Have you never heard the saying, “When in Rome, do as the Romans.” That is the fundamental philosophy behind ‘ignorance of the law is no excuse’. I don’t live in IL for several reasons, not the least of which is their proclivity for governmental corruption! The individual states are given statehood with the understanding that they will pattern their individual governments in accordance with the authority granted them under the US Constitution. The Feds are supposed to remain within their Enumerated Powers defending national borders, international treaties, and seeing to it that one state does not take advantage of another in commerce through unfair regulation and taxes. The States, being much closer to the individual citizen and their issues, can and should make laws that punish the wrongdoer without infringing on the inalienable rights of the law abiding citizen. That means that since guns don’t kill people, PEOPLE kill people, the punishment of the evildoer is left to the State except for Treason (under the Constitution). Punishment of evildoers should not limit the freedom of law abiding citizens, should it? If I feel the need to carry a gun pretty much all the time and (whether I know it or not) that crossing the river means I am in a jurisdiction that strips me of that right, I have a choice: I can stay where I am and freely carry my gun or I can leave my gun at home and go across the river. If I take my gun across the river with me and get arrested for breaking their law there is no one to blame but MYSELF! Giving the Feds unconstitutional power to arbitrate inalienable rights means they are no longer rights but privileges to be granted or withheld at their whim. A State is acting against the Constitution by enacting any law stripping me of any of my inalienable rights. But if its citizens are okay with it then it is still my prerogative to go there or not. It is not my right to ignore their law if I choose to visit! Nor is it within the Constitutional purview of the Federal Government to interfere beyond an opinion of the Supreme Court. And as one ex-president said, let them enforce it, when they handed down an opinion with which he adamantly disagreed!! Freedom is too precious to flippantly give up for expedience to some lawmaker whose replacement could turn on its head!!!