Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan has requested the state police make the name of every registered gun owner available to the public. She’s done so, stating it qualifies under the Freedom of Information Act. A judge has issued a temporary restraining order, blocking the release of information, though this is no doubt just the beginning.

Currently, the Illinois State Police maintains a database of all registered gun owners, those who possess a Firearm Owners Identification Card (FOIC). Madigan ruled the police release this list. The State Police sought a judge’s intervention and they got what they asked for—at least for now.

Madigan’s request has gun owners up in arms, wondering what purpose the release would serve. Some are saying it’s merely a political ploy on her part. This commentary in the Tribune states the request “sounds like so much politics aimed at those who don’t like the idea of people owning guns.” And that doesn’t seem to be too far off.

The FOID database is traditionally used by law enforcement and as a way to track accountability in the right to bear arms. Disclosing such information could breach privacy and potentially put the law-abiding gun owners at risk.

The Freedom of Information Act, created in 1966, allows for the disclosure of documents and information under the control of the government. A quick look even at the Wikipedia site explaining the act shows just how many exceptions and amendments have been applied to the Act.

The Associated Press filed the request under the Freedom of Information Act and this is what state Attorney General Madigan based her ruling off of.

Because the initial request came from the AP, it’s a fair guess they want to be able to access the listing for reporting reasons. They want to use the information in their journalistic endeavors. But do they have a right to the information under the FOIA? That’s something that will ultimately be decided by the courts.

Gun rights are a hotly contested issue in every state. The guarantee we are afforded under the Constitution’s Second Amendment is always making the news in one way or another. Citizen’s opinions range from the desire to ban all personally owned firearms to a virtual free for all in gun ownership. The majority, however, lie somewhere in between.

Because there are complicated laws surrounding lawful gun ownership, it isn’t too difficult for even a normally law-abiding citizen to run afoul of these laws. If you’re facing weapons charges in the state of Illinois, contact our lawyers today.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

This past week the United State Supreme Court ruled the ban on private firearms within Chicago violates the 2^nd Amendment right to bear arms. Now, local officials are struggling to find ways to control firearm ownership in a city torn apart by homicide and violence.

The High Court ruled that the 2^nd Amendment left localities no room to completely withdraw a person’s right to own a firearm, negating the 28 year ban Chicago had in place. Although the ban was only sporadically enforced, it meant law abiding citizens could not get a permit to own a gun. If they wanted a firearm-they had to possess it illegally.

While the court stated that localities could still maintain “reasonable gun control measures” an all out ban is unacceptable. So this week, city leaders in Chicago began discussing what measures could be used. According to the Wall Street Journal, everything from requiring liability insurance, criminal background checks, and firearms training is being considered.

Chicago is in the throes of a violent year, one to top last year for certain. Just a few weekends ago the city experienced 50 shootings and 7 murders. In one weekend.

The murder rate in Chicago is higher than New York City, whose rate is only 1/3 that of Chicago. Los Angeles’ rate is 2/3 as large as Chicago’s, making this city in particular need of something to control the violence.

Critics of the ban, however, state that this violence was going on while the ban was in place, proof they state that is was ineffective. Others who live in neighborhoods where gun violence is prevalent welcome new gun control measures that may positively impact the communities.

Gun control is a hot button issue whether you are in Chicago or the smaller communities of rural Illinois. A balance between the 2^nd Amendment rights and states’ ability to regulate that right has always been a point of contention. While the new ruling from the Supreme Court does clarify some things, it will no doubt lead to new questions as well.

Now and likely long after the laws change, however, there will be a multitude of gun laws on the books. There are numerous ways in which you can be charged with a firearms offense in the state of Illinois, no matter which municipality you live in.

Whether you are charged with possessing a banned firearm or other criminal charge, contact our attorneys to discuss the details of your case.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

As I wrote about last week, the Supreme Court is getting ready to rule on the Chicago handgun ban. Just as this battle is going on in Washington, Mayor Richard Daley is seeking to tighten restrictions within the city.

According to the Chicago Tribune, the mayor wants new state laws on guns. He wants it to be harder for people to get guns and he wants criminals who use guns to receive harsher penalties. Although most of his suggestions were said to have failed in prior legislative sessions, Daley is asking the state to try again.

Among those changes his is recommending are background checks for all firearms sales (even private sales), a complete ban on assault weapons, a requirement that all gun dealers be licensed, and a limit on the number of handguns a person can purchase in a single month.

In addition he is asking the lawmakers to make it a Class 1 felony to knowingly sell a gun to a gang member, harsher penalties for unlawfully using a weapon, and “microstamping” of guns to make them more easily identifiable.

Daley and he proposed laws are not without critics, of course. Any law or regulation placed on firearms will be met with resistance simply because many believe their right to bear arms, as guaranteed by the 2^nd Amendment, should not be limited.

The fact is, however, until the Supreme Court rules otherwise, cities and states can regulate firearms how they wish, hence the vast number of laws currently on the books in Illinois and states across the country.

You may believe you were simply exercising your right to bear arms when you were arrested for a firearms offense. However, you may have well known that what you were doing was against the law.

Whatever the case, we can help. Whether you are facing charges of possession of a firearm, or any other weapons related offense, call our defense attorneys today. We can give you some free legal advice and help you gain clarity on a system that can be intimidating and quite confusing.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

The city of Chicago has a ban on handguns. The city of Washington D.C. had a similar ban until the U.S. Supreme Court called that law unconstitutional. Now the case McDonald v. City of Chicago will take the issue before the Court of the Land once again–this time deciding if their D.C. ruling applies to states and cities as well.

Nearly anyone you ask knows what the 2^nd Amendment is: it guarantees the right to bear arms. Previous Supreme Court decisions suggested this “right” only applied to the federal government, making it okay for states and cities to restrict guns. However, some argue that cities like Chicago should not be able to ban handguns completely.

When the Supreme Court ruled that D.C.’s handgun ban was unconstitutional, it didn’t expand those prior rulings stating that the 2^nd Amendment only applied to the federal government. The reason? Washington D.C. is a different sort of locale, governed by the federal government in a way that cities within the 50 states are not.

It was only a matter of time, then, that the Court would be asked to clarify the right to bear arms as it applies to such bans within states and cities across the country. The “McDonald” in McDonald v. City of Chicago is a concerned citizen who believes he should be able to keep a handgun in the home to protect his family and his property.

Currently, there are numerous laws in every state and city in the nation, controlling not only the weapons that we can and cannot own, but how we can use them and where we can take them. These laws were written with public safety in mind. This new court case stands to potentially define where public safety and the 2^nd Amendment intersect.

If you are charged with possession of a firearm, unlawful discharge, or any other weapons offense you may feel misjudged. As your attorney, it would be my job to represent your best interest in the courts, whether you are in Cook County or another jurisdiction.

If you need assistance with your gun case, call our attorneys today for a free consultation.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.