Illinois Supreme Court Strikes Down State's Gun Law

[tombogan03884]

A win that makes you say "WTF ?" is still a win .  

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/09/15/Illinois-Supreme-Court-Strikes-Down-State-s-Gun-Law

Illinois is one of the most anti-gun states in America, and its supreme court is appointed by its governor. The past two governors have been zealous opponents of gun rights: Democrats Pat Quinn and the notorious Rod Blagojevich. The court they appointed just struck down Illinois’ soon-to-expire law against carrying firearms as a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment.

In Illinois v. Aguilar, the Illinois Supreme Court considered the case of Alberto Aguilar, who was engaged in criminal conduct when he was arrested, and also had a firearm on him in violation of Illinois law. He was convicted of carrying a firearm when he was not in his own home or business.

The court noted the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in D.C. v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago, striking down the virtually-absolute ban on owning a gun in Washington, D.C. in 2008 and Chicago in 2010, respectively. Both cases involved law-abiding citizens who wanted to have firearms in their home, and the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment guarantees their right to do so. The Illinois court also noted that in 2012 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held in Moore v. Madigan that the Second Amendment right recognized by the Supreme Court extends beyond the home to carry firearms in public, and that Illinois then-current statutes to the contrary were unconstitutional.

Based on these authorities, the Illinois court agreed that the current state law is unconstitutional, though adding that gun ownership is “subject to meaningful regulation.” The Illinois legislature recently passed a law allowing people to carry firearms subject to very serious restrictions. The Illinois Supreme Court mentioned in a footnote that Aguilar does not invalidate the new law, which does not go into effect until next year and is not at issue in this litigation.

But this decision is a significant victory for supporters of the right to keep and bear arms. No word yet on whether Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan—a staunchly anti-gun Democrat—will petition the U.S. Supreme Court to take this case and reinstate Alberto Aguilar’s criminal conviction.

[Solus]

I imagine he was charged and tried for violation of the general IL. ban on possessing firearms and not for committing a crime while in possession of a firearm or, if he has a record and is a felon, illegal possession of a firearm.

The court ruled that the law under which he was tried and convicted was unconstitutional.

Now I wonder if he can be tried for the same event under a different law or if that comes out to be double jeopardy.

Interesting that using a law that made honest people criminals allowed a criminal to go free.   

[tombogan03884]

If he was previously charged with the gun violation they can still charge him for the criminal act he was engaged in.

[Solus]

If he was previously charged with the gun violation they can still charge him for the criminal act he was engaged in.

Not sure if that is the case. 

If a person violates several laws in committing one crime, say 5 of them, can they try him for one, and than another till they go through all 5 or one of them sticks?

[tombogan03884]

I believe they can do exactly that.

[Sponsor]

[kmitch200]

It's not that uncommon for someone who has been charged with several felonies to be tried on the lesser ones first.
Then when they try the BIG charge, they can refer to him as "the convicted felon".