Re: Denied Illinois FOID card

More | Report Post

The Supreme Court in this ruling has said that persons in Washington DC have a
right to keep a gun in there home for protection and home defense. The keeping
firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill is a desireable thing.

What will be interesting to see is if the FOID registration system in IL and
similar systems in other states is/are a barrier to lawful firearm posession by
persons who can lawfully own a firearm. And if the FOID system or how it is
implemented is a significant obstacle that conflicts with the Supreme Courts
ruling.

Best case scenario, if you really want guns and don't want the hassle of
registering them, move to a state that does not require the registeration of fire
arms.

On 6/28/08, FOID SYSTEM IS UN-CONSTITUTIONAL wrote:
> Sure if you have solid proof that a person has mental issues from a certified
> mental health professional that a person is a threat to society, then that
> person should not have firearms. I really suggest that you have proof and can
> provide that proof from a certified mental health facility that someone has did
> something wrong, or shows signs that they are a threat to society before you
> take those guns from an American citizen home, or you are violating the
> constitution, and no better then the crooks we put behind bars for breaking
> constitutional law.
>
> On 6/27/08, -- wrote:
>> On 6/27/08, FOID SYSTEM IS UN-CONSTITUTIONAL wrote:
>>> The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a constitutional right
>>> to keep guns in their homes for self-defense, the justices' first major
>>> pronouncement on gun control in U.S. history. Prooves FOID Cards violate a
>>> persons rights.
>>
>> There are going to be challenges to existing gun laws because of the Heller
>> decision but don't expect that felons or those with a mental health history
>> will be allowed to own firearms. If you have spent time in a "rubber room"
> you
>> will still be restricted to owning a rubber gun.
>>
>> Read the decision carefully. It is available at:
>> http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf
>>
>> Don't expect that unrestricted ownership is now the law of the land should
> read
>> carefully. Read below.
>> **********
>> DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL. v. HELLER
>>
>> "Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.
>> It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any
>> manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed
>> weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment
>> or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast
>> doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by
>> felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms
>> in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or
>> laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of
>> arms."