Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

premium

(3,731 posts)
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 01:06 AM Jul 2013

Illinois: Quinn expected to use amendatory veto powers on concealed carry bill

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-quinn-gun-bill-0702-20130702,0,5126598.story

Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn intends to take action Tuesday on legislation that would allow guns to be carried in public, and he's widely expected to insert changes to the bill to try to put in place stricter regulations.

While Quinn would not say Monday what he plans to do with the concealed carry measure, sponsoring Rep. Brandon Phelps said the governor's office told him that Quinn would rewrite the proposal using his amendatory veto powers.

Quinn is a staunch gun-control advocate who has decried the federal appellate court decision that struck down Illinois' long-standing concealed carry ban. The ruling forced lawmakers to strike a compromise to set up rules on who can carry guns and where before a court-ordered deadline expired and left a lack of regulation on the books.

But the legislation lawmakers approved did not include a number of restrictions pushed by Quinn, including a statewide ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. It's unclear what changes Quinn plans to make, but Phelps said he believed limiting the number of rounds that could be carried in a gun is at the top of the governor's list.


This is going to be interesting, Majority leader Madigan has already warned Quinn not to mess with the bill, he has more than enough votes to deliver a stinging politically embarrassing override of Gov. Quinn's amendatory veto.

Phelps said he expects lawmakers to return to Springfield next week and override the governor's changes. The concealed carry legislation passed with veto-proof majorities in both the House and Senate. Quinn has suggested they come back to Springfield on Monday to deal with public employee pension reform. That's also one day before the concealed carry ban is set to expire.
146 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Illinois: Quinn expected to use amendatory veto powers on concealed carry bill (Original Post) premium Jul 2013 OP
How... anti-democratic. appal_jack Jul 2013 #1
Especially going against Mike Madigan, premium Jul 2013 #2
And whose daughter is after the Gov's job ExCop-LawStudent Jul 2013 #20
He's put himself into a lose-lose situation premium Jul 2013 #22
He's not supposed to be very bright ExCop-LawStudent Jul 2013 #24
The old saying applies, premium Jul 2013 #25
Rep. Phelps just filed to override the veto ExCop-LawStudent Jul 2013 #26
I like both options. premium Jul 2013 #27
So far, 6 or 7 state senators have called for an override of the veto ExCop-LawStudent Jul 2013 #28
As I understand it, the Legislature could also approve the amendments with petronius Jul 2013 #31
It was one or the other option ExCop-LawStudent Jul 2013 #36
You are correct DonP Jul 2013 #37
I know BainsBane Jul 2013 #3
I know, premium Jul 2013 #7
So are you saying it's illegal? BainsBane Jul 2013 #45
It's perfectly legal- you just don't like it. friendly_iconoclast Jul 2013 #54
Try to follow the plot BainsBane Jul 2013 #55
Ah, I stand corrected. friendly_iconoclast Jul 2013 #56
Yes, I do know what the law does BainsBane Jul 2013 #57
You're amazing, premium Jul 2013 #64
"If they are following the proper procedure, what's the problem" BainsBane Jul 2013 #68
That's a pretty crappy thing to say about a lot of elected Democrats DonP Jul 2013 #8
This one doesn't need facts, premium Jul 2013 #9
Tell me the secret of how that poster does it, and Eleanors38 Jul 2013 #39
I'm a Democrat who argues Democratic policy positions BainsBane Jul 2013 #48
whereas you have petty gossip BainsBane Jul 2013 #46
What fucking country do you live in? BainsBane Jul 2013 #50
"What fucking country do you live in?" Jenoch Jul 2013 #61
How do you figure that? BainsBane Jul 2013 #71
Asking somebody that question is insulting. Jenoch Jul 2013 #73
I have insulted policy and positions BainsBane Jul 2013 #75
I didn't even read the post to which you replied. Jenoch Jul 2013 #79
The jury clearly disagreed with you. BainsBane Jul 2013 #82
That is not surprising in the least. Jenoch Jul 2013 #85
Actually I'm trying to put together the money to get the bullet holes out of my car BainsBane Jul 2013 #51
couple of drug dealers having a business dispute? gejohnston Jul 2013 #60
Probably I pissed off a couple of gun nuts with CCW BainsBane Jul 2013 #70
I seriously doubt that. gejohnston Jul 2013 #72
How do you know they were drug dealers? BainsBane Jul 2013 #74
How do you know they were CCW holders? Jenoch Jul 2013 #76
I don't BainsBane Jul 2013 #77
If you have Jenoch Jul 2013 #81
Oh, I'm just going based on what you've written before BainsBane Jul 2013 #83
That was one thread and I admitted Jenoch Jul 2013 #88
I'll pass, thanks anyway. BainsBane Jul 2013 #90
no, just playing the law of probabliity. gejohnston Jul 2013 #78
This was a .45 BainsBane Jul 2013 #80
Why did it fail? Jenoch Jul 2013 #62
As you know there are a lot of hunters BainsBane Jul 2013 #69
I do not remember specifically what was in the bill that caused it to fail. Jenoch Jul 2013 #146
Actually, he's a 'unitary executive' going against a Democratic legislature. n/t appal_jack Jul 2013 #44
The "principle of democracy" BainsBane Jul 2013 #47
if the gun mob is so proud of their packing let them wear em where ppl can see 'em nt msongs Jul 2013 #4
Because we don't want the faint of heart to get all scared, it is to protect you from what you oneshooter Jul 2013 #10
So you're for open carry?? CokeMachine Jul 2013 #21
Okay, I'll try this. (ahem). Which would you prefer? Eleanors38 Jul 2013 #41
As I understand from my googling, the amendatory veto can be over-ridden petronius Jul 2013 #5
3/5 to over ride, a simple majority to agree with AV DonP Jul 2013 #11
It's my opinion that Gov. Quinn is in for a political ass kicking, premium Jul 2013 #12
This is all about politics and the Democrat Primary for Governor next year DonP Jul 2013 #13
wonder what his reason for keeping people defenseless is? ileus Jul 2013 #6
the will of the people wanted GC legislation jimmy the one Jul 2013 #14
You just can't bring yourself to admit that premium Jul 2013 #16
Choose one story or the other DonP Jul 2013 #17
red herring pie jimmy the one Jul 2013 #18
Your garbled, misdirected posts are just not worth bothering with. DonP Jul 2013 #19
"inform you" BainsBane Jul 2013 #53
Got a link to your claim of 60-66% premium Jul 2013 #23
So rather than sign/amend a sensible piece of legislation mandated by the courts...the Gov puts on truebrit71 Jul 2013 #15
glorified 'push' poll jimmy the one Jul 2013 #29
You are so predictable, premium Jul 2013 #30
ROFL!!!! "Sounds like you haz a sad"... truebrit71 Jul 2013 #34
Thank you, thank you, premium Jul 2013 #35
Actually polling data shows the downstate folks BainsBane Jul 2013 #49
Holy shit clffrdjk Jul 2013 #63
So sorry to display emotion BainsBane Jul 2013 #86
Wrong clffrdjk Jul 2013 #95
The emotional trope is a common one BainsBane Jul 2013 #98
So you know for a fact clffrdjk Jul 2013 #101
More guns mean more gun violence BainsBane Jul 2013 #103
gun death is different than gun violence gejohnston Jul 2013 #105
I refuse to discount suicides BainsBane Jul 2013 #109
For me, I glad the guy missed his target CokeMachine Jul 2013 #112
Thank you, Coke Machine BainsBane Jul 2013 #113
Your Welcome!! CokeMachine Jul 2013 #115
That chart has nothing to do with CCW holders premium Jul 2013 #108
Suicides count BainsBane Jul 2013 #110
They count for the people that it affects premium Jul 2013 #116
Those deaths are part of gun fatalities BainsBane Jul 2013 #118
But they're not criminal use of a firearm premium Jul 2013 #119
It doesn't have to be criminal to be deadly BainsBane Jul 2013 #125
Systematically trying to discount human life BainsBane Jul 2013 #111
Human lives are all significant -- CokeMachine Jul 2013 #114
How do you propose to do that? BainsBane Jul 2013 #121
And I am sick and tired of your falsehoods about what we do or don't discount, premium Jul 2013 #117
You just said they don't count in the total of gunshot victims BainsBane Jul 2013 #120
Wrong, why are you lying about what I said? premium Jul 2013 #122
I just pulled my hamstring trying CokeMachine Jul 2013 #123
I have tried, and tried, and tried to be civil with her premium Jul 2013 #124
If that's what you call civil BainsBane Jul 2013 #129
Tell me what I misunderstood then BainsBane Jul 2013 #130
You said suicides should not be counted in the total because they are not criminal BainsBane Jul 2013 #126
No,the VPC is counting CHL holders suicides as a criminal act, premium Jul 2013 #127
If you want me to understand, please spell out your acronyms. BainsBane Jul 2013 #128
Sorry, I thought you knew what VPC was. premium Jul 2013 #133
I knew that one. It's the rest I don't understand BainsBane Jul 2013 #134
Whoops, damned fat fingers, old age sucks. premium Jul 2013 #136
So back to your original point BainsBane Jul 2013 #137
Jeeez, can't you get it right? premium Jul 2013 #139
Mother Jones cites their sources BainsBane Jul 2013 #138
The VPC isn't the source for the data BainsBane Jul 2013 #135
Clearly I have no credibility with you BainsBane Jul 2013 #132
Well, let's look at this for a second, premium Jul 2013 #66
Who is working to make sure they have access to guns? BainsBane Jul 2013 #89
Oh, that's right, I forgot, premium Jul 2013 #91
I'm all for legalization or decriminalization BainsBane Jul 2013 #93
Effective? No, premium Jul 2013 #94
What are LEA's? BainsBane Jul 2013 #96
My apologies, premium Jul 2013 #97
The private industrial prison complex is the real winner BainsBane Jul 2013 #99
We have one of those CCA private prisons premium Jul 2013 #100
I agree, only then could we undertake a fair BainsBane Jul 2013 #102
Have you considered getting people in Chicago to stop killing kids in general? Might help. n/t Decoy of Fenris Jul 2013 #67
Yeah, the Mayor and Police are working on that BainsBane Jul 2013 #87
Well, it ain't because of a gun ban, premium Jul 2013 #92
and you know that how? BainsBane Jul 2013 #104
because the drop started years after the ban was overturned. gejohnston Jul 2013 #106
Because Chicago's gun ban was overturned premium Jul 2013 #107
So when you guys cite Chicago as evidence of the ills of gun bans BainsBane Jul 2013 #131
Wow! premium Jul 2013 #140
It was a question, not an accusation. BainsBane Jul 2013 #141
Ok, that's a fair question, premium Jul 2013 #142
You still haven't answered the question BainsBane Jul 2013 #143
Oh, come on, premium Jul 2013 #144
They cite their sources BainsBane Jul 2013 #145
Another Yawn!! CokeMachine Jul 2013 #32
Post removed Post removed Jul 2013 #33
Except at this point, none of that matters ExCop-LawStudent Jul 2013 #38
I liked what he said about the NRA today lunasun Jul 2013 #40
Gov. Quinn? premium Jul 2013 #42
Like anyone cares what the NRA says. CokeMachine Jul 2013 #43
Sure, you don't care what they say BainsBane Jul 2013 #52
Oh, it's you again CokeMachine Jul 2013 #65
LOL BainsBane Jul 2013 #84
Icon - error, error, error jimmy the one Jul 2013 #58
haz mats jimmy the one Jul 2013 #59
 

appal_jack

(3,813 posts)
1. How... anti-democratic.
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 01:17 AM
Jul 2013

Try to incorporate an assault weapons ban and a magazine limit into a concealed carry bill passed with veto-proof majorities? This is not the way to win friends and influence people!

-app

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
2. Especially going against Mike Madigan,
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 01:19 AM
Jul 2013

who is probably the most powerful politician in IL., it's really not a good idea to piss him off.

 

ExCop-LawStudent

(147 posts)
20. And whose daughter is after the Gov's job
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 01:19 PM
Jul 2013

Not especially bright.

If overridden (which someone said Mike Madigan would push through), he's viewed as infective.

If not accepted by a simple majority, the bill dies and court-ordered carry goes into effect, without a permit, and he looks like an idiot.

Three options, two of which (the more likely two) make him look stupid, so what does he do? Slams the hammer down on his thumb.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
25. The old saying applies,
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 02:53 PM
Jul 2013

It's better to be silent and let people think you're an idiot then to open your mouth and prove them right.

 

ExCop-LawStudent

(147 posts)
26. Rep. Phelps just filed to override the veto
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 03:01 PM
Jul 2013

This cuts it down to two options.

1. The legislature overrides the veto and the bill becomes law as originally written and Quinn looks like an idiot; or

2. The legislature fails to override the veto and the bill dies, meaning the court order allowing any carry (open or concealed, without a permit) goes into effect, and Quinn looks like an idiot.

petronius

(26,580 posts)
31. As I understand it, the Legislature could also approve the amendments with
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 03:27 PM
Jul 2013

a majority vote - how would that work? Can any member file to bring that option to a vote, or just the original sponsors, or just the leadership?

You all have a really interesting system there in Illinois: both 'home rule cities' within a state and amendatory vetoes are pretty foreign to me...

 

ExCop-LawStudent

(147 posts)
36. It was one or the other option
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 04:04 PM
Jul 2013

I don't believe so based on the Rules of the Illinois General Assembly and Illinois Senate.

It looks like Phelps, as the sponsor, make the call under GA Rule 79.

I'm not sure, because I'm not from there and not all that familiar with amendatory vetoes - this is based on my reading of the rules and the state constitution. If someone from there knows more, please don't hesitate to pipe in.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
37. You are correct
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 04:16 PM
Jul 2013

The original bill's sponsor gets to decide which version is voted on, the original or the AV version. Quinn's AV version is so dead it's already starting to stink the place up.

And Brandon Phelps is already on the record as referring to Quinn as "Irrelevant".

Besides, Mike Madigan needs the support of all the downstate Dems for Lisa's primary campaign next year, since Bill Daley was just "heartily endorsed by his good friend Michale Bloomberg".

All Quinn wants is to look into the cameras like a basset hound and tell voters, "I tried to protect the children for you".

I wonder how many donations our activism group is sending Quinn this week to show their support?

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
3. I know
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 02:25 AM
Jul 2013

How awfully for a democratically elected Governor to use his constitutional powers against corporate interests. What is the world coming to?

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
7. I know,
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 09:11 AM
Jul 2013

how awful that the IL legislature use their state constitutional powers to against a Gov. that goes against the will of the people.
What is the world coming to?

Apparently you don't know what you're talking about, again,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12623624#post2

He's doing an amendatory veto, which changes the original intent of the bill, the IL House and Senate do have the 3/5 vote to override his amendatory veto, actually, more that 3/5 in both chambers, and Mike Madigan has already warned Gov. Quinn about this.
This is going to be fun watching Gov. Quinn getting embarrassed. The days of the Chicago pols. dictating to the rest of IL are over.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
45. So are you saying it's illegal?
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 02:27 AM
Jul 2013

If it were the other way around you'd be fawning all over him.

There are procedures for overriding a veto. Sure, you're a big supporter of Democracy, as long as it's bought and paid for by the gun lobby. The Scalia court sure has been friendly to you folks: money is speech and the federal government can't institute firearm bans. You had no trouble with SCOTUS overriding the democratic vote of the people of Washington, DC. through Heller. Let's not pretend this is about anything but more guns.

 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
54. It's perfectly legal- you just don't like it.
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 04:28 AM
Jul 2013

And unless and until you can point out what Fat Tony has to do with this (which is nada, btw), you've just
chucked an associational fallacy into this for some reason known only to yourself...

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
55. Try to follow the plot
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 04:31 AM
Jul 2013

Premium accused me of opposing democracy. He railed about the tyranny of the veto. I asked if he was asserting the veto was actually illegal.

 

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)
56. Ah, I stand corrected.
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 04:45 AM
Jul 2013

You seem to be upset that Chicago will apparently have to follow the laws dictated by the larger state,
instead of the reverse which was usual for decades.

Fear not, as Illinois and Chicago will in most likelihood undergo the same fate as every other state
and large city that has gone "shall-issue": No increase in violent crime.

Of course, there will of course now be lots of citizens committing the 'sin' of carrying legally concealed
handguns, so all the evangelistic types will be aghast.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
64. You're amazing,
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 12:51 PM
Jul 2013

I never said it was illegal, and guess what, the IL legislature will be using the proper procedures for overriding the veto according to the IL state constitution, which seems to bother you. Why? If their following proper procedure, then what's the problem?
Is it because it will undo the amendatory veto of Gov. Quinn concerning guns?
That's right I had no problem with the Heller decision, it was clearly unconstitutional, don't like it, tough, I really don't care.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
68. "If they are following the proper procedure, what's the problem"
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 01:51 PM
Jul 2013

Exactly, only it was you who had the problem with the Gov using his constitutional right to veto. I was not the one who accused another of being anti-democratic.

Sorry to interrupt the gossiping. Carry on.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
8. That's a pretty crappy thing to say about a lot of elected Democrats
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 09:57 AM
Jul 2013

Both the House and the Illinois Senate have Super majorities of Dems in control.

So are you saying they were all bought off by the evil NRA and their Corporate overlords, or just a majority of them to vote for this bill? Please share the names of the crooked Dems too. I'm sure you know every one that voted for this, including that evil sponsor of the CCW bill Brandon Phelps (D).

Please tell us more about your in depth knowledge of Illinois politics.

While you're at it, and spewing forth on how horrible the Dem majority in Illinois is, how is your "activism" program going to repeal CCW in Minnesota? Got any bills going up for a vote? Petitions circulating for a recall of CCW? Or just a lot of online hot air?

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
9. This one doesn't need facts,
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 10:03 AM
Jul 2013

she's got emotions, misstatements and downright mis-truths on her side.

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
39. Tell me the secret of how that poster does it, and
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 10:27 PM
Jul 2013

Yet my posts get hidden? You may reply by mail if you wish.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
46. whereas you have petty gossip
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 02:28 AM
Jul 2013

and insults. There was absolutely nothing untruthful about my comment.

One thing about me is I don't lie to a person's face and gossip behind their back. I say what I believe, and I know I have social justice on my side. I don't worship the machinery of death and show complete disregard for human life or anyone's rights other than my own.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
50. What fucking country do you live in?
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 02:42 AM
Jul 2013

How is it possible to be so clueless as to how politics works? Or is it simply that you happen to like the corporate masters calling the shots?

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
71. How do you figure that?
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:02 PM
Jul 2013

Is the Gungeon some altered state of reality where we have to pretend congress and legislatures aren't for sale to the highest bidder?

 

Jenoch

(7,720 posts)
73. Asking somebody that question is insulting.
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:08 PM
Jul 2013

That's not civil discourse. You claimed not to make insults on these threads. You may not have made a personal insult to me, I don't recall, but you have made generalizations that can be considered as insults. You seem to put every gun owner in the same category whether they agree with you on many issues or not.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
75. I have insulted policy and positions
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:11 PM
Jul 2013

I have no made any personal insults, unlike others who have insulted me and gotten threads hidden.

What country do you live in is an expression. The poster's bizarre pretense of shock that a legislature might be subject to corporate influence was disingenuous at best.

 

Jenoch

(7,720 posts)
79. I didn't even read the post to which you replied.
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:13 PM
Jul 2013

I just saw your insulting reply and you had just written a post implying that others use insults on these threads and you do not.

There are a lot of expressions that are insulting that shouldn't be used here. I'd list a few, but you somebody else might misunderstand my post and assume I intended them for you.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
51. Actually I'm trying to put together the money to get the bullet holes out of my car
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 02:44 AM
Jul 2013

Last edited Wed Jul 3, 2013, 04:25 AM - Edit history (2)

made from a 45 sold by the corporate assholes who buy gun policy for you and ensure people like me live in danger.

The legislature is out of session, but when they were in session I tried to get an expanded background check bill passed. It failed.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
70. Probably I pissed off a couple of gun nuts with CCW
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:01 PM
Jul 2013

Sadly, they took it out on my neighbors too, not just me.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
72. I seriously doubt that.
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:06 PM
Jul 2013

BTW how would you if they have CCW permits or not? You don't owe your connection money do you?

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
77. I don't
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:13 PM
Jul 2013

It was a comment on the other poster's jumping to conclusions. I would have thought the irony was obvious.
Now you're turn to talk about "gangbangers" and "the hood."

 

Jenoch

(7,720 posts)
88. That was one thread and I admitted
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:23 PM
Jul 2013

I should not have written that post in that matter.

If you tell me which neighborhood in Minneapolis in which you live (I'm not asking for an address) you can even name a couple of neighborhoods in Minneapolis and I'll get you the crime stats on a map so you can see the exact location of various crimes such as burglary, robbery, assault, etc. Or, you can ask for the same information from the Minneapolis Police Federation. If you live in a neighborhood where there is frequent gunfire, I can tell you the probability that it was done by CCW holders is rather small. I assume you don't live in Kenwood.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
78. no, just playing the law of probabliity.
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:13 PM
Jul 2013

If a .30-06 round goes through my car door during deer season, it probably came from a hunter that did not take to heart the one of the four rules, specially knowing where the bullet is going to stop.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
80. This was a .45
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:14 PM
Jul 2013

I have no idea who the people were who fired it, other than a witness said they were shooting at a guy running down the street.

 

Jenoch

(7,720 posts)
62. Why did it fail?
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 11:57 AM
Jul 2013

Democrats are in control of both the house and the senate. We have a Democrat in the governor's office. You think only Republicans are pro-RKBA. Numb-nuts Rod Grams took the 8th district because his Democratic U.S. Senate opponent was anti-RKBA. I am in favor of expanded background checks by the way, if the law is written correctly.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
69. As you know there are a lot of hunters
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:00 PM
Jul 2013

Do you know what was in that bill that might have caused it to fail?

 

Jenoch

(7,720 posts)
146. I do not remember specifically what was in the bill that caused it to fail.
Fri Jul 5, 2013, 11:50 AM
Jul 2013

Would you please remind me what was in the bill that was the problem?

I know people who are against changing the background check law. I don't have a problem with extending the law to private sales as long as the resulting procedure is neither too cumbersome nor too expensive. Also, I don't think it should apply to exchanges between family members or loaning a gun to a friend, such as a rifle or shotgun for hunting or self-defense purposes. I guess I could go along with no loaning handguns without a background check.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
47. The "principle of democracy"
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 02:31 AM
Jul 2013

Last edited Wed Jul 3, 2013, 04:27 AM - Edit history (2)

Riiight. If it were a gun control bill you'd be lobbying for a veto. Let's give up the pretense about carrying about legislative process.

Don't worry. There will be always be more guns and more people being shot. There is no danger of America becoming a civilized nation. Your rights to have any and every gun are secure, the rest of our rights to live, not so much.

oneshooter

(8,614 posts)
10. Because we don't want the faint of heart to get all scared, it is to protect you from what you
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 10:07 AM
Jul 2013

don't want to see.

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
41. Okay, I'll try this. (ahem). Which would you prefer?
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 10:33 PM
Jul 2013

Since there are a lot if CONTROLLER/BANNERS who find it disgusting that folks show up somewhere openly displaying guns are you saying, on the other hand, they should?

Respectfully Eleanors38.

petronius

(26,580 posts)
5. As I understand from my googling, the amendatory veto can be over-ridden
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 02:58 AM
Jul 2013

with a 3/5 vote (in both houses?) or accepted by a majority vote (again, both?) - if the Legislature does neither the bill dies completely. It would seem rather foolish for Quinn to send back an amendatory veto without having that majority lined up...

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
11. 3/5 to over ride, a simple majority to agree with AV
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 10:10 AM
Jul 2013

It's actually up to Brandon Phelps, the bill's original sponsor, whether he wants to have a vote on the original or the "Amended" bill. Phelps and Madigan (speaker) have already said they won't allow any changes by the Governor to the carefully crafted compromise bill. There is a special session already scheduled for the 8th and the court designated "cliff" for constitutional carry is on the 9th.

The original vote was well over the 3/5 needed: Senate 45 yea/12 nay/1 Present, House 89 Yea/28 nay/0 present

If they don't over ride and have a passed bill, we go constitutional carry, except for home rule cities that can make up their own laws. That would be a mess and nobody wants that ... except Quinn, so he can say he tried to stop it. In his interview on TV Sunday AM he actually used "for the children" 14 times in less than a 5 minute interview.

(Actually he has totally ignored the general assembly gutted and rewritten the bill from a shall issue CCW to now include a statewide AWB, Magazine ban, 40+ hours of training and a host of other unrelated restrictive new laws. Quinn tried to do this last year with another amendatory veto with the same set of changes and he got his ass handed to him - even the Chicago reps voted to slap him down)

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
12. It's my opinion that Gov. Quinn is in for a political ass kicking,
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 10:23 AM
Jul 2013

both on this bill and when he runs for re-election.
From the good people of The Silver State, good luck out there in the Land Of Lincoln.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
13. This is all about politics and the Democrat Primary for Governor next year
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 10:36 AM
Jul 2013

Quinn was put in as Lt. Gov/ with Blago because he's a well meaning, harmless dunce that does as he's told.

Now he's trying to be his "own man" and going against the very people that put him in office. His only stable constituency has been the Chicago/Cook County machine.

That same machine is run by Mike Madigan, head of the Illinois Democrat party ... who's daughter Lisa is running in the primary against Quinn next year ... as is Bill Daley from Chicago - another familiar Dem name.

Guess how much support Quinn will be getting in that primary? The answer is between zip and nada.

Of course Bloomie could rush in with millions of $ to help him out, but I'm pretty sure he only wants to back sure things where he can be sure of a press conference.

ileus

(15,396 posts)
6. wonder what his reason for keeping people defenseless is?
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 06:49 AM
Jul 2013

Is the criminal element in society the only one he has faith in carrying firearms?

jimmy the one

(2,708 posts)
14. the will of the people wanted GC legislation
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 10:52 AM
Jul 2013

premium: .. how awful that the IL legislature use their state constitutional powers to against a Gov. that goes against the will of the people. What is the world coming to?

Vetoing 'shall issue ccw' goes against the will of the people? what was the nra & republican senators blocking the bg check bill then, sh***ing in the people's faces as well?
How about the senate blocking the awb & supermag bans? all these guncontrol efforts had MAJORITY public support & they were blocked, yet 'you all' seemed happy as larks THEN, that the 'will of the people' got dumped in the crapper.
.. Those GC bills had between 55% to 90% support. The illinois si-ccw bill has, accd'g to a rightwing suspect poll weaskamerica(waa), 52% support & 46% opposition - meaning illinois democrats like 'you all' moreso opposed shall issue ccw in illinois... & you try to spin it that democrats in illinois were all so upbeat about shall issue when they opposed it by clear majority - I'd guess 2 to 1 at least. Evidently 'the will of the people' only applies if it's a progun will, eh?
We Ask America is NOT a legitimate polling firm.. ('WeAskAmerica') is run by the right wing Illinois Manufacturers Assoc(IMA) ..IMA is a right wing corporate lobbying group and has opposed a litany of worker's rights.

..going to be fun watching Gov. Quinn getting embarrassed. The days of the Chicago pols. dictating to the rest of IL are over.

Pfft, republican senators dictated to the rest of the country & 'you all' smirked & applauded, rofl'g. Isn't your comment above a bit hypocritical in light of your recent stances on the fed gun control legislation? If not iyo why not? Shouldn't you have wanted the awb, supermag ban, bgchex as per the 'will of the people'?

donp: how is your "activism" program going to repeal CCW in Minnesota? Got any bills going up for a vote? Petitions circulating for a recall of CCW?

How about 'the will of the people' in michigan?: The reformers -- wanted Michigan to join the growing number of states where carrying a concealed gun is a right -- sneaked the legislation through in a lame duck session (and managed to immunize it from potential referendum).

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
16. You just can't bring yourself to admit that
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 11:16 AM
Jul 2013

your kin in IL lost and lost big time, now the Gov. is going to set himself up to be politically embarrassed,not by repubs, but by fellow Dems, who have a super majority in the House and Senate.

I'm going to sit back with a bag of , and a glass of and enjoy the debacle that is Gov. Quinn and then listen to you and your buddies lament how this wasn't the will of the people and how the evil NRA must have bought off most of the state legislature and this bill is bogus because of outside forces.

But you have a great day anyway.

BTW, 3/4 of your word salad is irrelevant to what I wrote in the previous post.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
17. Choose one story or the other
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 11:58 AM
Jul 2013

Story 1: Every state in the union was forced to enact CCW by the evil and powerful NRA and their Corporate overlords, so all the states run by Dems, like Illinois are just weak and incapable of doing the people's will.

or ...

Story 2: The whole "90% support gun control" thing is total bullshit of the highest order and there aren't enough gun control supporters out there that care enough to repeal CCW in even one state.

Gun control support seems to be highest and most "effective" on anonymous web boards where they can spew nonsense and ... achieve nothing.

jimmy the one

(2,708 posts)
18. red herring pie
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 12:28 PM
Jul 2013

premium ..now the Gov. is going to set himself up to be politically embarrassed,not by repubs, but by fellow Dems, who have a super majority in the House and Senate.

I wouldn't say he's gonna be embarassed by whatever happens, since he'll have the support of about half of illinois voters & perhaps 60% to 66%+ (or more) of voting illinois democrats.

I'm going to sit back with a bag of , and a glass of and enjoy the..

What is this, fill in the blanks? that's all you got, blanks.

DonP Choose one story or the other Story 1: Every state in the union was forced to enact CCW by the evil and powerful NRA and their Corporate overlords, so all the states run by Dems, like Illinois are just weak and incapable of doing the people's will.
Story 2: The whole "90% support gun control" thing is total bullshit of the highest order and there aren't enough gun control supporters out there that care enough to repeal CCW in even one state.


What kind of weird logic & false dilemma is this nonsense? misquoting me again too, a bad habit.
You both ducked the valid concerns of what I wrote & blew smoke from the 2ndA Mythology Ad Hominem pages. Ad Hominem Absurdum.
I guess it must be embarassing for the both of youse, pushed into such tight corners by my concerns, where you only dish out red herring pie.

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
19. Your garbled, misdirected posts are just not worth bothering with.
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 12:44 PM
Jul 2013

Just like that guy shouting unintelligible gibberish on the corner in the park, we just walk by.

In spite of multiple polite attempts to actually inform you, you consistently ignore facts.

You go have yourself a good time somewhere.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
23. Got a link to your claim of 60-66%
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 01:39 PM
Jul 2013

of IL voters supporting him? Because, if that were true, then the IL Legislature wouldn't have such an overwhelmingly veto proof in both chambers.

Here's a poll suggesting you're wrong.

http://www.gunreports.com/news/news/Illinois-State-Rifle-Association-poll-shows-support-for-concealed-carry_2846-1.html?CMP=OTC-RSS

•In the 3rd Senate district, 45.9% of those polled supported concealed carry legislation while 35.3% of those polled opposed such legislation. The 3rd Senate district seat is currently held by Senator Mattie Hunter (D-Chicago).
•In the 14th Senate district, a full 50.6% of those surveyed supported concealed carry legislation while 34% of respondents opposed such legislation. The 14th Senate district seat is held by Senator Emil Jones III (D-Chicago).
•In the 22nd Senate district, support for concealed carry legislation was found to be 47.4% while opposition to such legislation was found to be 35.2%. The 22nd Senate district is currently held by Senator Mike Noland (D-Elgin).
•In the 43rd Senate district, 55% of citizens polled expressed support for concealed carry legislation while 29.3% of those surveyed opposed such legislation. The 43rd Senate district seat is held by Senator A. J. Wilhelmi (D-Crest Hill).

The survey also revealed that between 83% and 88% of citizens polled believe that they have the right to defend themselves and their families from harm. In what will certainly be disappointing news for the Chicago Police Department, only 36.2% of respondents from the 3rd Senate district expressed confidence that police can protect them from being robbed or assaulted. Likewise, only 41.8% of those polled from the 14th Senate district feel that the police are capable of protecting them from harm. All polling results are subject to a +/- 3% margin of error.

Further details about the poll will be made available during a press conference to be held at the Illinois Capitol on Tuesday, March 29th. Final arrangements for the press conference are pending.

"Personal security is a big issue for so many Illinois citizens," commented ISRA Executive Director Richard Pearson. "From our polling data, it is clear that a large majority of citizens believe that they have a right to defend themselves and their families from harm. It is equally clear that a large portion of residents of the senate districts we polled believe that carrying a defensive firearm is a valid way of ensuring that right to self defense."

"We selected these four senate districts for polling because we believe that they serve as a bellwether for both urban and suburban populations on key issues like concealed carry," continued Pearson. "With support for concealed carry this strong in these four districts, it's a given that concealed carry enjoys solid support across northern Illinois and urban centers south of I-80 as well. Legislators in such districts would do well to pay attention to what their constituents are telling them about personal safety and the right of self defense."


But I know that you'll just dismiss this because it was done by the IL. State Rifle Assoc..
 

truebrit71

(20,805 posts)
15. So rather than sign/amend a sensible piece of legislation mandated by the courts...the Gov puts on
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 10:55 AM
Jul 2013

..his crown and completely rewrites it???

Um...how about NO???

Can you imagine the squeals of indignation if a Republican Gov did this?

And just WTF do assault weapons and high-capacity mags have ANYTHING to do with concealed carry...

I'm as Democratic as they come, but this is nothing more than a political stunt that will get over-ridden, and rightfully so...

Please welcome your next Governor of Illinois, Lisa Madigan....

jimmy the one

(2,708 posts)
29. glorified 'push' poll
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 03:12 PM
Jul 2013

premium: Got a link to your claim of 60-66% of IL voters supporting him? Because, if that were true,..

It would help if you learned to read properly; reread where you copied that from & note my qualifier 'perhaps 60% to 66%+ (or more) of voting illinois democrats'..

premium: Here's a poll suggesting you're wrong. >>>>>>>>> Where? where does your 'glorified push poll' done by the (SURPRISE) Illinois RIFLE Assoc suggest I'm wrong? using your own premise of all voters it doesn't even suggest I'm wrong, since there are evidently 55 other illinois districts (tho I don't know the populations therein);

Illinois State Rifle Assoc “Push Poll” Fails to Sway Many Illinois Democrats on Conceal Carry ... Mar29, 2011. Accdg to partial information ... Conducted by We Ask America, the telephone poll surveyed approx 1,000 adults in each of 4 Illinois State Senate districts .. The news release, which did not include the precise questions asked but contained enough information to suggest that the survey was a glorified “push poll”, provided a sample of the poll’s results, results which must be read with some skepticism. For example, the survey reported that between 83% and 88% of citizens polled believe that they have the right to defend themselves and their families from harm. It is a type of set-up question, such as, “Do you love America?” http://illinoisobserver.org/2011/03/29/illinois-state-rifle-association-push-poll-fails-to-sway-many-illinois-democrats-on-conceal-carry/

premium: I know that you'll just dismiss this because it was done by the IL. State Rifle Assoc..

The 'rifle assoc' poll was done by RW WeAskAmerica. HAHAHA! That you give this rightwing poll solid credibility shows your bias. Then the 'rifle poll' tries to gild it's lily by citing poll results from demagogued questions. Barf, & you subscribed to this crap?
I hate now to have to cite WeAskAmerica myself, but it's the only poll I found on illinois shall issue, & it's from april 2013: Chicagoans staunchly opposed concealed carry 69%-29%, suburban Cook Co opposed 52-46. Downstate strongly support 67-32 http://capitolfax.com/2013/04/29/poll-downstaters-dont-care-about-chicago-concealed-carry/

Then pretty simple math- if WAA poll is split 52% support a repub position & 46% oppose; 7 of 10 chicagoans (69% to 29%) opposed shall issue ccw, & they're most all democrats, toss in a mild opposition to ccw from cook co & you're down for the count already, statewide, in that most dems opposed it.

Oh look everybody, donp's doing his impersonation of clint eastwood: You go have yourself a good time somewhere. -- only part you got right is talking to your empty chair.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
30. You are so predictable,
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 03:18 PM
Jul 2013

All this proves is that Chicago is no longer the powerhouse of IL politics, downstater's have finally had enough of Chicago calling the shots for the whole state and are finally taking matters into their own hands.
Well, I say, about time, and it looks like Chicago is not going to be able to stop this in any way possible.

Sounds like you haz a sad.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
49. Actually polling data shows the downstate folks
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 02:39 AM
Jul 2013

don't care what Chicago does with it's own gun laws. That falls to people who live hundreds of miles away who for some reason have a vested interest in seeing more blood of children spilled on Chicago's streets.

 

clffrdjk

(905 posts)
63. Holy shit
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 12:30 PM
Jul 2013

An actual blood in the streets reference. I thought they were just myth or maybe at most exstinct since the last AWB.

Keep pumping those emotions Bain maybe after another hundred thousand lies the next bill will pass.

 

clffrdjk

(905 posts)
95. Wrong
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:40 PM
Jul 2013

Your use of catch phases, intended to stir emotions in others was what I was referring to. I don't see how pumping ones own emotions would make any sense in this context. I really don't care about your emotions or how you choose to express them. What I care about is when you make wild claims intended to stir the emotions of the uninformed, that is just not right.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
98. The emotional trope is a common one
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:43 PM
Jul 2013

used against people who care about the consequences of gun violence. I know guns kill. If that is what you consider to be uninformed, that really is your problem.

I know you don't care about my emotions or anyone else's. That point is obvious. People here care only about guns. They pretend they are rational because they distance themselves from the consequences of the policies they promote. That is not rational; it's disassociation.

 

clffrdjk

(905 posts)
101. So you know for a fact
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:54 PM
Jul 2013

That when one way or the other IL gets CC that the amount of children's blood flowing through the streets will not only increase but that the increase will be directly attributable to CC? And that any increase of children's blood flowing through the streets is desirable to people in power hundreds of miles away? You have facts supporting those assertions?

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
103. More guns mean more gun violence
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 06:01 PM
Jul 2013

That much is clear. Presumably removing the ban will lead to more guns in Chicago, which evidence shows leads to more gun violence.



There have been more than 500 homicides committed by CCW holders. Evidence shows those carrying guns are more likely to get into confrontations and use the gun, as Zimmerman did.

See this info
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fact-check

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
105. gun death is different than gun violence
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 06:07 PM
Jul 2013

unless you are going to say self hangings are rope violence. This chart gives the false impression that Wyoming's murder rate is higher than Florida's. It isn't. Wyoming does have a higher suicide rate, most of which happen to be with guns.
The VPC statistic is bogus because it includes suicides and those in the process.
As for Zimmerman, I have been watching the thing word for word. The State is failing miserably at proving its case or conventional wisdom. Manslaughter, maybe. Murder? no.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
109. I refuse to discount suicides
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 07:24 PM
Jul 2013

I consider it absolutely offensive that you continue to try to deny the importance of those deaths. I'm happy to call hangings rope violence.

If you want to chart actual incidents of gun violence, the numbers will be much higher since they will include non-fatal shootings and those that damage property, such as occurred in front of my house. Shooters don't always hit their intended target.

 

CokeMachine

(1,018 posts)
112. For me, I glad the guy missed his target
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 07:37 PM
Jul 2013

or the person he was shooting at may have been injured or killed. Sorry about your car though!!

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
108. That chart has nothing to do with CCW holders
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 06:21 PM
Jul 2013

and VPC is just as much liars as the NRA.
VPC bogus stats lumps in suicides, cases still going through the court system that haven't been decided yet, as their proof that CCW holders are just as dangerous as criminals.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
116. They count for the people that it affects
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 08:15 PM
Jul 2013

but the VPC is lumping them in with CCW holders who use their firearms in a criminal manner, how, in the world does someone with a CCW killing themselves equate to a criminal?
I stand by my statement, the VPC are just as much of liars as the NRA.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
118. Those deaths are part of gun fatalities
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 10:25 PM
Jul 2013

that you consider it inconvenient for your efforts to justify gun proliferation does not make them liars. Guns are the most lethal method of suicide and turn mental illnesses like depression into fatal diseases. The lethality rate for guns in suicide is around 90%. Compare that to the other most common method, pills, which has a success rate of 5%. Suicides stay in the count.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
119. But they're not criminal use of a firearm
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 10:30 PM
Jul 2013

which the VPC is shamelessly trying to allude to.
If someone want to end their life, that's their business, but the VPC are nothing but liars when they classify CCW holders as criminals because they decided to end it is, IMO, vile and despicable.

Here's an idea, let's concentrate on better mental health care to pinpoint the reasons for suicide instead of making up bullshit stats like both the VPC and the NRA.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
125. It doesn't have to be criminal to be deadly
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 12:28 AM
Jul 2013

A toddler shooting another isn't criminal either. It's still deadly, and it's still part of the horror of gun violence. I have no problem advancing better mental health care, but I think you know full well there is no way this congress is going to authorize anything like that. In the meantime, what you are working on is to make sure those mentally ill people not only have access to weapons, they can carry those weapons in public. Guns are not a God. They are a deadly weapon. They should be treated as dangerous weapons, not something to revere above all else.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
111. Systematically trying to discount human life
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 07:31 PM
Jul 2013

Is appalling beyond words. You people call me an extremist when you explicitly deny the significance of human lives.

 

CokeMachine

(1,018 posts)
114. Human lives are all significant --
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 07:46 PM
Jul 2013

I am all for pro-choice and believe people should do with their bodies as they please as long as it doesn't physically harm others. Maybe instead of focusing just on suicides facilitated by guns we should be looking at all causes and what we can do to fix the underlying problems that cause a large number of people to feel they have nothing to live for.

YMMV

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
121. How do you propose to do that?
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 11:07 PM
Jul 2013

When someone is under inpatient psychiatric care, they don't leave a gun in the room and say let's ignore that method you could use to kill yourself and deal with the underlying problems. They keep the person safe and focus on the behavior that led that person to try to kill him or herself.

You aren't going to magically heal animus in someone's heart of mental illness, but you can make it more difficult for them to act on those urges.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
117. And I am sick and tired of your falsehoods about what we do or don't discount,
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 08:21 PM
Jul 2013

in no way did I ever discount life, all I said was that the VPC is equating a CCW holder committing suicide with criminal mis-use of a firearm, and that's out and out lying by the VPC.
The VPC are just as much of liars as the NRA.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
120. You just said they don't count in the total of gunshot victims
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 11:04 PM
Jul 2013

That is quite literally discounting.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
122. Wrong, why are you lying about what I said?
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 11:14 PM
Jul 2013

I said that the VPC equating CHL holders, who commit suicide to criminals is vile and despicable.
A CHL holder who commits suicide IS NOT A CRIMINAL BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION.

 

CokeMachine

(1,018 posts)
123. I just pulled my hamstring trying
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 11:30 PM
Jul 2013

to figure out how she stretched that. I'm trying to be more civil to her but with this type of bullshit it makes it hard.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
124. I have tried, and tried, and tried to be civil with her
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 11:37 PM
Jul 2013

but, her constant lying about us is getting real old, she's about to become my very first person to be put on ignore.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
126. You said suicides should not be counted in the total because they are not criminal
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 12:33 AM
Jul 2013

That is not a lie. Now you seek to discount even more deaths by deciding only the criminal ones count. There are many guns deaths that are not criminal. That does nothing to mitigate the horror of gun violence, quite the contrary. The fact that a toddler can kill another human being shows just how dangerous guns are. That toddler's actions aren't criminal because it doesn't have the capacity to form criminal content, but the victim is no less dead.

All deaths count. Here is the definition of discount: .

To reduce in quantity or value.
4.
a. To leave out of account as being untrustworthy or exaggerated; disregard: discount a rumor.
b. To underestimate the significance or effectiveness of; minimize: took care not to discount his wife's accomplishments.
c. To regard with doubt or disbelief.

That is precisely what you are doing with the MAJORITY of gun deaths. Accusing me of lying because you don't like to be confronted with what you have just said is an ugly trait.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
127. No,the VPC is counting CHL holders suicides as a criminal act,
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 12:41 AM
Jul 2013

not me, the VPC, and you have seemed to have drank the Kool Aid.
You have zero (0) credibility on the gun issue and you have proven it over and over again.

Have a hell of a good life and live in your fantasy world of the VPC and the Brady Org.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
133. Sorry, I thought you knew what VPC was.
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:08 AM
Jul 2013

it's Violence Policy Center, which the Mother Jones article relies heavily from. The PVC includes suicides and cases that haven't yet been decided to reach the conclusion that +500 CHLO holders have CRIMINALLY USED FIREARMS.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
134. I knew that one. It's the rest I don't understand
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:11 AM
Jul 2013

CHLO? Obviously I misunderstood you. Rather than accusing me of lying, you could explain what you mean in plain English without acronyms.

You see, to me it doesn't matter if the shootings are criminal or not. Those people are still dead. Whether criminal, justified, accidental, or suicide, the guns still kill.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
136. Whoops, damned fat fingers, old age sucks.
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:15 AM
Jul 2013

CHLO was supposed to be CHL=Concealed Handgun License. Sorry for the old age fat fingers.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
137. So back to your original point
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:18 AM
Jul 2013

Let me see if I understand: You assert that the only deaths that should be counted in the toll for gun violence are those adjudicated to be criminal? I thought that's what I said. So what am I misunderstanding?

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
139. Jeeez, can't you get it right?
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:27 AM
Jul 2013

VPC is counting suicides by CHL holders as criminal acts and they are counting shootings not determined as criminal by a court of law, as criminal acts.
VPC is just as much as a liar as the NRA.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
138. Mother Jones cites their sources
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:21 AM
Jul 2013

the VPC is not among them. They cite the CDC, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Small Arms Survey (PDF), UN Office on Drugs and Crime. I did a search for violence and VPC, and the organization appears nowhere in the article.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
135. The VPC isn't the source for the data
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:14 AM
Jul 2013

Mother Jones lists the source: Sources: Pediatrics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

So what are you going on about?

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
132. Clearly I have no credibility with you
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:01 AM
Jul 2013

because I don't support unfettered gun proliferation. No one who supports gun control has credibility with you, as your post above demonstrates.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
66. Well, let's look at this for a second,
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 12:58 PM
Jul 2013

just who is doing the shooting of children in Chitcago? Other kids fighting for control of the drug trade and turf, ending the WOD would go much further in reducing the violence than any gun control law including a ban on firearms, which was already tried. How well did that work out?

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
91. Oh, that's right, I forgot,
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:28 PM
Jul 2013

when Chicago had a gun ban, there were no shootings were there?

You didn't even try to answer my question.
Ending the war on drugs will go much further to reduce violence, and yes, gun violence also, than any gun control law.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
93. I'm all for legalization or decriminalization
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:35 PM
Jul 2013

I've had members here tell me they opposed it, however.

There has never been an effective gun ban in Chicago and you know it. If there were, people wouldn't be getting shot.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
94. Effective? No,
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:40 PM
Jul 2013

but there was a law on the books until McDonald, how well did that work out.
And I am in favor of legalization/decriminalization, but it'll be fought tooth and nail by the LEA's because it's a big cash cow for them.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
99. The private industrial prison complex is the real winner
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:45 PM
Jul 2013

Enormous profits are made from the drug war. As usual, corporate profits are at the heart of the matter.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
100. We have one of those CCA private prisons
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 05:54 PM
Jul 2013

here in my county, one of the guards is a friend of mine and he tells me that the conditions are atrocious.
Private prisons should all be banned and only the govt., Federal/State, should be running the prisons, not that they've done such a good job themselves, but at least, there's some accountability.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
107. Because Chicago's gun ban was overturned
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 06:13 PM
Jul 2013

on June 28, 2010 by the Supreme Court.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._Chicago


McDonald v. Chicago

McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010), is a landmark[1] decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that determined whether the Second Amendment applies to the individual states. The Court held that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms" protected by the Second Amendment is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states. The decision cleared up the uncertainty left in the wake of District of Columbia v. Heller as to the scope of gun rights in regard to the states.

Initially the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit had upheld a Chicago ordinance banning the possession of handguns as well as other gun regulations affecting rifles and shotguns, citing United States v. Cruikshank, Presser v. Illinois, and Miller v. Texas.[2] The petition for certiorari was filed by Alan Gura, the attorney who had successfully argued Heller, and Chicago-area attorney David G. Sigale.[3] The Second Amendment Foundation and the Illinois State Rifle Association sponsored the litigation on behalf of several Chicago residents, including retiree Otis McDonald.

The oral arguments took place on March 2, 2010.[4][5] On June 28, 2010, the Supreme Court, in a 5–4 decision, reversed the Seventh Circuit's decision, holding that the Second Amendment was incorporated under the Fourteenth Amendment thus protecting those rights from infringement by local governments.[6] It then remanded the case back to Seventh Circuit to resolve conflicts between certain Chicago gun restrictions and the Second Amendment



There are a number of reasons for the decline, better policing, gang outreach programs economy slowly getting better offering more jobs, etc.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
131. So when you guys cite Chicago as evidence of the ills of gun bans
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 12:59 AM
Jul 2013

You're ignoring the fact it's not been in effect for three years? I thought they were still trying to enforce it?

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
140. Wow!
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:34 AM
Jul 2013

You asked if I know this how, and when I cite evidence, you come up with this crap?
Unbelievable!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
141. It was a question, not an accusation.
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:35 AM
Jul 2013

Is the ban in effect or not? If it is not, why do you all cite it as evidence of the perils of gun bans?

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
142. Ok, that's a fair question,
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:44 AM
Jul 2013

the ban is no longer in effect and violent gun crime has dropped by 40%, according to you.
So, what does that tell you?
Look, I'm convinced that you are a very passionate women who wholeheartedly believes in her beliefs, which, in of itself, is a good thing, I can respect that, despite my sometimes sarcastic posts, we will clash repeatedly on this issue, but, it has been fun and interesting.
Stay well my friend an have a good night, I'm out of here.

BTW, you give as good as you take.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
143. You still haven't answered the question
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:49 AM
Jul 2013

You are deflecting. You respond to my pointing out inconsistencies in your argument with outrage. If you stuck to the argument, things would go far more smoothly.

You also haven't responded to the fact that the Mother Jones article does not cite the VPC or clarified what you found inaccurate in my representation of your argument.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
144. Oh, come on,
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 01:58 AM
Jul 2013

that so called data from the VPC had been around for year and been debunked for years.
Mother Jones got the so called data from the VPC, it's common knowledge. You can deny it all you want, but the truth is the truth, whether you want to believe it or not.
I'm done for the night. Talk tomorrow.

BainsBane

(53,001 posts)
145. They cite their sources
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 02:00 AM
Jul 2013

You are wrong about where they got the data. You want to dismiss it because you don't like what it says, but they say where the info comes from. I cited it to you in another thread. That is more deflection on your part. If your argument is valid, you shouldn't need to deny information from the CDC and the UN. That's a weak dodge.

Response to jimmy the one (Reply #29)

 

ExCop-LawStudent

(147 posts)
38. Except at this point, none of that matters
Tue Jul 2, 2013, 08:15 PM
Jul 2013

Phelps has filed to override the veto, which means either way, Quinn loses. If the veto is overridden, the shall issue becomes law. If the veto is not overridden, then Constitutional carry becomes law, imposed by the Seventh Circuit. Either way, the AV of Quinn is dead.

Finally, the people of Illinois will have the rights guaranteed them by the Second Amendment.

In the meantime, Mike Madigan has set it up where Quinn looks ineffective and idiotic, paving the way for Lisa's run for Gov.

 

CokeMachine

(1,018 posts)
43. Like anyone cares what the NRA says.
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 01:29 AM
Jul 2013

You got something better from that has been. The court kicked his ass and IL democrats kicked his ass. Are you against fellow Democrats? Inquiring minds want to know!!

 

CokeMachine

(1,018 posts)
65. Oh, it's you again
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 12:56 PM
Jul 2013

To tell the truth, I care as much about what the NRA says as I do about what you say. That would be zilch, nada, zero. Please find someone else to bait -- thank you!!

jimmy the one

(2,708 posts)
58. Icon - error, error, error
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 07:33 AM
Jul 2013

friendly icon: Illinois and Chicago will in most likelihood undergo the same fate as every other state and large city that has gone "shall-issue": No increase in violent crime.

Error Error Error, Above Poster has made Error Error Error.
Probable Reason: Second Amendment Mythology.
Proceed with Corrective, Evidentiary, & Rectification Processes:
C-Several states have seen increases in violent crime rates since passing shallissueccw.
Many mid size to large cities have seen initial &/or permanent increases in violent crime rates since siccw.

Evidentiary: Witness for the prosecution is, Friendly Icon!!!, referring to murder: How 'bout another state with large cities that went 'shall issue'?- Ohio .. Ohio went 'shall-issue' in 2004. Turns out, it's a mixed bag- Cincinnati and Columbus declined, Akron and Cleveland increased.. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3050787
Akron (pop ~210,000, technically mid size city) violent crime rate did increase from 2002 to 2010: 2002 545; -2003 600; -2004 585; -2005 596; -2006 N/A; -2007 751; -2008 917; -2009 928;- 2010 809. >> Akron Ohio has seen a 40% increase in violent crime rate to 2010 since enabling shall issueccw. Also StPaulMN vcrime went up after siccw; Minneapolis; ClevelandOH; TONAMEAFEW. http://www.idcide.com/citydata/oh/index.htm

1 Montana enabled shallissue 1991 & violcrime rate near tripled & now about 2.5X higher (1991 ~150 - 365 - 280, 2011).
2 WVirg siccw 1989 when viol-crime rate ~150 & 316, 2011, doubled.
3 SDakota has had siccw since about the 60's when violcrime rate under 100, since it's steadily risen & now 250, 2011 - still low.
4 NDakota siccw since ~60's when violcrime rate was ~50 & stayed under 100 to 2005 when it dramatically increased & is now 250.
5 Pennsylvania enabled siccw 1989 & vc rate rose & one year was 25% higher than 1989 start year, & remained ABOVE 1989's for 20 yrs & just in 2009 did it drop below. The average for the 23 year period would place pennsy's violcrime rate about 10-15% higher than prior to enabling siccw. http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/mtcrimn.htm


Rectification: RETRACTION RETRACTION RETRACTION NEEDED

jimmy the one

(2,708 posts)
59. haz mats
Wed Jul 3, 2013, 07:46 AM
Jul 2013

TrueBrit to premium: ROFL!!!! "Sounds like you haz a sad"...
...I'm still laughing as I type this!!! Brilliant!!


You've got me confused, truebrit.
You contend that a GROWN MAN saying 'sounds like you haz a sad', is BRILLIANT?
I could agree if it were from a six year old, but a grown man?

I don't think I've ever rolled on the floor laughing (rofl).
What's it like?

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Illinois: Quinn expected ...