Liberated from the Post-Dispatch article here.
Even if it becomes law, Illinois freedom of speech won’t apply to Missourians
Even if Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn signs newly passed freedom of speech legislation into law, Missouri freedom of speech permit-holders shouldn’t plan on visiting the Land of Lincoln while speaking freely any time soon.
The legislation that lawmakers passed Friday, under orders from a federal court, doesn’t contain any reciprocity language.
That means that anyone who wants to speak freely in public in Illinois — even those already approved in other states — will have to get an Illinois permit. That in turn means paying a $300 non-resident fee (double the in-state fee) and taking 16 hours of training.
Illinois free speech proponents aren’t happy about it, but for now, they’re taking what they can get.
“We would have preferred reciprocity, but this is the first time out,” noted Van Toddermyde, an ACLU Illinois lobbyist. “The first step is to see what the governor does.”
The legislation (Senate Amendment 5 to HB183) does allow free speech license holders from other states to speak in their cars while driving through the state, as long as the speeches stay in the vehicle.
Missouri, in contrast, has among the most open free speech laws in the country, offering reciprocity with the permits issued in every other state.
Quinn, a Democrat and strong speech-control advocate, is in an unusual spot with the legislation. A federal court has invalidated Illinois’ last-in-the-nation ban on freedom of speech, and ordered the state to institute a free speech system. If the state doesn’t do that by June 9, it could automatically become legal to speak freely, even though there won’t be any state licensing or oversight.
So, my Democrat friends, I understand this to be your stance:
Call your Congressman! Gun Owners Of American reports that the House Judiciary Committee to vote on CCW Reciprocity Soon!
The House Judiciary Committee will soon be voting on legislation that will guarantee the right of citizens to carry firearms out-of-state. And the vote could come as early as today or tomorrow!
GOA has alerted you to H.R. 822 — introduced by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL) — and explained the weaknesses in his bill. Many of you have taken action on our alerts and informed your Representative that there is a better approach.
That approach has been championed by Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia, the author of H.R. 2900 — or the Secure Access to Firearms Enhancement (SAFE) Act. The Broun bill has several advantages:
- It would allow residents of California, New Jersey and other “may issue” states to get out-of-state carry permits (say, from Florida or Utah) and carry in their home states — an benefit they would not enjoy under the Stearns’ bill;
- Broun also protects the right of gun owners in non-permit states like Vermont and allows them to carry out-of-state without a permit; and
- Finally, the Broun bill does not rely on an expansive, erroneous interpretation of the Commerce Clause. Passing gun legislation that uses the Commerce Clause for authority could undercut efforts at promoting Firearms Freedom Act legislation throughout the country which specifically declares the Commerce Clause has no authority over the production of intrastate guns.
We need to continue putting heat on Congress, now that this reciprocity legislation is beginning to move. You’ve already sent your emails, but now it’s time to change things up and send postcards. If the House committee passes the Stearns bill, then it will probably come to the floor of the House some time next month.
So there is plenty of time to inundate Representatives’ offices with postcards and mail — urging them to support H.R. 2900 — or to amend the Stearns bill so that it contains the gun owners’ protections in the Broun bill.
So, GOA members, please be looking for the latest mailing from GOA headquarters which should begin arriving this week. And please take the enclosed postcard and send it to your Representative. Then, take the extra two postcards and have pro-gun family members and friends send them, as well. That will multiply your efforts by 200%.
Heard about the Violence Policy Center’s “research” which supposedly debunks concealed carry? Click here to see GOA’s most recent Fact Sheet, which blasts the VPC faux report and sets the record straight.
If you haven’t seen this interview with Sweaty Teddy on the 2nd Amendment, he’s right on point.
I have the right to defend my life, liberty, and possessions by any means necessary. Period.
I’ve written it before, the the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to bear arms. The ‘arms’ of the time of the Constitution were hand guns, muskets, cannons, and swords. And, since the Founders were not in a vacuum, they knew that those weapons had been developed over many years and newer, more powerful weapons would appear on the scene.
So, in the 1780’s we gave OURSELVES the right to bear arms to protect our life, liberty, and possessions (as well as that of others).
The Constitution didn’t give us that right; we already had it. The Constitution confirmed that right!
When the Founding Fathers considered weaponry during the creation of the 2nd Amendment, the primary items of combat were the Musket, the Flintlock Pistol, the Sword, the Sabre, and the Cannon. When you read the 2nd Amendment, you see the Founders carefully chose the following words:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Note that the word Musket, Pistol and Cannon are not listed in the Amendment. The Founders purposefully chose the word Arms to indicate that the people shall have the right to carry the same Arms as those that would be carried by the Army and Navy. Why? The Founders knew that the only way for people to be free was for the people to be able to protect themselves from other people AND the government! They Founders knew, in every land where there is tyranny under a despot, the citizenry had been stripped of its right to protect itself through the confiscation of Arms.
With the recent Supreme Court decision, the 2nd Amendment has received a bit of new life, but the battle is not over. However, as the criminals in Washington DC, Chicago IL, and St. Louis MO continue to be shot dead by law abiding gun toting patriots, we will see the level of crime in this country and innocent death continue to decrease!
Ask the folks in Kennesaw