Saturday, September 27, 2014

Illinois Concealed Carry Weapon (CCW) Permit Training Class

Illinois Concealed Carry Weapon (CCW) Training Class

Get your Illinois Conceal Carry License / Permit.... Plus get 3 other CCW's (Utah CCW, Arizona CCW & Florida CCW) - safely and legally conceal carry a handgun in over 35 States...!!!

Price: $275 (no other class fees), 

price includes;
1. Range fees ($25)
2. Illinois Livescan digital fingerprints ($60)
3. Utah & Arizona ink fingerprints ($25)
4. Florida ink prints - done by a cop ($10)
5. Passport photos ($10)
6. CCW application paperwork 
7. Assistance with CCW application paperwork 

Class Date: October 25-26th (16 hours)
Location: Oak Brook, Illinois 

331-642-8110 / www.IllinoisCC.com

Friday, September 26, 2014

A case for gun rights...

  • Bennett: The case for gun rights 

    Editor's Note: William J. Bennett, a CNN contributor, is the author of "The Book of Man: Readings on the Path to Manhood." He was U.S. secretary of education from 1985 to 1988 and director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under President George H.W. Bush.

    (CNN) - On NBC's "Meet the Press" this past Sunday, I was asked how we can make our schools safer and prevent another massacre like Sandy Hook from happening again. I suggested that if one person in the school had been armed and trained to handle a firearm, it might have prevented or minimized the massacre.

    "And I'm not so sure -- and I'm sure I'll get mail for this -- I'm not so sure I wouldn't want one person in a school armed, ready for this kind of thing," I said. "The principal lunged at this guy. The school psychologist lunged at the guy. Has to be someone who's trained. Has to be someone who's responsible."

    Well, I sure did get mail. Many people agreed with me and sent me examples of their son or daughter's school that had armed security guards, police officers or school employees on the premises. Many others vehemently disagreed with me, and one dissenter even wrote that the blood of the Connecticut victims was ultimately on the hands of pro-gun rights advocates.

    To that person I would ask: Suppose the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary who was killed lunging at the gunman was instead holding a firearm and was well trained to use it. Would the result have been different? Or suppose you had been in that school when the killer entered, would you have preferred to be armed?

    Evidence and common sense suggest yes.

    In 2007, a gunman entered New Life Church in Colorado Springs and shot and killed two girls. Jeanne Assam, a former police officer stationed as a volunteer security guard at the church, drew her firearm, shot and wounded the gunman before he could kill anyone else. The gunman then killed himself.

    In 1997, high school student Luke Woodham stabbed his mother to death and then drove to Pearl High School in Pearl, Mississippi, and shot and killed two people. He then got back in his car to drive to Pearl Junior High to continue his killings, but Joel Myrick, the assistant principal, ran to his truck and grabbed his pistol, aimed it at Woodham and made him surrender.

    These are but a few of many examples that the best deterrent of crime when it is occurring is effective self-defense. And the best self-defense against a gunman has proved to be a firearm.

    And yet, there is a near impenetrable belief among anti-gun activists that guns are the cause of violence and crime. Like Frodo's ring in "The Lord of The Rings," they believe that guns are agencies of corruption and corrupt the souls of whoever touches them. Therefore, more guns must lead to more crime.

    But the evidence simply doesn't support that. Take the controversial concealed-carry permit issue, for example.

    In a recent article for The Atlantic magazine, Jeffrey Goldberg, by no means an avowed gun-rights advocate, declared, "There is no proof to support the idea that concealed-carry permit holders create more violence in society than would otherwise occur; they may, in fact, reduce it."

    Goldberg cites evidence from Adam Winkler, a law professor at UCLA, that concealed-carry permit holders actually commit crimes at a lower rate than the general population.

    The General Accountability Office recently found that the number of concealed weapon permits in America has surged to approximately 8 million.

    According to anti-gun advocates, such an increase in guns would cause a cause a corresponding increase in gun-related violence or crime. In fact, the opposite is true. The FBI reported this year that violent crime rates in the U.S. are reaching historic lows.

    This comes in spite of the fact that the federal assault weapons ban expired in 2004. Supporters of the ban (not including anti-gun groups who thought it didn't go far enough in the first place) claimed that gun crime would skyrocket when the ban was lifted. That wasn't true at all.

    In fact, after the expiration of the ban, The New York Times, whose editorial pages are now awash with calls for more gun restrictions, wrote in early 2005, "Despite dire predictions that America's streets would be awash in military-style guns, the expiration of the decade-long assault weapons ban in September has not set off a sustained surge in the weapons' sales, gun makers and sellers say. It also has not caused any noticeable increase in gun crime in the past seven months, according to several city police departments."

    But let's take the issue one step further and examine places where all guns, regardless of make or type, are outlawed: gun-free zones. Are gun-free zones truly safe from guns?

    John Lott, economist and gun-rights advocate, has extensively studied mass shootings and reports that, with just one exception, the attack on U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson, Arizona, in 2011, every public shooting since 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns. The massacres at Sandy Hook Elementary, Columbine, Virginia Tech and the Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, all took place in gun-free zones.

    These murderers, while deranged and deeply disturbed, are not dumb. They shoot up schools, universities, malls and public places where their victims cannot shoot back. Perhaps "gun-free zones" would be better named "defenseless victim zones."

    To illustrate the absurdity of gun-free zones, Goldberg dug up the advice that gun-free universities offer to its students should a gunman open fire on campus. West Virginia University tells students to "act with physical aggression and throw items at the active shooter." These items could include "student desks, keys, shoes, belts, books, cell phones, iPods, book bags, laptops, pens, pencils, etc." Such "higher education" would be laughable if it weren't true and funded by taxpayer dollars.

    Eliminating or restricting firearms for public self-defense doesn't make our citizens safer; it makes them targets. If we're going to have a national debate about guns, it should be acknowledged that guns, in the hands of qualified and trained individuals subject to background checks, prevent crime and improve public safety.

    Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter

    Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion

    http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/19/opinion/bennett-gun-rights/?c=&page=3

  • To that person I would ask: Suppose the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary who was killed lunging at the gunman was instead holding a firearm and was well trained to use it. Would the result have been different? Or suppose you had been in that school when the killer entered, would you have preferred to be armed?

    Evidence and common sense suggest yes.

    In 2007, a gunman entered New Life Church in Colorado Springs and shot and killed two girls. Jeanne Assam, a former police officer stationed as a volunteer security guard at the church, drew her firearm, shot and wounded the gunman before he could kill anyone else. The gunman then killed himself.

    In 1997, high school student Luke Woodham stabbed his mother to death and then drove to Pearl High School in Pearl, Mississippi, and shot and killed two people. He then got back in his car to drive to Pearl Junior High to continue his killings, but Joel Myrick, the assistant principal, ran to his truck and grabbed his pistol, aimed it at Woodham and made him surrender.

    These are but a few of many examples that the best deterrent of crime when it is occurring is effective self-defense. And the best self-defense against a gunman has proved to be a firearm.

    LZ Granderson: Teachers with guns is a crazy idea

    And yet, there is a near impenetrable belief among anti-gun activists that guns are the cause of violence and crime. Like Frodo's ring in "The Lord of The Rings," they believe that guns are agencies of corruption and corrupt the souls of whoever touches them. Therefore, more guns must lead to more crime.

Thursday, September 25, 2014

National Gun Rights News

For Gun Shop Owners, It’s No Longer Hip to Be ‘Square’

Jennifer Kerns / @JenniferKernsDC / September 25, 2014 /

'A small credit card reader that offers big possibilities." 


It’s white. It’s square. And at 1-by-1 inch in diameter, it is the perfect accoutrement to any entrepreneur’s smartphone.

With its quick swipe capability and ultimate portability, the high-tech 

Square Reader credit-card processor has become an invaluable tool in today’s economy.

How high-tech credit card vendors and customers get their Second Amendment rights infringed.

Taxi drivers use it—as do trade-show vendors, online retailers and home contractors.

It is, as the company’s slogan says, a “small credit card reader” that offers “big possibilities.” But some of those big possibilities are apparently being foreclosed by the Obama administration.

Last summer, around the same time the U.S. Department of Justice’s Operation Choke Point began pressuring banks to drop customers who buy or sell firearms, tobacco and other goods considered “not acceptable” by the Obama administration, 

Square quietly changed its terms of agreement.

>>> Meet Four Business Owners Squeezed by Operation Choke Point

In an alert regarding a change of terms, Square notified vendors:

…you will not accept payments in connection with the following businesses or business activities: …sales of (i) firearms, firearm parts or hardware, and ammunition; or (ii) weapons and other devices designed to cause physical injury.

The new terms differ from Square’s original terms of agreement, which banned only the “online” sales of firearms, a practice for which sites such as the popular eBay 

have long been criticized

. (Square’s terms, by the way, also prohibit the online sale of cigarettes and other tobacco products—goods that also are targeted by Operation Choke Point.)

Today, the Square’s terms prohibit gun-shop owners from using the credit-card processor not only when they are conducting gun sales at their brick-and-mortar stores but even more so when they are offsite, representing their stores at gun shows where they often need the wireless Square Reader to ring up sales on smartphones or tablets. Gun show have been a target of anti-gun activists for nearly 20 years.

The action and its impact were noted by gun enthusiast blogs at the time, but it was hardly a blip on the radar screen of mainstream outlets.

.@Square’s revised terms of service harm gun vendors by limiting sales opportunities.

Now, with evidence mounting of an all-out war on Second Amendment supporters in the financial marketplace, it fits the bill of an Operation Choke Point target.

Square’s revised terms of agreement immediately forced vendors to halt the processing of transactions of citizens who simply wish to buy or sell firearms or ammunition.

The timing of the release of the Square’s new, more stringent terms just so happens to coincide with Operation Choke Point’s initial targeting in the spring of 2013, as reported by The Daily Signal.

>>> Lawmakers Throw Light on Secretive ‘Operation Choke Point’

The timing also coincides with banking relationship cancellations
of pro-Second Amendment candidates and campaigns throughout the United States, including last year’s 

Colorado recall elections over gun control.

Square’s press office did not responded to three attempts to obtain comment for this story.

Did Operation Choke Point have something to do with @Square’s anti-gun shift?

With the help of the U.S. Consumer Coalitiomore law-abiding business owners are coming forward to report abuses of power they suffered through Operation Choke Point.

As Americans begin to share their stories

, the question ultimately will become whose arms are more important: the long arm of the Justice Department, or our right to bear arms?


Sunday, September 21, 2014

Gun Control Myths - Article

Disarming the Myths Promoted By the Gun Control Lobby


As much as gun control advocates might wish otherwise, their attacks are running out of ammo. With private firearm ownership at an all-time high and violent crime rates plunging, none of the scary scenarios they advanced have materialized. Abuse of responsibility by armed citizens is rare, while successful defensive interventions against assaults on their lives and property are relatively commonplace.

National violent crime rates that soared for 30 years from the early 1960s began to decrease markedly since 1993. Last December the FBI reported that murder and other violent crime rates fell again by 6.4% during the first half of 2011 compared with the same period in 2010. A Gallup poll indicates that “Americans’ preference regarding gun laws is generally that the government enforce existing laws more strictly and not pass new laws.”

Recognizing these positive trends, most states now issue permits allowing qualified law-abiding people to legally carry handguns outside their homes. Unprecedented numbers are becoming licensed to do so, now totaling an estimated 10 million Americans, contributing, in turn, to a dramatic growth in gun sales.

A record of more than 1.5 million background checks for customers looking to purchase a firearm were requested by gun dealers to the National Instant Background Check (NICS) system last December. About one-third of these occurred during the six weeks before Christmas. They had previously recorded a 49% rise in background checks during the week before President Obama was elected in 2008 compared with the same week one year earlier.

The Brady lobby is upset that there has been no progress in leveraging tighter gun control legislation following the shooting January 8, 2010 rampage that killed 6 people and injured 13, including Democratic Representative Gabrielle Giffords. That tragic incident raised serious questions about background checks after it was determined that the accused shooter, having previously exhibited erratic behavior, legally purchased the weapon he “allegedly” used from a store.

Dennis Henigan, the Brady group’s acting president, told Reuters: “Really it is a national disgrace that the only piece of gun-related legislation to come to a vote since Tucson was this legislation that would have enabled dangerous concealed carriers like Jared Loughner to carry their guns across state lines.” Referring to a proposed “National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011″ (H.R. 822) which has passed the House of Representatives but stalled in the Senate, the resolution would require states to recognize one another’s concealed carry permits the same way they recognize one another’s driver’s licenses. The intent is to eliminate confusion and potential legal problems for traveling gun owners.

As pointed out in a recent paper titled “Tough Targets” released by the Cato Institute, “The ostensible purpose of gun control legislation is to reduce firearm deaths and injuries. But authors Clayton E. Cramer and David Burnett believe these restrictions put law-abiding citizens at a distinct disadvantage to criminals who acquire guns from underground markets since it is simply not possible for police officers to get to every scene where intervention is urgently needed. They also document large numbers of crimes…murders, assaults, robberies…that are thwarted each year by ordinary persons with guns.

A widely-known study conducted by GaryKleck and Marc Gertz in the 1990s found that there were somewhere between 830,000 and 2.45 million U.S. defensive gun uses annually. A National Crime Victimization Study (NCVS) which asked victims if they had used a gun in self-defense found that about 108,000 each year had done so. A big problem with the NCVS line of survey reasoning, however, is that it only includes those uses where a citizen kills a criminal, not when one is only wounded, is held by the intended victim until police arrive, or when brandishing a gun caused a criminal to flee.

For these reasons, the Cato researchers investigated published news reports which much more often reveal how Americans use guns in self-defense. The data set is derived from a collection of nearly 5,000 randomly selected incidents published between October 2003 and November 2011. Still, the authors also recognize limitations with this approach, since many defensive incidents are never reported by victims, or when they are, never get published. In fact, the overwhelming majority of the successful self-defense outcomes are those where the defendants’ guns are presented but never fired.

Most of the actual self-defense shootings in the Cato study didn’t involve concealed carry licenses, but more typically had to do with responses to residential invasions. Of these, 488 involved home burglaries. In addition, there were 1,227 incidents where intruders were induced to flee the scene by armed inhabitants, circumstances that might otherwise have resulted in injurious assaults including rapes and murders. There were 285 news accounts indicating that the defender had a concealed weapon license, which in the majority of these incidents took place outside a home or place of business. Pizza delivery drivers were common robbery targets.

Whereas gun control proponents often argue that having a gun put people at risk because a criminal will take it away and use it against them, it seems the reality is more often to be the reverse situation. The Cato data contains only 11 stories out of 4,699 where a criminal took a gun away from a defender, but 277 where the intended victim disarmed the bad guy, although the authors acknowledge that these event reports may be printed more frequently due to newsworthiness.

Still, it should also be remembered that the threatened party often has more motivation to fight back than a criminal hoping for an easy score. There were 25 news reports where armed rape attack victims ultimately got the upper hand, and 65 where this occurred in carjacking attempts.

Then there is the argument that more private gun ownership will lead to more accidents because the average citizen isn’t sufficiently trained to use a weapon defensively. While gun accidents do occur, the Cato study indicates that they are the most overstated risks. There were 535 accidental firearms deaths in 2006 within a population of almost 300 million people. Although every lost life is tragic, the proportion is not particularly startling.

On the other hand, Newsweek has reported that law-abiding American citizens using guns in self-defense during 2003 shot and killed two and one-half times as many criminals as police did, and with fewer than one-fifth as many incidents as police where an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal (2% versus 11%).

Finally, on the subject of public safety, just how well have gun bans worked in other countries? Take the number of home break-ins while residents are present as an indication. In Canada and Britain, both with tough gun-control laws, nearly half of all burglaries occur when residents are present. But in the U.S. where many households are armed, only about 13% happen when someone is home.

Doesn’t this comparison offer some indication that criminals are getting the message? Don’t you wish those bent on eliminating our Second Amendment rights would also?


http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/02/21/disarming-the-myths-promoted-by-the-gun-control-lobby/

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

National Firearm News

Obama administration forcing new gun buyers to declare race, ethnicity
ATF policy irks dealers, risks privacy intrusion, racial profiling: 

By Kelly Riddell - The Washington Times - Tuesday, September 16, 2014

The Obama administration quietly has been forcing new gun buyers to declare their race and ethnicity, a policy change that critics say provides little law enforcement value while creating the risk of privacy intrusions and racial profiling.

With little fanfare, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in 2012 amended its Form 4473 — the transactional record the government requires gun purchasers and sellers to fill out when buying a firearm — to identify buyers as either Hispanic, Latino or not. Then a buyer must check his or her race: Indian, Asian, black, Pacific Islander or white.

The amendment is causing a headache for gun retailers, as each box needs to be checked off or else it’s an ATF violation — severe enough for the government to shut a business down. Many times people skip over the Hispanic/Latino box and only check their race, or vice versa — both of which are federal errors that can be held against the dealer.

Requiring the race and ethnic information of gun buyers is not required by federal law and provides little law enforcement value, legal experts say. And gun industry officials worry about how the information is being used and whether it constitutes an unnecessary intrusion on privacy.

“This issue concerns me deeply because, first, it’s offensive, and, secondly, there’s no need for it,” said Evan Nappen, a private practice firearms lawyer in New Jersey. “If there’s no need for an amendment, then there’s usually a political reason for the change. What this indicates is it was done for political reasons, not law enforcement reasons.”

ATF said the change came about because it needed to update its forms to comply with an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reporting standard put into effect during the Clinton administration. The ATF declined to comment on why race and ethnicity information are needed in the first place or what they are used for. On its prior 4473 forms, the bureau had been collecting race data.

“OMB’s race and ethnicity standards require agencies to ask both race and ethnicity in a specific manner (as done on [Form 4473]), and agencies may not ask for one without asking for the other,” wrote Elizabeth Gosselin, a spokeswoman for the ATF, in an emailed response to The Washington Times. She did not say why the agency suddenly made the change in response to a rule that was more than a decade old.

For ATF to ask for a purchaser’s race and ethnicity is not specifically authorized under federal statute, and since a government-issued photo ID — like a driver’s license — and a background check are already required by law to purchase a gun, the ethnicity/race boxes aren’t there for identification reasons, Mr. Nappen said.

“There is nothing [in ATF or OMB’s website links addressing the change in policy] that supports the requirement that ATF collect race-based information. The OMB guidance merely describes what categories of race should look like if information is collected,” Laura Murphy, the American Civil Liberties Union director for legislative affairs in Washington, said in an emailed statement.

In addition, Mrs. Murphy notes, the OMB guidance was supposed to be implemented by 2003; there’s no information given why ATF decided to make this change almost a decade later, she said.

“If there is a civil rights enforcement reason for the ATF to collect this data, I have not heard that explanation from ATF or any other federal agency,” said Mrs. Murphy.

Both the NAACP and the National Council of La Raza — the nation’s largest national Hispanic civil rights group — declined comment.

Access to the form
The 4473 form is supposed to be kept in a gun retailer’s possession at all times — allowing ATF agents to inspect the form only during the course of a criminal investigation or during a random audit of the dealer. The form is to be kept out of the hands of the government, hence the distinction between “sales/transaction form” and “registration form.” But that isn’t always the case, gun rights advocates say.

“We’ve been contacted by several dealers saying ATF is or has been making wholesale copies of their 4473 forms, and it’s just not legal,” said Erich Pratt, spokesman for Gun Owners of America, a gun advocacy group. “If this is what they’re doing somewhat out in the open, what’s going on behind closed doors? Are these names and demographic information getting phoned [in and] punched into a government computer? Do they ever come out?”

During the time ATF revised its 4473 form to include Hispanic or Latino as an ethnicity, the Obama administration was building gun control cases by saying U.S. firearms dealers were supplying Mexican gangs with weapons and that violence related to the sales was seeping across the border.

In March 2009, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited Mexico City and gave a speech against American gun stores and owners — blaming them for the drug cartels’ violence. Mrs. Clinton subsequently told CBS News that “90 percent” of the “guns that are used by the drug cartels against the police and military” actually “come from America.”

About a week later, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. made the same points at a gun trafficking conference outside of Mexico City. In April, the president himself flew down to Mexico to inform President Felipe Calderon that Mr. Holder was going to review U.S. law enforcement operations, according to a 2011 report by the American Thinker.

This political worldview may have fueled decision-making at ATF, Mr. Nappen suggests. Around the same time that ATF started specifying “Latino/Hispanic” on their U.S. purchasing forms, they also required border firearms dealers in Texas, Arizona, California and New Mexico to start reporting multiple rifle sales.

In 2012, when ATF made the Form 4473 modification, they insisted their new reporting requirement for multiple rifle sales in those border states had led to “follow-up investigations involving transactions that might indicate firearms trafficking activities.”

“Was it coincidental [that] about the time the form changed the requirements came in that border states had to report multiple rifle sales, and there was a push in the antigun movement to claim American guns were arming Mexican cartels south of the border?” asked Mr. Nappen.

Although gun advocates speculate on the reasoning behind changing the form, on one thing they are clear: Requiring ethnicity and race to purchase a gun is a clear government overstep, violating Second Amendment rights.

“It’s an overreach, not authorized by Congress, taken upon [by ATF] unilaterally,” said Mr. Pratt. “The president has said his biggest frustration has been not getting gun control enacted — but we can see he’s been very active with his phone and his pen. And this certainly — either intentionally or unintentionally — feeds that notion.”

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/16/obama-white-house-forcing-new-gun-buyers-to-declar/?page=2#ixzz3DZpJo2SR 

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

Illinois Conceal Carry Weapon (CCW) Permit Training Class

Illinois Concealed Carry Weapon (CCW) Training Class

Get your Illinois Concealed Carry License / Permit.... Plus get 3 other CCW's (Utah CCW, Arizona CCW & Florida CCW) - safely and legally conceal carry a handgun in over 35 States...!!!

Price: $275 (no other class fees), 

price includes;
1. Range fees ($25)
2. Illinois Livescan digital fingerprints ($60)
3. Utah & Arizona ink fingerprints ($25)
4. Florida ink prints - done by a cop ($10)
5. Passport photos ($10)
6. CCW application paperwork 
7. Assistance with CCW application paperwork 

Class Date: October 25-26th (16 hours)
Location: Oak Brook, Illinois 

331-642-8110 / www.IllinoisCC.com

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

Illinois Conceal Carry - News

Concealed carry: How does it affect you?

Kaleb Schwaiger

Staff Writer

Photo by Billi Jo Hart/Prospectus News The Firearm Concealed Carry Act was put into effect on July 9, 2013 in Illinois. Schools are among the many restricted areas that guns are not allowed.

Photo by Billi Jo Hart/Prospectus News
The Firearm Concealed Carry Act was put into effect on July 9, 2013 in Illinois. Schools are among the many restricted areas that guns are not allowed.

On Wednesday, July 9, 2013, the Firearm Concealed Carry Act came into effect, making concealed carry legal in Illinois. At Parkland College and other learning institutions, however, weapons are still banned.

The concealed carry act, 430 ILCS 66/1 et seq, has several requirements for acquiring a license. An applicant must be over the age of 21 and not have any misdemeanors in the last five years. These include the use or threat of physical force, two or more DUI’s, or court ordered alcohol treatments including detoxification and drug rehabilitation.

If the applicant meets all these requirements, they then have to pass the required firearms training. Once training has completed and the applicant has been given their license, there are still many regulations to follow.

Restricted places include any government buildings, schools, hospitals and liquor establishments, public transportation, public parks playgrounds and athletic facilities, nuclear facilities, airports, amusement parks, zoos and museums, among other federally restricted areas.

According to Parkland Police Chief William Colbrook, there is one exception. He calls it the “parking lot exception.”

“A registered card carrying citizen is required to disarm themselves in the parking lot when they leave their vehicle. They must then lock their weapon up in either a case or the trunk,” Colbrook explained.

The theory there is that citizens have the right to protect themselves on the streets, and should be allowed to bring their weapon with them. Once they get to school grounds though, the job of protection falls on Campus Safety.

 Some might argue that it is safer to have concealed carry here at Parkland. The officers cannot be everywhere at once and if a situation arises, a civilian carrier could potentially defuse it. Colbrook feels that there is not enough study to know if concealed carry makes everyone safer or not.

Having concealed carry creates a new dynamic for the 2014 police force. Colbrook expects to get calls about people putting their weapons away in the parking lots. He is confident his team has been properly trained for the situations.

Before the law was in place, responding to a gun call would be big news. Now, however, the officers can assume nothing going in to the situation. Odds are the person will just be putting away their weapon, which Colbrook said will certainly cause concern to people the first time they see it happening.

Business Administration major Ashley Beals said she would feel safer knowing that trained people are carrying weapons.

“There is a time and place for everything,” Beals remarked, and guns are no different. She, like many others, is concerned that the guns might be used if someone gets upset, or as a form of intimidation.

Business Professor Judy Smith said that ideally only law enforcement would have weapons. She is okay with concealed carry as long as the licensees have proper training. Her main concern is the potential for more guns being available to children.

A suggestion Smith made was for the age to be increased to 25, since the human brain does not fully develop until around that age.

“People aren’t able to fully comprehend their actions at a younger age,” Smith stated.

Colbrook encourages the public to remain vigilant in spotting suspicious activity.

“We are only as good as everyone else is. If someone is out of line, try to get information and contact public safety. Be part of the solution,” Colbrook said.

If you need to report a crime or suspicious activity, please call Public Safety at 217-351-2200.

Sunday, September 7, 2014

Illinois Concealed Carry News

Veteran With Concealed Carry Permit Shoots Back At Chicago Gunman

.
.Veteran With Concealed Carry Permit Shoots Back At Chicago Gunman

One of the spate of shootings that took place in Chicago, Ill. over the July 4th holiday weekend involved a veteran with a concealed carry permit who was forced to a shoot a man who began firing on him and a group of friends.

The incident occurred Friday night, the Chicago Tribune reports.

The veteran and three of his friends were leaving a party on the city’s south side. When the group reached their vehicle, a container with liquor was sitting on top of it. A woman from the group asked another group gathered next door who the liquor belonged to and removed it.

The move angered 22 year-old Denzel Mickiel, who approached the veteran and his friends shouting obscenities. The man then went into his residence and returned with a gun.

As Mickiel opened fire on the group, the veteran took cover near the vehicle’s front fender, according to assistant state attorney Mary Hain, the Chicago Tribune reports.

The veteran fired two shots, hitting Mickiel both times.

Two of Mickiel’s friends also began shooting at the group, which was able to flee the scene in their vehicle.

Mickiel was transported to the hospital and is in critical condition. A woman in the veteran’s group was hit twice – once in the arm and once in the back – but was stabilized and taken to the hospital.

Mickiel is charged with attempted murder and will be held on $950,000 bond.

Had Friday’s shooting occurred a little more than a year ago, the veteran would not have been legally permitted to conceal carry his firearm.

Illinois was the last U.S. state to allow citizens to carry concealed weapons with a permit, finally passing a law on July 9, 2013. The state began issuing conceal carry permits in February.

Seven people died and approximately 50 were injured in shootings that took place in Chicago over the weekend. The city has among the highest violent crime rates among major U.S. cities.

Saturday, September 6, 2014

Illinois Conceal Carry Weapon (CCW) Class

Illinois Concealed Carry Weapon (CCW) Training Class

Get your Illinois Concealed Carry License / Permit.... Plus get 3 other CCW's (Utah CCW, Arizona CCW & Florida CCW) - safely and legally conceal carry a handgun in over 35 States...!!!

Price: $275 (no other class fees), 

price includes;
1. Range fees ($25)
2. Illinois Livescan digital fingerprints ($60)
3. Utah & Arizona ink fingerprints ($25)
4. Florida ink prints - done by a cop ($10)
5. Passport photos ($10)
6. CCW application paperwork 
7. Assistance with CCW application paperwork 

Class Date: October 25-26th (16 hours)
Location: Oak Brook, Illinois 

331-642-8110 / www.IllinoisCC.com

Monday, September 1, 2014

Illinois Conceal Carry Weapon (CCW) Class

Illinois Concealed Carry Weapon (CCW) Training Class

Get your Illinois Concealed Carry License / Permit.... Plus get 3 other CCW's (Utah CCW, Arizona CCW & Florida CCW) - safely and legally conceal carry a handgun in over 35 States...!!!

Price: $275 (no other class fees), 

price includes;
1. Range fees ($25)
2. Illinois Livescan digital fingerprints ($60)
3. Utah & Arizona ink fingerprints ($25)
4. Florida ink prints - done by a cop ($10)
5. Passport photos ($10)
6. CCW application paperwork 
7. Assistance with CCW application paperwork 

Class Date: September 6-7th (16 hours)
Location: Oak Brook, Illinois 

331-642-8110 / www.IllinoisCC.com