Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: It’s just a bill
Next Post: 3,369 new confirmed and probable cases; 22 additional deaths; 2,112 hospitalized; 506 in ICU; 3.6 percent average case positivity rate; 4.3 percent test positivity rate; 118,741 average daily doses
Posted in:
A measure advancing at the statehouse would require Illinoisans to submit fingerprints to get a Firearm Owner Identification Card and increase the costs, among other changes.
House Floor Amendment 1 to House Bill 1091 would bring about many changes, including what proponents say are efforts to modernize the state’s FOID and Concealed Carry License system.
Currently, there are tens of thousands of backlogs of individuals who have paid for their application to be processed, but are waiting months longer than the law allows. The system faces multiple lawsuits in state and federal courts.
Illinois State Rifle Association’s Ed Sullivan said while they support better firearm disposition policies to get guns from prohibited persons whose FOID cards are revoked, they don’t support the proposal of mandating fingerprints for people to exercise constitutional rights.
* Hannah Meisel with the quotable part…
The proposals backed by GPAC also include mandatory universal background checks for private gun sales or transfers unless it’s between immediate family members. Willis described those private sales as a “loophole,” and said her legislation would make it mandatory to go to a federal firearms licensed dealer who can perform a universal background check in order to make a private sale.
But Todd Vandermyde of the Federal Firearms Licensees of Illinois pointed out there are no such gun dealers in the city of Chicago due to local ordinances, and compared that situation with disenfranchising of Black voters.
“What would it be like if we said we’re going to have early voting in the state but there was not a single polling place inside the city limits of Chicago, and all those voters had to go outside to Cook County or elsewhere to vote?” Vandermyde asked. “We wouldn’t accept it. This is a Jim Crow law.”
House Judiciary - Criminal committee chair State Rep. Justin Slaughter (D-Chicago), who is Black, chided Vandermyde for his comparison.
“What we’re not going to do is associate this with Jim Crow laws,” Slaughter said.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 11:13 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: It’s just a bill
Next Post: 3,369 new confirmed and probable cases; 22 additional deaths; 2,112 hospitalized; 506 in ICU; 3.6 percent average case positivity rate; 4.3 percent test positivity rate; 118,741 average daily doses
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
The Jim Crow reference is in poor taste and diminishes his massage. He isn’t wrong about the comparison to concept of disenfranchising voters by not having a polling place in Chicago. But using a very charged term like Jim Crow was a very bad idea.
A better idea would be to get something in the legislation requiring Chicago to allow FFL dealers. He pretty much made sure that will not happen.
Comment by JS Mill Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 11:19 am
When you get any job working for the Feds you have to get your fingerprints taken. I don’t see the big deal.
Comment by Kathy Powers Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 11:20 am
This is the hyperbolic appropriation of a civil rights message to inflame emotion and overrule reason. Preventing a group of people from voting because of their race is no comparison to keeping tools of death from criminals and other dangerous people.
If Todd truly believed in the comparison, he would be condemning the GQP legislatures for instituting ID requirements and other suppression measures. Alas, he wouldn’t dare attack his GQP supplicants.
Comment by Norseman Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 11:32 am
==When you get any job working for the Fed== This is where I have to take off my liberal hat and put on the gunowner hat (yes, some of us have both). Its the principle. This is a constitutional right. Its not applying for a job. If this is the standard..then we should fingerprint voters…maybe a DNA sample. The constitution is inconvenient.
Comment by Anotheretiree Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 11:40 am
Malarkey. There are so many ways to solve this problem. Here’s one: make it possible for the thousands of currency exchanges in the city of Chicago to run the background checks an FFL would normally do. People in city neighborhoods use currency exchanges for everything from license plate stickers to check cashing to notary public stuff. The paperwork aspects of an FFL should present no challenge. Jim Crow indeed.
Comment by Dysfunction Junction Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 11:48 am
I think the principle could be that gun ownership demands responsibility for keeping the weapon safe. When a gun is used in a crime, the owner needs to be located, hence the fingerprints used for owner ID. Responsibility is inconvenient,
Comment by Kathy Powers Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 11:48 am
As much as I think Todd is a goofball prone to ridiculous comparisons, he’s not completely wrong about this one. There are better ways to implement universal background checks. Let’s think outside the box a little for once.
Comment by Excitable Boy Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 11:50 am
I don’t believe Slaughter was in the House when former NRA lobbyist Todd Vandermyde was joined at the hip to concealed carry bill sponsor Brandon Phelps. Vandermyde’s cronies Richard Pearson and Valinda Rowe helped recruit Chicago black man Otis McDonald as the lead plaintiff for the U.S. Supreme Court case that lead to citizen carry in Illinois.
After that when the IL legislature was forced to pass a carry bill, Vandermyde sold out to the police unions and placed Duty to Inform w/criminal penalties in Phelps’ bill, so cops have a pretext to kill any armed citizen they come in contact with. Using black people and then betraying them is Vandermyde’s usual routine. Nothing new here.
Comment by Elmer Keith Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 11:58 am
>But using a very charged term like Jim Crow was a very bad idea.
At least he didn’t equate wearing masks during a pandemic to slavery. Oh, wait.
https://capitolfax.com/2021/04/14/meanwhile-in-effingham/#comment-13392854
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:11 pm
=This is a constitutional right.=
And with every single other constitutional right there are limitations which have been upheld by the supreme court.
I have my FOID and CCL- but i do not see a legit reason against universal background checks. I can live with the inconvenience just like I have to live with “safety checks” on a Friday night.
The GQP should be COMPLETELY supportive of this given their ID to vote desires. It tracks perfectly. I mean voting is also a right, I would argue much much more sacred than the right to be part of a well regulated… err, carry a gun.
Comment by JS Mill Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:14 pm
While I think he has a point about the impracticality of some residents to comply with the draft legislation I’m of the notion that calling something “Jim Crow” is a lot like the Holocaust and Nazi comparisons. Jim Crow like Nazi’s and Holocaust were unspeakable evils, it cheapens them to use them for political points.
But that’s my 2 cents.
On a side note i’m curious what they envision the “Universal Background Check” aspect accomplishing that wasn’t already taken care of when they required ISP to be called and get a confirmation of a purchasers FOID before a transfer? Besides the hassle aspect of the fee and travel it seems to be the same result.
Comment by Mason Born Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:16 pm
What did Todd Vandermyde have to say about Philando Castile?
Comment by Candy Dogood Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:25 pm
Disenfranchising voting… and… requiring a location for something that can be done every single business day.
It’s not the same.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:28 pm
===“What would it be like if we said we’re going to have early voting in the state but there was not a single polling place inside the city limits of Chicago,…===
I’ll have to check my notes, but I don’t remember Todd or other gun rights supporters being outraged by voter suppression/attempts to disenfranchise in Georgia, Wisconsin or elsewhere.
A well regulated militia my &$%. As far as I can tell, they want no regulation whatsoever.
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:29 pm
== when a gun is used in a crime, the owner needs to be located ==
You DO realize the FOID only registers the firearm owner, not the firearm? There is not (or not supposed to be under the law) a database listing every firearm by make / model / serial number / owner.
Comment by RNUG Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:30 pm
Are you really surprised coming from someone like this?
https://www.facebook.com/tvandermyde/posts/4272030306158283
Comment by Shield Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:30 pm
= Willis described those private sales as a “loophole,” =
I would appreciate some examples from Rep Willis. Every single private sale requires the seller to get verification that the buyer has a valid FOID. And the FOID database is checked daily against various FBI and other crime databases.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:33 pm
==There is not (or not supposed to be under the law) a database listing every firearm by make / model / serial number / owner.==
And yet I can go on armslist.com and trade somebody for an Uzi. Something has to change.
Comment by Jocko Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:36 pm
===There is not (or not supposed to be under the law) a database listing every firearm by make / model / serial number / owner.===
Why not? Registration does not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms. Why not record serial numbers and track these weapons from owner to owner?
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:36 pm
== And yet I can go on armslist.com and trade somebody for an Uzi. ==
Not legally in Illinois unless you check the validity of the other person’s FOID
Comment by RNUG Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:38 pm
If you want to buy a gun from a store rather than a private party you can’t do it in Chicago either. Having to step outside of Chicago to buy a gun is just really not anything like Jim Crow laws.
Comment by Leslie K Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:47 pm
@ Elmer Keith
===…Vandermyde sold out to the police unions and placed Duty to Inform w/criminal penalties in Phelps’ bill, so cops have a pretext to kill any armed citizen they come in contact with.===
First, how about being a little hyperbolic? The Duty to Inform is only if the officer asks if you have a weapon. You do not have to proffer that information if you have a weapon otherwise. But my question is why wouldn’t you?
Comment by Nadigam Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:52 pm
==KP== Fingerprints are so 20th century. What you really need is a DNA sample.
Comment by Anotheretiree Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 12:55 pm
I’m a boomer. Fingerprints was the proposal, wasn’t it?
Comment by Kathy Powers Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 1:00 pm
Jim Crow was Jim Crow. Nothing else is Jim Crow.
Comment by Hyrum Powell Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 1:15 pm
I’m tired of whiny gun owners.
Comment by Dotnonymous Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 1:46 pm
DNA samples tend to give out more information than needed to simply ID someone.
Comment by Cheryl44 Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 2:03 pm
“What did Todd Vandermyde have to say about Philando Castile?” After fifty years of no lawful citizen carry, when they had the United States Supreme Court case McDonald v. Chicago behind them, Vandermyde and the good old boys in the NRA groveled and flopped over for the police unions in Phelps’ concealed carry bill. NRA members mostly live in all-white sundown towns and exurbia. They could care less about Philando Castile or any other black person killed by police, but they will use black people like Otis McDonald as fronts for their lawsuits.
Comment by Elmer Keith Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 4:00 pm
all veterans, teachers, state workers, and federal workers have fingerprints on file. Mine are with the U.S. Army, City of Chicago, State of Illinois, and Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. No harm done to me yet. And the Kingdom qualifies as a police state.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Friday, Apr 23, 21 @ 4:33 pm
Well having read the complain they have what I believe to be several problems.
they are trying to boot strap this up into Cook county courts. But City v Berretta already foreclosed upon a lot of this with that Illinois supreme court ruling and “To abate the public nuisance ” claim they make here was at the heart of that case.
there are claims that might make a case in a different way if this dealer did the things accused of and it appears they did a few due to the ATf findings but as per usual they try to take this theory of public nuisance and try to get a court to bite and that may sink the case
Comment by Todd Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 9:27 pm