[ChicagoMike]

Ok... as an IL resident ... I am painfully familiar w the AWB just signed into law.
Yet I see something similar in MI and NM along w a strange one now in MA which will outlaw every semi auto rifle and shotgun.

Even on the face of it... these new laws fail any 2A challenge thanks to Bruen adding upon the earlier court decisions going back to Heller.

Yet why the huge push now?

Is this part of Joe Biden's plan?

I hope that tomorrow, the judge hearing the ILRA case against IL will put a stay in place.
(Meaning you can rush to your gun store and buy a new rifle that would have been banned. )

I also hope that this gets sent to SCOTUS where they could put a final nail in the AWB coffin.
A single ruling by SCOTUS that finds these AWB laws are unconstitutional will hopefully end it. (Of course its never that easy.)

 

[WaM14gunner]

Ok... as an IL resident ... I am painfully familiar w the AWB just signed into law.
Yet I see something similar in MI and NM along w a strange one now in MA which will outlaw every semi auto rifle and shotgun.

Even on the face of it... these new laws fail any 2A challenge thanks to Bruen adding upon the earlier court decisions going back to Heller.

Yet why the huge push now?

Is this part of Joe Biden's plan?

I hope that tomorrow, the judge hearing the ILRA case against IL will put a stay in place.
(Meaning you can rush to your gun store and buy a new rifle that would have been banned. )

I also hope that this gets sent to SCOTUS where they could put a final nail in the AWB coffin.
A single ruling by SCOTUS that finds these AWB laws are unconstitutional will hopefully end it. (Of course its never that easy.)

Just as in the NY ruling yesterday, they punted. They like the appeals process to go thru to the big courts, then will take the case, but probably not until

 

[kollector03]

there are plenty of laws in place that are unconstitutional but remain enforced simply because no one has come forward with deep enough pockets to challenge it.

 

[ChicagoMike]

Just as in the NY ruling yesterday, they punted. They like the appeals process to go thru to the big courts, then will take the case, but probably not until

Yes, but here's the thing about the NY law.

If I understand it... there's no harm while they wait to go thru the courts.
In IL waiting could cause gun stores to go under because of something that will most likely be found unconstitutional.

To Kollector03's point...

Yes, In Chicago, there are no gun stores. They set up the ruling that it would be impossible for creating a gun store/range that wouldn't be within their minimal distance from a school or church or whatever. (Not that there is any evidence that showed having a gun range/store near them was an issue of safety.

There's also the FOID card.
Its one thing to make everyone get a card and submit to a background check, however it actually works here in IL. Where it fails is that in order for someone to get a FOID card who is over 18 and under 21, they need a guardian to co-sign for them. This is clearly unconstitutional. The State when challenged over this merely delayed the case until the plaintiff aged out and then got it dismissed due to a lack of standing.

The sad thing... once the law is overturned... Pritzker and his ilk will claim that they tried but it was the evil gun owners that are at fault.
Forgetting that the majority of gun crimes in Chicago occur w pistols not long guns. In fact there were twice as many murders in Chicago alone than for all of the killings using a long gun in the entire US. Sad but true fact.

 

[blackdiamond]

Just like cockroaches when you turn the lights on, the communist and anti-gunners are scrambling in panic. They see the writing on the wall with recent and pending SCOTUS, even lower court decisions involving egregious constitutional violations from the tyrant wannabes. They don't have the discipline to wait for the green flare, they opened fire prematurely exposing their really poorly built weak position. I'll bet you Obama wished he had paid as much attention as Trump did to appoint empty federal judge seats, which is now starting to pay off. IMO, they are going all in with a losing hand, but will always be a dangerous pit viper until we cut the head off and bury it.

 

[DukeConnor]

Trying to get stuff done while they still have the whitehouse.

 

[blackdiamond]

Just as in the NY ruling yesterday, they punted. They like the appeals process to go thru to the big courts, then will take the case, but probably not until

It appears to me that the SCOTUS has raised an eyebrow amid the wave of orchestrated "in your face" defiance" after the Bruen decision. I do think the SCOTUS is paying attention to obvious trends of lower left leaning courts using the legal system as nothing more than a stall tactic, hanging up litigation for years and years. I do see light at the end of the tunnel if we can maintain our position before the commies delete the rule of law and cancel out our courts.

 

[ChicagoMike]

It appears to me that the SCOTUS has raised an eyebrow amid the wave of orchestrated "in your face" defiance" after the Bruen decision. I do think the SCOTUS is paying attention to obvious trends of lower left leaning courts using the legal system as nothing more than a stall tactic, hanging up litigation for years and years. I do see light at the end of the tunnel if we can maintain our position before the commies delete the rule of law and cancel our courts.

I don't know.

I got the impression in that they're like the parent who doesn't like it when one of their kids always comes running when there's an argument between siblings.
It seems like a "you've got to work it out" moment. That SCOTUS wants to let the lower courts work through the process before they have to deal with it.

W.R.T the AWB laws ... SCOTUS gave them Bruen and now its up to the lower courts to resolve things using Bruen. I don't think SCOTUS will step in unless they have to and will wait to see how the lower courts react.

I agree that NY is acting out like a petulant child who didn't get their way... but now w Bruen, I guess SCOTUS wants to see what the NY courts do...

I really 'love' how el Fatzo claims that the AWB law in IL makes everyone safer when it doesn't address the actual problems in the first place.

 

[SGM (ret.)]

...
Yet why the huge push now?
Is this part of Joe Biden's plan?
....

Sort answers:

1) It isn't some sudden "huge push." The Dems and the anti-2A gun-control crowd have been telling us for years and years, right to our faces, that this is what they intend to do. They did it on a national level back in the '90s and all of these state level assault weapons bans are an extension of that very same effort.

2) Yes, Joe Biden says every chance he gets that he's going to ban assault weapons. He avoided the issue during his campaign, but no one should be surprised that an assault weapons ban was always part and parcel of his agenda.

The problem is that too many gun owners simply don't take these fascists at their own word and then make an effort to oppose them. These liberal fascists have no real hidden agendas. It's all out there for anyone who bothers to look to see.

 

[Rifleman-7.62]

The problem is that too many gun owners simply don't take these fascists at their own word and then make an effort to oppose them. These liberal fascists have no real hidden agendas. It's all out there for anyone who bothers to look to see.

I get so tired of hearing people say: No one is trying to take away citizen's private guns in America. They already have taken most of the citizen gun rights in New Jersey, Hawaii, California and New York. They are in process of trying to take them from Illinois citizens. Yes, the tyrants in this country are trying to take away private guns and in some areas succeeding. Once they get the semi-automatic rifles and the full capacity magazines they will come for the pistols, lever, pump and bolt actions later.

 

[Kmc1911]

Don't forget the Colorado AWB that I fully expect to pass. This state is full of cowards and vegans.

 

[XM25Dweeb]

Should be titled "Why the rush to control us?"

 

[wifetrained]

The question of "WHY" is what's relevant. What's coming down the pike that makes them so terrified of an armed populous.

 

[trashysquid]

The question of "WHY" is what's relevant. What's coming down the pike that makes them so terrified of an armed populous.

This. Sounds a tad tinfoil hat-ish, but given everything that’s come from this regime over the last 2 years - especially on the regulatory front - we can’t discount a larger plan being shoved through while they still control the bureaucracy.

 

[ChicagoMike]

The question of "WHY" is what's relevant. What's coming down the pike that makes them so terrified of an armed populous.

Yeah, its the why the sudden rush.

My take is a bit less evil.

Biden and others have been pushing for a new AWB since the earlier one ended.
They ignored the fact that the Feds concluded that it had zero impact on gun violence.
In fact during the ban, the beltway sniper(s) used a Bushmaster that was banned. ( I remember having to head into a meeting in DC and the cabbie telling me someone was shot an hour before and near where I was going. )

Now they want to ban all semi-autos. They wouldn't fly even after Heller, let alone after Bruen.
The AWBs ignore that they are attacking firearms that are common. Where they destructive or unique... they could be banned. (A state could ban you from owning a 20mm deck gun.)

I think that after the midterms... those states w a super majority of 'liberals' including the governor see this as their best chance to get it done.

They also know that it will take time for these to wind thru the courts. So they can cause harm.
Not to the gun owner, but to the gun store. If your local store goes out of biz, its now harder for you to buy a gun.
Plus they get the benefit of showing to their constituents that they at least tried something all the time knowing that it will get shot down by the courts. Plus, when that happens, they'll blame the GOP.

So in their mind, there is no downside.
You can't sue them for damages because they have immunity.

They also hide behind the claim that they believe what they passed was constitutional.

For El Fatzo, you can give him Ozempic, but you can't fix stupid.
Watch... he's going to make a run in 2024 and will challenge Biden in a primary.

 

[trashysquid]

They also know that it will take time for these to wind thru the courts. So they can cause harm.
Not to the gun owner, but to the gun store. If your local store goes out of biz, its now harder for you to buy a gun.
Plus they get the benefit of showing to their constituents that they at least tried something all the time knowing that it will get shot down by the courts. Plus, when that happens, they'll blame the GOP.

I would argue this is no less evil and Machiavellian since the fat tyrant up there is using the court system to bankrupt/put out of business the mom-and-pop gun stores and to force the deeper-pocketed chain places to comply or stop selling. Also very similar to attempts at taxing ammo as an indirect attack at gun ownership by turning the existing inventory in the population’s hands into expensive paper weights. And all this while said fat tyrant is or was in Davos sleeping soundly in his palatial digs under armed guard, courtesy of the Swiss army/police.

On another note, I also fear that all of this tit-for-tat, selective choosing of what laws to follow or not on both sides is accelerating our societal breakdown (combined with the breakdown of traditional family units and the abandonment of the belief in something greater than one’s self, but that’s just my humble opinion).

 

[ABNAK]

This. Sounds a tad tinfoil hat-ish, but given everything that’s come from this regime over the last 2 years - especially on the regulatory front - we can’t discount a larger plan being shoved through while they still control the bureaucracy.

Unless our side can get a handle on voter fraud (and I really don't care how they do it) then "they" will forever control the bureaucracy. Every election will have the same outcome: "Wow, despite our popularity being in the toilet, the American people somehow felt we were the right choice AGAIN."

 

[jeffmac712]

Looks like one Illinois court put a hold on it but it only covers the 800 plaintiffs if I read it properly. We believe that it is unconstitutional and will not stand the challenge but Gov. Pritzger and others believe it will. Maybe that is just grandstanding and using our tax dollars to play a game of legal challenge attrition.

Illinois state court allows limited pause on state's gun ban backed by Pritzker

 

[Donn21]

Trying to get stuff done while they still have the whitehouse.

I wouldn't count on it. We were supposed to see the Big Red Wave in '22.

 

[barnetmill]

Why the 'Rush'. Well they failed last year while they had to house and 50-50 in the senate to ban semiauto rifles and magazines. After the midterm election they lost the house and still do not have a 60-40 majority in the senate. The country is economically in trouble.
The smart thing for gun control as they see it is to use those states that are under democratic control to ban at the state level. It is to them a holy cause and even if it politically hurts them the DEM Party will do it in many locales.