Illinois Outdoors at
RulesIllinois Outdoors at

Prairie State Outdoors Categories

Top Story :: Opinion :: Illinois Outdoor News :: Fishing News :: Hunting News :: Birding News :: Nature Stories :: Miscellaneous News :: Fishing :: Big Fish Fridays :: Big Fish Stories :: State Fishing Reports :: Other Fishing Reports :: Fishing Tips, Tactics & Tales :: Where to Fish :: Fishing Calendar :: Hunting :: Hunting Reports :: Hunting Tips, Tactics & Tales :: Where to Hunt :: Tales from the Timber :: Turkey Tales :: Hunting Calendar :: Big Game Stories :: Nature and Birding :: Birding Bits :: Nature Newsbits :: Critter Corner :: Birding Calendar :: Stargazing :: In the Wild :: Miscellaneous Reports and Shorts :: Links :: Hunting Links :: Birding Links :: Video ::

Big Buck Stories

1960s :: 1980s :: 1991-92 :: 1992-93 :: 1993-94 :: 1994-95 :: 1995-96 :: 1997-98 :: 1998-99 :: 1999-2000 :: 2000-01 :: 2001-02 :: 2003-04 :: 2004-05 :: 2005-06 :: 2006-07 :: 2007-08 :: 2008-09 :: 2009-10 :: 2010-11 :: 2011-12 :: 2012-13 ::


Flathead's Picture of the Week :: Big bucks :: Birdwatching :: Cougars :: Dogs :: Critters :: Fishing :: Asian carp :: Bass :: Catfish :: Crappie :: Ice :: Muskie :: Humor :: Hunting :: Deer :: Ducks :: Geese :: Turkey :: Upland game :: Misc. :: Mushrooms :: Open Blog Thursday :: Picture A Day 2010 :: Plants and trees :: Politics :: Prairie :: Scattershooting :: Tales from the Trail Cams :: Wild Things ::


Q and A: status of Illinois’ concealed carry law

May 13, 2013 at 06:34 AM

The Associated Press

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) — The courts, the Capitol and the clock are complicating a debate over how to end the prohibition on carrying concealed firearms in Illinois.

There are fewer than 30 days to go before a judicial deadline for developing a framework on allowing public weapons possession in the only state that currently has a ban. Attempts at legislative remedies failed in the House late last month, including one endorsed by the National Rifle Association that could resurface. Senators may try a version of their own as early as this week.

Sen. Kwame Raoul, a Chicago Democrat, is refining an earlier concealed-carry proposal that drew gun owners' derision last month. Discussions with Senate Democrats could produce a consensus plan that could get a vote within days, spokeswoman Rikeesha Phelon said.

A federal court order in December that found the ban unconstitutional set a June 9 deadline for solving the problem. The question divides lawmakers along geographical and political lines and even splits the two chambers — both led by Democrats.


Here are some questions and answers about the issue:

Q: How has Illinois avoided the concealed-carry wave?

A: In a word: Chicago. For decades, it has been one of the nation's more violent cities. It's also a city dominated by Democrats, a party whose liberal wing has generally clung to strict restrictions on guns, at least in the half-century since gun control shot to the top of the national consciousness following the assassinations of President John Kennedy, Sen. Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr.


Q: What's the feeling outside Chicago?

A: The gun-rights agenda is far less party-based. Democrats and Republicans alike, particularly in central and southern Illinois, represent thousands of hunters and sports shooters; they are more conservative with stronger views about Second Amendment liberties.


Q: If this has been going on for years, why all the hubbub now?

A: A lawful gun-owning woman in Union County, in southern Illinois, was brutally beaten and left for dead in September 2009 while at work as a church treasurer. Despite her firearms-safety training and permits to carry concealed weapons in two states, she was unarmed because of Illinois' law. She sued in federal court in May 2011. The case was combined with another when it went before the 7th Circuit appeals court. The ruling, issued on Dec. 11, overruled two lower courts and found the right to keep and bear arms applies beyond someone's front door.

"The right to 'bear' as distinct from the right to 'keep' arms is unlikely to refer to the home," Judge Richard Posner wrote for the majority. "To speak of 'bearing' arms within one's home would at all times have been an awkward usage. A right to bear arms thus implies a right to carry a loaded gun outside the home."


Q: What's the impact of the ruling?

A: The court gave Illinois 180 days — until June 9 — to enact a concealed-carry law.

NRA-backed legislation in the House would require concealed-carry permit to be issued to applicants who have a valid Firearm Owners' Identification Card, complete training and clear a background check. It fell seven votes short of passage last month but the proposal's sponsor, Rep. Brandon Phelps, D-Harrisburg, could recall it.


Q: What happens if no law is enacted by June 9?

A: Gun-rights advocates use the term "constitutional carry" to describe a state in which, with an obsolete, discredited law on the books, Illinoisans could carry any type of weapon anywhere, at any time, concealed or not.

Technically, only those defendants directly affected by the 7th Circuit's ruling — the attorney general and Union County law enforcement officials — would be prevented from enforcing the law. But it's likely anyone arrested for illegal weapons possession would have a strong case for having a conviction tossed out based on the 7th Circuit's ruling.

Phelps wants to avoid that scenario.

"A lot of gun owners don't want a lot of restrictions so they want to go off the cliff," Phelps said. "I'm worried about that because of the uncertainty that it brings."


Q: What are the other plans?

A: Raoul's Senate proposal initially required not only that state police review concealed carry permit applicants but that those who live in Cook County or Chicago would have to receive an "endorsement" from police in those in those jurisdictions to carry. Raoul has since removed the Cook County provision, Phelon confirmed.

Gun owners oppose a special endorsement for a certain part of the state.

Phelon said "a few constructive weeks of discussions" could put the legislation on a path for a vote as early as this week.


Q: Could the state still appeal the court ruling?

A: Yes. Attorney General Lisa Madigan has not decided whether to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, but earlier this month, the court granted her request for more time to make that decision, until June 24.

That, of course, is after the court's deadline. If the General Assembly and Quinn agree to a law by then, the court case is moot and there could be no appeal.


Phelps's bill is HB997.



Contact AP Political Writer John O'Connor at

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press.

Your CommentsComments :: Terms :: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Comment Area Pool Rules

  1. Read our Terms of Service.
  2. You must be a member. :: Register here :: Log In
  3. Keep it clean.
  4. Stay on topic.
  5. Be civil, honest and accurate.
  6. .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Log In

Register as a new member

Next entry: Wyo. Game and Fish to begin research-trapping wolves

Previous entry: Proposals would change Ohio deer-hunting rules

Log Out

RSS & Atom Feeds

Prairie State Outdoors
PSO on Facebook
Promote Your Page Too

News Archives

September 2019
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          
Copyright © 2007-2014 GateHouse Media, Inc.
Some Rights Reserved
Original content available for non-commercial use
under a Creative Commons license, except where noted.
Creative Commons