Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton hammered five businesses or organizations that ban off-duty cops from carrying on their premises, in violation of Texas state law.  Among these was the Texas State Fair.  Kudos to AG Paxton for not only using common sense, but holding noncompliant feet to the fire.

Anyone who says that your vote doesn’t count or that voting is a waste of time clearly doesn’t understand that elections have consequences.

Stop for a moment and ponder if gun owners in Texas had stayed home and someone named Beto O’Rourke won the Texas AG race.  Do you think for a moment that Betaboy Robert Francis O’Rourke would have gone after these venues?

Here in Illinois we have the polar opposite from Ken Paxton.  A whole lot of pro-gun folks stayed home in the last election.

Instead of electing renowned civil rights attorney Tom DeVore as our AG, we got Kwame the Clown.

Recently, Kwame Raoul’s office released an “informal” opinion that retired and off-duty police officers who carry firearms on school property are committing a Class 3 felony.  In the “informal” opinion of Raoul, only on-duty police and armed security officers of said school have an exemption to the felony charge on school property.

What sparked this request for this opinion?

A state cop carried while off-duty at his daughter’s high school softball game.  While coaching there, his gun became momentarily exposed and some Suzy Soccermom or her husband Chad became upset.  A complaint was filed.

The brass at headquarters reacted by taking the state cop off the streets and putting him on a desk for months while they debated about firing him and filing a criminal complaint with the local prosecutor.  Probably the state cop’s saving grace was a local prosecutor who looked at the report and said, “Are you kidding me?”

So the state cop was returned to duty with a stern warning that he would (likely) be terminated and potentially prosecuted if he dared pack his gun while off-duty at his kid’s school – or any other one – again.

The Republican leader of the Illinois House asked for an opinion relating to off-duty and retired officer carry in schools.

You can see here what she got back.  It isn’t pretty.

In layman’s terms, the Land of Lincoln’s criminal-friendly (and cop hating) AG is putting retired cops at risk of arrest and a felony conviction that carries a sentence of 5-10 years in prison and a fine of up to $25,000 should they carry on school property.

Accordingly, in the absence of a statutory amendment otherwise providing, a qualified retired law enforcement officer may not carry a concealed firearm in a school or on the real property of a school without potentially violating subsection 24-1 ( c )( 1. 5) of the Criminal Code.

What’s more, the informal opinion lumps in “qualified law enforcement” with the retired officers at least twice.  Plenty of lawyers are reading the opinion and believe that it suggests that anyone not “on duty” law enforcement or armed security for the school in question gets treated the same as retired cops.

For example:

Lastly, subsection 24-1 ( a-6) of the Criminal Code provides that subsection 24- 1 ( a)( 4) does not apply to or affect a “qualified current or retired law enforcement officer” qualified under LEOSA. It may be argued that because subsection 24-l(c)(l.5) is defined as a violation of subsection 24-1 (a)( 4) in a school or on the real property of a school, the language of subsection 24-2(a-6) also exempts qualified retired law enforcement officers from subsection 24- l(c)(l .5). However, Illinois courts have held that each “specific location” provision set out in subsection 24-1 ( c )(1.5) is a separate offense from the general offense established by subsection 24-l(a)(4). Chairez, 2018 IL 121417, 118 (because subsection 24-l(c)(l.5) is separate from the sentencing provision set out in subsection 24-1 (b ), “we presume that the General Assembly intended that, if proven at trial, the specific locations enumerated in [sub]section 24-l(c)(l.5) are to be separate offenses that carry their own enhanced sentences different from the prescribed sentences in [sub]section 24-l(b)”); Cunningham, 2019 IL App (1st) 160709, 113 (“our supreme court [in Chairez] recently held that the ‘specific places’ provision of the UUW [ unlawful use of a weapon] statute ( section 24-1 ( c )( 1. 5)) creates separate offenses from the unconstitutional blanket prohibition on the possession of firearms outside the home for selfdefense stated in section 24-l(a)(4)”); Green, 2018 IL App (1st) 143874, 114 (discussing Chairez and concluding that “the offense of ‘UUW within 1000 feet of a school’ is distinct from the offense of UUW, which the Seventh Circuit found unconstitutional in Moore”). 12

Nothing says “pro-police” like holding out the potential for felony charges for off-duty cops carrying their self-defense pieces, right?

Here’s the conclusion:

For the foregoing reasons, qualified retired law enforcement officers qualified under the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004 who are qualified under the Illinois Retired Officer Concealed Carry program are not permitted to carry a concealed firearm in a school or on property belonging to a school. In the absence of a statutory amendment otherwise providing, a qualified retired law enforcement officer under LEOSA who carries a concealed firearm in a school or on the real property of a school potentially violates subsection 24-1 ( c )(1.5) of the Criminal Code of 2012.

In a state where the biggest city has the most federal corruption convictions several years running, and where you can’t swing a cat in the Illinois General Assembly buildings or Chicago City Hall without hitting at least a couple of corruption scandals, Kwame Raoul – aka Sgt. Schultz when it comes to real crime – can’t find any corruption.

But if a cop carries off-duty at his daughter’s softball game, look out!

So when it comes time to vote, VOTE.

Elections have consequences.  And if you don’t vote, you might get a Soros-loving state attorney general like Kwame the Clown to help make your state more dangerous for the good guys, including you.

22 thoughts on “While Texas’ AG supports off-duty police, IL AG Kwame Raoul threatens them with 5-10 years in prison”
  1. I have a friend who was an ISP trooper. At the time he was active duty (80’s to early 2000’s), he was required to carry at all times. If memory serves, I think he said he was on duty 24/7.

    1. A lot of other departments did too. Wonder how well that statute was covered at the academy, in-service law updates, or agency policy manual? Until the law is amended, tell Chad & Suzy they’ll have to pound sand and wait for on-duty personnel to show-up to protect their lil snowflake(s).

    2. Next door in Indiana, all cops were encouraged to carry at all times for the same reason – 24/7 readiness. I don’t think every department enforced it rigidly, but all the guys I knew did.

  2. crime-raoul wants his armed robbery/carjacking/home invading/ relatives & constituents to be safe from the law abiding

  3. So, a shooter is at a school parking lot, intent on killing innocent children. Meanwhile, alert and “Armed Citizen” driving by the school becomes aware of the situation. Upon arrival, exits the vehicle, opens rear hatch of their vehicle and quickly acquires the leftists most fear tool for self-defense, and labeled amongst many anti-gunners as the big, bad, black, mean-gun or “assault-rifle”. Grabbing the rifle, loading, charging and maintaining a quick sight picture. Simultaneously checking behind the shooter for potential danger downrange. Doing all these actions in a very short order and sight picture on the “bad-guy” before letting three quick rounds go. Pop, pop, pop. Two, to the the torso and one to the splatter box. The shooter is down. Kids and teachers safe.

    Now you are a felon and going to jail for being “guns” and using them on school grounds. Multiple guns. Plus carrying a concealed handgun. Yes?

    This is a fictional scenario. Below is a true one.


  4. What part of “ good guy w/a gun stops bad guy w/a gun” is too difficult to understand. Chicago dems must undergo mandatory lobotomies,

  5. The leftists want to create enough chaos that the average American will welcome U.N. troops in to confiscate weapons and restore order.

  6. Why should COPS have any particular privilege that I don’t? I’m better with my tools than probably 99% of cops, active, retired or underground.

    This creation of “special classes” that’re entitled to special privileges that others don’t have is simply class warfare. STOP DOING IT. Either we all have rights, or none of us do.

    Frankly, I’d rather have a hundred guys like ME armed at any given school event than even 1 “retired” cop.

    Remember the Times Square NY incident? The “on-duty” cops fired a hundred rounds at some bad guys, hitting literally EVERYTHING except what they were dreaming they were gonna hit, including FOURTEEN TOURISTS just lookin’ at bright lights, big city. FOURTEEEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Yeah, these people should have special “keep and bear” privileges that the rest of us, who actually PRACTICED WITH OUR TOOLS til we got good with ’em, don’t.

    Where’s my boy who’s always bad-mouthing the cops and their special privileges?

    1. NARCISSISM much, “kenny-boy”? It’s ALL about YOU! HUH? hahaha,
      “I’m better with my tools than probably 99% of cops, active, retired or underground”! MAYBE with the “tool” between yer legs in yer private “circle jerk”, yeah, you are probably the “HEAD circle jerker” all by yerself right? You make it sooo easy, liar, “where’s your boy”? Look in the mirror “kenny-boy” YOU are famous on this site for denigrating law enforcement officers and anyone and everyone that shows support for them! Did you just have another attack of senility or are you just soooo stupid you “fergot” all of your old cop-denigrating posts?
      Give me a break!

    2. Holy cow! I post a comment relevant to the subject matter of the original posting; like it or not (and I find myself disagreeing with management here about 25% of the time), it is related, relevant, pertinent and apparently one other commenter agrees with it 100%.

      AND THERE COMES the crazy ol’ mad-hatter coot GSL1589 with nothing but PERSONAL ATTACKS! Utterly unrelated to the subject matter of the posting.

      JOHNBOCH, did you not just warn this guy? DID you not just do another “housekeeping” post? He’s already caused himself to be SUED, and if he can’t keep his mouth shut, he’s gonna get red-flagged.

      Just sayin’ this so you all know it is NOT I who is doing this.

    3. But “ken”, it is ALWAYS all about YOU, isn’t it? Notice “ken” never disputes that fact, he wants the very attention he is complaining about. Narcissist quisling that he is.

    4. But “ken”, what makes you think Bob “agrees” with you and not me? Oh yeah, it’s your narcissism, isn’t it? haha {ken’s head exploding in 3…2…1..}

  7. Well now…. should situation arise, if I am nearby, I will not be stopping any school shooters. I retired from the job to be put in jail, while carrying under IROCC, stopping a murderer? These Communists need to go. A usual suspect in charge is never a good thing.

    1. Jeff – Acting in the public’s interest isn’t always what the public’s interested in.

  8. You still need a local state attorney to take this to court. Thank heavens for this. Most prosecutors would throw this out in a heartbeat.

  9. rat-mofos in America support gun control because they want their constituents to be safe from the law abiding/real humans

Comments are closed.