5/28
http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=69157&view=findpost&p=1156169

• Changes under House Amendment 1 for SB-337
• The special event language appears to allow dealers to handle firearm transfers at things like Ducks Unlimited dinners and such.
• The Licensee will be allowed to operate until they receive a denial from the Department, so if they get behind the curve on issuing certificates, it won’t shut down the gun shops.
• They changed some small date from 60 to 90 days to pay fines – yippee.
• They clarify non-residents working at gun stores.
• They still maintain the problem with individuals who have importers licensees where if the import permit gets revoked, that individual can lose their certificate/ license.  Under the idea of permit to “possess” How does that deal with someone who may loose a permit to carry but not their right to own a firearm?
• The change to “transferred” from transferred or carried does little as they still have the “handled” portion in the video requirement.  Firearms are often handled in a lot of ways in class rooms,  shipping and receiving and such. This is still going to add a lot of cost to small business.
• There is even more rulemaking to the Department, where they now get to approve the video systems required.
• They continue the open ended rule making by using including “but  not limited to indicators of straw purcheses.”  This is just another example of not dealing in good faith. They always have to add something extra to give more leeway to jack with people instead of justr fixing the problem and limiting the scope.
• They have now added that a licensee may be charged no more that $40,000 for certificates in the state. While this appears to be aimed at capping the amount of fees a chain store like Walmart might be charged, they have added an astronomical figure into the statute.  It remains unclear if there is a charge per license held, or of the cap $1500 is all inclusive of all the licensees an entity might hold, such as a manufacturers license, dealer license and importer license. OR is it up to $1500 for each?
• One of the largest and most significant changes is the requirement for the state police to begin creating a registry of private firearms transactions. You can escape the potential criminal penalties of losing or not having the records of a private sale, if you provide the State Police with the records of the transfer – i.e. registration. This would require the make, model serial, number who you sold it to and from you with dates.
• This is a registration system. Voluntary or not it is a very big step towards one of the holy grails of gun control. A registry of all firearms sold. And naturally, it not specifically exempt from FOIA.
• This is not a serious re-write of the bill it is an attempt to take some minor suggestions and cloak them in even more gun control.

5/25
http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=69131&view=findpost&p=1156010

Late yesterday they filed a House Amendment to SB-337 one of the components to this is that if you want to avoid the felony provisions for failure to keep a record of a private transaction, you would have to register the firearm and sale with the state police. The language is below.
"A transferee shall not be criminally liable under this Section provided that he or she provides the Department of State Police with the transfer records in accordance with procedures established by the Department. The Department shall establish, by rule, a standard form on its website.".

If this amendment is adopted, then anyone voting for the bill, will be voting in favor of the requirement that State Police start registering firearms and their transactions. . .

http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=69155#entry1156177

House Amendment 1 on SB337 and House Amendment 1 on SB2387 were just approved for consideration by the Rules Committee.

edit: The amendments are subsequently adopted and both bills are moved to 3rd reading on the floor.

HFA 1 for SB0337

House Floor Amendment No. 1
Provides that the Department may by rule create a process for checking the validity of the license, in lieu of requiring an affidavit. Provides that if the Department does not issue the certificate within 30 days, the licensee shall operate as if a certificate has been granted unless and until a denial is issued by the Department. Provides that a civil penalty or fine shall be paid within 90 (rather than 60) days after the effective date of the order imposing it. Provides that if an owner, employee, or other agent of the certified licensee is not otherwise a resident of this State, the certified licensee shall submit an affidavit stating that the owner, employee, or other agent has undergone a background check and is not prohibited from owning or possessing firearms. Provides that if a certified licensee has a license, certificate, or permit to sell, lease, transfer, purchase, or possess firearms issued by the federal government or the government of any state revoked or suspended for good cause within the preceding 4 years, the Department may consider revoking or suspending the certified licenses in this State. Provides that in making a determination of whether or not to revoke or suspend a certified license in this State, the Department shall consider the number of retail locations the certified licensee or any related person or entity operates in this State or in other states under the same or different business names, and the severity of the infraction in the state in which a license was revoked or suspended. Provides that if the Department issues a subpoena of a licensee, the licensee may file an emergency motion with the Director of State Police or a hearing officer authorized by the Department to quash a subpoena issued by the Department. If the Director or hearing officer determines that the subpoena was issued without good cause, the Director or hearing officer may quash the subpoena. Deletes provision that a licensee must maintain video surveillance of all areas that a firearm is carried. Provides that if a video security system is deemed inadequate by the Department, the licensee shall have 30 days to correct the inadequacy. Provides that the Department shall submit to the licensee a written statement describing the specific inadequacies. Provides that the Department may not charge a certified licensee in this State, operating under the same or different business name, fees exceeding $40,000 for the certification of multiple licenses. Provides that nothing in the Firearm Dealer License Certification Act shall be construed to interfere with any federal agency or any federal agency investigation. Provides that all Department rules adopted under the Act shall comply with federal law. Provides that the Department may as necessary coordinate efforts with relevant State and federal law enforcement agencies to enforce the Act. Provides that the requirement for a Federal Firearms Licensee to obtain certification begins 180 days (rather than 90 days) after the effective date of the Act. Makes other changes. Amends the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act to provide that private sellers of firearms, stun guns, or tasers who do not maintain transfer records in accordance with the Act shall not be criminally liable under the Act, provided that he or she provides the Department of State Police with the transfer records in accordance with procedures established by the Department. Provides that the Department shall establish, by rule, a standard form on its website.

HFA 1 for SB2387

House Floor Amendment No. 1
Provides that any person who is not a federally licensed firearm dealer and who desires to transfer or sell a firearm to any person who is not a federally licensed firearm dealer who does not comply with the provision that before selling or transferring the firearm the person must contact the Department of State Police with the transferee's or purchaser's Firearm Owner's Identification Card number to determine the validity of the transferee's or purchaser's Firearm Owner's Identification Card shall be punished as a Class A misdemeanor under the Firearm Owners Identification Card Act (rather than non-compliance shall not be punishable as a crime or petty offense). Makes a technical change.

Wow this is complete garbage.

Which is why your state reps and senators need to hear from all of us!

To those in my AO, Natalie Manley and Bertino-Tarrant are not our friends.

Manley is a dyed in the wool D who votes lock step with her party and she is very anti 2A

Tarrant was in the middle until lately.  Now she has turned towards the dark side so she will not get my vote come election time and I have told her so.

@interestedbystander - any movement today?

I've had a personal emergency requiring my attention and  have been out of touch with events for a while so I've got to do a lot of catching up.   The few times I could grab a peek on my phone, things did not look good   e.g. breaking the govs amendatory veto into separate bills with amendments, reintroducing gun dealer licensing, some potential gun registration with no FOIA exemption, etc.  Sounds like some  so called republicans (read 7 voted with the Dems in one chamber) have abandoned the pro 2A folks and are jumping in with the likes of Harmon.    Nybo and Oberweis sounded like they need to hear they are dead to us but I need to read up on current status.

A couple of updates I found so far:

Gun bills advance
http://www.sj-r.com/news/20180530/gun-bills-advance-in-illinois-legislature

Oberweis
https://m.facebook.com/ILGUNLOBBY/posts/10155725969317775

Dealer Licensing update and Gun registration
https://m.facebook.com/ILGUNLOBBY/posts/10155728256327775

http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=69190#entry1157283

IL-GUNLOBBY

SB-337 was amended in the House and they tossed this little gem in there:
"A transferee shall not be criminally liable under this Section provided that he or she provides the Department of State Police with the transfer records in accordance with procedures established by the Department. The Department shall establish, by rule, a standard form on its website.".
So the Department of State Police by a rule will develop a form to collect information on private transfers of firearms. We call this a form of registration. So what information is required to be collected? For that dear readers we must look at the current law.

“(b) Any person within this State who transfers or causes to be transferred any firearm, stun gun, or taser shall keep a record of such transfer for a period of 10 years from the date of transfer. Such record shall contain the date of the transfer; the description, serial number or other information identifying the firearm, stun gun, or taser if no serial number is available; and, if the transfer was completed within this State, the transferee's Firearm Owner's Identification Card number and any approval number or documentation provided by the Department of State Police pursuant to subsection (a-10) of this Section.”

So you the seller must keep Make, model serial number, the date you transferred it and the buyer’s FOID number. Lots of gun owners copy the FOID or write down the person’s name and info along with the FOID #.
More than a few legislators are hiding behind the idea that it’s not really registration since it’s voluntary. But is it really? People who don’t want to face the threat of a felony charge for losing their records, having the dog eat them or destroyed due to a flood or fire might feel that that threat makes tough to avoid. So they may do it, and for them that is a decision they get to make, but for the buyer, it’s not their decision.

Let’s say you buy a gun from someone. And not wanting to get jammed up, they file the paperwork with the State Police. So the State Police being good little law enforcement officers are going to ask for make, model serial number, date the firearm was transferred. They then most likely will require the seller to input their information, even if it is just a FOID, but since they are the repository of this information you know they are gonna want to make it a searchable database so that when the seller says he gave the info to State Police that they can quickly check to make sure it’s true. And then the seller is required under current law to get you, the buyers FOID number. That has all your info, and you have just had your firearm registered with the State Police without you consent. Not so voluntary, now is it.

And nothing in the bill prevents State Police from linking this data to your FOID card. Don’t think they won’t do it? They already link all of your FTIP call ins from gun dealers to your FOID and have the records going all the way back to 1992 when the system first started.
The proponents of the bill have done a lot to try and tamp down the idea that this is any form of registration, but no matter how you dress it up just like putting lipstick on a pig, still makes it a pig, this is a registration scheme. Make, model, serial number and your identifying information, being held by a governmental agency is a registry of firearms and their owners. Despite what anti-gunners say they don’t get to define the terms in our debate on this. It is a registry with threat of felonies for losing paperwork as the hammer for compliance.
We would also like to point out that there is no exemption to the Freedom Of Information Act of this information. While we would hope that the State Police would not release this type of information, it was not that long ago that the Attorney General was saying the State Police had to turn over the FOID card list to the AP. It took a lawsuit and change in the law to stop it.

Those people that supported this bill supported registering firearms. And while supporters of the bill say it is voluntary or permissive, what prevents the State Police decide by rule that the submission becomes mandatory? In other parts of the bill the State Police are given wide latitude on rulemaking so it might not be such a far-fetched idea that under a hostile administration, they would try to pass gun control via rule and bypass the legislature.

Hmm...ILGA recessed until November.   Not sure what is on their minds. Instead of getting to gov desk and starting veto or sign time window it seems to be on hold.

5/31/2018SenateMotion Filed to Reconsider Vote Sen. John J. Cullerton

Todd V
http://illinoiscarry.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=69190#entry1157382

"The motion to reconsider puts a hold on the bill as it can not move to the Governor's desk until the motion is removed or acted upon. interesting developement"

ILGA votes on the bill and amendments
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/votehistory.asp?DocNum=0337&DocTypeID=SB&LegID=100277&GAID=14&SessionID=91&GA=100&SpecSess=

Seems to me they are going to sit on it and see who the new Governor will be.

I could be wrong as there are no rules but Madigan's it seems, but I think the bill as is has to live or die with Rauner.   This general assembly ends mid January when the new elected governor and legislators take office.   Didn't think bills could span ILGA sessions and die at the end but I really am not sure.

Regardless, at a minimum I would expect them to use for maximum election campaign fodder against Rauner.