McHenry Times

Rep. Steven Reick (R-Woodstock) did not agree with Rep. Denyse Stoneback’s (D-Skokie) proposal to widen the class of petitioners that can file for firearm restraining orders.

Reick noted that Stoneback advocated for the original bill.

“You supported the original firearms restraining order bill,” he said. “Then you must have some at least tangential knowledge of the amount of negotiation that went into crafting this bill.”

The Firearms Restraining Orders Act had bipartisan support and was authored by state Rep. Kathleen Willis (D-Northlake) who has worked with Reick.  

“The fact that Rep. Willis, who originally brought this bill forward, came to me or I went to her and we hammered out what we thought at the time pretty much decided it was a national model that balanced the equities between public safety both to the person who was at risk of using a firearm on themselves or others and the general public as well as balancing civil liberties,” he reminded Stoneback. “This bill was supported not only by the gun control groups like yours but also by the Illinois State Rifle Association and the National Rifle Association.”

Reick, during the April 23 House Committee hearing on House Bill 1092 sponsored by Stoneback, went on to reiterate that the original bill does not need to be amended.

“This was a bill that was finely crafted with delicate balanced equities to make sure that all people's civil liberties and rights were protected along with the public as best we could. The discussion that you're bringing forth in this bill was made at that time and it was decided that to expand the eligibility of potential petitioners in this type of an activity would go very much against the civil liberties of the person whose rights were being denied to them under the 2nd Amendment. I believe that what your bill is doing, will do the same thing.”

House Bill 1092 “Provides that a firearms restraining order includes the seizure of the respondent's ammunition and firearm parts that could be assembled to make an operable firearm. Provides that ‘family member of the respondent’ includes a former spouse and a person with whom the respondent has or allegedly has a child in common.”

The bill is placed on postponed consideration with one vote shy to pass out of committee. Votes were tallied at 59 yeas, 44 nays, 5 registered present, and 10 not voting.