« Nikki Goeser: How Gun Control Killed My Husband | Main | an interesting find »
Illinois changes!
I was just told that the House and Senate overrode the governor's amendatory veto. The new law takes immediate effect. It even has limited reciprocity: out of state holders of CCW can carry inside their car, but not on their person.
UPDATE: Howard Nemerov reports that it takes a 60% vote to override a veto. In the House, the vote was 102-13 (89%) and in the Senate 45-12 (79%). This is a stunning defeat for the governor, esp since his party controls both houses.
Daily Kos, in a surprising favorable post, says the vote was 77-31 and 41-17. That'd be 71% and 70%. Breitbart is reporting same figures as Kos.
UPDATE: I got the first set of figures from Howard Nemerov's post. I can't check the link here, because PJ Media has a script that gives my browser fits.
14 Comments | Leave a comment
It seems everyone on the world is reporting the same vote tallies as Kos and Breitbart except you. Where did you get your figures?
Illinois politicians have known for decades that the state residents would just kill each other if they were allowed to carry guns, which is why the politicians have worked so hard to keep it illegal until now. Of course nonresidents are much worse, and would simply come in and kill all the residents if THEY were allowed to bring their hidden guns into the state. But if you make nonresidents pay a lot of money to bring their guns in then they WON'T shoot all the residents, so that'll be OK then.
You've gotta be really smart to be a politician in Illinois and know all this stuff.
They got state preemption and the need for supermajorities is gone. They can now more easily incrementally improve their law, lowering fees, lessening training, expanding permitted locations, removing signage, etc, just like most of the early adopter shall-issue states did back in the '90s.
People think too short term and "want it all right now" without remembering how long it took to get the "standard" for shall-issue to be what, for instance, Wisconsin just passed.
My home of Alaska had no carry in 1993, shall-issue with a bunch of negatives (carry limited to caliber and action type qual'd with, signage with force of law, little reciprocity, no restaurant carry, etc) in '94 but we steadily improved the law until, in 2004, just a decade after first passage, we got Con Carry.
This is a big win and can only get better.
So that means the final state has fallen. With the exception of DC every state has some sort of licensed carry. Here's hoping the trend continues and we all get Vermont/Arizona style lawlessness.
While this is indeed a large victory, there is much, much more to come.
Chicago is the home of a large part of the organized gun-control movement. The anti-gun fervor in the Windy City is very strong, and backed by a lot of money and power.
Speaking as a lifelong Illinoisan, and one who has been an active participant in the drive towards carry, I still have to say I'm somewhat in shock. I honestly did not think I'd live to see the day carry would be lawful in the Prairie State.
Of course, it isn't yet, and it won't be for a long time. The process is key, and the process was handed to the Illinois State Police. Woefully underfunded (they can't even keep enough patrol cars on the Chicago Tollway system to hold the average speed below 75mph) and strongly politicized, the ISP actually campaigned mightily against the law: their Legislative testimony from their PR sergeant was stunning: he lied that the ISP troopers only carry one gun and with fewer than ten rounds aboard- in their G22s.
Now, the ISP has six months to footdrag, whine, and obfuscate through the process of establishing the ridiculous requirements. Not the least of those is sixteen hours of "training"! Now, I own a busy training business and this would seem to be a boon to us, but the absurdity of getting people to sit through sixteen hours of (what? No one knows yet!) is stunning.
Then, our agents of government have another three months to issue the permits themselves. Given that this is an agency mandated by law to issue our FOID cards in 30 days and is running out to some four months, heaven only knows what will come out of the other end of that machine.
Then, the onslaught of the anti-gun forces is merely ramping up now, inspired by their beating in this one issue. They're very, very busy already formulating new restrictions and curtailments. The Chicago media is awash in stage-setting narrative about how fearful we all are around here of drunken shooting rampages in the various Chili's and Olive Gardens.
They're not done, and even when carry is all but impossible in the Chicagoland region (where more than half the state's population resides), they won't rest.
I'll go for a permit, and we're going for the ISP "approval" for instructing the permit requirement, but it will more of an exercise than anything productive.
OMG! Conceled carry!!! Dodge City! Blood in the streets! Just like...
Wait, they keep saying that and it never happens.
Of course, there was blood in the streets due to lawless gunplay in Chicago last weekend and the weekend before that and the weekend before that and etc., etc.
I'm just enjoying watching Quinn and Daley squirm and suffer.
Regarding the partial "reciprocity" part for out of stater's with guns in their cars ...
Does that allow us to carry loaded firearms, or just "transport" firearms? "Transport" meaning unloaded and locked in a case. The bills words seems like the former, but from looking at the FAQ on the ISP site they seem to believe the latter.
Experts?
Since the bill is about concealed carry, it seems from the context that it is indeed for carrying(?)
As to comments 9&10, here is the applicable passage from the passed bill. It's clear from this that carrying within the vehicle by an out-of-stater is now legal:
Nothing hing in this Act shall prohibit a non-resident from
transporting a concealed firearm within his or her vehicle in
Illinois, if the concealed firearm remains within his or her vehicle and the non-resident:
(1) is not prohibited from owning or possessing a
firearm under federal law;
(2) is eligible to carry a firearm in public under the
laws of his or her state or territory of residence; and
(3) is not in possession of a license under this Act.
If the non-resident leaves his or her vehicle unattended,
he or she shall store the firearm within a locked vehicle or
locked container within the vehicle in accordance with
subsection (b) of Section 65 of this Act
Thanks! It sure looks that way to me, too, and it seems pretty clear.
Fortunately it'll be a while before I go back to Chicago, so by then there'll probably be pretty clear guidance as to how this is being enforced.
Ironically ... as an out of stater, I believe this gives me the right to carry my firearm in Illinois immediately, since this went into effect immediately, while Illinoisians have to wait for the entire process to work it's way through and for licenses to be issued.
Uh, I don't think it says non-residents can carry in Illinois under their own license- just "transport" in a vehicle.
Illinois has resident and non-resident licenses under the new law, and no recognition or reciprocity that I've heard of- for actual carry.
I meant "carry" as in a car only. I was referring to the clause right above.
If this clause allows me to carry a loaded firearm in my vehicle ready to use because I meet the standards, then I may have rights that locals do not yet have (no they're still discussing whether limitations are allowable while ISP is working on getting out permits).
Reading the law as passed looks like freedom does have a price and that price is expensive for a non resident of Illinois.