It has beGUN.

[Dartful Dodger]

SB 2161 [sic] was prompted by an incident in the Chicago suburb of Wilmette, where a man was charged with violating a municipal handgun ban after he shot a burglar in his home. The bill would allow a court to clear a defendant of charges of violating such a ban if the gun was used in self-defense or in defense of another on the owner's property.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich vetoed the measure, saying "each individual municipality should determine which affirmative defenses apply to a violation of its own ordinance," but the Senate voted 40 to 18 to override him.

State Sen. Jeff Schoenberg, D-Evanston, represents the community of Wilmette and said the bill imposed upon the municipality's prerogative to impose stronger gun laws than those of the state. He was unable to convince enough of his colleagues to agree with him.

-- -- --

This is only a few days after the election, just think of it, we'll have at least four more years of this greatness!

[fredster]

We have an advanced culture here in TN.

They have that "safe harbor" law here in TN.  If you use your weapon in a place that you really shouldn't have it to defend life or property, they cannot prosecute you.

[Apollo]

Wow that's so cool, my wife and I are moving to the US as we've always wanted to be able to shoot people with impunity. It must be awesome to live in a place with hand guns so freely available.
God bless America.

[RacerX]

And here we go...  I thought I had seen the last of the political threads for awhile, but I guess not.  

[Apollo]

He he yeah sorry about that, I couldn't resist. Asking for trouble really I guess. But seriously you could count the number of handgun related deaths in New Zealand on the fingers of one hand because handguns are illegal.

[DrewKaree]

...you could count the number of handgun related deaths in New Zealand on the fingers of one hand because handguns are illegal.

See?  Not enough practice, you guys all shot the rest of your fingers off!  

[DYNAGOD]

the laws are a quagmire of contradiction..
federal ,state and local laws all contradict on another..
its absolutely non sensical..
a federal or court would find you innocent on all charges but a state court would give you 7-12.. makes no sense at all..
bus just because someone is in your home does not give you the right to shoot them ,there are several criteria that must be satisfied to use deadly force. most importantly in that situation is the imminent infliction of death or grievous bodily injury upon yourself by the invader..
(disclaimer,this is not legal advice)
more broadly ,the six duties of anyone considering the use of deadly force in self defense:

1).avoid physical contact and conflict at all costs:
you must do EVERYTHING in your power to avoid a situation or confrontation ,NO MATTER WHAT it takes!!
people who choose to bear the responsibility of carrying a firearm do not have the luxury of pride or feelings,so leave them at home.. if you can run away ,act like a crazy man,or anything other recourse than drawing your weapon you must take ,even if it means peeing all over yourself and singing thriller while spinning in a circle

2.)Escape ,evade,or retreat:
You MUST Run away like a little school girl...If there is a way out of a confrontation besides using lethal force, you MUST take it...if for example a court can find that you could have jumped off a royou instead used deadly force, you will be found guilty... the only exception to this is in your home,where you are considered in your safe zone, but that still does not give you the right to use deadly force.

3)Use only as much force as necessary:
 once youve incapacitated an individual it is not a license to kick theliving bejesus out of them or continue shooting them..
call the authorites and be thankfull you didnt have to kill anyone..

4: satisfy the reasonable person:
   would soneone who saw the concflict transpire agree that you were absolutely without any other recourse than the use of deadly force? this is a good bar to use to measure justification.. it forces you to look outside of yourself and reassess the situation

5.)Posess an actual belief of:

Endangered personal safety (to justify the use of non-deadly force)

Fear of imminent Death or grievous bodily injury (to justify the use of deadly force)

note that grievous bodily inhury is considered to be an injury that will likely eventully result in death..This is the grey area..you say "how do i prove to a judge or jury how i "felt".. the best thing you can do is to use the bystander rule from number 4.. if a bystander were there and saw the whole thing (and one may have) would you say that what they saw met all of the requirments im explaining here?
better be sure...

6: claim responsibility:
  if you run you look like the guilty party.. dont hide your firearm or anything else foolish,, call a police officer immedietly, holster your weapon and wait for them to arrive..
to do anyhtign else will jeopardize any future defense you may have..

[fredster]

Dynagod,

Was Centipede really the first video game from a woman designer?  Who was it?

[Crazy Cooter]

So you can shoot people with illegal weapons there?  That's stupid.  Either they're legal or they're not.  Of course if the owner is "grandfathered in" so-to-say, then it's a different story.

[DYNAGOD]

Dynagod,Was Centipede really the first video game from a woman designer?  Who was it?

according to videotopia,

Centipede, Atari Inc., 1981. Designed by Ed Logg and Dona Bailey, Centipede was the first arcade game from a woman designer. Colorful graphics and ingenious game play made Centipede the first game to attract more female fans than male.

[1UP]

You forget, this is also the country where someone can be prowling on your roof with intent to burgle, rape, or kill, trip and fall thru a plate glass skylight, impaling themselves on some pointy sculpture on your mantle, then sue YOU for negligence.  The law seems to do more to protect criminals in places where they shouldn't be, than it protects you in your own home.

I don't know how many times the cops have been lambasted for shooting someone 14 times after they came forward pointing something at the cops.  Sometimes it's a gun or knife, sometimes a wallet or cell phone.  But you know what?  When you are surrounded by 20 bored street cops, a K9 unit, a swat team and a helicopter, DONT RUN AND DONT F-ING POINT ANYTHING AT THEM!!

Apollo, don't worry.  The only people here who go around shooting indiscriminately are the gangs, and they don't get their guns legally in the first place.  Even then, if you stay out of the wrong neighborhoods (trust me, you will know) you have very little chance of getting involved in any violence.

Most deaths from shootings are from dumbasses who don't know how to store their weapons safely away from the hands of their own children.  I definitely think we need to require a certification in gun safety and marksmanship in order to qualify for a license to carry, even at home.

People who carry guns with them in public are just asking for trouble.  Unless you're quick-draw McGraw, the weapon will likely be used against you.  If you get mugged or car jacked, the best defense is always to throw away your wallet or keys, then run and scream your head off.  But I think you should have the choice of keeping a gun in your own home for self defense.  There is absolutely no reason for anyone to intrude and threaten you in your own domain, and if they do, they should understand the risk they are taking.

I personally think you should be able to shoot someone DEAD if you are reasonably sure they don't belong in YOUR HOME at 3am, and they refuse to leave immediately.  In most locales, if the assailant is moving toward you when you fire, rather than away from you, you're covered.  Of course, you should "try" to shoot to disable them, but in the heat of the situation, I don't think the courts should fault you for missing your mark.  

And I didn't even vote for Bush...I'm just sick and tired of having the hands of the cops and the general public tied, while the criminals are allowed to do whatever they want, knowing that there are a million loopholes that will protect them or shorten their sentence.  Hey, I've got a loophole: you don't invade the sanctity of my crib, and I absolutely promise not to blow your head off, and we're both happy.  The choice is yours, but don't put me in a position where I have basically no choice but to shoot.

[teef two]

No no no, I'm not getting drawn into yet another gun debate on a bb.

[sarcasm]I'm happy to live in a country where the criminals have the right to prosecute the homeowner if they are attacked when (oh I can't resist a Bushism here) burglarising your property.[/sarcasm off]

[patrickl]

Is it legal to leave a loaded handgun laying around the house so your kid can shoot himself (or his friend) with it?

[DYNAGOD]

Is it legal to leave a loaded handgun laying around the house so your kid can shoot himself (or his friend) with it?

in my state (MA), all guns in the home must be stored in a locked container or equipped with a tamper resistant mechanical lock or other safety device, properly engaged so as to render the gun inoperable by the owner or other lawfully authorized user.  
The penalty for each violation of this law can be severe:  up to $10,000 in fines and ten years imprisonment in state prison, and revocation of your LTC or FID.

[Dartful Dodger]

Is it legal to leave a loaded handgun laying around the house so your kid can shoot himself (or his friend) with it?

Is it legal to leave a knife or scissors laying around the house so your kid can stab himself (or his friend) with it?

Is it legal to leave car keys laying around the house so your kid can runover himself (or his friend) with it?

Negligent people should not have the right to raise kids, but they do.
This topic is about gun laws changing for the better, not about neglectful parents.

[Tailgunner]

This topic is about gun laws changing for the better, not about neglectful parents.

Speaking of gun laws changing for the better, I recieved this in the mail today. It's a 50 round drum magazine for my 1927-a1 Thompson submachine gun. They were banned by the AWB, and I ordered this one the day after it expired.

Now all I need is a pinstripe suit and a violin case.

[shmokes]

Good or bad, isn't it a bit of a stretch to give Bush credit for that veto override?  I mean, if everything in the election had occorred exactly the same, except Kerry was not in office, the legislature would still presumably have voted the same way.

Look on the bright side, though.  If this behavior is not tied to Bush, maybe it will go on for even more than 4 years.

[Dartful Dodger]

Good or bad, isn't it a bit of a stretch to give Bush credit for that veto override?  I mean, if everything in the election had occorred exactly the same, except Kerry was not in office, the legislature would still presumably have voted the same way.

Look on the bright side, though.  If this behavior is not tied to Bush, maybe it will go on for even more than 4 years.

Bush critics say the Republicans control everything, so if anything goes wrong in America, Bush is at fault.  But if anything goes right, Bush had nothing to do with it.

[shmokes]

Well...I don't think it's that simple.  It's more a matter of the president is rewarded or punished (somtimes unfairly)  based on what goes right or wrong.  This is especially the case when his party controls both houses of Congress because the President it's harder sell the idea that everything would have been fine if it weren't for the obstructionists from the opposing party in Congress (because they don't have a majority, of course).  This happens on both sides simply because it's so difficult to assign accountability anywhere else.  People generally have a very low opinion of Congress as a whole, but a very high opinion of their particular Senators and Representatives.  Us Utahns are happy with Orrin Hatch and his token push every year for an anti-flag-burning amendment and we just blame the rest of Congress for the fact that it didn't pass.  Orrin knows before-hand that he doesn't have even a hint of a chance of pushing the Amendment through.  It's a simple game to play and partially accounts for the crazy incumbency advantage in Congress.  In these last elections only 9 incumbents lost out of 435 (minus open seats from retirements or deaths).  Of those 9 incumbents who lost to challengers I believe 7 of them were from Texas and lost due to redistricting.  At least 6 were.  

I mean, would you blame Bush if the veto hadn't been overridden?  I just don't understand how Bush had anything to do with it one way or the other.  I know I certainly don't blame him.  I blame your local legislature.  

[JCKnife]

It is SO reassuring that no matter what hobby I dabble in next, I can find gun nuts there. Tailgunner, NICE DRUM! I've been wanting to get a Thompson for some time. I took the occasion of the end of the ban to get a case of NIW USGI magazines (AR-15) marked "Law Enforcement Use Only." It's nice to have a constant reminder of the law that we beat.