Day 13 of Illinois’ “Stay At Home” order. Guns Save Life watches as more and more governments release criminals – including violent criminals – from jails and prisons. At the same time, more and more law-abiding residents are reacting to uncertainty (and the release of prisoners onto the streets) by buying guns to protect their families.
In fact, gun sales in March broke records. And then some.
Nationally, the FBI reported an astonishing number of NICS checks.
And it’s no surprise given the lines of people waiting outside gun shops.
But not all of those are gun purchases. Indeed many are checks on carry license holders.
Looking under the hood, we do have the actual number of firearm transaction checks completed for the Land of Lincoln.
For March 2020, Illinois dealers reported 61239 single-firearm sales and 2408 multiple gun sales. Contrast that with last year’s 42581 and 1302 respectively. Clearly, sales have spiked.
These dwarf March 2012’s numbers: 31,461 and 775.
So far this year in Illinois, 89422 handgun single sales have been checked, 36436 long guns sales and 4261 multi-purchase sales have been run through the system. That’s about one gun for every 100 residents.
Factor our the minors, felons and illegals, that is closer to one gun for every 75 residents in the Land of Lincoln. In a time when venturing into stores carries a personal risk of catching the ‘Rona.
Yes, Americans do not want to be defenseless. Especially in uncertain times – and when their government won’t keep them safe by placing the well-being of criminals over the safety and well-being of productive, law-abiding residents.
What’s more, a lot of these new gun owners were just average, everyday people who didn’t think much about guns. They believed what the media and anti-gun politicians told them about guns being easier to buy than teddy bears and sex toys.
In many cases, reality hit them upside the head.
A cartoon recently captured this perfectly. Karen goes to the gun store…
The other half of the equation for new (and existing) gun owners has to do with Ammunition.
In a word, from what we’ve heard, common caliber ammunition is scarce. Buyers have stripped shelves dry.
Even two weeks ago, ammo was wiped out. Now, I’m told it’s even worse. Obviously.
One retailer I know has (had?) ammo is MegaSports in Plainfield. They aren’t as cheap as your local farm store, but they aren’t Cheaper Than Dirt gouging either. They have lots of common caliber ammo (again, at last report) with no limits.
Yeah, one box of $12 9mm for $40.
Or a used AR-15 milspec mag:
I’ve heard from a lot of health care workers. Some liken this period of quiet in their facilities as the water withdrawing from the beaches before the tsunami hits.
Others are seeing increasing numbers of tested-positives and “presumptive” positives.
None outside of Chicago think it’s critically bad. Yet. And the worst is yet to come according to local, state and national health experts. Supposedly, Illinois will crest in a couple of weeks.
Time will tell.
Regardless, unless there is a vaccine released, the Wubonic Plague will return as soon as people return to public gatherings and locations. Argh.
Guns Save Life meetings.
Yes, Guns Save Life meetings are cancelled for the month of April – including the last Sunday meeting in Chicagoland.
Look for an Executive Director’s Report next week on the status of gun rights in Illinois and beyond.
Gun Rights Case from Illinois Supreme Court
The Illinois Supreme Court did release its decision in the ISRA’s Brown case. That was attorney David Sigale’s case where he tried to maintain a circuit court ruling striking down the FOID Act’s constitutionality.
David Sigale has a consistent track record of less than optimal oral argument performances. In this Brown case, Sigale’s orals proved no better.
After repeatedly trying to have it both as a facial challenge to the FOID Act an as-applied challenge on Ms. Brown’s behalf, Sigale finally threw Illinois 2.3m gun owners under the bus and instead argued for an as-applied to Vivian Brown. This was probably the best for Ms. Brown. This definitely wasn’t the best for the rest of Illinois’ gun owners.
The Illinois Supreme Court punted on a decision when it comes to the Second Amendment and the FOID Act. We’ll call this a draw at best for Sigale and the ISRA as the Illinois Supremes remanded it back to the circuit court with instructions.
The common-law doctrine that holds that courts should not compromise the stability of the legal system by declaring legislation unconstitutional when it is not required is “ ‘[o]ne of the most firmly established’ ” in constitutional law (Lorton v. Brown County Community Unit School District No. 1, 35 Ill. 2d 362, 364 (1966) (quoting Grasse v. Dealer’s Transportation Co., 412 Ill. 179, 201 (1952))) and one that this court has applied with diligence. See, e.g., Ultsch v. Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund, 226 Ill. 2d 169, 176-77 (2007) (noting that a just respect for the legislature requires that statutes not be found unconstitutional unless necessary)…
The circuit court’s holding that section 2(a)(1) of the FOID Card Act is unconstitutional was not necessary for the resolution of this case. Thus, in accordance with Trent and Hearne, the circuit court’s constitutional holding cannot “properly serve as a basis for direct supreme court review.” Hearne, 185 Ill. 2d at 455. We must therefore vacate the court’s finding of unconstitutionality and remand the cause to the circuit court to enter a modified judgment order that excludes that finding. In so holding, we emphasize that we express no opinion on the merits of the circuit court’s statutory analysis. The entry of a modified judgment order is done only to preserve the State’s right to seek review in the appellate court of the circuit court’s nonconstitutional basis for dismissing defendant’s information (Ill. S. Ct. R. 604(a)(1) (eff. July 1, 2017)) and to “permit the normal appellate process to run its course” (Trent, 172 Ill. 2d at 426).
And the conclusion:
The circuit court’s ruling that section 2(a)(1) of the FOID Card Act is unconstitutional as applied was not necessary to the resolution of this case. Therefore, we remand this cause to the circuit court. We direct that the order entered by the circuit court on February 14, 2018, be vacated. We further direct that the October 16, 2018, judgment order dismissing defendant’s information be vacated and then modified to exclude the ruling that section 2(a)(1) is unconstitutional.
Feel free to offer analysis of the full decision in comments.