http://news.yahoo.com/illinois-governor-vetoes-parts-concealed-carry-gun-bill-193038993.html
On noes, OC is soooo bad...
On noes, OC is soooo bad...
-
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 Governor vetoes parts of concealed carry gun bill
- Thread starter protias
- Start date
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
It's what I expected, he is expecting that SCOTUS will overturn the circuit court ruling on appeal. I also suspect SCOTUS will overturn the ruling.
davidmcbeth
Banned
Was in Illinois recently and visited a few gun stores ... its a madhouse there
Dave Workman
Regular Member
he didn't really veto parts of the bill, he did an "amended veto" and CHANGED parts of the bill as passed.
ISRA is pretty fired up, as is the CCRKBA. I wrote about it in my Examiner column this afternoon:
Ill. Governor Quinn sets stage for CCW confrontation
http://www.examiner.com/article/ill-governor-quinn-sets-stage-for-ccw-confrontation
This is going to get rather interesting...:banghead:
ISRA is pretty fired up, as is the CCRKBA. I wrote about it in my Examiner column this afternoon:
Ill. Governor Quinn sets stage for CCW confrontation
http://www.examiner.com/article/ill-governor-quinn-sets-stage-for-ccw-confrontation
This is going to get rather interesting...:banghead:
junglebob
Regular Member
He tried an amended veto on an ammunition bill, turning it into an AWB bill. His veto was overridden on that bill and I expect it to be on this one as well. I can't see him getting 19 reps in the house to change their vote so it isn't overridden. I also don't expect the Southern Illinois rep and state senator sponsoring the bills to go along with is amendments.
He's pandering to his Chicago area supporters hoping to get reelected.
If his veto isn't overridden its "court carry" and July 10 open carry of any firearm you like will be legal,(well almost still no class 3) unless some local ordinance prohibits it. The CC bill does have preemption in it so no local firearms ordinances on carry when it passes.
The legislature will be in special session on July 9, so expect it to go into regular session that day and override his veto.
What Junglebob said. This isn't working out so well for Quinn. Remember that once HB183 is over ridden and becomes law that we lose in any case. This is a Chicago carry ( no carry ) bill. We lose if we win.
Carthago Delenda Est
Carthago Delenda Est
Last edited:
BB62
Accomplished Advocate
(my bold)
I don't get your assertion - if his veto is not overridden, why doesn't the law he signed (with adjustments) stand?
??
notalawyer
Regular Member
I think everyone is mis-characterizing this "amended veto". I believe it is simply a veto with suggestions to the legislature what the language would need to be to in order to get his signature the next time it's passed.
Baked on Grease
Regular Member
As I understand it he hasn't 'signed' anything into law at this point. He made suggestions to the legislature and sent the bill back. If they don't revote on the changed bill by July 10th then the previous injunction from the judge takes effect and there is no more state law on CC, therefore you now have Constitutional Carry by default. (Until a new law finally is signed)
He can't make changes to a law and let the bill sit on his desk till it becomes law, the changes must be voted on.
Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk 2
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
That is the way I understand it, but I was not sure.
notalawyer
Regular Member
Now the other problem is that there is no preemption in Ill. So localities are free to pass whatever restrictions they want.
davidmcbeth
Banned
http://www.examiner.com/article/gov...u-s-and-illinois-constitutions-simultaneously
The amendatory veto process is a power granted to Illinois governors allowing them to make changes to bills that have passed. If a simple majority in each chamber accepts the governor's changes, the altered bill becomes law. If three fifths of each chamber (36 of the state's 59 senators, and 71 of the 118 representatives) vote to override the veto, the original bill becomes law. If neither happens, the bill is dead.
I would let the bill die ... die you bill, die !
Don't vote ! Or vote against the veto amendments but not by a 3/5th majority.
So folks who support constitutional carry could vote FOR the amended bill to keep the % below what is needed to override but not enough to approve?
The amendatory veto process is a power granted to Illinois governors allowing them to make changes to bills that have passed. If a simple majority in each chamber accepts the governor's changes, the altered bill becomes law. If three fifths of each chamber (36 of the state's 59 senators, and 71 of the 118 representatives) vote to override the veto, the original bill becomes law. If neither happens, the bill is dead.
I would let the bill die ... die you bill, die !
Don't vote ! Or vote against the veto amendments but not by a 3/5th majority.
So folks who support constitutional carry could vote FOR the amended bill to keep the % below what is needed to override but not enough to approve?
BB62
Accomplished Advocate
Thanks to Baked on Grease, WalkingWolf, notalawyer, and (I can't believe I'm doing this) davidmcbeth for the information about what the actual "veto" is.
davidmcbeth
Banned
Your welcome ... now get on your phone and start calling reps ... this bill should be dead ! Allow constitutional carry !
(Who cares about chicago at this point in time)
BB62
Accomplished Advocate
It's "you're" welcome, and I don't think the reps will pay any attention to someone from my location - which is clearly visible by my name, btw.
Last edited:
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
BUT local, state, and federal judges can strike them down if they do not meet the muster of the injunction. IOW Chicago if it passes it's own laws, they STILL will have to allow some form of carry. I only see Chicago and Springfield doing that, Cook county might also, but I am not so sure about Sangamon county.
The law abiding citizens need to leave those places in Illinois and let those cities collapse.
Last edited:
notalawyer
Regular Member
Yep, but people will still be arrested and likely prosecuted and it will take a year or two to get each one of these new laws before a court of appeals.
WalkingWolf
Regular Member
But this is what we get from orgs like NRA, and ISRA "baby steps". IMO this whole court ruling was made a fiasco because the supposed 2A orgs were scared poopless that OC would get a foot hold. A law that guaranteed constitutional rights would cut into their bottom line.
Ever wonder why we hear so little from Alaska, and Vermont?
They know how to spell F-R-E-E-D-O-M........in my best William Wallace (Braveheart) voice
BB62
Accomplished Advocate
You guys need to give up - because, as the $hitcago Sun Times reasons oh so well: "So a man packing 10 guns, some peeking out of his jacket, goes into a restaurant and gets drunk and boisterous. Good idea?..."
http://www.suntimes.com/opinions/21101371-474/legislature-should-accept-changes-to-gun-bill.html
http://www.suntimes.com/opinions/21101371-474/legislature-should-accept-changes-to-gun-bill.html