Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Effective ban on new handguns in California | Main | Ruminations on the NSA-Verizon datamining »

Illinois governor faces interesting choice

Posted by David Hardy · 7 June 2013 09:41 AM

The Seventh Circuit struck the Illinois complete ban on carrying, with a stay on the ruling's effectiveness extended thru July 9. The legislature has passed a bill which provides for carry permits which (while it has exceptions) is an enormous improvement on the status quo.

The Chicago Tribune reluctantly endorses the bill, noting "Quinn doesn't have to seal the bill with a kiss. But he should take note of two realities. One, a veto would place Illinois at risk of having no law regulating the concealed carry of firearms."

· Chicago aftermath

3 Comments | Leave a comment

Nor'Easter | June 7, 2013 2:30 PM | Reply

This just shows the power the courts can exercise in these matters and warms my heart to see that somebody out there still believes in the constitution. This would have never passed in the corrupt and unfailingly leftist Legislature of Illinois otherwise. Great to see them squirming.

WPZ | June 7, 2013 3:48 PM | Reply

They may be squirming, but not a lot.
We still don't have a law. We aren't going to have permits any time soon, maybe not even this year.
They still have several bullets in their stop-carry gun and we're pretty nearly out.
The 7th's decision was a good tool but it only has so much efficacy.

wrangler5 | June 9, 2013 11:21 AM | Reply

A veto of the bill would leave IL without a statewide law prohibiting gun carry, but there are something like 220 home rule cities, each of which can adopt its own ordinances on the subject, with whatever provisions they choose. (Other than, presumably, a complete ban on all forms of carry.)

Of course, some might be comfortable with no law against carry, others might just prohibit open carry. But given how hard Chicago makes it to even OWN a handgun, what kind of law do you think they'd pass regarding carry? Smaller towns might not want to face the legal costs of defending restrictions on carry and so might do nothing. But a patchwork of differing rules would be a nightmare for anyone moving around or through the state with a firearm.

BTW, IL law regulates firearms in both its criminal code and the Wildlife Code. Does anyone know if the new law supersedes or repeals the Wildlife Code as it relates to guns in cars? Or was the Wildlife Code involved in the federal litigation so that it too was declared unconstitutional?

Leave a comment