Wednesday, July 3, 2013

What about Illinois?

I'm surprised that Mike didn't mention Illinois governor vetoing parts of concealed carry gun bill saying "This is a flawed bill with serious safety problems that must be addressed".

Of course, I think that Illinois should have taken this up on appeal since the court said that "the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues".

Not to mention that the "may issue" laws were proposed by the same organisations which are trying to introduce the more permissive laws back in the 20s and 30s.

In the days when they had no problem with the Second Amendment and gun control...

I bet you lot love eating raw prawns--you certainly seem to be fed them quite a bit by your leaders.

And you call US "sheeple".

15 comments:

  1. "This is a flawed bill with serious safety problems that must be addressed".

    They act like they’re the first state to do this instead of the last.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not last; most recent.

      Expect them to be leading in the states that make all gun laws more restrictive.

      As they should be.

      Delete
    2. Dog Gone, I realize that facts and logic aren't your thing, but how many other states have at least some form of concealed carry licensing or require no license at all?

      Delete
  2. The measure passed with 89 votes in the House and 45 in the Senate, meaning as many as 18 House legislators and nine senators could choose to stand with Quinn and his changes to the bill still would be rejected. That's a tough feat for any governor, not to mention one that has routinely been criticized for issuing demands to lawmakers without working to first build support.

    Quinn is a raging gun banning moron, that got elected to the office riding the coattails of an even bigger moron.

    The house is ready to override the governor, and humiliate him again, just like when they overrode Quinn's rewriting a law allowing instate ammo sales and tried to turn it in to an assault weapons ban.

    Senate Bill 681 allows FOID card holders to mail-order ammunition purchases from in-state licensed firearm dealers. Ammunition purchases from out-of-state dealers are already allowed under the law.

    Supported by the Illinois State Rifle Association and National Rifle Association, Senate Bill 681 does not preempt any portions of the FOID Card Act.

    http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory/97/senate/09700SB0681_11282012_006000M.pdf


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probably not this time; there is a lot of support to restrict guns in IL, an rightly so.

      Delete
    2. Dog Gone, you do realize that you wouldn't have been allowed to carry in Illinois, right?

      Delete
    3. Probably not this time; there is a lot of support to restrict guns in IL, an rightly so.

      Any more insightful predictions?

      Your side does what it does best--lose. That's what losers do.

      Delete
  3. Leave it to a Chicago Democrat to take a true bipartisan compromise and screw it up. The legislation passed with the more than enough votes to override the Governor's veto.
    He has intentionally tried run out the clock running towards the July 9 deadline ordered by the Federal Courts to implement a concealed carry permit system. Perhaps it was some last ditch hope that everyone would have a giant mind change and agree with him.
    The Governor is currently so far out of touch that for some reason he felt that having victims of gun violence that took place during his tenure would be a good thing. And to top it off, even Mayor Bloomberg is backing his Democratic opponent.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Actually, Dog, I don't eat prawns. Too much like cockroaches for my taste.

    Regarding the Constitution, I do an odd thing to understand it. I read what it says.

    But perhaps you'll have noticed that many didn't understand a whole lot of what is in there in the past. We used to think that saying prayers in school didn't violate the First Amendment. We only a little while ago required the police to warn people of their rights. We used to ban authors that are now taught in literature courses. A lot of things have been poorly understood or misunderstood until citizens stood up.

    Here's the biggest problem you have, though. You say we are being fed lies by our leaders. I don't have a leader. I make up my own mind. That's what you object to. You want to lead me, and I won't have any of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No Campy, you don't think and you clearly don't read well for comprehension.

      There is leadership; it's known and recognized as hierarchy, in one form.

      It is significant in passage - and opposition- to legislation.

      There is no basis to assume that those who voted the first time will vote the same next time - if there is a next time.
      That identical pattern of voting does not usually happen.

      Rather with Quinn's opposition, there is at least a 50/50 chance this won't pass second time around.

      Delete
    2. Then it will be interesting to see if he can lead and pull off a legislative upset, or will his veto overridden. Considering that the current vote shows percentages that seem on par with the supposed percentage of people that want universal gun checks.

      Delete
    3. Dog Gone, there's a difference between saying that I don't comprehend good writing and saying that I don't follow your gobbledygook. What on earth are you talking about there?

      And as for calling me Campy, fuck you. You're nothing but a whiny prig who stamps her foot and screams whenever anyone doesn't obey you. You must have missed the day logic got taught in logic class, since your idea of good thinking is to pop in and throw filth around and then leave without responding or providing support for your nonsense. I've tried to be polite to you in the past, but you lack the decency to return that courtesy. You make wild claims about vague achievements that you're unwilling to substantiate, but what I see is someone who wasn't bright enough actually to complete a degree and get a job. You like to see yourself as a sophisticate, but you are, in fact, a child who woke up from a nightmare and stumbled into the room where the adults were talking. Now get a glass of water and go back to bed.

      Delete
  5. Thanks, Laci, for posting this one. I didn't get to it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "There is no basis to assume that those who voted the first time will vote the same next time - if there is a next time.
    That identical pattern of voting does not usually happen."

    Your complete lack of understanding of the legislative process under the Illinois constitution is astounding, the governor's veto is hardly that, in a true dictatorial fiat, Quinn rewrites law all by himself, with no input from the legislature. The Illinois house and Senate (who have no respect for Quinn and see him as a raging buffoon.) are both gearing up to override (return the law to it's original bi-partisan legislated form)

    And your fantasy that it is 50/50 that the legislature is going to allow Quinn to derail this an impose his will on the legislature.

    Quinn tried imposing a semi-auto ban and magazine ban this time last year and got bitch slapped by the legislature, by the exact same vote that they passed the bill in the first place.




    ReplyDelete
  7. Good news. The Illinois legislature has overridden the veto.

    ReplyDelete