DuPage County state's attorney Joe Birkett was on the news today along with prosecutors from Cook and Lake Counties, stressing the point that he and his colleagues will prosecute anybody carrying a handgun in a fanny pack. He's an opportunistic fellow, raised in Chicago and now the prosecutor in Republican, DuPage County. Word is he will will be the next U.S. attorney in northern Illinois when Bush takes command. Sure sounds like a Democrat wanna'-be-whore.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ill. fanny packs
- Thread starter 2shots
- Start date
I'm getting mine as soon as possible. If it pisses off liberals, I'm all for it.
I see this as one step safer than open carry, but still not the same as concealed. But if we can convince enough gun owners to do it, we gain an argument when the libs come to ban it in the next session. We might even be able to convert it into CCW. Illinois HAD to have some kind of kick in the teeth or the issue would never have been addressed at all.
The risk, of course, is that if they DO ban this mode of carry they may decide they can afford to ban the transportation of unloaded guns in cases at the same time, since it's all the same law. I doubt they could pull that off with the deer hunters, but if they specified handguns....who knows?
I see this as one step safer than open carry, but still not the same as concealed. But if we can convince enough gun owners to do it, we gain an argument when the libs come to ban it in the next session. We might even be able to convert it into CCW. Illinois HAD to have some kind of kick in the teeth or the issue would never have been addressed at all.
The risk, of course, is that if they DO ban this mode of carry they may decide they can afford to ban the transportation of unloaded guns in cases at the same time, since it's all the same law. I doubt they could pull that off with the deer hunters, but if they specified handguns....who knows?
Al Mondroca
New member
DuPage County state's attorney Joe Birkett was on the news today along with prosecutors from Cook and Lake Counties, stressing the point that he and his colleagues will prosecute anybody carrying a handgun in a fanny pack. He's an opportunistic fellow, raised in Chicago and now the prosecutor in Republican, DuPage County. Word is he will will be the next U.S. attorney in northern Illinois when Bush takes command. Sure sounds like a Democrat wanna'-be-whore.
Perhaps a well-funded gun rights group should publicize their intent to defend anyone arrested under that decision, and to sue Birkett and Co. for depriving them of their civil rights under color of authority.
Perhaps a well-funded gun rights group should publicize their intent to defend anyone arrested under that decision, and to sue Birkett and Co. for depriving them of their civil rights under color of authority.
John Birch is the man in IL for fighting for our rights here. I have been to a few gatherings with him. 100% Patriot! A 20 year vetran of the US Army, retired.
All you wanted to know about carrying in IL legally!
http://www.concealcarry.org
All you wanted to know about carrying in IL legally!
http://www.concealcarry.org
Unbelievable
That such an arrogant f-stain would come out and publicize to the world his victim-disarmament stance where there is an arguable basis for not doing so. He is in essence stating: "Whoa, nellie; you law-abiding citizens thought for a moment there that we, as your government, would actually let you protect yourselves, but you are sadly mistaken. If you do, we will do our best to make your life hell." This puts a thumb in the eye of all decent citizens. Al Mondroca, you are right on as to what should be done. Personally, if I lived there, I would get some kind of small hard-sided case with a handle, with the word "GUN" in big letters on the side, and walk back and forth on the sidewalk in front of that attorney's office carrying it, and shoot him the bird repeatedly whenever he walked in or out of his office.
That such an arrogant f-stain would come out and publicize to the world his victim-disarmament stance where there is an arguable basis for not doing so. He is in essence stating: "Whoa, nellie; you law-abiding citizens thought for a moment there that we, as your government, would actually let you protect yourselves, but you are sadly mistaken. If you do, we will do our best to make your life hell." This puts a thumb in the eye of all decent citizens. Al Mondroca, you are right on as to what should be done. Personally, if I lived there, I would get some kind of small hard-sided case with a handle, with the word "GUN" in big letters on the side, and walk back and forth on the sidewalk in front of that attorney's office carrying it, and shoot him the bird repeatedly whenever he walked in or out of his office.
Al, it's been done. The CCRA isn't particularly well-funded but they've got a couple thousand earmarked and set aside for the first person wrongfully arrested under this law.
Anyone who's interested in that and all the other sordid details, check out http://www.gunssavelife.com and click on "Six Seconds to Safety."
My hope is that we can argue at the next session that the sensible course is to create a shall-issue CCW with the requirement of training. This is not perfect, obviously, but much better than we have. I'd like to have the luxury of debating whether CCW permits are Constitutional!
Anyone who's interested in that and all the other sordid details, check out http://www.gunssavelife.com and click on "Six Seconds to Safety."
My hope is that we can argue at the next session that the sensible course is to create a shall-issue CCW with the requirement of training. This is not perfect, obviously, but much better than we have. I'd like to have the luxury of debating whether CCW permits are Constitutional!
<My hope is that we can argue at the next session that the sensible course is to create a shall-issue CCW with the requirement of training. This is not perfect, obviously, but much better than we have. I'd like to have the luxury of debating whether CCW permits are Constitutional!>
Don, this is why I checked the forum this morning. The Ill. Constitution, Article 1, Section 22, says, "Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Can anyone explain what "subject only to police power" does to the rest of the statement? Does this mean that outlawing gun wearing ("bearing") is against the Ill Constitution? Of course, it is against the US Constitution. Where do these guys go to law school that they don't read these documents?
diana
Don, this is why I checked the forum this morning. The Ill. Constitution, Article 1, Section 22, says, "Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Can anyone explain what "subject only to police power" does to the rest of the statement? Does this mean that outlawing gun wearing ("bearing") is against the Ill Constitution? Of course, it is against the US Constitution. Where do these guys go to law school that they don't read these documents?
diana