PDA

View Full Version : Chicago gun range restrictions get tweeked


wjc
09-06-2011, 5:17 PM
From the Chicago Tribune, 6 September 2011


The Chicago City Council isnít done tinkering with gun-control measures it hastily approved last summer after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a decades-old handgun ban.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-city-council-tweaks-chicago-gun-range-restrictions-20110906,0,4056588.story

dantodd
09-06-2011, 5:30 PM
didn't someone suggest that there is no reason to believe that Chicago wouldn't continue to change their regulations if the courts didn't provide appropriate relief? :gura:

Librarian
09-06-2011, 6:03 PM
Attorney Walter Maksym, who sued the city on behalf of people who want to sell guns in Chicago, said he believed even the revised shooting range restrictions would be too onerous to pass court muster.
Yes, I believe Walter is likely correct. I hope 7th Circuit is demonstrably unamused.

tonelar
09-06-2011, 6:11 PM
Did the court pass its ruling already? Or were they stayed?

ldsnet
09-06-2011, 10:04 PM
This new regulation might actually work to OUR benefit - making the requirement of a State and City permit card to even USE a range Chicago is blatantly demonstrating the cards are only about restrictions to a Right and not about public safety or any other BS.

So with this requirement, under Federal and state law I could transport my handgun with me to my sister's residence in Chicago while I visited, but I can not take them to a local Chicago range since none of us have (or can apply for) a Chicago handgun card.

Nope. Don't see this passing muster either

Howard Roark
09-06-2011, 10:19 PM
There are about 12 ranges in Chicago, a couple of them are private security for wealthy or corporations, and the remainder are government. The demand is there for public ranges, but the supply has been blocked.

@Idsnet: I agree with you, it's hard to justify keeping suburbanites and out-of-staters away from a hypothetical Chicago gun range based on public safety.

Continual re-work of the Chicago gun range ban indicates a sort of tone-deafness by the Aldermen & Mayor. They still haven't got it right.

Not to worry, they will submit soon.

dantodd
09-06-2011, 10:28 PM
Maybe the state of Illinois will eventually be tired of looking like fools because of Chicago and they'll just pass a strong preemption law.

Funtimes
09-07-2011, 1:34 AM
And the bill just keeps on getting bigger! http://www.hawaiidefensefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Animated-Gif-Counter-11.gif

:43::43::rolleyes:

Anchors
09-07-2011, 1:50 AM
Maybe the state of Illinois will eventually be tired of looking like fools because of Chicago and they'll just pass a strong preemption law.

Best option yet!
(Well, except it is nice using Chicago to make great pro-gun case law).

DannyInSoCal
09-07-2011, 1:57 AM
When they lose this one - They will go after the ammo.

Just like Kalifornistan...

press1280
09-07-2011, 3:28 AM
Maybe the state of Illinois will eventually be tired of looking like fools because of Chicago and they'll just pass a strong preemption law.

Unfortunately, it seems you need super-majorities in IL to pass anything like that. Look at the shall-issue bill in IL, they needed 71 out of 100 to pass a bill that was pre-emption proof. Chicago was almost all the no votes, and would do it again even in the face of losing millions in lawsuits.

socal2310
09-07-2011, 8:03 AM
Unfortunately, it seems you need super-majorities in IL to pass anything like that. Look at the shall-issue bill in IL, they needed 71 out of 100 to pass a bill that was pre-emption proof. Chicago was almost all the no votes, and would do it again even in the face of losing millions in lawsuits.

Is there any precedent for a circuit court issuing an extremely broad ruling in the face of a recalcitrant municipality playing games like this?

If so, Go Chicago! :43:

Ryan

jar
09-07-2011, 8:51 AM
Is there any precedent for a circuit court issuing an extremely broad ruling in the face of a recalcitrant municipality playing games like this?

If so, Go Chicago! :43:

Ryan

They can appoint a special administrator to write their laws for them.

lhecker51
09-07-2011, 2:01 PM
Chicago and many other cities such as LA will just keep tweeking away. Even if the courts order cities and states to comply with decisions, it will not stop them from flat out disregarding the order. Los Angeles is a great example of this. If you think that relief will come to us in the form of a court decision, you are all dreaming. As long as cities continue to challenge and flaunt orders by the courts, we will never be free men.

They can continue these tactics for eternity. The DOJ would then be required to intervene but in this case, they choose what they will enforce and what they will ignore. You will rot in prison over illegal laws and they will ruin your life.

Trying to navigate all of the California and federal gun laws is impossible and the definition of those laws change depending on the mood of the current administration. What may have been perfectly legal the day before may make you a felon based on a new interpretation of the existing vague laws. To own a gun in this state is to run the risk of persecution by the state and possible prison. An example was the legal AW that fired full auto on a range due to soft primers. As I recall that individual was convicted.

These gun laws are vague for a reason: To force submission to authority by intimidating the law abiding citizen and making firearms ownership impractical and entirely too risky. Our wins in the courts just go ignored. What is to keep a county sheriff from ignoring an order to issue to all law abiding citizens when they know very well that the DOJ will not investigate nor will they enforce the law?

We have become a country of subjects when the will of the people is ignored by those elected and APPOINTED (BATFE). The bill of rights has been ignored by the feds and the states for decades! The 1st, 2nd, 4th, 10th and 14th amendment are some of the most abused or ignored. They are written in simple English yet it takes a government lawyer to twist and pervert them to their will and intent. There is no black and white, only shades of grey. We California gun owners live in this grey world.

nicki
09-07-2011, 3:01 PM
What if the SCOTUS said to states that you can regulate how arms are carried, either openly or concealed as a right and gave them an order with guidelines on how to estabish a "constitutionally permissible" system with a ruling saying the current law is a violation of the second amendment.

That would mean Illonis would effectively be like the other 4 states constitutional carry states until they put together a law that would pass muster.

Courts have done this before on other issues. Montana for instance found that the state couldn't issue speeding tickets because reasonable and prudent were vague.

There was a period of time(5 months) when Montana effectively had no speed limit until a 75 mph was instituted. Then of course highway fatality rate changed, it went up.

Check out national motorist association if you have a heavy right foot.

Nicki