TexasCHLforum.com

Keith B wrote:

barstoolguru wrote:

There will be a fight, still, but there are a lot of pro-gun forces in Illinois. It really is a state held captive by a leftist Chicago mafia and a city full of utterly stupid voters. Unfortunately that model has now been transplanted to the national level. But there is a good chance for the 2A in Illinois now. The sound you hear coming from that "Stop Concealed Carry Coalition" is the sound of panic.

Sounds like the tables are changing but a lot of the anti-gun people seem to be coming from COOK County which is 40% of the population of the state and lots of income (Chicago)

Has Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn Accepted Defeat on Concealed Carry?

Today, the Gov.’s remarks seem to reflect a resignation to that inevitability.
In a statement, the Gov. said that he would work with the General Assembly on a concealed carry bill provided that the law includes “reasonable restrictions,” such as prohibiting the mentally ill from carrying concealed firearms (something that’s already illegal under federal law).

http://www.guns.com/2012/12/12/illinois ... led-carry/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Isn't that going to prohibit most Cook County politiicians from getting a license?

Yeah, including a certain Cook County politician now residing elsewhere.

sjfcontrol wrote:

barstoolguru wrote: The official press release issued by SA Ronald Dozier goes on to state:

"As the State’s Attorney, I have to make a choice. Do I continue to enforce laws that I believe to be unconstitutional, a belief that is supported by decisions of the highest court in the land, or do I continue to prosecute citizens who run afoul of State gun laws but have no evil intent or purpose in mind? . . . I’m not willing to do that anymore—too many good people will be harmed."

this came off of ; http://www.illinoiscarry.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Did anybody else notice that both sides of his "choice" result in continuing the status-quo?
Choice "A", continue to enforce unconstitutional laws...
or
Choice "B:, continue to prosecute citizens...

I understand it a little differently I guess.

I see a statement that says he has in the past enforced laws that he believed to be unconstitutional, that now have been ruled as such, and he questions whether he would continue to do so, and as a collateral statement, that he is unwilling to do that (prosecute those who carry in defiance of IL's current law) any more.

Parsing it my way, it reads as permission for the law abiding citizens of IL to go ahead and carry now, now that they know that the law preventing them from carrying is unconstitutional, he is not willing to prosecute. I would assume that a FOID would still be necessary because the 7th did not rule the FOID law unconstitutional, just the law against concealed carry.

That said, I would also expect that those same law abiding citizens could expect to get a free ride in a fancy police car wearing a new set of silver bracelets if caught.

This may just be whistling in the wind for them, the 7th has released its decision and given the Illinois legislature 180 days to come up with a concealed carry law.