Everyone knows that the RKBA applies outside the home. It has taken a while to get a court to rule that way. Hard to defend yourself and loved ones outside the home with anything other than a firearm.
I agree......those holsters for bricks are a pain in the "#2*!"....especially the IWB ones. :lol:
I'm hoping that with the 7th District court referencing Heller and McDonald, the AG for IL will forgo the appeal to the SCOTUS. With this comes the problems of getting a CC bill that is very restrictive for the citizens of IL to obtain, except through political channels. If the Reps outside of Chicago can form a strong alliance and them convert a few Chicago reps, they have a good chance of getting a descent bill. I know, I'm dreaming a little.
I hope they cannot pass any bill and in six months Illinois will have constitutional carry by order of the courts.
I agree......those holsters for bricks are a pain in the "#2*!"....especially the IWB ones. :lol:
I'm hoping that with the 7th District court referencing Heller and McDonald, the AG for IL will forgo the appeal to the SCOTUS. With this comes the problems of getting a CC bill that is very restrictive for the citizens of IL to obtain, except through political channels. If the Reps outside of Chicago can form a strong alliance and them convert a few Chicago reps, they have a good chance of getting a descent bill. I know, I'm dreaming a little.
Dreaming?
Not at all. The problem rests on getting downstate politicians to realize that they now hold all the cards. Unfortunately, even you have succumbed to the tendency to "hope for a good CCW bill" to come from this.
Don't feel bad. The majority of comments I've been seeing on most gun boards seem to echo this wish.
If Illinois fails to pass CCW legislation in 180 days, carry becomes unrestricted. There seems to be some apprehension that Madigan will appeal and, somehow, this ruling will be reversed.
Remember, this is a Federal Appeals Court decision. In order to reverse this ruling, a Federal court would have to decide that a Constitutionally protected right, that has been incorporated by a majority of states, DOES NOT APPLY OUTSIDE THE HOME.
Federal. This reversal would affect all states.
Therefore, what do you think the chances of an appeal that would effectively nullify established CCW laws in 49 other states would be?
I'm guessing snowball/hell.
And yet, I'm guessing Madigan will soon be launching gobs of Illinoisian's tax money down this fiery hole.
For decades, anti-gun Illinois politicians have been stomping on CCW legislation. Now that the threat of unrestricted carry looms, LET THE FLIP-FLOPPING BEGIN!
Suddenly, I forsee all those that were against CCW.......will now be the biggest supporters of some form of CCW bill being passed.
If pro-2A Illinois legislators are worth their salt, they will put the kibosh to any of it. ("Hey! You Chicago politicians were all against any CCW bills, remember?")
However, I don't forsee this happening. BUT (and this is a big "BUT") Hopefully Illinois Pro-2A politicians will see that they are in the driver's seat and they can force "shall issue", campus carry, full pre-emption, and any other tiny detail they wish........or simply let the 180 days go by and "TA-DA!".....unrestricted carry.
So, if Illinois gets some namby-pamby, super strict, B*!! $#!T CCW laws at the end of everything, it will be because these supposed "pro-2A" politicians aren't as pro-2A as they say they are.
Dreaming?
Not at all. The problem rests on getting downstate politicians to realize that they now hold all the cards. Unfortunately, even you have succumbed to the tendency to "hope for a good CCW bill" to come from this.
Don't feel bad. The majority of comments I've been seeing on most gun boards seem to echo this wish.
If Illinois fails to pass CCW legislation in 180 days, carry becomes unrestricted. There seems to be some apprehension that Madigan will appeal and, somehow, this ruling will be reversed.
Remember, this is a Federal Appeals Court decision. In order to reverse this ruling, a Federal court would have to decide that a Constitutionally protected right, that has been incorporated by a majority of states, DOES NOT APPLY OUTSIDE THE HOME.
Federal. This reversal would affect all states.
Therefore, what do you think the chances of an appeal that would effectively nullify established CCW laws in 49 other states would be?
I'm guessing snowball/hell.
And yet, I'm guessing Madigan will soon be launching gobs of Illinoisian's tax money down this fiery hole.
For decades, anti-gun Illinois politicians have been stomping on CCW legislation. Now that the threat of unrestricted carry looms, LET THE FLIP-FLOPPING BEGIN!
Suddenly, I forsee all those that were against CCW.......will now be the biggest supporters of some form of CCW bill being passed.
If pro-2A Illinois legislators are worth their salt, they will put the kibosh to any of it. ("Hey! You Chicago politicians were all against any CCW bills, remember?")
However, I don't forsee this happening. BUT (and this is a big "BUT") Hopefully Illinois Pro-2A politicians will see that they are in the driver's seat and they can force "shall issue", campus carry, full pre-emption, and any other tiny detail they wish........or simply let the 180 days go by and "TA-DA!".....unrestricted carry.
So, if Illinois gets some namby-pamby, super strict, B*!! $#!T CCW laws at the end of everything, it will be because these supposed "pro-2A" politicians aren't as pro-2A as they say they are.
Somebody better warn Obama that the walls in the white house are not drywall. Maybe Michelle should buy him a stress ball when the six months is up.The best part is:
""They have 180 days to enact a carry law, or else there is no prohibition on carrying a gun. There's not much else to argue about," said Vandermyde. "If they won't pass a bill . . . then you could walk down the street with a rifle slung over your back and there's nothing they can do about it.""
Constitutional Carry in Illinois is in sight if they would just drop the ball
A part of me hopes that it does go to the Supreme Court. I know that it might be dangerous waters for the 2A, but I could easily see them agreeing with the lower courts. Imagine what that would do if the law of the land said that RKBA applies outside of the home.