Are you following HB0997 in the Illinois House of Representatives? This is Rep. Brandon Phelps' bill about concealed carry, now sponsored by 45 Representatives (out of 118).
The bill has moved from the Rules Committee to the House Judiciary Committee. Note that the Judiciary Committee is addressing more than just concealed carry. Can you be in Chicago at 10:00AM on Friday?
From the Illinois State Rifle Association comes the following announcement:
"The Illinois House Judiciary Committee has announced a pair of hearings on proposals to eliminate 2nd Amendment rights here in Illinois. Information on these two committee hearings is as follows:
"1. Tuesday, 19 February, at Noon in Room 114 of the State Capitol Building, Springfield.
"2. Friday, 22 February, at 10:00 AM, Room 600, Bilandic Building, 160 North LaSalle St., Chicago
"During each of these hearings, committee members will be debating just how they plan to eliminate private firearm ownership in Illinois. They will certainly be discussing means to ban and confiscate 85% of the firearms currently owned by Illinois citizens. They will also be discussing how to confiscate magazines holding more than 10 rounds. Other topics of debate will also include “universal licensing and registration,” shutting down gun shows, and restricting concealed carry.
"It is critically important that law-abiding firearm owners flood both committee meetings. Otherwise, anti-gunners will take control of the meetings with disastrous results for freedom loving citizens. Be sure to get to the meeting rooms at least a half hour early to ensure that you get a seat. Be sure to wear IGOLD shirts and hats. If you see members of the media there, approach them and tell them you are a law-abiding gun owner and you do not support further gun control.
"If you cannot attend either of these meetings, they please complete an on-line witness slip for each meeting by going to these two sites:
Witness Slip for February 19 hearing and Witness Slip for February 22 hearing
Seven Years for Child Porn
6 hours ago
9 comments:
Our side shows way too much civility and tolerance. Blatant disregard of the IL and US Constitutions needs to be met with open truculence and anger.
Redstate.com has an article by radio host Dana Loesch that describes the actions being taken by Missouri gun owners against proposed legislation from 4 Democrats to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens. Read http://www.redstate.com/dloesch/2013/02/16/missouri-gun-grabbers-feeling-the-heat/
Seriously, in order to stop the left from destroying what remains of the Constitution, our side is going to have to adopt the same "smashmouth" in-your-face tactics that the left uses against us.
Why do gun nuts think their "right" to own firearms is not subject to regulation? We already acknowledge the rights to free speech, press and religion have to be limited -no shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, no porn sold to children, no animal torture in religious ceremonies. Similar limits need to be placed on firearms and who should have access. Even Justice Scalia agrees the government has the right to impose reasonable limits.
The NRA: Making firearms available to criminals for over 140 years.
What law-abiding citizen could get his/her panties in a twist over anything as mundane as this:
"Creates the Family and Personal Protection Act. Provides that the Department of State Police shall issue a license to a person to: (1) carry a loaded or unloaded handgun on or about his or her person, concealed or otherwise; (2) keep or carry a loaded or unloaded handgun on or about his or her person when in a vehicle; and (3) keep a loaded or unloaded handgun openly or concealed in a vehicle. Prohibits the carrying of the handgun in certain locations. Provides that the license shall be issued by the Department of State Police within 30 days of receipt of a completed application and shall be valid throughout the State for a period of 5 years from the date of issuance. Provides for renewal of licenses. Establishes qualifications for licensees, certified firearms instructors, and instructor trainers. Provides for home rule preemption. Provides that the provisions of the Act are severable. Amends the Freedom of Information Act. Prohibits from inspection and copying information about applications for licenses to carry a handgun and about license holders contained in the database created by the Family and Personal Protection Act, except as authorized by that Act. Amends the State Finance Act and the Criminal Code of 2012 to make conforming changes. Effective immediately."
Robert, if you happen to be sincerely interested in an answer to your question, I can offer resources to you. There are restrictions. We gun-owners are greatly concerned about the possibility of registration and eventual confiscation. Should that happen, then the populace would not be able to defend itself against "enemies, foreign and domestic."
To your last comment that the NRA has been making firearms available to criminals for over 140 years, I cannot even imagine how you could come up with such a statement.
Robert, I'm delighted that you don't have any objection to HB 0997.
Robert asks: Why do gun nuts think their "right" to own firearms is not subject to regulation?
Why do certain gun grabbing fascist clowns think they have the right to tell us what kind of (or how many) guns we can own? What right do these statists have to tell anybody what to do with their lives?
The Amendment says "shall not be infringed," not "subject to the hoops that hopolophobes want law abiding people to jump through before you can exercise your rights."
I read an editiorial today from a paper in Ohio. In part it says:
"What do you get when you cross aggressive government attempts to strip citizens of their Second Amendment rights with at least 65 million American gun owners, who have just bought roughly 65 million more guns in only the last four years? Let’s just say, “trouble” could be a euphemism for an answer." http://morningjournal.com/articles/2013/02/17/opinion/doc5120526a84d64806228549.txt?viewmode=fullstory
Another term would be "smashmouth, in-your-face resistance."
The problem with folks like Robert is that "reasonable" gun control to them consists of punishing law-abiding people for criminals’ crimes. This is not only unamerican but is also unconstitutional. And if we are going to pass gun control laws, how about laws that actually produce something other than the puff up the fake moral superiority and self-righteousness of its bloviating supporters?
Maybe the gun grabbing fascists should mind their own business, and leave LAW ABIDING citizens alone!
Progressives - stealing Americans lives, liberty and property for over 100 years.
That is true that "reasoable" regulations can be put into place but that is not what is going on. They keep calling for a ban on "assault" weapons but don't define what that is. It would appear from the television reporting that anything other than a revolver would fit that bill but who knows for sure. Justice scalia also said that guns that are not "unusual" were fine. The AR 15 and Glock are two of the most well known and widely owned guns in america. They are hardly unusual however they are both under attack as needing to be banned by folks like you. Don't cheery pick Scalia like the rest of your brethern. Also, before you get high and mighty about your NRA statement about giving guns to criminals, check your own White House's record. Does Fast and Furious ring a bell?
Progressives are actually regressives.
Mike, thanks for your response!
Post a Comment