McLean County ILLINOIS AG Will NOT PROSECUTE FOR CONCEAL CARRY

Most state attorneys general have limited prosecutorial authority. I would not think the Illinois AG would have the authority to prosecute routine crimes like carrying a concealed deadly weapon. This is from their website:

Through the Criminal Enforcement Division, the Attorney General coordinates crime-fighting activities with state, county and local authorities. In particular, the Attorney General's Office assists state's attorneys in the prosecution of criminals in all regions of the state and handles all cases from DUIs to Death Cases. In addition, specialized bureaus within the Criminal Enforcement Division handle a variety of cases that do not fall within the traditional scope of a local prosecution office such as complex financial cases, public corruption matters, medicaid fraud, environmental crimes, high tech crimes and cases dealing with the involuntary commitment of dangerous sex offenders. The Criminal Enforcement Division also operates a statewide grand jury with jurisdiction over multi-county crimes related to drugs, gangs and guns.
Click to expand...
http://illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/about/jobs/agency_profile.html
 
Its my understanding that the NRA views that as a "divide and conquer" strategy by Chicago and they've rejected it multiple times in the past.
Click to expand...
A few years back, it looked like a proposed law for concealed carry had a good chance of passage. However, it was amended to allow individual cities and counties to opt-out. Had it passed, Illinois would have been a confusing (and dangerous) patchwork of counties: some in which it was legal, and some in which it was a felony.

A lot of gun owners cried foul when the NRA walked away from the table on that one.
 
1) Statement from Madigan's office basically saying the Illinois AG can't do anything about this

2) This state rep La Shawn Ford seems like the messenger for the antis, they are offering to let CCW go forward for most of Illinois in exchange for an AWB and letting Chicago and similar municipalities continue to deny people the right to carry.
Click to expand...


That’s the problem, driving in a straight stretch of road in the Chicago area (like I do often) because of the irregular way in which localities including the city of Chicago are laid out means you can literally start in one town, briefly cross into another town, cross into a third town, then cross back into the first all in just a few miles of driving.

If you allow individual Cities/Towns/Villages "opt out" of concealed carry then the law is worthless to the majority of the population of Illinois.

Conceal carrying and traveling in any of the "collar counties" around Chicago(Lake, DuPage, Kane, Will and McHenry) impractical because you would need to constantly worry about however briefly crossing the boundary of a place where CC is banned.

Not to mention that it would subject those traveling through the state of Illinois to a different destination subject to a confusing web of local restrictions. You cannot easily drive from Iowa to Indiana , Indiana to Wisconsin or Missouri to Indiana without going through some sort of area that would have a CC ban.

Lets face it, Cook County would pass a CC ban, a good number of towns in Will, Lake, Dupage and to a lesser extend Kane and McHenry county would pass a CC ban. Rockford would have a CC Ban. Springfield would have a CC Ban, Areas bordering St. Louis would have a CC Ban and Champaign/Urbana would probably try for one too. Look at a map of these areas and the interstate highways that go through them. Interstate CC through Illinois would be so difficult as to be near impossible without serious risk of breaking the law.


We need to go for this all or nothing, Chicago must be FINALLY dragged kicking and screaming into the real world where the Second Amendment guarantees ones right to protect themselves inside and outside the home.
 
Last edited:
All I can say is,,,

All I can say is,,,
McLean County State’s Attorney Ron Dozier is one gutsy dude.

He's basically calling a very well established group of anti's to come out and fight.

Wow! The times they are a'changing.

Aarond

.
 
The following is from a press release sent out today 8/21/12. The complete version is here: http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/2012/08/another-shot-across-bow-by-illinois.html

It's really incredible. There's no arguing with common sense.


As the State’s Attorney, I have to make a choice. Do I continue to enforce laws that I believe to be unconstitutional, a belief that is supported by decisions of the highest court in the land, or do I continue to prosecute citizens who run afoul of State gun laws but have no evil intent or purpose in mind? Certainly the more cautious approach to such controversial issues is to keep enforcing the law, whenever possible in the least harmful way, until enough higher court cases are resolved against them that the anti-Second Amendment folks are forced to change. I’m not willing to do that anymore—too many good people will be harmed.

In fact, since I was appointed State’s Attorney last December, I have been quietly changing our policies to bring them in accordance with the rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court. Now I am announcing publicly that the McLean County State’s Attorney’s Office will no longer enforce those parts of the following Illinois statutes relating to firearms: Firearm Owners Identification Card Act (430 ILCS 65), Unlawful Use of Weapons (720 ILCS 5/24-1), Aggravated Unlawful Use of Weapons (720 ILCS 5/24-1.6) and provisions of any other statutes that appear to be in contravention of the Heller and McDonald decisions.
The questions we will seek to answer in determining whether or not to file charges are:
1) What appears to be the reason or purpose for the person’s possession of carrying a firearm?
2) Was the firearm actually displayed, or used, for an improper purpose or in a reckless manner?
3) Was the person under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or have illegal drugs on his or her person or in their vehicle?
4) If the person is not an Illinois citizen, was the weapon possessed or carried in accordance with the laws of the State of his or her residency?
5) Is the person a member of or affiliated with any gang known to engage in illegal activities?
6) Has the person been convicted of a felony offense? If so, how long ago and for what offense(s)?

Other questions may arise as we continue to improve our policy.
Click to expand...
 
I guess whatever idea Pat Quinn, Lisa Madigan and Hiram Grau came up with to pressure Dozier to delay his press release didn't work so well :D
 
Gusty man. What's interesting is unlike Dear Leader refusing to prosecute people under DOMA or Federal drug laws, this man has SCOTUS decisions to back himself up with, nice move. We'll see what happens next.
 
I live in McLean Co

the sheriff and the BPD chief agree with the DA, but have said they will continue to "enforce the law," meaning they'll make arrests. It will be up to the DA (who will replaced by the DA-elect that has stated this is "reckless.")

My guess is if anyone gets pinched for of these offenses, the current DA will decline the prosecute, but the new DA will file or refile charges against those arrested during this time period as soon as he's in office.

I'm not going to be a test case, that's for sure!
 
It's going to get very ugly if someone does carry concealed and has to use a weapon in self-defense.

Even if I lived there I wouldn't carry until the law was changed. I stop a voilent crime by shooting someone and the legal ramifications both criminal and civil will be horrible. I might not be criminally prosecuted, but I'll lose everything else.
 
KevK, Believe it or not Illinois has some good laws to protect you if you are defending yourself against someone committing a forcible felony.

In Public Act 093-0832 it says "In no case shall any act involving the use of force justified under this section give rise to any claim or liability brought by or onbehold of any person acting within the definition of "agressor of this Article, or the estate, spouse, or other family member of such a person, against the person or estate of the person using such justified force, unless the use of force involves willful or wanton misconduct.

In other words you can't be sued by a perp for defending yourself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top