Guns Save Life has a reputation for aggressive advocacy of gun rights and your right to defend yourself. And following the US Supreme Court’s Bruen decision, we have already taken action to benefit Illinois gun owners and their right to own guns and defend themselves.
In 2019, Guns Save Life sued in state court to have the FOID Act ruled unconstitutional. Since the Bruen decision, our legal team has filed for a summary judgement citing the Bruen decision.
We’re also exploring, with our legal team, the potential for new litigation against some Illinois gun control measures both local ordinances and state laws.
Not only that, but we’ve sent offers to a number of municipalities in Illinois. The offer? We spare them humiliating litigation striking down their local ordinances banning common semi-auto firearms and magazines if they voluntarily agree to end enforcing them as Los Angeles has done with their ordinance. The alternative, as outlined in the letter, is that we rub their noses in the humiliation of defeat among not only their local residents, but state-wide and even nationally. Fear of humiliation and building a reputation of fecklessness is a powerful motivator for some folks to do the right thing.
We’re not foolish enough to think these cities and their anti-gun local political leadership will roll over and play nice in respecting the rule of law and US Supreme Court decisions, but it will give them the option to avoid humiliation and considerable expense paying for our side’s lawyers if we sue and win on a civil rights action. We expect the more pragmatic politicians receiving this letter to give serious consideration to our offer.
From our point of view, a win is a win, no matter if it comes from voluntary compliance with the case law or forced compliance with court orders.
Here’s the letter to Deerfield.
GSL’s letter to Deerfield Mayor Daniel Shapiro
Dear Mayor Shapiro (with a carbon copy to Chief Sliozis):
Greetings sir. I currently serve as the Executive Director of Guns Save Life, Inc. You may recall that we’re the people who sued to block your Village’s amendment of a firearms ordinance to ban common semi-auto firearms and the magazines that feed them. As you should know, we won on the magazines, and the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that you could keep your new local ban on the guns.
In light of the new Bruen decision from the US Supreme Court, I wanted to reach out and offer your city an opportunity to voluntarily end enforcement of said ordinance, just as the City of Los Angeles has done.
The upside to your village is that you can do so with minimal negative publicity and expense.
On the other hand, should you opt to steadfastly maintain the validity of your faulty ordinance, we’ll file another lawsuit. Given the Bruen precedent, we will win. After all, SCOTUS accepted another gun ban appeal, vacating the lower court decision and remanding it back to circuit court for reconsideration following the decision in Bruen.
If you think that your legal team over at Perkins and Coie will prevail in a fresh lawsuit and bail you out on this, I’d direct your attention to Superior, CO where an Obama-appointed federal judge just enjoined that city’s gun and magazine ban, citing Bruen.
Not only will we exploit the filing of a lawsuit for publicity purposes, but we’ll exploit your inevitable loss in court for another round of rubbing your nose in the humiliation of defeat. Each time your village appeals and loses, we’ll continue with another round of the humiliation tour. As an added bonus, we’ll likely receive reimbursement from the Village of Deerfield for our legal costs as the prevailing party in a civil rights action.
You wrote on your webpage at the Village of Deerfield website, “Mean what you say, and say what you mean.” I live by that expression myself, along with walking the walk in addition to talking the talk.
Again, should you wish to avoid negative publicity and expense, please carbon copy me with a directive from your corporate counsel or police chief instructing your village police officers to cease enforcement of your unconstitutional city ordinance banning ownership, possession or use of America’s favorite rifle, the AR-15, and other semi-automatic firearms.
The alternative is that we file another court action and let the real fun begin.
Sincerely,
John Boch
And here’s one to the Mayor of Aurora, IL… You know him… Richard Irvin. Note the additional personalization (emphasis added) for Mayor Irvin.
Dear Mayor Irvin:
Greetings sir. I currently serve as the Executive Director of Guns Save Life, Inc. We’re the folks who sued your peers in Deerfield over their amended ordinance that banned common semi-auto firearms and magazines. At the Illinois Supreme Court, we won on the magazines but the justices allowed their new gun ban to stand.
In light of the new Bruen decision from the US Supreme Court, I wanted to reach out and offer your city an opportunity to voluntarily end enforcement of Aurora’s gun and magazine ban ordinance, just as the City of Los Angeles has done with theirs.
I know you campaigned as pro-gun in your recent campaign for the Republican nomination for Governor, so this should be an easy ask.
The upside to your city is that you can do this with minimal negative publicity and expense.
On the other hand, should you opt to steadfastly maintain the validity of your faulty ordinance, we’ll file a lawsuit. Given the Bruen precedent, we will win. After all, SCOTUS accepted another gun ban appeal, vacating the lower court decision and remanding it back to circuit court for reconsideration following the decision in Bruen. In the past week or so, a group challenged Superior, CO’s similar ordinance. An Obama-appointed federal judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking further enforcement of that city’s gun and magazine ban, citing Bruen.
Not only will we exploit the filing of a lawsuit for publicity purposes, but we’ll exploit your city’s inevitable loss in court for another round of rubbing your nose in the humiliation of defeat. As an added bonus, we’ll likely receive reimbursement from Aurora for our legal costs as the prevailing party in a civil rights action.
Again, should you wish to avoid negative publicity and expense, please carbon copy me with a directive from your corporate counsel or police chief instructing Aurora’s police officers to cease enforcement of your unconstitutional city ordinance banning ownership, possession or use of America’s favorite rifle, the AR-15, and other semi-automatic firearms or the magazines that feed them.
The alternative is that we select your city to file another court action and let the real fun begin.
Sincerely,
John Boch
Thus far we’ve only heard crickets.
But don’t worry… we’re wrapping up a nice surprise for them.
Diggin that!