On Friday in Illinois, a Lake County Circuit judge tossed a Deerfield ban on so-called “assault weapons.”
The ban had also had targeted “high capacity magazines.”
Additionally 86’d: “semiautomatic rifles, semiautomatic shotguns and semiautomatic pistols with detachable magazines.”
Anyone in defiance of the law would be fined $1,000 per day until they moved their gun to a club or holding facility outside of Deerfield.
The judge’s ruling referenced owners’ “clearly ascertainable right to not be subjected to a preempted and unenforceable ordinance.”
But the city ain’t done.
From the Chicago Tribune:
Deerfield officials said they are reviewing the ruling with their legal team and exploring options, including an appeal to the Illinois Appellate Court. In the meantime, they said, the village will abide by the ruling and not enforce its ban.
“This unprecedented interpretation of state legislative action and intent make this case ripe for appeal,” village officials said in a statement. “We continue to believe that these weapons have no place in our community and that our common-sense assault weapon regulations are legal and were properly enacted.”
In 2013, the Illinois legislature was eyeing a moratorium on all firearms, but that was shut down by the Supreme Court and the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. So they went for an alternative.
As reported by The Daily Wire:
At that time, the legislature passed the Illinois Concealed Carry Act — a heavily restrictive concealed carry scheme that requires hours of training and extensive background investigation — and the Firearm Owner’s Identification Card Act, which requires that any prospective Illinois gun owner register with the state and apply for a license simply to purchase a gun. The legislature added that any municipalities seeking more restrictive gun control measures —including Deerfield — do so sometime before July 19, 2013, when the new Illinois laws took effect.
In response to the recent ban, two gun owners filed a suit which claimed Deerfield — as well as other state municipalities — had missed its chance to further regulate gun ownership in 2013.
Deerfield argued that the new ban was simply an amendment to the earlier ordinances rather than wholly new legislation.
The judge didn’t buy it.
So the ban got the boot.
Here’s somethin’ to kick around: Only followers of the law follow the law; maybe Chicago would do better to figure out how to take guns from criminals instead of the good guys. Until then, no ban is going to make the streets any safer. So how about allow would-be victims the ability to defend themselves? That at least tempers the the criminals’ firepower.
The best defense is a good offense.
That aside, there is a problem in Chicago, and it isn’t guns. It’s ugliness in the hearts of men. That age-old malady — one which, I believe, has worsened (see here) — lurks deeper than any legislation can reach. Find something to address a man’s soul, and you’ll better not only him, but those around him.
Such a force won’t be found in rooms of lawmaking or halls of justice. But it may be discovered in places such as this.
I’m Alex Parker, and that’s what I think.
Find all my RedState work here.
Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below.
If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”