The Village of Deerfield tried to do an end run around Illinois’ preemption rules to pass a so-called “assault weapons” and “high capacity magazine” ban. Guns Save Life promptly filed suit and won a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the law. About a month ago, GSL won a permanent injunction blocking enforcement.
Regrettably, the Village of Deerfield didn’t get the message about infringing on the civil rights of the village’s residents and visitors. Just like southern communities that voted for Jim Crow laws to disenfranchise blacks in an earlier time, today’s Village of Deerfield board jumped back in with both feet and voted unanimously to appeal the judge’s decision to an Illinois Appellate Court.
The Chicago Tribune has the story:
The Village of Deerfield plans to appeal a judge’s March 22 ruling permanently blocking the village from enforcing a ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines.
In a short statement Tuesday, the village announced that Mayor Harriet Rosenthal and the village board had unanimously agreed April 15 to appeal the ruling of Lake County Circuit Court Judge Luis Berrones to the Illinois Appellate Court.
In that ruling, Berrones contended that Deerfield overstepped its authority in April 2018 when it enacted a ban on assault weapons after the Illinois legislature had declared such regulations to be the exclusive power of the state.
Gun rights’ groups that filed suit against Deerfield include Guns Save Life, which has the backing of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action; the Illinois State Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation.
In 2013, the Illinois legislature had given municipalities until July 19 to enact assault weapons regulations before a new Illinois Concealed Carry Act and an amended Firearm Owner’s Identification Card Act eliminated their ability to do so. Timely laws could later be amended, state statute specified.
Deerfield officials assert that the 2018 ban on assault weapons is an amendment to a 2013 ordinance that defined assault weapons and required their safe storage and transportation within the village.
Recall how the Brady Campaign’s lawyers and Perkins Coie, the firm tied to the Clinton Foundation, have partnered with Deerfield to argue against civil rights. Meanwhile, on the other side Guns Save Life, with support from the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action argues for the cause of freedom.
Then there’s the fact that Deerfield’s arguments supporting the need for their would-be radical gun ban make no sense. We covered some of them earlier right here.
Brady Campaign Defends Deerfield, IL Gun Ban With Insane Arguments
The defendants’ brief (click for .pdf) in opposition to our motion for injunctive relief argues the village’s ban on rifles is necessity “to protect the public health, safety and welfare.” Then they boldly cite criminal misuse of handguns as justification for their ban on scary-looking rifles.
Hard to believe, right? It’s true. They cite the South Carolina church killings and the attempted assassination of Gabby Giffords — both crimes committed with handguns — as reasons to ban rifles.
They also cited the Washington D.C. Naval Yard spree killing. There, a lunatic used a no-frills Mossberg 500 shotgun purchased at Dick’s Sporting Goods to kill most of his victims. He also used a handgun stolen from a murdered security guard.
Yes, the Village argues that they need to ban rifles because of criminals who used handguns and shotguns to kill people. That’s some sound logic, right? Not so much.
Wait. It gets worse. The defendants’ brief also names two domestic Islamic terror attacks as reasons to ban guns in Deerfield. Yes, they actually cited the Islamic terror attacks in San Bernardino, CA and at the Orlando Pulse nightclub as justification for taking our guns. So because the U.S. Government can’t protect us from Islamic terror attacks, the Village of Deerfield should disarm law-abiding Americans?
The brief also cites the Sutherland Springs, Texas church massacre. At the same time, it fails to note that a good guy’s AR-15 stopped the killings.
The audacity of these control freaks knows no limits and no shame.
I serve as Guns Save Life’s Executive Director and we look forward to our day at the Appellate Court.
Interestingly enough the Illinois Supreme Court just ruled in the unanimous Webb decision that categorical bans on commonly used “arms” is unconstitutional. So if stun guns and TASERs are in “common use” in Illinois, as noted by the Illinois Supreme Court, then America’s favorite rifle and similar modern sporting rifles certainly share that common use designation.
In other words, the Brady legal team and the Village’s Clinton-affiliated law firm will have tough sledding to enact their scheme to deny village residents their rights.