Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: SAF wins injunction v. City of Chicago gun range ban!!!!

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    SAF wins injunction v. City of Chicago gun range ban!!!!

    BREAKING: Bellevue v. Chicago; SAF wins injunction v. gun range ban!

    In a stunning victory that puts cities on notice they cannot ignore the Supreme Courtís Second Amendment rulings, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has ordered a lower court to grant a preliminary injunction against the City of Chicagoís gun range prohibition, in a case filed last year by the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation.


    http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-i...-gun-range-ban

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    Good News!! Chicago will eventually get the message.
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863
    Bellevue v. Illinois: SAF seeks injunction against state carry ban

    Hot on the heels of its win before the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Wednesday that resulted in an order to the federal district court forcing the City of Chicago to allow gun ranges inside the city limits, the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation has moved for a preliminary injunction against the State of Illinois to prevent further enforcement of that stateís prohibitions on firearms carry in public by law-abiding citizens.


    http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-i...tate-carry-ban

  4. #4
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    "If you are an anti-gun politician trying to defend a restrictive gun law, (Alan) Gura is the last guy you want to see coming through the door."

    Now that's good writing right there!

    TFred

    P.S. Although you did leave out the Virginia Citizens Defense League from your list of grassroots organizations... I know, I know, you can't list them all, and that is a good thing to have too many of...
    Last edited by TFred; 07-08-2011 at 03:21 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Mas49.56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Workman View Post
    Bellevue v. Illinois: SAF seeks injunction against state carry ban Hot on the heels of its win before the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Wednesday that resulted in an order to the federal district court forcing the City of Chicago to allow gun ranges inside the city limits, the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation has moved for a preliminary injunction against the State of Illinois to prevent further enforcement of that stateís prohibitions on firearms carry in public by law-abiding citizens.http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-i...tate-carry-ban
    I was reading on another forum that if the injunction is implemented, than Illinois citizens could open carry in Chicago with a FOID card. Would a visitor be allowed the same right without such a card? Hypothetically speaking.

  6. #6
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by Mas49.56
    I was reading on another forum that if the injunction is implemented, than Illinois citizens could open carry in Chicago with a FOID card. Would a visitor be allowed the same right without such a card? Hypothetically speaking.
    IANAL, but in reading other IL Supreme Court rulings, they've decided that a permit is the equivalent of a FOID card for the purposes of transport by non-IL residents.

    So it would make sense the same would apply to carry.
    But the law doesn't always make sense.

    (And IIRC, the ruling said "a permit from the person's state of residence"??? So maybe an OOS permit, for those who don't have a home-state permit, wouldn't be valid.)

  7. #7
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    IANAL, but in reading other IL Supreme Court rulings, they've decided that a permit is the equivalent of a FOID card for the purposes of transport by non-IL residents.

    So it would make sense the same would apply to carry.
    But the law doesn't always make sense.

    (And IIRC, the ruling said "a permit from the person's state of residence"??? So maybe an OOS permit, for those who don't have a home-state permit, wouldn't be valid.)
    First, I assume by OOS you mean Out Of State.

    I do not claim to have an answer to this, but as a part of the ongoing debate on the Federal Gun Free School Zone Act, a common question is whether an out of state permit qualifies for the exception listed in that law.

    (Briefly, the GFSZA forbids the carry of a gun within 1,000 feet of any school property, effectively making virtually every gun carrier in the United States of America a Federal Felon. You are excepted from the law if you hold a permit, thusly: (ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;)

    There is a letter (posted on Wikipedia, among other places) from a no-name (not literally, but not from a high official) declaring their opinion that an out of state permit would not be sufficient to meet the exception.

    I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but I am not alone in my opinion that an out of state permit would meet the exception codified in the GFSZA.

    Here's why: Exactly what is a permit? Is it the physical card or paper or piece of plastic that you carry in your wallet? No. It is an intangible grant of license to do something, in this case, carry a concealed handgun or weapon (depending on what state you are in.) I live in Virginia. Due to Virginia's onerous lack of privacy for CHP holders (applications and all that personal information are deemed "public records" for any would-be home-invader or criminal to peruse at will), I have chosen to obtain an out of state permit, that is on the list that is honored by Virginia. I had the same FBI background check that would have been run during a Virginia application, and Virginia allows (literally permits or licenses) me to carry a concealed handgun based on the satisfactory evaluation of my qualifications performed by that other state. It must be viewed this way, if for no other reason than the fact that no license or decree of any kind by another state can trump local state law. I have to satisfy Virginia's requirements (which the out of state permit does do) to carry a concealed handgun, even though the facts that satisfy the local rules were taken care of by another state.

    So when it comes down to it, Virginia does license me to carry a concealed handgun, they just didn't print the card for me.

    As we all, know, the GFSZA is almost certainly unconstitutional, especially since Heller and McDonald, and nobody knows this better than the United States Department of Justice, so we will never see a case of a sole violation of this law prosecuted, and it is even less likely that we will ever see a court ruling on "what is a permit".

    That's my take on it, as worthless as it may be. As I said, I'm not the only one who sees it this way, but in all likelihood, it will never see a full resolution.

    TFred

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •