Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/23/2006 11:22:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/23/2006 11:28:37 AM EDT by ops144]
what does this mean to you???

i see it as an awb as it is written now would be illegal...?

am i wrong?

4. The Sixth Illinois Constitutional Conventions Committee on Bill of Rights in their official commentary interpreted this provision in 1970 as a guarantee that "a citizen has the right to possess and make reasonable use of arms that law abiding citizens commonly employ for purposes of recreation or protection of person and property." Any use of the police power, the Committee said, that "attempted to ban all possession or use of such arms, or laws that subjected possession or use of such arms to regulations or taxes so onerous that all possession or use was effectively banned, would be invalid."

www.nraila.org/GunLaws/StateLaws.aspx?ST=IL
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 12:45:19 PM EDT
It sounds like that to me too. We'll see how the courts interpret it. Illinois legislators just don't get it.
I called my reps office last week (and the week before) about HR 2414. The woman who answered the phone told me that she had received no calls in favor of the bill and many opposed to it. We'll see how the vote goes if it ever comes up.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 3:02:26 PM EDT
Print it and mail it to all members of State Reps.,Sen.and Gov.
Link Posted: 1/23/2006 7:15:23 PM EDT
That quote sopunds akin to the Federalist / Anti federalist papers being used to support the 2A... and we know how the anti's love to ignore them.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 2:52:42 AM EDT
This hasn't seemed to have stopped Chicago and Cook county from doing whatever the hell they feel like.
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 5:36:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By sleepercaprice1:
It sounds like that to me too. We'll see how the courts interpret it. Illinois legislators just don't get it.
I called my reps office last week (and the week before) about HR 2414. The woman who answered the phone told me that she had received no calls in favor of the bill and many opposed to it. We'll see how the vote goes if it ever comes up.




..and your rep would be?
Link Posted: 1/24/2006 9:02:52 AM EDT
Unfortunately just like every rule ever written, it always has the "subject to change" fine print....


CAUTION: Firearm laws are subject to frequent change and court interpretation. This summary is not intended as legal advice or restatement of law. This summary does not include federal or local laws, ordinances or regulations. For any particular situation, a licensed local attorney must be consulted for an accurate interpretation. YOU MUST ABIDE WITH ALL LAWS: STATE, FEDERAL AND LOCAL.

Link Posted: 1/25/2006 1:15:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ghostwalker:

Originally Posted By sleepercaprice1:
It sounds like that to me too. We'll see how the courts interpret it. Illinois legislators just don't get it.
I called my reps office last week (and the week before) about HR 2414. The woman who answered the phone told me that she had received no calls in favor of the bill and many opposed to it. We'll see how the vote goes if it ever comes up.




..and your rep would be?



Jim Durkin- he replaced Eileen Lyons who recently retired.
Top Top