-
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.
Ezell v. Chicago, 7th Decides - REVERSES District, REMANDS for grant of injunction
- Thread starter Gundude
- Start date
MarkD51
Regular Member
Still is a huge crock of **** IMO.
A $100 to own a gun, and registration.
The council raised concerns about accidental discharge at the ranges. What about the "non-accidental" discharges by criminals that have rampantly plagued the city of Chicago for at least the last 50 years?
This legislation is again, nothing but a sham, and a scam by Chicago politicians to take your money, nothing more now, than a monetary "penalization" to be a gun owning, law abiding american citizen. Seems there's not much difference, to a criminal robbing me, and sticking his hands in my pockets, or if it's done by a Chicago politician, still sounds like robbery to me, and as well an invasion of a citizen's privacy of the right to own, and bear arms
A $100 to own a gun, and registration.
The council raised concerns about accidental discharge at the ranges. What about the "non-accidental" discharges by criminals that have rampantly plagued the city of Chicago for at least the last 50 years?
This legislation is again, nothing but a sham, and a scam by Chicago politicians to take your money, nothing more now, than a monetary "penalization" to be a gun owning, law abiding american citizen. Seems there's not much difference, to a criminal robbing me, and sticking his hands in my pockets, or if it's done by a Chicago politician, still sounds like robbery to me, and as well an invasion of a citizen's privacy of the right to own, and bear arms
Last edited:
Thundar
Regular Member
This is a great victory for gun rights. As I read this ruling, bear means more than carry. It means use for proficiency as well.
Gunslinger
Regular Member
This was an excellent decision. The jackals in chicago thumbed their nose at the Supreme Court. Now the Federal Courts have taken that thumb and shoved it in their eye. A good start showing the Gulag that it's not all powerful anymore.
MarkD51
Regular Member
I'm sorry if my last post was harsh.
Perhaps a step in the right direction, but still seems like too little, too late.
Perhaps though, this has opened a door.
Still sounds like a "play to pay" scheme, where only the rich, and affluent can afford to play, and a considerable amount of red tape, to excersize one's second amendment rights in the windy city.
Maybe still too early to comment on such, but thought I read that range fees will be in the vicinity of $50. That's $50 per visit? Won't surprise me that there will be other strings attached, like "you buy our ammo, our targets, etc etc.
Knowing Chicago quite well, since I was born, and raised there, it wouldn't at all surprise me of an existance of an ongoing continual harrasment of those that choose to use these so called ranges.
To have in your possession a handgun, and ammo, they won;t be sure to determine you as just a person about to visit a range, or on your way to commit a crime.
That there will still be a strong, unwritten handgun ban in effect, and little doubt of things like confiscation of weapons occuring if one doesn't follow their strict rulings to a T.
Sorry if I sound apprehensive, but my suspicions are mostly due to not at all trusting any Chicago Politicians, nor the Chicago Police Dept.
Perhaps a step in the right direction, but still seems like too little, too late.
Perhaps though, this has opened a door.
Still sounds like a "play to pay" scheme, where only the rich, and affluent can afford to play, and a considerable amount of red tape, to excersize one's second amendment rights in the windy city.
Maybe still too early to comment on such, but thought I read that range fees will be in the vicinity of $50. That's $50 per visit? Won't surprise me that there will be other strings attached, like "you buy our ammo, our targets, etc etc.
Knowing Chicago quite well, since I was born, and raised there, it wouldn't at all surprise me of an existance of an ongoing continual harrasment of those that choose to use these so called ranges.
To have in your possession a handgun, and ammo, they won;t be sure to determine you as just a person about to visit a range, or on your way to commit a crime.
That there will still be a strong, unwritten handgun ban in effect, and little doubt of things like confiscation of weapons occuring if one doesn't follow their strict rulings to a T.
Sorry if I sound apprehensive, but my suspicions are mostly due to not at all trusting any Chicago Politicians, nor the Chicago Police Dept.
Last edited:
cato
Newbie
Looking forward to home range practice with a suppressor in my lifetime!