7th Circuit Court of Appeals Says 2A Applies Outside The Home - IL CCW to Follow?

[30 cal slut]

I know, we had some disappointing rulings from NY but this is encouraging.

http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/NY0MKV7Y.pdf

Pages 20-21:




We are disinclined to engage in another round of historical analysis to determine whether eighteenth-century America understood the Second Amendment to include a right to bear guns outside the home. The Supreme Court has decided that the amendment confers a right to bear arms for self-defense, which is as important outside the home as inside. The theoretical and empirical evidence (which overall is inconclusive) is consistent with concluding that a right to carry firearms in public may promote self-defense. Illinois had to provide us with more than merely a rational basis for believing that its uniquely sweeping ban is justified by an increase in public safety. It has failed to meet this burden. The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment therefore compels us to reverse the decisions in the two cases before us and remand them to their respective district courts for the entry of declarations of unconstitutionality and permanent injunctions. Nevertheless we order our mandate stayed for 180 days to allow the Illinois legislature to craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendment as interpreted in this opinion, on the carrying of guns in public.

REVERSED AND REMANDED, WITH DIRECTIONS; BUT MANDATE STAYED FOR 180 DAYS.

[Cincinnatus]

Interesting. Does this overturn any specific IL laws?

[SeriousStudent]

This could be very good. Thanks for the info.

I will not start holding my breath, however, given the make-up of the political bodies in Illinois.

I do wish good luck to all our friends up north.

[30 cal slut]

Interesting. Does this overturn any specific IL laws?

IL is the only state that doesn't have some form of legal CCW. Only LE's and peace officers (like Chicago councilmen) can carry. IIRC, there is also a guard card for security. But no civilian CCW.




720 ILCS 5/24-1

Sec. 24-1. Unlawful Use of Weapons.
(a) A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons when he knowingly:

...

(4) Carries or possesses in any vehicle or concealed on or about his person except when on his land or in his own abode, legal dwelling, or fixed place of business, or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission, any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm, except that this subsection (a) (4) does not apply to or affect transportation of weapons that meet one of the following conditions:

(i) are broken down in a non-functioning state;

or (ii) are not immediately accessible;

or (iii) are unloaded and enclosed in a case,

[nineteenkilo]

Here's another link (http://blogs.suntimes.com/politics/2012/12/big_win_for_gun-rights_groups_federal_appeals_court_tosses_state_ban_on_carrying_concealed_weapons.html)

[Eurodriver]

IL is the only state that doesn't have some form of legal CCW. Only LE's and peace officers (like Chicago councilmen) can carry. IIRC, there is also a guard card for security. But no civilian CCW.

While that may be true, lets not get ahead of ourselves.

While I lived in Hawaii I applied for a CCW. Despite having zero criminal record, I was denied because I didn't prove enough of a "need".

(I.E. I hadn't been murdered yet)

[gunrunner505]

http://blogs.suntimes.com/politics/2012/12/big_win_for_gun-rights_groups_federal_appeals_court_tosses_state_ban_on_carrying_concealed_weapons.html

[ryr8828]

Posner finally made a decision? I see he stalled us off of our constitutional rights by 6 months though.

[AK47guy81]

Not if Eric Holder has anything to say about it...

[gunrunner505]

The 6 month delay is under the auspices of giving our "elected representatives", I refuse to call them officials as that would indicate competence, time to write a law. You know they will use every second and dirty trick to try and weasel out of it but it looks like the debate at least is over. Finally.

[gunrunner505]

Not if Eric Holder has anything to say about it...

He couldn't stop it 49 other times. Can he stop this one?

[Lincoln7]

That would be the difference between shall issue and may issue. But only IL and DC have no issue.

[Koshinn]

Not if Eric Holder has anything to say about it...

What's Eric Holder going to do?

[Koshinn]

While that may be true, lets not get ahead of ourselves.

While I lived in Hawaii I applied for a CCW. Despite having zero criminal record, I was denied because I didn't prove enough of a "need".

(I.E. I hadn't been murdered yet)

Besides the aforementioned shall vs may issue, Hawaii isn't in the same district as Illinois, so it doesn't apply to Hawaii.

But a few pro-2A groups are currently at the 9th Circuit trying to get a ruling that "may issue" is unconstitutional. The one from Hawaii is http://www.hawaiidefensefoundation.org/

[lifebreath]

Without appealing to the Supreme Court, Illinois is now ordered to allow concealed carry or craft a law in keeping with the ruling within 180 days. I doubt if the state will appeal, since it would be an uphill climb with the other 49 having some form of CCW.

I live in Illinois ... I'm thinking the dems who shot down the more restrictive CCW bill earlier this years wish they'd have voted to pass it.

[RyanB]

As I understand it there's a majority for shall issue but Madigan won't schedule a vote. The shall issue group now gets their way or sits on their hands for constitutional carry.

[Street Dog]

It is not Eric Holder, but Governor Pat Quinn and House Speaker Mike Madigan. These are the guys that will do, and have done, everything they can to keep concealed carry out of Illinois.
Perhaps this court decision will turn the tide here, but this is Illinois. (See my tag line below)

[danish]

I am not getting too excited yet. Who knows what kind of bs ccw law they come up with and how hard it will be for a citizen to get a permit. This is still Illinois....

[lifebreath]

As I understand it there's a majority for shall issue but Madigan won't schedule a vote. The shall issue group now gets their way or sits on their hands for constitutional carry.

At this point, the Court of Appeals has decided the issue, and the state MUST allow concealed carry in a form consistent with the court's ruling. The state has 180 days to draft legislation before the order is remanded back to the lower court to implement.

[Koshinn]

At this point, the Court of Appeals has decided the issue, and the state MUST allow concealed carry in a form consistent with the court's ruling. The state has 180 days to draft legislation before the order is remanded back to the lower court to implement.

What is their ruling? Can they make it "may issue" and thus have a de facto ban on ccw like California and Hawaii?

[RyanB]

At this point, the Court of Appeals has decided the issue, and the state MUST allow concealed carry in a form consistent with the court's ruling. The state has 180 days to draft legislation before the order is remanded back to the lower court to implement.

You missed the point.

You're getting concealed carry, yes. Without action by the legislature it will not require a permit. The legislature could however pass a shall or may issue statute. I am told that the legislature has the votes for shall issue but Madigan won't allow a vote. So now the shall issue faction can write the law or go eyeball to eyeball blocking may issue laws until you get shall issue or constitutional carry.

[SPARTAN HOPLITE ARMS]

I am not getting too excited yet. Who knows what kind of bs ccw law they come up with and how hard it will be for a citizen to get a permit. This is still Illinois....

If there anywhere near as competent as the wonderful dimwits of NY, they'll just copy and paste NYC's laws and claim you can exercise your rights while denying every carry permit application for not showing proof of need. See NY's recent circuit court appeal decision and you'll know what I mean.

[R0CKETMAN]

I've bow hunted in Illinois multiple times each of the last seven years. Every time I cross the state line I'm not only reminded of the lack of reciprocity, but the inability of my friends there to CC. We're talking rural farm country.

Congrats on getting your rights back.

[lifebreath]

If there anywhere near as competent as the wonderful dimwits of NY, they'll just copy and paste NYC's laws and claim you can exercise your rights while denying every carry permit application for not showing proof of need. See NY's recent circuit court appeal decision and you'll know what I mean.

That's possible, but two factors weigh against it. 1) they don't have enough votes to force a highly restrictive law through. Furthermore, a bill was introduced earlier in the year that had everyone's support (both parties and various LE groups), but a couple of votes switched at the last minute. It is likely that this would be used as the basis for a new law. 2) The Court's ruling, while not outright condemning NY's laws, spoke against the 2nd District's ruling that upheld NY's restrictive laws. Thus, this courts ruling signals to lawmakers that they should not be too restrictive.

As RyanB stated, if a law is not passed in 180 days, the order nullifies the current law. That law defines "unlawful use," and while in theory, the Illinois legislature could let the court order go into effect without crafting a new law, that's not going to happen. They have to do something. Also, in my mind, this court ruling gives the anti-gun dems in the state an "out" to go ahead and pass a law, which has continued to be a yearly contentious issue.

Here's the opinion if anyone wants to read it.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion.pdf (http://www.lincolndiagnostics.com/public/doug/guns/2012 IL 7 circuit appeals opinion.pdf)

[polymorpheous]

Way to go neighbors!
I wish you all the best!
:)

[scottryan]

This will get taken to SCOTUS and the outcome will not be in our favor.

Heller vs DC should have never gone to SCOTUS either.

These communist shithole states like Illinois and the people that live their can deal with their own problem. Now their problems will become our problems.