Illinois bill creates triple background check and other shenanigans

[jc1240]

HB 3239 - new firearm permit training

FOID (firearm owner ID) card - background check 1 -> (new) apply to local PD for a permit to buy (background check 2) that is good for only 10 days -> purchase (background check 3)

Local PD may decline issuing "transfer permit" at its discretion (back to may-issue).
Creates a registry of these temporary purchase permits
FOID card would require state-sanctioned 8-hour class with live-fire training.

Skip to 2:45 to bypass intro and in-video ad.

 

[Slackdaddy]

HB 3239 - new firearm permit training

FOID (firearm owner ID) card - background check 1 -> (new) apply to local PD for a permit to buy (background check 2) that is good for only 10 days -> purchase (background check 3)

Local PD may decline issuing "transfer permit" at its discretion (back to may-issue).
Creates a registry of these temporary purchase permits
FOID card would require state-sanctioned 8-hour class with live-fire training.

Skip to 2:45 to bypass intro and in-video ad.

This is NOT back to may-issue.
This is may issue for any firearms purchase, want to buy a bolt action .22 rimfire? it is at the discretion of the local PD,, Or this is how I read it.

 

[jc1240]

This is NOT back to may-issue.
This is may issue for any firearms purchase, want to buy a bolt action .22 rimfire? it is at the discretion of the local PD,, Or this is how I read it.

Ok. "May purchase" then. Still tyrannical BS.

 

[Tungsten]

There has to be a way to prevent states from continually trying to limit rights instead of filing suit after the fact. There should be some 2A oversight board where no gun laws can go into effect until the Independent Review Board (not like the bs one in MD) verifies that the law is consitutional.

 

[Occam]

There has to be a way to prevent states from continually trying to limit rights instead of filing suit after the fact. There should be some 2A oversight board where no gun laws can go into effect until the Independent Review Board (not like the bs one in MD) verifies that the law is consitutional.

And in a deep-blue state that wants to ban guns entirely, who would be choosing that oversight board? The members of that board would be the ones interpreting the constitution? By what standards? That's what courts are for, and the Supreme Court in particular.

Systems of infringements like this are that natural new process the left uses for dragging pro-2A entities into expensive, years-long litigation. And the pro-2A people only have to have a bit of bad luck or slip up once to allow this stuff to stick. There's a reason legislators are generally allowed to pass whatever they want: because the constitution treats them as a co-equal branch of government. Then their work gets to be tested by people appealing to one of the OTHER branches (the judiciary). It sucks that one party is so willing to abuse that process, but it's the process we've got and it sucks less than every other arrangement.

 

[Tungsten]

And in a deep-blue state that wants to ban guns entirely, who would be choosing that oversight board?

I was thinking something like the Voting Rights Act and how some states must get federal approval before changing the laws. It wouldn't help in this administration, but it would at least kill the laws during a sane administration.

 

[Bob A]

I was thinking something like the Voting Rights Act and how some states must get federal approval before changing the laws. It wouldn't help in this administration, but it would at least kill the laws during a sane administration.

What is needed is a strong executive branch, to enforce the laws as written and confirmed legitimate by the SCOTUS.

 

[FN509Fan]

Thank dog I moved out of Illinois in 2006, unfortunately I moved to the People's Republic of Maryland.

 

[JPG]

Hopefully one day soon the courts will get to the point where they read the last half of the 2nd amendment - "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

 

[Combloc]

There are three choices:
1. Leave Illinois,
2. Comply,
3. Ignore the edict.

IMO, mass non-compliance is where they are at this point. They are throwing crap at the wall so fast, it can't be cleaned off fast enough. This is by design. It's gone so far downhill that the people of Illinois are deluding themselves to think the courts or voting harder will dig them out.

 

[Biggfoot44]

There are three choices:
1. Leave Illinois,
2. Comply,
3. Ignore the edict.

IMO, mass non-compliance is where they are at this point.

The compliance in lL is under 10% , if not under 1% . This is their stepping up .

Discretionary purchased / transfers .

Mentioned in WGL Video , but not in the thread yet , is the even worse part .

Create mandatory training for Initial and Renewal FOID Cards .

NRA , etc, not allowed to give the Training , only Police Departments.

Training becomes difficult to obtain , and probably expensive .

 

[Trepang]

Can we just kick Chicago out of the State?
Maybe give it to Wisconsin?

 

[Sev89]

Can we just kick Chicago out of the State?
Maybe give it to Wisconsin?

Leave the Cheese state out of this

 

[Allen65]

Can we just kick Chicago out of the State?
Maybe give it to Wisconsin?

WI already has to deal with Madison Leftist idiocy.