Sunday, August 12, 2012

Jesse Jackson Jr's FOID Card

It's well known among Illinois gun circles that anti-gun advocate Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (IL-2 D) has a FOID card and is a regular customer at a gun shop in the South Suburbs. Yes, double standards abound.

JJJ is also currently seeking mental health treatment at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN for Bipolar Disorder. Hope he is feeling better but here's the crux of the matter, since he has now been in a mental health institution w/i the last five years, according to the FOID act, he is ineligible to possess a FOID card or firearms w/i this state:
(iv) He or she has not been a patient in a mental
        
institution within the past 5 years and he or she has not been adjudicated as a mental defective;
Note: this is for initially obtaining one.

So that begs the question (one of many):  Are the Illinois State Police going to revoke his FOID card as required by the act(sec8-e) or is he going to receive preferential treatment?

Update: here's sect 8E:
Sec. 8. The Department of State Police has authority to deny an application for or to revoke and seize a Firearm Owner's Identification Card previously issued under this Act only if the Department finds that the applicant or the person to whom such card was issued is or was at the time of issuance:

(e) A person who has been a patient of a mental institution within the past 5 years or has been adjudicated as a mental defective;
As a resident of Chicago (according to the IL State Board of Elections), are his firearms stored at his home?


If so, does he have a Chicago Firearms Permit and/or registrations and will they be revoked by the city?

If not, where are they stored? Elsewhere in Il or at his out of state residence while attending the Hill?

Since he has called for bans on handguns and semi-auto firearms, does he own any of the firearms he wants to deny others? 

I think these are all relevant and important questions to have answered.

And another issue is the response by the anti-gun groups like the ICHV or Brady Campaign.  They go on about keeping guns away from people w/ mental health issues.  Will they now be hypocrites now that one of their pet politicians falls under that category or will they call for him to dispose of his firearms?  What is Chicago Mayor and MAIG member Emanual going to say?  Will he call JJJ out or will he cover for him just like his predecessor Daley did for Alderman Mell?

I think we at least know the answers to those.




Unorganized Militia Gear Unorganized Militia Gear
Follow TrailerDays on Twitter
Unorganized Militia Gear

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Jr. bought an Uzi back when he was living in Champaign on Tahoe Court. I've seen the 4473 with my own eyes.

Miguel said...

Somebody must notify Japete ASAP. I bet she won't waste a minute and denounce him to the proper authorities. [snicker]

nk said...

and has not been adjudicated a mental defective

It's the conjunctive, not the disjunctive.

Pawpaw said...

Concur with nk: The word AND (and has not been adjudicated...) is controlling. As I read the highlighted part of the statute, he must have been a patient in a mental institution AND adjudicated defective.

Jesse Jr.s FOID is safe from the law, which is precisely the result we want, as gun-owners and free Americans. We want the most rights for the most Americans.

The fact that he's a hypocrite is for the voters to judge. Y'all have fun with that.

Thirdpower said...

Sec 8 E

Sec. 8. The Department of State Police has authority to deny an application for or to revoke and seize a Firearm Owner's Identification Card previously issued under this Act only if the Department finds that the applicant or the person to whom such card was issued is or was at the time of issuance:

(e) A person who has been a patient of a mental institution within the past 5 years or has been adjudicated as a mental defective;

To get the FOID initially you need to prove both, to get it revoked it can be either.

Kristopher said...

Pawpaw:

The actual text of the law use the word, "or", not "and" in that line.

Jr. is still in violation of the law.

Anonymous said...

But Section 8 says it can only be revoked if subsection e was true at the time of issuance- not if it happens after its already issued.

Also, here is Section 8.1:

Sec. 8.1. Circuit Clerk to notify Department of State Police.

(b) Upon adjudication of any individual as a mental defective, as defined in Section 1.1, the court shall direct the circuit court clerk to immediately notify the Department of State Police, Firearm Owner's Identification (FOID) department, and shall forward a copy of the court order to the Department.


So the only way to revoke a FOID is by being declared a mental defective, and not just attending a mental institution. So what does that mean? See Section 1.1:

Sec. 1.1. For purposes of this Act:
"Has been adjudicated as a mental defective" means the person is the subject of a determination by a court, board, commission or other lawful authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or mental illness, mental impairment, incompetency, condition, or disease:
(1) is a danger to himself, herself, or to others;
(2) lacks the mental capacity to manage his or her own affairs;
(3) is not guilty in a criminal case by reason of insanity, mental disease or defect;
(4) is incompetent to stand trial in a criminal case;
(5) is not guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility pursuant to Articles 50a and 72b of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. 850a, 876b.

Thirdpower said...

You're reading it incorrectly. Look at it like this:

the person to whom such card was issued (is) or (was at the time of issuance):

Anonymous said...

Not sure of the legality IANAL but the reality is that if you get admitted for psych reasons overnight your FOID will be revoked.

Speaking from family experience the revocation letter was within 5 days of the admission, it is the only time I have ever seen the Illinois .gov move that fast.

This is going to be fun.

NukemJim

AuricTech said...

As I read it, Section 8(e) grants the Department of State Police (DSP) discretion in this matter. The key wording is that the DSP "has authority [i.e., is not required] to deny an application for or to revoke and seize a Firearm Owner's Identification Card previously issued" in the event either of the conditions listed in subsection (e) become known to the DSP. Since the statute in question appears to grant such discretion to the DSP, I would expect them to exercise it in favor of this Congresscritter* keeping his FOID. After all, he's a "Dedicated Public Servant," in the Heinlein sense of the term.

In the unlikely event that the Illinois DSP revokes this Congresscritter's FOID, I would be willing to contribute to any fund that would help him appeal such a decision.

*For the record, I use the word "Congresscritter" as a generic term for any Member of Congress, regardless of said Congresscritter's political views or party orientation.