Cuts in police services from budget crunch means citizens are 'on their own'

When USA Today reported Aug. 25 that budget cuts are forcing local police agencies across the country to stop responding to certain crimes, the revelation reinforced a growing public sentiment that we the people are responsible for our own well-being, not government.

Primary election results around the country hint at a possible sea change in Congress and state legislatures in November; out with the tax-and-spend (and spend some more) crowd, and in with fiscal responsibility. The country is in trouble financially, and that translates to reduced basic services, including public safety.

Right now, according the USA Today story, police are only declining to respond to property crimes. But what is next, if the economy continues its downturn under what many view as a disastrous fiscal agenda of the current Congress and administration? For those who have balked at the "trickle down" theory, here's a short refresher course: If the federal government sneezes, states catch a cold. ...

Read the whole article from Alan Gottlieb and Dave Workman in the Statesman Journal. 

Posted Wed Sep 1 21:48:09 CDT 2010

Win a Hunt on NILO farms!
Raffle benefits Quincy High School Rifle Team

The Quincy School Board cut the funding for the Quincy High School Rifle Program. This school has the team with the last remaining high school indoor smallbore range in Illinois.

OLIN Corp.(Winchester) has graciously donated a hunt at the NILO Farms area. The hunt is for 2 people and 2 days. Includes lodging, meals, ammo, live birds, clay birds, dogs, and guides. All the winners have to do is get to NILO Farms at Brighton, IL ( near Alton, IL) and have fun. The hunt has a value of $3500 and tickets are $10.00 each or 3 for $25.00. If you are interested in supporting this raffle, call QHS Coach Jim Holtman @ 217-430-6803, or send email to: qhsrifleteam@yahoo.com

Download and print the flyer for the raffle! (630 KB PDF)

Posted Mon Aug 30 08:03:17 CDT 2010

EPA:
No ban on lead in ammunition, but fishing sinkers, that's still being looked at

EPA Denies Petition Calling for Lead Ammunition Ban

Release date: 08/27/2010

Contact Information: Brendan Gilfillan gilfillan.brendan@epa.gov

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today denied a petition calling for a ban on the production and distribution of lead hunting ammunition. EPA sent a letter to the petitioners explaining the rejection – that letter can be found here: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemtest/pubs/sect21.html

Steve Owens, EPA assistant administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, issued the following statement on the agency’s decision:

“EPA today denied a petition submitted by several outside groups for the agency to implement a ban on the production and distribution of lead hunting ammunition. EPA reached this decision because the agency does not have the legal authority to regulate this type of product under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) – nor is the agency seeking such authority.

“This petition, which was submitted to EPA at the beginning of this month, is one of hundreds of petitions submitted to EPA by outside groups each year. This petition was filed under TSCA, which requires the agency to review and respond within 90 days.

“EPA is taking action on many fronts to address major sources of lead in our society, such as eliminating childhood exposures to lead; however, EPA was not and is not considering taking action on whether the lead content in hunting ammunition poses an undue threat to wildlife.

“As there are no similar jurisdictional issues relating to the agency's authority over fishing sinkers, EPA – as required by law – will continue formally reviewing a second part the petition related to lead fishing sinkers.

“Those wishing to comment specifically on the fishing tackle issue can do so by visiting http://www.regulations.gov. EPA will consider comments that are submitted by September 15.”

This press release is posted one of the EPA websites. 

Posted Sat Aug 28 09:39:35 CDT 2010

Alert from the NSSF:
EPA Considering Ban on Traditional Ammunition — Take Action Now

August 25, 2010 By Larry Keane NSSF
All Gun Owners, Hunters and Shooters:

With the fall hunting season fast approaching, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Lisa Jackson, who was responsible for banning bear hunting in New Jersey, is now considering a petition by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) – a leading anti-hunting organization – to ban all traditional ammunition under the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976, a law in which Congress expressly exempted ammunition. If the EPA approves the petition, the result will be a total ban on all ammunition containing lead-core components, including hunting and target-shooting rounds. The EPA must decide to accept or reject this petition by November 1, 2010, the day before the midterm elections.

Today, the EPA has opened to public comment the CBD petition. The comment period ends on October 31, 2010.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) — the trade association for the firearms, ammunition, hunting and shooting sports industry — urges you to submit comment to the EPA opposing any ban on traditional ammunition. Remember, your right to choose the ammunition you hunt and shoot with is at stake.

The EPA has published the petition and relevant supplemental information as Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2010-0681. If you would like to read the original petition and see the contents of this docket folder, please click here. In order to go directly to the ‘submit a comment’ page for this docket number, please click here.

NSSF urges you to stress the following in your opposition:

* There is no scientific evidence that the use of traditional ammunition is having an adverse impact on wildlife populations.

* Wildlife management is the proper jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the 50 state wildlife agencies.

* A 2008 study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on blood lead levels of North Dakota hunters confirmed that consuming game harvested with traditional ammunition does not pose a human health risk.

* A ban on traditional ammunition would have a negative impact on wildlife conservation. The federal excise tax that manufacturers pay on the sale of the ammunition (11 percent) is a primary source of wildlife conservation funding. The bald eagle’s recovery, considered to be a great conservation success story, was made possible and funded by hunters using traditional ammunition – the very ammunition organizations like the CBD are now demonizing.

* Recent statistics from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service show that from 1981 to 2006 the number of breeding pairs of bald eagles in the United States increased 724 percent. And much like the bald eagle, raptor populations throughout the United States are soaring.

Steps to take:

1. Submit comment online to the EPA.

2. Contact Lisa Jackson directly to voice your opposition to the ban:

Lisa P. Jackson
Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 564-4700
Fax: (202) 501-1450
Email: jackson.lisa@epa.gov

3. Contact your congressman and senators and urge them to stop the EPA from banning ammunition. To view a sample letter, click here.

ISRA received this alert from NSSF via email, here's a link to the same alert posted on the NSSF Blog. 

Posted Thu Aug 26 09:22:41 CDT 2010

SAF FILES AMICUS BRIEF IN NORDYKE CASE, ARGUES FOR STRICT SCRUTINY

BELLEVUE, WA - The Second Amendment Foundation has filed an amicus curiae brief in the long-running Nordyke v. King case in California, arguing that Second Amendment issues must be decided on a "strict scrutiny" basis, and that an ordinance in Alameda County banning gun shows at the county fairgrounds is unconstitutional because it would not withstand that standard of review.

This case was a catalyst for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear SAF's case challenging the handgun ban in Chicago, because in an earlier Nordyke ruling - subsequently set aside in favor of a full en banc hearing by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals - created a conflict in the circuits over Second Amendment incorporation.

SAF's brief was written by attorney Alan Gura, who argued the landmark 2008 Heller case and represented SAF and its co-plaintiffs in the recent McDonald case, and is currently working with the foundation on other cases in Maryland, Illinois, New York and North Carolina.

Alameda County passed an ordinance more than ten years ago prohibiting the carrying of firearms on county property following a shooting at the county fair in 1998. Russell and Sallie Nordyke operated a gun show at the county fairgrounds. The shooting incident was not related to their gun show, but county officials used that as an excuse to adopt the prohibition.

"This is a very important case," said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, "because it could establish the highest standard of scrutiny to which gun laws around the country would be subjected. While gun prohibitionists were upset by the 2008 Heller ruling and demoralized by our victory this year in the McDonald case, they are terrified of a strict scrutiny standard that could be established by the Nordyke case."

The Nordyke case's importance, Gottlieb stated, "cannot be underestimated, or understated."

"Strict scrutiny is the standard of review to which all constitutionally-protected fundamental civil rights must be held," he observed. "This case has survived for more than a decade, a fact in itself that is remarkable. We believe, in the wake of Heller and McDonald, that the Ninth Circuit must act decisively to protect the Second Amendment from willy-nilly regulation by anti-gun public officials."

---------

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.

Posted Thu Aug 19 20:09:59 CDT 2010

Membership renewal drawing results

The winner of the membership renewal drawing is from Clinton, IL. He won a Springfield Armory 9mm XDM pistol.
The 2nd prize (Alpen Optics binoculars) went to a gentleman form McNabb, IL.
The 3rd prize (Alpen Optics spotting scope) went to a gentleman from Arthur, IL.

All winners have been notified

Posted Thu Aug 19 20:13:11 CDT 2010

SAF Sues Chicago Over Gun Range Prohibition on 1A, 2A Grounds

CHICAGO, Aug. 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) today filed a lawsuit in federal court against the City of Chicago's new gun ordinance, asserting that "by banning gun ranges open to the public…under color of law," the city is depriving citizens of their right to keep and bear arms in violation of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Joining SAF in this lawsuit are the Illinois State Rifle Association (ISRA), Action Target, Inc., and three individual plaintiffs including a retired Chicago police detective. They are represented by attorneys Alan Gura of Virginia and David Sigale of Chicago, who teamed up with SAF and ISRA on the landmark case of McDonald v. City of Chicago, which incorporated the Second Amendment to the states, effectively striking down Chicago's 28-year-old handgun ban.

"While the city has adopted new regulations that make it legal to own handguns," said SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, "they have crafted this new ordinance to make it virtually impossible for prospective gun owners to meet all legal requirements unless they travel outside the city for mandatory training. The new ordinance prohibits public gun ranges inside the city yet the city demands that handgun owners get at least one hour of range training time.

"This is a 'Catch-22' scenario," he continued, "that seems deliberately designed to discourage Chicago residents from exercising their firearm civil rights barely two months after those rights were restored by the Supreme Court."

Individual plaintiffs are Rhonda Ezell, a victim of three attempted burglaries who has disabilities making it difficult for her to travel outside the city; Joseph Brown, a WWII U.S. Army veteran who was among the liberators of the infamous Dachau concentration camp, and William Hespen, a retired police detective, all of whom must qualify for Chicago Firearms Permits.

Action Target, a Utah-based company, builds shooting ranges and manufactures gun range equipment and supplies. It has a long history of providing gun safety equipment and training, and has previously built law enforcement shooting ranges in Chicago. However, Action Target is prohibited from building a public target range within the city's limits under the restrictions of the new gun ordinance.

Randy Graham, vice president of Action Target, said, "We believe that citizens have a constitutional right to use and train with firearms in a safe and controlled environment. As a leader in the firearms training industry, Action Target is committed to standing up for these rights."

"By banning public gun ranges," Gottlieb said, "and by banning the loan and rental of firearms at such ranges, Chicago is acting under color of law to deprive citizens of their right to keep and bear arms, and to conveniently receive the education required under the ordinance that is necessary to obtain a Chicago Firearms Permit. The city is violating both the Second and First amendments, and we are asking the court to put an end to this nonsense."

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

This press release is posted on PRNewswire.  

Posted Mon Aug 16 12:54:39 CDT 2010

ISRA-PVF Press Release:
Governor Quinn Steps Up Attacks On Law-Abiding Firearm Owners

CHICAGO, Aug. 10 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following was released today by the ISRA Political Victory Fund (ISRA-PVF):

Law-abiding Illinois firearm owners are under a renewed attack by Gov. Pat Quinn's re-election campaign. After receiving the endorsement of a radical gun control group last week, Quinn's campaign is now the apparent mastermind of a plan to place a referendum on the November ballot that would call for the banning of a wide variety of popular hunting and target firearms.

Petition documents filed with the Illinois State Board of Elections show the title of the proposed referendum as being "Petition to Ban the Sale on Semi-Automatic and Assault Weapons." Notarized signatures on over 100 pages of petitions show one "Maz Jackson" as being the petition circulator. Maz Jackson is a top field operative for the Quinn gubernatorial re-election campaign.

"It appears that Pat Quinn plans to attack hunters and sportsmen from every angle," commented ISRA-PVF spokesman, Richard Pearson. "First he throws in with the likes of gun control extremists Jim and Sarah Brady, and now his campaign staff is circulating petitions seeking to ban most of the privately owned firearms in the state. Once again, Pat Quinn has shown himself to be more in step with Mayor Daley and the Chicago power structure than he is with the vast majority of Illinois citizens."

The ISRA-PVF is a political action committee affiliated with the Illinois State Rifle Association. Donations to the ISRA-PVF are not tax deductible. A copy of our report is available for a fee from the Illinois State Board of Elections, Springfield, IL

This press release is posted on PRnewswire.  

Posted Wed Aug 11 16:09:07 CDT 2010

Oppose Petition to Ban Traditional Ammunition

All Gun Owners, Hunters and Shooters,

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) -- the trade association for the firearms, ammunition, hunting and shooting sports industry -- urges you to contact the Environmental Protection Agency to oppose a petition filed August 3 by the extremist Center for Biological Diversity to ban traditional ammunition. Your right to choose the ammunition you hunt and shoot with is at stake.

Express your opposition by calling or e-mailing:

Lisa P. Jackson Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20460 (202) 564-4700 Fax: (202) 501-1450 Email: jackson.lisa@epa.gov

And

Steve Owens Assistant Administrator, Prevention, Pesticides & Toxic Substances U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20460 (202) 564-2902 Fax: (202) 546-0801 Email: Owens.steve@epa.gov

Background:

The National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms, ammunition, hunting and shooting sports industry, encourages all gun owners, hunters and shooters to oppose the petition filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seeking to ban the use of traditional ammunition containing lead-core components. This ban would apply to ALL ammunition including ammunition used by target shooters.

Filed by several agenda-driven groups including the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), the petition erroneously claims that the use of traditional ammunition poses a danger to (1) wildlife, in particular raptors such as bald eagles, that may feed on entrails or unrecovered game left in the field and (2) that there is a human health risk from consuming game harvested using traditional ammunition. Also falsely alleged in the petition is that the use of traditional ammunition by hunters is inconsistent with the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976 -- Congress expressly exempted ammunition from being regulated as a "toxic substance."

NSSF urges you to stress the following in your opposition:

* There is no scientific evidence that the use of traditional ammunition is having an adverse impact on wildlife populations that would require restricting or banning the use of traditional ammunition beyond current limitations, such as the scientifically based restriction on waterfowl hunting.

* Recent statistics from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service showing that from 1981 to 2006 the number of breeding pairs of bald eagles in the United States increased 724 percent. And much like the bald eagle, raptor populations throughout the United States are soaring.

* A ban on traditional ammunition would have a serious negative impact on wildlife conservation. The federal excise tax that manufacturers pay on the sale of the ammunition (11 percent) is a primary source of wildlife conservation funding. The bald eagle's recovery, considered to be a great conservation success story, was made possible and funded by hunters using traditional ammunition - the very ammunition organizations like the CBD are now demonizing. ...

This release is posted via the National Shooting Sports Foundation (external link)

Posted Thu Aug 5 13:27:26 CDT 2010

ISRA-PVF: Governor Quinn Receives Well-Deserved Endorsement From Radical Gun Control Group

CHICAGO, Aug. 3 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following was released today by the ISRA Political Victory Fund (ISRA-PVF):

The ISRA-PVF is delighted to learn that Gov. Pat Quinn's re-election campaign has received the endorsement of the nation's most active gun control organization – the Jim & Sarah Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (BCPGV). Now that Quinn has accepted the BCPGV endorsement, the voters of Illinois finally know for sure just where Pat Quinn stands on the issue of private firearm ownership.

It is well known that the BCPGV only endorses political candidates who are tightly aligned with the organization's ideals. Thus, it is now safe to assume that Quinn marches in lockstep with the most radical elements of the gun control movement. Likewise, it is now safe to assume the following about Pat Quinn:

* Pat Quinn supports a legislative agenda that would result in the banning and confiscation of most of the sporting firearms owned by law-abiding American citizens.

* Pat Quinn supports the establishment of a complex regulatory environment that would make it impractical, if not impossible for law-abiding firearm retailers to stay in business.

* Pat Quinn supports a gun control agenda that would drive thousands of jobs out of Illinois and starve the state's coffers of millions of much-needed tax dollars.

* Pat Quinn supports mandated design requirements that would render most of the sporting firearms in use today too expensive, too complicated and too impractical to own.

* Pat Quinn will continue to deny law-abiding citizens the right to employ defensive firearms to protect themselves and their families – even in their own homes.

* Pat Quinn supports a legislative agenda that punishes law-abiding firearm owners while ignoring the true cause of gun violence – the career criminals who roam our streets with impunity.

"Although the BCPGV billed today's event as their endorsement of Pat Quinn, I see things a bit differently," commented ISRA-PVF spokesman, Richard Pearson. "What I saw today was Pat Quinn endorsing the BCPGV's extremist campaign to eliminate private firearm ownership. In light of the recent Supreme Court decisions in the Heller and McDonald cases, it is clear that Quinn is out of touch with the intent of our Constitution. Furthermore, opinion polls show decreasing public support for woefully ineffective gun control proposals such as those advanced by Quinn and his friends at the BCPGV. Certainly, Quinn is totally out of step with the mainstream public who he wishes to represent in the Governor's Mansion."

"The Quinn camp will claim long and loud that the Governor seeks only to impose 'reasonable' gun control measures," continued Pearson. "But, before buying that malarkey, it is important to keep in mind that the BCPGV's gun control agenda is anything but 'reasonable.' In fact, the BCPGV is so extreme that the organization gave President Obama an 'F' rating because they felt that Obama is too 'pro-gun' for their taste. It is hard to imagine what must be going on inside the heads of people who actually believe that Obama is too pro-gun. As with so many other issues, Pat Quinn's acceptance of the BCPGV's endorsement demonstrates that he cannot resist latching on to the radical fringe whenever it comes his way."

The ISRA-PVF is a political action committee affiliated with the Illinois State Rifle Association. Donations to the ISRA-PVF are not tax deductible. Our report may be purchased for a fee from the Illinois State Board of Elections, Springfield, IL.

This press release is posted on PRNewswire.  

Posted Wed Aug 4 08:27:44 CDT 2010

Firearms Industry Responds To Anti-Hunting Attack On Traditional Ammunition

NEWTOWN, Conn – The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms, ammunition, hunting and shooting sports industry, has announced its opposition to a petition filed today with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) seeking to ban the use of traditional ammunition, containing lead-core components, by America's sportsmen and women. The petition, filed by several agenda-driven groups including the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), erroneously claims that the use of traditional ammunition by hunters is inconsistent with the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976. The petition goes on to suggest that the use of traditional ammunition poses a danger to wildlife, in particular raptors such as bald eagles, that may feed on entrails or unrecovered game left in the field.

"There is simply no scientific evidence that the use of traditional ammunition is having an adverse impact on wildlife populations that would require restricting or banning the use of traditional ammunition beyond current limitations, such as the scientifically based restriction on waterfowl hunting," said NSSF President Steve Sanetti ...

Read the whole press release @ The Street. 

Posted Wed Aug 4 08:26:15 CDT 2010

SAF SUES IN MARYLAND OVER HANDGUN PERMIT DENIAL

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation and a Baltimore County, MD man today sued Maryland authorities in federal court because the man’s handgun permit renewal was turned down on the grounds that he could not demonstrate “a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger.”

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.

Joining SAF in the lawsuit is Raymond Woollard, who was originally issued a carry permit after a man broke into his home during a family gathering in 2002. Woollard’s permit was renewed in 2005, after the man was released from prison. That man now lives about three miles from Woollard. Defendants in the case are Terrence B. Sheridan is the Secretary and Superintendent of the Maryland State Police, and three members of the Maryland Handgun Permit Review Board, Denis Gallagher, Seymour Goldstein and Charles M. Thomas, Jr.

SAF and Woollard are represented by attorneys Alan Gura of Virginia and Cary J. Hansel of Joseph, Greenwald & Laake of Greenbelt, MD. ...

Read the rest of the the article from the Second Amendment Foundation. Partners with the ISRA in McDonald v Chicago.

Posted Thu Jul 29 16:19:24 CDT 2010

ISRA's McDonald decision repaints 2nd Amendment litigation nationwide!

One month ago, the Supreme Court held in McDonald v. City of Chicago that states, not just the federal government, are prevented from violating Americans’ Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The Supreme Court did not, however, define the full scope of the right, nor the standard of review by which challenged statutes will be judged.

In other words: It ain’t over yet. A number of pending lawsuits across the country will further shape how the Second Amendment will be applied. The first lawsuit of note comes from Chicago. As soon as the Supreme Court struck down the city’s handgun ban in McDonald, Mayor Richard Daley worked with the city council to pass a very restrictive gun-control regime to take the ban’s place. The National Rifle Association promptly filed suit, challenging, among other things: a ban on having more than one “assembled and operable” firearm in the home at any time; a rule forbidding gun owners to carry their firearms in their own garages, porches, and places of business; and a policy outlawing gun shops and shooting ranges in the city in spite of the training and range time the city requires for obtaining a permit. ...

Read the whole story @ NationalReviewOnline.  

Posted Thu Jul 29 13:08:51 CDT 2010

THE DIGGINS DECISION HAS BEEN INCORRECTLY INTERPRETED BY MANY,
OPENING THE DOOR TO ARREST AND PROSECUTION
from ISRA Attorney Victor Quilici

Since People v. Diggins was decided by our State Supreme Court, a number of articles, commentaries and general blogging have circulated stating that guns can be easily and safely transported in motor vehicles in just about every manner possible, loaded, unloaded, and in some cases in fanny packs worn by drivers and/or passengers. Nothing can be further from the truth than those type of analysis.

To begin with, Diggins focuses on the language in the UUW statute that relates to “aggravated unlawful use of a weapon.” The State Supreme Court addressed the exemption provisions of Section 24-1.6 (c)(iii) which provides that a person is not guilty of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon if that weapon is “unloaded and encased in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container by a person who has been issued a valid Firearm Owner’s Identification card.” The Court begins by noting:
“[W]e are asked to determine whether the center console of a vehicle is a ‘case’ within the meaning of this provision. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that it is.”

One of the first points the Supreme Court states was that a prior decision by the 4th District Court of Appeals was flawed when it held that a glove compartment was not a “case” within the meaning of the exemption language because a glove compartment is not portable.

Even though the Supreme Court made that observation, that does not mean that it ruled expressly that glove compartments are cases. While part of its analysis, it was not part of the Court’s decision. That determination must come in another decision, when the issue is squarely before the Court. Also, that observation may be quoted in future cases.

What is important in Diggins, is that the Supreme Court holds that a case does not have to be a container specific to a firearm and it need not be limited to something portable. The Court’s language is understandable to non-attorneys when it says:
“Unpersuaded by the State’s arguments, we conclude that the legislature used the broad general term ‘case’ unmodified. Giving the word ‘case’ its plain and ordinary meaning, as we must, permits but one conclusion: the term ‘case’ in Section 24-1.6 (c)(iii) includes any portable or non-portable receptacle and need not be interpreted only in reference to firearms.
. . . Based on the foregoing, we find, in the case at bar that a center console of a vehicle falls within the ordinary definition of case.
. . . Whether the statute is wise or the best means to achieve the desired result are matters left to the legislature, not the court.”

Special Note from the ISRA Webmaster: This analysis is not to be construed as legal advice. Please consult with your own attorney for such advice.

Posted Sun Nov 15 18:53:16 CST 2009

WARNING TO ALL MEMBERS REGARDING
HOSPITALIZATION AND DOMESTIC DISPUTES

Recent Illinois Law (PA 95-0564) provides that health care professionals report patients to the state police anyone that they believe might pose a danger to themselves or others. ISRA has learned of situations where a party has been admitted to a hospital for stress, alcohol treatment, or other scenarios where part of the admission procedure included a short interview with a psychologist on staff. Questions asked, include gun ownership, and/or the Possession of a FOID card. Within a few weeks that individual receives a notice from the Illinois State Police revoking his or her FOID.

Obviously, when being interviewed by somebody in a hospital setting, ask if he or she is a psychiatrist or a psychologist, who you don’t have to communicate with. And, be sure what information you are willing to disclose to any interviewer. Of course, you should not lie, but a simple refusal to disclose gun ownership may be enough to avoid the problem.

If you think you may be in a situation where the justice system may become involved with restricting your ownership of firearms, such as when facing hospitalization, or in a domestic dispute, unless caught up in an emergency situation, be sure to have your firearms removed from the home as quickly as possible, in the care of a friend or family member who possesses a FOID, and who lives a good distance from your residence. Also, advise your spouse or other party who shares the home with you that you have done so. Most importantly, in any court setting, you will then be able to assure the Judge, that although you possess a FOID, you have removed all firearms from within the home.

These tips can save your firearms from being confiscated and/or your FOID being revoked. ISRA is working to solve these problems, both legislatively, and through litigation.

Posted Sun Nov 15 16:02:27 CST 2009