As I understood it you all don't want any bill to pass anyways. So the more fighting and less consensus the better right?
At first, I thought the lack of a bill would lead to constitutional carry, therefore, the way to go.
After further consideration, the lack of a bill would lead to many questions remaining unaddressed, therefore, troublesome.
One thing it WOULD do is allow unregulated carry of firearms in the state. This behooves the anti's to address the issue and pass a law. If they don't, COOL! Anyone can carry anything, anywhere. Sounds good to me! So, if anti-gunners wish to table the issue and refuse to pass legislation providing for a CCW process, that's great for pro 2A supporters, and means there's nothing forbidding you from slingling your AR-15 over your shoulder and marching right into the local courthouse, football game, or corner bar.
So, I'm pretty sure the anti's are going to want to address this.
Which also tosses the ball right back into our court. After all, the previous issue with nullification of all Illinois' carry prohibitions also adds some problems for Pro 2A supporters.
1) Without a permit process, how would an Illinois citizen lawfully carry if he/she chose to travel out of state?
2) Carrying a firearm without a "permission slip" would almost certainly lead to continued enforcement of nullified law until a person arrested could "prove their innocence". What do you honestly think would happen if you did, indeed, choose to tote your perfectly legal AR right down Chicago's Michigan Avenue? I'll tell you: You'd be illegally arrested, illegally tossed into the klink, have your legal AR illegally siezed, and have to sit there, spend money on attorney's fees, and go through the whole rigamarole in order to be acquitted, (which you probably would be). Being found completely innocent under these circumstances might feel wonderful, but it falls right into the hands of the anti's, anyway. Are you willing to spend tens of thousands of dollars, sit in a jail cell, and spend untold hours in court to finally be told you did nothing wrong? The anti's aren't banking on "right or wrong". They don't care. They simply wish to inconvenience you, hassle you, and make your life a living hell to the point that, even though legal, lawful behavior is still thwartd by "political threat". It's the Chicago way.
3) How would constitutional carry be regarded by home rule cities? (The same as it would in #2: Municipalities would most likely enforce nullified anti-carry laws anyway and claim they are exempt from the findings that gun bans are illegal. This would lead to the entire process all over again. We'd have to await the process of a court to find that the recent finding nullifying carry bans does, indeed, apply to home rule cities.)
Pro 2A Illinoisians, and anti-carry rights grabbers are BOTH better served by a law stating the requirements for lawful carry. This removes any and all dispute any municipality in Illinois could possibly raise.
The cool part is, it is a WIN/WIN situation for Pro 2A Illinoisians.
#1) If there is no CCW law passed, Municipalities will definately face instances of having to allow carry of anything, in any manner, anywhere (WIN).......or having to go through numerous cases of litigation that would, most likely, prove very expensive for the cities and state if they try to uphold anti-carry laws that have been nullified. Even though the process would prove a complete pain for carriers (getting arrested under vague [read: no] carry guidelines),
it would eventually prove more problematic for the state once expensive payouts following lawsuits begin happening because there is no law forbidding carry of any type, anywhere. (WIN)
#2) If there is CCW law passed, Pro 2A Illinoisians should, pretty much, be able to name their terms and receive a Christmas list of everything they want in a CCW bill like: low fees, full reciprocity, long renewal rate, full pre-emption, shall issue, and a host of any and all other goodies imaginable. (WIN), or.......see #1.
I may be completely out in left field, but I welcome any discussion about whether this opinion is valid/invalid, including whether or not these concerns should be publicly aired in the interest of Illinoiscarry.com, in which case mods should feel free to remove it. I'll edit to do so, if asked.