Semi-Autos to be Banned in Illinois

guns are banned in Washington D.C. too.

well, something about guns banned DC has been lifted?

I think the IL ban is assault weapons, AR 15 SKS AK 47 and the like, not hunting semiautomatic Brownings and Remingtons with standard 4-5 round clips. That would affect shotguns more than rifles, since most liberal lawmakers do not know the difference.

I think Illinois is a liberal state much like New York and Mass, right?
 
Pump and semiauto shotguns will be classified as Assault Weapons.
Bolt action rifles--or ANY scoped rifle will be classed as Sniper Weapons.
Semiautomatic pistols will be called Assault Pistols, and therefore eeevil.

I think that is a little paranoid
 
I have read as much as I can about this in the last few days and nothing I have read says anything about pump or semi-auto shotguns. I was at my local gunshop yesterday and they said it did include these shotguns and I would only be able to hunt with a side by side, over and under, or s single shot. But I still haven't ready anything like that. I agree that even if this bill doesn't include everything, the next one will. I was just trying to get a handle on this one.
 
I think Illinois is a liberal state much like New York and Mass, right?

More like New York I'd think than Massachusetts, in that it's a largely rural and more or less conservative state whose politics are unfortunately dominated by one very large, very liberal city/metro area.

Up and down State Street, I remember going into the stores and seeing the goodies. Woolworth's actually had a gunsmith on site--I saw in the rifle racks some really nice custom Weatherby rifles, and one that stuck me as being impossibly long. That was (I now recognize) an 8mm Mauser.

Sears, Roebuck and Co. had to my young eyes the ultimate rifle--an M1 carbine that I wanted badly.

Montgomery Ward's had the complete line of Winchester semiautomatic .22's.

Look at the city now! Look at the suburbs! Look at the STATE!

This is not entirely the fault of "the Machine" as you put it...a large part of this change also seems to have been brought on by a slowly changing culture. Because this change is occurring outside Chicago and Illinois (and outside New York and Massachusetts as well). Even where guns are less regulated, you hardly see M1 carbines at the local Sears; that's limited to sporting good stores and gun shops.

Use your best and most powerful weapon--the vote!

Indeed. And call your local reps and make sure they know darn well how you feel. I feel like a broken record, but I've not recommended against any of this. I think this needs to be stopped, too.

My point is that your representatives will take you much more seriously if you know what you are talking about. Sure, the evil liberals of Chicago might want to classify every deer rifle as a sniper rifle and ban it; but that's not what this law is doing. This law won't even (in theory) confiscate your AR-15. So if you call your rep claiming that it will, he will probably dismiss you as some fringe wingnut wackjob.

I mean seriously, I'll quote it again from the ISRA website:
IF YOU DO NOT ACT NOW, YOU MAY HAVE NO GUNS LEFT BY THE 4TH OF JULY

Caps and "these amps go to 11" rhetoric theirs, of course. So it's March (well, this was written in February). So they're suggesting that in five months' time the Illinois state government will manage to ban all guns? I suppose that may happen. I may have a piano fall on my head as I walk down the street as well.

It's overblown rhetoric with little relation to the truth like this that pushes far too many gun owners to the fringes of the debate; and you'll never pick up anybody from the fringes. Especially not the majority of moderate folks who are largely undecided on firearms and really don't much care that you need to pick up. You'll just sit there on the fringe, complaining about them taking your scary black guns and talking about what you'll do when the SHTF all the while watching your second amendment rights get taken away because people who actually could have been brought to your side instead looked at illogical and overblown rhetoric like this and went :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: .
 
"My point is that your representatives will take you much more seriously if you know what you are talking about. "

I think representatives tend to fall into two categories as regards gun control:

"Dianne Feinstein" -- This representative could care less if you know what you're talking about because his/her mind is made up, and you are not going to change it. In any event he/she doesn't know enough to tell if you know what you're talking about. (I suppose there are some pro-gun representatives like this, but as a Californian I have never seen one; go figure.)

"I want to get re-elected" -- This representative takes all input and filters it by putting it into the "pro" or "con" bucket. At election time, he/she counts up the various buckets of issues and decides how to run the campaign. He/she also doesn't care if you know what you're talking about.

Tim
 
Wow, Tim...cynical much? ;)

Of course, you're largely right. But there is also a chance that when the latter kind of politician is filtering/sorting information into his "pro" and "con" buckets, he might give the complaint of somebody who at least knows what the law they're calling about does more weight. I know that if I were a politician I would...because while "uneducated yokel who doesn't even know what he's talking about" and "well spoken and well informed gun owner who knows exactly what he's talking about" are equally likely to vote against me if I support such a law, I'd suspect that the latter would have a better chance of convincing others to vote against me.
 
"Wow, Tim...cynical much?"

No, just a 53 year old lifelong Californian. On the other hand, maybe "yes".

Tim
 
I believe the citzens of Il. have a serious problem. And if this goes through, you can bet other states will follow. If y'all are interpreting this right, all "assault" weapons (what ever the state wants to call an assault weapon this week) and some .50 cal guns & ammo will be banned. ( BP still ok?)Currently owned guns must be registered with the state. ( so they know where to come get them when that law passes) And anyboby that moves, or is born into the state after passage is not allowed to own or inherit one of these guns while living in the state. That sounds like a slow motion confiscation plan to me. Since all of these registered guns will probably have to be turned into the state when the registered owner dies or decides to get rid of it. Now some may think the alarmists are exagerating a bit but remember. Chicago's mayor tried to ban restaurants from serving certain foods. Actually got the law on the books for a while.
 
Seems that Chicago owns Illinois. I always thought of Chicago as a small island off the Northeast coast of Illinois. Funny thing is, I live in Illinois and I'm closer to Nashville Tennessee than Chicago. People in Tennessee always ask how far I am from Chicago. The state of Illinois isn't represented by Chicago, and when it comes to a vote, downstate always gets the shaft because we have fewer population. In effect, the gun user people in most of the state have no say.
 
Seems that Chicago owns Illinois. I always thought of Chicago as a small island off the Northeast coast of Illinois. Funny thing is, I live in Illinois and I'm closer to Nashville Tennessee than Chicago. People in Tennessee always ask how far I am from Chicago. The state of Illinois isn't represented by Chicago, and when it comes to a vote, downstate always gets the shaft because we have fewer population. In effect, the gun user people in most of the state have no say.

You guys aren't alone. This is a common complaint in many states that are dominated by a single city populationwise. For gun control IL and NY seem to be the worst, but you'll hear similar complaints on a range of issues from WA, CO, MN, and others. Doesn't even have to be a single city...you'll hear plenty of complaints from people outside Los Angeles and San Francisco regarding some of the laws pushed on the entire state of California. Gun laws being a big one.
 
I called and.....

I just got off the phone with my Rep., Dan Reitz. I actually talked to him. He is against house bill 873, which is the assault ban, and I didn't talk to my senator, Dave Luechtefeld, but his aid told me that he is against senate bill 16 and will be voting that way. I am from southern Illlinois, which as we stated is a different state than Chicago Illinois, so we will see how this comes out. I knew they were both against it before I called but it felt good to hear it, especially right from the rep himself.
 
Back
Top