http://www.wsiltv.com/story/38654654/rauner-signs-gun-order-of-protection-waiting-period-laws?platform=hootsuite

Just peachy.

Looks like he did this so he can veto the dealer licensing bill?

Not condoning his action (I favor Constitutional Carry), just saying it might be the only way to prevent a registry?

This from WGN in Chicago
https://wgntv.com/2018/07/16/rauner-signs-law-allowing-guns-to-be-removed-from-those-deemed-dangerous/

The folks over at Illinois Carry think this is actually a pretty decent bill. Here's what they said:

The attorneys seem to think the bill meets due process and constitutional muster because the order is not final until the firearm owner has their day in court, which must happen quickly.

What makes this bill exceptional compared to the gun grab bills:

1. The requirement for clear and convincing evidence is a high bar to provide and is one of the highest standards in the country.

2. The order is not final until the person has their day in court and that must happen within 14 days.  This could even happen as early as that day or the next.

3. Ownership is not prohibited and the firearms can be transferred to someone the person trusts for safekeeping.

4. Property is returned without need to petition the court.

5. If the clear and convincing evidence of being a danger is indicative of a mental illness, the judge can issue an order for a mental health evaluation.

6. If the clear and convincing evidence of being a danger is indicative of a criminal act/terrorism, charges can be filed and an arrest warrant can be issued at the same time.

7. In the meantime, the firearms are removed from the scene and taken into safe keeping until the orders are dismissed or expire.

8. FOID/CCL could be suspended instead of revoked (if there are no additional circumstances that would make the person ineligible for a FOID/CCL).  These would then be reinstated when the order is dismissed or expires. If you have been following the nightmare we have with FOID/CCL appeals, you know this is a HUGE win.

9. The penalty for false testimony is a felony and is another deterrent for abusing the process.

Rauner also signed a law Monday extending a 72-hour waiting period for all guns, not just handguns.

Swanhunter posted about this bill earlier

https://www.ar15.com/forums/Hometown/HB2354-Update-Firearm-Restraining-Order-Emergency-Intervention-Bill/23-625976/

they can take our guns without us being in front of a judge....

this is straight from the bill...all someone has to do is request an "ex parte" order, i.e. really a super duper emergency....and that's how it will be used.  You don't get to go defend your self...look at the bolded part in the bottom...they take your guns....maybe AFTER that, they'll let you get into court...and seriously....what could possibly go wrong with you trying to get your guns back...sure....they'll just let you walk in and load em all up....because state and local law enforcement never slow walks things...or looses things....

this is gun confiscation in slow motion....
No...it's time to leave!

Section 35. Ex parte orders and emergency hearings.

(a) A petitioner may request an emergency firearms
restraining order by filing an affidavit or verified pleading
alleging that the respondent poses an immediate and present
danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself, or
another by having in his or her custody or control, purchasing,
possessing, or receiving a firearm. The petition shall also
describe the type and location of any firearm or firearms
presently believed by the petitioner to be possessed or
controlled by the respondent.

(b) If the respondent is alleged to pose an immediate and
present danger of causing personal injury to an intimate
partner, or an intimate partner is alleged to have been the
target of a threat or act of violence by the respondent,
petitioner shall make a good faith effort to provide notice to
any and all intimate partners of the respondent. The notice
must include that the petitioner intends to petition the court
for an emergency firearms restraining order, and, if petitioner
is a law enforcement officer, referral to relevant domestic
violence or stalking advocacy or counseling resources, if
appropriate. Petitioner shall attest to having provided the
notice in the filed affidavit or verified pleading. If after
making a good faith effort petitioner is unable to provide
notice to any or all intimate partners, the affidavit or
verified pleading should describe what efforts were made.

(c) Every person who files a petition for an emergency
firearms restraining order, knowing the information provided
to the court at any hearing or in the affidavit or verified
pleading to be false, is guilty of perjury under Section 32-2
of the Criminal Code of 2012.

(d) An emergency firearms restraining order shall be issued
on an ex parte basis, that is, without notice to the
respondent.

(e) An emergency hearing held on an ex parte basis shall be
held the same day that the petition is filed or the next day
that the court is in session.

(f) If a circuit or associate judge finds probable cause to
believe that the respondent poses an immediate and present
danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself, or
another by having in his or her custody or control, purchasing,
possessing, or receiving a firearm the circuit or associate
judge shall issue an emergency order.

(f-5) If the court issues an emergency firearms restraining
order, it shall, upon a finding of probable cause that the
respondent possesses firearms, issue a search warrant
directing a law enforcement agency to seize the respondent's
firearms. The court may, as part of that warrant, direct the
law enforcement agency to search the respondent's residence and
other places where the court finds there is probable cause to
believe he or she is likely to possess the firearms.