Jump to content

korgs130

Members
  • Posts

    97
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

527 profile views

korgs130's Achievements

Member

Member (2/24)

  1. I’m not running for political office and I highly doubt he’d have made the video if he wasn’t. That’s the point I’m attempting to make. Not a super huge flex on his part when you add in the county he lives in.
  2. So he’s doing what it seems the vast majority of IL firearms owners are doing. He made a video to clearly score political in his primary election. To my original question, he doesn’t show, and probably doesn’t own, a full auto Glock with 3D printed switch and suppressor for the same reason I don’t own one and most folks don’t own one. It is because of the legal consequences of not complying with the NFA and IL law, including PICA, regarding machineguns, even though those laws are unconstituational.
  3. Meh. Political posturing IMHO. “Will not comply.” Okay, does he comply with the: NFA GCA FOID FOPA FCCA I bet he complies with all of the above. The fact is that he, like the rest of us (myself included) abide all manner of infringements on our civil rights. I have no doubts that he supports our 2A rights, but I don’t find video by a politician not comply with PICA impressive. Why doesn’t he have full auto Glock with 3D printed switch and a home built suppressor in the video?
  4. Noticed that as of 1 Dec the ISP updated their PICA Q&A. Lots of interesting new answers, in particular #25…
  5. I ask myself this question several times a day. Applying Occam’s Razor, this simplest answer is that ISP leadership is ignorant when it comes to firearms. While a lot of LEOs are “gun guys” the vast majority are not. Clearly the ISP legal council from the hearings is out of her depth when it comes to firearms. Add to that they were handed an incredible vague law written by politicians know even less about the topic. If “gun guys” like us can’t determine how to apply the law, I think it is unrealistic for us to expect any true clarification from the ISP. It’s one big soup sandwich. As far as the politicians that wrote and passed PICA, my view that they are deliberately ignorant. They want us disarmed, so they see no advantage in making clearly understood laws when in comes to firearms. The more vague a law, the easier it is to prosecute someone for violating the law.
  6. Just when you thought it couldn’t be any more confusing. Here is the way I read this horribly written “clarification.” The above is actually a list of items designed for firearms and that attach to firearms, but ARE NOT “Assault Weapons Attachments.” From PICA: “(3) "Assault weapon attachment" means any device capable of being attached to a firearm that is specifically designed for making or converting a firearm into any of the firearms listed in paragraph (1) of this subsection (a).” None of the items on list from the answer make an firearm an “assault weapon.” For example look at “Aftermarket stocks that do not otherwise meet the criteria in (1)(a).” From above. I think the ISP are trying to say that if a stock is not: “(iii) a folding, telescoping, thumbhole, or detachable stock, or a stock that is otherwise foldable or adjustable in a manner that operates to reduce the length, size, or any other dimension, or otherwise enhances the concealability of, the weapon;“ Then the stock IS NOT considered an “Assault Weapons Attachment” (ie a fixed stock that would go on an 20” AR15 Colt Sporter would not be an “AWA” because that is not a feature making that firearm an “AW”). Unfortunately, because of the way it’s worded, it is impossible to know fore sure.
  7. The fact that the ISP cannot answer most questions about this law show exactly how poorly written PICA is. How in the heck does the ISP expect the average citizen properly understand how to comply with the law when they, themselves, don’t understand how to comply with it? Of course I’m fairly certain that is a feature, not a bug.
  8. Sen Weaver's email: chuck@senwaever.com The 73rd dist rep is no longer David Leitch. It is now Ryan Spain Springfield Office: 228-N Stratton Office Building Springfield, IL 62706 (217) 782-8108 District Office: 5407 N. University St., Arbor Hall Suite B Peoria, IL 61614 (309) 690-7373 (309) 690-7375 FAX Email: spain@ilhousegop.org
×
×
  • Create New...