Federal appeals courts strikes down Illinois CCW ban

[71buickfreak]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...n-illinois-ban-on-carrying-concealed-weapons/

Mark one down for the good guys! This is good news on the 2A front. It will likely end up in the SCOTUS, but I would hope the ban would be struck down by them too.

 

[Coded-Dude]

The state has 180 days to amend/re-write the law, or it becomes unconstitutional. I'm sure they will attempt to continue to make it difficult for law-abiding citizens to carry, but this is a huge win for us. It's good to see the appellate courts starting to confirm the decisions made in Heller(and McDonald), that the right to keep AND BEAR arms is paramount to one's right to self defense.

"We are disinclined to engage in another round of historical analysis to determine whether eighteenth-century America understood the Second Amendment to include a right to bear guns outside the home. The Supreme Court has decided that the amendment confers a right to bear arms for self-defense, which is as important outside the home as inside," the judges ruled.

As I stated in the other thread, this could fast-track some of the other cases in other states that are fighting similar unconstitutional statues/laws(mainly Richards vs Prieto).

 

[poopgiggle]

The 9th district isn't bound by precedent from the 7th district so it doesn't help with Prieto that much. However, if the 9th decides differently, this will definitely make it to SCOTUS. I'd rather SCOTUS ruled sooner rather than later, because I don't think we're ever going to get a Supreme Court that's as friendly as the one we have now.

 

[scubaokie]

This is a big win for residents of the state of Illinois. But they still have a long way to go. Last time I checked it was still illegal to defend yourself with a firearm in Illinois even if a someone kicked in the front door of your home. You are only justified to shoot if you fear for your life, have a registered weapon and are willing to show a FOID card to officers upon their arrival. that is only if your local municipality does not have a handgun ban in place. When I visit family in Illinois my CCW permit from Oklahoma would not permit me the privilege of protecting my family in their home.

 

[Surveyor1653]

This is a big win for residents of the state of Illinois. But they still have a long way to go. Last time I checked it was still illegal to defend yourself with a firearm in Illinois even if a someone kicked in the front door of your home. You are only justified to shoot if you fear for your life, have a registered weapon and are willing to show a FOID card to officers upon their arrival. that is only if your local municipality does not have a handgun ban in place. When I visit family in Illinois my CCW permit from Oklahoma would not permit me the privilege of protecting my family in their home.

Not sure about this part. IL's SC recently ruled that a person's out-of-state CCL is his FOID card.

The 7th District win for IL is a big one, for sure, though. (ETA: As well as those of us who travel there while armed, maybe. Instead of doing the "Stop in St Louis to render useless" dance, maybe someday we'll get to carry in, although I seriously doubt it)

 

[Remington]

[Broken External Image]

 

[Coded-Dude]

The 9th district isn't bound by precedent from the 7th district so it doesn't help with Prieto that much. However, if the 9th decides differently, this will definitely make it to SCOTUS. I'd rather SCOTUS ruled sooner rather than later, because I don't think we're ever going to get a Supreme Court that's as friendly as the one we have now.

Mostly agreed because there is already a split decision because of the Kalchalsky case, so this will likely go to SCOTUS regardless(althouhg I hope the CA9 panel sees these cases for what they are - 2A violations). That, and the 9th could ignore this ruling completely saying CA doesn't have an outright ban on issuing licenses(and that their level of strict scrutiny is fine). However, I think the cases(Richards & Peruta) were argued well and used Heller to establish that; 1) it is a right beyond the home - and 2) too much scrutiny can cause constitutional controversy. Most of that is opinion, but SAF continues to win 2A case after 2A case and there is a good chance we could prevail here.

 

[farmerbyron]

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Remember that technically you can get a permit in NYC even though in reality you can't.

Currie, D-Chicago, said that “justices surely do not mean that we would have to have wide-open” laws in Illinois. She said Illinois must now look at what other states are doing, such as disallowing guns in day-care centers and other locations.

“If we need to change the law, let us at least craft a law that is very severely constrained and narrowly tailored so that we don’t invite guns out of control on each of our city’s streets,” Currie said. “I don’t want people out of control wandering the streets with guns that are out of control.”

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-us-appeals-court-strikes-down-states-concealedcarry-ban-20121211,0,7034171.story

 

[Coded-Dude]

The current goal is to have virtual shall issue in every state. Certainly states, counties, and cities will attempt to create gun free zones(and they will be challenged - short of private property), but the objective is to get all states to issue permits to citizens for the purpose of self defense. National reciprocity and even Constitutional carry(getting a permit without undue burdens) would be ideal, but that likely wont come until much later(if at all - Obama has 4 years to change the Heller 5). For now SAF and CGF are working to get permits for anyone who wants one....and there are a lot of people who can't even get one.

 

[BikerHT]

Not sure about this part. IL's SC recently ruled that a person's out-of-state CCL is his FOID card.

Do you know where I can find something about this? I'm currently working outside of Chicago and am definitely interested in this.

This is a couple of quotes from one of the articles about today's ruling...

But the dissenting judge, Ann Claire Williams, raised questions that could come up in a possible appeal or when lawmakers begin to debate and craft a new law addressing the issue.
After saying that "protecting the safety of its citizens is unquestionably a significant state interest," Williams wrote, "when firearms are carried outside the home, the safety of a broader range of citizens is at issue. The risk of being injured or killed now extends to strangers, law enforcement personnel, and other private citizens who happen to be in the area."

The country needs "one state people can look to and see it's still doing the right thing," Mark Walsh, director of the Illinois Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said last year.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap...BmASBA?docId=71bd66d548554ae293b930e464ed09d6

What a DWEEB!