9 thoughts on “Wilmette, IL Suspends Handgun Ban”

  1. It might be something they could call a victory, just a round-about one. Getting rid of all the pure handgun bans hurts them, but not as much as easy incorporation would. If the matter ends up being Massachusett’s ownership ban rather than Chicago’s, I know it’ll be harder to get incorporation from the Supreme Court.

  2. The law remains on the books even though the police say they won’t enforce it. The police could change their minds on a whim, The people are still at the mercy, or lack thereof, of the government until the ban is removed from the city ordinances.

  3. It’s hard to be sure from the wording here, but Morton Grove, IL might be doing the same thing:

    Morton Grove Mayor Richard Krier said the village would comply with the law.

    “We are a small suburban town,” he said of the north suburb, which banned the possession or sale of handguns 27 years ago. “We’ve never had any real handgun violence before then or since then.”

  4. its actually a smart legal action for them… they can sit back and watch Chicago get their asses sued off… once Chicago spends millions of dollars in legal fees and looses, the other towns can make up their mind for free…

  5. Minor nit: since they’re suspending enforcement against everybody, likely with an eye to repeal the ordinance altogether if their lawyers determine that the no-incorporation dog don’t hunt, the issue would be mootness, not standing. That said, I agree that individual villages complying with Heller rather than forcing new lawsuits of their own is a good thing. It might not matter much, though, unless Chicago and NYC follow suit. In that case, we’ll see all the same new cases, just with fewer defendants.

    Best case scenario: every gun-banning city assumes Heller applies to them, drops the worst form of gun control currently in existence, and the gunny suits go after the worst forms that remain. Slippery slopes slip both ways.

Comments are closed.