Welcome to GSL

This login is for the website administrators.

Please use the member login link in the main navigation bar to access the members sections.

Member Login
Lost your password?

Illinois Concealed Carry update – Dec 4th

December 4, 2013

 

Yesterday, the Illinois House and Senate passed a “trailer” bill which cleaned up some language and made some very minor changes to the new Illinois Firearm Concealed Carry Act which passed into law last summer.  The bill goes to Governor Pat Quinn for final approval.

It spells out mostly good news for the good guys.  There’s also some bad news of late for the bad guys (defined as people who are opposed to your civil rights).

The good news first:

Fingerprinting:  The trailer bill now allows your local law enforcement agency – IF they choose to get registered – to do LiveScan fingerprinting of CCW applicants and charge whatever fees they want.  They may elect to charge the state-required $31.50 alone or they may add some additional fees onto that for providing the service.

This is good news for those who may not have a LiveScan vendor near their residence, but who don’t want to do a “hard card” fingerprint card which will give the State Police 30 additional days (for a total of 120) to process the application.

Mental health issues:  The trailer bill also took out “law enforcement official, or school administrator” as individuals who may report a gun owner as a danger to themselves or others and have the gun owner’s firearm rights suspended without due process or potentially later revoked.  It added those who are “developmentally disabled” as a reason to deny a license.  Again, minor, but relevant.

Duty to Inform:  The bill clarifies the duty-to-inform and clearly expands it – so nobody can claim they didn’t know – that if an officer asks a passenger or non-resident if they are carrying, the licensee MUST notify affirmatively if they have the gun on or about their person.  Failure to do so could result in a felony charge of Obstruction of Justice.  This is no change to the existing bill, but a clarification for any confusion.

Edit to add:  Seems this little amendment was added thanks to some people reading a poorly-moderated thread over at IllinoisCarry.com.  Thanks guys and gals. 

And for those who are dead-set opposed to any form of “duty to inform”, you’re going to have a hard time convincing a super-majority of the legislators that your point of view is the “sensible”, reasonable or prudent one. 

Also:  Remember that today, almost all police officers are mic’d up and recording traffic stops and this cuts both ways.  There is very little leeway for officer misconduct but at the same time your demeanor is being recorded.

Corrections:  Active duty corrections get a pass on all 16-hours of training now.

Previous law enforcement or corrections firearm training:  These now count for the first eight hours of training under the IL law.  They will need to get the final eight hours (four hours legal, four hours weapons handling and the qualification) to be eligible.  They must have left their previous employment in good standing to receive this credit.

Appeals Board:  As we read the trailer bill, language was inserted making it a part of the State Police (so the FBI would share certain confidential information with the board).  Also, electronic fingerprints will almost certainly be required for cases heard by the board (again, to satisfy some FBI issues).

 

And the mixed news, including bad news for bad people (which is good news for all the rest of us):

In the regulations front, the Illinois State Police are doing a mixed job.  They angered part-time Cook County Sheriff and full-time political hack Tom Dart by prohibiting the use of the law enforcement information database (LEADS system) to create objections to applicants.  It’s going to have to be real reports from real instances from the reporting department (Tom Dart’s Cook County Sheriff’s Department, for instance), not a “google search” of law enforcement records from across the nation identifying (a) reason(s) to file an objection.  Sorry Tom.  Word has it he’s nearly apoplectic.  Baby Jesus is giggling.

On the other hand, they have replied to proposed rule-making and are proposing to change the qualification scoring from “hit the target” to “hit the scoring rings” of the target for purposes of qualification.  We’re opposed to that change because it’s not what the law, as passed, says.

Frankly, as an instructor myself running through over 400 people through the required training in November, the change would have rejected only a single shooter:  A smart-alec who shot at the head of the B-27 silhouette and scored a 29 (he pulled a single shot as I recall).  Under the new regulation, that would have been a failing score.  Even my start-to-finish, eyes closed (with range officers watching nearby) qualification shoot would have still passed, easily.

We’re working on getting a copy of the ISP’s new proposals to post them here for your edification and comment.  We will put them up when they arrive.

That’s what I’ve got for now.

Hat tip to Todd Vandermyde, the NRA-ILA’s man in Springfield, for clarifying some of these issues for me to share with all of you.

All the best.

And Happy Hannakuh as appropriate.

 

 

16 Responses to Illinois Concealed Carry update – Dec 4th

  1. KK on December 4, 2013 at 5:30 pm

    A good note regarding the ISP: Something must be improving. After sending off my wife’s FOID application in late October, I was prepared to wait awhile to see anything from them. Much to my surprise, her card arrived 27 days later. Anyone else have similar reports?

    • jerry on December 4, 2013 at 9:48 pm

      My wife applied for her FOID in June, took her 10 days.

    • Woody on December 5, 2013 at 1:23 am

      My cousin’s came in less than a month.

  2. Oscar B. on December 4, 2013 at 6:19 pm

    I’m taking this as if a person wanted to get their prints done, say at the county sheriffs office, that the only drawback would be that if may take an extra 30 days to process your application?

  3. Bill Morrison on December 4, 2013 at 7:01 pm

    The extra 30 days is if you don’t submit prints at all. Only electronic submissions are allowed. Per the law, prints are not required but not submitting them will add 30 days to the process.

    • jerry on December 4, 2013 at 9:56 pm

      That’s the way the law reads, but if you go to the ISP website, that’s not the way they’re treating it.

    • KK on December 5, 2013 at 1:36 pm

      We were told at the CC class that prints ARE required, and that the 30 day difference is if you use the print card, rather than do it electronically.

  4. Bill on December 4, 2013 at 7:29 pm

    With the amount of Yes votes this bill received, Idiot Commie Pat Quinn’s signature isn’t going to matter should the fool decide not to sign this.

  5. ken on December 4, 2013 at 9:41 pm

    I’m a Christian. I’m offended by your Hannukah reference. Where’s the line form to start whacking off heads?

    Oh, wait! We Christians don’t do that. …………….. YET!

    • jboch on December 5, 2013 at 1:06 pm

      Hey now, let’s play nice.

      John

  6. jboch on December 5, 2013 at 1:08 pm

    Livingston County Sheriff is gonna print for free (aside from the state mandated $31.50.) for vets, act duty mil, retired LEO & corrections.

    $10 for everyone else!

    Limited days and hours though.

    Plans still being formulated. Will blog on it when it’s closer to live.

    John

    • James on December 10, 2013 at 1:35 pm

      Yay!

  7. John H on December 6, 2013 at 6:49 am

    Speaking for those of us who are dead-set opposed to the unconstitutional “duty-to-inform” law; we’re certainly NOT going to convince a super-majority of our legislators to repeal anything. We’re going to convince a federal court judge to overturn “duty-to-inform” (as well as the public transportation ban, and those discriminatory ‘no-guns-allowed’ signs in private businesses open to the public). Indeed, the concealed carry act, itself, was the result of federal court action.

    Furthermore, our constitutionally guaranteed right to remain silent during police questioning without an attorney present is NOT felony obstruction of justice! It’s simply naive to claim it is.

    And, for those who are dead-set on capitulating to “duty-to-inform” as the law of the land, isn’t extending the duty to inform to all in- and out-of-state licensees in the vehicle a good thing? After all, it’s for ‘officer safety’, right? Thanks, John!

  8. Joe W. on December 6, 2013 at 12:10 pm

    Is Illinois going to join their neighboring states in honering each others CC permits?

  9. ChicagoGunSmith on December 6, 2013 at 1:13 pm

    Finger prints are OPTIONAL. Finger prints are NOT REQUIRED unless your application goes to the review board, THEN and ONLY THEN shall finger printing become mandatory. As it stands right now finger prints MUST be livescan digital, but are not required. Ink prints will currently NOT be accepted.

    It is clearly written in the law, the ISP has 90 days to approve deny your application, the ISP has 120 days if you choose not to submit finger prints.

  10. gerald peoria on December 11, 2013 at 7:59 pm

    fuck you Todd. You sold out and lied to former LE. karma is a bitch you wolf-faced slob.