Court Invalidates Illinois Gun Laws - 12/11/2012

[DonP]

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has invalidated Illinois’s ban on carrying loaded weapons in public, and given the General Assembly 180 days to come up with a new law that meets the Second Amendment.

Posner’s order to the legislature:

"The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment therefore compels us to reverse the decisions in the two cases before us and remand them to their respective district courts for the entry of declarations of unconstitutionality and permanent injunctions.

Nevertheless we order our mandate stayed for 180 days to allow the Illinois legislature to craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendment as interpreted in this opinion, on the carrying of guns in public."

Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Court-Invalidates-Illinois-Gun-Laws-183017841.html#ixzz2Ellw7cpZ

6 months to write a new constitutional law and maybe another trip to SCOTUS.

This is going to be fun to watch, but it's far from over.

[hack89]

1. The frontlash continues. nt

[upaloopa]

2. What's the point of carrying loaded guns in public?

Does carrying a loaded gun in public mean out we're all can see?
Should I be able to go anywhere I want with a gun and holster on my belt? Is that the new normal?
In a unrelated matter some people didn't like seeing gay men nude in the Castro. They made a law against that. What's the difference here? A penis doesn't scare me like a loaded gun does. The penis doesn't have the same potential to harm me as a gun does.

[trouble.smith]

3. get used to it buddy.

[upaloopa]

4. Why the shitty reply?

Is it some need to be macho? Is that what wearing a gun does for you? Isn't it macho enough to be male?

[trouble.smith]

12. Oh, I'm sorry. here

feel better now?

[hack89]

5. Concealed carry - you will never know it is there. nt

[upaloopa]

6. I get that

[hack89]

7. So don't worry about legal CCW

it is all the criminals around you carrying guns that should concern you.

[upaloopa]

35. I wrote a long OP last week saying I agree that

the 2nd Amendment gives you RKBA.
I said I understand the need to defend yourself. I thought this was about open carry which I don't favor but can't do much about

[hack89]

39. I can understand why open carry make many uncomfortable

that is why CCW is always the better option.

[S_B_Jackson]

43. The 2nd Amendment doesn't "give" us the RKBA

it affirms that that right exists as an a priori condition, and protects that already existing right from infringement by the Federal, (and post-McDonald) state, county, and municipal governmental infringement.

In this decision, the court doesn't specify whether open or concealed carry is to be preferred - they're giving the state of Illinois 180 days to figure out and codify what THEY prefer........

[upaloopa]

46. What ever if I said I completely support you

you still find fault with me.

[petronius]

8. I agree with you - the San Francisco law is stupid. And personally, I'm no more

or less bothered by the sight of an un-holstered penis than I am by the sight of a holstered firearm. But I don't think this ruling requires open-carry (visible) necessarily - a concealed-carry law would seem to suit just as well...

[GreenStormCloud]

9. The point is self-defense.

By having a gun on me I can defend myself against a violent criminal if I should happen to be targeted by one. There are over ten million violent and/or property crimes every year, according to the FBI. That means there is a reasonable chance that I, or my stuff, could be targeted and I may need a gun.

Does carrying a loaded gun in public mean out we're all can see?
Depends upon the state. I prefer to carry concealed because people like you would needlessly become fearful and get a case of the vapors.

Should I be able to go anywhere I want with a gun and holster on my belt?
Yes. Unless the owner of the property forbids it. In that case he should provide adequate, effective, security. Merely posting a "Gun Free Zone" sign is not adequate, effective security.

Is that the new normal?
Society is moving in that direction.

In a unrelated matter some people didn't like seeing gay men nude in the Castro.
It is unrelated.

A penis doesn't scare me like a loaded gun does.
What does and doesn't scare you is irrelevant. However, as a courtesy to people like you I keep my gun concealed. In Texas I have to anyways. Even if we had open carry I would still keep it concealed - maybe.

[pipoman]

25. Where have you been?

There's no chance of violence against you in IL.

[upaloopa]

36. I understand

[ManiacJoe]

10. The point of carrying a loaded gun

Last edited Tue Dec 11, 2012, 10:21 PM - Edit history (1)

is to defend you and yours should the need arise.

> Does carrying a loaded gun in public mean out we're all can see?

Some carry openly, some concealed. Concealed usually requires a license/permit via background checks; open carry normally needs no special permission.

> Should I be able to go anywhere I want with a gun and holster on my belt? Is that the new normal?

Yes, you should be able to go anywhere, except for the few places listed by law like courthouses, schools, and the parts of bars/restaurants restricted by age. This is the old normal.

> In a unrelated matter...

Since it is OT, address it in the appropriate forum.

Unless your behavior tends to threaten the lives of others, you are at virtually no risk from the Good Guys carrying guns. Your risk from the Bad Guys is another story all together.

[upaloopa]

37. Ok

[oldhippie]

14. If you have to ask the question ...

... you wouldn't understand or want to hear the answers.

[-..__...]

15. The penis doesn't have the same potential to harm me as a gun does

Try telling that to HoF http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1255 or Zardoz...

[Trunk Monkey]

17. Re: The penis doesn't have the same potential to harm me as a gun does.

Are you unfamiliar with STDs?

Does carrying a loaded gun in public mean out we're all can see?

I think it means outside your home

Should I be able to go anywhere I want with a gun and holster on my belt?

Pretty much, maybe not to a nuclear reactor or the White House

Is that the new normal?

Actually in most of the country, it's the old normal

[PavePusher]

18. "Is that the new normal?"

It's a return to the old normal, when people knew that their personal security was their own responsibility. Still is, always has been.


"The penis doesn't have the same potential to harm me as a gun does."

Penii carry some pretty nasty diseases, some of which can be lethal.

[spin]

31. Unless you attack a person with a legally concealed weapon ...

your chances of being shot on purpose or by accident are less than your chances of getting hit by lightning if you live in the Tampa Bay area of Florida which likes to call itself the lightning capital of North America.

The news media and those who wish to impose extreme gun control will do their best to convince you that allowing honest citizens to carry weapons in public will lead to a return to the 'Wild West" with shootouts at every intersection and at high noon on Main Street. Many incidents involving a questionable use of a firearm for self defense by a citizen licensed to carry will receive national publicity while those situations where a firearm is used successfully to stop an attack will be largely ignored even by the local news.

Of course you have a higher chance of being shot by a criminal who is illegally carrying a firearm but since the violent crime rate in our nation has fallen to levels last seen in the late sixties, you have little to fear even from an armed felon unless you are involved in the drug trade or are a gang member.

If you live in a state where the law requires weapons to be carrying concealed you will probably never see a firearm carried by a civilian in public. In Florida alone over 800,000 residents have concealed weapons permits and some carry on a regular basis. Let me assure you that a person legally carrying a concealed firearm will not be as obvious as a person walking around nude. I personally an not bothered in the least by either.

[AtheistCrusader]

33. Wrong.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

11. The full text of the opinion with the Court's reasoning can be found here:

http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/537394/u-s-appellate-court-gun-law-decision.pdf

[Remmah2]

13. I think I just heard a few heads implode.

[TPaine7]

29. Fortunately, there are few brains to clean up--the heads were mostly empty. nt

[Remmah2]

45. Those that post the hollow points?

[-..__...]

16. And another win...

smells like... victory!

[PavePusher]

19. I'm disappointed in the court.

Last edited Tue Dec 11, 2012, 05:00 PM - Edit history (1)

I'd like to see a court say something akin to: "Since you've fucked around on the issue for so long, the following goes into effect immediately, no injunctions will be entertained: Anyone who may legally own a firearm may legally carry it openly or concealed, in/on any public property including all government offices, and any private property that is not posted against it."

Hey, a person can dream, right?

[DonP]

24. There's a perfectly good CCW bill siiting there already, Dem written and Dem sponsored

It missed passing with a super majority (to over ride Chicago and other local laws) by only 6 votes last session, and 3 of those votes have already announced they would change their votes.

But even with some Chicago reps support, I'm sure they'll dick around and try to find a way to not allow CCW like they've done with McDonald.

Then wind up writing more big ass checks to the NRA, SAF and ISRA.

[Eleanors38]

26. Yes, a stay in the order will allow this to happen...

[DonP]

20. Now this is encouraging too, from Chicago Alderman Brookins no less

Ald. Howard Brookins, 21st, chairman of the City Council black caucus, welcomed the decision, saying allowing Chicagoans to carry concealed weapons would help level the playing field in neighborhoods where law-abiding citizens feel like they need firearms to protect themselves.

"Certain people will have a sense of safety and peace of mind in the ability to do it," Brookins said of conceal-carry. "I know that even people, for example, just trying to see that their loved ones get homes safely are in technical violation of all sorts of weapons violations. If you just walk out to your garage and see that your wife is coming in the house safely, and you happen to have your gun on you, you're in technical violation of our ordinance. So I would hope all these ordinances would be consolidated so there's one set of rules and people would know where the bright line is to what they can and cannot do with respect to carrying a weapon."

Brookins said he's not worried doing away with the state ban would lead to an increase in gun violence as more people walk the streets with weapons. "I think those people have a gun now, they've just been made criminals because they can't legally have it," Brookins said. "And I think the gangbangers and thugs are going to have a gun regardless."

[-..__...]

21. Someone needs to inform Ald. Brookins...

that the terms "gangbangers and thugs" are racist "code words".

[DonP]

23. Well, he's proboably not a "Real" Dem, anyway

Just another "poser" serving for decades in Chicago's all Dem city council.

We all know that all real Dems support more gun control all the time.

Somebody in ''Meta" said so, so it must be true, right?

[TPaine7]

28. The good alderman obviously isn't a TWUU black person

There was once a poster on DU who was the world's greatest authority on authentic blackness, black men and the black experience... A white Canadian woman, IIRC.

Our definitive arbiter of blackness--she who must not be named--would explain it to you in detail were she still among us.

[DonP]

30. She also spoke for all women too

At least until she pissed off so many they got rid of her.

We had a guy like that in our unit in the 1st Cav.

The CO and CSM referred to him laughingly as "The World's Foremost Authority". The guy came in an E3 and after 18 months he was still an E3.

[spin]

34. I hate to say this but i miss the unnamed Canadian woman. ...

She was irritating and tended to insult those who disagreed with her but she argued for the gun control position far more effectively than most who survived longer or followed her.

I found that I had to do a lot of research on the issue of gun control to counter her arguments. I often found our debates frustrating as it seemed to me that I was following Alice into the rabbit hole but they also were frequently entertaining and educational.

As I mentioned, she did have a tendency to insult other posters which really never bothered me. I often enjoy being insulted in a reply to one of my posts as I feel it shows that I am winning the debate. Insults are often a tactic used by losers.

She did thrive in the era when the gungeon was the wild Wild West of DU.

[TPaine7]

38. She really irritated me...

On the bad side...

*She hid behind trifling technicalities when her opponent had a valid point
*She was rude and condescending when totally unprovoked
*She was gratuitous in her profanity and lack of civility
*She had grandiose views of her knowledge (as in regarding herself as an expert on black black American men). I don't exactly have a low opinion of my knowledge and reasoning abilities, but I wouldn't dream of speaking for white Canadian women.
*She had a way of speaking without saying anything

But...

*She actually had the intellect to often see when she had been defeated. She would never (or at least very rarely) admit it, but she would usually shut up.
*She sometimes made strong arguments.
*She was very entertaining, especially when furious.

I wouldn't exactly say I miss her, but I do notice she is gone.

[spin]

40. You summed it up nicely. (n/t)

[Atypical Liberal]

22. "the right to self-defense is “broader than the right to have a gun in one’s home.”"

"Judge Richard Posner, a Reagan appointee and one of the University of Chicago Law School’s leading conservative intellectuals, rejected laws against carrying guns in public, declaring that "the constitutional right of armed self-defense is broader than the right to have a gun in one’s home."

To justify his decision, Posner reached all the way the back to the 18th Century, when settlers were required to carry guns outside the home to protect themselves against hostile Indians. While conceding there are no hostile Indians in modern Chicago, Posner argued that there are still hostile people lurking out of doors."

Fantastic news for Illinois. It will soon become the last state in the Union to allow CCW.

Hooray for freedom!

[Glaug-Eldare]

27. Good news for Ray Woollard!

It certainly reinforces his argument, even if it's not in the 4th Circuit. It'll help with the Supremes.

[AtheistCrusader]

32. THE BACKLASH COMETH

[armueller2001]

41. It's a great day for civil rights

yup

[Doug.Goodall]

42. Nothing good is going to come from this. n/t

[PavePusher]

44. Why do you say that?

Has re-adopting carry laws made any other state less safe/raised crime rates?

[LAGC]

47. The end is nigh!