No more concealed-carry delay

There's no reason to reward state legislators for wasting time when doing a job they had no choice but to do.

Reluctantly complying with a federal court order, state legislators last week signed off on concealed-carry legislation, but the issue is far from resolved.

Gov. Pat Quinn, who has signaled his unhappiness with the bill, still must decide whether to sign or veto it. If Quinn vetoes the legislation, legislators must deal with a veto override. Finally, Attorney General Lisa Madigan has yet to make a decision about whether to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the December 2012 appeals court decision striking down Illinois' ban on concealed carry.

Stuck in this morass of indecision and uncertainty, Madigan this week asked the judges on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to allow the state an extra 30 days comply with the court's order to draft legislation allowing concealed carry.

There is no good reason for the court to do so. The six months the court allowed for Illinois to address the issue is more than sufficient time for Quinn and state legislators to meet the court's mandate.

At the same time, it would be advisable for Madigan to seek high court review, if only to allow the Supreme Court to fully address an issue on which different appeals courts have disagreed.

These two issues ought not be confused.

When it struck down Illinois' ban on concealed carry, the 7th Circuit stayed enforcement of its ruling until June 9 to allow legislators time to pass a law containing reasonable regulations. The Legislature has now done so, although Quinn has yet to act.

Madigan is asking for an additional 30 days — to July 9 — before the court's ruling becomes effective to "provide the governor reasonable time to review" the law.

"If signed into law, the (concealed-carry bill) will resolve the plaintiffs' claims in these lawsuits," the attorney general's office stated in its motion for the 30-day delay.

Madigan argued that it's important to allow the 30-day delay because if Quinn does not act by June 9 there will be no law addressing concealed carry and the confusion of who can carry and where would pose a public safety threat.

"The expiration of the stay ... would present a significant hardship, not to the defendants in an individual or official capacity, but to the people and the Constitution of Illinois," the attorney general's office stated.

That sounds like a good reason for Quinn to quickly review the bill and sign it. Regardless of his personal feelings, he essentially has no other choice if he wishes to avoid concealed carry without rules.

Concealed-carry advocates opposed Madigan's motion, saying it is without statutory support and is sought "for dilatory reasons."

They called the original six-month stay "extraordinarily generous" and noted that Quinn and the General Assembly frittered away much of that time.

"Nothing required the legislature to wait until the last possible moment to pass a law," pro-concealed-carry lawyers said in response to Madigan's motion.

That would seem to be the bottom line. Why should state officials be spared the consequences of their own conscious delays? Even assuming the possibility of a no-rules environment starting June 9, Quinn still has sufficient time to review and sign the legislation.

That's not to say there aren't questions to address — the fundamental premise of the appeals court decision needs further exploration. That's why Madigan would better serve the state by asking for a Supreme Court review of the 7th Circuit decision.

Sections (2):Editorials, Opinion

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

STM wrote on June 05, 2013 at 9:06 am

Yeah!  Let's get out there and shoot something dangit!

Sid Saltfork wrote on June 05, 2013 at 4:06 pm

Quinn will trace his signature on it.  Madigan is making Quinn look more incompetent than seemed possible.  Look for Bill Daly's decision this week on whether he will run against Quinn in the primary.  If he does not run, Lisa Madigan will run.  Both could end up running against Quinn in the primary with Quinn coming in a distant third.

Mike Madigan has to go.  However, there is nothing out there that can force him to go. 

jdmac44 wrote on June 06, 2013 at 8:06 am

Yeah, I tell you, those concealed carriers in the 39 Shall Issue states are nuts!  All you hear about it how it's turned into Mogudishu!  People getting shot everywhere!  Those people are crazy!  All they want to do is shoot people!  Can't wait to get up in the morning and shoot people, shoot somebody before going to bed and at lunch time!

That was all sarcasm, if you missed it.

Bulldogmojo wrote on June 06, 2013 at 8:06 pm

You are exactly right. It isn't Mogadishu so why do you feel the need to walk around armed?

When CC goes wrong --> http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/ccwprivatecitizens.pdf

also

http://www.kansascity.com/2013/01/08/4000708/officials-review-accidental-shooting.html

What could go wrong?

http://www.wdtn.com/dpp/news/local/montgomery/accidental-shooting-outside-a-walmart#.UbE6a-dwqSp

There will be CC horror stories like this soon but with Illinois in the headline. 

CC permit does not validate future sensible judgement of public use of a weapon.

 

johnny boy wrote on June 06, 2013 at 8:06 am

yes - 'dilatory' good words to describe Quinn and Princess Lisa. That, and a few others that woudn't pass the censor here. (1) get Quinn out (2) do NOT let the daughter of Oz in. Just that simple.