- Joined
- May 5, 2006
- Messages
- 1,777
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Illinois Supreme Court Remands Second Amendment Challenge in Wilson v. County of Cook
- Thread starter John Pierce
- Start date
Dreamer
Regular Member
The ironic thing about this ruling is that they depend on the "assault weapons not protected by the Second Amendment" argument.
Apparently, they have never read the "US vs. Miller" case of 1939--the case that essentially put sawed-off shotguns in the same regulated class as machine guns, using the argument that they were not "in common use by the militia or military". (this argument is fundamentally flawed, because US Marines and Infantry made extensive use of short-barreled shotguns in WWI--the DOD purchased over 30,000 for use in the trenches of WWI...)
Anyway, I think it is a VERY difficult argument to make that "assault weapons" (which in IL mean anything that looks vaguely more military than a bolt-action .22 rifle) are not "in common use by the military". Either the Miller precedent applies to protecting military-style guns for use by the "militia" or it doesn't--you can't have it both ways.
Illinois is a separatist nation-state. I firmly believe the People of the US should vote ALL the states out of the Union that grossly restrict the 2nd Amendment. If IL, MD, CA, NY, NJ, and MA don't want to abide by the contract they signed in the form of the US Constitution, then their membership in this "social contract" we call the United States should be voided, along with ALL the Federal funding, aid, and protection they receive as a member of the Union.
If we threatened States with pulling their Federal funding unless they recognized the 2A (like the Feds did with highway funding when they bullied the States into raising the drinking age to 21), you'd see the attitude of these states on "gun control" change in a hot minute.
Every judge who voted to uphold IL's "assault weapons ban" should be removed from the bench, disbarred, and brought up on charges of Sedition, for conspiring to undermine th eUS Constitution, and colluding to deny the fundamental human rights of Illinois citizens.
And then, we should start heating up the tar, and cutting open the pillows...
Apparently, they have never read the "US vs. Miller" case of 1939--the case that essentially put sawed-off shotguns in the same regulated class as machine guns, using the argument that they were not "in common use by the militia or military". (this argument is fundamentally flawed, because US Marines and Infantry made extensive use of short-barreled shotguns in WWI--the DOD purchased over 30,000 for use in the trenches of WWI...)
Anyway, I think it is a VERY difficult argument to make that "assault weapons" (which in IL mean anything that looks vaguely more military than a bolt-action .22 rifle) are not "in common use by the military". Either the Miller precedent applies to protecting military-style guns for use by the "militia" or it doesn't--you can't have it both ways.
Illinois is a separatist nation-state. I firmly believe the People of the US should vote ALL the states out of the Union that grossly restrict the 2nd Amendment. If IL, MD, CA, NY, NJ, and MA don't want to abide by the contract they signed in the form of the US Constitution, then their membership in this "social contract" we call the United States should be voided, along with ALL the Federal funding, aid, and protection they receive as a member of the Union.
If we threatened States with pulling their Federal funding unless they recognized the 2A (like the Feds did with highway funding when they bullied the States into raising the drinking age to 21), you'd see the attitude of these states on "gun control" change in a hot minute.
Every judge who voted to uphold IL's "assault weapons ban" should be removed from the bench, disbarred, and brought up on charges of Sedition, for conspiring to undermine th eUS Constitution, and colluding to deny the fundamental human rights of Illinois citizens.
And then, we should start heating up the tar, and cutting open the pillows...
Last edited:
It puts the plaintiffs back to almost square one and hanging on to anything 2A related in IL state courts is pretty much a lose proposition. The IL SC upheld the Cook County ban; if nothing else, this thing case is going to be drawn out and very expensive for both sides since it will eventually make its way back up to the IL SC again through appeals by either side.
By the way, I unfortunately reside in IL.
By the way, I unfortunately reside in IL.
Last edited: