Illinois lawmakers pass bill to fine gun owners for improper storage
requires new rules for storing guns in homes where children and at-risk people are present.
Gun owners could be fined anywhere from $500 if weapons are not securely stored to $10,000 if an unsecured weapon is used in a crime or suicide.
Rep. John Cabello (R-Machesney Park) believes the bill criminalizes lawful gun owners.
'People are going to be so confused as to what they are supposed to do. And that's what this Democrat majority wants. They want to make more law-abiding gun owners criminals,' he said.
Tyler Krieter, a member of the activist group Moms Demand Action, says the bill focuses on irresponsible gun owners.
'I hear the pushback from the other side because the other side thinks that always just coming after law-abiding citizens. And no, we're not. We're coming after people who are criminals, who are irresponsible with their guns,' said Krieter.
He said the bill is based on data and studies.
'About 50% of gun owners don't securely lock all their firearms away here. And 82% of the teen suicides involve a gun that belonged to a family member, it says. It's not a left or right thing. It's statistics,' Krieter said. 'Almost every member of my family owns a gun here. We all agree with this bill here. It's going to help lower down suicides among teens. It's going to help cut down on irresponsible gun owners. If you are a responsible gun owner, you have nothing to worry about.'
Cabello said he doesn't agree.
'The Democrats seem to just want to go after the law-abiding citizen in constantly making it harder and harder for folks to own weapons,' he said.
Critics of the bill say they plan to challenge its constitutionality if Gov. Pritzker signs it into law.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
23 minutes ago
- The Hill
Senate approves more than $180 billion in 2026 funding before August recess
The Senate on Friday passed its first tranche of government funding bills for fiscal year 2026 ahead of its upcoming August recess, but Congress is bracing for a potentially messy fight to prevent a shutdown when they return in September. The chamber approved three bills that provide more than $180 billion in discretionary funding for the departments of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), military construction, legislative branch operations and rural development. The bills passed in two parts: on an 87-9 vote for military construction, VA, agriculture and FDA funding; and an 81-15 vote for legislative branch funding. The votes cap off days of uncertainty over whether the Senate would be joining the House on a monthlong recess with any of its 12 annual funding bills passed out of the chamber. Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.), who heads the subcommittee that crafted the full-year VA funding bill, said Friday that he sees the first batch of bills as more of a 'test run.' 'It's just been so long since we've done our appropriations bills. A lot of people just [forgot] the procedures,' he told The Hill, noting that in the previous congressional session senators 'really didn't do bills.' Appropriators say the vote marks the first time since 2018 that the Senate has passed funding legislation before the August recess. 'It's really a matter of just kind of legislating again, and the more we do it, the easier, the easier it'll be as we go back,' Boozman said. In the past week, senators had gone through several iterations of their first funding package of the year, as leaders on both sides worked through frustrations in their ranks over proposed spending levels and actions by the Trump administration that incensed Democrats. Well over half of the funding approved Friday is included in the annual VA and military construction bill, which calls for upwards of $153 billion in discretionary funding for fiscal 2026. That includes about $133 billion for the VA and roughly $20 billion for the Department of Defense military construction program. More than $113 billion in discretionary funding would go toward VA medical care. The annual agricultural funding plan calls for $27 billion in discretionary funding for fiscal 2026. It includes $8.2 billion for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), about $7 billion in funding for the Food and Drug Administration, roughly $1.7 billion for rental assistance, and nearly $1.23 billion for the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). Democrats have also highlighted $240 million in funding in the bill for the McGovern-Dole Food for Education program, which was targeted in President Trump's latest budget request. The annual legislative branch funding plan calls for about $7 billion for House and Senate operations, the U.S. Capitol Police and agencies like the Library of Congress (LOC), the Government Accountability Office, the Congressional Research Service (CRS), the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), and the Architect of the Capitol. Capitol Police would see a boost under the plan, along with the CBO, while funding for the LOC, the CRS and the GAO would be kept at fiscal 2025 levels. Lawmakers also agreed to $44.5 million in emergency funds aimed at beefing up security and member protection, citing safety concerns following the shootings of Minnesota lawmakers earlier this year. Republicans had previously been uncertain about whether the third bill would be passed as part of the package this week until Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a senior appropriator, said a deal was worked out to allow him to vote on the measure separately from the other bills. Kennedy has criticized the legislative branch funding bill for its proposed spending levels. 'It just doesn't seem appropriate for us to be spending that much extra while everybody else has to take a cut,' he told reporters in late July. 'Now, some of my colleagues point out, yes, but the extra spending is for member security.' 'If you're going to spend extra money on member security, find a pay-for within the bill. I just think the optics are terrible and the policy is terrible,' he said. 'We ought to hold ourselves to the same standard we're holding everybody else, and that's why I'm going to vote no.' Republicans also blame Sen. Chris Van Hollen's (D-Md.) resistance to the Trump administration's relocation plans for the FBI's headquarters for weighing down efforts to pass the annual Justice Department funding bill. Senators had initially expected that bill, which also funds the Commerce Department and science-related agencies, to be part of the package until those plans fell apart earlier this week amid a clash over Trump administration plans to relocate the FBI headquarters. Speaking from the Senate floor on Thursday, Van Hollen, the top Democrat on the subcommittee that crafted the annual funding deal, said he had been pushing for an amendment aimed at ensuring the FBI would 'have a level 5 security headquarters.' He noted his previous attempt during committee consideration that temporarily led to the adoption of an amendment to the DOJ funding bill that sought to block President Trump's plans to keep the FBI's headquarters in Washington, D.C. However, the change was later scrapped after staunch GOP opposition threatened to tank the bill. 'It didn't happen because members of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Republicans and Democrats, didn't think that was the right thing to do – to preserve what we had set out before and make sure that the men and women [of the FBI] have a level 5 security headquarters,' he said. 'We did it because the President of the United States was going to throw a fit if that provision stayed on.' Van Hollen said he hopes the bill will be able to 'get back on track' in September. However, Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kansas), chair of the subcommittee alongside Van Hollen, offered a rather gloomy outlook for the bill's next steps after recess. He argued much of the focus in September is likely to be on getting a deal on a funding stopgap, also known as a continuing resolution (CR), to keep the government funded beyond the Sept. 30 shutdown deadline. 'When we get back from recess, we'll move to working on the CR to get us so I would guess if the CJS has a path, it's probably just the CR and will continue,' Moran said. 'All the work that we've done goes away, and we'll go back to CR and fund those agencies at the same level and same way that we did last year.' 'Every time we say we want to do appropriation bills, then there's someone who has a reason that, 'Not this time,' 'Not this one,' 'Not – because I didn't get what I want,'' he said. 'And this time we're arguing over an amendment that was allowed to the senator who's objecting, but he wanted a commitment that he get the outcome he wants.' 'And he didn't win in committee, and he wouldn't win on the Senate floor, but he can, I wouldn't think, but he can make his case. But he rejected that option,' he said.
Politico
24 minutes ago
- Politico
Democratic governors advise strong counteroffensive on redistricting
Kelly didn't cite California Gov. Gavin Newsom by name, but he is the most high profile, and likeliest, example of a Democrat considering a counteroffensive remapping effort to squeeze more seats from a blue state. On Thursday, Newsom said he'd seek a November special election to have voters approve a new House map that would boost Democrats' numbers. It's an expensive and potentially perilous gamble that his Democratic colleagues throughout the country appear to be backing — a notably more aggressive posture for the party. Various mid-decade redistricting efforts could launch a partisan arms race, as the parties look to redraw competing congressional maps to their own advantages. Democrats face a tougher path, as several blue states are bound by independent redistricting commissions and state constitutions, which would prevent them from quickly remaking maps. By contrast, discussions are already underway in several other Republican-controlled states that could follow Texas' lead, including Missouri, Indiana and Florida. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz acknowledged there's 'validity' to concerns that Republicans might gain even more seats, should redistricting wars escalate. But, Walz and Kelly said, 'there's a bigger risk in doing nothing.' 'We can't just let this happen and act like it's fine, and hope that the courts fix it,' Kelly said. 'We have no idea, quite honestly, at this point, what the courts might do, but by virtue of us responding in kind, we do send a message. We're not going to take this line down.'
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Democrats say a GOP plan to redraw House districts in Texas harms Black and Hispanic voters
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Democrats argued Friday that a Republican plan for redrawing districts in Texas to create more winnable U.S. House seats for the GOP is not only a power grab by President Donald Trump but also an attack on Black and Hispanic voters that violates the landmark federal Voting Rights Act. The plan's Republican author acknowledged during a state House committee hearing that his proposed map is designed to help the GOP pick up five seats in Texas, something Trump is pushing to preserve the party's now-slim House majority. The Texas House committee expected to vote on the plan by Saturday, allowing the full House to vote as early as Tuesday, before going to the Senate. Democrats have few options for thwarting the Republican plan during a 30-day special session called by GOP Gov. Greg Abbott, and calls for offsetting efforts in Democratic states intensified among Democrats outside Texas. Democratic legislators in Texas can walk out, go to another state and prevent either chamber from conducting but would face fines — and also block relief for victims of deadly flash flooding last month in the state's Hill Country. Republicans disputed that their plan dilutes the power of Black and Hispanic voters to elect candidates of their choosing and said it could give them better representation by uniting some communities that previously have been split. But the new lines likely would make it harder for four Hispanic incumbents and two Black incumbents to retain their seats in 2026. The Texas delegation would go from a 25-13 split in the GOP's favor to a 30-8 advantage. 'I've never seen anything this brazen, this broken and this spineless,' said former Democratic U.S. Rep. Colin Allred, who's running for the U.S. Senate. 'If you do this, we'll see you in court and at the ballot box.' Defending the map and partisan motivations Texas once was required by the 1965 Voting Rights Act to submit its redistricting plans to the federal government for review because of its past history of discrimination, but the U.S. Supreme Court declared in 2013 that the requirement was outdated and unconstitutional. The act requires states to have the number of districts in which minority voters can elect a candidate reflect their percentage of the population. The GOP plan creates five new districts without any incumbents, and sponsoring Republican state Rep. Todd Hunter noted that in four of them, at least half of the voting-age U.S. citizens are minorities, and there would be 10 Hispanic-majority districts, rather than the current nine. 'It's a good plan for Texas,' Hunter said. Hunter acknowledged that the lines were being redrawn 'for partisan purposes,' which he said is allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court. He said a law firm was consulted as the map was being drawn. Other Republicans testified in favor of the plan for other reasons, many of them mayors or local party chairs. Melinda Preston, Denton County's GOP chair, said the new maps will reflect the booming population in the state of 30 million. The redistricting push could move to other states Democrats argued that if Republicans succeed in redrawing the districts in Texas, Trump will push other states to redraw theirs before they'd normally do so, which would be in 2031 or 2032, after the next nationwide census. States are required to adjust the lines at least once every 10 years to keep the districts as equal in population as possible after population shifts. That's led Democrats in California and New York to consider redrawing their states' lines to help Democrats, though each state has an independent commission for drawing the lines. Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly, chair of the Democratic Governors Association, also said Democratic governors should retaliate, if they can. 'We need to respond in kind, which I think we do to protect the American people,' Kelly said Friday at news conference during a DGA meeting in Madison, Wisconsin. 'I hate the fact that we're here, that we even have to consider something this drastic.' Why walking out is hard for Democrats Texas is unusual in requiring two-thirds of members to be present for the House or Senate to conduct business. That rule would allow Democrats, particularly in the House, where they hold 62 of 150 seats, to shut the chamber. But Democrats haven't publicly promised to do that, though they've used the tactic in the past. House members now face a fine of $500 each day they're absent, and the chamber's rules prohibit lawmakers from tapping campaign funds to pay them. In addition, the chamber also couldn't consider flood relief proposals — which Democrats have insisted should be the focus of the special session. Democratic state Rep. Rhetta Bowers accused Abbott and his fellow Republicans of holding that relief hostage so they could 'slice up Black and Latino communities just to please Donald Trump.' 'Let me be clear: We will not allow flood relief to be used as a bargaining chip for racially rigged maps,' Bowers said during a briefing for reporters and others. How the map could change the partisan balance Under the exiting lines, which were in place for the 2022 and 2024 elections, Republicans won all of their seats in districts carried by Trump by at least 10 percentage points. Democrats won all 11 districts carried by Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris, and Democratic Reps. Henry Cuellar and Vincente Gonzalez won reelection in districts that Trump won by less than 10 points. If the GOP's proposed map had been in place in 2024, Harris would have won eight districts, and Trump would have won the other 30 by at least 10%. In San Antonio, Democratic Rep. Joaquin Castro would be drawn out of a safe blue district into one that Trump would have won by nearly 22 points. And in Houston, Democratic Rep. Al Green would live in a majority-Hispanic district — but 72% of the Black voters he now represents would not. He would go from being in a district that Harris carried by 44 percentage points to one Trump would have carried by 15 points — with a GOP incumbent. 'This is not democracy,' Amanda McLaughlin, a North Texas resident, said. 'Is it worth destroying Texas to give the president five more seats?' ___ Hanna reported from Topeka, Kansas. Also contributing were videojournalist Lekan Oyekanmi in Austin; Scott Bauer in Madison, Wisconsin, and Brian Witte, in Annapolis, Maryland. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
