National IL Gun Confiscation Bill - Close to Passing

[Ura-Ki]

View attachment 438650

And you wanna know the real kicker, most of those bubblegummers all got to keep their jobs

 

[Gator Monroe]

There's the Fix NCIS Bill that disarmed all veterans and anyone taking anxiety meds like GOA and OFF said they would. Oh wait ........

Hmmm sounds like it was ripped right outta the headlines ?

 

[bbbass]

How did this become a Trump bash thread??

 

[justcuz]

Quite interesting the membership is all rallying around the shock and awe breitbart article initially cited and yet nobody has mentioned actually reviewing the IL HB 1465 about the exact wording of the provision which in fact states:
Illinois General Assembly - Full Text of HB1465

4 (c) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (d) of this
5 Section, 90 days after the effective date of this amendatory
6 Act of the 100th General Assembly, it is unlawful for any
7 person under 21 years of age within this State to knowingly
8 possess an assault weapon, assault weapon attachment, .50
9 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge.

Guess I am missing the forfeiture or confiscation of said firearms in the HB's wording.

Oh and there are exceptions to < 21 possessing these weapons which the article failed to include:

10 (d) This Section does not apply to or affect any of the
11 following:
12 (1) Members of the Armed Services or Reserve Forces of
13 the United States or the Illinois National Guard, while in
14 the performance of their official duties or while traveling
15 to or from their place of duty.
16 (2) Transportation, transfer, or sale of weapons,
17 attachments, or ammunition for sale or transfer in another
18 state.
19 (3) Possession of any firearm if that firearm is
20 sanctioned by the International Olympic Committee or by USA
21 Shooting, the national governing body for international
22 shooting competition in the United States, but only when
23 the firearm is in the actual possession of an Olympic
24 target shooting competitor or target shooting coach for the
25 purpose of storage, transporting to and from Olympic target
26 shooting practice or events if the firearm is broken down
1 in a non-functioning state, is not immediately accessible,
2 or is unloaded and enclosed in a firearm case, carrying
3 box, shipping box, or other similar portable container
4 designed for the safe transportation of firearms, and when
5 the Olympic target shooting competitor or target shooting
6 coach is engaging in those practices or events.
7 (3.5) Possession of a firearm for the limited purpose
8 of training for or participation in a sanctioned
9 competitive shooting event supervised by a certified
10 firearms instructor, if, while traveling to or from the
11 location the firearm is broken down in a non-functioning
12 state, is not immediately accessible, or is unloaded and
13 enclosed in a firearm case, carrying box, shipping box, or
14 other similar portable container designed for the safe
15 transportation of firearms. In this paragraph (3.5),
16 "sanctioned competitive shooting event" has the same
17 meaning ascribed to the term in Section 1.1 of the Firearm
18 Owners Identification Card Act.
19 (4) Any non-resident who transports, within 24 hours, a
20 weapon for any lawful purpose from any place where he or
21 she may lawfully possess and carry that weapon to any other
22 place where he or she may lawfully possess and carry that
23 weapon if, during the transportation the weapon is
24 unloaded, and neither the weapon nor any ammunition being
25 transported is readily accessible or is directly
26 accessible from the passenger compartment of the
1 transporting vehicle. Provided that, in the case of a
2 vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver's
3 compartment the weapon or ammunition shall be contained in
4 a locked container other than the glove compartment or
5 console.
6 (5) Possession of a weapon at events taking place at
7 the World Shooting and Recreational Complex at Sparta, only
8 while engaged in the legal use of this weapon, or while
9 traveling to or from this location if the weapon is broken
10 down in a non-functioning state, or is not immediately
11 accessible, or is unloaded and enclosed in a firearm case,
12 carrying box, shipping box, or other similar portable
13 container designed for the safe transportation of
14 firearms.
15 (6) Possession of a weapon only for hunting use
16 expressly permitted under the Wildlife Code, or while
17 traveling to or from a location authorized for this hunting
18 use under the Wildlife Code if the weapon is broken down in
19 a non-functioning state, or is not immediately accessible,
20 or is unloaded and enclosed in a firearm case, carrying
21 box, shipping box, or other similar portable container
22 designed for the safe transportation of firearms.

 

[justcuz]

Maybe the one bright spot to this whole thing is if it passes, someone will take it all the way to the supreme court and hopefully rule definitively on the second amendment. Maybe finally put all the gun control talk in the grave for good...

2007:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL. v. HELLER
Held:
1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a
firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for
traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
Pp. 2–53.
(a) The Amendment's prefatory clause announces a purpose, but
does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative
clause. The operative clause's text and history demonstrate that it
connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.
(b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court's interpretation
of the operative clause. The "militia" comprised all males physically
capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists
feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in
order to disable this citizens' militia, enabling a politicized standing
army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress
power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear
arms, so that the ideal of a citizens' militia would be preserved.
Pp. 22–28.
(c) The Court's interpretation is confirmed by analogous armsbearing
rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately
followed the Second Amendment. Pp. 28–30.
(d) The Second Amendment's drafting history, while of dubious
interpretive worth, reveals three state Second Amendment proposals
that unequivocally referred to an individual right to bear arms.
Pp. 30–32.
(e) Interpretation of the Second Amendment by scholars, courts
and legislators, from immediately after its ratification through the
late 19th century also supports the Court's conclusion. Pp. 32–47.

2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.
It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any
manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed
weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment
or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast
doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by
felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms
in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or
laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of
arms. Miller's holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those
"in common use at the time" finds support in the historical tradition
of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.
Pp. 54–56

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

 

[etrain16]

Good grief. Perhaps folks should read even further in the bill...

5 (e) Sentence.
6 (1) A person who knowingly delivers, sells, or
7 possesses or causes to be delivered or sold, in violation
8 of this Section an assault weapon commits a Class 3 felony
9 for a first violation and a Class 2 felony for a second or
10 subsequent violation or for the possession or delivery of 2
11 or more of these weapons at the same time.
12 (2) A person who knowingly delivers, sells, or
13 possesses or causes to be delivered or sold, in violation
14 of this Section an assault weapon attachment commits a
15 Class 4 felony for a first violation and a Class 3 felony
16 for a second or subsequent violation.
17 (3) A person who knowingly delivers, sells, or
18 possesses or causes to be delivered or sold, in violation
19 of this Section a .50 caliber rifle commits a Class 3
20 felony for a first violation and a Class 2 felony for a
21 second or subsequent violation or for the possession or
22 delivery of 2 or more of these weapons at the same time.

So, if a person, age 18-20 is in possession of a weapon listed in this bill, they are guilty of a Class 3 felony for a first violation, it gets worse after that. A FELONY to possess an item that they, a lawful adult would otherwise be allowed to legally possess.

Is it a "confiscation"? Good grief, if you are passing a law that forces people that would otherwise be lawfully allowed to own such an item to get rid of them, whether or not the government comes to take them from you, what is the actual result? The guns are gone, as a result of government action. If you already own something and the government forces you, by law, under penalty of felony arrest and conviction, to get rid of it, it's accomplishing exactly the same affect as a confiscation. Threats. And don't tell me if they find out you have a gun that they won't come and take it from you directly.

It's pretty clear - this is a confiscation. Play around with the words, but forcing someone to get rid of their property, property they lawfully own, is just that.

Splitting hairs over one missing word hardly makes this deal palatable to gun owners. Most of the folks here seem to understand that.

 

[justcuz]

Finally, it is interesting to note the under tone of sedition from this membership on a public forum!

 

[Kruel J]

Finally, it is interesting to note the under tone of sedition from this membership on a public forum!

It's not a public forum, it is privately owned and operated.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Well sedition is how the United States came into being...
Andy

 

[IOM]

 

[IOM]

 

[justcuz]

It's not a public forum, it is privately owned and operated.

Ah, private is ownership and would lead to a closed loop where nobody except membership could see content, that the forum's home is on the very public internet means everyone outside the membership can read forum member's commentary eh?

Orwell's big brother is alive and well and has been for decades and numerous folk have had to judicially defend themselves from that oversight.

 

[justcuz]

Well sedition is how the United States came into being...
Andy

noticed your grayed out comment is missing when replying...
AndyinEverson quote: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves... unquote

forgive me, might i ask the illustrious staff member if they have any specific negative wave(s) promoted by my opinions or misspoke to warrant such a snide pronouncement towards me?

 

[Kruel J]

noticed your grayed out comment is missing when replying...
AndyinEverson quote: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves... unquote

forgive me, might i ask the illustrious staff member if they have any specific negative wave(s) promoted by my opinions or misspoke to warrant such a snide pronouncement towards me?

That's actually his signature and shows in every one of his posts. If you came here just to start arguments with everyone I suggest you read the forum rules and if you don't like them you are welcome to go somewhere else.

Community Rules

 

[Andy54Hawken]

noticed your grayed out comment is missing when replying...
AndyinEverson quote: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves... unquote

forgive me, might i ask the illustrious staff member if they have any specific negative wave(s) promoted by my opinions or misspoke to warrant such a snide pronouncement towards me?

I wasn't being snide in my comment...
Just pointing out that it was with sedition that the United States came into being...
No need to read into what I said ...

As for my "Why Don't you knock it of with them negative waves"...its a quote from Donald Sutherland's character in the movie Kelly's Heroes...
I like it and again no need to read into or put your feelings into what I say or post...
Andy

 

[justcuz]

That's actually his signature and shows in every one of his posts. If you came here just to start arguments with everyone I suggest you read the forum rules and if you don't like them you are welcome to go somewhere else.

Community Rules

The rules were reviewed prior to initially posting which is why my posts, if reference material is used, are cited to meet rule #4.
Thank you for your clarification. I was truly trying to discern if there was a problem and didn't wish to assure I didn't violate rule #7.
Finally, I am sorry you misconstrue my postings as starting arguments, not my intent, but rather meant to provide clarification to subject matter being posted.

 

[justcuz]

I wasn't being snide in my comment...
Just pointing out that it was with sedition that the United States came into being...
No need to read into what I said ...

As for my "Why Don't you knock it of with them negative waves"...its a quote from Donald Sutherland's character in the movie Kelly's Heroes...
I like it and again no need to read into or put your feelings into what I say or post...
Andy

thanks for clarification it is certainly appreciated and I personally have an affinity to donald's "scream" meme from invasion of the body snatchers.

 

[Gator Monroe]

That's actually his signature and shows in every one of his posts. If you came here just to start arguments with everyone I suggest you read the forum rules and if you don't like them you are welcome to go somewhere else.

Community Rules

Yeah , what he said

 

[11Charlie]

Another thread ruined WTF

 

[justcuz]

Good grief. Perhaps folks should read even further in the bill...

5 (e) Sentence.
6 (1) A person who knowingly delivers, sells, or
7 possesses or causes to be delivered or sold, in violation
8 of this Section an assault weapon commits a Class 3 felony
9 for a first violation and a Class 2 felony for a second or
10 subsequent violation or for the possession or delivery of 2
11 or more of these weapons at the same time.
12 (2) A person who knowingly delivers, sells, or
13 possesses or causes to be delivered or sold, in violation
14 of this Section an assault weapon attachment commits a
15 Class 4 felony for a first violation and a Class 3 felony
16 for a second or subsequent violation.
17 (3) A person who knowingly delivers, sells, or
18 possesses or causes to be delivered or sold, in violation
19 of this Section a .50 caliber rifle commits a Class 3
20 felony for a first violation and a Class 2 felony for a
21 second or subsequent violation or for the possession or
22 delivery of 2 or more of these weapons at the same time.

So, if a person, age 18-20 is in possession of a weapon listed in this bill, they are guilty of a Class 3 felony for a first violation, it gets worse after that. A FELONY to possess an item that they, a lawful adult would otherwise be allowed to legally possess.

Is it a "confiscation"? Good grief, if you are passing a law that forces people that would otherwise be lawfully allowed to own such an item to get rid of them, whether or not the government comes to take them from you, what is the actual result? The guns are gone, as a result of government action. If you already own something and the government forces you, by law, under penalty of felony arrest and conviction, to get rid of it, it's accomplishing exactly the same affect as a confiscation. Threats. And don't tell me if they find out you have a gun that they won't come and take it from you directly.

It's pretty clear - this is a confiscation. Play around with the words, but forcing someone to get rid of their property, property they lawfully own, is just that.

Splitting hairs over one missing word hardly makes this deal palatable to gun owners. Most of the folks here seem to understand that.

Splitting hairs over shock and awe term posting "they're coming to take it away" meaning "the action of taking or seizing someone's property with authority; seizure." verses you can't possess it is not under any circumstances the same, especially since there are exemptions to <21 being allowed to 'possess'!

There is absolutely no 'taking or seizing' by agents of the state of Illinois as is the spirit and tenor of this thread since the <21 citizen has the long firearm and only uses it as provided under the exemption provisions previously discussed, w/o fear of judicial repercussions.

So for example, every citizen > 16 of this country understands if they are caught by law enforcement driving while "under the influence of substances' in violation of their state statutes. Oh, the nice judicial system just took away the citizen's access to their vehicle possibly due to inability to pay court costs/finds by invalidating their DL. How does the citizen get to work, school, grocery store, etc.?

Now, why isn't there extreme outrage about this denial of a citizen's access to their personal vehicle by state governance which is prevalent across the country?