Here is what OC (of a sort) gets you In Illinois

[ilbob]

imported post

http://icarry.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=195&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

Illinois law on firearmstransportation is relatively clear. Unloaded, encased, must have firearm ownerID card in possession. No requirement to transport in trunk, or locked up, etc.

This guygot atactical nylon holster, modified it so it completely encases hispistol (making it a legal gun case per Illinois law), straps on holsterwith UNLOADED gun, and wanders around town for a few months before attracting the 'right" kind of attention.

Mall ninjas noticed holster and either arrested him or had him arrested (that part is not totally clear). After discussing it for several hours, local cops charged him with misdemeanor UUW (unlawful use of weapon). State's attorney bumped it up to felony (I suspect because he is under 21, and thatis an aggravating factor).

He also managed to get himself arrested for DC last fall at the college he attends. Apparently the EMPTY holster and nylon windbreaker he was wearing with his web site address on it "alarmed" an employee. That charge was dropped and he is now suing them in federal court. IMO a classic first amendment case. I guess he wore both for a couple months at the school and than eventually wandered into the college police station wearing them.

My guess is as soon as a judge sees what happened (presuming everything I have been told about the case is true) the thing will be tossed out on its ear. But, in the meantime, he is under indictment for a felony.

I casually know Shaun. I think he means well, but I am just not sure how to take this situation. I just don't see much traction in the right to carry around an unloaded gun. Not really something you can rally the troops to, although I must admire his spunk. And 50 some people have signed up as members of his fledgling organization so far (I am not among them BTW).


6-2-06 update. Now I am a member.

 

[DKSuddeth]

imported post

sometimes it takes a very courageous individual to make a change. Martin Luther comes to mind when I say that. Shaun isn't any different. Truth to tell, were I to still live in Illinois (and single) I'd be doing this and more. The state of Illinois ( and the federal court that presides over it) are one of a handful of co-conspirators to disarm the populace. The 'home rule' crap that the Illinois courts made astounds me that it's been upheld.

sometimes I wonder if Illinois is going to be the catalyst for revolution.

 

[ilbob]

imported post

DKSuddeth wrote:

sometimes it takes a very courageous individual to make a change. Martin Luther comes to mind when I say that. Shaun isn't any different. Truth to tell, were I to still live in Illinois (and single) I'd be doing this and more. The state of Illinois ( and the federal court that presides over it) are one of a handful of co-conspirators to disarm the populace. The 'home rule' crap that the Illinois courts made astounds me that it's been upheld.

sometimes I wonder if Illinois is going to be the catalyst for revolution.

The courts did not make it up. It is in the state constitution, just as it is in many state constitutions.

 

[DKSuddeth]

imported post

ilbob wrote:

DKSuddeth wrote:

sometimes it takes a very courageous individual to make a change. Martin Luther comes to mind when I say that. Shaun isn't any different. Truth to tell, were I to still live in Illinois (and single) I'd be doing this and more. The state of Illinois ( and the federal court that presides over it) are one of a handful of co-conspirators to disarm the populace. The 'home rule' crap that the Illinois courts made astounds me that it's been upheld.

sometimes I wonder if Illinois is going to be the catalyst for revolution.

The courts did not make it up. It is in the state constitution, just as it is in many state constitutions.

Im unaware of the home rule provision in the illinois constitution. can you put it up here?

 

[John Pierce]

imported post

The home rule portion of the Illinois constitution ...
[line]SECTION 6. POWERS OF HOME RULE UNITS

(a)  A County which has a chief executive officer elected
by the electors of the county and any municipality which has
a population of more than 25,000 are home rule units. Other
municipalities may elect by referendum to become home rule
units. [i][b]Except as limited by this Section, a home rule unit
may exercise any power and perform any function pertaining to
its government and affairs including, but not limited to, the
power to regulate for the protection of the public health,
safety, morals and welfare; to license; to tax; and to incur
debt.[/b][/i]
(b)  A home rule unit by referendum may elect not to be a
home rule unit.
(c)  If a home rule county ordinance conflicts with an
ordinance of a municipality, the municipal ordinance shall
prevail within its jurisdiction.
(d)  A home rule unit does not have the power (1) to
incur debt payable from ad valorem property tax receipts
maturing more than 40 years from the time it is incurred or
(2) to define and provide for the punishment of a felony.
(e)  A home rule unit shall have only the power that the
General Assembly may provide by law (1) to punish by
imprisonment for more than six months or (2) to license for
revenue or impose taxes upon or measured by income or
earnings or upon occupations.
(f)  A home rule unit shall have the power subject to
approval by referendum to adopt, alter or repeal a form of
government provided by law, except that the form of
government of Cook County shall be subject to the provisions
of Section 3 of this Article. A home rule municipality shall
have the power to provide for its officers, their manner of
selection and terms of office only as approved by referendum
or as otherwise authorized by law. A home rule county shall
have the power to provide for its officers, their manner of
selection and terms of office in the manner set forth in
Section 4 of this Article.
(g)  The General Assembly by a law approved by the vote
of three-fifths of the members elected to each house may deny
or limit the power to tax and any other power or function of
a home rule unit not exercised or performed by the State
other than a power or function specified in subsection (l) of
this section.
(h)  The General Assembly may provide specifically by law
for the exclusive exercise by the State of any power or
function of a home rule unit other than a taxing power or a
power or function specified in subsection (l) of this
Section.
(i)  Home rule units may exercise and perform
concurrently with the State any power or function of a home
rule unit to the extent that the General Assembly by law does
not specifically limit the concurrent exercise or
specifically declare the State's exercise to be exclusive.
(j)  The General Assembly may limit by law the amount of
debt which home rule counties may incur and may limit by law
approved by three-fifths of the members elected to each house
the amount of debt, other than debt payable from ad valorem
property tax receipts, which home rule municipalities may
incur.
(k)  The General Assembly may limit by law the amount and
require referendum approval of debt to be incurred by home
rule municipalities, payable from ad valorem property tax
receipts, only in excess of the following percentages of the
assessed value of its taxable property: (1) if its population
is 500,000 or more, an aggregate of three percent; (2) if its
population is more than 25,000 and less than 500,000, an
aggregate of one percent; and (3) if its population is 25,000
or less, an aggregate of one-half percent. Indebtedness which
is outstanding on the effective date of this Constitution or
which is thereafter approved by referendum or assumed from
another unit of local government shall not be included in the
foregoing percentage amounts.
(l)  The General Assembly may not deny or limit the power
of home rule units (1) to make local improvements by special
assessment and to exercise this power jointly with other
counties and municipalities, and other classes of units of
local government having that power on the effective date of
this Constitution unless that power is subsequently denied by
law to any such other units of local government or (2) to
levy or impose additional taxes upon areas within their
boundaries in the manner provided by law for the provision of
special services to those areas and for the payment of debt
incurred in order to provide those special services.
(m)  Powers and functions of home rule units shall be
construed liberally.

 

[VApatriot]

imported post

DKSuddeth wrote:

sometimes it takes a very courageous individual to make a change. Martin Luther comes to mind when I say that. Shaun isn't any different. Truth to tell, were I to still live in Illinois (and single) I'd be doing this and more. The state of Illinois ( and the federal court that presides over it) are one of a handful of co-conspirators to disarm the populace. The 'home rule' crap that the Illinois courts made astounds me that it's been upheld.

sometimes I wonder if Illinois is going to be the catalyst for revolution.

It did take a lot of courage for Martin Luther to stand up against the Catholic Church in 1517, and it also took a lot of courage for Martin Luther King Jr. to stand up for civil rights in the 1960s.

 

[DKSuddeth]

imported post

VApatriot wrote:

DKSuddeth wrote:

sometimes it takes a very courageous individual to make a change. Martin Luther comes to mind when I say that. Shaun isn't any different. Truth to tell, were I to still live in Illinois (and single) I'd be doing this and more. The state of Illinois ( and the federal court that presides over it) are one of a handful of co-conspirators to disarm the populace. The 'home rule' crap that the Illinois courts made astounds me that it's been upheld.

sometimes I wonder if Illinois is going to be the catalyst for revolution.

It did take a lot of courage for Martin Luther to stand up against the Catholic Church in 1517, and it also took a lot of courage for Martin Luther King Jr. to stand up for civil rights in the 1960s.

hmmm, seems I got caught trying to use a shortcut on the internet.

I did mean martin luther king jr.

 

[ilbob]

imported post

Martin Luther was every bit as courageous in what he did, but it was a long time ago and few people learn much history from that period of time. Germany at that time was in such a confused state, many people just give up trying to understand it.

The history of the German States from the time of the Holy Roman Empire until the German Empire was formed, is fascinating, if extremely confusing. At times there were hundreds of independent states that constituted the HRE. Most of them issued their own coinage, had their own laws, and their own sovereign ruler,even though a few were just a single smallcity or even only a few square miles in area.

Some time when you are ready to be completely confused,try googling Holy Roman Empire and read for a few hours. The incredible history of this region from the late 8th century until the late 19th century willgive you ahead ache, but you may also find it quite interesting.

 

[VApatriot]

imported post

ilbob wrote:

Martin Luther was every bit as courageous in what he did, but it was a long time ago and few people learn much history from that period of time. Germany at that time was in such a confused state, many people just give up trying to understand it.

The history of the German States from the time of the Holy Roman Empire until the German Empire was formed, is fascinating, if extremely confusing. At times there were hundreds of independent states that constituted the HRE. Most of them issued their own coinage, had their own laws, and their own sovereign ruler,even though a few were just a single smallcity or even only a few square miles in area.

Some time when you are ready to be completely confused,try googling Holy Roman Empire and read for a few hours. The incredible history of this region from the late 8th century until the late 19th century willgive you ahead ache, but you may also find it quite interesting.

I love one quote I have heard about the Holy Roman Empire.

"It was nether 'holy' nor 'Roman'nor an 'empire'"

But back to the topic, this guy should be praised. He is making a tough stand for what he knows is right.

 

[ilbob]

imported post

I think the quote is from Voltaire.

The operative part of the UUW statute is

does not apply to or affect transportation of weapons that meet one of the following conditions:
[...]are unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container by a person who has been issued a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card

Since the words "other container" are actually in the statute, and a purse has been found to qualify,I don't see what they can convict him on. But stranger things have happened.

I think as a prosecution strategy, they would be better off if they charged him with DC. They might be able to pull that one off, since the DC statute is a lot murkier.

 

[SFC Stu]

imported post

I'll bet this case gets dropped just like the last one. The Prosecutor does not have a leg to stand on. SFC Stu

 

[ilbob]

imported post

SFC Stu wrote:

I'll bet this case gets dropped just like the last one. The Prosecutor does not have a leg to stand on. SFC Stu

One would think so. But the criminal justice system tends to take a dim view of people using it to make a point. It would not be a big stretch for them to think that is exactly what he is doing.

 

[DKSuddeth]

imported post

this is winnebago county and to my knowledge (I haven't lived there in over 10 years) they have never had someone challenge them like shaun has done. I can only assume that they will try to press him toplea bargain so that they don't have to deal with a new precedent.

 

[ilbob]

imported post

The Winnebago CountySA (Paul Logli)is up for a federal judgeship.

Who knows what that adds to the mix, or whether it adds anything.

Logli is generally regarded as fair and honest, for what thats worth.

It would not be anew precedant. There are several cases on point, at last threeI am aware of. One involved a gun in a purse.I think it was an appeals court ruled that was an acceptable container fora gun under the UUW statute.

 

[SFC Stu]

imported post

Shaun has a good firearms lawyer and with a fair Judge, may set a state precedence.

If he does, it may encourage the legislature to pass a CCW law. It's imperative that that we get rid of Rod Blagobitch this fall! SFC Stu

 

[ilbob]

imported post

SFC Stu wrote:

Shaun has a good firearms lawyer and with a fair Judge, may set a state precedence.

The precedents have already been set at trial court level (I think 3 of them). The problem is that it is basically meaningless unless it goes up the food chain and no state's attorney is likely to appeal such a minor case.

Even with solid precedent I am not convinced it means a whole lot. The "right" to carry an unloaded gun around is not something too many people will get all that excited about.

 

[ilbob]

imported post

<deleted>

 

[junglebob]

imported post

For those that are wondering the case is still in court I believe. I believe another court appearanceis scheduled for this month. At the last appearance in court the modified case which was taken as evidence was badly torn. Shaun says it was in perfect condition when taken from him.

 

[30 cal slut]

imported post

looks like Shaun won one. story at icarry.org.



:celebrate

 

[lockman]

imported post

http://www.icarry.org/index.php

Shaun Kranish "Aggravated Unlawful Use of Weapons" DISMISSED!!!
Posted by SAK on Monday, July 16 @ 20:41:27 CDT (6 reads)
(comments? | Score: 0)


I went to court today, and Judge Steven Vecchio ruled according to the law, as it is written, despite pressure from the state to "legislate from the bench" on this entirely POLITICAL issue.

The charge of Aggravated Unlawful Use of Weapons was dismissed with prejudice because I was exempt from prosecution according to the exception firearms may be transported that:

(iii) are unloaded and enclosed in a case,

firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container by a person who has been issued a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card;