WBEZ | concealed carry

Morning Shift: Are you penalized for BWB (buying while Black)?

Mon, 13 May 2013 09:07:00 -0500

We'll dive into a survey that says African American homeowners pay more than their white or Asian counterparts for similar homes in similar neighborhoods. Plus uncovering the ultimate Chicago book, and more.

Cook County Sheriff proposes concealed-carry ordinance

Mon, 06 May 2013 14:29:00 -0500

Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart is proposing a county concealed-carry ordinance if lawmakers in Springfield can't come up with a statewide law.

A federal court has ruled Illinois' ban on the public possession of firearms is unconstitutional and gave the state until June 9 to come up with a concealed-carry law.

But the Chicago Sun-Times reports that Dart worries that if lawmakers don't come up with anything by then, it will be legal for anyone with a firearm owners' identification card to carry a gun anywhere.

So he wants a countywide ordinance ready to go just in case. His ordinance would give him the authority to approve and reject licenses to carry concealed firearms in the county and applicants would have to pay $300 fee for a license.

Sparse attendance at legislative hearing on relationship between mental health and guns

Thu, 07 Mar 2013 11:40:00 -0600

Illinois lawmakers are continuing to hold hearings into issues related to guns.

They met Thursday to discuss guns and mental health issues, but the hearing was sparsely attended. When House members have held similar hearings on carrying concealed weapons, the room has been packed full.

A velvet rope was put in the hallway to control the line of people waiting to get in. For Thursday’s hearing on mental health issues and guns, the velvet rope was out but nobody was standing in line.

State Rep. Jil Tracy (R-Quincy) said the two issues are related. She said she was recently at a hearing discussing cuts to mental health programs, while at the same time there was a hearing on guns going on in a separate building.

“We need to fund mental health in this state far better than we’ve been doing,” Tracy said.

Most lawmakers raised questions about how people can get their gun ownership ID, or FOID card, revoked. One common way is for judges to revoke someone’s FOID card while they appear in court. Chris Kachiroubas, the clerk of circuit court for DuPage County, said most of those instances come from Cook County.

Kachiroubas also testified that there’s no mechanism for court clerks to send revoked FOID cards to the Illinois State Police, which oversees the gun card program.

“If the court doesn’t order that it be sent to the state police, it just sits in a file somewhere,” said State Rep. Dennis Reboletti.

Jessica Trame, with the Illinois State Police, testified that the FOID card owner may still possess the card, but it would be revoked in their system if a judge orders it. She acknowledged that might not matter, though, if the person were to try to get a gun through a neighbor or someone who doesn’t run FOID cards through the State Police’s system.

Meantime, throughout the two hour-long hearing, there were few questions about mental health issues or getting counseling for those who see violence first-hand.

Public transit takes center stage in debate over carrying concealed weapons

Fri, 22 Feb 2013 17:54:00 -0600

A federal court reinforced its opinion on Friday that Illinois must adopt a new law allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons.

That leaves lawmakers wondering if passengers on trains and buses could start carrying guns. At a legislative hearing in Chicago on Friday, some public officials said they don’t want guns in churches or government buildings. Several mass transit agencies said they also don’t want guns on buses or trains.

Ron Holt agrees. He’s the father of Blair Holt, a teenager who was shot and killed on a Chicago bus a few years ago. Holt said he’s frequently asked what if another passenger had had a gun.

“There would’ve been more bloodletting on that bus. More people would’ve been shot. More people would’ve been killed,” Holt testified to the House Judiciary Committee.

But Todd Vandermyde, a lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, said the law should apply throughout the state.

“We think that just because you avail yourselves of public transit, that you should not be deprived of your right to self-defense,” he said.

The head of the Chicago Transit Authority, Forrest Claypool, said allowing guns on public transit is a, “recipe for disaster.”

Claypool said violent crime dropped 19 percent last year on the CTA. He said theft of smart phones has gone up, and he’s concerned bystanders could get hurt if concealed weapons are allowed on the CTA.

“Concealed carry in other environments may work very well. On a crowded train or bus or platform at a station, it’s a recipe for disaster,” he said.

Meantime, geography is shaping some of the debate over concealed carry. A lot of the differences in arguments have to do with the age old divide between downstaters and Chicagoans.

Chicago Alderman Harry Osterman took a veiled dig at the argument that people should be allowed to carry guns on buses and trains at Friday’s hearing.

“I’ve read recently people advocating carrying them on an L, and I would assume that none of the people that have advocated that have ever ridden on an L,” he said.

Meantime, the NRA’s Vandermyde wasn’t so veiled in his comments.

“Certain members of the body think that everybody south of I-80 is some kind of Neanderthal,” he said.

Vandermyde said people should be allowed to carry concealed weapons on public transit and he went so far as to say Chicago and Cook County abuse the rights of gun owners.

Next week, the parties involved meet again to discuss a ban on so-called assault weapons.

At guns hearing, debate centers around concealed carry, not schools

Tue, 19 Feb 2013 23:07:00 -0600

The line for the general public to get into the House Judiciary Committee’s hearing on guns Tuesday was already long an hour before it started. Anyone looking to get in had to get through two metal detectors and have their driver’s license photocopied.

John Laskowski, 60, got in late.

Laskowski is from McHenry County and said he was in Springfield anyway, so thought he’d pop in to see lawmakers at work for the first time in his life.

What he saw, for the last hour of the discussion at least, was a hearing with a particular emphasis on concealing weapons. Laskowski said he thinks there’s some legitimacy to the argument that concealed carry could reduce crime.

“People who suspect that there may be weapons available, in my mind, probably are less likely to go ahead and try to take advantage of someone that they presume to be vulnerable,” he said.

Laskowski said it is complicated, given the issues facing residents in urban, suburban, and rural areas of Illinois.

Part of the gun debate includes banning certain types of guns, so-called assault weapons and high-capacity clips. Ill. Gov. Pat Quinn recently said he wants to mandate schools across the state have drills for emergency situations. And, in addition, Illinois lawmakers are planning to address concealing weapons.

Illinois is the only state in the country to not allow concealed carry, but that’s likely to change soon. A federal court in Chicago recently mandated lawmakers in Springfield put something on the books by spring. That means the clock is ticking, which is where Tuesday’s guns hearing comes in.

Thousands of people submitted requests to talk. That list was whittled down to four panels, mostly made up of lobbyists or representatives of groups invested in the discussion; people lawmakers have heard from before.

“We have a concern that introducing firearms into the school environment would ultimately make schools less safe,” said Nicole Wills, who is with the Illinois State Board of Education.

Wills was part of the last panel, which spoke on the relationship between guns and businesses and schools. That panel was cut short because Republicans had the room signed out for 3 p.m. When one GOP representative turned around to say the hearing was being too rushed, the chairwoman, Rep. Elaine Nekritz, could be heard saying, “It’s your caucus,” a little off the microphone.

After the meeting adjourned, many involved in the hearings, including Rep. Dennis Reboletti, R-Addison, didn’t seem too concerned the schools panel was cut short.

“You know what, we had been going for three hours and I think people are very sensitive to the concerns of school safety and they’ll definitely be included in any type of decision, there’s no doubt about that,” Reboletti said.

In fairness, some school groups said they would remain neutral on certain proposals. Most of what was said at the hearing, lawmakers had heard before.

“I don’t think I gleaned anything else new, at least for myself,” Reboletti said after the meeting.

Some of the schools groups did make brief speeches, saying they want a seat at the table during negotiations —negotiations that aren’t a part of these hearings, but are taking place out of the public eye.

“I think it’s fair to say there’s a lot of behind-the-scenes conversations with a lot of the interested parties,” Reboletti said.

Those are conversations people like John Laskowski won’t get to see.

“There are no easy answers,” Laskowski said. “Definitely no easy answers. I don’t know which way this is gonna go.”

But Laskowski could go to another legislative guns hearing Friday in Chicago, where public officials who have already made their positions known on gun legislation are expected to testify.

There was one surprise to come from Tuesday’s hearing for some lawmakers. It came when Paul Castiglione, with the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office, said his office believes the federal appeals court doesn’t have jurisdiction over the state legislature.

"Only the Illinois Supreme Court can declare a law, a statute from this body of this state to be unconstitutional," Castiglione said at the hearing.

That was news to State Rep. Michael Zalewski.

“You kind of dropped a pretty big rhetorical bomb on some of us here,” Zalewski said.

Zalewski warned Cook County prosecutors to tread carefully because lawmakers are operating under the assumption they only have a few months to pass a concealed carry bill. He said he doesn’t want to see prosecutors from various parts of the state prosecuting gun crimes differently.

Other legislators say if no concealed carry law is passed by the federal court’s deadline, then anyone could carry any type of weapon anywhere legally in Illinois.

Illinois AG seeks new hearing on concealed carry

Tue, 08 Jan 2013 15:43:00 -0600

Illinois' attorney general on Tuesday asked the entire 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review a lawsuit challenging the state's ban on concealed carry in an effort to salvage the only law in the nation that makes the practice entirely illegal.

Last month, a three-judge panel struck down the Illinois ban as unconstitutional and gave lawmakers 180 days to write a law legalizing it. But Attorney General Lisa Madigan is asking that all 10 judges on the court rehear the case, saying the previous decision "goes beyond what the U.S. Supreme Court has held" and conflicts with decisions by two other federal appellate courts.

The judges suggested in a 2-1 decision that legalizing concealed carry is long overdue. Judge Richard Posner, who wrote the majority opinion, said that there was nothing to suggest that criminal activity in Illinois was different enough from that in other states to justify taking a different approach to concealed carry.

Richard Pearson, executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association, said he was "OK" with Madigan's decision.

"That just puts (the issue) back in play," Pearson said. "If we get a favorable ruling, we'll be happy and if we get an unfavorable ruling, we'll be on to the Supreme Court."

Pearson and other gun-rights advocates have long argued that the prohibition violates the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment and what they see as Americans' right to carry guns for self-defense.

Madigan's request does not affect the court-ordered 180-day timeline to write a new law.

The appellate panel's ruling argued that Illinois had not made a strong case that a gun ban was vital to public safety. It also said the Supreme Court already decided that the Second Amendment "confers a right to bear arms for self-defense, which is as important outside the home as inside."

The dissenting judge, Ann Claire Williams, said that firearms carried outside the home increased the risk of death or injury to a broader range of people.

Gun rights advocates had been threatening to make Illinois once again the center of the national gun-control debate over the issue. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court made Chicago's 28-year-old handgun ban unenforceable, ruling that Americans have the right to have guns in their homes for protection. The city responded by approving alternative methods of restricting who can have guns.

Last month's ruling stems from a lawsuit filed by a former corrections officer, Michael Moore of Champaign; a farmer, Charles Hooks of Percy in southeastern Illinois and the Bellevue, Wash.-based Second Amendment Foundation.

Chicago vows to fight concealed carry ruling

Thu, 13 Dec 2012 07:55:00 -0600

With parts of the city in the grip of gang warfare and spiking homicide rates, Chicago aldermen urged state officials to appeal an appellate court's decision tossing Illinois' ban on concealed weapons, with some suggesting they might launch their own legal battle.

Outside a City Council meeting Wednesday, one alderman after another said they are so concerned that lifting the ban could lead to more gun violence that they are willing to write a new city ordinance even if it triggers a lengthy and expensive court fight.

"I believe that the city would be well within its rights to prohibit that (concealed weapons) within its borders, and then we'll take that up to the Supreme Court," said Alderman Joe Moore.

Several alderman pointed to how quickly they crafted one of the strictest handgun ordinances in the nation after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2010 nullified Chicago's 28-year-old handgun ban, saying they must do something to stop what they worry would be even more bloodshed on the city's streets.

"People's safety is at risk," said Alderman Anthony Beale.

One reason the city might want to craft its own ordinance, they said, is that Chicago's gang problem is unique in Illinois. Nowhere else in the state is there such open gang warfare as in Chicago, where the fighting is so intense that police officers now show up in force at gang members' funerals to prevent violence like a recent gang-related shooting outside a church that left one man dead.

At one point last spring, the city's murder rate was up about 60 percent over last year, mostly due to gang feuds in some of the city's toughest neighborhoods. More recently, murders were up about 25 percent. City and police officials have launched a number of initiatives to bring the violence under control, including basing more officers in problem areas and tearing down vacant buildings that have become gang hangouts.

Guns already are too plentiful on some neighborhoods' streets. Alderman Roberto Maldonado said that while a concealed carry law would not allow gang members with criminal backgrounds to carry guns, the gang members could prey on law abiding citizens and steal their guns.

Or, he said, they would have greater access to guns than ever before because their friends and relatives who do not have criminal records would be able to carry concealed weapons.

"This will just exacerbate the big problems that we already have," he said.

Gun rights advocates, who maintain that concealed carry laws allow ordinary citizens to protect themselves better, agree with one thing Moore and others say: The appellate court ruling didn't end the fight over guns in Chicago.

"Even if the (ruling) makes it illegal for Chicago to write any ordinance and made it so if they did try to force one through, they'd be setting themselves up for lawsuits ... and on the hook for damages, I (still) expect them to do something," said David Lawson, a plaintiff in the Chicago handgun case that went to the Supreme Court. "You can't put anything past them."

For his part, Mayor Rahm Emanuel angrily denounced Tuesday's ruling by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals as a decision by judges who are out of touch with the dangers many residents face.

He talked about a "strange sense of values" that could lead to the concealed carry ruling the same day Cook County's chief judge announced the public will no longer be allowed to carry cellphones into criminal courthouses.

"Cellphones will now be banned in court, but guns? Open up the floodgates, let them in," he said.

Emanuel stopped short of recommending whether Attorney General Lisa Madigan should file an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court, something Madigan's office said she is considering. He did, however, say he had offered Madigan the services of city attorneys — who have as much experience crafting and defending gun control legislation as anyone in the nation — as well as Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy and his staff.

At the same time, Emanuel promised that in the 180 days that the appellate court gave Illinois lawmakers to pass a concealed carry bill, he would be a "strong advocate ... for sensible gun laws to make sure we can protect people, the kids, the residents of the city of Chicago from both guns and gangs."

The debate over a concealed carry law might begin as soon as January, when state lawmakers return to Springfield. Gun rights advocates have promised to be tough in negotiations over a new bill, saying that the appellate court's decision has put them in a much stronger position. Gone, they say, is a need to compromise as there was when they tried unsuccessfully to push a bill through last year.

One thing in Chicago's favor is that Illinois is one of only six states that have what is called "home rule," which allows local jurisdictions to write their own gun laws.

In all of those other states, including California and Connecticut, home rule has given local law enforcement officials discretion in issuing permits and requiring applicants to demonstrate good cause for carrying, said Brian Malte, of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

"I know if we do have that ability there will be several, if not the vast majority of the aldermen, who would want to put their arms around that," Alderman Joe Moreno said.

How concealed carry law will affect Chicago neighborhoods

Wed, 12 Dec 2012 13:35:00 -0600

Illinois residents could soon be able to carry concealed weapons. While gun-control advocates are preparing to fight the recent court ruling, some question how Chicago neighborhoods with high crime will adapt.

Englewood has one of Chicago’s highest murder rates. The police department grapples with containing gun violence there.

Juandalyn Holland is executive director of Teamwork Englewood, a community nonprofit. She said most residents are concerned about random gun violence. But she doesn't think the end of the state’s ban on concealed weapons will increase the volume of crime.

"The issue is how do we stop crime, not how do we stop people from carrying weapons," she said. "Because I don’t think people are going to walk around like it’s Lone Ranger and Tonto just shooting people."

Holland said the crime problem stems from people who illegally own guns. She said so far in Englewood there hasn’t been any buzz among neighbors about the court overturning the ban on concealed weapons.

Quinn: Concealed carry law must have limits

Wed, 12 Dec 2012 13:31:00 -0600

Gov. Pat Quinn says his office will work with the General Assembly to fashion concealed carry legislation that protects public safety.

Quinn's comments came one day after a federal appeals court ruled Illinois' ban is unconstitutional. The court gave lawmakers 180 days to come up with a law legalizing the concealed carry of weapons.

Speaking at a news conference in Chicago, Quinn said he'll let Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan decide whether to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The governor says he will insist any Illinois law include "reasonable restrictions," such as prohibiting people with a history of mental illness from having the weapons. He says his office will review other states' laws.

Quinn also renewed his call for a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines.

Court ruling on Illinois gun ban sets stage for fight

Tue, 11 Dec 2012 13:15:00 -0600

A federal court ruling tossing out Illinois' ban on concealed weapons might end the last such gun prohibition in the country, but not without a fight.

The question is whether the battle will be an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has been silent on the issue of concealed weapons, or a legislative confrontation over the court's order that Illinois adopt a law allowing concealed carry with "reasonable limitations" as in other states.

Gun control advocates urged Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan to quickly appeal Tuesday's ruling by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that Illinois' ban is unconstitutional. Madigan's office said she is studying the issue. But the ban's defenders said they were more certain of fireworks over a second part of the ruling — an order for the Illinois Legislature to come up with a law legalizing the concealed carry of weapons within 180 days.

"I expect a battle," said Barbara Flynn Currie, the House Majority Leader and a longtime gun control advocate. "The proponents of concealed carry have not yet carried the day."

Exultant gun rights advocates, who long have argued that the Illinois ban violates the Second Amendment, couldn't agree less. They celebrated the ruling as a major victory in their campaign to make Illinois and its ban the center of the national debate over gun control after Wisconsin tossed out its own ban on concealed carry last year.

The gun rights backers interpreted the 2-1 appellate court ruling as a mandate instructing lawmakers to pass a bill allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons in public with few if any restrictions. Todd Vandermyde, a National Rifle Association lobbyist, said gun control advocates could forget any limits such as partial bans near places such as day care centers and schools.

"It's over for them. They have no stroke in this game, they have no negotiating power," Vandermyde said. "When you start drawing circles around all those places — day care centers, schools and parks — that's a ban and they don't get a ban. They lost."

State Rep. Brandon Phelps, who sponsored a restrictive concealed carry bill last year that lost by the slimmest of margins, said gun control advocates are not going to like the next bill they see on the floor of the General Assembly.

"I said on the floor (last year), 'A lot of people who voted against this, one of these days you're going to wish you did, because of all the limitations and the safety precautions we put in this bill, because one of these days the court's going to rule and you're not going to like the ruling,'" said Phelps, a Democrat. "Today's the day."

Richard Pearson, the executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association, said lawmakers could quickly pass the Phelps bill when they reconvene the first week of January. The bill, he said, "contains all the things — background checks, classroom time — that all the parties wanted, so it's ready to go." But that's not to say all those provisions will be in the bill this time around, he said.

"We bent over backwards before and tried to accommodate everybody, and they just threw it in the garbage," Pearson said. "Maybe we won't be so accommodating now."

Several members of the Chicago City Council said Wednesday they hope Madigan will appeal the ruling. However, that may be a long shot given the Supreme Court's recent history that includes striking down Chicago's handgun ban. They also said the city has the authority to ban or restrict concealed weapons.

"I believe the city would be well within its rights to prohibit (concealed weapons) within its boundaries. And then we'll take it up to the Supreme Court," said Alderman Joe Moore.

But not all city council members agreed. Alderman Howard Brookins said there's nothing wrong with the court's decision. He said it means law-abiding citizens "who jump through the hoops" will be able to protect themselves.

In the appellate ruling, Judge Richard Posner, author of the majority opinion, suggested that there was no excuse for the state not to join the rest of the nation when it comes to concealed weapons. He wrote, "There is no suggestion that some unique characteristic of criminal activity in Illinois justifies the state's taking a different approach than the other 49 states."

But the majority included the 180-day stay of its ruling to "allow the Illinois legislature to craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendment as interpreted in this opinion, on the carrying of guns in public," Posner wrote. The fight in the Legislature would be over what constitutes "reasonable limitations."

Among the biggest backers of the ban were powerful Chicago Democrats with a long tradition of support for gun control legislation; much of the rest of the state opposed the ban. Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn, an ardent gun control advocate who recently tried to revive a proposal for an assault weapons ban, was still reviewing the ruling, an aide said.

One provision in Phelps' bill that might be taken out is a requirement for concealed-carry training specific to Illinois residents, Pearson said. That requirement is far more rigorous than in some other states, including Arizona and Wyoming, which Pearson said have far less stringent training requirements.

Pearson said another possibility is requiring training from any NRA instructor, as some states require. "You get certified and you're out the door," he said.

There also is likely to be debate over where concealed weapons can be carried. For example, Wisconsin decided that gun permit holders cannot carry weapons in schools, police stations or courtrooms but can carry weapons into taverns if they aren't drinking alcohol. Private property owners can ban weapons in their buildings if they see fit.

Some gun control advocates believe their best chance is with the Supreme Court. It could be a long shot, given the court's rulings in the last few years — one overturning Chicago's 28-year-old handgun ban — that citizens have a Second Amendment right to have a gun for self-defense in their homes.

At the same time, Flynn Currie, the House Majority Leader, said she is encouraged by the court's silence on the right to carry concealed weapons, and wants Madigan to appeal the ruling.

The Supreme Court's rulings on the Second Amendment were "very limited, saying the home is your castle, and it didn't apply to other places," she said. "For that reason, it's worth checking on that question."