|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
IL: Emanuel Urges Rauner to Sign the Gun Dealer Licensing Bill
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://constitutionnetwork.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Mayor Emanuel, Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson plus the FBI and ATF are celebrating the confiscation of 7,000 illegal guns so far this year in Chicago. More than a thousand of them were taken in the south side’s 6th police district in part because of co-operation from the community. Standing next to a table of confiscated guns, Rahm again called on Governor Rauner to sign the gun dealer licensing bill on his desk, asking “Is he going to use his pen or his politics?”
|
| Comment by:
lbauer
(9/26/2018)
|
| Any gun dealer in Illinois or anywhere else in the US must already have a federal firearm license or FFL, and anyone doing a retail business in the state must already have a business license. A state gun dealer license serves only two purposes, more money for a desperately broke state, and an additional way to harass honest gun sellers. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
