Village's cannot ban guns ex post facto

History and facts once again conflict with the hysterical and unconstitutional actions just taken by Deerfield, Illinois.

Deerfield officials have passed an ordinance that seeks to confiscate firearms that the village leaders themselves have deemed as dangerous. This misguided body has also announced its intention to fine legitimate and rightful gun owners amounts ranging from $250 to $1,000 per day. Both actions are irrational, capricious and to say the least unconstitutional.

Article 1, Section 9 and Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution set forth simple and concise prohibitions from passing "ex post facto" laws by either Congress or any state government body. In a 1992 paper published by Georgetown University, Jane H. Aiken, professor of law in South Carolina, provides the following excerpts that define the origins of the constitutional bans on ex post facto laws: The drafters believed that the power to pass ex post facto laws was one of the hallmarks of tyranny. Such laws place the citizens at the mercy of the government, unable to know the consequences of their acts and constantly subject to the possibility of legislative vindictiveness. The framers recognized from their experience the potential for abuse of retroactive laws - laws that were often the tools of tyrants to achieve politically motivated results.

Can there be any doubt that the "proposed actions" of Deerfield are anything but "ex post facto" and vindictive regulations aimed to punish lawful citizens from owning firearms that they previously bought and now own legitimately under existing Illinois statues?

Whatever your opinion may be on firearm ownership, when the Deerfield owners bought these firearms, they were both legal to buy and legal to own. Deerfield officials cannot violate their constitutional rights just because they disagree with their actions.

Dale Plautz

Round Lake