[UtiPossidetis]

Illinois gun restrictions unfairly target foster parents, lawsuit claims

Fox News reports that Illinois foster parents must either certify that there are no firearms in their home or complete a form called the Foster Family Firearms Arrangement. That document requires a list of all guns and ammunition in the home and locations where they are stored. Would-be foster parents also must certify the guns have trigger locks and are stored unloaded, separate from ammunition and in locked containers accessible only with a key kept off the premises or on the owner’s person.

The rules can be enforced by involuntary home inspections, according to the lawsuit.

 

[Headspace]

Screw IL. That is all.

But seriously, The people of that state get what they elect. I hope that if rules like that come out for GA, we will react at the voting booth and get rid of the pond scum that came up with the idea.

 

[CoffeeMate]

But these poor unfortunate foster children have been through so much already. Is it unreasonable to require SAFE foster homes for them?

[/sarcasm]

Yadda yadda yadda.

 

[CoffeeMate]

Funny thing, I was just talking about bigotry against firearm owners.



.

 

[Craftsman]

Is anyone surprised that the State wants more terrified, dependent, useless people who will continue to vote them into power?

 

[gunsmoker]

complicated

Do families that contract with the State to raise foster kids have the same rights as parents of their own natural kids?
Can the State condition the placement of kids in a foster home on the adults in that home agreeing not to exercise their rights to the full extent they otherwise could?

This case is bigger than just guns.

Consider religion. Suppose a prospective foster family says they will raise their kids as jihadists whose goal will be to put America under the sword of sharia law by any means necessary. Can the State say: "No, that's not cool. If you insist on that, we're taking the kids back." ??

Could the State refuse to place kids with a family that believes in only natural healing or healing through prayer, but no medical intervention. If you die from the flu, that's fine, because obviously that was God's will. Taking antibiotics would mess with God's plan and throw the universe out of whack.

How about racism? What if a foster dad became a follower of the New Klu Klux Klan and vowed to raise his children in a "white identity" household where the kids could only play with white ayrian kids, listen to music from caucasian artists, and had to read 3 pages of Mein Kampf before bed each night? Could the State say NO to that? Could they take the kids back?

If so, then we're not talking about rights that cannot be infringed. We're talking about privileges that can be regulated by the government to whatever level serves the overall public good.

That takes the 2A out of it, and then it becomes a matter of administrative law. Was the agency's decision arbitrary and capricious, or was it based on reasonable evidence and data that supports safe-storage households as the best kind for families?

 

[Phil1979]

Next thing you know, there will be a checkmark on the form:

"I certify no one in the household will teach the children that Jesus loves them, or that the Bible is the Word of God."

Cause, to be fully dependent on government, you must agree that government is not only your physical savior, but spiritual savior as well. They know best, after all. :roll:

 

[GM404]

Keep in mind this is fairly common practice in many states, including the "oh so free Republic of Texas!!!!".

While in Texas, we were a licenced foster home. It's all a very long story, but the requirements were very similar to that of Illinois and yes, you had to disclose all your weapons/ammo/locations and how they were stored. And yes, we were subject to no-notice inspections AT ANY given time. The rules for being a foster home are quite stringent and well, it was enough pain in the arse that we didn't do it here in Georgia. I do understand the need for rules,, but they make it SO DIFFICULT that most people won't even CONSIDER opening their home for foster kids.

Oh so..here's a similar lawsuit from the VERY RED state of Oklahoma:

http://newsok.com/article/5471832

And, from the Georgia DFCS Child Safety Agreement

 

[CoffeeMate]

Consider religion. Suppose a prospective foster family says they will raise their kids as jihadists whose goal will be to put America under the sword of sharia law by any means necessary. Can the State say: "No, that's not cool. If you insist on that, we're taking the kids back." ??

No, that would be racist. They would make them sign a "Foster Family Terrorism Agreement" first.

 

[CoffeeMate]

If so, then we're not talking about rights that cannot be infringed. We're talking about privileges that can be regulated by the government to whatever level serves the overall public good.

I get the State's interest in protecting its charges however it deems fit. I also get that prospective foster parents are licensed in order to act as agents of the State in these matters. This is very different than natural families so comparisons to them aren't meaningful, especially as regards "regulating" or "infringing".

However, I can't help but see this as being primarily politically driven.

How many people are killed in automobile accidents each year? How many of them are children? How many of them are really young children facing the wrong way in a car seat? ... It doesn't matter if it's more or less than the number killed with firearms, the question is how many?

How many before we need a "Foster Family Automobile Arrangement" that forbids cars in the household, or if there is a car, it must be independently locked away with the battery removed and stored separately, and a separate safe / key lock for the car key itself?

Studies "show" that red meat kills people. For the safety of the kids, a "Foster Family Strictly Vegan Arrangement" that includes agreeing to random no-knock raids at dinner time to inspect the food on the table. Proper meat-free nutrition is important.

Why isn't there a "Foster Family Text Free Living Arrangement" prohibiting ever allowing the child within ten feet of a cell phone, 'cause you know... drunk teenagers texting and driving kills people.

 

[GM404]

How many before we need a "Foster Family Automobile Arrangement" that forbids cars in the household, or if there is a car, it must be independently locked away with the battery removed and stored separately, and a separate safe / key lock for the car key itself?

Well, there are requirements for that too. I had to send my updated insurance binders at every renewal as well as a copy of the safety inspection that was done annually in Texas. Child seat installations had to be inspected by someone at CPS or by a Texas Trooper.

If you have never been licenced as a foster home, it's difficult to understand HOW MANY rules there are. Water heater temp? Yeah, forget about having HOT water in your home...it will be lukewarm at best and yes...it WILL be checked for maximum temperature. You have alcohol in the home? It had to be LOCKED up. You have a pool? Oye...just give it up...not worth the hassle.

Our home initial home study was over 100 pages long...the physical inspection of the home was over 20 pages long. And this was in TEXAS...not some crazy liberal state like Illinois.

You HAVE to WANT to be a foster home to put up with the government intrusion. And no one is forcing anyone to be a foster home, so I don't see that your rights are being "taken away".

 

[UtiPossidetis]

I understand your point but I can think of two real situations where it wasn't as optional to be a foster home as your situation. In some instances I have seen families have to become foster homes for relative's children that they feel obligated to care for but the state needs to be involved. The other is in instances of adoption where the process takes a while and the parents have to "foster" the child until the process is complete. In those instances rights are being abridged. Remember, if the government sets the standard in one area there is less stopping them from extending it to another area, like biological children, under the guise of "its for the children".

 

[GM404]

I understand your point but I can think of two real situations where it wasn't as optional to be a foster home as your situation. In some instances I have seen families have to become foster homes for relative's children that they feel obligated to care for but the state needs to be involved. The other is in instances of adoption where the process takes a while and the parents have to "foster" the child until the process is complete. In those instances rights are being abridged. Remember, if the government sets the standard in one area there is less stopping them from extending it to another area, like biological children, under the guise of "its for the children".

Well, as unfortunate as it is, (at least in Texas), when kids are removed by the state and placed with family members, they too have to meet requirements as dictated by the state...yes, even for family. So I would concede that then those rights are being infringed. As for the adoption process, it's usually called "foster to adopt" and the requirements for licensure are the same. The only real difference is that the state *tries* to match the kids with the appropriate home eg., if you are a "foster to adopt" home, then the state will try to place kids that have a high chance of being permanently removed from the home (parents rights are terminated) whereas if there is a good chance the kid will go back home, they try to place them in a straight foster home.

The unfortunate fact of the matter is many of these kids are put into commercial group homes because there aren't enough people who go through the trouble to open their homes to these kids.

This is a cause that is near and dear to my heart. I was shocked to learn how FEW foster homes that are in the East Cobb area. It was such a disparity from San Antonio where there were a LOT more homes and these were run by folks whose means were quite a bit less than the folks I live near. So many folks here with the means to make a difference, but so few do it.

AND since we are on the subject...here is a shameless plug. I understand that becoming a foster family is hard...it's VERY HARD. BUT...if you feel so inclined to help, there is a way to help these kids without going through the pain of becoming a foster home. I have been involved with this organization here in Georgia and Texas and they really do help. http://www.gacasa.org/

The lives and well being of children are hanging in the balance. Every child who cannot live safely at home should have a CASA volunteer who will help ensure their safe passage out of foster care, to the benefit of their children, and generations to come.

 

[UtiPossidetis]

Funny, I offered pro bono services to our local CASA years ago and was ignored cold by them. Tried a second time a year later, same result. Guess who hasn't tried a 3rd time?

 

[GM404]

Funny, I offered pro bono services to our local CASA years ago and was ignored cold by them. Tried a second time a year later, same result. Guess who hasn't tried a 3rd time?

I am sure where you are located, but I am in Cobb County and I also had difficulty getting involved. Long story short...in Texas CASA can accept donations, corporate sponsorship's, etc. So in the San Antonio office, there were about 20 people on staff; the program is run VERY well. In Cobb County, they use ONLY government funds and aren't allowed to use private donations or have corporate sponsors. SO...they have two people who work in the office and they TRY to manage the entire program and as you can guess, it isn't very smooth.