SP Intel Report- November 10, 2015


Cook County Ammo Tax Ordinance To Be Heard Friday, November 13

Within yesterday’s SP Intel Report, I mentioned that Cook County President Toni Preckwinkle is proposing a tax on ammunition sales in the county. The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action reported on its website Monday:

Cook County Board of Commissioners has proposed Ordinance 15-6469, a proposal to impose a tax on ammunition, similar to proposals reported on in the past. This ordinance will be heard on Friday, November 13, at 1:00 p.m., by the Cook County Board of Commissioners Finance Committee.

This proposal would impose a $0.05/cartridge tax on all centerfire ammunition and a $0.01/cartridge tax on all rimfire ammunition, and would therefore penalize law-abiding gun owners for exercising their fundamental right to keep and bear arms. By definition, holders of a valid FOID card are the only persons legally permitted to purchase ammunition in Illinois, and therefore are the only persons subject to this tax – not the criminals responsible for the violence on the streets of Chicago…

That last bit sound familiar to readers of yesterday’s Intel Report? You can read the entire NRA-ILA piece on their website here.


Wisconsin Democrats Push To Ban ‘Semiautomatic Assault Weapons’

The push for more gun “control” is alive and well north of the Illinois state line too. From a press release published on the Urban Milwaukee website last Wednesday by Wisconsin State Representative Lisa Subeck (D-Madison):

MADISON –Today, Representative Subeck (D-Madison), along with Representatives Terese Berceau, Melissa Sargent and Chris Taylor, circulated an Assembly bill that would ban the transportation, purchase, possession, or transfer of semiautomatic assault weapons in Wisconsin.

“Our nation has watched as community after community has had to confront the tragedies that occur when weapons designed to kill large numbers of people quickly get into the hands of a dangerous person,” said Representative Lisa Subeck. “No Wisconsin community should ever have to face such a tragedy at the hands of someone armed with a semiautomatic assault weapon.”

Semiautomatic assault weapons are a class of firearms that are designed to kill large numbers of people quickly. They have been used in many high-profile shooting incidents, including the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut; the 2012 Aurora, Colorado movie theater shooting; the 1999 Columbine High School massacre in that state; and the 1993 office shooting at the 101 California Street building in San Francisco.

“I can conceive of no legitimate reason that any citizen should need to own or use a semiautomatic assault weapon,” said Rep. Subeck…

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

“Semiautomatic assault weapons.” Haven’t heard of that one before. The word wankers hard at work again. You know, on behalf of gun “safety.” You can read the entire press release on the Urban Milwaukee website here.

Former U.S. Comptroller General David M. Walker Warns Real U.S. Debt Closer To $65 Trillion Than $18 Trillion

It’s been some time since I’ve blogged about former Comptroller General of the United States David M. Walker. Appointed by President Clinton, Walker served as Comptroller General and head of the Government Accountability Office from 1998 to 2008. While at the GAO, Walker warned Americans about the nation’s long-term fiscal challenges as part of the “Fiscal Wake-Up Tour.” Frustrated by Washington’s refusal to confront these challenges, Walker left the public sector on March 12, 2008. I noticed Mr. Walker was back in the headlines this past weekend. Bradford Richardson reported on The Hill website Saturday:

The former U.S. comptroller general says the real U.S. debt is closer to about $65 trillion than the oft-cited figure of $18 trillion.

Dave Walker, who headed the Government Accountability Office (GAO) under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, said when you add up all of the nation’s unfunded liabilities, the national debt is more than three times the number generally advertised.

“If you end up adding to that $18.5 trillion the unfunded civilian and military pensions and retiree healthcare, the additional underfunding for Social Security, the additional underfunding for Medicare, various commitments and contingencies that the federal government has, the real number is about $65 trillion rather than $18 trillion, and it’s growing automatically absent reforms,” Walker told host John Catsimatidis on “The Cats Roundtable” on New York’s AM-970 in an interview airing Sunday…

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

Whenever the national debt is brought up, I think about all those Pollyannas who go around saying the debt doesn’t matter. Give it a few more years when Washington and the Fed run out of road to kick the can. Then hold on for dear life

Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (


Richardson, Bradford. “Ex-GAO head: US debt is three times more than you think.” The Hill. 7 Nov. 2015. ( 9 Nov. 2015.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Highland Park, Illinois, ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Latest

Back on December 23, 2013, I blogged about the City of Highland Park on Chicago’s far North Shore passing an ordinance banning “assault weapons” within its city-limits at a June city council meeting.

Subsequently, the Illinois municipality was sued for its “assault weapons” ban.

Last week, a federal court rendered a decision on the lawsuit. From the website of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action on May 1:

The U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision on Monday allowing a Chicago-area gun and magazine ban to stand. Such bans are justifiable, according to the court, merely on the basis that they “may increase the public’s sense of safety.”

The case, Friedman v. Highland Park, was filed in 2013, and sought to invalidate a city ordinance that banned “assault weapons or large capacity magazines (those that can accept more than ten rounds).” Highland Park was one of several Chicago suburbs that hastily enacted municipal ordinances regulating or banning the possession of “assault weapons” before the state’s 2013 concealed carry law preempted home-rule authority to do so.

This week, in a 2-1 decision, a three-judge panel upheld the ban. According to the majority opinion, “A ban on assault weapons won’t eliminate gun violence in Highland Park, but it may reduce overall dangerousness of crime that does occur ….” Remarkably, the majority went on to suggest that even if the ban’s incursion on Second Amendment rights had no beneficial effect on safety whatsoever, it could still be justified on the basis of the false sense of security it might impart to local residents. “[I]f it has no other effect,” the majority wrote, “Highland Park’s ordinance may increase the public’s sense of safety. Mass shootings are rare, but they are highly salient, and people tend to overestimate the likelihood of salient events.”

The majority acknowledged that “assault weapons” can be beneficial for self-defense because they are lighter and more accurate than alternative options and can be wielded more effectively by householders. Yet they quickly threw their own logic aside to reassert the city’s interest in reducing perceived risk over the tangible benefits that that modern firearms provide to their owners. “If a ban on semiautomatic guns and large-capacity magazines reduces the perceived risk from a mass shooting, and makes the public feel safer as a result, that’s a substantial benefit,” the opinion argued.

Judge Daniel Anthony Manion dissented from the majority opinion. Manion forcefully and persuasively argued that the ruling opinion is “at odds with the central holdings in Heller and McDonald: that the Second Amendment protects a personal right to keep arms for lawful purposes, most notably for self-defense within the home.”

He went on to press the point that only individuals “make the ultimate decision for what constitutes the most effective means of defending one’s home, family, and property.” In stark contrast to the majority, Judge Manion was willing to recognize the constitutional dimensions that individual choice makes in the Second Amendment realm, just as it does with other fundamental rights. “Ultimately, it is up to the lawful gun owner and not the government to decide these matters,” he wrote.

Judge Manion’s reminder that when it comes to our fundamental rights, “The government recognizes these rights; it does not confer them,” cannot be overemphasized. Unfortunately, his colleagues refused to uphold their duty to recognize either the right at stake or Highland Park’s violation of it. Rest assured, however, that your NRA will continue the fight to see that injustice corrected.

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

Robert McCoppin reported on the Chicago Tribune website on April 28:

A federal court Monday upheld Highland Park’s ban on assault weapons — possibly setting the stage for a showdown over the issue before the U.S. Supreme Court…

Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson said he was confident the law could be overturned on appeal to the Supreme Court, but the National Rifle Association would have to decide whether to make a costly appeal.

“The Second Amendment is about the right to keep and bear arms,” Pearson said. “The government doesn’t get to pick the list.”

(Editor’s note: Bold added for emphasis)

Stay tuned…

Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (

(Editor’s note: Permission to reproduce this piece granted by the NRA-ILA)


McCoppin, Robert. “Appeals court upholds Highland Park assault weapons ban.” Chicago Tribune. 28 Apr. 2015. ( 5 May 2015.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Proposed Ban Of Common AR-15 Rifle Ammunition Suspended

In case you haven’t heard the latest about that proposed ban on common M855 ball ammunition (or SS109 as it’s sometimes referred to) for the AR-15 semi-automatic rifle, the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action reported on their website yesterday:

Fairfax, Va. – The National Rifle Association (NRA) was instrumental in stalling the Obama Administration’s initial attempt to ban commonly used ammunition for the most popular rifle in America, the AR-15. The announcement that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) will suspend its proposed framework to ban M855 ammunition validates the NRA’s assertion that this effort was nothing more than a political maneuver to bypass Congress and impose gun control on the American people.

“Today’s announcement proves what we have said all along — this was 100% political. President Obama failed to pass gun control through Congress, so he tried to impose his political agenda through executive fiat. But every gun owner in America needs to understand Barack Obama’s hatred of the Second Amendment has not changed,” said Wayne La Pierre, Executive Vice President of the National Rifle Association.

Chris Cox, Executive Director of NRA-ILA criticized the dishonest campaign to ban this common ammunition: “The lies used to justify the ban were shameful. This proposal was never about law enforcement safety – it was about the Obama Administration’s desire to pander to billionaire Michael Bloomberg and his gun control groups. Since they haven’t been able to ban America’s most popular rifle, they are trying to ban the ammunition instead.”

Since the BATFE announced its plan to ban commonly used ammunition less than a month ago, the NRA rallied its five million members and tens of millions of supporters across the country in strong opposition. In addition, the NRA worked with congressional leaders in both the U.S. House and Senate to oppose this misguided proposal.

“The NRA would like to thank House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and House Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman John Culberson for leading the fight against this unconstitutional attack on our Second Amendment freedoms,” continued Cox. “This was a significant victory for our five million members and tens of millions of supporters across the country.

“Make no mistake, this fight is not over. We will remain vigilant and continue to fight against President Obama’s attempt to dismantle the Second Amendment,” concluded LaPierre.

To view the congressional letters to BATFE, along with the Member signatures, click here and here.

To view recent op-ed in the Daily Caller by Chris Cox on the proposed ammunition ban, click here.

Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Congressional Democrats Push ‘High-Capacity’ Magazine Ban

Like I blogged Monday, the gun “control” crowd is off-and-running several weeks into the new year. In addition to a ban on certain AR-15 rifle ammunition, they’re also pushing to ban “high-capacity” firearm ammunition magazines. From the website of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislation Action (NRA-ILA) last Friday:

Anti-gun U.S. Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) and U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty (D-Conn.), have introduced their Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act (S. 407 and H.R. 752, respectively), in yet another attempt to ban magazines that accept more than 10 rounds. Similar legislation has been introduced in previous Congresses, and has repeatedly failed since the expiration of the Clinton “large” magazine ban in 2004.

Firearms designed to use magazines that hold more than ten rounds have been around for more than a hundred years. Today they constitute a majority of all new firearms manufactured, imported and sold in the United States, for what the Supreme Court, in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), called the central purpose of the Second Amendment: self-defense. While gun control supporters claim that the magazines are unnecessary for self-defense, millions of Americans disagree, and the Supreme Court has ruled in Heller that laws are unconstitutional if they prohibit firearms that are in common use for defensive purposes.

Moreover, studies have shown that magazine bans don’t reduce crime. The congressionally-mandated study of the 1994-2004 federal “large” magazine “ban” concluded that its 10-round limit on new magazines wasn’t a factor in multiple-victim or multiple-wound crimes. A follow-up study concluded that “relatively few attacks involve more than 10 shots fired,” and “the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.” And a majority of law enforcement in the United States acknowledges that banning standard-capacity magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds will not increase public safety.

A person attacked in a parking lot, or at home in the middle of the night, will probably have only the magazine within the firearm. No one should be arbitrarily limited in the number of rounds he or she can have for self-defense.

The NRA opposes this legislation and will continue to fight attempts in Congress to limit magazine capacity.

As I type this, each and every co-sponsor of this legislation is a Democrat (16 in the Senate and 107 in the House).

You can track the status of Senate Bill 407 here and House Bill 752 here via

Permission has been granted by the NRA-ILA to reproduce the above.

Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

NRA: BATFE To Ban Common AR-15 Ammo

It was only a matter of time. Several weeks into the new year, and the gun “control” crowd is off-and-running again. There’s been a number of developments lately, but here’s one that seems to be really worrying American gun owners- particularly those possessing the popular AR-15 rifle. From the website of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislation Action (NRA-ILA) this past Friday:

In a move clearly intended by the Obama Administration to suppress the acquisition, ownership and use of AR-15s and other .223 caliber general purpose rifles, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives unexpectedly announced today that it intends to ban commonplace M855 ball ammunition as “armor piercing ammunition.” The decision continues Obama’s use of his executive authority to impose gun control restrictions and bypass Congress.

It isn’t even the third week of February, and the BATFE has already taken three major executive actions on gun control. First, it was a major change to what activities constitute regulated “manufacturing” of firearms. Next, BATFE reversed a less than year old position on firing a shouldered “pistol.” Now, BATFE has released a “Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(c)”, which would eliminate M855’s exemption to the armor piercing ammunition prohibition and make future exemptions nearly impossible.

By way of background, federal law imposed in 1986 prohibits the manufacture, importation, and sale by licensed manufacturers or importers, but not possession, of “a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely . . . from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium.” Because there are handguns capable of firing M855, it “may be used in a handgun.” It does not, however, have a core made of the metals listed in the law; rather, it has a traditional lead core with a steel tip, and therefore should never have been considered “armor piercing.” Nonetheless, BATFE previously declared M855 to be “armor piercing ammunition,” but granted it an exemption as a projectile “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.”

Now, however, BATFE says that it will henceforth grant the “sporting purposes” exception to only two categories of projectiles:

Category I: .22 Caliber Projectiles

A .22 caliber projectile that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition under 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(B) will be considered to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile weighs 40 grains or less AND is loaded into a rimfire cartridge.

Category II: All Other Caliber Projectiles

Except as provided in Category I (.22 caliber rimfire), projectiles that otherwise would be classified as armor piercing ammunition will be presumed to be “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes” under section 921(a)(17)(C) if the projectile is loaded into a cartridge for which the only handgun that is readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade is a single shot handgun. ATF nevertheless retains the discretion to deny any application for a “sporting purposes” exemption if substantial evidence exists that the ammunition is not primarily intended for such purposes.

BATFE is accepting comments until March 16, 2015 on this indefensible attempt to disrupt ammunition for the most popular rifle in America. Check back early next week for a more in-depth analysis of this “framework” and details on how you can submit comments.

How to comment – from the BATFE

ATF will carefully consider all comments, as appropriate, received on or before March 16, 2015, and will give comments received after that date the same consideration if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given except as to comments received on or before March 16, 2015. ATF will not acknowledge receipt of comments. Submit comments in any of three ways (but do not submit the same comments multiple times or by more than one method):

ATF email:

Fax: (202) 648-9741.

Mail: Denise Brown, Mailstop 6N-602, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 99 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20226: ATTN: AP Ammo Comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denise Brown, Enforcement Programs and Services, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice, 99 New York Avenue, NE, Washington, DC 20226; telephone: (202) 648-7070.

Permission has been granted by the NRA-ILA to reproduce the above.

“BATF to ban M855/SS109 ammo”
YouTube Video

Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Chicago’s Gun ‘Control’ Fetish Costing City Big Bucks

If I still lived in Chicago, I’d be livid at City Hall the way those guys keep pissing away hard-earned taxpayer dollars challenging litigation in defense of gun rights.

How many dollars? Recently, over $1.5 million.

From the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action website on July 11:

Check, Please! Chicago Once Again Learns an Expensive Lesson About the Second Amendment

While litigants generally bear their own costs in the American legal system, certain provisions of federal law allow parties who prevail in “proceedings in vindication of civil rights” to be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees. NRA has once again used these provisions to recoup attorney’s fees from the City of Chicago. You would think that Chicago’s disarmament-focused politicians would have learned their lesson after being court ordered to pay NRA over $600,000 in legal fees for work done by NRA attorneys on McDonald v. City of Chicago. Nevertheless, Chicago has once again been court ordered to pay NRA’s legal fees, this time $940,000 for work on Illinois Association of Firearm Retailers v. City of Chicago (formerly Benson v. City of Chicago). That case challenged the prohibition on lawful gun sales within the city. As noted earlier this week, this brings Chicago’s recent total for NRA legal fees to over $1.5 million.

That’s a lot of cash, even to politicians who are spending their constituents’ money. Still, the city’s new push to keep gun dealers away through over-regulation may well indicate that its aldermen and its mayor, Rahm Emanuel, remain willing to spend even more taxpayer funds to support even more symbolic and ineffective gun control.

“May well indicate?” Try “indicate.” Here’s what Mayor Emanuel had to say after the Chicago City Council passed what critics says is a de factor ban on gun stores in the city (special-use zoning would keep gun stores out of 99.5 percent of Chicago) late last month. Don Babwin of the Associated Press wrote June 25:

Emanuel, while not welcoming a lawsuit, suggested it was important to pass the toughest ordinance possible whether or not it prompted a legal challenge.

“You have to do what you think is right,” he said.

Easy to say- and do- such things when it’s other people’s money on the line.

By Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (

(Editor’s note: Permission granted to reproduce NRA-ILA article)


Babwin, Don. “Chicago City Council passes strict gun store law.” Associated Press. 25 June 2014. ( 15 July 2014.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 Firearms, Government, Gun Rights, Legal No Comments

Quote For The Week

“Ladies and gentlemen, the armed citizen made America free, and the armed citizen will keep America free.”

-Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke, Jr., speaking at the 143rd NRA Annual Meetings & Exhibits, NRA-ILA Leadership Forum, on April 25, 2014

By Christopher E. Hill
Survival And Prosperity (

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Update On Illinois Legislation For Raising Mandatory Minimum Prison Sentences And Imposing Truth In Sentencing For Gun Crimes

“Illinois law already mandates a minimum 15-year sentence when a person with a gun commits any felony offense, and a one-year minimum for unlicensed gun possession and licensed possession of a loaded gun.”

-Illinois State Senator and Illinois Senate Criminal Law Committee member Patricia Van Pelt (D-Chicago), in a Chicago Tribune commentary, October 23, 2013

Here’s the latest on legislation at the state level that’s been backed by the Emanuel administration and Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez that would not only raise mandatory minimum prison sentences for gun crimes but would require offenders to serve 85 percent of their sentences. From the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action earlier today:

The NRA-ILA has just learned that new changes to recent legislation aimed at imprisoning law-abiding Illinois citizens for a victimless crime will likely be proposed very soon. While no language is currently available for review, the NRA-ILA has obtained information that the proposed changes will eliminate any mandatory minimums from the legislation for first-time offenders of the Unlawful Use of Weapons (UUW) or Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon (AUUW) statutes, with no aggravating factors such as previous felonies or gang membership.

However, current law provides that probation is not available as a sentencing option, so individuals would still be sentenced to jail time, for which they are required to serve at least 85 percent of their sentence. This policy change continues to create a scenario in which an unsuspecting citizen who has chosen to carry a firearm for self-defense, could serve significant jail time for a regulatory infraction.

(Editor’s note: Italics added for emphasis)

So, to update a scenario that critics of this legislation have been putting out there, if a man with a concealed-carry permit left his firearm in his car because he and his spouse are going some place where guns are banned, and she leaves without him while taking the car, and subsequently gets pulled over by police, the spouse would still get slapped with a jail sentence since probation is not an option. At least that’s what I take away from all this.

Why the apparent insistence on punishing the “unsuspecting citizen”?

A number of observers suspect this is a conscious effort being carried out by anti-gun politicians in the state, hoping to make poster-children out of these unfortunate individuals and scare away other Illinois residents from exercising their Second Amendment right.

Stay tuned…

By Christopher E. Hill, Editor
Survival And Prosperity (


“Illinois: Proposed New Changes to Mandatory Minimum Bill.” NRA-ILA. 4 Nov. 2013. ( 4 Nov. 2013.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Only 7 Illinois Municipalities Pass ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans By State-Imposed Deadline

On July 1, I wrote the following concerning new “assault weapon” bans being considered by a number of Illinois municipalities:

As Illinois Governor Pat Quinn has only until July 9 to sign Illinois House Bill 183 (so-called “Firearm Concealed Carry Act”), discussion and implementation of “assault weapons” bans in Chicago-area municipalities has been ongoing. Back on June 21 I mentioned an e-mail I received from the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action that pointed out:

HB 183 contains a provision that allows certain localities up to ten days from the date of enactment to make laws prohibiting so-called “assault weapons” before this legislation prohibits local governments from doing so at a later date.

Well, Illinois House Bill 183 is now law, and the deadline for enacting new “assault weapon” bans has passed. From the NRA-ILA yesterday:

Illinois: Many Local Governments Rush to Enact Last-Minute Gun Bans, But Few Succeed in Circumventing Statewide Regulation of Firearms

With enactment into state law of concealed carry legislation, House Bill 183, a new fight for gun rights in Illinois was started. A clause included in this new law allowed home rule local governments to enact their own so-called “assault weapon” bans within ten days of House Bill 183’s enactment. In the days preceding and immediately following enactment, a flurry of city council meetings were scheduled to discuss or pass a ban on popularly owned semi-automatic firearms.

Approximately sixty different local meetings were scheduled in total, and many Illinois NRA members and gun owners attended those meetings and contacted their local officials in opposition to these hastily crafted restrictions. Due to the efforts of those law-abiding citizens defending their Second Amendment rights, only seven new “assault weapon” bans were enacted throughout the state (listed below) before the deadline – Friday, July 19.

If you or anyone you know have been arrested or harassed under a local ban or ordinance, please contact the NRA Legislative Counsel’s office at (703) 267-1161.

Localities with new bans:

• Calumet Park – (No language available)
• Dolton – Assault Weapon Ban (No language available)
• Evanston – Assault Weapon Ban (Page 11)
• Highland Park – Assault Weapon Ban
• Melrose Park – Assault Weapon Ban (No language available)
• North Chicago – Assault Weapon Ban
• Skokie – Assault Weapon Ban (Page 50)

Other local governments passed ordinances pertaining to firearms storage and transportation. Those localities include:

• Country Club Hills
• Deerfield
• University Park
• Winnetka

Thank you to all members who attended local meetings and voiced their opposition to bans or unreasonable regulations on firearms commonly owned for self-defense. While Illinois now has concealed carry, continued vigilance is necessary to ensure protection of our rights. Your NRA-ILA will continue to fight unreasonable restrictions and will keep you updated.

Next up for these 7 municipalities concerning this issue?

Lawsuits, I suspect.

By Christopher E. Hill, Editor
Survival And Prosperity (

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Several Chicago Suburbs Consider ‘Assault Weapon’ Bans As Result Of State Concealed-Carry Legislation

Several Chicago-area municipalities are considering bans on so-called “assault weapons” as a result of concealed-carry legislation that’s been passed by the Illinois General Assembly and is awaiting signature by Governor Pat Quinn. From an e-mail I received yesterday from the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action:

Illinois: Localities Attempting to Enact Anti-Gun Ordinances in Anticipation of Firearms Preemption Law

Your NRA-ILA has learned recently that some localities in Illinois are scrambling to consider bans on popular semi-automatic firearms while House Bill 183 awaits consideration of Governor Pat Quinn (D). If enacted into law, House Bill 183 will contain comprehensive preemption of handgun-related local ordinances for anyone with a FOID card and reserves regulation of all laws relating to the concealed carrying of handguns to the state. It also provides protections to those traveling with firearms by providing comprehensive preemption of local ordinances as applied to individuals with a FOID card who are transporting firearms in compliance with all state regulations. Firearms preemption prevents lawful concealed carry licensees and firearm owners from being caught in a web of confusing local ordinances and laws as they go about their daily routines. However, HB 183 contains a provision that allows certain localities up to ten days from the date of enactment to make laws prohibiting so-called “assault weapons” before this legislation prohibits local governments from doing so at a later date.

Quinn has been granted an extension of thirty days by a federal court to consider signing HB 183,leaving ample time for localities to enact anti-gun ordinances.

Some of these localities include:

Buffalo Grove
Highland Park
Orland Park
Wheeler (Editor’s note: I believe the NRA-ILA meant Wheeling)

While handgun laws will be preempted for those with a FOID card under HB 183, its language of past bans on “assault weapons” could include popular and commonly used handguns and circumvent this firearms preemption. Serious concerns still exist about the potential loopholes and legal issues in House Bill 183.

NRA members are urged to contact your local government officials and respectfully urge them to OPPOSE any ordinance that would restrict the rights of law-abiding Illinois citizens or hinder their right to self-defense. Stay tuned to NRA-ILA for updates.

By Christopher E. Hill, Editor
Survival And Prosperity (

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Survival And Prosperity
Christopher E. Hill, Editor
Est. 2010, Chicagoland, USA

Successor to
"The Most Hated Blog On Wall Street"
(Memorial Day Weekend 2007-2010)


Please Rate this Blog HERE

Limited Time Offers

Via Banner Ads Below (navigate to vendor home page if necessary); Updated 11/13/15:
>CHIEF Supply Free Shipping Over $69 (code needed); 15% Off Medical Supplies Plus Free Sniper Disinfectant w/ Orders Over $69 Thru 11/26 (Code Needed); Free Slim Tri-Fold Wallet w/ Orders Over $50 Thru 11/26; Free TDU Storm Belt w/ Purchase Of $69.99 Or More In 5.11 Pants Thru 11/26
>Airsoft Megastore Free Shipping On All Orders
>BGASC Silver Bullion, 90% U.S. Coin Sale
>BulletSafe Bulletproof Baseball Cap $119 Pre-Order Price; Ballistic Plate Only $169
>Food Insurance November Black Friday Specials; Warehouse Clearance Sale
>Nitro-Pak Black November Event Up To 35% Off
>Pyramyd Air Thanksgiving Sale Thru 11/21
>Tractor Supply Co. New Online Only Deals Every Day Thru 11/15; Free Shipping Online Only On Favorite Brands
NEW! Advertising Disclosure HERE
Buy Gold And Silver Coins BGASC Review Coming Soon
Nitro-Pak--The Emergency Preparedness Leader Nitro-Pak Reviewed HERE
Food Insurance Reviewed HERE
BullionVault Reviewed HERE
Free Wallet w/ $50 Purchase @Chief CHIEF Supply Reviewed HERE
bullet proof vests BulletSafe Reviewed HERE
Pyramyd Air is your one-stop shop for everything airgun related. Reviewed HERE
Airsoft Megastore Reviewed HERE
Survival Titles Save 20% Paladin Press Reviewed HERE



Prepper Website

RSS Chris Hill’s Other Blog: Offshore Safe Deposit Boxes

  • Related Reading: Austria’s Anonymous Private Vaults
    This morning I was reading an article on The Nestmann Group’s website entitled “Austria: Anonymous Storage and The World’s Safest Bank.” Offshore expert Mark Nestmann informed readers: Not that long ago, Austria had the world’s most stringent financial secrecy laws. Anonymous savings (Sparbuch) and securities (Wertpapier) accounts were widely used. The War on Terror, Money […]
  • Ireland: No Bank Safe Deposit Boxes For New Customers
    Further evidence that in some parts of the world, private, non-bank vaults are increasingly becoming the only game in town. Louise McBride reported on the Irish Independent website last Sunday: The banks have taken a lot of things from us in recent years. Here are ten things you can no longer do at your bank… […]
  • World’s Best Offshore Private Vault Videos For 2015, Honorable Mentions
    Last Wednesday, Offshore Safe Deposit Boxes started naming the “World’s Best Offshore Private Vault Videos” for 2015. Third place in the “short program” category went to Siam Secure (Thailand), runner-up was Sovereign Safe Deposit Centres (England), and the winner for the TV commercial-style marketing videos this year was Custodian Vaults (Australia). Third place in the […]
  • World’s Best Offshore Private Vault Videos For 2015, Part 2
    On Wednesday, Offshore Safe Deposit Boxes started naming the “World’s Best Offshore Private Vault Videos” for 2015. Third place in the “short program” category went to Siam Secure (Thailand), the runner-up was Sovereign Safe Deposit Centres (England), and the winner for TV commercial-style marketing videos this year was Custodian Vaults (Australia). Today, we’re going to […]
  • World’s Best Offshore Private Vault Videos For 2015, Part 1
    Back on June 25, 2014, I published a post entitled “World’s Best Offshore Private Vault Videos.” I wrote back then: Earlier this year when I was developing this blog’s sister site- Offshore Private Vaults– I came across a number of marketing videos from the various non-bank asset storage facilities. This week, I thought it would […]