Illinois Bill to Ban all Modern Firearms

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by cosmicexplorer

 

Please, this in no way is meant as disrespect . . .

If the government takes away our weapons then we will be reliant on the "state" to protect us.

Police, (state, local, federal) will be the "nannies" to keep us safe instead of people taking personal responsibility for their own safety.

Right I agree...I feel like you think we dont agree but I do! haha and with me being a cop I can tell you we show up too late almost every time. By the time someone calls it in, it is dispatched to us, I get to my car since they don't like us driving as much any more to cut down on gas costs, to the time I show up and cautiously work my way through a scene it has been a hell of a lot of time. We need guns for home protection.

IL Bills Pulled

The latest from the NRA’s Todd Vandermyde: it appears that Democrats in the Illinois legislature who have been try to railroad two gun control measures have pulled their bills. Translation: they counted heads and didn’t have the votes.

link

I've tried to excerpt some of the most pertinent parts from the text of the bill here:

AMENDMENT TO [ILLINOIS] HOUSE BILL 1263

Sec. 24-1.9. Possession, delivery, sale, and purchase of semi-automatic assault weapons, assault weapon attachments, .50 caliber rifles, and .50 caliber cartridges.

(a) Definitions. In this Section:

(1) "Semi-automatic assault weapon" means:
...
(C-1) a semi-automatic rifle or pistol with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition;

(C-2) a semi-automatic rifle or a pistol with the capacity to accept a detachable magazine, a muzzle brake, or muzzle compensator;

(D) a semi-automatic shotgun that has any of the following:

(i) a folding or telescoping stock;

(ii) a pistol grip or thumbhole stock;

(iii) a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 5 rounds; or

(iv) an ability to accept a detachable magazine.
...

(b) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d), 90 days after January 1, 2014, it is unlawful for any person within this State to knowingly deliver, sell, purchase, or possess or cause to be delivered, sold, purchased, or possessed, directly or indirectly, a semi-automatic assault weapon, an assault weapon attachment, any .50 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge.

SOURCE: PDF of the bill

If I read it correctly, it would define any semi-automatic rifle or pistol with the capacity to accept a detachable magazine as a semi-automatic assault weapon and ban the delivery, sale, purchase, or possession.

I'm not even really a gun person, and I consider that offensive, unreasonable, and unconstitutional!

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by cosmicexplorer

 

How will Illinois be "safer"?

Only criminals will have weapons if there is a ban.

*shakes head*

That's always a funny statement to me.

Of course only criminals will have guns if they're against the law; It's true by definition.

I'm not quite sure why this is such a hot button issue. I mean, I've never even held a gun and I'm fine. However, I wouldn't want people to ban something I liked like Mexican food, but I'm not gonna threaten people over it. I'd just be a little upset and go about my daily life.

I think that if guns were made illegal most people would just about their normal lives unchanged and the "gun people" would just be sad for a while until they found another hobby.

The only pro-gun argument that I can see is an economic one. With an already ailing economy do you really want to make a multi-million dollar industry illegal? It would be like making cigarettes illegal. Sure they're bad for people, but they make people a lot of money.

Originally posted by cosmicexplorer

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by cosmicexplorer

 

Please, this in no way is meant as disrespect . . .

If the government takes away our weapons then we will be reliant on the "state" to protect us.

Police, (state, local, federal) will be the "nannies" to keep us safe instead of people taking personal responsibility for their own safety.

Right I agree...I feel like you think we dont agree but I do! haha and with me being a cop I can tell you we show up too late almost every time. By the time someone calls it in, it is dispatched to us, I get to my car since they don't like us driving as much any more to cut down on gas costs, to the time I show up and cautiously work my way through a scene it has been a hell of a lot of time. We need guns for home protection.

I think we agree, I just didn't want you to think I was insulting law enforcement.

My little brother is a federal marshal.

Good post op, i hope you follow your conscience, after all nothing can whip you harder than your own sense of right and wrong.
As for your other post talking about the grey areas that are used to achieve arrests and prosecutions where they were not meant to be, i think this article shows in bucket loads that this is exactly what is happening.

www.wired.com... -software/

DoesntThe constitution superceede any state or federal law?
The bill of rights?
Are these documents NOT the basis of the republic?
Where is the Supreme Court on this usurpation of citizen rights and freedoms?
Why cant they stand uo for the rule of law and not the rule of tryranny?
The US Army was proven to be using psyops on visiting legislators not so long ago.....
There are signifigant reasons for suspicions that goverment is compromised....
Thats put it mildly....
I am thinking there is no turning back either......
Like what will happen is set up to happen.....because the answers have already been thought of, and the plan is 85% success rated.....
Every week the pressure is brought higher in increments, and carefully played like a virtuoso violin....
By the time forces are unleashed there will already be counterforces in place to crush them.....no matter what form the resistance takes....

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
IL Bills Pulled

The latest from the NRA’s Todd Vandermyde: it appears that Democrats in the Illinois legislature who have been try to railroad two gun control measures have pulled their bills. Translation: they counted heads and didn’t have the votes.

link

Hasn't been pulled...just not perceived to pass...but neither was the NDAA...

It's Fox News...but whatever

On Wednesday night, a state Senate committee advanced two measures to restrict semiautomatic weapons and high-capacity magazines. It's unclear at this point whether the full Senate will take them up before the new General Assembly class is sworn in Jan. 9, when the process would have to restart.

The bills would face an uphill climb in the Senate, particularly as gun groups were mounting a flash campaign against them. FoxNews.com was told late Thursday that Democrats were still trying to line up the votes, after the measures passed on party lines out of committee the night before.

And to further prove that these are still alive, in some sense...

Chicago Tribune

Such are the political dynamics of a lame-duck session in Springfield: some lawmakers who are in their final days of service don't show up to work, making it difficult to pass tough legislation.

...

At the same time, an effort to ban semi-automatic assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines --- backed by Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel --- also lacked the votes needed for passage. Opponents argued the measure was too broad and unworkable.

With no action on those two controversial issues, senators were preparing to return home. A final day of the Senate’s lame-duck session remains an option for Tuesday, the day before the next General Assembly is inaugurated. But that could depend on whether the House takes any action. House members are scheduled to be in Springfield from Sunday through Tuesday.

So, they are still alive...just doubtful to pass...

So my question is, can Texas handle the mass exodus of Illinois residents that move to escape a state full of tyrants? I will wait to see what happens, but I will apsolutely move before I hand anything over. Enough is enough! I am so tired and angry that our leaders are just ignoring our constitution and natural rights to suit their own agenda. The bully is not going anywhere, so you either have to stand up to the bully or find another playground.

Originally posted by Mayson
That's always a funny statement to me.

Of course only criminals will have guns if they're against the law; It's true by definition.

I'm not quite sure why this is such a hot button issue. I mean, I've never even held a gun and I'm fine. However, I wouldn't want people to ban something I liked like Mexican food, but I'm not gonna threaten people over it. I'd just be a little upset and go about my daily life.

I think that if guns were made illegal most people would just about their normal lives unchanged and the "gun people" would just be sad for a while until they found another hobby.

The only pro-gun argument that I can see is an economic one. With an already ailing economy do you really want to make a multi-million dollar industry illegal? It would be like making cigarettes illegal. Sure they're bad for people, but they make people a lot of money.

So having the right to own a gun is like having the right to eat Mexican food?

And if Mexican food was banned you would just be "a little upset" by it?

Please go immediately to see a doctor to have your head examined.

The logic and self preservation areas of your brain seems to be damaged ...

reply to post by cosmicexplorer


I personally know many FIBS and almost all them love guns. At some point conservatives will take back the crap hole that Illinois has become.


The state is a real mess in many areas all because of progressive liberals. When conservatives hold power states and local government do great. When liberals hold power they fall apart. But the people voting for liberals are lacking the wisdom to see this simple truth.

Originally posted by The X
Good post op, i hope you follow your conscience, after all nothing can whip you harder than your own sense of right and wrong.
As for your other post talking about the grey areas that are used to achieve arrests and prosecutions where they were not meant to be, i think this article shows in bucket loads that this is exactly what is happening.

www.wired.com... -software/

Hey mate your link didn't work (or it has been removed) but I think I got the idea just be reading the link title haha!

Originally posted by MrBigDave
So my question is, can Texas handle the mass exodus of Illinois residents that move to escape a state full of tyrants? I will wait to see what happens, but I will apsolutely move before I hand anything over. Enough is enough! I am so tired and angry that our leaders are just ignoring our constitution and natural rights to suit their own agenda. The bully is not going anywhere, so you either have to stand up to the bully or find another playground.

haha I was thinking Indiana but Texas will do!

reply to post by cosmicexplorer


If you have not already, I suggest you look into your local sheriff's department. With a resume like yours I imagine you'd be a shoe in, and you would be able to work for one of the last remaining law enforcement agencies who uphold the constitution. Just a suggestion.

This Bill is to ban all semi auto firearms, regardless of clip capacity and even pump shot guns (the language even suggests any pump rifle). Already Chicago outaws thses types of weapons! You even need a permit to keep a gun in Chicago and it must be on the list of allowed weapons, until recently all handguns were outlawed for law abiding citizens. Illinois even requires a FOID card to even touch a gun let alone buy ammunition or even have it in your possession!

When Rahn took over as mayor, crime ecalated and so did the shootings! Chicago is short some 100 police officers, since he took over to help balance the city budget. He even admits, it's the criminal activity causing the problem, so he wants law abiding citizens to give up thier rights.

Another Bill is trying to limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds or under but you can keep larger ones. If you register them with the State police and they can impose any amount of fees for this registration. They also want to regulate all shooting ranges in Illinois, again place them under state police control and yes impose any fees for regulation the state police want to!

Illinois also has been violating federal law for many decades now, they keep a registration of all gun purchases made in the state. Even though federal law states, that after the FBI back ground check is complete, all records are to be destroyed. This data base is of course kept by the state police. The only reason to keep these records is for confiscation!

Chicago Gun Grabbers have always stated that thier ultimate goal is a gun free Illinois! DON'T forget, Obama is from Chicago and shares this feeling about GUNS!

look, I realize that prohibition was a federal law hy and nationwide, but Illinoise was that state hit hardest by prohibition. Chicago was the land of gangsters in the mob like Al Capone. They should know best better than anyone else what banning something does. Al Capone never would have become the man he was Norwood there have been so many slaughters and killing the in Chicago if it were not for the banning of alcohol.

reply to post by Hijinx


Thx for the suggestion mate....Id probably leave LE all together....and try to run a business...or work with plants (they never talk and im ok with that haha). Be safe brother.

Originally posted by MegaMind

Originally posted by Mayson
That's always a funny statement to me.

Of course only criminals will have guns if they're against the law; It's true by definition.

I'm not quite sure why this is such a hot button issue. I mean, I've never even held a gun and I'm fine. However, I wouldn't want people to ban something I liked like Mexican food, but I'm not gonna threaten people over it. I'd just be a little upset and go about my daily life.

I think that if guns were made illegal most people would just about their normal lives unchanged and the "gun people" would just be sad for a while until they found another hobby.

The only pro-gun argument that I can see is an economic one. With an already ailing economy do you really want to make a multi-million dollar industry illegal? It would be like making cigarettes illegal. Sure they're bad for people, but they make people a lot of money.

So having the right to own a gun is like having the right to eat Mexican food?

And if Mexican food was banned you would just be "a little upset" by it?

Please go immediately to see a doctor to have your head examined.

The logic and self preservation areas of your brain seems to be damaged ...

edit on 3-1-2013 by MegaMind because: (no reason given)

Sure. Both seem like just as arbitrary a "right". If the only Mexican restaurant in town closed, you wouldn't hear chants of "they can have it when they pry them from my cold dead fingers" and if you did, you'd think that those people were wacko.

It's not as if there haven't been things that were banned before and most people didn't get violent as a result. I remember when I was a kid there were these paintball guns that spawned a movie called "gotcha" that I'm going to assume had the same name. The toys somewhat quietly disappeared and everyone moved on and lived their lives.

Now, it might seem weird to liken guns and a child's toy and Mexican food, but I think that I can even begin to relate the two shows how much of an anachronism the second amendment is to (what I assume is) the average person. I mean a crazy person could easily drive their car onto a busy city sidewalk and crush a lot of people, but would they even be considering banning cars?

Would I seem more like I had a healthy functioning brain if I thought that the only thing that was keeping a death squad from breaking down my door and killing me was the fact that bob down the street had a handgun? Or if I harbored fantasies of being a rebel freedom fighter against a corrupt government?

reply to post by Mayson


A restaurant closing is hardly the same thing as the government telling you that you may no longer consume mexican food.

I would think that it was perfectly obvious that when a government tells you what foods you can and cannot consume that that government has overstepped its function and role.

Raw milk is a perfectly good real world example.

I for one want to be free to consume what I want. Its my body after all. And that goes for drugs as well.

No one has a right to tell me what I can and cannot consume. And if the government ever steps in and tells me I can't consume the tomatoes I grew in my back yard then yes we are going to have a major problem. To me that is worth fighting over.

So what's your line in the sand?

Will you ever defend your rights or freedoms if they are threatened?

Would you at least provide support for those that would defend your freedoms?

Or will you cower and lick the hand that feeds you?

I think I know that answer ... better get your knee pads out on stand by ...

the world is changing quickly.