Lake Erie Conservative

thoughtful discussion(s) about issue(s)

… Illinois Will Have Concealed – Carry , Whether Governor Quinn Likes It or Not …

Posted by paulfromwloh on Thursday,July 4th,2013

Also , the Gun Grabber crowd is scared [bleep]less to appeal Moore v Madigan to the United States Supreme Court

.. Concealed Carry law is coming to Illinois . Their legilature may not be wild about it . I will guarantee you that their current governor , Pat Quinn , does not like the idea one bit . It explains some of his recent actions , described below …

Quinn writes stricter rules into concealed carry bill

Ray Long and Monique Garcia

11:05 PM CDT, July 2, 2013

Gov. Pat Quinn on Tuesday made sweeping changes to a bill that would allow concealed guns to be carried in public, writing in tougher regulations he deemed “common sense” amid staunch criticism from lawmakers who say they are poised to overturn his efforts when they return to Springfield next week.

Flanked by gun control advocates during a veto ceremony, Quinn argued the legislation lawmakers sent him would harm public safety by letting people carry as many guns as they wanted in places they shouldn’t be allowed.

“I think this is an example of a situation in Illinois where the legislature passed a bill in a hurried way at the inspiration of the National Rifle Association, contrary to the safety of the people of Illinois,” Quinn said after announcing the changes. “We don’t need the NRA telling us how to keep people safe in Illinois.”

The move sets up a showdown in Springfield between the Democratic governor and state lawmakers who overwhelmingly backed a rare and carefully constructed compromise on the often volatile issue of gun regulations despite ideological, cultural and geographic divisions. Lawmakers were trying to beat a federal appeals court deadline to set up rules allowing people to carry concealed weapons after judges tossed out Illinois’ last-in-the-nation ban in December.

It took sponsoring Rep. Brandon Phelps less than an hour to file a motion to override the governor’s changes. Phelps said Quinn’s actions were more about politics than policy, contending Quinn is seeking to build support among anti-gun voters in the Chicago area ahead of what could be a tough re-election bid next year.

“This puts us in a very precarious situation where those who choose to override him so that we’re compliant with the (7th) Circuit Court of Appeals reject some of the things he pointed out that are legitimate concerns,” said Rep. Andre Thapedi, D-Chicago, who said he supports an override. “Had he raised some of these issues earlier, they could have been incorporated into the bill.”

Quinn’s office argued that the governor fought for a number of changes while the bill was being drafted, only to be hampered by negotiators friendly with gun rights advocates.

Looking ahead, lawmakers return to the Capitol on July 9 and Quinn faces a tough fight given the overwhelming support the legislation received in both chambers. To override Quinn’s changes, the effort would need the support of three-fifths of lawmakers in both chambers. That’s 71 members in the House and 36 in the Senate.

The measure passed with 89 votes in the House and 45 in the Senate, meaning as many as 18 House legislators and nine senators could choose to stand with Quinn and his changes to the bill still would be rejected. That’s a tough feat for any governor, not to mention one that has routinely been criticized for issuing demands to lawmakers without working to first build support.

Lawmakers also could move to accept the governor’s suggestions, but that seems unlikely to happen, even though it puts some legislators in the position of taking a tough vote against what gun control groups say are needed public safety changes to the bill.

“He might have had some good ideas,” said Rep. Jack Franks, D-Marengo. “But if he doesn’t engage in the process, he’s not relevant.”

Quinn appealed to the public for help, encouraging people to reach out to their lawmakers over the Independence Day weekend to demand they support his plan.Last fall, Quinn launched a similar effort when he asked the public to talk about public employee pension reform during Thanksgiving dinner. A pension reform bill has yet to reach the governor’s desk.

“I think it is important in the coming week that people across our state have the opportunity to look carefully at what the legislature has proposed, and what I have changed in this bill to make it safer for the people,” Quinn said. “We ask the people of Illinois to tell their legislators, ‘please support the common sense changes that I have made in this bill.'”

Specifically, Quinn recommended that citizens be allowed to carry only one concealed weapon that can carry a maximum of 10 rounds of ammunition — a major change from the legislation which puts in place no limits on how many guns or rounds could be carried.

Quinn also wants to ban guns from all places that serve alcohol, not just businesses in which booze makes up the majority of sales, as is currently written in the bill. He also wants to clarify language to make sure guns be completely concealed instead of partially, saying a gun peeking out of a pocket or purse could incite chaos.

In addition, the governor wants to give store and business owners more authority to ban guns from being carried on their property. Under the measure passed by lawmakers, guns would be allowed on the private property unless a sign was posted prohibiting them. Quinn wants to reverse that and ban guns from being carried on the private property unless an owner posts a sign giving “express permission.”

Quinn also wants employers to have more leeway to stop guns from being carried into the workplace and to require those carrying guns to immediately inform police they are carrying a gun if questioned. And he wants to strip out a provision that would give cities only 10 days after the state law takes effect to enact a local assault weapons ban, saying local officials shouldn’t have their hands tied when determining public safety needs.

The Illinois State Rifle Association ripped Quinn, saying he is attempting to severely restrict how and where citizens may carry firearms.

“Self defense isn’t some sort of carnival game where the house stacks the odds against the good guy,” said Richard Pearson, the group’s executive director, in a statement. “We’re talking about defending the lives of everyday Illinoisans here. The new restrictions appearing in Quinn’s amendatory veto encumber good citizens to the point where carrying concealed becomes pointless — which is exactly the intention of the governor and his friends in the gun control movement.”

 

[-] amendatory veto

an amendatory veto is an unusual bird . Most vetoes are the bill itself , line items , or budget items . this one allows a governor (in 7 states , matter of fact)

to amend bill , with veto protection . It could drastically overhaul a bill , and if the governor has protection , then his / her veto would be upheld , and the bill would be adopted , as amended .

Where things can be confusing , is that in Illinois , you cannot legally carry a gun on the streets , outside of your own home . That is the essence of what the court case (Moore) seeks to overhaul . The bill does allow guns to be finally carried on the streets , but the debate is over concealment , and concealed – carry .

[-] limits on guns

[-] limits on rounds

these 2 together — Quinn in essence wants to change the law , when the gun has

then been concealed , and relieve people , or limit their rights .

[-] where a gun can be taken

related to booze , and where booze is sold

[-] local assault weapon ban(s)

what an assault weapon is

He is taking off the limits on ” assault weapon ” bans on localities . It is supposed to be state-wide policy , one way or the other .

[-] concealment

none

partial

total

[-] gun possession on private property

allowed , unless banned

quinn reverses [banned , unless allowed]

LEC here — right now , this battle is over the bill . It is a carefully crafted compromise . The Democrats are not wild about the subject , but , pun intended , they have a “gun  to their head . ” They have found out that the 7th Federal Circuit court is not kidding around . Neither is Pat Quinn .

.. A veto override is likely , reinstating the original legislation , and negating Governor Quinn ‘ s proposed changes . Even with the likely override , the big question is , will the Appeals Court be O.K. with it ? They may not .

.. Also , the gun – grabbing crowd is scared to death over a possible appeal to the United States Supreme Court . If Moore v Madigan were to be appealed , and it would be upheld (by 6 to 3 , as is likely) , that type of precedent would do all sorts of damage to gun restrictions at the state level (such as Illinois ‘) . New York ‘ s Williams Act , and its recent S.A.F.E. law would , in all likelyhood , be swept away .

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: