Rejoice gun ban advocates! Just try to keep it in your pants, okay?

And you assume that this has nothing to do with having the kind of culture that votes in a legislature that wants to ban assault weapons?

This law does not remove other laws. Without probable cause the police cannot search for weapons. So the people who have guns but no one knows because nothing ever happens with them have nothing to fear. However, those who brag, intimidate, and break other laws with guns around have a new problem.

You see this doesn't effect calm law abiding gun lovers because no one is after their guns. The cops are not breaking down any ones doors, they are simply going to add this charge to other times people get arrested because that is how they work.

You are lying and saying they are running around taking guns from everyone when it simply is not true. However, I would not go around flashing your gun and waving it about like a complete guntards as no one wants to see your gun in public. Think about it like your dick, and treat it like the surrogate penis it is and keep it where no one can see it in town. There are no deer needing to be shot by you in Deerfield town limits.

rich white people! Wait - aren't the scared, conservative "gun culture" people white too? Well this is quite the conundrum we have here!
So....clear this up for me.... some scared conservative whites are guntards but other scared conservative whites are heroes. So race isn't the factor - it must be education level, or income level. But what about wealthy educated whites who don't want to ban assault rifles? I know quite a few of them. Maybe it's geography? Somebody dig up some data on what constitutes a "guntard" or "gun fetishist" or a uniformed definition of these terms.

never said they were taking guns yet. That begins in June! Then they face a fine of up to 1,000 dollars a day.
That is BTW about the price of an AR-15 tricked out with a few accessories. But fuck them, they make good money in Deerfield. But nobody is after their guns!


http://fox2now.com/2018/04/04/illin...-automatic-weapons-violators-face-1000-fines/

YES! Now I see the "end game" here! It doesn't matter if Deerfield doesn't have any gun violence. If we ban the AR-15/semi-auto weapons in more & more towns eventually a life will be saved! It may cost millions in tax-payer resources - and thousands of people will die from revolvers, pump shotguns holding three shells maximum, knives, hammers, etc. during the court battles. Cops & civilians may be injured/killed confiscating weapons or fining people (talk about some irony!) but hey, eggs & omeletes, right?

It's okay to pass laws limiting guns as long as they don't actually limit guns. Gotcha.

You've been watching Glenn Beck connect dots again, haven't you?

Well military style rifles are still illegal in Massachusetts.
In his ruling, US District Judge William Young of Massachusetts wrote that the state’s ban on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines does not violate the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment.

“The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear Arms,’ ” Young wrote in a 47-page ruling. “In the absence of federal legislation, Massachusetts is free to ban these weapons and large-capacity magazines. Other states are equally free to leave them unregulated and available to their law-abiding citizens.

How are police going to charge you a grand a day for something they do not know and cannot prove? It is one thing if you go out there and give them proof by waving the shit around and being a guntards with it, but if it is in your house and the police have no way to prove it or search your house it is like speeding. We all do it all the time but it is not illegal unless you get caught. You act stupid with a gun and break the law or advertise your shit so the police have probably cause to search that is on you. No one should know you have a gun until you need it, and that does not include flashing it at people and saying don't fuck with me. You have no right to intimidate anyone else with your gun.

That is some Alex Jones Hillary in a time machine bullshit right there. Even the silver gerbil doesn't coat his whole body in tinfoil every day like the guntards do.

no, I don't watch his show (does he have one?) I listen mostly to NPR radio though, if that puts things in perspective. But it does seem that most gun control people have zero motivation to actually accomplish anything other than to make themselves feel superior to the unwashed masses of gun owners. So can any of you who do think Deerfield is doing the right thing explain how this ban will save lives.....since no lives are being taken by the citizens of Deerfield at the present time? How will this ban improve upon perfection? How will this ban make anyone safer? Connect those fucking dots if you can. Thanks!

Tick...tick...tick...

Individual counties and municipalities can pass whatever they want. Literally whatever they want. For instance, the famous "Shootout at the OK Corral" was the legally deputized law enforcement, the Earps and Doc Holiday, going down to the corral to disarm the Cowboys. Dodge City had famously banned any and all guns in town except for those used by law enforcment. The Cowboys refused to hand over their guns and the shootout was on.

My City Council can pass an ordinance at their next meeting invalidating all Georgia driver's licenses and instructing the local municipal police to cite anyone with a Georgia license as driving without a license. Now, that's blatantly illegal and I could sue the City, challenging that law. The Circuit Court would issue an injunction prohibiting enforcement until a hearing could be held and the Circuit Court would find in my favor at the hearing and my lawyer and I would get a nice fat payout from the City's insurer. This whole thing would be a massive waste of time and money.

But, there would be a brief window where those cites were "legal" and when has a waste of time and money ever deterred a politician from doing anything that would draw attention to themselves?

What do you mean cannot prove? Every time you legally purchase a gun there is a sales receipt/sales record. And most people purchase guns from dealers near where they live. It wouldn't be hard to check sales records from the nearby stores that sell guns (specifically AR-15 or other similar weapons) and see who from Deerfield purchased one.
Also everyone in Illinois must have a Firearms Owners Identification Card to purchase a gun. That would narrow down the search pool right there. Also Deerfield is a suburban area surrounded by & adjacent to other suburban areas - nobody shoots gun off their back porch, they go to shooting ranges. These ranges also have records of who shoots there - one more way to connect-the-dots. So yeah, the authorities can indeed figure out which homes are likely to have guns. It's not rocket science.

Never mind that the AUTHORITIES (God damn them all to Hell) will have to have some motivation to do this and absolutely overwhelming public support to even think about trying it. By your lights any possible abuse of authority and any excuse and any theoretical ability to grab guns makes it an absolute certainty that the AUTHORITIES will try it.

well since Deerfield has enough council members (representing I would think the general interests of the majority of the citizens) to initiate a gun ban and a steep fine for malcontent non-compliant gun owners, it would stand to reason that they would support an all-out effort to round-up all these guns. Thus overwhelming support might be a given. If not, it just proves that it was political grandstanding & glad-handing and they are all bark & no bite, with no real credibility or authority. Either way Deerfield management might be in for a bumpy ride indeed!

What’s the point of the ban, then, if not to get rid of the guns? Seems to me the only answer is to make criminals out of those that don’t comply.

What do you want to bet that come June, a bunch of black homes get raided looking for weapons based on business records?

So gun grabbing is a tool for racists?

Deerfield is 95.88 percent white - that should be a fairly simple task.

Historically, definitely. This time, well, I guess we’ll find out.

it used to be. One of the reasons for gun control was keeping them out of black hands. Now it's come full circle and the goal in Deerfield is keeping them out of white hands. What a country!

Yup, but still gotta take them from crazy whity all the same.

Yet since the gun homicide rate is ZERO in Deerfield there must not be too many crazy white gun owners there. Aren't there cities more deserving of a gun ban?

Okay, so O2C says it's a plot to take guns away from Deerfield's black residents. OF says it's a plot to take away guns from Deerfield's white residents. Is this getting just tad weird?

Oh you haven't seen weird yet - let this Deerfield ban get traction and hilarity will ensue! It has the potential to make gun control people the laughing stocks that we all know they were born to be.

I think it's a lot more likely that nothing happens, no doors get kicked in and no guns get grabbed, but that won't stop the gun lovers from quaking in fear that's it's going to happen.

If there are none then the law won't hurt anyone. It is like a law against stealing. It does not mean a thing if you are not stealing. But it needs to be said.

Except people can own “assault weapons” without misusing them. People can’t steal without committing a crime.

Yes, people can own things without stealing them. That is why the cops don't bust down their doors just looking for stolen merchandise. They have to have a reason. Just like with banning guns. They have to have a reason to come to you as possessing a gun. There is no probable cause that your gun is within town limits until you give them some. Don't give them some, like don't steal shit, and you don't have to worry.

So what needs to be said here? What is being said is "none of you Deerfield gun owners have committed gun crimes but we want to ban ownership of certain guns anyway."
Another thing being said is "we obviously feel taking away the rights of our citizens based on what might someday happen in our town is acceptable."

Deerfield is safer than about 83 percent of the towns in America. No gun crime, no gun homicides. They must be doing something right! So how will banning one class of weapons improve the lives of Deerfield residents? What will limiting the rights of a small percentage of it's residents (those who possess what they call "assault weapons") accomplish?