ChicagoRonin70 Posted July 14, 2020 at 04:55 PM Share Posted July 14, 2020 at 04:55 PM So, I was looking at the language of the Cook County Blair Holt Assault Weapons Ban and I noticed that nowhere does it appear to be written therein, and thus as laws are required to be interpreted and followed in this country, does it state that a weapon that is classified as a "firearm" according to the NFA is considered an "assault weapon" under the ban. It specifically only lists the following types of weapons" A semiautomatic rifle that has the capacity to accept a large capacity magazine detachable or otherwise A semiautomatic pistol or any semi-automatic rifle that has a fixed magazine, that has the capacity to accept more than ten rounds of ammunition; A semiautomatic pistol that has the capacity to accept a detachable magazine A semiautomatic shotgun Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder Conversion kit, part or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person Which very much seems to mean, legally, that a weapon that would be legally classified as a non-NFA "firearm," such as a weapon that started out as a pistol, but which has a barrel of more than 16" and an overall length of more than 26" which also has a vertical foregrip, as discussed in this thread about VFGs here on Illinois Carry. To wit: However, if your pistol is greater than 26", you can add a foregrip because it's then considered a "firearm".< 26" no foregrip> 26" foregrip is legal So if, say, you have a carbine conversion kit that has a 16.5" barrel and an overall length of more than 26", and which also has a vertical foregrip, thus becoming legally a non-NFA firearm, which by definition cannot be a conversion kit "from which an assault weapon can be assembled" since it is none of the above-listed categories, but rather a conversion kit to a non-NFA firearm. Thus, even though the weapon started out as a pistol, it was converted to a non-NFA firearm by the addition of the kit, it would not violate the written letter of the law by converting a pistol to an "assault" weapon, because the Cook County ban does not in any way list non-NFA "firearms" among the classifications of weapons that would be included among ones that could be considered "assault weapons." As well, if someone already had one of these, because there cannot be ex post facto laws that make illegal something that was previously legal, at the very least such a non-NFA firearm would be grandfathered in to be legally ownable (by that person, or whomever they might sell it to, since it already existed in that format at the time any law could be passed against owning such a weapon). Am I off base here, or am I interpreting the English language as it is written, with regard to that idiotic law? This would be the kind of thing worth going to court over, and really blowing a hole in this stupid county's senseless law, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ultra magnus Posted July 14, 2020 at 06:25 PM Share Posted July 14, 2020 at 06:25 PM "Conversion kit, part or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person" This is what would probably hang you up. Let's say you non nfa firearm takes AR mags. If you own any rifle or pistol that takes AR mags, you are now in possession of parts that can be assembled into an assault weapon. Buffer tube and stock, same thing, shorter upper, same thing. Not completely brushed up on my non nfa firearm minutia, but if the vert grip is required, it may be a non starter if it's a pistol without one. Because then, by default you are in possession of all the part for an assault weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benbow Posted July 14, 2020 at 11:33 PM Share Posted July 14, 2020 at 11:33 PM how about an AOW NFA ar15 non-pistol, that is identical to a pistol, except it has a front hand grip. Total NFA tax, $5. I have them in stock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoRonin70 Posted July 15, 2020 at 12:13 AM Author Share Posted July 15, 2020 at 12:13 AM "Conversion kit, part or combination of parts, from which an assault weapon can be assembled if those parts are in the possession or under the control of the same person" This is what would probably hang you up. Let's say you non nfa firearm takes AR mags. If you own any rifle or pistol that takes AR mags, you are now in possession of parts that can be assembled into an assault weapon. Buffer tube and stock, same thing, shorter upper, same thing. Not completely brushed up on my non nfa firearm minutia, but if the vert grip is required, it may be a non starter if it's a pistol without one. Because then, by default you are in possession of all the part for an assault weapon. Actually, I specifically addressed that above: So if, say, you have a carbine conversion kit that has a 16.5" barrel and an overall length of more than 26", and which also has a vertical foregrip, thus becoming legally a non-NFA firearm, which by definition cannot be a conversion kit "from which an assault weapon can be assembled" since it is none of the above-listed categories, but rather a conversion kit to a non-NFA firearm. Thus, even though the weapon started out as a pistol, it was converted to a non-NFA firearm by the addition of the kit, it would not violate the written letter of the law by converting a pistol to an "assault" weapon, because the Cook County ban does not in any way list non-NFA "firearms" among the classifications of weapons that would be included among ones that could be considered "assault weapons." Since the conversion kit would not be a kit for one of the weapon types listed in the law, but rather it was a conversion kit for a non-NFA "firearm" (and not a pistol, rifle, or shotgun), and since non-NFA "firearms" are not among any of the weapons that would be considered "assault weapons" (you can't have an "assault weapon" conversion kit for something that isn't enumerated in a law, can you?), that's where it seems there is a gray area. Also, if the vertical grip is on the conversion kit and not the pistol, then the pistol wouldn't be an NFA firearm, but once the kit was joined with the pistol receiver, it would then have a barrel of over 16" long, an overall length of more than 26", and a vertical grip, and thus be a non-NFA firearm . . . . . . and thus not be one of the weapon types that could be considered an "assault weapon." Nor could the conversion kit be considered assault weapon parts, because a non-NFA firearm isn't listed, and thus parts for a non-NFA firearm are not, by such definition, "assault weapon" parts. I think that it might be sufficient of one that a legal challenge could be made, possibly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted July 15, 2020 at 01:00 AM Share Posted July 15, 2020 at 01:00 AM The difficulty lies in the fact that the county ordinance doesn't interact with, or rely on the NFA to define an "assault weapon" for county purposes. They are parallel laws, one making some things illegal and the other, different things. For the county the meaning of the term "assault weapon" is wholly contained within the ordinance, possession of which is then made a violation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoRonin70 Posted July 15, 2020 at 02:44 AM Author Share Posted July 15, 2020 at 02:44 AM The difficulty lies in the fact that the county ordinance doesn't interact with, or rely on the NFA to define an "assault weapon" for county purposes. They are parallel laws, one making some things illegal and the other, different things. For the county the meaning of the term "assault weapon" is wholly contained within the ordinance, possession of which is then made a violation. Well, that's interesting. However, that leads to another, equally curious question. Since 430 ILCS 66/90 (Firearm Concealed Carry Act) states that . . . Sec. 90. Preemption. The regulation, licensing, possession, registration, and transportation of handguns and ammunition for handguns by licensees are exclusive powers and functions of the State. Any ordinance or regulation, or portion thereof, enacted on or before the effective date of this Act that purports to impose regulations or restrictions on licensees or handguns and ammunition for handguns in a manner inconsistent with this Act shall be invalid in its application to licensees under this Act on the effective date of this Act. This Section is a denial and limitation of home rule powers and functions under subsection (h) of Section 6 of Article VII of the Illinois Constitution.(Source: P.A. 98-63, eff. 7-9-13.) . . . does that if one used a carbine conversion consisting of an upper/slide that attached to the receiver of a handgun, which is serialized and is considered to be the weapon, but which also has parts that would violate the so-called "assault weapons" ban, be covered under such preemption as listed above? Say, the same carbine conversion unit discussed above in the original posting, but without the vertical pistol grip, so that it would not be considered a non-NFA firearm, but rather still a pistol, despite having a barrel length of more than 16" and an overall length of 26"? Assuming that the firearm was originally a pistol, the resulting firearm, with an attached shoulder stock, is not an NFA firearm if it has a barrel of 16 inches or more in length. Since the ATF has ruled that a pistol is still a pistol, if it starts out as a pistol, even if it has a stock and and a barrel of more than 16" (and if it is more than 26" and doesn't have a vertical foregrip, it is not an NFA firearm), would that mean that such a pistol with a carbine conversion, that doesn't have a vertical foregrip, is covered by preemption and so exempt from Cook County's "assault weapons" ban? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted July 15, 2020 at 11:29 AM Share Posted July 15, 2020 at 11:29 AM If the firearm falls within the definition of a "handgun" within the FCCA then, for persons licensed under the Act, county code would be preempted. With a barrel length greater than 16" and an overall length greater than 26", I don't know if that would be designed to be fired with a single hand as required by the FCCA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockman Posted July 15, 2020 at 11:50 AM Share Posted July 15, 2020 at 11:50 AM If the firearm falls within the definition of a "handgun" within the FCCA then, for persons licensed under the Act, county code would be preempted. With a barrel length greater than 16" and an overall length greater than 26", I don't know if that would be designed to be fired with a single hand as required by the FCCA. Are not most guns designed to be fired by a single hand. There is an irony that even for small compact pistols a two hand hold is recommended and ingrained in training, although not required. That two hands are preferred, recommended or taught does not change that by design. Rifle or pistol by design may be held and fired single handed wether that was intended or not. ^ this *** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauserme Posted July 15, 2020 at 02:21 PM Share Posted July 15, 2020 at 02:21 PM I'm on board with all of that, I just don't know if the state would appreciate the same distinctions you and I would. "Held and fired", for example, means something different that if it read "held or fired". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicagoRonin70 Posted July 15, 2020 at 04:34 PM Author Share Posted July 15, 2020 at 04:34 PM If the firearm falls within the definition of a "handgun" within the FCCA then, for persons licensed under the Act, county code would be preempted. With a barrel length greater than 16" and an overall length greater than 26", I don't know if that would be designed to be fired with a single hand as required by the FCCA. But, isn't the part that is the actual firearm, which is the receiver, such as this . . . . . . designed to be fired with one hand? The conversion slide is legally merely an accessory, and not the gun, according to the government, since it can be sent through the mail and doesn't need to be sent to an FFL, so it's legally a pistol, according to the definition and law. This is, of course, why firearm laws are idiotic, because there are potential loopholes to exploit such as this. Meaning, these kind of laws should be illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.