The Illinois House of Representatives just made history by passing a shall-issue right to carry measure by a whopping 85 votes, far more than the 71 needed for passage.
Of course, Gov. Patrick Quinn and Chicago’s Mayor Rahm Emanuel are *very* upset by this and pledged (impotently) to stop the measure in the Illinois Senate.
Gun owners, call your State Senator *right now* and urge him to vote yes on SB2193.
If you don’t know who your Senator is, or if you need his number, we can help.
House passes gun bill over Quinn, Emanuel objections
SPRINGFIELD (Tribune) — Over objections of Gov. Pat Quinn and Mayor Rahm Emanuel, the House approved a concealed weapons bill today that is aimed at ending Illinois’ status as the last state in the nation without a law to allow its citizens to carry guns in public.
But the gun bill backed by House Speaker Michael Madigan goes to a Senate where President John Cullerton has denounced the proposal because it would override local gun laws like Chicago’s assault weapons ban.
Cullerton’s stance tempered the House victory, but sponsoring Rep. Brandon Phelps contended it is critical to move forward because Illinois faces next Friday’s deadline for the spring session’s adjournment and a court order that gives the state June 9 to fashion a law. A federal appeals court struck down the state’s ban on concealed carry.
“After years of debating this issue,” said Phelps, the state legislature’s leading gun rights advocate, “it is incredibly difficult if not darn near impossible to come to a middle ground on this issue. Every legislator on this floor has a different opinion when it comes to concealed-carry policy.
“Even among us gun-rights legislators and even among the gun-control legislators, our ideals of the perfect concealed-carry legislation is not identical,” Phelps said. “There is not a bill that we could possibly draw up in which every single legislator on this floor would be perfectly happy with. We live in Illinois. We never thought this day would come.”
The House passed the bill 85-30, with one lawmaker voting present.
This is not a victory “won”. Should the Senate pass it and the
Quinn sign it, based on the comments of the Chicago Reps this morning, they will not give up in their attempts to shoot it down.
Their obession with their rules and laws that are not working is beyond belief. They still believe that they are the only special city in the nation and not required to be part od the larger body of citizens. These next 180 days will be very demanding.
I just spoke with Brandon Phelps office. Staffer state that if Senate does not concur and pass, we WILL have constitutional carry BUT with HOME RULE.
What is home rule? Is that like local ordinance?
home rule means 220 different ordinances across the state… a real mess.
No, Jake.
Home Rule is basically an aphorism for “Chicago.”
It’s the Constitutional proviso that municipalities with populations of so many (sorry, I’m unaware of the present figure, but it’s MILLIONS) may make their own laws that may supercede the state law. That proviso also permits that the General Assembly may by a certain vote, eliminate the home rule option. That is, Home Rule UNLESS the GA says otherwise, but the courts have said it must be clear and unequivocal.
It was a bow to chitcago, of course. Not 220 jurisdictions, unless and until they each achieve the millions in pop that would permit.
Talk is cheap.
When will the Senate vote?
You know, I really wish people were involved enough to bother learning the basic civics of Illinois government and law. Municipalities with over 25,000 population are automatically Home Rule and smaller communities can put the question on the ballot and vote themselves in. There are currently 220 Home rule communities in Illinois, some as small as Bryant Illinois, pop 255….
It does not require “millions”….
You do not need a law or the permission of the state to exercise a natural right.
agreed
No, but you do need clearly written laws and judges who honor them to stay out of prison.
It ain’t perfect. But, it is a start. Let us know when to start calling Senators.
In the mean time- I’m betting the almost defeated gun grabbers will try something to get even – look out for an attempt to pass a mag ban.
I haven’t been able to find anywhere what is acceptable for the 16 hours of training, maybe I missed it but I don’t think so. Sadly no provisions in the bill for those of us with the shiny DD214….
John Boch, For those of us who have taken the Personal Protection in the Home two day course. How many hours does that account for? Still do not know if our Florida concealed carry permits will be honored? Or are these questions premature?
GSL Defense Training’s NRA Personal Protection in the Home Course is 17 hours.
It also satisfies all points listed in the bill for a class to cover.
We’ll have to wait and see, but I think our alumni are going to be very happy campers.
John
Section 75. Applicant firearm training.
25 (a) Within 45 days of the effective date of this Act, the
09800SB2193ham001 – 29 – LRB098 10174 MRW 46317 a
1 Department shall begin approval of firearm training courses and
2 makes a list of approved courses available of the Department’s
3 website.
4 (b) An applicant for a new license shall provide proof of
5 completion of a firearms training course or combination of
6 courses approved by the Department of at least 16 hours, which
7 includes range qualification time under subsection (c) of this
8 Section, that covers the following:
9 (1) firearm safety;
10 (2) the basic principles of marksmanship;
11 (3) care, cleaning, loading, and unloading of a
12 concealable firearm;
13 (4) all applicable State and federal laws relating to
14 the ownership, storage, carry, and transportation of a
15 firearm; and
16 (5) instruction on the appropriate and lawful
17 interaction with law enforcement while transporting or
18 carrying a concealed firearm.
19 (c) An applicant for a new license shall provide proof of
20 certification by a certified instructor that the applicant
21 passed a live fire exercise with a concealable firearm
22 consisting of:
23 (1) a minimum of 30 rounds; and
24 (2) 10 rounds from a distance of 5 yards; 10 rounds
25 from a distance of 7 yards; and 10 rounds from a distance
26 of 10 yards at a B-27 silhouette target approved by the
09800SB2193ham001 – 30 – LRB098 10174 MRW 46317 a
1 Department.
8 Section 80. Firearms instructor training.
9 (a) Within 45 days of the effective date of this Act, the
10 Department shall begin approval of certified firearms
11 instructors and enter certified firearms instructors into an
12 online registry on the Department’s website.
13 (b) A person who is not a certified firearms instructor
14 shall not teach applicant training courses or advertise or
15 otherwise represent courses they teach as qualifying their
16 students to meet the requirements to receive a license under
17 this Act. Each violation of this subsection is a business
18 offense with a fine of at least $1,000 per violation.
19 (c) A person seeking to become a certified firearms
20 instructor shall:
21 (1) be at least 21 years of age;
22 (2) be a legal resident of the United States; and
23 (3) meet the requirements of Section 25 of this Act,
24 and any additional uniformly applied requirements
25 established by the Department.
09800SB2193ham001 – 32 – LRB098 10174 MRW 46317 a
1 (d) A person seeking to become a certified firearms
2 instructor trainer, in addition to the requirements of
3 subsection (c) of this Section, shall:
4 (1) possess a high school diploma or GED certificate;
5 and
6 (2) have at least one of the following valid firearms
7 instructor certifications:
8 (A) certification from a law enforcement agency;
9 or
10 (B) certification from a firearm instructor course
11 offered by a State or federal governmental agency;
12 (C) certification from a firearm instructor
13 qualification course offered by the Illinois Law
14 Enforcement Training Standards Board; and
15 (D) certification from an entity approved by the
16 Department that offers firearm instructor education
17 and training in the use and safety of firearms.
18 (e) A person may have his or her firearms instructor
19 certification denied or revoked if he or she does not meet the
20 requirements to obtain a license under this Act, provides false
21 or misleading information to the Department, or has had a prior
22 instructor certification revoked or denied by the Department.
Are there any provision or language that allows immediate (June 9th) carry if you have a non-resident CCW permit from Utah or other state?
not that I saw… no reciprocity.
So everyone has to wait unitl the state gets its act together ??
Yeah. My guess is it will be next spring before anyone is issued a permit.
Is there a time limit for how long it takes to process an application? Given the sorry record of Illinois with FOID cards, can we expect any different with CCW permits?
Mr maddigan. My mind set has changed about you thank you ! Now we have some hope. I am not sad about the wait, as I still can transport legally. I. Just hope mr Quinn and mr Immanuel. Would understand that this is a good thing for. The good guys who are on their side. This is a team of good. Guys. Not bad guys. We all are against bad guys!!!! We are ON YOUR SIDE. Remember that. !!
I’m carrying on June 9th and will continue to carry until and unless either a) Quinn signs a bill or b) Quinn’s veto is over-ridden.
John
I do not understand why Scumbags Gov. Quinn and mayor Emanual are not charged with obstuction of justice? They were issued a court order to ammend CC In Illinois. and they STILL intend to defy a supreme court order! WTF!!!! Send these traitors to Jail already!!!
So doesn’t any law that is finally passed still have to pass the smell test by the 7th Circuit Court Appeals. Maybe I’m not being a realist but seems that if the court does not like what it reads, the court will strike it down. Then the court would issue its own guidelines. Someone tell how I’m wrong in this.
Too much government speak talk. You’ll have to pay to have your Constitutional right? This one stinks. Throw it out and start again.
it’s still not over.. the Senate could still strip away preemption before passing it (if Cullerton allows it to come to the floor). Quinn would sign a non-preemptive bill and we’d be stuck with all the bad parts of this bill and lose the good part.
Time to start hitting up Senators (Frerichs in particular seems to have gotten much more squishy lately)
Remember folks, just because this passed doesn’t mean Madigan is on “Our” side or “One of us”. He is still from Chicago, and still part of the “Chicago Power Hungry Machine”. We need to keep our friends close and our enemies even closer. We need to keep vigilant and watch for any shady bills coming from Springfield.
We just won a big battle in the House. Now we need to charge thru the Senate, then eventually the Governors office.
The war is far from over, but we can see Berlin over the horizon.
What is the OUTCOME of Lisa Madigan’s motion for an extension of time in the supreme court to file a petition for cert, anyone know?
Why. Mr Quinn must you always go against what. We the constitution has given us and we have a guy named Quinn that WE have voted to LEAD one state. And he does the opposite of what he said. And swore to do. By of allowing our rightful freedom to be exercised. And his GOOD buddy in Chicago agreeing with him and don’t want our help. Don’t understand that we are on their side were not the criminals!
Quinn does not care about anything outside Chicago. I still say that even if the bill passes Senate and the rest of the political process, the Court still has to decide if it passes their conditions. The court specifically pointed at Chicago. The prohibition on mass transit is pretty limiting for Chicago. Lets hope the court still decides “not good enough”. Then sets down their specifics as final. Daddy’s girl can try going to SCOTUS, won’t matter.
Looks to me like it’s pretty much pay $150 to be able to carry in your car, and a few other places here and there. By the time you account for all the businesses and such that will post “firearms prohibited,” plus all the places that the bill prohibits, there’s not a whole lot left. We’ll spend more time removing our weapon to put it into the car, than we will spend actually carrying it. Some of the places the bill prohibits are where one might need the weapon most.
Just seems a little strange that after all of this, we all of a sudden get 85 votes for a bill. What’s really going on?
85 votes in the house, an utterly tremendous showing for a gun bill in Illinois. Yet quinn and cullerton still have the arrogance to say they will actively fight it. Maybe cullerton’s been spending too much time with his mobbed up business partners on Rush st. to see the forest for the trees. Hope somehow both quinn and cullerton get to share cell space with blago.
Hate to come back again, but I think daddy sat the little girl down and had a talk with her. –“”–
Can all this be negated with a simple majority in both houses? Don’t they still actually control both houses?
I’m still not comfortable with this.