Exemptions in House concealed-carry bill

Exemptions in House concealed-carry bill

Following are among the exemptions included in the concealed-carry bill passed by the Illinois House on Friday:

— Any building, property or parking area under the control of a public or private elementary or secondary school.

— Any building, property or parking area under the control of a preschool or child care facility.

— Most state buildings and properties, including courthouses.

— Any local government building.

— Any adult or juvenile detention or correctional institution.

— Any public or private hospital, mental health facility or nursing home.

— Any bus, train or form of transportation paid for in whole or in part with public funds, and any building or parking area under the control of a public transportation agency.

— Any building, property or parking area under the control of an establishment that serves alcohol on its premises, if more than 50 more of the establishment's gross receipts within the prior three months is from the sale of alcohol.

— Any public gathering or special event conducted on property open to the public that requires the issuance of a permit from the unit of local government.

— Any public playground.

— Any public park, athletic area or athletic facility under the control of a municipality or park district.

— Any property under the control of the Cook County Forest Preserve District.

— Any building, classroom, laboratory, medical clinic, hospital, artistic venue, athletic venue, entertainment venue, officially recognized university-related organization property, whether owned or leased, and any real property, including parking areas, sidewalks, and common areas under the control of a public or private community college, college or university.

— Any building, property or parking area under the control of a gaming facility licensed under the Riverboat Gambling Act or the Illinois Horse Racing Act of 1975, including an inter-track wagering location licensee.

— Any stadium, arena or the real property or parking area under the control of a stadium, arena, or any collegiate or professional sporting event.

— Any building, property or parking area under the control of a public library.

— Any building, property or parking area under the control of an airport.

— Any building, property or parking area under the control of an amusement park.

— Any building, property or parking area under the control of a zoo or museum.

— Any street, driveway, parking area, property, building, or facility, owned, leased, controlled, or used by a nuclear energy, storage, weapons, or development site or facility regulated by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

— The owner of private real property of any type may prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms on the property under his or her control. The owner must post a sign indicating that firearms are prohibited on the property, unless the property is a private residence.

Source: Senate Bill 2193

Sections (2):News, Local

Comments

News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.

Login or register to post comments

rsp wrote on May 25, 2013 at 7:05 am

It would be nice if someone would show a map of all the areas excluded. If people were going to be in any of these places they would either have to leave their gun at home, or locked in their car. Don't have a car? Ride the bus? You aren't worthy of self defense. 

Daxndata wrote on May 25, 2013 at 8:05 am

Seems a bit ridiculous.  Morons in the state legislsture seem to think they can pass a billthat says "you can carry a consealed weapon anywhere in the state you want...as long aas it is only on your property."  Sounds reminiscent of Henry Ford's claim way back that you can have a Model T car in any color...as long as it's black.

Stupid people don't seem to get it that criminals will carry whatever, whereever, whenever they want.  Law abiding people want the law to reflect their RIGHT to protect themselves whereever, and whenever...with whatever.

EL YATIRI wrote on May 25, 2013 at 9:05 am
Profile Picture

For all practical purposes the bill won't result in freedom to carry.  If you do carry expect the "hassle factor" from police who will be detaining you, demanding ID, searching you while you are not breaking any law whatsoever.

ROB McCOLLEY wrote on May 25, 2013 at 7:05 pm
Profile Picture

True.

 

I envision a landmark court case.

gamera wrote on May 25, 2013 at 2:05 pm

Most of these exemptions include parking areas so you can't leave it in your car either. 

 

Basically, you can't have it in a public areas paid for with public monies, places with children, or places that are highly regulated.

rsp wrote on May 25, 2013 at 7:05 pm

In other words, you can't have it in public...

Techman588 wrote on May 26, 2013 at 1:05 am

And so illinois govt. thinks they arte cute! Well folks I see another illinois buisness as usual governor and perhaps a few others in prison, after all we only have one in custody at the moment and our average has been 2 for quite some time Quin step down or get ready for some striped pajamas! IDIOTS ! WE ARE NOT AMUSED!

ajbuckle wrote on May 26, 2013 at 9:05 am

This is a roadmap for crazies who want to shoot up a bunch of people.  The above listed places are where you can commit mass murder without anybody shooting back.

Illini Libertarian wrote on May 26, 2013 at 10:05 pm

I'd like to know how many violent crimes occur annually in all of the above named areas in Illinois.  Our politicians won't allow Illinoians to protect themselves from violent crimes in parks, public properties, universities, etc.  To be fair, these politicians should not be allowed to bring armed security into these areas either...would that stipulation change their opinions?

Bulldogmojo wrote on May 27, 2013 at 12:05 am

I know right? I'm with you people!!! This is an outrage!! Why if I had a nickle for every time I had to dodge a hail storm of bullets just to get from my car to the library to return a book or wanted to take the Clinton Nuclear power plant tour and shoot off a .38 in the containment building just to hear what it sounded like.

Who among us hasn't wanted to carry a sidearm into a courtroom so we could settle the score if things didn't go as we saw fit? Am I right? How about when someone tries to get on the MTD without a transfer and needs a little " high capacity clip tune up" to make sure they don't try it again?

No guns on a playground? That one really tears it for me how else are we going to teach kids how to form an orderly line at the slide?

I also foresee a possible landmark case where a violent 3 time loser with a judge for a father squeeks through on getting a concealed carry license because of suspicious "dismissals" , self deputizes and arms himself to "Protect" his neighborhood pool house, pursues and kills an unarmed teenager with no other eyewitnesses to the entire incident then misleads the court at the bail hearing about his resources and the existence of a second passport. Like that would ever happen!

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/X/2/5/NRA-Crazed-Ideologues.jpg

If you are so full of fear that you can't leave your home without arming yourself then you are a prisoner of your own irrational mind and could never be truly free.

WOW wrote on May 27, 2013 at 12:05 pm

A couple of years ago a lady was raped at the Champaign Public Library. A crazy man kept harrassing her inside the library. She reported it to the libarary (that didn't do much). The minute she stepped foot out of the library she was pulled behind the bushes and raped. If she had a Smith and Wesson Lady 38, she would have had a fighting chance.

With this new law, the outcome would be the same since defenseless people are easy targets of bad guys.

Bulldogmojo wrote on May 27, 2013 at 7:05 pm

I'm not familiar with the case at the library. Based on your description of the incident, I'm pretty sure if someone is threatening you or harrassing you regardless of the location, you don't report it to a librarian or the cashier at the coffee shop you are obligated to report the matter to the POLICE.

You remember the POLICE right? The people we as a society actually empower to walk around with firearms and the extensive training on how and when to use them. The concealed carry crowd always seem all to ready to leave the police out of the equation.

As an example, here is a brief list of  "Law abiding" legal gun owners who suddenly decided they weren't going to be so law abiding anymore.

http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/ccwprivatecitizens.pdf

 

WOW wrote on May 28, 2013 at 3:05 pm

I remember the police. In Champaign alone, I remember Detective Lisa Staples, who the police can't seem to keep her out of a car when she's drunk. The first time she was caught was in an unmarked squadcar traveling the wrong way on I-72 with her lights off. Then, there were a couple of Champaign police officers that tried themselves to commit murder. One of them drove to another state to kill his ex wife. Thankfully, a security guard (non police) reported him doing suspicious stuff, so he was caught before he carried out his plans. There was the Urbana officer that was having a fling with a convenience store clerk, after he used department resources to stalk her to her home while he was on duty. Drew Peterson was a police officer in Illinois. He was conviceted of murdering his 3rd wife and they can't find his 4th wife's body. Not all police are honest or always respectable. Putting your total trust in any police department is unwise. Despite these bad examples, I do think most police officers are honest, but I wouldn't want to have to trust my life to them based on their response time alone.

Your PDF file only shows around 200 total cases (not convictions) nationwide for a number of years. The City of Chicago ALONE had 532 murders last year that they have a corpse from. NO one in Chicago, but the police, had the ability to legally carry a gun. This doesn't include the number of people in the City of Chicago that were shot or threatened (a much higher number). The year before the City of Chicago had just under 500 homicides. This doesn't include the total number of homicides where no body was found, so the real number of deaths is probably much higher. It also is only the City of Chicago, and doesn't include the suburbs and doesn't include the total number of murders by the City of Chicago residents in the rest of the state.

Just in the past 2 years there were nearly 1000 deaths that the Chicago Police didn't stop, no one did. The dead were victims waiting to happen, and it happened. Our state helps the bad guys by weakening their victims.  Armed guards at a bank are a huge deterent of would be bank robbers and armed citizens would be a huge deterent of more crime.

Bulldogmojo wrote on May 28, 2013 at 6:05 pm

Yes the list was cases of people who were allowed to concealed carry by law and decided to kill people with said firearms so it's a lot but not all. This will happen in Illinois when CC starts. A certain percentage of people who look legit on paper and are issued CC permit but who have no business with a firearm will kill someone in Illinois.

Your answer to police corruption is to carry a gun? Your answer to crimes that didn't happen to you but you somehow wantingly paint yourself with a connection to, is carry a gun? Your answer to gang violence in Chicago where you probably rarely go or live is Carry a gun? Your answer to just going outside is to carry a gun. Let's try involving yourself in society without escalating matters with weapons.

If the very implementation of this CC law is such a clear warning to criminals why would you need the gun itself? Isn't your new law enough? The criminals won't know who is carrying so they will stop pulling crimes on people, right? Or are you just looking for a chance to kill someone and get off calling it self defence?

Wearing a gun in public by its very definition turns every day events into armed escalation.

I would 100% back conceal carry anywhere and anytime as long as those issued passed a formal psychiatric evaluation first. The NRA would fight that every step of the way as they do national background checks because they know it will turn up a lot of people who are illegally in posession of firearms. We wouldn't want to cut into those precious bottom line profits of gun manufacturers that have been oh so carefuly cultivated by your fears, would we?

WOW wrote on May 27, 2013 at 12:05 pm

It's a good thing bad guys know that those places are off limits.

The state should also ban firearms at both liquor stores and gas stations, so they won't get robbed anymore.

highspeed wrote on May 28, 2013 at 9:05 am

So apparently some of you have never ventured outside of Illinois for fear of being shot by a concealed carry permit holder. 

Bulldogmojo wrote on May 28, 2013 at 3:05 pm

Certainly not with the expectation that they were all that was standing between me and being victimized by someone else. What an absurd point.

highspeed wrote on May 28, 2013 at 4:05 pm

It`s absurd to think that Illinois citizens aren`t good enough to have conceal carry

Bulldogmojo wrote on May 28, 2013 at 6:05 pm

You mean rational enough? Don't you?