(GSL) – The Illinois State Police held a series of three hearings to answer questions and provide specifics on implementation of the gun registration aspect of the Protect Illinois Communities Act. The hearings accomplished neither.

From the ISP website:

On January 10, 2023, Governor JB Pritzker signed into law Public Act 102-1116, the Protect Illinois Communities Act (Act). The Act regulates the sale and distribution of assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, and switches in Illinois. The Act went into effect immediately upon signing. Individuals who possessed assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, and other devices listed in the Act before it took effect are required to submit an endorsement affidavit through their Firearm Owner’s Identification Card account.

The Illinois State Police is holding three public hearings on the Protect Illinois Communities Act proposed rule. The hearings are scheduled at the following locations, but can also be heard via WebEx. Persons wishing to speak at the public hearing must do so in person and must submit a completed witness slip.

For more information, click here.

The hearings proved a disaster for ISP and not much better for the state’s gun owners. ISP Attorney Suzanne Bond (more about her and how she got her job here) and a Captain were basically “the committee.” And people had to register the day before in order to speak.

ISP Attorney Suzanne Bond.

Right out of the gate it became clear that at best, ISP wasn’t taking this seriously.

In fact, the more we consider the format of the events, the “technical difficulties” and the answers (and misinformation) given out, more than a few of us are wondering out loud if the entire event was simply JB Pritzker’s people ordering the ISP leadership to deliver a giant “F-You” to gun owners seeking answers.

Either way, it was a disaster for State Police. The annoying buzz on the first gun registry hearing livestream video proved our first clue.

The second hearing was arguably their best performance, although Todd Vandermyde made them look like idiots when ISP’s legal beagle Suzanne Bond indicated that a Star Wars lightsaber would indeed need to be registered as a banned accessory.

Then at the third and final meeting in a packed community center, ISP didn’t provide video streaming OR a sound system.  That in a room packed with over 150 people.


ISP attorney Suzanne Bond may as well as have been a parrot. She kept repeating the exact same answer over and over: “Answers to this question can be found on the ISP website on the Protect Illinois Communities Act page.”

When questions got specific, she misstated facts more than once and asked for written questions to be addressed later. Some people pointed out they’ve been writing with these same questions for months without response.

No doubt JB Pritzker just smiled at how this whole series of public hearings went down.

5 thoughts on “Were the Illinois State Police’s PICA public hearings really just an ‘F-You’ to gun owners?”
  1. Can the videos of these hearings be used as evidence in the lawsuit saying PICA is unconstitutionally vague?
    ISP attorney Suzanne Bond may as well as have been a parrot. She kept repeating the exact same answer over and over: “Answers to this question can be found on the ISP website on the Protect Illinois Communities Act page.”
    She was parroting that answer because she had no clue what PICA actually prohibits and doesn’t prohibit, and neither does the state or the courts.

  2. Another way to look at this is that ISP can later make more “flexible” decisions about what is and is not banned. Like I have said before, if in doubt, ISP can say it is banned. Police often tell us to surrender to them now and to sort it out in court later. As we see so often, there is little risk to them and lots of risk to us. Even if we later win at our own expense, we do not get our guns back. The state has huge resources to fight us “little people.” It will soon be cheaper for us to buy new guns and give up on the old ones. Stangely, this never happens to the real criminals.

  3. When will the greater 2A community understand that we are our own worst enemy? We have “pro-2A” lawmakers like Plummer feeling sympathy for………….NOT YOU……….the state police! We have “pro-2A” advocates and organizations that write red flag laws with anti-gun lawmakers. We have “pro-2a” people with a voice that refuse to recognize that police qualified immunity is putting all the benefit in the cops hands and all of the legal risk and burden on the citizens shoulders while IGNORING the lesson from New Mexico dangling right in front of everyone’s faces that cops there did not want to enforce the governor’s gun ban executive order not because they were interested in our rights or respecting their oaths, it was because THEY PERSONALLY would get sued for civil rights violations – police care about themselves and their paychecks, they don’t give a crap about us, sorry! We have “pro-2A” organizations negotiating our rights away and getting us nothing back in return. We have “pro-2A” lawmakers that vote against gun control bills but then turn right around and advance the agencies who carry out the gun control they just voted against. THIS IS LIKE WATCHING PEOPLE WEAR A MASK ALONE IN THE CAR!

  4. I am with you, Mr Boch. I think they were told to just go through the motions and to screw with us.

    Also, some of you (I suspect someone posting under multiple names) really has a boner for Plummer.

Comments are closed.