Illinois bans sales and possession of semi-automatic firearms

[HisArpy]

I'd love to see that as well. Those officials are violating their oaths of office to support and defend the Constitution. As it stands right now the Governor, the legislature of Illinois and any civil officer enforcing this law are in defiance of the SCOTUS.

Legislative immunity doesn't cover felonies. There's some precedent on this which can be found by an internet search.

Sec 1983 makes it a felony to deny someone their civil or constitutional rights under color of authority.

Put the two together and see where you end up from a purely theoretical legal perspective.

That we haven't gone there only shows that our law enforcement and judicial branch of government is part of the problem. The slack jawed party line voter is the rest of the equation.

 

[HisArpy]

No.
For a 'lawyer' you have poor reading and comprehension skills.

It's not my fault you forgot the premise of your argument.

 

[Rightguide]

Legislative immunity doesn't cover felonies. There's some precedent on this which can be found by an internet search.

Sec 1983 makes it a felony to deny someone their civil or constitutional rights under color of authority.

Put the two together and see where you end up from a purely theoretical legal perspective.

That we haven't gone there only shows that our law enforcement and judicial branch of government is part of the problem. The slack jawed party line voter is the rest of the equation.

If we had a real DOJ its Civil Rights Division would be teeing up charges against those officials.

 

[Emerson40]

Plenty of democratic, free nations have enacted tight gun control legislation, and have seen school and mass shootings drop drastically, and even go away altogether.

And people can still legally own guns.

And all the mean baddies and criminals who, according to derpy, are always lurking just around the corner, just waiting for gun legislation to come along and make it easy to storm your home, steal your DVD player and rape the wimmenz… well they never showed up.

The real issue is that the US has an insecure white male (i.e., the likes of derpy and vetteman) population, groomed by the likes of the NRA, with relatively easy access to guns, who clutch fervently to an outdated section of an old document from a bygone era, that could use updating, more than vetteman’s iPhone 5s.

Until that gets fixed, the US will remain behind while the rest of the world advances and evolves, and the blood of school kids will just continue to be the price payed for ‘murikans to own more pew-pew penis substitutes than can comfortably fit into a gun safe, under the guise of free-dum. Ain’t no gubmint gonna tell me what I can and can’t do!

 

[BluesDriver66]

Lol.

DC v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008). You should read it before you show off that pet ignoramus you keep in your pocket any further.

There's even a wiki page on it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

For those too lazy to click:

Fucked up decisions from the hard core right wing Scalia Court are neither rare or surprising. Changing the definitions of words is standard operating procedures in reactionary right wing circles. Everything from "Pro Life" and "Religious Freedom" to "Alternative Facts" and "Creation Science". The framers of the Constitution use words like "militia" because they meant "militia", regardless of opinions of corrupt Supreme Court Justices.

Dissenting opinions​

The Stevens dissent seems to rest on four main points of disagreement: that the Founders would have made the individual right aspect of the Second Amendment express if that was what was intended; that the "militia" preamble and exact phrase "to keep and bear arms" demands the conclusion that the Second Amendment touches on state militia service only; that many lower courts' later "collective-right" reading of the Miller decision constitutes stare decisis, which may only be overturned at great peril; and that the Court has not considered gun-control laws (e.g., the National Firearms Act) unconstitutional. The dissent concludes, "The Court would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.... I could not possibly conclude that the Framers made such a choice."

Justice Stevens's dissent was joined by Justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer.

 

[Chobham]

The gov and legislature of Illinois are going to find out that there's an entire world of difference between passing/signing a law and enforcing it.

Right now most of the sheriff's in Illinois are in revolt over this law calling it blatantly unconstitutional. Unconstitutional laws are void ab initio and don't have to be obeyed or enforced.

50 sheriffs at last count.

 

[JohnnySavage]

If the left were really serious about gun control (which they aren't - they enjoy having it as a political banshee cry), they'd start the process to repeal the Second Amendment. Until that happens, this is just more bullshit designed to pander to their base.

 

[icanhelp1]

If we had a real DOJ its Civil Rights Division would be teeing up charges against those officials.

These lefty bureaucrats have this image in their minds that all democrats agree to giving up their legally acquired firearms. Me thinks there are millions of democrats, independents that cherish the right to own firearms. Out in big sky country an AR-15 is nothing more than a varmint rifle. When it comes to Chicago they don’t prosecute illegal possession of a firearm to the fullest extent of the law. Seems comical that if they can’t enforce the laws on the books what makes them think they can enforce additional laws. Going after law abiding citizens is low hanging fruit, sooner or later they’re going to have to address the criminal crowd.

Is the new law a restriction on magazine capacity. I think most firearms that have 10/15 round capacity are semiautomatic.

 

[phrodeau]

Looks like high capacity magazines were not banned. Ten rounds is pretty damned high.

 

[Rightguide]

Fucked up decisions from the hard core right wing Scalia Court are neither rare or surprising. Changing the definitions of words is standard operating procedures in reactionary right wing circles. Everything from "Pro Life" and "Religious Freedom" to "Alternative Facts" and "Creation Science". The framers of the Constitution use words like "militia" because they meant "militia", regardless of opinions of corrupt Supreme Court Justices.

Dissenting opinions​

The Stevens dissent seems to rest on four main points of disagreement: that the Founders would have made the individual right aspect of the Second Amendment express if that was what was intended; that the "militia" preamble and exact phrase "to keep and bear arms" demands the conclusion that the Second Amendment touches on state militia service only; that many lower courts' later "collective-right" reading of the Miller decision constitutes stare decisis, which may only be overturned at great peril; and that the Court has not considered gun-control laws (e.g., the National Firearms Act) unconstitutional. The dissent concludes, "The Court would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.... I could not possibly conclude that the Framers made such a choice."

Justice Stevens's dissent was joined by Justices David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer.

The dissenting opinion in that case isn't the settled law. See New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. ___ (2022.

 

[Rightguide]

"Well regulated militia" mean anything to you? It's right there in the Constitution. Plain as day.

U.S. Constitution - Second Amendment​

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Note the comma and what appears after it. It's called the "unqualified command" of the Second Amendment, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The power to regulate and organize militia itself was established in the Art. I sec 8. Note as well that the Bill Of Rights is not a catalog of "government" power.

 

[Rightguide]

These lefty bureaucrats have this image in their minds that all democrats agree to giving up their legally acquired firearms. Me thinks there are millions of democrats, independents that cherish the right to own firearms. Out in big sky country an AR-15 is nothing more than a varmint rifle. When it comes to Chicago they don’t prosecute illegal possession of a firearm to the fullest extent of the law. Seems comical that if they can’t enforce the laws on the books what makes them think they can enforce additional laws. Going after law abiding citizens is low hanging fruit, sooner or later they’re going to have to address the criminal crowd.

Is the new law a restriction on magazine capacity. I think most firearms that have 10/15 round capacity are semiautomatic.

There are many semi-automatic rifles and lever action rifles with tubular magazines that hold more than 10 rounds that are 100 years old. The new Second Amendment legal standard of "text as informed by history" is not on the side of the stupid gun grabbers.

 

[Emerson40]

If the left were really serious about gun control (which they aren't - they enjoy having it as a political banshee cry), they'd start the process to repeal the Second Amendment. Until that happens, this is just more bullshit designed to pander to their base.

I think not just the left, but even some on the right are serious about gun control. I don’t think the process will be started anytime soon because of the insurmountable obstacles in the way.

Both the House and the Senate would need two-third majority votes to even get things underway. Did you not see the gong show, the absolute cluster-fuck of a circus that just happened with just electing the Speaker. The current lot of elected - both parties - are more interested in power and in fucking over the other team, than they are governing and acting on behalf of the people. Do you think them capable of any serious legislative gun debate, in their current state?

Now let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that the House and Senate were able to manage a two-third majority vote. Then it goes to the States for ratification, where it would require 3/4 of them (38) to pass it.
All the while the NRA and gun lobbyists are spreading their propaganda (you gonna outlaw cars next? ) and rhetoric, and throwing sticks into the spokes and doing all they can do to stymie any debate and discussion.
Toss in the talking heads on Faux crying that this is all about taking away all your precious guns (even though it’s not about outlawing gun ownership), and you have huge numbers of the gullible and easily led in the South, parts of the West, and in the Mid-west, some who are passionate gun owners, thinking it’s only about taking away all their guns (it’s not), and the 3/4 vote slips further away.

Name one elected member who you think willing and even marginally capable of putting their shoulder into it, and trying to push that huge rock up that monstrous hill…

You can call it a banshee cry if you like, but the reality is that it is a political hot-button topic, not unlike the southern border, abortion, etc. And it’s not going to be going away anytime soon. As much as mass shootings have become part of the daily norm in the US, and don’t even make it above the fold unless something heinous is tied to it or the numbers of dead are high, folks are getting fed up with the body counts and bloodshed, and are starting to demand change.

The 2nd is an outdated Amendment that needs reform. It would not be written as it is if it was written today. But ‘murikans are in love with their guns. They played a big part in their bloody history and are woven into American culture, and it is difficult to discuss guns rationally with some when so many fee-fees are involved.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Note the comma and what appears after it. It's called the "unqualified command" of the Second Amendment, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The power to regulate and organize militia itself was established in the Art. I sec 8. Note as well that the Bill Of Rights is not a catalog of "government" power.

Seriously, WTF do you know about 17th century English Grammar? If anything I suspect it derives from those Federalist papers you hold so near and dear to your heart.

What you have gramatically speaking is a "simple sentence" which includes "one clause". Which is exactly why so many people over the years have such a hard time determining exactly wtf the founding father were trying to get at.....But you,MR wrongway have narrowed it down to a comma!! *chuckles* Thanks for the laugh.....bozo

 

[Britva415]

misunderstanding of rednecks in general [...]

They need the gun to protect themselves from idjits like you who want to take away both their bible and their guns.

Stop pretending anyone wants to take away your Bible.

It's dishonest and this is why we understand you perfectly.

 

[Rightguide]

Stop pretending anyone wants to take away your Bible.

It's dishonest and this is why we understand you perfectly.

You don't have enough time in grade to understand him perfectly.

 

[Rightguide]

It's always good when the Sheriff can decide which laws are 'unconstitutional' and thus not bother with them - or enforce the opposite. They can say that an election was 'unconstitutional' when their side loses. Or that equal rights to education or voting is. Then we get officers lined up outside schools in Alabama or outside voting stations in Georgia deciding who goes inside.

That's why they are "elected" officials who take an oath to support and defend the Constitution.

 

[Rightguide]

More than 70 Illinois counties say they will not enforce state 'assault weapon' ban: Report
By
Rachel Schilke, Breaking News Reporter

January 16, 2023 01:32 PM

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...inois-counties-not-enforce-assault-weapon-ban

 

[ll74]

More than 70 Illinois counties say they will not enforce state 'assault weapon' ban: Report
By
Rachel Schilke, Breaking News Reporter

January 16, 2023 01:32 PM

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...inois-counties-not-enforce-assault-weapon-ban

They should all be fired.

 

[Bray123]

Republican Solomon Pena, who lost his race to incumbent Democratic State Rep. Miguel Garcia by more than 45 percentage points, has been taken into custody for "conspiring with, and paying four other men to shoot at the homes of two county commissioners and two state legislators,” according to Albuquerque Police Chief Harold Medina.

Isn't there something about insane people no being allowed firearms? Oh yes, they have to be currently committed involuntarily in a hospital. The day after being released they can have a gun and run as Republican candidate. What could go wrong?

 

[Chobham]

Republican Solomon Pena, who lost his race to incumbent Democratic State Rep. Miguel Garcia by more than 45 percentage points, has been taken into custody for "conspiring with, and paying four other men to shoot at the homes of two county commissioners and two state legislators,” according to Albuquerque Police Chief Harold Medina.

Isn't there something about insane people no being allowed firearms? Oh yes, they have to be currently committed involuntarily in a hospital. The day after being released they can have a gun and run as Republican candidate. What could go wrong?

Not even half of the story.

Pena is a convicted felon who was neither endorsed nor supported by the republican party.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Not even half of the story.

Pena is a convicted felon who was neither endorsed nor supported by the republican party.

Yes or no, was he a Republican Candidate?

Did he, or didn't he receive campaign money from the Republican party?

Did he or didn't he win the Republican nomination for the house in New Mexico?

https://mobile.twitter.com/solomonpena2022

 

[Rightguide]

Not even half of the story.

Pena is a convicted felon who was neither endorsed nor supported by the republican party.

Yet Bray does what he does best...as a true representation of the Democrat mascot he Brays.

 

[LLCox]

Around 1.3 billion guns in the US. That is around 3.4 guns for every American (your results may vary). I own thirteen and have not pointed a gun at a person yet.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Around 1.3 billion guns in the US. That is around 3.4 guns for every American (your results may vary). I own thirteen and have not pointed a gun at a person yet.

Cool I own more than you, none however are in the US.