Illinois Sheriff: I Support the Constitution and the Second Amendment, But . . .

By
Grace Stevens
-
128
◀Previous Post
Next Post▶
There have been many questions on where I stand regarding the assault weapons ban bill just signed into law. Following the horrifically tragic mass shooting right here in Highland Park, not seven months ago, along with the mass shootings we see on a weekly basis across our nation, I issued a statement, which remains true today.
 
I said: “As a society, so many have become numb to mass shootings as we read about them nearly every day. Then, on Independence Day, when our families, our children, our friends, were gathered along parade routes to celebrate this nation’s independence a calculated coward unleashed unprecedented terror on our community with a weapon of war. I truly hope this is the last mass shooting we live through before assault-style rifles are banned. Assault-style rifles are nothing more than killing machines, and they have no place in a civilized society. It is time action is taken. While the intent of my message is not meant to be political, I feel the most significant action that can be taken to minimize and prevent further carnage is by enacting a full ban on assault-style rifles.”
 
While I am a believer in our Constitution and our 2nd Amendment, I firmly support the ban on assault-style rifles and I truly hope our federal government follows to ban them nationwide. Since our Constitution and the 2nd Amendment were formed, firearms have become much more sophisticated and much more deadly. Our Founding Fathers were not loading .223 rounds into their muskets. They were not using firearms designed to disintegrate human bodies. As I said following the Highland Park mass shooting, these weapons of war do not belong on our streets. They’re used to kill our police, used to kill innocent people, and used to inflict maximum carnage on their victims.
 
Our Illinois legislators discussed and created a bill, which was amended several times, after input from law-enforcement and other stakeholders. The bill was voted on and passed. It was then signed by the governor, which makes the bill law. I, as your Sheriff, am sworn to enforce the law. It’s incredibly dangerous for me to cherry-pick and enforce only laws I agree with, or only laws I feel are important. That is not what our Constitution of the State or Illinois intends for law-enforcement. That is not what the people of Lake County or Illinois deserve.
 
It’s important to note, unfortunately many remain very divided in this country, which leads to mudslinging, hate, rumors, false information, and innuendo being spread, instead of fact. I ask everyone to take a deep breath. I encourage those who haven’t read the law to give it a read for themselves, instead of listening to others who might be spreading misleading or false information.
 
This law does not mean our deputies will be going door to door, asking for documentation on weapons. It does not mean we are forming a team to search your home for weapons. Like everything else we do in our profession, we will use discretion and common sense.
I, along with other Lake County leaders have heard from thousands of people who support this legislation. I stand with the people of Lake County, and I will always do everything in my power to keep you safe.
— Lake County, IL Sheriff John D. Idleburg via Facebook

◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

128 COMMENTS

      • Another history illiterate who does not know to consider the fact that those muskets used black powder which was used to makes bombs. In fact bozo sheriff a powder horn from the day if ignited could blow your azz sky high…just in case you get your incompetent hands on one.

        Furthermore when morons want to talk Gun Control they best fact check the history of Gun Control for its deep roots in racism and genocide.

        Frankly sheriff…A Black American belonging to the democRat Party makes as much sense as a Jew belonging to the nazi party…Chew on that.

        • …A Black American belonging to the democRat Party makes as much sense as a Jew belonging to the nazi party…Chew on that.

          You know Debbie, This sayng you repeat can’t be said too many times in my opinion (honestly, no BS) It’s just as true w/ any other demon-crab though no matter what color they are…they see the politicians helping the country circle the drain yet these VBC–Victims by Choice ( john farnam) STILL vote Dimocrat! It boggles the mind!

      • Hopefully if he has any kids they turn out to be smarter than he is. Not a very high goal though.

        • he stated his position…no need to repeat it endlessly…he’s not really convincing anyone who opposes him on this issue to change their stance…

  2. So he doesn’t support the second amendment and he is breaking the oath he took when he was sworn into office.

    • Rule of thumb: if a law can’t be effectively enforced without using unconstitutional methods, said law is unconstitutional.

      • “Rule of thumb: if a law can’t be effectively enforced without using unconstitutional methods, said law is unconstitutional.”

        “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land;”

        All laws are considered to be constitutional unless, and until, declared unconstitutional by a court (ultimately the US Supreme Court). Thus, all law is enforcable as an exercise in an oath of office to uphold the constitution, as illuminated by laws of the legislature.

        We the people do not have authority/power to declare for ourselves which laws are constitutional, nor the authority/power to ignore laws simply because we individually decide laws are constitutionally null and void.

        Until laws are adjudicated as unconstitutional, violation, or defiance, are subject to legal sanctions.

        • Which makes it all the more frustrating that elected officials can support and have signed into law blatantly unconstitutional laws. Especially with how slowly the justice system works. Stupid people vote stupid people into office and we have to wait years for any recourse.

        • “We the people do not have authority/power to declare for ourselves which laws are constitutional, nor the authority/power to ignore laws simply because we individually decide laws are constitutionally null and void.

          Until laws are adjudicated as unconstitutional, violation, or defiance, are subject to legal sanctions.”

          Wrong on all counts. First, the constitution is the “supreme law.” This means, in no uncertain terms, that any law not in compliance with the constitution is unconstitutional. No authority has any right to sanction any US citizen for complying first with the constitution.

          Any authority within the United States that attempts to arrest, detain, indict, or convict a US citizen who complies with the US constitution instead of any unconstitutional is itself violating both the constitution and their oath of office and therefore subject to prosecution.

      • They will rely on snitches to get their search information.

        A criminal junky has more standing to them than us mere “civilians” (said with a sneer of barely disguised contempt).

    • exactly !!! he is a criminal by taking that oath and then making this statement — he could be grabbed by the military and tried for treason — UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE — can be used on civilians that take an oath to the constitution and brake it in writing and speech!!!!!

      • “UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE — can be used on civilians that take an oath to the constitution and brake it in writing and speech!!!!!”

        That is really interesting. Do you have links to where I can read more?

    • “I guess he has no idea of the destruction that a .54 caliber ball to a person.”

      Or a .75 ball round, as in Civil War 2.0.

      Or that .223 is essentially a .22 calibre bullet. Put a standard .22 bullet in a casing capable of reaching 55,000psi in a rifle, and you can do the same damage.

      How convenient to be ignorant of the purpose of the second amendment: fend off invaders, overthrow a tyrannical government. 2A protects weapons of war.

      I remember my BIL telling me that only government and criminals should be allowed to have guns.

    • From the Sheriff:

      “Our Founding Fathers were not […] using firearms designed to disintegrate human bodies.”

      I’m still waiting to see someone (I’m looking at you, Thunder Ranch and/or Garand Thumb) to do a review on one of these mysterious weapons that blows out lungs and disintegrates human bodies.

      ****
      I just thought of this right now as I wrote the above:

      My grandfather once told me of an elk hunt long ago in which he made a perfect shot and had to track the beast to where it finally collapsed and expired. Upon field dressing and removing the offal, he found that the round had completely passed through the animal, and the hydrostatic shock had obliterated the heart and pulled most of the tissue out the exit wound.

      So instead of banning ARs and the diminutive .223, maybe the good ‘ol Sheriff should be looking at Bubba hunters and their 7mm Magnums. Though that doesn’t sound as politically palatable to the Karens, I suppose…

      • Single shot to single shot wouldn’t various muzzleloaders do substantially more damage to a human torso than anything in common usage short of a hot shotgun slu

        • One of the reasons that lead rounds were outlawed for use in war was the massive wounding caused by a flattened large caliber round passing through the body. (The second reason was that lead and high velocity are mutually exclusive; the lead strips off the round and fouls the barrel in just a few shots.)

          There were innumerable amputations during our Civil War due to the impact of either .54 cal or .69 cal lead ball on the human body. They literally evaporate bone such that there was no way to repair the wound.

          Then of course, the whole purpose of the 2A was to ensure that the militia had the right to bear military arms, so this whole “weapons of war” thing is just so much hog wash.

        • You can thank the Geneva and Hague conventions outlawing expanding or exploding small arms ammunition being used by regular recognized military combatants.

          Civilian and Police use of such ammunition was deliberately neglected.

        • @Mark,

          “Evaporate bone”? I’m sure they caused substantial shatter damage, but this is the first I’ve heard of Civil War era weapons vaporizing human bone tissue.

          Maybe they were .69 cal balls in the 40W range.

  4. “…and I will always do everything in my power to keep you safe.”
    such as take your means of self defense away. since all guns could be interpreted as “killing machines” (as well as hundreds of other common items) this is just a step towards elimination of the things.

  5. “I ask everyone to take a deep breath. I encourage those who haven’t read the law to give it a read for themselves, instead of listening to others who might be spreading misleading or false information.”
    It’s blatantly unconstitutional period! This clown is truly evil and has no business as Sheriff. Almost as if he never heard of Hitler.

  6. “Our Founding Fathers were not loading .223 rounds into their muskets. They were not using firearms designed to disintegrate human bodies.”

    [Brown Bess has entered the chat]

    • brass cannons loaded with canister shot entered as well. cannons were nothing more than upscaled muskets at that time.

  7. Shouldn’t he be outfitting police carrying muskets? To be historically accurate. Maybe armed only with clubs?

    • One of the things completely missed by many of these people is that even at the time of the founding, there was plenty of access to weapons the would completely remove someones entire head from their body. Things that were capable to taking an entire limb in a single shot.

  8. Our Founding Fathers wanted citizens to have arms commensurate with the standing armies of the day, and would be aghast at the restrictions forced upon Free men and women’s Second Amendment Rights!

  9. The criminal activity that he refers to will not just stop if EVERY AR15 were to go away over night. These guns are not the problem. The 223 round isn’t the problem either. It absolutely is people like him that keeps feeding this that is the problem. Blame the tool and completely ignore the person controlling it.

    • it’s never been the AR, Highland park has had an AWB for how long? Murder is presumably illegal in Chicago but they have how many murders a week there? And that’s typically not even using “assault weapons” just regular handguns.

      AWB is always just a first step because those scary looking guns are easier to demonize. That won’t fix the violence in Chicago, so they will need to implement the next step and next and next…

      • did he have anything to say about Glock switches that have now become so prevalent in the criminal community?

  11. It’s important to note, unfortunately many remain very divided in this country, which leads to mudslinging, hate, rumors, false information, and innuendo being spread, instead of fact.

    Also form Sheriff Idontknowshit:

    Assault-style rifles are nothing more than killing machines, and they have no place in a civilized society.
    and
    Our Founding Fathers were not loading .223 rounds into their muskets. They were not using firearms designed to disintegrate human bodies.

    Bet he issues those same types of weapons to his deputies.

  13. Typical. ‘I support (fill-in-the-blank), but I don’t.’

    In 1905, Winchester introduced a semi auto detachable box mag rifle in calibers heavier than 7.65×39. Discontinued in 1954. No background check, id, or age limit. Strictly OTC, just heroin and cocaine.

    No parade incidents.

    Guns and dope never harder to get in the US, yet here we are, in the 21st century, with shot up parades. What happened?

      • Realistic images of extreme violence first appeared on prime time TV (US) around 1960. The modern era of style high score mass shootings began in 66.

        Most countries continued to censor violence, and have lower rates of “random” violence to this day.

        Exposure of young brains to hyper-violent imagery is what correlates to the statistics, not the “availability of guns and drugs”.

        Although creating a criminal class of unprecedented wealth and power ain’t helping even a little bit.

        Monkey see, monkey do.

  14. “Like everything else we do in our profession, we will use discretion”

    The Founders’ ideal in creating our Republic was “a government, not of men, but of laws” – i.e. one whose functionaries have zero discretion whatsoever.

  15. The Founding Fathers knew advancements in technology would occur. Smooth bore to rifling. The Boston shipyards were known for their advancements in ship design.
    Could they of imagined of things like the machine gun? Maybe Ben Franklin. The Atomic bomb? Likely not.
    If they saw the destructive power of what our politics has become, they would of enacted term limits.
    If they could of seen the erosion of the 1stA and 2ndA, they would of expanded on those rights to ensure what has happened would of never came to pass.
    And if they saw the destructive power of social media, they would of been in awe and openly wept.

    • There were repeating firearms in the mid 1700s IIRC. And a semi auto air rifle was carried by Lewis and Clark. Semi auto handgun was around in the cowboy days, though newly invented..

      • Country Boy:
        “And a semi auto air rifle was carried by Lewis and Clark.”
        Nope. It was a repeater, but nowhere near semiauto. To reload, the rifleman had to tilt the rifle muzzle-up to make sure a rifle ball was in the shuttle loader, push the shuttle from left to right to put the ball in battery, level the rifle, cock the valve actuator (looks like a side-lock hammer) and THEN squeeze the trigger. That is a far cry from semiauto.

    • Ian at Forgotten Weapons reviewed a multi-barreled black powder flintlock machine gun. It used superimposed powder and ball in each barrel and channels between the bores would start the process in another.

      These were used by ships for close in defense.

      The problem was once started the firing couldn’t be stopped until the gun was empty.

  16. Fentanyl and automobiles are the greatest killing machines that Americans are faced with, in the wrong hands.

    • “Fentanyl and automobiles are the greatest killing machines that Americans are faced with…”

      No one needs a gun, but people need fentanyl for their pain relief. 150,000 dead from fentanyl is a small price for society to pay to be able to avoid pain.

      93,000,000 people are killed in the US each year, by guns. No one needs a gun.

      (maybe it is only 930,000 each year, or 93,000; but, it is a really big number)

  17. Wow that guy is so full of sht I can smell it from here.
    “I wont cherry pick.” – – ” We will use discretion.”
    Otay

    • Any “Agents of Gooberment” that choose to try gunm confiscation should review their Insurance policies and make sure their Wills/ Final arangements are up to date. “Discretion?” Ha ha ha ha ha ha ! You mean just like Ruby ridge, Waco etc etc etc ???????
      A million gunms sold a month for 37 consecutive months! (that’s as of Sept/2022)
      “August’s figures show there is a clear and steady desire by the American public for lawful firearm ownership,” according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, an industry trade group ( Newsmax)
      Americans are choosing their gun rights by the millions each month while gun control politicians talk only of efforts to deprive them of their Constitutional rights. They are voting with their wallets. Politicians would be wise to heed to the will of Americans lawfully exercising their Constitutional rights and instead focus their efforts on locking up criminals that misuse firearms,” the NSSF said.

      Gentlemen and Ladies, I gotta go out and do some shopping, I’ll be right back (🔫🔫🔫– snicker snicker)

  18. “Like everything else we do in our profession, we will use discretion and common sense.”
    Good Golly Miss Molly, if this is what he calls “common sense” he’s truly an idiot.

    • Country Boy, even idiots can see the foolishness in his statements. People like this sheriff are far worse than a mere idiot. A stupid person is someone who cannot comprehend things. This sheriff and those with similar views are the very definition of stupid.

  19. Who exactly has been disintegrated by.223 Remington? Prairie dogs, ground hogs, chipmunks? Sure enough not a human. The shooters are supplied by the government, and doing the work of the government to try to justify disarmament. Should we cut the good sheriff’s prick off because of rape?

    • Redneck.45lc,

      “Should we cut the good sheriff’s prick off because of rape?”

      You do realize that an astonishing large number of Progressive True Believers want to do exactly that–remove all men’s uniquely male anatomy item–in the interest of women’s equity or some such nonsense.

  20. Kinda like “I support the 13th Amendment but we cannot continue to ignore the terrible cost our friends, families, children and homes have paid allowing this unprecedented level of unchecked, unlimited and unregistered freedom.”

    Maybe once we start applying limits evenly and consistently across the board jackasses like this will wake up.

  21. So if the morbidly obese governor and the legislature had passed a law allowing slavery of blacks in the state, which is just as unconstitutional as the AWB, this sheriff would enforce it because “it’s the law?”

    • Gipper’s Ghost,

      I came to call attention to the same quote from Sheriff Idleburg:

      “Our Illinois legislators discussed and created a bill, which was … voted on and passed. It was then signed by the governor, which makes the bill law. I, as your Sheriff, am sworn to enforce the law.”

      I will add another dimension to it, though. The Illinois state Constitution and the United States Constitution are the Supreme Law of the Land. Whenever a unit of government passes a law which violates the clear and simple language of either constitution, it is immediately null-and-void. Thus, not only does the Sheriff’s office compel him to pursue justice (jailing people for merely possessing an inanimate object is not justice), the Sheriff’s office also compels him to uphold the Supreme Law of the Land which forbids government from interfering with the right of the People to keep and bear arms.

      In other words, that Sheriff is a giant douchebag and has no righteous nor legitimate authority to enforce laws which infringe on the right of the People to keep and bear arms.

      • Most likely he received a very large monetary gift to go along and enforce the unconstitutional law

  22. What if arsonists used tamp0ns (tamp0ns are made of cotton and excellent fire starters) to start fires and kill 200,000 people every year. Look at how silly Lake County Sheriff John Idleburg looks if we update his statements accordingly:

    Fisking #1

    Tamp0ns are nothing more than killing machines, and they have no place in a civilized society. … the most significant action that can be taken to minimize and prevent further carnage is by enacting a full ban on tamp0ns.

    Fisking #2

    As I said following the Highland Park arson mass murder, these implements of mass arson do not belong on our streets. They’re used to kill our police, used to kill innocent people, and used to inflict maximum carnage on their victims.

  23. When the leftists use the term “the face of white supremacy” when describing Larry Elder. They are using Projection. Because the white left will rely on a compliant black person in authority. To enforce they’re unconstitutional and racist edicts.

    It would be very interesting to see this Sheriff’s reaction, for a reporter to ask him about, the racist history of Illinois gun control laws. Or ask him about the “racist roots of gun control” written by Clayton E. Cramer from 1993.
    Your FOID card is a racist copy of the Mulford Act in California.

    From jun 2021

    “ISRA supported the FOID card when it was first implemented in the late 1960’s”

    https://www.mom-at-arms.com/post/isra-supported-the-foid-card-when-it-was-first-implemented-in-the-late-1960-s

    • Well we’re headed for Lake County…INDIANA. Mebbe LaPorte or further. EFF ILLanoy. To echo John Belushi “I hate ILLannoy Nazi’s”! ISRA are the definition of fudd.

    • Chris T in KY,

      Actually the FOID has it roots in 1938 German Weapons Act.
      http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3390
      The 1968 Gun Control Act was written by Senator Thomas J Dodd.
      Dodd was a judge at Nuremberg. He also had a copy of the 1938 German Weapons Act.
      Mayor Daley Sr. and Dodd were buddies and Daley did not want blacks to have guns.
      The 68 GCA act greatly reduced the average citizens RIGHTS to have guns.
      Mayor Daley Sr. did not want ANY handguns in Chicago, something he would not live to see.
      In 1982 under Mayor Jane Byrne Chicago became the first major city to enact a handgun freeze in United States history. http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/557.html

      As for Larry Elder if the GOP in California had run a stronger person against Gavin Newsomes 2021 recall, California would have a different governor. Larry Elder is out for one person only, himself.
      He now peddles the snake oil Relief Factor just like Mike Huckabee is a huckster for Relaxium.

      As for ISRA they have become the only real pro 2A group in Illinois while the NRA and others have bugged out or use funds for personal use. ISRA has the biggest war chest and legal team.
      ISRA knew that with a super majority in both houses and JB that they couldn’t fight this.
      Instead they were waiting for a decision on the legality of the FOID card and were waiting for a decision in the Illinois Supreme Court to get rid of the FOID because a circuit court had ruled that the FOID rule was unconstitutional but the Illinois Supreme Court stopped short of declaring the rule unconstitutional.
      ISRA came off as bad guys.

      Tell me how much money “Mom-At-Arms” or even John Boch’s Guns Save Life have in their war chest?
      As for “Mom-At-Arms” it looks like they get 5 hits a day and are more into selling shirts and fanny packs.
      How about Illinois Carry? It’s not like Valinda Rowe isn’t making a living off of that website.
      https://dev.thetruthaboutguns.com/it-might-surprise-you-who-helped-write-illinois-new-lethal-violence-order-of-protection-law/ and yet people are sending her money to pay her gas bill.

      ISRA has A LOT more money then any of these feel good groups and an actual website that isn’t on WordPress. They have been in existence since 1903. ISRA has attorneys and lobbyists.
      What about Todd Vandermyde and GOA? Well he jumped ship from the NRA and the best I can tell he makes money off of his YouTube channel and selling gun parts on Ebay. He also looks like he needs to go to AA and isn’t a registered lobbyist anymore in IL.

      I don’t tell you what is going on in Kentucky so please don’t tell me what is going on in Illinois.
      Donate to ISRA, they are best prepared to fight this and don’t have to join forces.
      Most of the gun dealers are giving their money to ISRA while the other fringe “gun rights” groups are probably using this constitutional travesty to stuff their pockets.

      BTW: Sheriff Idleburg has to support this or he won’t get reelected in Lake County. That’s where the parade thing happened and spoiled Highland Parks parade. Tom Dart of Cook County has always hated guns in the hands of citizens and Dustin Heuerman of Champaign is gay and woke. They are the three Sheriffs out of 102 who will. Did you know that some northern county DAs will not prosecute anyone arrested by say local PDs until this “bill” is heard by a court and a ruling is made?
      That really has JBs panties twisted.

      Nothing in this bill other then the sale, purchase or delivery high capacity magazines is in effect until April 10th. If you have a Glock 17 that holds 17 rounds that you carry then you are good until then. After that you still have them on you.You can have then along with 30 or 100 round rifle magazines on or in your property. You can also use them on shooting ranges as long as you transport then unloaded in a case or other container. The real fun begins January 1, 2024. but it will all be overturned long before that.

    • “ISRA supported the FOID card when it was first implemented in the late 1960’s”

      The FOID card was strictly because of Daley Sr. and Dodd.
      It went right along with the GCA of 1968 which ISRA couldn’t oppose.
      The IL senate vote was 55-5 a year before and the country was in chaos.
      It made the riots of 2020 look weak in comparison.
      ISRA supported the FOID because it was the only way blacks were going to get guns.
      ISRA around since 1903, Mom-At-Arms is what, 3 years old?
      Read ALL of what you post and not what a bunch of Karens highlight.
      http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3390

  24. “They were not using firearms designed to disintegrate human bodies.”

    Hmmm… my civilian grade AR-15’s don’t do that, no ones civilian grade AR-15 does that, and never have.

    This goes right along with the claim from anti-gun that a single .223/5.56 bullet from a civilian grade AR-15 rifle will vaporize a body so completely that all traces of a persons body would cease to exist even DNA. Seriously. they actually make this claim. Anti-gun organizations have made this claim, there’s even an anti-gun study thrown around by anti-gun that implies this, Democrat politicians have made this claim right along with a 5.56 rifle fires a .50 caliber round and is as heavy as 10 filled boxes one may be moving on moving day.

    First, its a stupid thing to claim. Second, there is no such documented evidence of such and it has never been seen to actually happen despite the claims last year of a person claiming to be a doctor who claimed that suddenly the person was vaporized and gone when they were shot. Third, its impossible under the laws of physics because the human body molecules are bound by such energy force that there is no rifle bullet on earth no matter the caliber that can break those bonds to vaporize a human body. Fourth, if such were possible, under the laws of physics, the very first .223/5.56 round that was fired from an AR-15 that ever hit anything at all – the impact energy would be so great that space and time would be ripped apart, and the Earth would cease to exist having been blown apart and you would not be reading this today

    A while back now Bloombergs Trace and the Gun Violence Archive – it was discovered the main source of their data is not police reports but rather MSM. A sampling of their ‘data’ vs the media source revealed that they never check back with the source and find out that the source was wrong. They just take the first thing pumped out by MSM then drum up all these numbers to claim hundreds of ‘mass shootings’ that were not mass shootings by their own definitions. One of the issues they were challenged on was their claims of victim numbers when they started spewing out stuff in articles and in media. When the number of victims they claimed didn’t add up they claimed that the reason for the missing body’s was that a single .223/5.56 bullet from a civilian grade AR-15 rifle vaporize the body’s so completely that all traces of a victims body ceased to exist even DNA.

    • “a single .223/5.56 bullet from a civilian grade AR-15 rifle will vaporize a body so completely that all traces of a persons body would cease to exist even DNA. Seriously. they actually make this claim“

      I would seriously be interested in learning more about this, would you be kind enough to provide a source or citation?

      • MINOR Miner49er. Did you bother to read what .40 wrote? He said that is basically a bold faced lie that a .223/0r/5.56 will vaporize a body. Your own anti-gun radicals have made this claim repeatedly over the years although it has been DEBUNKED. It has been debunked so thoroughly that if you Google that statement you won’t get any results. Google is famous for such.

  25. He hit just about every space on gun control talking points bingo

    I support 2A BUT, weekly mass shootings, Americans are desensitized, assault-style rifle, killing machine that has no place on our streets, 223 disintegrates the body, MAXIMUM CARNAGE, Founders had muskets and were too dumb to forsee modern weaponry, kills innocent bystanders and cops

  27. “As a society, so many have become numb to mass shootings BY BLACK MALE CRIMINALS as we read about them nearly every day.”

    There. FIFY.

    Maybe a little black folk control is what we really need.

  28. “Our Founding Fathers were not loading .223 rounds into their muskets. They were not using firearms designed to disintegrate human bodies.”

    No, the Founding Fathers were using .70 caliber lead balls that did far, far, far, more damage to human bodies than the puny little .223 round. This “sheriff” displays an astonishing ignorance. He doesn’t know that .70 is larger than .223, or that .70 caliber musket balls will take off an arm or a leg while .223 bullets (if they don’t tumble or fragment) sometimes only create a pencil-sized wound, which is why the US Army is switching back to full-powered rifle rounds (the 6.8x51mm Common Cartridge, which is as powerful as the .30-06).

  29. I Support the Constitution and the Second Amendment, But . . . I hate law abiding gun owners and don’t give a damn about their rights.

    There ya go Sheriff, I fixed it for you.

    “Assault-style rifles are nothing more than killing machines”

    Once again, there is not one of your (politically loaded false term) “Assault-style rifles” that has ever been the responsible party, nor can it be, for any shooting, period. The responsible party is the mentally ill person who committed the mass shootings you allude to and not thousands of law abiding Illinois citizens who you will gladly help into a jail cell and continue to trample on their rights.

    It is not lost on me that no where in your screeching nonsense of deflection and excuse have you addressed the real responsible party which is the person who committed these crimes to which you allude. So judging by that and the fact that its now even easier as of Jan 1 2023 for criminals in your state to escape penalty/prosecution and/or continue crimes, it can only be posited that while law abiding citizens rights are being trampled by your tyrannical governor that the rights of criminals are intact and you are satisfied with that.

    Quit lying Sheriff. You don’t “Support the Constitution and the Second Amendment” – what you support is your tyrannical governors fat ass.

  30. “It does not mean we are forming a team to search your home for weapons. Like everything else we do in our profession, we will use discretion and common sense.”

    So, a snitch tip-line, then? What an actual fascist uses… 🙁

  31. @muckraker
    “Which makes it all the more frustrating that elected officials can support and have signed into law blatantly unconstitutional laws.”

    “A republic, if you can keep it.”

  32. @Southern Cross
    “You can thank the Geneva and Hague conventions outlawing expanding or exploding small arms ammunition being used by regular recognized military combatants.”

    The US was not a signatory to that treaty in 1899. (another arrogant and stupid attempt to make war more humane….as if war can somehow become respectable.

    • Although not a signatory the USA did agree to follow the terms and conditions. The use of Sierra Match King bullets of terrorists was ruled legal because they are not recognized military combatants.

    • the idea of the Hague compact was to make war more humane…[good luck with that]…and to wound rather than kill…something that supposedly benefitted both sides….

      • “and to wound rather than kill…something that supposedly benefitted both sides….”

        Soft lead projectiles are very good at creating devastating wounds, especially the calibers from .45 and up.

    • “liberal white guilt
      can get anybody elected
      to any office
      anywhere in america”

      Dimwitocrats seem to have mastered the art.

  36. Seems this wannabe “Sheriff”doesn’t have a clue what the Constitution nor the 2nd Amendment mean.

  37. @The TTAG
    “Sam:
    Not you either. Not even me.”

    You gotta get with the times: if a man can decide to be a woman, if scientists decide biological men can get pregnant, then I can, and did, decide that I am the only trustworthy person in the country. Since I claimed it first, I get the title.

  38. Ok, here it is again, more slowly:
    “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;….shall be the supreme Law of the Land;”

    Only the courts have authority to determine whether a law is made pursuint to the Consititution. The “theory” of individual nullification has no constitutional support with respect to whether or not individuals are subject to action of law enforcement until the law is adjudicated as unconstitutional. If it were otherwise, we would have plentiful case history demonstrating the “theory”.

    We are not the first generation to consider whether the laws of the nation are entirely constitutional. We did not suddenly discover the idea that if any individual decides a law is unconstitutional, that individual is free to defy/ignore such law. I was introduced to the “theory” in 1962, in high school civics class. Escaping detection of defiance is not the same as establishing a legal principle/precedent.

    As to whether a government agent can be punished for enforcing a law later determined to be unconstitutional…good point for further investigation/debate.

  39. Since our Constitution and the 1st Amendment were formed, communication has become much more sophisticated and much more pervasive. Our Founding Fathers were not reading news articles online and able to tweet insults against the president at will…”

    hrm

  40. @FN DA HP
    “Isn’t that what King George said?”

    King George was correct: the colonists did not have authority ignore the laws of parliament (nor commands of the king). The founders were not free of consequences for declaring the laws of England to be null and void. The founders admitted they did not have authority to oppose the king and parliament, by refering to a higher law:“Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God”.

    If rebellion were operating under the rule of man-made law, it wouldn’t be rebellion at all. The founding of this nation, the orgainzing for rebellion were illegal; the nation was founded in illegality under British law. The colonists did not have authority to declare British law null and void, so they rebelled, and and paid the price for defying existing laws they decided were null and void.

    • denying them representation in the enactment of laws they were expected to obey was the core issue of the revolution…blindless obedience to a higher power without question has never been our strong suit..and is the reason many came here to escape it….

      • “denying them representation in the enactment of laws they were expected to obey was the core issue of the revolution…”

        That is the long taught notion, but the DOI doesn’t support the conclusion. IAW the DOI, the reason for rebellion was not “no taxation without representation”. The catalyst was, “…when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government…”

        Gotta think that if “no taxation without representation” was the central, capital, complaint that caused the rebellion, the founders would not have been shy about so stating in the DOI.

  41. Enforcing gun control to the point of attempted confiscation will get the left killed. And rightly so. No 2nd Amendment, no laws, rules, country. Only death.

  42. test cases will determine whether legislation like this will stand…rigid enforcement will just hasten that outcome..let’s see just how hard they will push it….

  43. Illinois Sheriff: I Support the Constitution and the Second Amendment, But my comment is stuck in moderation because I used the word 40’s German European axis or what used to mean happy.

  44. @XZX
    “Horseshit.”

    The epitome of intelligent discourse, but to what, specifically, do you refer?

    • Your discourse, of course

      “Only the courts have authority to determine whether a law is made pursuint to the Consititution”

      Factually incorrect.

      As multiple Sheriffs would explain, if they wanted to waste their time.

      • “Factually incorrect.”

        Legally correct. Abberations are not legal principle/precedent.

        The issue was whether individual declarations of what is/is not “constitutional” can protect the public from government sanctions; it cannot. The matter at hand is not whether one can declare something constitutional/unconstitutional and possible evade detection. Nor was the discussion related to governmtent agencies abusing their power.

        Thus, if one declares the income tax to be unconstitutional (meaning an amendment to the constitution is unconstitutional) and goes decades without detection, the lack of detection does not establish legal precedent.

        If a law enforcement declares that confiscating legally owned firearms is constitutional (and goes about it), such does not set legal precedent, or make universal confiscation legal/constitutional.

        In the end, only the courts can determine what is constitutional….after laws are enacted.

  46. THe only comments I have a concern the last two paragraphs. Just how is it intende to implement the law if there are NO search teams and CONFISCATIONS?

    How can a respected Officer in Law Enforcement even mention ‘cheery picking laws’ that he does not agree with as a subject of discussion.

    [Though I do realise that the law provides for an element of discression -though that ‘discression’ may be challenged at any time]

    It is NOT the funftion of Law enforcement to MAKE the laws or to act as Judge and Jury it is the duty of Law Enforcesment to ENFORCE the laws as decided by the elected legislature administered by a INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY. If you do not agree with the law then there is the BALLOT BOX through which in a DEMOCRACY the legislature is change. Not at the point of a gun or as a sop to limited public opinion.

    The banning of semi-auto rifles to the genera lpublic can be challenged in FEDERAL COURTS can it not??

  47. He looks like an affirmative action poster child.

    He’s never supported the Second Amendment in his entire life.

  49. He said he swore to uphold the law. But if you look up the actual oath that he actually swore when he took office as an Illinois sheriff, he didn’t. He took an oath to uphold the Federal and State of Illinois Constitutions. The oath doesn’t mention Illinois Statutes at all.

Comments are closed.