Keep and Bear Arms

Police Organization Questions Illinois Gun Policies,
Calls for clarification of laws to protect police officers and citizens

Police Organization Questions Illinois Gun Policies,
Calls for clarification of laws to protect police officers and citizens

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 8, 2001

The Second Amendment Police Department today called upon Illinois lawmakers and top state officials to address their confusion as to the meaning of current laws regarding the carrying of concealed weapons.

"The recent arrest of John Horstman and his subsequent rapid release from custody and all charges," said Leroy Pyle, 2ampd Founder and Director, "suggests that the lack of clear language within current law could end up having dire consequences for both police officers and lawful, decent citizens. In fact, with the Horstman case, it already has."

Mr. Horstman was arrested on July 24, 2001 for carrying an unloaded firearm in a back pack. His bond was initially set at $250,000, but thirteen days later, all charges were dropped and he was free to go.

Said Mr. Pyle, "Arresting a citizen for a violation of the law should only happen when the law was violated. And if no law was violated, there should be no arrest. So did he violate the law? And if not, why was he arrested, and why were police officers put into a situation of having to enforce laws according to the whims or personal philosophies of a State's Attorney and his superiors?

At issue is the wording of the law that addresses the transport of firearms. A clause in the text of the law states that a registered gun owner can carry an unloaded gun "enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box or other container." That is exactly the manner in which the firearm was being transported by Mr. Horstman.

A recent news article described the law as "an ambiguous clause in the state's gun-control law." State's Atty. Joseph E. Birkett has publicly stated that his own interpretation of the law is 'the way it is' -- that an unloaded gun cannot be carried in an "other container" that looks like a fanny pack -- and he backed up his assertion by calling for the use of force against, among others, John Horstman. Birkett's office initially charged Horstman -- a 40-year-old computer systems engineer whose only brush with the law had been a speeding ticket -- with aggravated unlawful use of a weapon. If the state had pressed the issue and succeeded in convicting the gun owner, Horstman could have served up to 3 years in prison -- for obeying the law to the letter.

In a previous press release, State's Attorney Birkett had publicly threatened the arrest of any decent gun owner who transports a firearm as proscribed by law, and now he has made good on his threat. But to what purpose? To catch and release?

How does a Citizen Catch & Release Program serve the safety and peacefulness of the community? Answer: it doesn't; the enforcement of laws based on politically-motivated interpretations can be dangerous to police officers and decent gun owners who are simply trying to do the right thing.

Nothing can surpass the indignation suffered by Mr. Horstman, his stay in jail, and the costs involved in his release and legal defense. He should be fully recompensed, and an apology is in order. And the police officers who were dragged into this mess also deserve an apology, as well.

The Second Amendment Police Department deplores the negative impact such arbitrary actions have on Law Enforcement relations within the community. Using political might to require peace officers to enforce laws based on politically-motivated interpretations contributes to negative feelings, rude exchanges, and unnecessary tensions between peace officers and the good citizens they aim to serve.

The 2AMPD supports the right of Illinois citizens to carry firearms as clearly defined in the law. And the law enforcement officers in the great state of Illinois deserve the respect of their superiors by being provided clearly defined, legally justifiable orders.

We urge our government officials to address these discrepancies quickly to avoid future events such as this unfortunate arrest/release scenario. During careful review of this entire "gun carry" issue, we also press upon our public servants the need to refer to both the Illinois State constitution and the United States constitution, each of which states, respectively, "the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" and "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Those words are also quite clear.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CONTACT:
Leroy Pyle, SJPD (Ret)
[email protected]
Chicago, IL 60610
Phone: 312-482-9910
http://www.2AMPD.net
Available daily for radio, television and print interviews.

	Print This Page

Written By:	Second Amendment Police Department
	Police Organization Questions Illinois Gun Policies, Calls for clarification of laws to protect police officers and citizens Police Organization Questions Illinois Gun Policies, Calls for clarification of laws to protect police officers and citizens FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 8, 2001 The Second Amendment Police Department today called upon Illinois lawmakers and top state officials to address their confusion as to the meaning of current laws regarding the carrying of concealed weapons. "The recent arrest of John Horstman and his subsequent rapid release from custody and all charges," said Leroy Pyle, 2ampd Founder and Director, "suggests that the lack of clear language within current law could end up having dire consequences for both police officers and lawful, decent citizens. In fact, with the Horstman case, it already has." Mr. Horstman was arrested on July 24, 2001 for carrying an unloaded firearm in a back pack. His bond was initially set at $250,000, but thirteen days later, all charges were dropped and he was free to go. Said Mr. Pyle, "Arresting a citizen for a violation of the law should only happen when the law was violated. And if no law was violated, there should be no arrest. So did he violate the law? And if not, why was he arrested, and why were police officers put into a situation of having to enforce laws according to the whims or personal philosophies of a State's Attorney and his superiors? At issue is the wording of the law that addresses the transport of firearms. A clause in the text of the law states that a registered gun owner can carry an unloaded gun "enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box or other container." That is exactly the manner in which the firearm was being transported by Mr. Horstman. A recent news article described the law as "an ambiguous clause in the state's gun-control law." State's Atty. Joseph E. Birkett has publicly stated that his own interpretation of the law is 'the way it is' -- that an unloaded gun cannot be carried in an "other container" that looks like a fanny pack -- and he backed up his assertion by calling for the use of force against, among others, John Horstman. Birkett's office initially charged Horstman -- a 40-year-old computer systems engineer whose only brush with the law had been a speeding ticket -- with aggravated unlawful use of a weapon. If the state had pressed the issue and succeeded in convicting the gun owner, Horstman could have served up to 3 years in prison -- for obeying the law to the letter. In a previous press release, State's Attorney Birkett had publicly threatened the arrest of any decent gun owner who transports a firearm as proscribed by law, and now he has made good on his threat. But to what purpose? To catch and release? How does a Citizen Catch & Release Program serve the safety and peacefulness of the community? Answer: it doesn't; the enforcement of laws based on politically-motivated interpretations can be dangerous to police officers and decent gun owners who are simply trying to do the right thing. Nothing can surpass the indignation suffered by Mr. Horstman, his stay in jail, and the costs involved in his release and legal defense. He should be fully recompensed, and an apology is in order. And the police officers who were dragged into this mess also deserve an apology, as well. The Second Amendment Police Department deplores the negative impact such arbitrary actions have on Law Enforcement relations within the community. Using political might to require peace officers to enforce laws based on politically-motivated interpretations contributes to negative feelings, rude exchanges, and unnecessary tensions between peace officers and the good citizens they aim to serve. The 2AMPD supports the right of Illinois citizens to carry firearms as clearly defined in the law. And the law enforcement officers in the great state of Illinois deserve the respect of their superiors by being provided clearly defined, legally justifiable orders. We urge our government officials to address these discrepancies quickly to avoid future events such as this unfortunate arrest/release scenario. During careful review of this entire "gun carry" issue, we also press upon our public servants the need to refer to both the Illinois State constitution and the United States constitution, each of which states, respectively, "the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" and "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Those words are also quite clear. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ CONTACT: Leroy Pyle, SJPD (Ret) [email protected] Chicago, IL 60610 Phone: 312-482-9910 http://www.2AMPD.net Available daily for radio, television and print interviews.