Uncle Harley Posted January 25, 2012 at 04:14 AM Posted January 25, 2012 at 04:14 AM How do the differences in these two laws affect me for the purposes of the Unlawful Use ofWeapons law?It is recommended that persons transport their firearms only unloaded and in a case in order to be fullycompliant with all statutes. A firearm transported in a container other than a case while engaged in activitiescovered by the Wildlife Code could subject an individual to a charge of Class B Misdemeanor under the WildlifeCode but would not be considered Unlawful Use of Weapons if the container were a "firearm carrying box,shipping box, or other container" as provided in the Criminal Code. source: www.isp.state.il.us/docs/ptfire.pdf Notice the reference to two different "codes". Oh, and according to Diggens, a console is a 'case' as provided in the Criminal Code. was this directed at me? ( if so see my post just previous to this one.) ir are you just re-enforcing what I stated?
Tvandermyde Posted January 25, 2012 at 04:15 AM Posted January 25, 2012 at 04:15 AM uncle i would agree with you, and if a DNR cop tried to write me for it, i would tell him we are going to have a realllly big arguement in Court.
abolt243 Posted January 25, 2012 at 04:17 AM Posted January 25, 2012 at 04:17 AM How do the differences in these two laws affect me for the purposes of the Unlawful Use ofWeapons law?It is recommended that persons transport their firearms only unloaded and in a case in order to be fullycompliant with all statutes. A firearm transported in a container other than a case while engaged in activitiescovered by the Wildlife Code could subject an individual to a charge of Class B Misdemeanor under the WildlifeCode but would not be considered Unlawful Use of Weapons if the container were a "firearm carrying box,shipping box, or other container" as provided in the Criminal Code. source: www.isp.state.il.us/docs/ptfire.pdf Notice the reference to two different "codes". Oh, and according to Diggens, a console is a 'case' as provided in the Criminal Code. was this directed at me? ( if so see my post just previous to this one.) ir are you just re-enforcing what I stated? Just a comment, not directed at anyone in particular. I know that you and I agree on this, this was reinforcement of your post.
Uncle Harley Posted January 25, 2012 at 04:19 AM Posted January 25, 2012 at 04:19 AM Todd- Thank you Abolt- Thank you as well.
es503IL Posted January 25, 2012 at 06:24 PM Author Posted January 25, 2012 at 06:24 PM 1/19/2012Judge granted motions to clarify and motion to cite supplemental authority. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk Just out of curiousity, wheres that information coming from? The last thing that I saw posted on the docket was from 01Dec2011.
NakPPI Posted January 25, 2012 at 06:45 PM Posted January 25, 2012 at 06:45 PM This information is posted on Pacer as a text order on 1/19/12. I'm not sure what else to say? Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk
mauserme Posted January 25, 2012 at 07:18 PM Posted January 25, 2012 at 07:18 PM 1/19/2012Judge granted motions to clarify and motion to cite supplemental authority. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk Just out of curiousity, wheres that information coming from? The last thing that I saw posted on the docket was from 01Dec2011.You can register for a PACER account here. It doesn't cost anything if you limit your usage.
es503IL Posted January 25, 2012 at 08:47 PM Author Posted January 25, 2012 at 08:47 PM Huh, I would have figured that if anything happened with the case (procedural or otherwise), it would be posted to the docket. Thanks.
XJCraver Posted January 27, 2012 at 01:53 PM Posted January 27, 2012 at 01:53 PM Thank you, Todd and AB, for the clarifications. I still see it as a gray area of the law, that could very well be exploited, but will concede the argument for now. Thanks again. Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.