search
top

Civil Rights Victory in Illinois

An Illinois State Attorney is refusing to enforce some of the state’s gun laws that he finds to be unconstitutional:

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 McDonalddecisions.

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.

I wish we had more public officials that took their oaths seriously. It should be noted that our opponents are attempting to bully and intimidate this State Attorney into throwing more honest gun owners in jail where obviously the gun control crowd believes they belong. It would be wise for our side to call and thank the SA for this stance. Here’s the contact info:

CSGV-IL-SA

7 Responses to “Civil Rights Victory in Illinois”

  1. LC Scotty says:

    If only they had the same regard for laws when the law in question is pre-emption…

  2. alcade says:

    I live in IL as well, and once attended a lecture my own state’s attorney gave on the state’s gun laws. Someone in the crowd asked why, with so much local support for concealed carry, couldn’t the county simply issue a concealed carry license. His response was that county law couldn’t contradict state law. I’m not sure if anyone else noticed the irony of the statement, since our state law clearly contradicts federal law, but “them’s the breaks.”

  3. MichaelB says:

    Hey it’s my county this time on the right side of the issue! Prosecuting an unconstitutional law is unconstitutional. The local radio story describes a MO resident recently not being prosecuted for transporting a rifle in a rack in accordance with MO laws but violating IL laws.

  4. MichaelB says:

    And still awaiting a ruling from the 7th district court that moves this issue forward.

  5. Archer says:

    Note that although the SA will not prosecute, local police and sheriffs are still largely obligated to arrest, search, and seize (in accordance with written law) if they notice anything out of place.

    Under his watch, there are no legal penalties, but it’s still against the law and an “exercise at your own risk” situation. IOW, this is NOT the “de facto concealed carry” many are making it out to be.

    • GMC70 says:

      Police and sheriffs are not “obligated” to arrest at all. Officers, like prosecutors have (with a few exceptions) discretion to arrest, or not. And the State’s attorney has now put them on notice that they need not arrest in these cases, as they will not be prosecuted. They can, and should, act accordingly.

  6. Phssthpok says:

    The CSGV has their panties in a wad over a decision to “not enforce gun laws in his county”.

    I read that press release as stating quite clearly that he will enforce superceding law (the COTUS) with which the local laws were in conflict.

top