During her last session in the Illinois House of Representatives, State Rep. Jeanne Ives voted against what is called “Red Flag” gun control legislation.
The Sunday night that she and Republican primary opponent Evelyn Sanguinette spoke to Algonquin Township Republican Precinct Committeemen, I asked about her reported willingness to support such legislation now that she was running for Congress.
Here is her reply:
“If you want to really solve [the problem of gun violence], you have to look at what [Cook County State’s Attorney] Kim Fox is doing letting two-time defendents out and pleading out gun offenses.
With regard to gun dealer licensing bills, Ives explained that there are problems with five dealers in suburban Cook County.
“If you have a dealer with more than five [violations] in three years, then they should be subjected [to the stricted regulations in the new gun dealer licensing law],” Ives said.
“When I offered a commonsense amendment on the gun dealer licensing
that would apply only to a Federal Firearms Licensee who has been found by the federal or State government to have three or more firearms used in the commission of criminal offenses sold or transferred by the licensee within the 5 years prior to his or her application for certification of his or her license, the Democrats rejected my bill.
“They are not interested in commonsense laws, only laws that hurt law abiding citizens.
She said she was “open” to a Red Flag law “if you can make it very narrow.”
She argued that there should be “due proces within three days” and police “can’t take guns before due process.
“If you narrowly trailored it” and require[d] that complaints be made by “someone very close to that person who knows he’s very dangerous” such legislation would be acceptable.
“It would be a very narrow case,” she concluded, pointing to this National Review article.
She added later, “The Illinois version of the ‘Red Flag law’ is overly broad and unconstitutional in my eyes, as it asks for due process weeks after confiscation.”
Ives opposed all gun legislation presented in Springfield except for a ban on bump stocks, which she voted for.
“All of the legislation would do nothing to take guns out of the hands of criminals,” she explained in an email.
Day 6
Anyone see Gasser at work day?
Days with no confirmed sightings by bloggers
4
Days with confirmed sightings?
1
So she supports red flag laws and trusts government bureaucrats to create a narrowly tailored process?
What happened to Jeanne Ives?
At least Sangetti is pro 2nd amendment
Millerite…er GasserWathchdog you are watching the wrong official(s).
The real problems: the board, attorney, supervisor, clerk.
Even if ANY of them are on site, there’s still no one home.
The township should not exist, the Millers and cohorts should be held legally responsible and OUR money (restitution) returned to the taxpayers.
We were calling for the games, ploys, schemes to end and the bills to be paid over and over and over.
If you spent as much time “studying and vetting the previous 60yr reign, we’d all be richer and happier!!
PS: Ms. Lawrence, we don’t buy the lame excuses when in fact conceding. Please, resign….ALL of you.
outwiththeold on 07/12/2019 at 9:57 am said:
Lawrence, STOP the games and take care of business.
The incident has been vetted, reported, studied, has passed law enforcement action and atf complied with.
Now pay the salt company and then resign!
Forget about Townships! They are less than a pimple on the ass of progress!
Pay attention to what is happening!
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-enforcement-problems-with-gun-grabbing-red-flag-laws-are-even-worse-than-you-think
I think Ms. Ives needs to place this policy approach into a position paper on 2nd amendment issues, and when she references her legislative attempts, she needs to include bill No., Amendment Number, etc., so discerning voters can look up the legislation for ourselves.
I know she served in the 98th, 99th and 100th General Assembly, but vintage sessions of the General Assembly are stored online, so wouldn’t be a large effort to find the legislation.
Might be interesting for her to include in her position paper if she would support the current legislation before the U.S. House or the U.S. Senate, including H.R. 8, H.R. 1112, H.R. 838 (TAPS), and NICS legislation, among others.
That would be an interesting read and hope her campaign writes it and publishes it soon. The same goes for Sanguinetti.
Thanks for the write-up you promised, Cal.
“All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void”
Marbury v Madison, 5 U.S. (2 Cranch), 137, 174, 176 (1803)
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/5/137/
Naughty, naughty Ives!
This diplomat is naughty too: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49405099
Illinois already has on the books (as of January 1, 2019) what amounts to a “red flag” law.
The new act is titled “Firearms Restraining Order Act” and the citation is 430 ILCS 67.
Prior to Monday, no one had brought a petition under this act in McHenry.
As with any new law, there are many questions as to how it is to be applied and interpreted.