Illinois won't be following example
Illinoisans looking forward to packing heat will be waiting quite a while.
With the state of Wisconsin on the verge of allowing its citizens to carry concealed weapons, Illinois soon will be the only state in the nation to deny its citizens that right.
Some, including state legislators and gun-advocacy groups, suggest it won't be all that long before Illinois abandons its status as the union's sole dissenter on concealed carry. Don't bet on it.
As long as Illinois politics continues to be dominated by Chicago politicians, concealed carry remains a very long shot — no matter how popular the notion is to the public at large.
That's why some concealed-carry proponents have proposed a compromise. They have suggested that individual counties be allowed to decide for themselves. That's a particularly bad idea that would create a patchwork of conflicting rules throughout Illinois. But it's a non-starter because it's just as obnoxious to gun foes as concealed carry statewide.
For all practical purposes, Illinois politics is ruled by Cook County and Chicago. The state's other 101 counties are just along for the ride.
Outside Cook County, most Illinois residents view guns as a source of recreation or self-protection. In Cook County, guns are perceived by elected officials as a source of crime.
Here's the irony. Guns are a source of crime in Cook County, but that's because the criminals there ignore existing legal restrictions on gun ownership. They've turned the city into the world's largest outdoor shooting gallery. Meanwhile, honest citizens either risk arrest by arming themselves or cross their fingers and take their chances.
At first glance, concealed carry laws appear to be a genuinely frightening proposition. They conjure up images of the old west and daily shoot-outs in the town square.
But it's not that simple. Those who seek to take advantage of these new laws often are required to take a series of steps before being eligible to do so. The most important include gun safety training and background checks.
People who take advantage of concealed carry laws are not just honest, hard-working citizens but knowledgeable of and comfortable with firearms. In other words, they are the people best suited for handling the serious responsibility of carrying a concealed weapon.
But don't try telling that to Gov. Pat Quinn. He's repeatedly denounced concealed carry legislation and promised to veto any bill that authorizes it.
"I don't agree with those advocates who feel that that is a measure for public safety. I think it's the opposite," Quinn said.
No anti-gun zealot could have stated his grounds for opposition any better than Quinn. Here's the problem with his logic.
If concealed carry really is a source of more mindless violence, as Quinn suggests, why have 49 states legalized it? If these laws result in the kind of impulsive, heart-breaking carnage that Quinn presumes, why is the trend moving in the direction of more concealed carry, not less concealed carry?
Gun foes, however, cannot be persuaded. Former Chicago Mayor Richard Daley routinely worked himself into frenzied opposition whenever the subject was raised in his presence.
With House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton, both Chicago Democrats, in strict control of the legislative process in Springfield, it's hard to imagine any concealed carry bills being allowed to move through the legislative process or surviving a Quinn veto.
Like it or not, that's just a political fact of life.
I do not believe that conceal and carry is only opposed by the Democratic party. Are Republicans the only ones that want conceal and carry? What do the Independents think? I know one who does not want conceal and carry. I don't want to be around criminals carrying concealed weapons. I, also, don't want to be around "non-criminals" carrying concealed weapons. If you want "public safety" by carrying a gun, make the law so the gun is publicly exhibited. Yeah, criminals would still have hidden guns; but your gun is quicker to draw. If you want to carry a gun, carry it. Take it to the store with you. Wear it at the mall. Pack it in church. Keep it in easy reach in a bar. I know criminals will have hidden guns; but, I will know where to shop also.
A criminal by definition is one who does not follow the law. Restricting law abiding citizens has zero affect on crime. Allowing law abiding citizens to exercise their constituionally protected rights however, makes criminals think twice about who they victimize. It's reduced crime in 48 States. Soon to be 49.
A Republican Governor is the key to passage in Illinois. Illinois fell about 4 votes shy of passing this law with a veto proof number. What will be needed to make it law is a Govenor that is pro freedom. One that won't veto such legislation.
Anyone that fears being in the presence of law abiding concealed carrying citizens evidently lives solely in the bubble of Illinois. If you've ever left the State, you were most likely in their presence.
I was in Arizona when the "public exhibiting" of guns allowed it's citizens to carry guns. It made sense. I do not want to be around some gun carrying, want-to-be John Wayne. Does anyone have a neighbor that they think should not conceal and carry? If you are that afraid of criminals, wear your gun in public. Let everyone know that you are armed. What are you afraid of? Are you afraid that some people will think that you are a nut? Is that why you want to hide a gun? Otherwise, let the rest of the citizens decide who they want to associate with. What's next? A right-wing ad that says: "Support Conceal and Carry, or We Will Kill You". Put it on a state wide referendum. Let everyone decide instead of a group of paid off legislators, and media.
False statements and misleading by the News-Gazette editorial board:
"As long as Illinois politics continues to be dominated by Chicago politicians, concealed carry remains a very long shot — no matter how popular the notion is to the public at large."
In case the N-G didn't know, the concealed carry bill that failed in the General Assembly earlier this year was supported by a lot of "Chicago politicians." In fact, the only reason it failed is because the bill would overrule home rule authority granted to municipalities and therefore required a 3/5ths majority to pass. Yes, no "Chicago politicans" as from the city proper actually supported the bill, but Madigan allowed it on to the floor, and many suburban "Chicago politicans" voted for the bill.
"With House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton, both Chicago Democrats, in strict control of the legislative process in Springfield, it's hard to imagine any concealed carry bills being allowed to move through the legislative process or surviving a Quinn veto." Again, Madigan allowed the bill to move through his chamber, and he even let the bill be drafted in a rural-dominated committee, the Agriculture committee.
"But it's not that simple. Those who seek to take advantage of these new laws often are required to take a series of steps before being eligible to do so. The most important include gun safety training and background checks."
That is, of course, great, but only if the system works.
Let's also quit pretending that Chicago is just evil place out to get downstaters. Over half the population of the state lives in the Chicago metropolitan area. Over half. That's a majority and its will is allowed to be represented. We can argue all we want over the positives and negatives of concealed carry, but there is no tyranny of the majority here. There's nothing tyrannical at all. Apparently, the will of the majority of Illinoisans is being represented.
As for the "outdoor shooting gallery" comment, the N-G can't possibly believe that with a straight face. In Chicago, like every other area of America and the world, the most crime and the most gun crime occurs in the poorest areas. Areas with no economic prospect, bad schools, and little to no community involvement because they have been largely forgotten by, and occasionally patronized by, politicians and policymakers. This allows crime to seep in and criminal organizations to develop. Criminal organizations like to be armed. There's just as much gun crime in these types of areas in Chicago, LA, NYC, Miami, and Houston. The latter four cities are in concealed carry states. Concealed carry is band-aid (maybe a necessary one), but not a permanent solution for crime like its loudest advocates make it out to be. Concealed carry has done nothing for the highest crime areas in those places. Social and economic policy is a curer of many more ills. Consider that the Mafia traffics illegal guns, white supremacist biker gangs do it, black street gangs do it, Hispanic cartels do it. Concealed carry will solve none of these problems. It may help weed off some petty criminals in largely non-urban settings, but again, the best policy in all areas is proactive policing, economic, and social policy. Demagoguery, like this editorial engages in, does nothing but add flames to a debate that needs to be serious and well thought out. A drive-by concealed carry policy does nothing but rearrange deck chairs. The loudest concealed carry advocates, including folks like Rep. Brandon Phelps (D) in the Illinois House, need to be willing to demonstrate with facts why concealed carry is positive policy for the vast majority of Illinoisans, Chicago, suburban, and downstate alike. These same folks also need to be willing to support statewide policy that fights crime on all fronts. Until those days come, everyone, pro-concealed carry and anti-concealed carry alike are just posturing. Just like this N-G editorial.
1. Conceal and Carry Laws are not obnoxious. They are unreasonable and disturbing.
2. Guns are not only seen as a source of crime in Chicago. They are seen as inherently violent in certain circumstance. There are no circumstances when you need to conceal a gun other than when you intend to kill someone. The state should not allow anyone to walk around in public with the intent to kill anyone.
3. Illinois is not ruled by Cook County.
4. Just because someone passes a test and has a clean record does not warrant them having special rights. Lawyers pass bar examines and have often no arrest records, but does that mean that they should be allowed to break the law? Please make arguments with warrants and refrain from stigmatizations and straw men.
5. If all the other states jumped off the Brooklyn Bridge, would that mean that Illinois should jump off the Brooklyn Bridge too? It is illogical to assume that you should do something just because everyone else is doing it.
In sum, please make arguments with warrants.
1. Conceal and Carry Laws are not obnoxious. They are unreasonable and disturbing.
In your opinion, conceal carry laws are unreasonable and disturbing. In my opinion, they permit law-abiding citizens to defend themselves against violent criminals.
2. Guns are not only seen as a source of crime in Chicago. They are seen as inherently violent in certain circumstance. There are no circumstances when you need to conceal a gun other than when you intend to kill someone. The state should not allow anyone to walk around in public with the intent to kill anyone.
In your opinion, there are no circumstances when you need to conceal a gun other than when you intend to kill someone. In my opinion, keeping personal protection firearms concealed...
(a) makes the criminals think extra hard about who might be armed and who isn't. This benefits those who choose not to carry firearms as well as those who do.
(b) keeps them out of site from overly curious children and potential thieves.
(c) does not mean that the citizen intends to kill. It means that the citizen intends to not be killed, raped, or maimed by a violent criminal.
3. Illinois is not ruled by Cook County.
In theory, I agree. In practice, the dense population of Cook County means that it contains a higher concentration of power and influence than the rest of the state.
4. Just because someone passes a test and has a clean record does not warrant them having special rights. Lawyers pass bar examines and have often no arrest records, but does that mean that they should be allowed to break the law? Please make arguments with warrants and refrain from stigmatizations and straw men.
First off, these are not "special rights" -they are rights that we all start out with under the U.S. Constitution. That aside, your Lawyer example is highly fallacious. IF a state has concealed carry laws permitting citizens to obtain permits, AND a citizen passes the required proficiency tests and background checks to obtain the permit, THEN that citizen would not be breaking the law by carrying a concealed firearm.
Please refrain from accusing others of using fallacious arguments by using fallacious arguments yourself.
5. If all the other states jumped off the Brooklyn Bridge, would that mean that Illinois should jump off the Brooklyn Bridge too? It is illogical to assume that you should do something just because everyone else is doing it.
It is just as illogical to assume that we should NOT do something because others ARE doing it.
We can, however, look to other states where such laws have been enacted already to see that politicians' assertions that citizens would become Wild West types with shootouts over parking spaces are not based on any real data. If these laws were not working out in other states, why are they not being repealed? Why instead are many states expanding them?
Tom, I can understand that you yourself see no need to ever defend yourself or your family from a violent criminal attack. For myself, I know that criminals have guns, knifes and other deadly weapons. I don't like the State telling me that I cannot defend myself or my family from violent assault.
Criminals already carry concealed weapons now matter how strict the gun control laws are. Criminals steal guns and buy guns from other criminals. Criminals do not undergo background checks or adhere to waiting periods for obtaining their guns. Gun control laws, including laws against concealed carrying, only restrict the rights of responsible law-abiding citizens.
Here in Illinois, criminals can shoot indiscriminately at anyone they wish to shoot. They know that law-abiding citizens are not armed, and now they also know that Illinois has no threat of death penalty. This leaves law-abiding citizens like myself and my family more vulnerable to violent attacks here than in other states.
There are excellent training classes in Central Illinois for safe handling of firearms and for their use in personal protection. Folks in these programs learn how to keep their firearms safe from curious children and other unauthorized users. These classes also teach ways to try avoiding confrontations while remaining prepared for them only as a last resort.
I agree that Cook County will fight with every resource available against Illinois citizens having the right to defend themselves. Here in Illinois, we responsible, law-abiding, tax-paying citizens do not have the right to defend ourselves or our children from violent attack outside the home.
We are more vulnerable than citizens in other states, and that seems to be exactly how the folks running Cook County like it.
Tom Skelton,
I was just wondering what you mean by "special right". The right to keep and bear arms is not special, it is an enumerated, individual, fundamental right that was re-affirmed in the bill of rights and upheld by SCOTUS twice.
For you folks who are so scared of conceal carry I just wonder, have you traveled outside the state of IL any time recently?
Keep in mind that maybe not a majority but an awful lot of us who would apply for an IL ccw already have ccw from other states such as PA, FL, UT, AZ among others.
Chicago likes for their people to live in fear, they like flash mobs attacking people randomly without fear of reprisal. It means that without an alternative, the people will cry out for more law enforcement. If the people cry out for more law enforcement, it would logically follow that more taxes and administration are necessary, more revenue flowing, more union jobs that owe their livelihood to the powers that be, more power, more power, more power. That is, ladies and gentlemen, how the Chicago Machine has and always will work. Welcome to Illinois.
Sid Saltfork,
I can't speak for all propents of right to carry but personally the reason I don't care for open carry is there are too many folks like yourself who make "man with a gun calls" to police. It happens quite a bit in open carry states like PA for example.
In addition to that reason I just don't have a desire to flawnt it about, cover up and shut up is my motto. I tried open carry when we were in TN last summer and it lasted all of 5 minutes, I just felt like I had a big spotlight on me, so I covered back up.
If everyone just covers up, we know we have protection, you don't see it so you don't get all freaked out and everyone is happy.
PS - it was none other than Rahm Emmanuel, before he was mayor, who said "Never let a good crisis go to waste". It is an excellent opportunity to amass new power, write new laws that couldn't have been written before i.e. The Patriot Act, The Military Commissions Act, Patriot Act II...
I share the pessimism, as a lifelong Chicago resident, in the ability of this State to EVER allow its citizens all of the Bill of Rights enjoyed by the rest of the country. Obviously we the sheeple get the government we deserve and keeping voting back into office.
But to continue the utter nonsense of otherwise law abiding citiznes suddenly turning into rampaging criminals simply because they were carrying the means for self protection defies all logic and an entire country filled with decades of examples to the contrary. The law abiding OBEY the laws, hence the descriptive 'law abiding'.
I too hold a permit to carry a concealed firearm in most of these United States, and do so every time I cross the border into the land of the free (Indiana) and beyond. If any of the critics have ever ventured outside this nanny State, they HAVE been standing next to good folks who also happened to be carrying a concealed firearm for their personal protection. I suspect they were not then witness to those folks turning criminal?
What makes Illinoisans so irresponsible they cannot be allowed the same RIGHTS as everyone else?
RandyP. I agree. I would like to know where all this wild west is at or people in stores shooting at each other. I guess these people doesn't go outside of the state than because 49 states has concealed carry. the only reason the antis are fighting so hard in this state is because the other state kicked them out, because they want there rights. face it we will have the right to bear arms its our RIGHT not for you to say other wise.
Interesting Editorial and comments.
For those of us old enough to remember when you could carry a concealed weapon in Illinois (in some jurisdictions) and there was no waiting period to buy a firearm and you didn't need a special identification card to own a firearm, that all came to a screaming stop in 1968 when the Reverend Doctor King was murdered. The first Mayor Daley was terrified of an inner city insurrection and made sure Illinois laws were changed during the Constitutional Convention in 1970. His own son, Richard the II was a delegate amd made sure "those people' would never be able to legally own guns.
Anyone who does any research on the history of firearm ownership in Illinois knows that the basic cause of our restrictive gun laws were originally racial in nature and that is still true today.
I was a white suburban police officer in Cook County then and if I am aware of it, why aren't the African-American legilslators of Cook County and Chicago aware of it?
But more sinisterly, maybe they are aware and just putting their own priorities over the constitutional rights of their constituients.
The right to be armed and having the ability to defend yourself should not be restricted to a single class or race. It's time for the American citizens of Cook County and Chicago to stand up for themselves and demand the rights the Constitution guarantees to all Americans..
Well after I read all of your comments, it seemed pretty clear. I believe all of you with your individual arguments, and logic summed up the the representation of Hide Your Gun legislation. Put the bill to a public referendum so everyone can decide for themselves. Yep, your responses show what kind of people support hidden guns. Once you get your way, you can carry them to your kid's Christmas program at the school. You can carry your hidden gun to the football games, to church, to the store, and to the doctor's office. God forbid if people would look at you carrying your gun in public. It might make you insecure. Most will have to buy pants with bigger pockets though. You will need them to impress people with your hidden Model 1911-A. I doubt that most of you ever even got into a fist fight. One that made you so enraged that you couldn't remember the details later. Well some people out there have. They will have their hidden guns also. Businesses will have to have signs saying: "Check Your Guns At The Door"; but you all will object to that also since it is your confused right to bear arms. Glad that you are planning to protect the rest of the citizens from the bad guys, and the government. Better buy more bullets before they run out again. The black helicopters have been flying at night. New internment camps are being built underground now. Camo clothing has hidden symbols. Better get ready, ha, ha, ha...........
Sid,
Carrying a firearm makes you responsible for your actions. I cannot be responsible for you; you cannot be responsible for me.
It’s an overused example but still an apt one,
People drive drunk every day in every city of the US. Are you afraid of being on the road? How many people die every day to a texting related accident? Is that lady putting on makeup noticing she just drove through a four way stop sign? What about that guy who is half in my lane while resting his eyes? I can ponder these things all I want but ultimately I am responsible for only myself and passengers while driving. I cannot drive everyone’s car for them. Accidents will happen and people will get hurt, all I can do is be sure in my ability to react and respond accordingly. I am a responsible driver.
The same is true about firearms. Not everyone should be able to carry, or even own a firearm. The same holds for owning a car. I will never question the want to license for this reason. But if they qualify for a license it should be given until it is proven they are incapable of having it.
I have never gotten into a fist fight where I have been so enraged I couldn’t remember the details. I’m not sure I could even contemplate a situation that happening. (I am responsible for my actions) I have although, been in a situation where a firearm was used to protect family members from certain harm from a violent criminal. A firearm owned by a responsible person SAVED my family members lives. It was an unfortunate situation but it does happen.
I am fine being surrounded by people with firearms at church, the store, or doctor’s office. For those times where it is questionable, it’s nice to know I have an extra option at my disposal that I can use accordingly. It’s my responsibility to make sure I take the correct action.
We are the only place left that dictates your own responsibility for you in this matter. IL needs to grow up and trust it's own citizens.
I have a FOID card, and a gun. I keep my gun in a secure location in my house. It is for home protection. I could carry it with the clip out of it in the glove compartment of my vehicle if I felt the need to do so. Your argument is that people should have the right to carry hidden guns to protect themselves from other people with hidden guns. More hidden guns makes the problem worse. Public display of guns lets everyone know you are carrying a legal gun. One of the previous comments indicated that they felt like a "spotlight was on them" when they carried their gun in public. The "spotlight" was the rest of the public wondering if he was a "gun nut". Times are not so bad that we all have to wonder who is carrying a gun. You may feel the times warrant it. You seem okay with hidden guns being carried in church, stores, and schools. I don't feel the same way. You talk about "responsible" gun owners; but you, also, mention drunken drivers. We have a problem with D.U.I.'s so that makes it okay for hidden guns? When I submitted my F.O.I.D. card application, a background check for felonies was done. That was it. There was no required training program as for hunting. There was no interview to determine if I believed in UFOs. Anyone can get a gun except those found guilty of a crime. What do people do with their old guns? You can buy a bunch of guns if you want. Where do you think the "criminals" get their guns? Where do all of the guns purchased end up... Mexico? My point is that the issue should be on a statewide referendum for people to vote on. It should not be in the hands of corrupt, pandering politicians. People who disagree with your view should have a right to decide for themselves. For me, I do not want people carrying hidden guns in public places because they feel the need to have a hidden gun since others around them may have hidden guns. Are you really okay with hidden guns being carried in your kids school, where your wife shops, and in church? The whole thing is insanity brought on by the gun industry, pandering politicians, and gun nuts. The rest of us have a choice through voting; but you don't want that.
Right on, Sid.
I see the 'guns save life' members are out in full force. How stupid is that saying, anyway? Guns don't save lives, they take lives. What they really mean to say is that 'my gun might save my life by taking your life.' Defibrillators saves lives, seat belts save lives, antibiotics save lives...guns do not save lives.
Here's an interesting website that tells the other side of the story that rarely gets told.
That's a good source, but I'm sure it won't change the minds of people who don't feel safe outside unless they have a gun. These are the same people who say Champaign is experiencing rampant crime and violence. In short, they are unconnected to reality and want the rest of us to just deal with their paranoia and allow them to pack heat wherever they want to -- everywhere.
They want to carry their guns in parks and playgrounds and malls. But of course, they're 'responsible' so none of them will ever drop or lose their guns in a public place where kids can find them. And their subsequent premise is flawed as well: turning a robbery into a multiple shooter public gun fight does absolutely nothing to help anyone and ramps up the chances of people being killed. What if the 'responsible' concealed carrier misses and hits an innocent bystander? What if the cops arrive and shoot the 'responsible' concealed carrier? What if multiple 'responsible' concealed carriers pull out their guns and start shooting each other?
The link shows that -- at least -- 319 people have been murdered by 'responsible' concealed carriers. Why would we want to add to that number by allowing frightful people with compensation needs to carry hidden guns in our public spaces?
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.