Posted: 4/30/2015 9:08:45 PM EDT
|
Valinda and I spent a productive couple days at the State Capitol this week. On Tuesday, the Chief Legal Counsel for the CCL Review Board invited us to a meeting along with Todd, Mr. P of the ISRA, ISRA lobbyist Sharee L. and ISP Lobbyists Hutchins and Thompson. We discussed the current state of the review board, problems, and potential fixes. Good meeting and good input. I enjoy working with good folks!
The last remaining board member has accepted a position on the board, official approval and training is being scheduled for the entire board. Hopefully they will be in a position to begin reviewing objections soon. Yesterday, we met with Senate Democrat Chief of Staff David Gross. I think the meeting went very well. He had a lot of questions about technical fixes for the Firearm Concealed Carry Act and we were able to provide information and suggestions. At the end of the meeting he wanted to know what we thought about the need for suppressors!! We also had a chance to visit with several downstate senators and express our concern that our issues are not getting a chance to be heard in committee and not making it to the floor for a fair debate and vote. Met with Rep. Brandon Phelps and he says there are good conversations going on in the House about technical fixes to the Concealed Carry Act and went over a few of them. We cautioned that we do not want anything slipped in that would result in any steps backward. Just as Todd says, the trailer bill should include only technical corrections and not substantive gains or losses. |
|
Thanks for your time, thanks for the update, and thanks for promoting our rights.
SwanHunter, I know you are mostly involved in the concealed carry side of things, but hopefully in the conversations, someone is discussing clarification of the short barreled rifles (SBRs) under 26" overall length administrivia. As you probably recall, the ATF is no longer approving Form 1s for Illinois residents making SBRs under 26" overall length. Thanks again! John Thomas |
|
Quoted:
Thanks for your time, thanks for the update, and thanks for promoting our rights. SwanHunter, I know you are mostly involved in the concealed carry side of things, but hopefully in the conversations, someone is discussing clarification of the short barreled rifles (SBRs) under 26" overall length administrivia. As you probably recall, the ATF is no longer approving Form 1s for Illinois residents making SBRs under 26" overall length. Thanks again! John Thomas There is a glitch in the language on overall length. Requirement is 26 in or longer and folks need to remember to measure with stock fully extended. A bill has been filed to fix the language however, leadership currently has a freeze on gun bills. Need to pressure your congress people to get bills to floor for a vote! |
|
is there anything about requiring prints, digital or not?
a completely unreliable source on FB claims there is a bill introduced that would require prints, even if not digital. also claims that all permits issued without prints would be suspended until prints are filed This is his post i'm not believing it at all. But this is Illinois Just to let everyone know that my contact at ISP has told me that there is a bill to change the wording to the CCW law as far as not having to submit prints. It was never the concept not to have to submit prints they (assumed) with the wording that people would understand that if you did not do live scan you would submit hard card prints which would take the additional 30 days for mailing and such. The proposed legislation is being introduced that requires all who submit a CCW application to either do live scan or hard card and once it is passed it will immediately suspended all those permit holders who did not submit prints but will reinstate them as soon as they do.. So Instructors and students beware of telling or submitting applications and not issuing your prints. Just a heads up |
|
Quoted:
is there anything about requiring prints, digital or not? a completely unreliable source on FB claims there is a bill introduced that would require prints, even if not digital. also claims that all permits issued without prints would be suspended until prints are filed This is his post i'm not believing it at all. But this is Illinois Just to let everyone know that my contact at ISP has told me that there is a bill to change the wording to the CCW law as far as not having to submit prints. It was never the concept not to have to submit prints they (assumed) with the wording that people would understand that if you did not do live scan you would submit hard card prints which would take the additional 30 days for mailing and such. The proposed legislation is being introduced that requires all who submit a CCW application to either do live scan or hard card and once it is passed it will immediately suspended all those permit holders who did not submit prints but will reinstate them as soon as they do.. So Instructors and students beware of telling or submitting applications and not issuing your prints. Just a heads up There is no proposed bill concerning requiring prints that I know of...His information concerning the intent of the law requiring prints is not true at all. The language is what it is on purpose. Your friend or his ISP friend (or both) are messed up.  
|
|
Quoted:
There is no proposed bill concerning requiring prints that I know of...His information concerning the intent of the law requiring prints is not true at all. The language is what it is on purpose. Your friend or his ISP friend (or both) are messed up. Quoted:
Quoted:
is there anything about requiring prints, digital or not? a completely unreliable source on FB claims there is a bill introduced that would require prints, even if not digital. also claims that all permits issued without prints would be suspended until prints are filed This is his post i'm not believing it at all. But this is Illinois Just to let everyone know that my contact at ISP has told me that there is a bill to change the wording to the CCW law as far as not having to submit prints. It was never the concept not to have to submit prints they (assumed) with the wording that people would understand that if you did not do live scan you would submit hard card prints which would take the additional 30 days for mailing and such. The proposed legislation is being introduced that requires all who submit a CCW application to either do live scan or hard card and once it is passed it will immediately suspended all those permit holders who did not submit prints but will reinstate them as soon as they do.. So Instructors and students beware of telling or submitting applications and not issuing your prints. Just a heads up There is no proposed bill concerning requiring prints that I know of...His information concerning the intent of the law requiring prints is not true at all. The language is what it is on purpose. Your friend or his ISP friend (or both) are messed up. I heard the same bad info from a guy at work last week, but he added that the "bill" would also change the law to may issue. He said the bill would require everyone to turn in their licenses and they would issue new ones on a may issue basis. This guy is a very vocal anti-gun person and not somebody that I want knowing that I carry so I didn't argue with him. I asked him to find out the bill number so I can read the entire bill. I'm still waiting. I also asked him where he saw that info because it seems that someone is spreading false information. His answer was that he saw it on the Internet but didn't remember where. I asked him again yesterday if he found the bill number and he said no. I'm not going to let him off that easy. I will continue asking for a bill number. Maybe he will learn to not spread false information. The anti gun people do not like that Illinois has a concealed carry law. |
|
The bad information has come from both sides of the issue. Right after the law passed, I spent a lot of time stamping out bad information...Much of it coming from ISP folks about training...Much coming from regular run of the mill idiots. I love the idea of pinning some of these rumor spreaders down and make them produce. We often have to pin down legal folks in the ISP and challenge their "rules". It is amazing how paid "legal" folks get it so wrong too.
Hold their feet to the fire and make them put up or shut up!
|
|
Quoted:
We often have to pin down legal folks in the ISP and challenge their "rules". It is amazing how paid "legal" folks get it so wrong too. Hold their feet to the fire and make them put up or shut up! I'm reminded of the testimony of a certain ISP Sergeant assigned to the Legislative Affairs office who provided testimony similar to this during the veto override hearings: Pol: So you're telling this hearing that, if we do not adopt the Governor's complete ban on carrying concealed firearms in any location that serves alcohol that people will pay $150 to obtain a concealed carry license. ISP: Yes Sir. Pol: They're going to go to restaurants that serve alcohol with the expressed purpose of drinking to the point of intoxication because they know that bars are posted... ISP: Yes Sir Pol: You're telling me that they are going to spend all that money and time and training and then go out of their way to find a way to get drunk... ISP: Yes Sir. Conveniently there are no transcripts of the hearings. Funny that, especially given the emphasis a certain Politician's Daughter places on "sunshine" and "openness". |