Prospects For Concealed Carry In Illinois Improve

In the past, concealed carry bills have tended to have more support in the Illinois House than in the Illinois Senate. CCW bills have in the past been sent to the Senate Public Health Committee which is dominated by Senators from Chicago. They have died in committee as a result.

This year may be different.

Senate President John Cullerton (D-Chicago) said in an interview Tuesday with WSIL-TV in Carbondale that if concealed carry passes the House and there is enough support in the Senate the bill would get a vote.

Tuesday in Carbondale, Cullerton indicated that even though he is opposed to “people having loaded weapons on them,” he would consider assigning the bill to another committee.

Noting that concealed carry has not fared well in the Public Health committee, Cullerton said, “If it does pass the House, if we have enough folks that want to have a vote on the Senate floor we can have that vote.”

While the Illinois House just defeated state pre-emption by not passing that bill with a great enough majority, concealed carry looks it might have enough to pass. Rep. Brandon Phelps (D-Harrisburg) is quoted in the same Chicago Tribune article about concealed carry.

Also today, Rep. Brandon Phelps said he is close to pulling together 71 votes to pass his proposal to allow people to carry a concealed weapon. But Phelps, D-Harrisburg, said he doesn’t plan on calling the bill for a vote until the House returns from its break in late April, giving him time to refine the measure.

“We’re three to four votes short right now,” Phelps said. “But now that all the law enforcement groups are for it, they’re talking about it more and more. But there is definitely a big push from the city of Chicago right now trying to beat this – a huge push.”

Again, as with all things concerning guns in Illinois, it is Chicago versus the rest of the state.

“So Long As It Was Concealed And It Wasn’t Loaded”

WRAL-TV sent reporter Beau Minnick to get “man in the street” perspectives on HB 111 which passed the North Carolina House this past week.

One man said he didn’t object to firearms in parks so  “long as it was concealed and it wasn’t loaded”. I think someone doesn’t quite get the concept behind concealed carry and personal protection.

Based on the other comments – especially the ones from patrons in a sports bar – I think the detail about carrying concealed and not consuming alcohol was conveniently left out of the conversation. Nothing in HB 111 allows a person to carry concealed and consume alcohol. That is still illegal under North Carolina law as it should be.

I must wonder how much footage was left on the editing room floor from this exercise in broadcast journalism.

“In this case, a well-earned gun permit “

The Star-Ledger of Newark is the largest newspaper in the state of New Jersey. It calls itself “The Voice of New Jersey”.  It has traditionally been very pro-gun control.

I wrote a few days ago about the denial of a concealed carry permit for Jeff Muller by Judge David Ironson. Judge Ironson found that Mr. Muller failed to provide proof “of justifiable need”. This despite Mr. Muller being a kidnapping victim who still fears violence from his kidnappers or their families.

I thought Judge Ironson’s decision was ridiculous. I am not alone. The Star-Ledger Editorial Board agrees. In an editorial entitled In this case, a well-earned gun permit, the Star-Ledger said:

Even the staunchest proponents of gun control must admit Jeffrey Muller has a good reason for wanting to pack a handgun.

After describing the ordeal that Mr. Muller endured, they noted he felt unsafe.

Now, lo and behold, the man feels unsafe. He wants a gun permit, because he fears avenging family members of the arrested kidnappers may attack him again. But a Superior Court judge in Morristown this week denied his second request for the permit, saying he provided “no proof of justifiable need” to carry a weapon.

Come again? This guy has more reason than anyone to take advantage of his Second Amendment rights. For God’s sake, give this poor Muller his gun.

If even the Star-Ledger Editorial Board can see that Mr. Muller has a good reason for a concealed carry permit, then what is wrong with the judges in the state of New Jersey that they fail to comprehend that Jeff Muller still faces danger? Does living in a world where their own security is provided for by the taxpayers of the state of New Jersey in the form of armed court bailiffs blind these judges to the real dangers faced by ordinary people? The answer is unfortunately but obviously yes.

An Open Letter From Colleen Lawson To Illinois Legislators

Colleen and David Lawson were two of the plaintiffs in McDonald et al v. Chicago et al. Mrs. Lawson posted the open letter to Illinois legislators today on her Facebook page. She has graciously given me permission to reprint it here.

Dear Legislator:

Could you please help me decide which of my kids lives to save? Here’s the problem:

Last night yet another of my kids found himself on the goodbye end of a robber’s gun as the robber slowly counted down

“5 . . . 4 . . . 3 . . . 2 . . . “

I know you politicians told us “if it saves one life, then keeping guns away from law-abiding citizens is the right thing to do!” but I’m having a little trouble figuring out which life is the one to be saved. I’ve had most of these kids for 20 years or more, and I’m rather fond of them all.

My kid last night? It was his third time facing armed robbers in Chicago, in Illinois. Can you tell me how many times is just right and how many times is too many?

The one last night was in a convenience store at the time. He and his friend had gone into the store to buy soda, and they hid as the robber stuck his gun in the face of the store clerk and began counting down.

Do you give classes in hiding? Wait, that can’t be right, cause many kids get found anyway, and it’s not always easy to stay quiet if your heart is thudding and you’re afraid. Maybe you give classes in what kids should do if they find themselves around guns. No, that’s not right. State Sen. Annazette Collins proposed that idea, to keep kids safe and deglamorize firearms, and she was roundly trounced for the idea.

Mr. Legislator, all my kids have been robbed at gunpoint on the streets of Chicago — well, all the young ones, who still live in Chicago. Does that mean that it’s better for my kids to live someplace else? Wait, that can’t be right, because you keep telling us that Chicago is a good place to raise children.

Is it best to just stay home? That can’t be right, cause the first time he was robbed at gunpoint he was on the steps of his own house.

Maybe being in a group is best. No, that can’t be right, either. The last time, three of my kids had grouped together for safety as they walked home from a friend’s house. But their attackers had grouped together, too. Three unarmed victims, three robbers with guns, just over three blocks from home in what was once one of the three safest areas of the city.

Mr. Legislator, I have tried to keep my family safe by living in an area where lots of policemen live. But it seems to be open season on cops, too, in Chicago. Even Thomas Wortham, a cop who was also the son of a cop, was shot in front of his parents home as his father watched.

Should I try one of the other “safe” areas? No, less than twenty-four hours ago, an acquaintance of mine was in a group of 4 and got robbed in Lincoln Park by . . . a group of 4.

Maybe only going out in daylight is the answer? Or maybe in an area that’s more retail than residential? Gosh, that can’t be right: Two of my girls were attacked mid-afternoon as they waited for a bus right outside a major shopping mall.

Perhaps you say that everything’s fine because none of my kids were shot or killed, and because last night’s robber chose to be contented with the money and goods, and let the clerk and customers go. But it would have been hard to say that as I wiped the blood from the face of the one who’d had her head slammed into the concrete sidewalk as she and her friends were robbed.

And that can’t be right, anyhow, cause not everybody’s kids escape uninjured.

Can you tell me if there is a questionnaire that we give to a criminal to determine which ones will be “nice” and not kill their victims? Just hurt them a “little” or leave them in fear for a while? How much is “a little”? How long is an okay “while”?

Maybe I’ve misunderstood the whole “if it saves one life” policy; Does it mean that, so long as it’s MY kids life that’s saved by being unarmed on the streets of Chicago, the disarmed citizen policy in Illinois is still justified? Which kid? What do I tell the siblings? What do I tell my neighbors, as they mourn for their slain kids?

What if it’s your kid that gets killed or hurt, Mr. Legislator, and I’m unable to help?

A couple of these kids aren’t mine by birth: they just hang out at my house cause they feel safe here. Should I tell them to stop feeling safe?

To me, they’re all my kids, and I tell them every day how valuable they all are. One studies daily for her GED, one’s in college to be a grade school teacher, one’s still in high school, one works twelve hours a day helping underprivileged children, one’s less than a semester away from getting his law degree. Should I ease up on the value talk? Should I tell them that, “Hey, folks die every day, that’s just the way it is?” Devalue life a little bit so they don’t think there’s anything unusual about being helpless victims?

No. That can’t be right. Because that is exactly how you grow a criminal. You desensitize him to the value of life, take away his sense of what is right and what is wrong, and expose him to crime after crime after crime after crime until he sees no hope for the future and learns to either be a victim or to look for victims.

And that is exactly how you grow a victim. Let them know that there is no chance of anyone nearby who has the ability to help them if they find themselves at the mercy of an attacker. Gee, it sounds like the same thing you tell a would-be attacker, doesn’t it? Let them know that they need have no fear of anyone being able to fight back. And they will come. And they do come. And keep on coming. There are entire blocks in Chicago where street attacks have occurred weekly — WEEKLY, Legislator! — for years without a single arrest being made.

Dear Legislator, please tell me what I am to say to my kids today, when they ask me why this keeps happening to them. I really want to know. I don’t mean to cut into your busy day. I just want to do what’s right.

Don’t you?

Maybe it would be easiest to just share with me what you tell your own kids and I will share it with mine.

I totally understand that your intentions were good when Illinois first believed that criminals would obey the same no-gun laws that the law-abiding follow … but what do you tell your kids when they ask you why we have not ripped away that errant foundation as has every other state within America? What do you tell them when they ask how you will know which of them will be hurt or killed by an attacker, and how you have chosen that to be okay by you?

What do you tell your kids when they ask why we elected you, then gave some of you the right to conceal carry, and others of you the expense of a protection detail, and then nod our heads in submission as you tell the rest of us that it is better that we do not get the same ability to defend ourselves?

Criminals know that there are less than a thousand Chicago cops armed and able to stop them during any given shift these days.

I personally know thousands of Illinois private citizens who take their citizen responsibility seriously enough that 34 other states trust them to calmly, competently and maturely carry concealed firearms as they live their daily lives. The children in those states can stand on their own steps, shop in convenience stores and wait for busses near malls with the confidence that they and would-be criminals are constantly aware that someone may be right nearby to thwart an attack and help them stay safe. Someone who has so committed themselves to time, training and mastery of defense that they stand out easily as the calmest ones seen in an emergency situation.

But in Illinois, criminals and victims walk our streets with only the confidence that, unless you — personally, Legislator — stand in support of HB 148 and bring concealed carry to the lone holdout state of Illinois, no one will ever come to your children’s aid if they, like my kids, find themselves at the mercy of an attack. This can’t be right, can it?

Though I have taken the time to learn and master the calm and skill necessary to defend my family and yours, I cannot personally afford a security detail for my family at this time. If you won’t allow me to defend my children – and yours – in the face of armed attack on the streets of Illinois, will you kindly share your protection detail with my family? My neighbor wants to hear your answer, too.

And, if you will not, then tell me, please: What shall I say to my kid today, as I help him through the sound he’s heard again and again for the past 12 hours?

You remember — the one that goes “5 . . . 4 . . . 3 . . . 2 . . . ?”

How long should he wait for the final “click”?

How long should I?

College Planning Courtesy of CSGV

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence is horrified at the thought that trained, state-certified, law-abiding adults should be allowed to carry concealed on the property of higher education institutions. To that end, they have established a new website called Armed Campuses. The website lists those schools where concealed carry on campus is permitted.

CSGV tries to equate gun-free zones as safe places.

The overwhelming majority of colleges and universities in the United States of America prohibit the carrying of firearms on their campuses. These gun-free policies have helped to make our postsecondary education institutions some of the safest places in the country.

To justify this position they use 1999 stats from the Department of Education that says that the criminal homicide rate on college campuses is lower than the criminal homicide rate for the United States as a whole. While their stats may be correct insofar as they go, no effort is made to compare rates for urban campuses versus rural campuses or anything in between. Moreover, using 1999 stats cuts out the murders that happened at gun-free Virginia Tech and gun-free Northern Illinois University.

The site tries to say that rapes and other violent crimes perpetrated against college students happens off campus 93% of the time. That is like saying that if a student at UNC-Chapel Hill is robbed on the north side of Franklin Street it is off-campus crime while if it happened on the south-side it may well have been on campus. It is still a violent crime.

When discussing so-called gun-free zones, I prefer to remember what Massad Ayoob said about them on Tom Gresham’s GunTalk radio program a few years ago. He said “so-called gun-free zones are nothing but hunting preserves for psychopaths.”

If I were a parent, I would use the Armed Campuses website as a place to look for a place to send my child and not as a place to avoid.

Why I Don’t Live In Illinois

The Complementary Spouse’s mother lives in O’Fallon, Illinois and her father is buried there. O’Fallon is a pleasant little town about 20 miles east of St. Louis. It is also the home of Scott Air Force Base. I like going out to visit and enjoy the solid, mid-western atmosphere of the town and its people.

I couldn’t live there.

The guns laws of the State of Illinois and the impact on the politics of the state from Chicago would drive me nuts. Thanks to a story on the IllinoisCarry forum linked by Thirdpower at Days of our Trailers blog, I have another reason.

A good friend of mine received his AZ ccw application yesterday. He filled it out and then went to the Champaign police department this morning to get fingerprinted. He was denied because they said they will not do fingerprints for ccw apps from any state because IL is not a carry state. He informed them that he is aware that IL is not a carry state, that the AZ license is not honored here and that it is a felony to exercise the right to bear arms in IL.

He explained that he is wanting to get this AZ permit because it is honored in IN where he spends a great deal of time along with about 28 other states. They still would not print him.

He asked so you’re telling me that there are gang bangers on W Bradly right now carrying handguns that are not old enough to possess a handgun by federal law, do not have a FOID or even know what a FOID is and they’re committing crimes, killing people and raping women, meanwhile I a tax paying, law abiding citizen am standing here in the Champaign police department trying to do the right thing knowing full well that after I get these prints, fill out this application, pay $60 for app and $30 for the prints I still won’t be able to carry in IL but am still being denied just getting a set of fingerprints done?

The answer was YES. We do not do fingerprints for ccw apps because IL is not a carry state. They also told him that no law agency in IL will do this for the same reason. He explained that that was false because he knows dozens of people who have out of state ccw permits that required fingerprints.

Finally it was admitted that this was a decision that was made a couple years ago specifically within the Champaign police department and it was made by “the people upstairs”.

My friend is a bit frustrated as a citizen, as a tax payer and as a law abiding citizen who is just trying to do the right thing.

Another person on the IllinoisCarry forum followed up with the Champaign Police Department on their refusal to do fingerprinting for a person to obtain an out-of-state CCW permit. He spoke with a lady in their records department.

She acknowledged that CPD will not print for any CCW permits “because it’s illegal in IL”.

I pointed out that these were forms necessary for other states to conduct their business and why was it a problem for them to fill out print cards for other states.

“It’s an ethical issue,” she replied.

I asked who made that decision not to print “for ethical issues”. She didn’t have a name.

Ethical issue? I must live on another planet from the decision makers in this police department. I would consider it unethical to refuse to provide the fingerprinting services. Arrgh!

HB 111 – Concealed Carry In Restaurants And Parks Passes Out Of Committee

HB 111, the bill in the North Carolina State House that would allow concealed carry in restaurants that serve alcohol and would allow concealed carry in parks, passed out of the House Judiciary A Subcommittee today.

Grass Roots North Carolina issued a full report on the subcommittee hearings including news on all amendments this evening.

In a bruising battle fought by both legislators and GRNC’s Legislative Action Team, HB 111, “Handgun Permit Valid in Parks & Restaurants” fought its way out of the NC House Judiciary A Subcommittee and now heads for a floor vote as early as tomorrow. Both strengthening and weakening changes were made to the bill.

REP. HILTON’S SUBSTITUTE

Working with GRNC, bill sponsors Mark Hilton (R-Catawba, ****), Jeff Barnhart (R-Cabarrus, ****) and Fred Steen (R-Rowan, ****) produced an enhanced version of HB 111 which included concealed carry not only in municipal parks, but in state parks as well. The substitute was quickly adopted as the working vehicle for the bill.

COMMITTEE FIGHT

Anti-gun Reps. Deborah Ross (D-Wake, GRNC 0-star), Bill Faison (D-Durham, **), and Larry Hall (D-Durham, 0-star) tried to tie up the bill with repeated questioning and with contradictory and shifting amendments. Ross demanded that, in restaurants, servers ask diners ordering alcohol whether they are carrying firearms. In a confusing array of amendments to amendments, ultimately the committee passed an amendment to the bill under which restaurants MAY but are not REQUIRED to ask those ordering alcohol of their status. As noted below, GRNC will vociferously oppose even this weakened language on the House floor.

An equally confusing series of amendments was offered by Faison, who tried to remove both municipal and state parks from the bill. After Hilton, Barnhart and Steen opposed Faison’s proposals, they ultimately failed in an 8-5 vote.

In an effort to tie up the bill, Faison repeatedly dogged bill sponsors with questions about why permit-holders need to protect their families in restaurants, demanding unavailable crime statistics and complaining “Where’s the problem?” Hall painted fanciful pictures of shootouts between patrons in restaurants, and demanded exclusion of parks for the sake of “youth groups,” saying he didn’t want permit-holders “further endangering” kids.

But leading the charge to subvert gun owners’ ability to protect themselves was Ross, who claimed support for her weakening amendment from the Restaurant Association (whose lobbyist then stood to oppose the Ross amendment), and whined that concealed carry is specifically exempted from the right to keep and bear arms enumerated in the North Carolina Constitution.

UPDATE: Gary Robertson of the Associated Press has more on the bill passing out of committee and the opponents reactions to the bill.

Know Who You Are Dating

Sean at An NC Gun Blog has a story about a man shooting his girlfriend at the veterinary clinic where she worked in Johnston County. Turns out he was a convicted felon which should have made this sort of crime “unpossible” as felons are precluded by law from possessing firearms.

One moral of this sad story is that you shouldn’t be dating convicted felons as they just aren’t good dating material. Sean gives excellent advice on how to make sure the man (or woman) you are dating is not a felon.

Ladies. Can I talk to you for a moment? Here’s the deal. It’s expensive to get a full background check on your beau, so here’s how you can shortcut the process. Ask to see his concealed weapon license. The license will tell you two things. First, he’s not a felon, druggie, wife beater, or adjudicated mentally incompetent. Second, it will show that he’s capable of defending you. You might want to pick up a Concealed Carry License for yourself. I mean, how does he know YOU’RE not a felon?

Concealed carry permits – not just to carry concealed but to improve your love life. What more could you ask?

Illinois Concealed Carry Bill Reported Out Of Committee

Concealed carry legislation is on the move in the State of Illinois!

The Agriculture & Conservation Committee passed HB 148 out of committee by a 12-2 vote. HB 148 is the bill that would finally establish concealed carry in Illinois and would preempt home rule on firearm regulations. The bill has 36 sponsors and co-sponsors.

HB 148 would:

Creates the Family and Personal Protection Act. Permits the county sheriff to issue permits to carry concealed firearms to persons at least 21 years of age who meet certain requirements. Requires an applicant for a permit to have completed specified training requirements developed by the Illinois Law Enforcement Training Standards Board consisting of classroom instruction and live firing exercises. Preempts home rule. Amends the Illinois Police Training Act and the Criminal Code of 1961 to make conforming changes. Effective immediately.

This bill now goes to the floor of the Illinois State House. With IGOLD – Illinois Gun Owners Lobby Day – set for this Thursday, I don’t think the timing could be any better.

H/T ISRA