otherwise I don’t see any reason for restrictions. Armed criminals will do whatever they want to do anyway. And armed citizens are not “snapping” and shooting up public places in droves.
What a tragedy. The worst part is that she was denied the legal means of self defense.
I really despise the liberal political machine in Chicago.
IMHO what she needs to do is file a class action lawsuit against the individual Illinois politicians for negligence, gross misconduct, and anything else a damn good lawyer could come up with!!!! Make the people who are ultimately responsible for this (the politicians) pay every penny of her medical bills that are a result of this crime for the rest of her life, pay back the churches money with interest, and make their ass’es walk chicago’s mean streets every night for a year without any means of protection!!!!! Not even a cell phone!!!!! Maybe the NRA-ILA or another such org needs to get involved!!!!! Maybe you can’t sue the state itself but you can sue the individuals!!!!! Just my opinion!!!!’