Political Rewind: Guns, Animals and Cell Phones in Illinois
It's always good to be caught up on state politics. Here's an easy guide to what happened this week.
Editor's Note: This article was created by aggregating news articles from Illinois Statehouse News that were written by various Illinois Statehouse News reporters.
SPRINGFIELD — Guns, snakes, cell phones and revenue projections emerged in legislation during the busiest week of the Illinois General Assembly so far this spring.
Friday was the deadline for lawmakers to get their legislation heard before, and voted out of, committee.
Bill sponsor: Concealed carry ‘long overdue’
Once again downstate lawmakers pushed to legalize the concealed carry of firearms in Illinois, the last state in the nation where some form of carry, concealed or open, is not legal.
House Bill 5745 would allow sheriffs in the state’s 102 counties to issue concealed-carry permits. People wanting a permit would have to pay a $65 fee and complete firearms training. No one with a criminal record would be given a permit.
To approve this bill would require 71 votes in the House, instead of a simple majority of 60 votes. Because lawmakers decided that a statewide concealed-carry law would pre-empt local laws, the bill would require three-fifths of the chamber to pass it.
State Rep. Brandon Phelps, D-Harrisburg, is sponsoring the legislation, which passed out of the House Agriculture and Conservation Committee on Tuesday.
Concealed-carry legislation has been a perennial failure in the statehouse, but Phelps said Wisconsin’s decision to approve concealed carry last year is putting pressure on Illinois.
“It’s long overdue … We’re very close. We’re not going to give up,” Phelps said.
Colleges and universities in the state have been pushing back against the legislation, which allows them to opt out, but then be liable for anyone who is injured during an attack that a concealed gun might have prevented.
House passes ban on using cell phones while driving
Hoping to limit the problem of distracted driving, the Illinois House passed a bill banning hand-held cell phone use while driving, in a bipartisan vote of 62-53 on Thursday.
“I remember seeing people driving with a coffee and doughnut in each hand and steering with their knees,” said state Rep. David Harris, R-Arlington Heights, who voted for the bill. “There are distractions everywhere, but cell phones have become so pervasive. It’s clearly a public safety issue.”
House Bill 3972 makes hand-held cell phone use while driving a “moving violation,” carrying with it a $75 ticket. Using speakerphones and wireless headsets would be permitted, and there are exceptions for emergency vehicles and law enforcement.
The push for the ban comes after the National Transportation Safety Board, or NTSB, a federal advisory agency, in December recommended banning all cell phone use while driving, including hands free talking — although no state has gone that far.
Illinois is one 35 states that bans text messaging while driving, according to the NTSB, and if the House bill becomes law, Illinois would join nine other states banning hand-held cell phone use.
Amid efforts to curb distracted driving, some have questioned whether cell phones are a cause or symptom of distraction.
State Sen. John Millner, R-Bloomingdale, a former police officer, said people who are driving erratically should be targeted, regardless of whether they’re using a phone.
“Some people can drive just fine while talking on the phone,” he said. “Others can’t, and they know who they are.”
Exotic animal owners could face fines
A few summers ago, in Peoria County, an elderly man walked out his front door and stepped on a 14-foot-long Burmese python, which had escaped from a nearby screened-in front porch, said Lauren Malmberg,director of the Peoria County Animal Protection Services.
The man and python escaped unscathed — the snake’s owner picked it up the next day, for a $50
redemption fee — but it wasn’t an isolated incident, said Malmberg.
“People call and say, 'Oh, so and so has a huge reptile in their basement,' and they want us to go in, raid the house and take them out," said Malmberg. “They don't know that it's legal to own them.”
Senate Bill 3264, sponsored by state Sen. Heather Steans, D-Chicago, would require that dangerous animals, such as large snakes, be kept in escape-free enclosures and be registered with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, or DNR, for a $250 annual fee.
“We need a way to make sure (DNR) has the ability to control the most dangerous of the exotic animals. These animals are being sold without much oversight,” said Steans.
Exotic animal owners decried the bill as onerous and unnecessary.
Scott Smith owns All Animal Expo in Wheaton, and twice a month rents out the DuPage County Fairground, hosting vendors who sell everything from prairie dogs to pythons to iguanas and more rarely lions, tigers and bears.
“This would shut us down,” he said.
The legislation is being held in the state Senate Agriculture and Conservation Committee, while Steans revises it.
General Assembly, Quinn disagree over revenue projections
The General Assembly’s revenue projection is $200 million less than Gov. Pat Quinn’s $33.9 billion projection.
Already facing a relatively smaller amount of cash to go around — this year’s budget includes a jump in the scheduled pension payments of $1 billion over last year — Quinn says the General Assembly’s figure is going to squeeze out needed services.
Revenue projections became important to the budgeting process, starting last year because of a new state law that requires the state budget to be based on projected income, not wants and needs.
State Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno, R-Lemont, warned her colleagues Wednesday that just because the state is likely going to bring in $33.7 billion, doesn’t mean the Legislature should budget it all to be spent.
“We all agree how much revenue we have to deal with. Next we have to agree how we will spend the available revenues. This is not the same as a spending plan,” Radogno said.
The Illinois House and Senate have convened until after the March 20 primary elections.
Skully
8:20 am on Sunday, March 11, 2012
49 States have some sort of Conceal Carry WHY is IL. the last. If the people of IL. would quit letting Chicago politicians run this state maybe it could get on the right track. If a cell phone law is passed I think it should include everyone including Cops. You have Cops using cell phones,inboard computers,radio's etc. when driving. If a CDL truck driver is going to be outlawed from using a cell phone so should everyone else.
Tom Selleck
10:36 am on Sunday, March 11, 2012
No it should not include the Police! How do you think the Police get their calls? i.e. cell phone, radio or via computer ! How do you expect them to get the call and respond to the call if you think that are to be included in the ban!!!
T-Bone
10:16 am on Sunday, March 11, 2012
I am just happy that with all of the other problems in this Great State, the house was able to ban the possession of Shark Fins this week! WTF Really!
Tom Selleck
10:37 am on Sunday, March 11, 2012
I'm glad about the shark fun ban!!!!
Tom Selleck
2:46 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
I spoke with several people who insist using a cell phone is their constitutional right. I had too tell them, they are wrong! Driving a car in Illinois is not a right , but a privilege and the state can dictate to drivers what they can and can't do when driving ! If the state wanted too, they can take ones license away w /o any questions asked and no one can't do anything about it!!
Albert Gazalooch
6:07 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
"49 States have some sort of Conceal Carry WHY is IL last?"
Answer: One word.... "Chicagopolitics!"
Anthony Bonanno
6:12 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
If you can't talk on a cell phone then you can't talk at all while you are driving it is the same thing. All this is because of the drive being distracted : eating, drinking, talking, getting dressed, makeup, billboards, signs, REALLY BRIGHT HEADLIGHTS/TAILLIGHTS, all a distraction. And can someone please tell me why a police car has so many lights on it that it looks like a UFO? At night it screws up my night vision. I but it cost tax payers a lot to.
Lettuce
6:46 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
Actually, it is not the same. Phone conversations are far more distracting than in-person chatting for many reasons. If you are really interested, go to: http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletters/Harvard_Mental_Health_Letter/2010/September/why-cell-phone-conversations-distract-drivers
Tom Selleck
6:46 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
It's plain and simple a majority of drivers using cell phones stuck in their ears do not use common sense and drive like idiots! Must I explain what they do wrong? There are plenty to list! And why are you so concerned about the lights on a Police car? The big reason is for high visibility so morons that are using cell phones or other stupid things while driving see the Police car!
hammerheadfl
7:25 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
If you have any questions about the CWP law or training contact www.e2c.us or 1-866-371-6111 and the Instructors at Equip 2 Conceal will be happy to help you.
John Reif
8:57 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
Why don't the out law cars, trucks, baseball bats, hamers, screw drivers, nails, anything could hurt or kill people. Yet they will not pass the Concealed and Carry. Get rid of Chicago. Then we down south can live and not be told by Chicago how we should live.
John Reif Carrollton, Illinois
Albert Gazalooch
10:25 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
State Sen. John Millner is the same brain trust that sponsored the bill making it illegal to drive 20 MPH over the speed limit in the left lane. NOT for speeding but, for impeding those who want to go faster!
If the police aren't catching people doing 20+ over the limit in any lane, those doing 10 MPH over in the left lane have nothing to worry about. The left lane is for passing slower traffic NOT people going faster than you are! There are way too many people passing just for the sport of passing for no reason at all.
Speaking of speeding... I'm on I-55 twice a month beteween Chicago & Springfield. Guess who's whipping down the highway well over the speed limits? Vehicles with State House license plates! Your good old lawmakers themselves!
The purpose of the law was to target SLOW drivers in the left lane (those doing the speed limit or below) which I agree with. However, most motorists that refuse to comply with the speed limits think this law was created to give them a license to ignore the speed laws.
Tom Selleck
10:47 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
All the more reason for speed cameras on expressways and tollways!!!
Anthony Bonanno
11:57 pm on Sunday, March 11, 2012
Tom Selleck I am for from a moron and a few weeks ago I was driving with my family in the car NOT on a cell phone was turning onto the side street where there was a cop car with its lights on and I almost hit the cop because I could not see him on the side of his car because of the lights. Just like these real bright headlights they work well you can see for a mile they are so bright the problem is that for the half mile the on coming car can't look strait ahead at you because the lights are to bright. Real safe. Its all about making money not safety it it was people would also have to wear a helmet wail driving a motorcycle. So yes there are people out there that can't drive and talk on a cell phone but they are the same people that can't do two things at the same time. If it were safer than there wouldn't be exceptions for police officers. Who by the way talk on there cell phones and radios plus use there computer in the car.
Tom Selleck
9:13 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
I have never ever had any problems with a Police car and it's flashing lights, regardless of day or night! And yes Police / Fire are exempt from the ban! How do you expect them to response to calls and protect you and others. Soon as the ban is passed,Police/Fire will only be able to use their phones for priority emergency calls!
JasonH
8:24 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
There were accidents and idiotic driving before cell phones and there will certainly be accidents and idiotic driving afterwards if this ban gets enacted. You CANNOT legislate away stupidity or legislate in responsibility. This bill does nothing, but punish all because of a few.
Tom Selleck
9:17 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
Yes there are idiotic drivers of all forms, but cell phone usage while driving is getting ridiculous. So what if a few get caught, at least they are getting ticketed! Plus like I said before, put up more speed cameras.
Anthony Bonanno
9:27 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
Well said
JasonH
12:51 pm on Monday, March 12, 2012
So they get ticketed. Still doesn't solve anything.
Tom Selleck
9:45 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
Once the ban takes place and I see someone using a hand held cell phone , I will take a date/time stamped picture of the driver and then of the cars license plate and send it off to the Police and even tell them I'll sign the citation !
Tim
9:54 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
You will take a date/time stamped picture of someone using their cellphone while driving... with your cellphone... while you are driving.
Tom Selleck
10:11 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
There's no law on a camera! Leave it in the front passenger seat and use when needed!
Tom Koz
9:56 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
Iowa has the right idea:
Since Iowa is one of six states without the right to keep and bear arms in its constitution, lawmakers felt it necessary to establish this fundamental right. However, opponents of the proposed amendment took issue with its unequivocal and explicit language:
“The right of individuals to acquire, keep, possess, transport, carry, transfer, and use arms for defense of life and liberty and for all other legitimate purposes is fundamental and shall not be denied or infringed. Mandatory licensing, registration, or special taxation as a condition of the exercise of this right is prohibited, and any other restriction shall be subject to strict scrutiny.”
House Joint Resolution 2009 passed by a vote of 61-37.
"For far too long, we've seen judicial abuse of our Second Amendment," said Rep. Matt Windschitl (R-Missouri River) one of the bill’s sponsors.
http://www.guns.com/iowa-house-democrats-storm-out-capitol-pro-gun-bills.html
Tom Koz
9:57 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
A Law Enforcement Officer explains why YOU should carry a firearm:
http://officersmith.blogspot.com/2012/02/help-police.html
Tom Koz
9:58 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
Another district court says the 2nd Amendment does not stop at the front door:
United States v. Weaver (S.D. W. Va. Mar. 6, 2012).
Quote
While it is true that the Fourth Circuit has so far stopped short of expressly
recognizing a Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms outside the home,
this Court has no such hesitation. The Supreme Court itself has acknowledged a
Second Amendment right to protect oneself not only from private violence, but also from public
violence. See Heller, 554 U.S. at 594 (stating that, by the time of the
founding, the right to have arms was "fundamental" and "understood to be an
individual right protecting against both public and private violence."). The
Heller Court additionally mentioned militia membership and hunting as key
purposes for the existence of the right to keep and bear arms. See id. at 598.
Confining the right to the home would unduly eliminate such purposes from the
scope of the Second Amendment's guarantee.
http://www.archive.o...3229.2906.0.pdf
Kristie
10:01 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
While we're at it, we should ban eating while driving. The lady that I saw eating rice with chopsticks while driving down the highway had to be more distracted than someone holding a cell phone to their ear.
Tom Selleck
10:12 am on Monday, March 12, 2012
I agree ! A ban a driving and eating!
Tom Selleck
2:50 pm on Monday, March 12, 2012
I'm 100% for the cell phone ban and for red light / speed cameras! Do you know why?? I want to see drivers get their much deserved citations, because everyone thinks they can drive any way they wish ! Like speeding well over 30 mph on the expressways, using cell phones, changing lanes and cutting in front of others with out a directional and even riding the shoulder when traffic is at a stand still and idiots that love to tailgate even when one is doing 10 over the limit! Do you know what I enjoy doing? No directional to change lanes in front of me , I don't let the driver in front of me! Tailgate me, I turn on my parking liight switch which looks like I'm suddenly braking and watch the idiot behind me slam on his brakes as I continue along ! Then if I see an idiot riding the shoulder , I drive half way into the shoulder and the idiot has no where to go! So much fun!!
T-Bone
7:13 pm on Monday, March 12, 2012
I'm starting to think you are a Road Rage Crazy Fool! You should have stopped a couple comments ago!
Tom Selleck
8:00 pm on Monday, March 12, 2012
Not road rage ! Just giving this idiots a taste of their own medicine! Don't you think the idiots deserve it???
Barry Allen
7:53 am on Tuesday, March 13, 2012
That IS the definition of road rage!
T-Bone
9:41 pm on Monday, March 12, 2012
Hello! That's Road Rage! You will learn when they pull out their concealed weapon and you get shot! Haha!
Tom Selleck
11:00 pm on Monday, March 12, 2012
I have been packing for years! What I do , does that justify someone shooting at me??? I'm totally against concealed weapons for that sole purpose as you mentioned someone would do!! If someone is stupid to that that , I'll just give a couple of taps to their head!
Tom Selleck
11:10 pm on Monday, March 12, 2012
All the more reason that type of idiot doesn't need to carry a concealed weapon! Those type of idiots get weeded out! Road rage are the ones cutting me off and tailgating me and riding the shoulder like idiots! Love to see one loose control and smack into the concrete divider as they speed like an idiot and cut off other drivers!
Tom Koz
10:02 pm on Monday, March 12, 2012
State Rep. Jim Durkin (rep. for Lemont residents) voted AGAINST law abiding citizens being able to protect themselves with a firearm. Jim Durkin was 1 of only 3 republicans voting against. Vote Jim Durkin OUT of office!!
Tom Selleck
11:01 pm on Monday, March 12, 2012
I'll vote for him!!
T-Bone
2:11 am on Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Tom S... I was just pointing out how the CC could work against you if it passes and you are driving like that. (Kind of a twist on another subject in this article.) Not that you deserve to get shot for driving like that but there are a lot of people who get shot that don't deserve it in this world. Someone upset with a gun in their waistband no matter what they are mad about or how normal they usually think is a dangerous thing. And ya I wouldn't be surprised of Road Rage shootings go up!
Tom Selleck
9:24 am on Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Well said and I agree!!