Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Howard Nemerov

Bio

June 2, 2013 - 5:42 am

The Illinois legislature has complied with an appeals court ruling that their concealed carry ban was unconstitutional. Governor Quinn hasn’t said whether he’ll sign the bill or not, but the bill had enough votes to override a veto.

The new law instructs the Illinois State Police to issue a carry permit to law-abiding Illinois residents who pass the required 16-hour training and pay a $150 fee (shall-issue law). Gun owner must also have a state-issued Firearms Owner Identification card (FOID) to buy a gun in Illinois. Recently, there have been a record number FOID applications each month, leading to a backlog as police try to process them all. Meanwhile, the University of Chicago ignores their own back yard and continues insisting that gun ownership is declining.

Adding up the expense of buying a carry gun, $10 FOID fee, training class, and $150 application fee, Valinda Rowe, of the group Illinois Carry, expressed concern that this law will deprive poor people from the ability to partake of their civil right of self-defense.

It’s this latter group of people who may need concealed carry the most. Despite inclement weather, Chicago gangs shot eight more people between Thursday afternoon and Friday morning. According to BET:

Chicago’s murder rate is widely considered to be fueled by the drug wars that are fought between the city’s network of gangs. The homicide rate has been largely confined to the city’s south and west areas, African-American bastions of Chicago.

The new carry law is a step forward, but it nevertheless is a gun control law, controlling how and where law-abiding citizens can legally carry. It contains a clause saving Chicago’s “assault weapons” ban. It raises the financial bar for those who want to carry legally, maintaining the imbalance of power in favor of those who ignore laws.

Once again, gun control is shown to be racist. These gangsters didn’t wait for a law to be passed before carrying concealed firearms. Blood’s already running in the streets of Chicago, despite it having the strictest gun control laws in the country. Those suffering the most, poorer American’s of African descent living in Chicago, risk being barred once again from their right to keep and bear arms.

Former civilian disarmament supporter and medical researcher Howard Nemerov investigates the civil liberty of self-defense and examines the issue of gun control, resulting in his book Four Hundred Years of Gun Control: Why Isn’t It Working? He appears frequently on NRA News as their “unofficial” analyst and was published in the Texas Review of Law and Politics with David Kopel and Carlisle Moody.

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (13)
All Comments   (13)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
It's interesting to see anti-gun states like Illinois loosening up on gun controls while the schools do ever crazier things to suppress them. And not just real guns but pictures of guns. And even signatures that look remotely like guns. Someone just pointed out this story on a newsgroup I visit: http://m.now.msn.com/school-says-deaf-boys-name-sign-looks-too-much-like-a-gun

Imagine! A three year old deaf boy having to change his signature because some buffoon thought it looked like a gun!
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Our government does not have our safety as its top priority. Items much higher on the list: to gain more control over our lives and to stick its hand deeper into our pockets. And when it has stick its hand in to the point it pulls out only Lint, it then tells us that it will give some of our money back if we only give-up even more of our rights. Citizens exercising thier 2nd Admend. rights is an anathema to the controling agents in our government and they will resist ferociously. But when they are forced to give in a little then they refer to thier next priority, more money from us to them (which as a by-product is also considered as a punishment to us for standing up to them). So if this is them giving an inch, look for even worse resistance on thier part for us to gain just an inch more (as in no CCW or other gun fees). I'm not saying don't try, but while we're struggling to break down the ANTI-2nd Admend. wall, we must realize there are many other inter-linking parts of the government holding it up. Fight, but fight smart.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
This guys are lucky compared to a lot of states to be able to conceal and carry
Not like CA and all these DEMS power hungry political agenda thinking they are helping Californians and some spineless FFL under the control of the DOJ. Who by passes the amount time allowed until further notice under the current law instructed by the DOJ What a scam.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
If you can pass the current background check, then you should be issued a permit that give you clearance to purchase additional guns in the future without constant checks, you would be able to conceal carry anywhere. We would save millions of $$$ from the checks, and everyone would have a permit if they wanted a gun to carry or buy. No more illegal gun laws. Think about it.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Gridley, why should you have to pay for your right to carry a gun as provided for under the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. If they can charge you $150.00 then they can charge you $1,500. Why not $15,000.00. What about the Americans that can not afford that. Isn't that denying your rights under the Constitution?
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
I never said anyone should have to pay to exercise their civil rights; that's outrageous, and should never be tolerated. What I said was, if lived in Chicago I would do it, even though it's wrong for the government to require it. My life is worth more to me than $150.

When I lived in California, where it's STILL impossible for the average citizen to get permission to carry, I carried anyway, because staying alive was more important to me than having the government's permission. I now live in a "shall issue" state and pay, even though I feel it is wrong, to have the government's permission to carry. It's a matter or practicality.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
test

45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
If I lived in Chicago I'd certainly pony up the $150 "application fee" and whatever else it cost to be able to carry a gun for protection, even if I had to sell my food stamps!
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
It is funny that Chicago finally has to give out CCW permits Only because the courts are forcing them to. Most states require costly permits, etc. to get a CCW and in this Capitallistic world we live in that is acceptable ! As far as the poor people not being able to afford these costs is No problem because they live in a Socialistic World where everything is provided for them including Police protection.(whatever that may consist of)
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
---Adding up the expense of buying a carry gun, $10 FOID fee, training class, and $150 application fee, Valinda Rowe, of the group Illinois Carry, expressed concern that this law will deprive poor people from the ability to partake of their civil right of self-defense.--

And it does.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Where is Jackson. Where is Sharpton. The Black Man must stand up for his Rights under the 2nd Amendment. Don't let the old black men take your rights away. And surely, don't let the white house take your rights away.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Well hey, maybe we should enact a federal program for low income gun owners? ObamaGun anyone?
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
That would be consistent with the ObamaPhone program but completely unthinkable at the same time given the anti-gun hysteria felt by Democrats.

I have no doubt whatever that Obama is going to leave "his people" dependent on the police; he'll never let them arm themselves against the predators within their own communities. He'll take away police protection from whites altogether and concentrate it in the minority communities if he has to rather than let ordinary minority people defend themselves.

Oh my god! Have I just stumbled on the next initiative of the Obama/Holder team? If they can ignore the New Black Panther voter intimidation case because the offenders were black, I suppose it wouldn't be totally ridiculous to imagine them removing police protection from whites and reserving it for minorities....
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All