Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Saturday, October 25, 2008

Coming soon to Illinois towns that have dropped their handgun bans?

In line with my policy of keeping a close eye on the enemy, I was taking a look around on the website of the Illinois Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (ICPGV) last night. For those not familiar with them, they're the Illinois chapter of the rabidly anti-gun Legal Community Against Violence (LCAV).

It turns out they've written what they're calling a "model" gun law for Illinois jurisdictions.

10/24/08 – New Model Gun Law from LCAV for Illinois

The Legal Community Against Violence (LCAV) has developed LCAV Model Gun Owner’s Safety and Responsibility Act for Illinois jurisdictions to require firearm owners’ safety certificates, registration, safe storage of firearms, and reporting of lost and stolen firearms. Visit www.lcav.org to read the model law.
My first thought was that the plan here was to push this law (we'll look at it in a minute) in the state legislature. That puzzled me, because even in Illinois, nothing that draconian is going to pass any time soon.

After some discussion at IllinoisCarry.com, I (belatedly) came to realize that the real idea is to pass this kind of thing in Illinois municipalities (like Evanston, Wilmette, Oak Park, and Morton Grove) that have dropped their handgun bans in the wake of the Heller decision, and others (Winnetka and Chicago) that have not done so yet, but may eventually be forced to.

Sort of like the "emergency legislation" enacted by the Washington D.C. city council immediately after Heller, the idea of this law would be to implement gun laws just as draconian as they could possibly be without an outright ban.

So let's take a quick look at the details (starting on page 20--and running 14 pages--here).
1) Gun owner licensing (with safety training--5 hours of classroom instruction and 2 hours of live-fire training) for each gun, with the license requiring renewal every 2 years (I think the instruction is waived for renewal, but the written test is still required);

2) Registration for every gun, renewal required annually;

3) "Safe storage" (either trigger lock or gun safe) required--having the gun on one's person is no exception;

4) "Lost or stolen" reporting requirements;

. . . and probably stuff I missed or am forgetting. No mention was made of any limit on fees that would be required for the safety instruction, licensing, and registration.

"Only Ones" would, of course, be exempt
Now that's shall not be infringed in action, isn't it?

By the way, LCAV has several other "model gun laws" in mind. Some are standard citizen disarmament fare--"assault weapons" bans, .50 caliber bans, etc., but for anyone who doubts that they want to inflict U.K.-style forcible citizen disarmament on us, note that they apparently want to ban air rifles.
Personalized Handguns
Requires the personalization of handguns – equipping handguns with technology that prevents them from firing when operated by an unauthorized user. Provides testing standards and certification procedures for personalized handguns. Prohibits the manufacture, importation, purchase and transfer of non-personalized handguns.

Assault Weapons
Bans assault weapons using provisions that are more comprehensive than federal law. Also bans large capacity ammunition magazines.

Fifty Caliber Rifles
Prohibits the sale of 50 caliber rifles and cartridges.

Air Rifles
Bans the sale and possession of air rifles, defined to include B-B, air and pellet guns.

Universal Background Checks
Requires background checks on all prospective firearm purchasers, closing a loophole in federal law allowing private firearm sellers (i.e., unlicensed persons) to sell guns without conducting background checks.

Regulating Gun Dealers
Regulates firearms dealers. Supplements federal law by requiring, among other things, that dealers obtain a local permit, conduct employee background checks and obtain liability insurance. Also prohibits dealers from operating in residential neighborhoods and near other “sensitive” areas, such as schools, playgrounds and places of worship. LCAV created models for Illinois and California, both of which can be tailored to other jurisdictions.
Expect to see more and more of this kind of thing in the aftermath of Heller.

More at Days of Our Trailers.


the pistolero said...

2 hours of live-fire training) for each gun
What, do they really think that, say, a Kimber 1911 is that much different than a Springfield 1911?

Kurt '45superman' Hofmann said...

What, do they really think that, say, a Kimber 1911 is that much different than a Springfield 1911?

In fairness, it depends on what they mean by the following, whether or not my take on it is an exaggeration:

ii) Live firing requirement: The applicant must complete at least [two hours] of live firing instruction at a firing range using the type of firearm to be purchased or acquired;

What does "type" mean? Who knows? I think that for California's "safety tests," they require a separate sample even for different finishes within the same model (but I'm not sure about that), so I'm assuming the worst.

B Smith said...

I have a handgun that prevents use by an unauthorized person.
It accomplishes this by putting a small, round hole through the offending party before he (or she) can take my gun away from me.
Some input from the authorized user is required, though.

Anonymous said...

I just made a mistake and read the California State Constitution and found the following:


SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

The above was copied from the California State Constitution. It looks to me like I can own and carry a weapon for my personal safety. Could someone enlighten me about this?

Kurt '45superman' Hofmann said...

That sounds like a reasonable interpretation of that article of the California constitution, but I wouldn't count on it providing any protection for you in court.